Written by the Winners: Difference between revisions
→Video Games
Fixguy53ae (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
FlashRebel (talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 112:
* ''[[Final Fantasy Tactics]]'' is full of this trope. {{spoiler|Saint Ajora and the Lucavi in the past and then the official history of Ramza and the Kingdom as a whole.}} Possibly subverted by the Durai Reports though.
* In ''[[Guild Wars]]'', White Mantle history records Saul D'Alessio's final battle against the Charr as a defeat. In fact, D'Alessio won the battle, but his gods murdered most of his followers and abducted him, never to be seen again. Ironically, this would lead to D'Alessio being villified by the people who overthrew the White Mantle when he would have likely sympathized with their cause.
* ''[[Guild Wars 2]]'' shows that [[Evil Overlord|Palawa Joko]] has been busy rewriting Elona's history after reconquering and expanding his land, replacing his embarrassing defeats with easy victories and [[Fake Ultimate Hero|taking credit for everything the player characters did to save Tyria from destruction]]. Par for the course for a [[Narcissist]] of his caliber.
* Mentioned by developers of ''[[League of Legends]]'' as the reason why Demacia is perceived as "good", while Noxus is "evil".
** The Journal of Justice is written by the League(neutral organization) and averts this trope(see also Morgana vs Kayle).
Line 132 ⟶ 133:
** The objective historical truth about Drusilla is that the imperial oath was aimed at her as well as her brother, that the coins of the empire depicted her like they would depict any emperor, that she had a imperial cult around her just like the other emperors had, and that there was a national mourning when she died. Also, that she was married to another man and that her brother was married to another woman. Two of the funny quirks about the rumors about [[Brother-Sister Incest]] is that they 1. Seems to have started after Caligula's death, and thus long after Drusilla's death. 2. That the story was simplified by pretending that Drusilla's husband and Caligula's wife didn't exist, rather then commenting on how ''they'' reacted to the stories.
** The ruins of Pompeii were a great find in large part because they were uncontaminated by this (though it is also valued for a lot of mundane information about Roman life).
* The Byzantine practice of Iconclanism, the banning of the veneration of icons, became utterly hated after a century of intense religious debate, and thus, any emperor who even remotely promoted it got utterly slandered by the anti Iconlanists regardless of all the good they did for the Empire. Leo III, who founded the Isaurian dynasty and who saved the Byzantine Empire from the Umayyad Caliphate, was utterly demonized by his religious rivals and slammed for heresy, to the point that it took more recent historians decades to restore his reputation. and Leo was more fortunate, since even his fiercest enemies had to concede he did bring an end to a century of turmoil. His successor, Constantine V, who was even more Iconclanistic, managed to follow up on the reforms of his father and managed win a string of victories against the Abbasid Caliphate and the First Bulgarian Empire, finally becoming the Emperor under which Byzantium could go on the offensive. Nevertheless, Constantine was still hated and bashed, especially since iconclanism would mark the end of Byzantium's hold over the Papacy and mark the permanent split of the churches. Not surprisingly, it took centuries for moderate historians to start to heal these reputations, pointing out their positive sides and actions and the fact that many Byzantine citizens associated iconclanism with military victory, as the Byzantines started winning when iconclanism was instituted, a state of mind that persisted until the victories of the Macedonian dynasty, who were not iconclanists, showed that iconclanism was not necessary for victory or the Empire's well being.▼
* [[Richard of Gloucester|Richard III of England]] is a good example. While he wasn't the nicest guy around, he was also not the [[Complete Monster]] that the dynasty that succeeded him portrayed him as, either, as the modern research shows. It doesn't help that [[Shakespeare]] was [[Richard III|with the Tudors on this issue]].
* Ivan IV of Russia. Consider at the very least the fact that he actually ''prayed'' for those he sentenced to death. Though, that would not be especially abnormal for his highly religious time. Still, there is plenty of historical debate as to whether he destroyed Muscovite society and caused the Time of Troubles or whether he dug out the foundations of Peter the Great's new Russian Empire (or both). There is also debate as to whether his epithet "Groznii" means "Terrible" in the modern sense of "horrible" or in the Old Testament sense of "awe-inspiring". The fact remains that he has been used as a historical justification for the need of a strong leader in Russian society (see: Stalin).
