To Those Complaining About Historical Inaccuracy

I must beg to differ that it does more harm than good. Do you know how many ignorant people there are out there? I watched a video just this morning where they questioned people on the street who couldn't even name George Washington as the first president (which isn't technically accurate) or even the century in which he served. Even a show with historical inaccuracies will get the basics across to people like that, and this is the type of show they would watch as opposed to a straight documentary format.

Maybe they could have protrayed Sam Adams in a more historically accurate view. The series "John Adams" was much better than this. As for the Boston Massacre (a term that Sam or his cronies) came up, I have never read anything in any book that placed either Adams or Hancock anywhere near the event. The British troops were not the bullies portrayed in the show, in fact the "real sons of Liberty" practiced tactics trying to goad troops into commiting "police brutality".

Another glaring inconsistency is having any Irish immigrants. There were more black members of the real Sons of Liberty than Irish. I would be willing to bet a weeks pay there were no Irish in Boston until 1830 - I could be wrong but Massachusetts was founded by puritans and settled by protestants. The current large Catholic population in Massachusetts didn't arrive for many decades after the revolution.

Yep the fake history channel. The only accurate history this channel does is WWI, WWII, VIETNAM WAR stuff. The rest is conspiracy loon bin therioes Alien Conspiracy report as fact by fake-ass scientists.

Hell I want them to do a 20/20 style documentary on the new species of Shark to be discovered in the Pacific, The rare Laser-shark or its cousin the sharktopus.

If you go to the board for Vikings, you'll find the same complaints about historical inaccuracy.

I knew I recognized the theme. Hans Zimmer makes spectacular scores for movies. It almost MAKES the movie. A good movie with terrible score could easily flop.

Very true. And they are probably still teaching that George Washington chopped down his father's cherry tree. I just got a book from my brother Lies My Teacher Taught Me. Think I'll read it tonight.

Rickathedj,

Indeed! In fact water was shunned because clean water was difficult to find. Children were often given watered down beer or wine.

Before the discovery of microbes, empirical evidence showed that people who drank beer and wine got typhoid fever or dysentery less often than people who drank water. Distilled spirits were a premium and a lot of it was used to "fortify" beer or wine.

Wine was very hard to come by because it was nearly all imported from Spain. The "Little Ice Age" drove most wine making south into Spain and Italy and is why northern Europeans became good at brewing and southern France, Spain and Italy became good at making wine.

Beer and ale were made locally by the colonists who usually always kept a barrel on hand.

It wasn't just Americans who drank like fish the whole western world was inebriated because of the problem of clean water and not understanding the reason behind diseases.

Regarding the cloth or bandanas, if such a thing ever happened it would have been the militias who would have used them. British soldiers were drilled to be automatons and any modification of their uniform would have been seen as insubordinate - I highly doubt they would have used them. In any case, it would have been mentioned before since wearing a cloth over any part of your visage would have been seen as cowardly and surely have been used as propaganda fodder.

Side note: A small group of Springfield area Massachusetts distillers revolted after the American Revolution because they objected to being taxed - the original bootleggers.