You Are There Dennis Humphrey

Great presentation, but plays fast and loose with the facts.

Listened to a few episodes at this point. I can say that the presentation is extremely solid, the podcasters do an excellent job of making you feel that you are legitimately listening to a radio broadcast from the events they covered. No small feat considering how much suspension of disbelief this requires.

However I immediately noticed some concerning choices in favour of dramatic flair over factual accuracy. One stark example that sticks in my mind from the first episode is when the British make a point of denoting Napoleon as "His Majesty". This is even commented upon, which is then followed by a long exposition on the part of the British on why they chose to do this, because the British character means doing the right things at the right time.

The problem? This is the exact opposite of the way in which the British conducted themselves in this situation. Rather than addressing him as his Majesty, they refused to do anything of the sort, and instead addressed him by Military rank, and a lower Military rank than the highest he held even! (From memory, they addressed him as if he were a Colonel). Why the authors chose to make such a POINT of vearing off into historical innaccuracy completely baffles me: It neither really assists the narrative, nor helps us get an idea of his general treatments even if it were wrong in its particulars.

Again, we are not talking about a little slip up of the facts, but a very purposeful diversion, that lasts multiple minutes, into the spinning of a narrative that was the exact opposite of accurate. It just baffles me.

This is a great podcast in technical terms, and very well written, but I think those of us who've spent years listening to rigorous historical podcasts that are out there will feel disappointed.