Stupid History: Tales of Stupidity, Strangeness, and Mythconceptions Throughout the Ages

by Leland Gregory

Why exactly is Paul Revere revered? Was the lightbulb really Thomas Edison's bright idea?

* Best-selling author Leland Gregory employs his masterful wit to expose historical myths, faux "facts," strange events, and tales of human stupidity throughout history.

If it would shock you to learn that Benjamin Franklin didn't discover electricity, you'll appreciate this take on hundreds of historical legends and debacles. Historians and humorists alike may be surprised to learn

* Samuel Prescott made the famous horseback ride into Concord, not Paul Revere.

* As a member of Parliament, Isaac Newton spoke only once. He asked for an open window.

* On April 24, 1898, Spain declared war on the U.S., thus starting the Spanish-American War. The U.S. declared war the very next day, but not wanting to be outdone, had the date on the declaration changed from April 25 to April 21.

With these and many other stories, leading humorist Leland Gregory once again highlights both the strange and the funny side of humankind. 

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Humor, Reference, Ebooks, Historical, Trivia

267 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2007

Reviews

[Sean O'Hara · Rating 1 out of 5]

The title doesn't lie. This is a book of stupid, easily disproven trivia, often with an absurd Amerocentric or Eurocentric slant. Among the highlights:

* It's impossible to fight in chariots since the reins require two hands. Luckily ancient cultures were smart enough to design -- get this -- chariots with room for passengers. Gregory claims Hollywood invented this "myth" -- apparently in his world, Homer was a script writer, considering the numerous examples of chariot battles in the Iliad.

* Lizzie Borden didn't kill her parents. The evidence for this claim -- why she was acquitted. Just like Klaus von Bulow and OJ Simpson.

* Horseshoe crabs "are survivors of a species that became extinct 175 million years ago." Leaving aside the question of how this is "history," how exactly can an extinct species have survivors? Maybe he means that they're descended from a species that is now extinct, but then so are humans.

* He gives a really garbled interpretation of what the Emancipation Proclamation accomplished, followed by that Lincoln quote that neo-Confederates like to throw around because, removed from context, it makes Lincoln sound like a political opportunist who didn't care about slavery.

* "On November 8, 1918, the United Press Association reported that Germany had signed a peace agreement, thereby bringing World War I to an end.... But the story was wrong. It all started when someone, now believed to be a German secret agent, called the French and American intelligence offices to report that Germany had signed an armistice.... The war did't officilally end until June 28, 1919, with the signing of the Treaty of Versaille[sic]." Technically correct, but otherwise wrong. Fighting on the Western Front ended on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month, 1918 -- this is the event commemorated in America as Veterans Day, and known in the rest of the world as, yes, Armistice Day. The news report was three days premature, not seven months. And the treat of Versailles didn't end the war -- it set the terms of peace between Germany and the Anglo-French alliance. There were many more powers involved with the war, and as many treaties ending the conflicts between each country.

* An account of the 1657 fire in Edo (which Gregory anachronistically calls Tokyo) based upon legend instead of fact.

* "August 8, 1945, two days after the US Army Air Force dropped the nuclear bomb Little Boy on Hiroshima and one day after Fat Boy [sic] devastated Nagasak, the Soviet Union declared war on Japan. By doing so, the Soviets were able to partake of the spoils of the Pacific war without actually having to fight in it." The second bomb was Fat Man, and it was dropped on August 9, the day after the Soviets declared war. But far more importantly, the Soviets did fight against Japan in the week between their declaration of war and Japan's surrender -- and in fact, many historians argue that their entry into the conflict was as important to Japan's capitulation as the nuclear strikes.

* He gives a silly explanation of the phrase "sow wild oats," placing its origins in the Middle Ages, when in fact it dates back to antiquity.

* A story about a newspaper that accidentally included a picture of John Wayne Gacy in an article about National Clown Week. A quick google turns up lots of references to the story but no original source -- a classic hallmark of an urban legend.

