Commonly believed historical inaccuracies

Two towns in Cork claim to be the birthplace of Napoleon's favourite horse but there seems to be no solid evidence for either.

Two Cork locations have fought a long battle maintaining it was in their areas that Napoleon's famous white horse Marengo was bred - the village of Bartlemy, near Fermoy and Buttevant, where it's said the horse changed hands on it way to France after being sold at Cahirmee Fair.

The Cahirmee Fair is a horse fair held annually just outside Buttevant and it has a long history. No doubt it supplied many horses used in the Napoleonic Wars but it seems fanciful to claim that Marengo was bought there, especially as Britain was at war with France since 1793, the year Marengo is believed to have been born.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/spotlight/arid-40229498.html

As a bonus, it is claimed that Wellington's horse Copenhagen was also bought at Cahirmee Fair. Although more plausible, that claim too is unsupported by historical evidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_(horse)

Sorry to spoil a good yarn. Marengo deserves to be remembered - here he is crossing the Alps in probably the most famous equestrian painting. Has there ever been a more dramatic image of man and horse. Contrast Marengo's wild stare with Napoleon's calm determination. Once he crossed the Alps, Napoleon looted the finest art and sent it to the Louvre.

Red Hare wrote: »

I was always taught in Primary school by the Mercy Nuns that the synod of 1111 was in Rathkeale. I cannot find any info online except wikipedia stating that it was in Rathbrasil near Portlaoise.

Has anyone gone a better source of information as to the location of the synod of 1111?

Wikipedia puts it near Mountrath


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_R%C3%A1th_Breasail


I've seen claims for a Tipperary location, and even suggestions that the Glankeen bell shrine was made to be used at the synod


http://irelandbyways.co.uk/ireland-routes/byroute-7/byroute-82-co-tipperary-co-clare/3/


So - no one really knows, but probably not Rathkeale - it needed to be somewhere physically central, but near to the territory of the power brokers. Probably the most important synod until Thurles in 1850, so it would be nice if it was in Tipp!

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

I am not sure if it has been mentioned but a Commonly believed historical myth is the idea that some musical notes were onced banned in the Catholic Church due to being linked to satan (tritone interval/ devil's interval). It never happened and is used regularly in religious music.

Leonard Cohen knew that chord

“It goes like this, the fourth, the fifth
The minor falls, the major lifts
...
And even though it all went wrong
I'll stand right here before the Lord of song“

magicbastarder wrote: »

unless people start quoting (reputable) sources, i'm pretty much at the point where i think this thread is being used to peddle the very opinions it was set up to chop down.

Were the owners of the 'charcoal producing ironworks' referenced in your 'source' (which does NOT - in passing -appear to have been written by an academic historian) Gaelic speakers?


If not then it confirms that 'the English' cut down our woodlands. Richard Boyle may have been many things but he was not an Irishman.

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

The point I was making no one makes this point when talking about Native Americans unfree labour or modern day bonded labour which both are not chattel slavery.

Native Americans practised chattel slavery.
The Comanche certainly seem to have been practising it by the late 18th and early 19th century (chattel slavery is here defined as servitude that is involuntary and where one's owner can be changed without one's permission and where this will change the place and nature of one's work:
The Comanche did not enserf their captives they enslaved them.

I would accept that slavery among the comanche was not inherited.) .


I think it is indisputably proven that the Cherokee held black people specifically as slaves the same sense as white people held slaves.

magicbastarder wrote: »

i never claimed otherwise. i originally referred to the claim that our woodlands were cut down to build the british navy.
then someone claimed they were cut down to remove hiding places for the rebel irish, a claim i also queried.

(the book shown - 'reading the irish landscape' by mitchell and ryan - specifically shows the mention of the charcoal making in the context of the plantation of munster.)

Without wishing to be tendentious I'm not sure of the utility of the distinction.

I would imagine it was the people who owned the forests and woods of Ireland who chopped all the trees down. I would imagine that your average Irish peasant - landless or otherwise - would not be in a position to help themselves to the lumber growing in the nearest forest. I always thought turf was the most common domestic fuel?

Fritzbox wrote: »

I would imagine it was the people who owned the forests and woods of Ireland who chopped all the trees down. I would imagine that your average Irish peasant - landless or otherwise - would not be in a position to help themselves to the lumber growing in the nearest forest. I always thought turf was the most common domestic fuel?

Yes and those people were the British.

A2LUE42 wrote: »

And his recounted youth was wildly inaccurate.
Source - 'Eric and Us'

That's if we are willing to accept the writer of "Eric and Us" account of Orwell's youth over Orwell's version. But why should we - and why would we want to?