It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Books are one of our greatest resources, but many times in history books have been written which are misleading or untrue. In some cases this has lead to widescale death and destruction and evil governmental regimes.
This is a list of ten of the worst books of this type – books that have done more harm than good. The common thread in all of these books is deception – invariably not intentional, but the consequences are the same regardless.
This list is in no particular order.
10.Malleus Maleficarum
Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger, 1486
On the list because: It inflamed witch hunts across Europe
Malleus Maleficarum (The Hammer of Witchraft) was a manual for witch hunters and judges to catch witches and stamp them out. It came out just prior to the protestant reformation and it was one of the most popular books amongst the reformers who were wanting to smash “evil” out of their countries. Between 1487 and 1520, twenty editions of the Malleus were published, and another sixteen editions were published between 1574 to 1669. This book single-handedly launched centuries of witch hunts.
Originally posted by BarmyBilly
I was just about to say the qu'ran but i got beat to it
It has more anti-semitism in it than mein kampf!
Originally posted by LadyTrick
listverse.com...
interesting list but credit where credits due you've written down word for word from this podcast
Originally posted by solid007
Guy's if you have 3 hrs spare time, then this is very interesting!!
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by illuminatitanimulli
reply to post by sprocket2cog
Wiccans didn't exist in the 1400's.
Witchcraft in those days was considered folk magic. Or basically anything that wasn't christian.
.
Originally posted by alfa1
And here was I thinking that you'd put in the Bible or the Koran, or similar works.
Interesting list though. Let me add another.
Robert Lowth
A Short Introduction to English Grammar (1762):
His English grammar work was made at a time when 'English' as a subject in its own right was just starting to be tought, and found itself as one of the few textbooks available. Thus, its quickly became a popular standard text. Popular enough to be up to edition 45 by 1800.
Trouble is that Lowth (and his followers) loved Latin so much that he thought English should be more like Latin. And to make it so, he simply *invented new rules* for English and put them in his book. Rules that make sense in Latin but have not, are not and never will be actual rules in the way English is really spoken by people.
A large number of those dumb rules that teachers have punished students for getting wrong over the years are all his fault.
Rules about split infinitives, double negatives, sentences ending in prepositions, the use of "me" and "I" and many more that you get "wrong" every day... blame Lowth.
Originally posted by alfa1
And here was I thinking that you'd put in the Bible or the Koran, or similar works.
Interesting list though. Let me add another.
Robert Lowth
A Short Introduction to English Grammar (1762):
His English grammar work was made at a time when 'English' as a subject in its own right was just starting to be tought, and found itself as one of the few textbooks available. Thus, its quickly became a popular standard text. Popular enough to be up to edition 45 by 1800.
Trouble is that Lowth (and his followers) loved Latin so much that he thought English should be more like Latin. And to make it so, he simply *invented new rules* for English and put them in his book. Rules that make sense in Latin but have not, are not and never will be actual rules in the way English is really spoken by people.
A large number of those dumb rules that teachers have punished students for getting wrong over the years are all his fault.
Rules about split infinitives, double negatives, sentences ending in prepositions, the use of "me" and "I" and many more that you get "wrong" every day... blame Lowth.
Originally posted by sprocket2cog
Originally posted by illuminatitanimulli
reply to post by sprocket2cog
Wiccans didn't exist in the 1400's.
Witchcraft in those days was considered folk magic. Or basically anything that wasn't christian.
.
Dude, no need to jump from a great height... lets use the word Pagan then shall we, oh and modern English didn't exist in 1400 either so i doubt it was actually called folk magic either
peace.
edit on 20-4-2011 by sprocket2cog because: (no reason given)