* He gives a ludicrous account of the Emperor Claudius' death. Too bad no one knows what happened to Claudius -- most historians agree he was murdered, but how, or even where, is a matter of conjecture. Gregory's account is based upon just one of the contradictory versions found among ancient sources.

* "On April 24, 1898, Spain declared war on the United States.... The United States delared war the very next day but, not wanting to be outdone, had the date of the declaration of war read April 21 instead of April 25." April 21 was the day the US declared a blockade against Cuba; Congress backdated the declaration to give post hoc legitimacy to what had been an act of war.

* He repeats the story of Davd Rice Atchison who was allegedly President for one day. The tale is based upon the fact that in 1849 inauguration day fell on Sunday and Zachary Taylor decided to delay his oath for one day. Okay, if Taylor didn't become President on March 4, 1849 because he didn't take the oath, how did Atchison become President if he didn't take the oath either? A careful reading of the Constitution will show that Taylor did in become President on March 4, but couldn't exercise his powers until he took the oath the next day.

* Several examples of battles that didn't take place at the site they're named after. Okay, so what? Land battles are usually named for the strategic objective or a notable landmark in the vicinity.

* Several stories of nuclear bombs being involved in crashes and miraculously not detonating. Nukes are finicky devices -- if they don't go off in a very particular way, there will be no nuclear reaction.

* He claims the term "flea market" comes from the Dutch term for valley market and has nothing to do with fleas. No, it's a direct translation of a French term meaning, "flea market."

* He says sauerkraut was renamed "liberty cabbage" in World War II. Close -- that happened in WWI.

* A downright racist story about the Emperor Menelik II ordering electric chairs be installed in Ethiopia without realizing they needed electricity. Ho, ho, ho, those stupid darkies and their savage ignorance. Gregory must imagine Menelik as something out of a Tarzan movie -- a guy in a loincloth and necklace of bones presiding over primitives from his grass hut. A little googling shows how stupidly offensive this story is.

* He repeats the legend of the Great Military Leader who grew tired of his soldiers wiping snot on their coat sleeves and ordered buttons sewn on to stop them. The story is normally attributed (without source) to Frederick the Great, but Gregory pins it to Napoleon -- during his campaign against Russia. Because it's not like the quartermasters had anything better to do than sew superfluous buttons on hundreds of thousands of uniforms.

* "The confusion abou Napoleon's size arose because after his autopsy, it was reported that he measurd five feet two. The problem is, he was measured based on the old French system of pied de roi ... which was shorter than the modern foot." Do the math. If Gregory's facts are correct (hah!), Napoleon would be shorter than 5'2 in modern units.

[Benjamin Sobieck · Rating 3 out of 5]

How much does a typo matter to you?

If it's in fiction - and the writing is otherwise top notch - my response is, "Who cares?"

But what if it's non-fiction? Does it change how you view the information?

That was the boondoggle "Stupid History," by Leeland Gregory, presented. I downloaded it to my Nook as part of a Free Friday promotion from Barnes & Noble.

I don't want to be a jerk and say something like, "I'm glad it was free." But I definitely don't want to pay for editing this bad. For all I know, it wasn't the author's fault. He probably burned himself out on research and passed the editing to a third party, who did a shoddy job.

I don't know that's the case. I do know one thing: The historical trivia was entertaining to read. The quick entries about, well, stupid history trivia make essential reading for a Walking Encyclopedia of Worthless Information like me. Or if you hang your e-reader next to your toilet paper - unlike me.

However, the information may be rendered extra worthless if it's not accurate. The numerous typos throughout "Stupid History" force me to consider this. Much of the trivia I'd heard before, and I knew was accurate. As for the rest, that's up to you, dear reader.

Be careful. You might end up learning some "stupid history" yourself.

[Jon · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5 stars

I didn't laugh and I barely smiled. Most of the trivial historic oddities I already knew. A handful were uncommon but in poor taste (I put it down to 'guy humor' and moved on). Very light quick read, perfect for wasting time on a muggy summer evening.

