When we were in school (or sometimes even earlier), we become acquainted with historical figures like Queen Elizabeth I and George Washington. Usually, we saw a nice portrait of the person we’re learning about, but what we didn’t realize is that most of these images aren’t correct. What we mean is that many of these historical figures looked a lot different than that pretty painting. Shocker, we know.
Fun fact: artists used to get paid on commission. When they painted something, they’d get paid if the person liked the art. That meant the artist would paint their subject as beautiful as they could – maybe they’d even get a big tip. Because of this, people (especially royals) look a lot different than their supposed portraits.
We stumbled upon images of what historical figures actually looked like, and we had to share. Honestly, we never thought that some of these historical figures would look that much different from their art.
Funny enough this isn’t an antiquated concept, surely you know of a handy little something called photoshop? Oh, yes, you do! Those Instagram filters and editing apps aren’t a new idea. Everyone, even in the 1100s, wants to be seen as beautiful! So, we can’t blame them for forcing their artists to paint them as kindly as possible. Here’s what 24 historic figures actually looked like.
Everyone knows George Washington and his accomplishments as the first president of the United States. Most of the images we see of him show him with a stern brow and a strong jawline, which is pretty typical for the time – just take a look at any picture of Benjamin Franklin.
George Washington was America’s first president. He set the precedent for American leadership for generations to come. Of course, he and his cohorts at the time would want his likeness remembered as strong, stern and overall, not ugly! The facial features given to him for at the time of the painting’s rendering were seen as desirable and attractive.