Popular misconceptions about 19th century History

[Flashman]

President Lincoln is cited as shutting down newspapers during the war, along with jailing political opponents and journalists, and suspending habeas corpus. That also sounds authoritarian to me.

Rather a large difference between limiting a free press during a national crisis/war and limiting a free press during peacetime in order to further the cause of human chattel slavery.

 

[Tanc49]

Chinese technological stagnation was purely the fault of the Qing Dynasty

Because of Confucianism and prolific consumption of rice, China is fully adverse to any technological and social innovation

 

[skarosianlifeform]

And also Japan didn't change AT ALL during the pre-Meiji isolation period, and instead was in total stasis.

 

[Gloss]

Because of Confucianism and prolific consumption of rice, China is fully adverse to any technological and social innovation

Northern China eats grain, must explain their superiority. /s

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

My list of misconceptions:


1. Ottoman Empire failed to reform.

2. War of independences created the States in the Balkans (it was Russia, it was always Russia).

3. Every European Power had the goal to drive the Turks out of Europe (to be fair, it was probably desired as an utopia but nobody wanted the other to fill the vacuum abandoned by the Ottomans).

4. Russia with a different Czar (Constantin, longer Alexander II etc...) is destined to turn in to a constitutional monarchy.

5. Austria-Hungary is destined to lose all/most of their non-German lands.

 

[Brunaburh]

1. The Irish potato famine was a natural disaster.
2. Italian unification was inevitable and the Italian population welcomed it.
3. Southern Italy had a small brigand problem rather than a nationalist terror.

 

[cmakk1012]

2. War of independences created the States in the Balkans (it was Russia, it was always Russia).

Hey, that’s not fair! Sometimes it was Britain!

4. Russia with a different Czar (Constantin, longer Alexander II etc...) is destined to turn in to a constitutional monarchy.

I’m almost tempted to argue the opposite—that no matter who was on the throne the nation would eventually become oppressively totalitarian.

 

[123456789blaaa]

Here's another: the idea that the Ottomans had no involvement in the Scramble for Africa. The disaster of the 1877-78 war severely limited their options but there was a tremendous amount of detail and interest put into plans to extend OE interests with Muslim Africa states/peoples. The Ottoman Scramble for Africa: Empire and Diplomacy in the Sahara and the Hijaz is a great book that goes into this.