Ebook Formatting Critique: I downloaded this book as one of Barnes & Noble's Free Friday offerings for the Nook Color in June 2011. I thought a book published just four years ago, in the 21st century, would have been transferred to electronic format with fewer errors. The errors I cringed upon while reading looked like typical OCR (optical character recognition) errors missed by the software (requiring human intervention) from scanned hard copy. I find that inexcusable since the book most likely existed as an electronic document before printing to paper. Even more inexcusable if these same errors occur in the print book.

[Nate · Rating 2 out of 5]

Pretty entertaining, and I'm a sucker for tales of historical misconceptions, but there are a few glaring problems with this book.

First, a couple of tales that he presents as "fact" are misleading. For example, an early tale in the book states that Lizzie Borden, famous axe murderer, was actually unanimously found innocent by the jury, implying that the famous rhyme about her is just a historical misconception. However, there is a big difference between a "not guilty" verdict and actual innocence. It is widely believed that her defense attorney was able to manipulate the sexist views held by jurors of the time (1893) to play into their view that there was no possible way this sweet young woman could have committed the crime. The judge also excluded her unsuccessful attempt to purchase cyanide shortly before the murders, and her entire original inquest testimony. At the time of her arrest, police noted that she was eerily calm and did not seem to exhibit any shock or sadness at the brutally axe-murdered bodies of her parents. In short, at best her guilt is questionable, and it's certainly interesting that a jury found her innocent, but to present that verdict as a "look, she was actually innocent" tale is such an incomplete picture that it's dishonest.

Second, another of his supposed "facts" is in reality just a conservative rant about the Constitution disguised as fact. He states that there is no separation of church and state because that specific phrase does not appear anywhere in the Constitution, gives his own opinion on the policy justification for the establishment clause, then states that "no one, not even the courts, takes the time to read it." Yeah, okay. Clearly the members of the Supreme Court analyze and interpret the Constitution without even bothering to read what it is they are interpreting and Leland, a comedy writer, understands the Constitution better than they do. He's not a lawyer, he doesn't understand constitutional law, and he needs to knock it off with the backseat lawyering. The question of how far the language "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" should go is a thorny and controversial one, but no matter what your view, you can't just take your viewpoint (in his case, a strict constructionist one) and state it as fact. Aside from that, through the interpretation of the Supreme Court, the Constitution gives a whole lot of rights that are not explicitly stated, and in all likelihood were not contemplated by the founders. That whole "implied rights" thing, like the right to privacy, which came out of Griswold v. Connecticut and served as the basis for Lawrence v. Texas and Roe v. Wade. Whether you agree with them or not, under current US law, the Constitution does in fact provide us with these implied rights, even though the Constitution doesn't explicitly set them out.

Third, he doesn't cite authority. For anything. Considering his track record with the above tales, and the fact that he retold well-known urban legend 911 calls as actual 911 calls in some of his other books, I don't really trust all of his unsourced and unlikely stories as fact.

Despite all this, it's an entertaining book, and the majority of it is probably true, hence the 2 stars rather than 1. I would just recommend taking the tales with a grain of salt unless you have the time to think about and verify them with your own research.

[Brandon_C1 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Extremely funny and completely butchered my knowledge in history

[George · Rating 2 out of 5]

AMUSING TO SILLY.

‘Stupid History: Tales of Stupidity, Strangeness, and Mythconceptions Throughout the Ages,’ by Leland Gregory was a “Free Fridays” free NOOKbook from B&N.com, and worth every penny I paid for it. It is a collection of ‘historical’ trivia tidbits—more than a hundred of them—ideally sized and suited for reading on the ‘john’. [Although, I do admit to some trepidation in submitting my eReader to such a humid environment.]

It’s hard to complain about the ‘quality’ of a ‘free’ book, but I will mention, by way of warning, that this one is rife with annoying typos—e.g. every time the number two is indicated it is spelled ‘too’.

Recommendation: An absolute “must read” for all historical trivia nerds who would delight in knowing that “The Battle of Bunker Hill was actually fought on Breed’s Hill..”—(page 48). For all others, there’s not much to be missed here.

