Changing History

[naomi24]

Something someone on television said that got me thinking. If you could change one historical event, what would it be ?

[naomi24]

sandyRoe, perhaps I worded the question badly, but most of the contributors here seem to get the gist.

[Canary42]

Eve rejects the fruit offered by the serpent.

[DTCwordfan]

The arrow had missed Harold at Hastings - history would have been very different.

[naomi24]

DT, funny you should say that. I wondered what this country would have been like had the Norman invasion failed.

[emmie]

Hitler and all he stood for.

[emmie]

i believe he would have still come to power irrespective of WW1, someone on here said that if the shooting of Franz Ferdinand hadn't happened then the world would have been a better place, that wasn't the real catalyst for that catastrophe.

[DTCwordfan]

Probably a complete mess, naomi, though the Saxons were becoming more organised and taking things like art to a high level. Danziger's 1066 is an interesting read, 1215 even better as the documentation of life was that much richer following the Domesday Book and the rise of the influence of the Church in recording life at large.

[emmie]

The Romans invading, Britain had thriving communities, laws and women seemed to have had more input into daily life than they did after the Romans came and conquered. The thinking seems to be they gave us laws, roads, and government, but they also took what they wanted, and crushed anyone who got in their way.

[Kromovaracun]

"i believe he would have still come to power irrespective of WW1"

How so? Even before the Depression, Hitler wasn't really listened to in any numbers of significance - it was only at a time when there was significant feeling of national ruin and desperation for him to exploit that he started becoming popular.

Plus there's also the fact that the Versailles settlement was incredibly damaging to Germany for no particularly good reason other than a directionless feeling of vengeance on the part of the French government. WW1 gave Hitler a perfectly valid grievance with the international system which people became willing to listen to after the Depression.

[Kromovaracun]

"215 even better as the documentation of life was that much richer following the Domesday Book and the rise of the influence of the Church in recording life at large."

Which are both parts of the Norman legacy, surely...

[naomi24]

^^ I would have said so.

[emmie]

perhaps you are right, but economic depression as well as a strong leader can cause wars by dint of their personalities, Stalin had it as did Hitler, how else could you persuade millions to follow you.

[Kromovaracun]

I'd stay Stalin was able to mobilize people because of the promises he made, and the fact that he (largely) delivered on them - albeit in an extremely bloody, "ends-justifies-the-means" kind of way.

For example, most Soviet citizens had understood the urgent need for industrialisation for a long time, and the diaries and testimonials we have of the 1930s suggest that despite the horrific living conditions, many people remembered the period very favourably. Plus the vast new construction projects benefited a new class of people - managers,foremen,skilled workers etc. who were suddenly in gigantic demand - who then became very supportive of the government. Sheila Fitzpatrick's 'Everyday Stalinism' covers this quite well.

I'm not sure it had much to do with Stalin's charisma as a leader, as he didn't actually turn up on radio or newsreels all that often, and he certainly didn't have any oratorical skill of note. That's why the government was able to pass an actor off as him so successfully in 40s/50s movies. The few wars that Stalin actually instigated (e.g. Finland) tended to be fairly small, and out of the population's sight as much as possible - they weren't spun as the crusades that Hitler always seemed to be launching.

[ToraToraTora]

these sorts of questions are all totally futile as changing them may have been worse than what actually happenned. WW1 would have started anyway reagardless of the assination. The atomic bomb would have been invented at some point if not when it was and I would argue the atomic bomb has saved millions of lives. Hitler not born? Perhaps worse atrocities would be committed. you cannot second guess history.

[AB Editor]

"you can't keep a good story down"

I believe this applies to nearly every situation suggested here - especially the ones focused around remving a single person. The person doesn't hold the idea, we just place extra emphasis on that person in the story which conveys the idea.

[keyplus90]

I will read that book again and you ask this question again when you see the creator after this life has ended and ask him why he made the mistake by sending Muhammad to this world. You will get your answer.

[Octavius]

Stop Cheryl getting her bottom tattooed by someone other than me