Similarly, the Battle of Bunker Hill was actually fought on nearby Breed’s Hill.
No doubt there are quite a few unsung and unknown female heroes of the American Revolution.
There were debates on that, and Columbus also seemingly thought Asia stuck out a lot further. Honestly we really arent sure of what Columbus actually thought.
True, but Bunker hill was well known and on the maps. I found one period map and Breeds hill wasnt mentioned by name on it.
On the subject of Paul Revere’s ride, I always wondered if it was really possible to distinguish two lanterns in the Old North Church from Charlestown. Well, I went by there on the night of the 250th anniversary reenactment, and I can tell you that yes, it is.
A atone’s throw from Bunker Hill.
Distinguish the lanterns, hell, I believe they got the signal wrong anyway. The regulars used boats, but just to get to the other side of the river/estuary.
Nice local note, thank you.
Here’s one that is debated: Was Ulysses S Grant an alcoholic? Best as I can tell, he had a largely undeserved reputation for drunkenness. Yes, he had a few incidents of public intoxication (during his military career), which were largely attributable to boredom or loneliness. But he stayed sober when he needed to, and much of the reputation stems from slurs by his detractors.
Beating the dead horse for humor here: Saratoga county didn’t exist until 1791. So what was the battle called originally?
At least one source has Stillwater preceding the county by a couple of years. I stand by their claim to fame! 
Regarding the slander and vilification meted out to poor Sybil: Someone warned the militias regarding the Regulars decent upon Danbury! If not Sybil, then who? 
Related, maybe: there’s a story that Grant, while President, was stopped for speeding in Washington D.C. while driving a horse-drawn carriage (of course), possibly under the influence of whiskey. The story says that the policeman recognized Grant, then apologized and tried to let Grant go. Grant refused to be let go unless the officer issued a proper citation. The story, if true, would lay to rest the idea that Presidents are immune from regular law enforcement. Unfortunately, I think the only source for the story is one of the officer’s descendants and that no other records have been found for the claim. Darn it.
I don’t think this is the case. My understanding is that the Supreme Court ruled, in Trump vs. United States, that a President has immunity when performing official acts. Grant driving his carriage would presumably not have been an official act.
What I find most incredulous about this story is speeding tickets predating the automobile.
True, but trump driving a car would be. Or so spake SCOTUS. Once l’etat cest moi, everything is an official act; yes, even pooping.
Perhaps not. I could certainly imagine some sort of law about reckless horsemanship in a crowded city. No galloping where pedestrians are about, etc.
Back in the days of carriages with 2 or more horses, carriage collisions and run-over pedestrians were not rare occurrences. IIRC from my late wife, a lot of the common-law jurisprudence about motor vehicle accidents dates from the horse-drawn days. If there’s civil law about it, good bet there was code law too.
I believe it to be credible. There are apparently contemporaneous reports of the incident,
Was General Grant Arrested for Speeding in Washington, D.C.? (U.S. National Park Service).
ETA: I think the dubious claim is that he was arrested for speeding while president. That part is more suspect. The documented incidents happened before he became the chief executive.
I’ll speculate that the current Supreme Court chose to create an ambiguous standard that it could interpret as it wishes. Actions done by a Republican President will be deemed “official acts” that are covered by legal immunity while actions done by a Democratic President will be deemed to fall outside of this protection and subject to criminal charges. I feel they’ve intentionally established IOKIARDI as a legal precedent.
Christopher Lee told Peter Jackson during his stabbing scene in Return of the King that his character Saruman shouldn’t utter a single word or sound after said injuries were infliced (by Wormtongue). He knew this because he apparently killed a number of people during WW2 that way, which seems to ruin the ability of the lungs to exhale any air.
Well, speaking of historical myths debunked, Christopher Lee mayyyy have been a a wee bit of an exaggerator. He still served honorably in WW II, but his stories of derring-do are a little over the top and not corroborated by any person or record.
People enjoying this topic might like the Our Fake History podcast, which has also covered many of the “facts” mentioned in this thread. It is a deeper dive, with 1-3 episodes, at an hour each, on a topic. This generally will cover background of the myth, background on the real history, and analysis on what degree the myth is based in fact.
The most recent episode I listened to talks about the idea that The Wizard of Oz is an allegory for politics and the gold and silver monetary debate at the very end of the 19th century. His conclusion is that Baum probably didn’t intend it that way. The typical interpretation requires that Baum is a Democratic supporter of Bryan, but he probably was not.
Mostly, the Wizard behind the curtain is a great allegory for any politician you want to satirize. Interpreting the book as a story about farmers and workers versus the elite is defensible, but only in the way that any work can be validly interpreted in ways not originally intended by the author.
No politics please. The story about Grant is fine, modern day SCOTUS should perhaps be in P&E? Thanks
“” Mortimer stated. “He was attached to the SAS and SOE as an RAF liaison officer at various times between 1943 and 1945, but he did not serve in them.” That is a nitpick. Lots of that stuff never got made public, also.
Does this make Grant the first “Sovereign Citizen”? 
Aha! Now we know what the “S” letter for his middle name was referring to…