B&N NOOKbook, 368 pages

[Charlie · Rating 3 out of 5]

There were some interesting facts in this book, but the author was quite crass in some of the articles he included and the way he described them. He also came across quite arrogant and superior in pointing out errors in history, as if to say people are stupid for believing these things. I also didn't like the way he reported a small error about a historical occurrence and then reported another small error in the same event, and then another later on in the book and then another. It was almost as if he was trying to stretch things out to make the book longer. I will probably keep this book to reference the articles that were helpful, but I won't be recommending it

[Thomas Holbrook · Rating 4 out of 5]

There are books that demand to be read: those who’s reading bring enlightenment and new direction to life, others are read from a seeming directive of the collective unconsciousness, and those that seem to lift the mundane of life to the sublime of living. Then there are books that are read because they are fun and remind the reader that some things are too important to be taken seriously. This volume is of the latter group.
History is as exciting as the ability of the historian to relate the events being presented. Unfortunately, such ability exciting is in short supply. Mr. Gregory’s book takes some of the familiar stories taken as historical fact and exposes them as being misrepresented at best or in error at worst. In other instances, he shows how history has been “hidden” due to its having become familiar and therefore have made it invisible. In still others, he cites anecdotes that flesh out some of the less interesting or remote moments of history. Regardless of what he is doing to which moment of history it is all fun reading.
This is a book that deals with history but it is not a history book. If history can be defined as “stories (lies) written by the victors,” then this book is a stick used to poke certain of those victors in the eye. The author holds no part of History as “cow scared” (i.e. Paul Revere, Magellan) that cannot be made in to hamburger and he grinds the beef with profound glee.
The book is to be read with an eye toward humor, but that does not remove the educational moments. Learning to differentiate myth from fact, reality from wish, what one was told from what actually happened is an important aspect of a well-rounded education and Mr. Gregory’s intent lies in the reality of that theorem. There are few moments of questionable content in the book and even those are innuendo. No bloodshed (except to report history) is offered and there is no “adult” language.
Had this book been part of the syllabus for my college History course; I may have attended it with more frequency and interest. I definitely would have been a better student of that dusty discipline.

[Michelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

The title is a fair warning to all, this is in fact stupid. I'll accept that this is a bias opinion because I knew most of these "tales" already but it has it's problems. Some of the entries in this book aren't even tales, they are just random facts that have nothing to do with history. Another weak point is the fact that their are no sources listed anywhere in this book, I understand that people can have a plethora of information on their own but it would have helped the creditability of this a lot more. Also there were quite a few spelling errors that were repetitive and drove me crazy and the longer you read the more the author begins to insults everything. The positive is that each entry is short and too the point, so it catches you're attention and doesn't bog you down with tons of information. It's also a fairly quick read if you like history.

[Dusty Craine · Rating 3 out of 5]

I liked this book. I'm a big fan of stupid random trivia. Some of the facts in this book are things I had read before but it was a very interesting, quick compilation of those strange facts.

I'm reviewing the ebook version here too, and I have to say that this edition of the book is horribly converted. There are typos all over the place, bad OCR recognition in other places and at one place or another the conversion is so bad that I couldn't even figure out what was trying to be said.

It was definitely worth it's Free Friday price tag but I may have bristled had I paid anymore than .99 cents for this book. Do yourself a favor and borrow it from the library or a friend via LendMe, if that's possible.

[Stephanie (Reading is Better With Cupcakes) · Rating 1 out of 5]

Yes, I did read the whole thing. I found it rather, well, stupid.

The tidbits of history were ok, I learned a couple of neat things.

However, the humor the author attempted was over done and rather lame. Top that with the HORRIBLE editing of the book, and you have a rather lame read.

Someone should have taught his editor that when you mean 2 things, you spell it as 'two' not as too. Also, a 'v' should not be replaced with 'u'. So many errors, it was hard to read.

I don't know if these errors are a part of the paperback edition as I read the ebook one.

I would not waste your money on the ebook edition (I thankfully got it for free). It isn't worth it.

[SheLove2Read · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is basically a book of little known historical facts and anecdotes. While some of the entries are interesting and even enlightening, the majority of the book is written in a "humorous" way that detracts from the enjoyment of the book, for me at least.