Line 163:
{{quote|History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.}}
:(And he did: among other works, a six-volume History of the Second World War.)
▲* The Byzantine practice of
* Napoleon Bonaparte's early military career was remembered by history in drastically different ways than how it played out.
** His Italian campaign is depicted as Napoleon being completely undefeated, triumphing against all odds, without any support from the Directory, winning against a bunch of hopelessly incompetent Austrian generals. While Napoleon certainly did not lose any major battles, he still lost two battles at Bassano and Caldiero in November 1796. The Directory also sent Napoleon support and troops, albeit not nearly as much Napoleon asked for, which he complained bitterly about. Furthermore, the Austrian generals, while frequently out generaled by Napoleon, were not incompetent, and most of their strategies probably would have worked against a lesser commander. Very tellingly, they had Napoleon on the ropes twice, first in August during the first relief to the siege of Mantua, where Napoleon was effectively trapped between Quasdanovich and Wurmser, and it was only through an error by Wurmser and a strong rearguard action by Augerau before Napoleon managed to win at Castiliogne. The second time in November of 1796 during the third relief of the siege of Mantua, where Napoleon was outnumbered on every front, and where Alvinczi and Davidovich threatened to encircle him, and Wurmser could cut off his line of retreat. Napoleon actually seriously considered retreating all the way back to Milan, before realizing the Austrians were being too slow to take advantage of his defeats. He promptly launched a daring attack at Arcole, which allowed Napoleon to win and keep the Austrians at bay.
*** The two main battles of the Italian campaign that are remembered the most are often depicted vastly differently than how it really happened. The Battle of Lodi is frequently depicted as Napoleon first forging his legend, with the entire Austrian army defeated and Italy being open to Napoleon. While Lodi was where Napoleon first got his belief that he was better than most generals, the battle was actually quite a minor affair. Most of the Austrian army was already gone when the battle began in earnest and the fighting was primarily between the Austrian rearguard and Massena's decision. Furthermore, the Austrian rearguard suffered rather light casualties and escaped in good order, and Napoleon frequently conceded that the frontal attack would not have been needed since it was in the late evening. The battle of Arcole is also depicted as a classic Napoleonic plan, sweeping across the Alpone river and defeating the entire Austrian army with Napoleon taking the flag across in person. In reality, Arcole was a desperate last gamble to try to save the siege of Mantua, Napoleon had already been beaten on all three fronts three times, two of them defeated personally, and had the Austrians attacked, Napoleon would have had no choice but to retreat. Furthermore, Arcole was a messy battle, thanks to the terrain, neither side could deploy troops, and so it came down to troop quality, numbers and the skill of the commanders. Very tellingly, when the battle came to an end, the margin was very narrow and the Austrian army still presented a major threat. It was not until the Battle of Rivoli in January 1797 that Napoleon won a crushing victory that ended the war decisively in French favor.
** Napoleon's Egyptian campaign is also depicted as Napoleon being undefeated in battle, sweeping all before him and triumphing against all odds, securing Egypt and Syria as French territories and returning to France as a conquering hero. Although Napoleon certainly won a great victory at the Battle of the Pyramids, his expedition was stranded in Egypt due to the Battle of the Nile. Furthermore, his campaign into Syria was marred by controversy, as at Jaffa he ordered the execution of 3000 Ottoman prisoners under the arguments that he did not have the soldiers to guard them, several of them had broken their oaths not to fight against France, and they had executed his soldiers under a flag of truce. This controversy would stain Napoleon's reputation for the rest of his life. Furthermore, after a two month siege of Acre, Napoleon was forced to lift the siege and admit defeat, his first major strategic defeat of his career. After securing Egypt from an Ottoman invasion, Napoleon abandoned the army and left for France, a decision that would similarly haunt Napoleon's reputation, as he left his army sick, exhausted and no prospect of victory and Egypt was lost two years later.
{{reflist}}
| |||