History You Can Trust vs. Disinformation.

History You Can Trust vs. Disinformation

I have been researching the histories of public-houses for a few decades, a period in which there has been dramatic changes in the way the public read and digest information. Moreover, technological advances have enabled many to post information in ways that old codgers could not have imagined back in the day. This can be very positive in many respects, particularly with first-hand accounts or memories posted on forums, blogs and social media. However, one has to tread very carefully as there is so much disinformation out there. Such a term may be a tadge harsh as I doubt if the amateur historian deliberately intends to mislead their readership. However, the vast array of platforms now means that factual errors are increasingly being compounded and perpetuated. Needless to say this is rather distressing to those who, like myself, make every effort to present history that can be trusted.

In compiling historical notes on public-houses I quite often come across certain details that simply cannot be verified, either through lost documents or the lack of a primary source. Sometimes I will add my own theory but always state where there is some conjecture on my part. What I will not do, however, is state something as fact unless I am sure of it. I have been known to go to extreme lengths to get to the bottom of things. For example, when researching the Anchor Inn at Digbeth, I went to the bank that was mortgagee to the publican in order to examine the deeds of the property. These had to be held at the bank for security on the funding so the only way to view them was to spread them out on a desk in the manager's office. I have also tracked down former publicans and interviewed them to gain an insight into the premises in days of old. I have spent countless hours in court records offices to compile accurate details of licence transfers. I have visited brewery offices to look at documents pertaining to houses within their estate. I have acquired historical documents when they have become available, not to mention spending considerable sums on original photographs. I could go on, but the end result is WYSIWYG, but with an enormous amount of effort to provide accurate information.

Where possible I source information from tithe maps and tithe agreement documents to determine early land ownership on which public-houses were built, and to determine any additional land ownership adjoining the plot.

It is getting increasingly problematic to find original indentures but I try to plod on through the electronic age to source the original documents pertaining to public-houses. Accordingly, if I state that a certain person was the first owner of a building it is because I have dug out a primary source such as an indenture and found the name within.

When typing up a list of sequential licensees for a public-house it is because I have been to the court records offices or archives to source the original clerk's register. I have been to places like Birmingham Magistrate's Court, Matlock Archives, Stafford County Court, Worcester Archives and the old archives at Coseley to name a few. So, apart from a possible misreading of the clerk's handwriting, these lists are completely accurate.

I note that some Edwardian rate books are appearing on genealogy sites which is great. However, I have done what they call a deep dive into really old rate books dating back to the early 19th century. These are excellent for determining if a licensee is an owner-publican or a tenant, along with details of rateable values.

One of my favourite sources of information are original building plans. So, if you find me describing a building in some detail it is almost certainly because I had the plan in front of me or I have taken photographs of the original held in the archives. I do not make fanciful or imagined remarks on the interior of a pub as I am describing exactly how the place was when constructed.

It can be tricky attempting to apply a date to a photograph that has no supplementary information. However, because I buy - yes, physically pay money for the images used on the site, with a few that I have obtained a licence to use, I can often zoom in to read information to accurately date an image. So, if I state a photograph was taken in a certain year, or between certain dates, it is because I can see something in the image that provides such information.

Amid the many thousands of words I have typed up there is the possibility that something does not quite add up. However, I have got to the point of tearing my hair out at some of the rubbish I read these days. I guess the worst crimes are committed on Facebook pages created for specific places. There are plenty of ridiculous posts that are completely inaccurate. But it is not just online where a right load of tosh is written. Some local history books are compiled by individuals too lazy to actually get their fingers grubby with historical documents. So without further ado, here are some of the errors I have recently encountered. And, yes, I have named names. They have the right to reply and hopefully they will. What is certain, with the advance of technology and media platforms, I have had enough. The alternative is to let it all slide. But what is the point of writing history for future generations if it is wrong?

This is scanned from Page 81 of "Blackheath : A Second Selection" by Anthony H. Page, a book issued by Sutton Publishing Limited in 2002. I met the author in the local archives some years ago. He seems like a nice chap and has produced a lot of history books on Blackheath and Rowley Regis. However, I have no idea how he came up with the caption for this photograph. He wrote : "With construction completed, the new Britannia Inn is pictured at its opening on 8 December 1930." This is incorrect. But here we have a classic example of this factually incorrect statement being compounded. The following is a screenshot taken from the Facebook Group "I Remember Blackheath & Rowley Regis," the image being posted by Mike Fenton who, I believe, is a moderator of the group.

Like thousands of individuals using social media, he had posted a photograph which infringes all the rules of copyright. In terms of text, did he check the information that he clearly read in the book by Anthony H. Page? No, he simply compounds the error by spreading it across a social media platform. For his caption he wrote : "The Britannia, pictured at its opening in 1930 ..... it was demolished in the late 1920s and re-built." When I took this screenshot he had 50 likes for his post. On May 22nd, 2021, he posted the same image with another caption claiming the pub opened in 1930. This time his post got 174 likes. So, that is a fair number of people who now think the pub was opened in 1930. And on it goes. The truth is that the brewery did not buy the land on which the pub was built until October 18th, 1937. The premises were opened on December 7th, 1939. The clerks at M&B were meticulous with their record-keeping and I found this information within a ledger held at the old Coors Museum at Burton-on-Trent. I took the trouble to travel to the former home of brewing to find this information. Sure, the original caption is only nine years out but if we do not bother to record things properly we may as well pack up and let everyone make things up. While we are at it let's say that the Battle of Waterloo took place in 1824. After all, it is only nine years out.

Ian M. Bott put together "Wednesbury In Old Photographs," published by Alan Sutton Publishing Limited in 1994. This is an extract from page 52 of the book. The caption for this image reads : "Workers from William Plimley's Carriage Works, Red Lion Mews, Bridge Street, on an outing to the Fighting Cocks Inn, near Wolverhampton, c.1905." Such charabanc excursions were enormously popular in the early 20th century, some of the parties being quite adventurous by travelling from the Black Country to the River Severn or a pocket of Shropshire. However, the author has suggested here that the workers of William Plimley's Carriage Works only travelled to a pub near Wolverhampton. If so, they needn't have booked the charabanc as they could have walked! I assume that the author is referring to the Fighting Cocks that once stood near Goldthorn Hill where an Aldi supermarket stands in the 21st century? True, in the Edwardian period there was not a great deal of development around the Parkfield pub, but more than can be seen in this rural setting. The site of the Fighting Cocks near Wolverhampton was not on a hill such as the slope seen in the above image. The building seen in the photograph still stands in the 21st century and the outline of the structure is pretty much the same as seen here. Trading as the Swallow's Nest in recent times, the pub stands near the top of the hill at Romsley in Worcestershire.

This publication is so bad I have a special section devoted to a critique of the book. The author, Steve James a.k.a. Steve Pratt, is a member of the British Guild of Beer Writers. However, he really should jump ship to the Crime Writers' Guild as he is guilty of theft of intellectual property. But where he has not been a complete plagiarist he has made loads of errors. Such is his appalling approach to historical facts, this author could perhaps claim to have coined the phrase Fake News. Click on the book to view his list of crimes.

This howler is taken from an information board installed at the Royal Victoria Gardens at North Woolwich. I do not know who put together the information for the local council but it is incorrect. William Holland was involved with the Royal Pavilion Hotel in later years, the licence of the hotel being transferred to him in May 1869. The Royal Pavilion Hotel was built as a result of the railway being opened in June 1847 - some 20 years earlier. One of the first references I have seen for the premises is dated June 1848. In that year William Holland would have been just 11 years of age!