[Shannon · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a free ebook for my nook. It really lived up to the name stupid. It was just filled with non-sense information. Some were funny, some made you think, and some made you want to roll your eyes and slap the author. This will not be a re-read but is ok if you're bored out of your mind.

[Sarah Sherrin · Rating 3 out of 5]

All in all, it was a fun and quick read. Some of his facts were spot on and other were left to interpretation of what actually happened. I'm glad I was able to read it, but might not be picking it up again for a while.

[Jen · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really like learning lesser known tidbits of information. This book sparked many great conversations.

Unfortunately, some of the facts in this book are incorrect.

[Martha · Rating 1 out of 5]

Okay, I didn't read the entire book. It was pretty stupid.

[Monique · Rating 2 out of 5]

so far i'm not impressed - incomplete research, pointless opinions and don't get me started on the typo's.

[Stephanie · Rating 1 out of 5]

Lots of stupid history told in a snarky and unlikeable tone. No thank you....

[Bettie]

1* from Stephanie

[Lanvin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although there were some few typos on it I couldn't put it down, I loved it to bits, set all night reading it to the end.

[J · Rating 3 out of 5]

For many who learn about history they take what is told them, complain about the dates and then just as promptly attempt to either delete what they learn or act like they ever heard of it. History is this just a dry and dead subject that is always considered quite boring.

Leland Gregory does a great job in diving into the world where history isn't only told but revealed for its eccentricities, its quirks and sometimes its stupidity as well as its misquotes. The reader furthermore is thus brought into a world where history is rather more fascinating, intriguing and quite alive than that which many read about.

The writing for the entries are given mostly a title and a page to briefly describe the events that are being focused on. At the same time the author uses pop culture references to help intrigue amateur readers and as a result there are some rather dad-like jokes with a few being quite cringeworthy to many readers. Otherwise the blank spots of the pages are given with misquotes and other fun facts that may or may not relate to the story above it. And of course the reader is cautioned to take these stories with a grain of salt while encouraged to do their own research to prove or disprove what the author is telling them.

Altogether it was quite a fun and fascinating read while one that will help to renew the interest of history fans or at least give some new history readers a chance to understand history isn't all dry facts combined with dust.

[Miss Clark · Rating 3 out of 5]

3. 5 stars


This was an enjoyable offering by Gregory, with many anecdotes and fun stories of strange coincidence and whatnot. I liked the sections that explained a phrase or custom.

However, there are no sources given. Which means that I feel compelled to look up and research almost everything myself before sharing it with someone as I would hate to pass on faulty or fabricated information.

No bibliography or reading list for those interested to delve further into this history. That is not only customary, but required with these sorts of books.

[Denise · Rating 2 out of 5]

A collection of random trivia (not all of which actually relate to history), some more, some less entertaining, and some complete nonsense that is easily disproven. No attempt is made to impose a structure of any kind, no sources are cited for anything, the editing is abysmal, some of the (many, many) puns are absolutely cringeworthy... but I guess if you enjoy random trivia, you might still get a chuckle out of some of these.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

A variety of silly trivia, most of it related to American or European history. I wish there was a table of contents or index so I could more easily find my favorites.

[Tagcaver · Rating 1 out of 5]

I think "Stupid Lame Jokes" would be a better title of the book. 'Nuf said.

P.S. The e-book version has many typos, misspellings, and incorrect dates.

[Mac Daly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Movie misquotes, historical faux pas, and the tale of ocean passengers who were on five sinking ships before finally making shore. These are some of the amusing and sometimes shocking historical events contained in this tome.

[Gary Pointon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Got me through the waiting lines at Disneyworld. If I ever use one of these tales sand facts in real life I’ll upgrade my rating.

[Robin · Rating 2 out of 5]

One of the things I don't like about this series of books is that the author often doesn't elaborate on certain topics and leaves the reader hanging. Too many times I'm left wondering with more questions than answers.

