The way I heard it, Henry VIII suffered a bad jousting injury, gave up on physical exercise because of the pain it caused him after that, and that’s why he bloated up.
And then there’s Benjamin Frankin and the Gout.
He was 44 when he had the accident and already had more than middle aged spread going, though he was sleek compared to his later years. The lack of exercise and comfort eating after the accident (and living in a time when people literally drank beer like it was water [for good reason]) and his increasingly gargantuan appetite turned him into a morbidly obese prematurely old man by the time he was 50. Medical historians estimate his weight at above 380 pounds by the end of his life, and copious accounts of his health maladies (including constant and increasing thirst, violent irritability, infections that would not heal) are consistent with diabetes (as is massive weight gain for that matter). Accounts in recent years suggest his death was more likely attributable to diabetic kidney failure and other natural causes than the syphilis which was the previous diagnosis. (Google Henry VIII diabetes will bring up references to the articles.)
But I have an aunt in New Brunswick …
Tell her to keep up the good work!
Any WW1 movie which portrays Generals as stay in Chateaus types.
Dozens of British Generals were killed in the war.
So not one general stayed in such accommodation, ever? General Pershing did. And Harry Truman wrote of the palatial accommodations he and his fellow officers including generals stayed in in France before going to the front.
Where did I say that?
As well as that most people ignore the fact that over a thousand of Sparta’s allies from Thebes and Thespiae stayed behind with the 300 hundred Spartans to hold the pass at Thermopylae.
You certainly seemed to be saying that. You gave “Any WW1 movie which portrays Generals as stay in Chateaus types” as an example of a historical inaccuracy. If some generals were staying in chateaus - which was true - then it’s not inaccurate.
What, specifically, do you want supported? That the assassination was not the cause, but a “minor incident”? That Kaiser Wilhelm was looking for an excuse to start the war?
The politics of Europe were very unstable at the time. The Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires were breaking up, Serbia had gained independence and been through two wars.
History’s Worst Decisions by Stephen Weir has this to say (p. 109 - 115):
The History Channelhas a web page that says:
I think most historians agree that the assassination might have been the trigger, but it wasn’t really the cause.
Germany was expansionist, the Balkans were a powder-keg, Europe was a collection of mutual-aid alliances stacked against each other, and Serbian nationalists were trying to claim territory. Throw into that mix a political insult as justification, and it’s a cascade effect.
I would disagree with “Serbia, which had done nothing more than be the home of Colonel Apis, was blamed, and given impossible conditions to fulfill, and then invaded anyway.”
The reality was that the Serbian government was guilty. You had a terrorist organization running operations in Austria-Hungary and assassinating Franz Ferdinand. And the people running the organization are Serbian military intelligence officers.
It wasn’t out when this thread was started but there are lots of inaccuracies in The Lone Ranger, from the Golden Spike Ceremony being moved to Texas down to the number of stars on the flag, but much this can be attributed to Tonto being an unreliable narrator and not right in the head.
A bird brain, you could even suggest.
That’s not accurate. The age of marriage in Europe during the renaissance/classical eras was much higher than usually believed. Generally late teens/early 20s (with men marrying at an older age than women). Early marriages were only common in the aristocracy.
I don’t know if people would have been truly shocked by the marriage of a 13 yo to a middle-aged man, but spring/autumn unions were generally perceived negatively (see the custom of organizing charivaris during such marriages).
nm
Thought I’d chuck in something that was on my mind after reading some of the reviews of “The White Queen,” a Starz miniseries that premiered tonight, based on Philippa Gregory’s recent novels about the Cousins’ War and Wars of the Roses.
Many of these reviews make a derisive mention of the fact that the characters don’t look “dirty” enough for a series set in this time period–clean hair, clean clothes, teeth not rotten, the castles and houses a little too clean, etc. That’s actually a criticism that comes up in many discussions of historical accuracy in movies and TV.
But the thing is…isn’t that kind of the point? That kind of realism could probably only go so far before it became off-putting (though I can see where it would have its place in certain kinds of movies). Plus, if that level of hygiene was commonplace, then it would stand to reason that people living in that era would hardly take notice of it. So you could make a case that by not making an issue of it, portrayals like that allow us to see it as those back then would have seen it.
I dunno…what do you guys think?
Agreed… A “realistic” portrayal of the era would have damn near everyone sporting smallpox scars all over their faces (and arms, and wherever.) Modern audiences would find it distracting. Distancing. Off-putting.
Historical accuracy is good, to a point. But some details are best glossed over in the interest of the audience. We don’t need to visit their privy, either. Would a movie about the Great Age of Sail really be improved by showing sailors going out to the fore-chains to poop? Nah.
I gave a talk on Scottish clothing and weapons to a group of high school students that were studying MacBeth. The teacher wanted me to focus on Scotland c. 1000-1300. The first thing I did was ask if any of the students had seen Braveheart. When a bunch of hands went up, I told them to forget everything they saw in that movie. The kilts, the tartans, the armor, the weapons, the tactics, the wode, jus primae noctis, the Bruce’s background, Wallace’s training, the entire battle of Stirling…
It’s like they did no research at all.