Stupid Ancient History (Stupid History)

Join Ben, Noel and special guest Christopher Hassiotis as they explore some of humanity's most hilarious military missteps, from round ships to rocket bullets and ball tanks. Join the guys as they explore the rise and fall of the notorious Forty Elephants. During Europe's period of witchcraft hysteria, one enterprising and failed witch hunter sought to bolster his reputation by creating an authoritative text on the existence, discovery and persecution of witches.

While it may seem silly now, the Malleus Maleficarum was a runaway success, with thousands of copies inundating European society even while various officials warned against treating it as a reliable source. Listen in to learn more about The Hammer of the Witches. In , a poor neighborhood in London fell victim to a strange, tragic and boozy disaster -- this calamity would eventually leave eight people dead.

Stupid Ancient History - Leland Gregory - Google Книги

So what exactly happened? How could an entire neighborhood flood with a deadly deluge of beer?

Tune in to find out. Nowadays, world-famous children's author Dr. Seuss is one of the most well-known writers on the planet. Join the guys as they explore the real-life, tragic stories of feral children abandoned by their human parents, adopted by animals and raised in the wild. Join the guys as they dive into a strange, grisly story from the early days of dentistry. Before Lewis and Clark set out to explore the western side of the continent, they tried to prepare for every possible contingency — including medical conditions like constipation.

Stupid Ancient History

On March 3rd, , residents of Bath County, Kentucky were startled to see what appeared to be chunks and flakes of meat falling from the clear, cloudless sky. The rain, which only lasted a few minutes, captured national attention. People across the country proposed various theories explaining the deluge, and today the guys believe they've finally solved the mystery.

With , words and 3 million quotations, the Oxford English Dictionary is a massive tome. Work began on the dictionary in , but the first edition wasn't published until Compiling the dictionary was a Herculean task, and James Murray, the editor of the dictionary, put out a call for assistance. This early crowdsourcing strategy worked surprisingly well. Murray was particularly impressed by his most prolific and consistent contributor, an enigmatic fellow named Dr.

So impressed, in fact, that Murray decided he had to meet the man in person. It's safe to say the meeting didn't go as expected. Born Robert Miller, the man who would later become known as Count Victor Lustig traveled across Europe and the US bilking hundreds of people out of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

He had many, many scams, and posed as everything from an elite theatre producer to a stressed-out, down on his luck government official and more. For most of his career, Victor was able to talk his way out of any arrests or convictions. Join Ben and special guest Christopher Hassiotis as they explore the Count's most ambitious, ridiculous scam -- selling the Eiffel tower twice.

In the second part of this two-part series, special guest Wayne Federman explores the strange, curse-word-riddled stand-up bit that resulted in George Carlin setting a legal precedent with the Supreme Court. Listen in to learn how curse words changed the world and sparked a debate that continues today. Lenny Bruce is a legend in the history of stand-up comedy, and while his use of explicit language thrilled audience members, it didn't win him any friends in law enforcement. In fact, Bruce was arrested multiple times for his use of 'obscenities', sparking a larger, continuing debate about the nature of free speech.

Join the guys as they learn more about the early days of stand-up and the Lenny Bruce controversy with this week's special guest: Comedian, actor, writer and historian Wayne Federman. A necropolis in what is now Northern Italy holds a strange and, at first glance, terrifying corpse. A Lombard man, aged somewhere between 40 and 50 years old, lost his right arm in a brutal accident. That was the boondoggle "Stupid History," by Leeland Gregory, presented. I don't want to be a jerk and say something like, "I'm glad it was free.

For all I k How much does a typo matter to you? For all I know, it wasn't the author's fault.

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

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

Extremely funny and completely butchered my knowledge in history. Aug 25, Nate rated it it was ok. 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 innocenc Pretty entertaining, and I'm a sucker for tales of historical misconceptions, but there are a few glaring problems with this book. 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 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.

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.

Account Options

Texas and Roe v. 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. Considering his track record with the above tales, and the fact that he retold well-known urban legend calls as actual 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. Jun 21, George rated it it was ok Shelves: View all 3 comments. Jan 19, Anna Ligtenberg rated it it was ok. ISBN - 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.

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. 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 The title is a fair warning to all, this is in fact stupid.

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. 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 defini I liked this book. It was definitely worth it's Free Friday price tag but I may have bristled had I paid anymore than.

Do yourself a favor and borrow it from the library or a friend via LendMe, if that's possible. 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.

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 p Yes, I did read the whole thing. 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. Mar 10, Sarah Sherrin rated it liked it. 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. 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. Nov 16, SheLove2Read rated it liked it Shelves: 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. Sep 22, Stephanie rated it did not like it Shelves: Lots of stupid history told in a snarky and unlikeable tone.

Jun 11, Martha rated it did not like it. Okay, I didn't read the entire book. It was pretty stupid. 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. May 05, Jen rated it it was ok Shelves: 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. Oct 20, Miss Clark rated it liked it Shelves: 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 cus 3. That is not only customary, but required with these sorts of books. Aug 05, Tagcaver rated it did not like it. I think "Stupid Lame Jokes" would be a better title of the book. The e-book version has many typos, misspellings, and incorrect dates.

Aug 29, Gary Pointon rated it liked it. Got me through the waiting lines at Disneyworld. 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?

There 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. 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?

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.

Bestselling Series

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.

Apr 30, Thomas Holbrook rated it really liked it Shelves: There are books that demand to be read: 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 e There are books that demand to be read: History is as exciting as the ability of the historian to relate the events being presented.

Unfortunately, such ability exciting is in short supply. 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. 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.