For example, the book tells us that Chinese Checkers was not invented in China yet fails to answer the logical questions of "then where did it originate from?" (the answer is Germany, btw) and "why was it named Chinese Checkers?" (an American company thought it sounded good). There are countless other examples and I sometimes felt like I was spending more time on Wikipedia checking follow up questions than actually reading the book.

What's worse this that sometimes the lack of elaboration can lead to some misleading information.

For example, the author claims that George Washington was not actually the first President of the United States of America. John Hanson was, and he was followed by 6 more presidents before Washington was sworn in, making Washington actually our eighth president.

This is where he ends the entry but the question begs "Then why is Washington considered the first president?" The answer is John Hanson and the others never actually held the title of "President of the United States of America". They held the title of "President of the Continental Congress" (which was not the same thing) and there were even others who served even before Hanson (Hanson was the first to serve after the signing of the Articles of Confederation).

So there IS a valid reason why we're taught Washington was our first president. Unfortunately, the author failed to explain this, thereby misleading his readers and leaving them with unanswered questions. I understand the nature of the book is to provide short entries, it's not intended to be an elaborate, comprehensive history book. But as you can see, it would only take a few extra sentences to provide the above information.

That said, there are several very amusing stories and if you're looking for a light, entertaining read this will definitely fit the bill. Just remember to take it with a grain of salt.

[Jamie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book and I found it very interesting. I read a review about it though that said, how much do you care about grammatical errors and typos? I don't usually care too much about them, although I do notice them more and more.... but, this book corrects things that could've been as simple as a typo, or a missing hyphen, or something like that. So with this book, although I found it interesting, it lost some of it's credibility with me as being true because of the errors.

Still very entertaining and interesting, but I'd be inclined to do my own research before quoting it as fact to someone else.

One part said something about Mormons believe... and being a Mormon I want to take the time to correct it. There was one other clip, (after that clip in the book) that I also didn't agree with but I'm having problems finding it. Anyways, the Mormon clip:

"According to the Mormon religion, anyone who isn't Mormon is called a Gentile--anyone, So in essence, in Utah, even Jews are considered Gentiles."

The Mormon's Bible Dictionary says, "The word gentiles means the nations, and eventually came to be used to mean all those not of the house of Israel... As used throughout the scriptures it has a dual meaning, sometimes to designate peoples of non-Israelite lineage, and other times to designate nations that are without the gospel, even though there may be some Israelite blood therein...." So, by ONE definition yes, even Jews are considered gentiles- because they are without the full gospel as we see it. By this scriptural definition (used in the Bible) Jews would also be considered gentiles to all Christians, as they do not have the fullness of the gospel through Jesus Christ- the difference is, that isn't preached in other Christian churches. But there is also the other definition, by which Jews are most definitely not considered to be gentiles, as they are of the house of Israel. Jews are not the only tribe of Israel, they are just the only tribe that has continued to remain intact and wasn't scattered.

[Anna Ligtenberg · Rating 2 out of 5]

ISBN 0740760548 - I love history. I love books that correct long-standing beliefs that are not true. That should put this book right up my alley. I'm inordinately sad that this book stinks.

Short paragraphs refute popular historical myths, share amusing anecdotes and trivia and are riddled with puns. There are one- and two-sentence notes, as well, generally a sort of page-filler.

History books like these are usually about things that happened in… you know, history. Technically, yes: yesterday is history, but in this context, history isn't usually last week. There are some items in this book that are, pretty much, last week. Those items are more a matter of interpretation than established fact, so there's not a lot of debunking room. On the older items, those that "refute popular myths," there's just too little substance here. Not only does the original story and the "correction" take up FAR less than a full page in a small book, but there's nothing here to back up author Leland Gregory's assertions. I've been able to fact check a few things online and in books but, seriously, isn't citing sources Gregory's job? Gregory does, however, do a fairly good job of repressing his own politics.

The "amusing anecdotes" are far more on target. Though they, too, would benefit from more text and some sourced, they're just amusing enough to make it as they are. If you're looking for a more serious title that challenges what you think you know about history, try ISBN 156584100X Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong.

- AnnaLovesBooks