A Great thread!

Xoxxon · May 3, 2003

This is the first thread I've ever initiated. Yay!

Now that that's out of the way, I have a question. You've got Alexander the Great, Frederick the Great, etc. How many "the Greats" (or the equivalent) are there in world history, and what does it take to be remembered as "the Great?" Oh, and just to load the question even further, what do you think those criteria betray about whoever is calling that person "the Great" in the first place?

w_mullender · May 5, 2003

Depends on the country you live in I think.

Vandelay · May 5, 2003

All "the Greats" have invariably killed or had killed lots and lots of people...

Cheers,
Vandelay

unmerged(1057) · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Vandelay
All "the Greats" have invariably killed or had killed lots and lots of people...

Cheers,
Vandelay

It depends really..Everybody knows Peter the Great..the Tsar..but we have another Peter the Great who is active right now..he doesn´t kill people...only teams...naturally I´m referring to Peter Forsberg..

Kasperus · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Xoxxon
This is the first thread I've ever initiated. Yay!

Now that that's out of the way, I have a question. You've got Alexander the Great, Frederick the Great, etc. How many "the Greats" (or the equivalent) are there in world history, and what does it take to be remembered as "the Great?" Oh, and just to load the question even further, what do you think those criteria betray about whoever is calling that person "the Great" in the first place?

I would not dare giving hard numbers but perhaps the fact that for most countries in the world between 1150-1419 there has been at least one ruler who has been known as 'the Great' tells already enough

. Obviously most of you never even heard of 80% of these 'the Great`s' which proves that greatness is quite relative.
I have btw a personal suspicion that some 'the Great`s' have been created only in the 19th century and later because a 'nation' could not be considered 'worthy' (according to itself at least) if it didn`t have at least one great ruler in its history.

w_mullender · May 5, 2003

Holland doesnt have a "great"

Kasperus · May 5, 2003

indeed, weird enough

Though there are a few counts who come close being called 'Magnanimous'

w_mullender · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Kasperus
indeed, weird enough Though there are a few counts who come close being called 'Magnanimous'

Maybe we can slip in Charlemagne as being dutch

Finnish Dragon · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Wasa
It depends really..Everybody knows Peter the Great..the Tsar..but we have another Peter the Great who is active right now..he doesn´t kill people...only teams...naturally I´m referring to Peter Forsberg..

As far as I understand Peter Forsberg isn´t a historical character and I wouldn´t call him Peter the Great because there is a possibility to confuse him with the Czar Peter the Great of Russia.

I know that the Swedes and the Finns does have bad memories about him. Btw Wasa, nice sign this time.

unmerged(1057) · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Finnish Dragon
As far as I understand Peter Forsberg isn´t a historical character and I wouldn´t call him Peter the Great because there is a possibility to confuse him with the Czar Peter the Great of Russia. I know that the Swedes and the Finns does have bad memories about him. Btw Wasa, nice sign this time.

He will be..

..and he is already called "Peter the Great" by the hockeymedia over there...hmm...Tsar Peter was great...for the russians...but my great great great grandfather Erik Eriksson lies somewhere deep in Ukrainian soil outside the town of Poltava....

unmerged(234) · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by w_mullender
Holland doesnt have a "great"

Not Sweden either, excepet fot Gustav Adolf who was awarded it by our parlament, but since no one uses it he hardly qualifies.

Xoxxon · May 5, 2003

Finnish Dragon: Everybody is a historical character!

Kasperus: It sounds like you're saying that "great"ness is really a manifestation of the rise of romantic nationalism in the 19th century. Is that accurate?

Thanks for the replies, guys!

Finnish Dragon · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Xoxxon
Finnish Dragon: Everybody is a historical character!

I won´t consider any living characters as historical ones. Mr. Forsberg is alive and he is a living character.

People who are dead are historical characters. I guess that many people will see this quite an academic issue anyway but this is my opinion.

Kasperus · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Xoxxon

Kasperus: It sounds like you're saying that "great"ness is really a manifestation of the rise of romantic nationalism in the 19th century. Is that accurate?

To a certain degree I think yes. Though I`m sure that there were many rulers who gained their nicks during their life (or shortly thereafter) an intriguing thing is that such nicks were more often based on much less "general" characteristics of a ruler but rather on small characteristics, mostly physicall or based on an event: the long, the short, the smart, the fat, the bearded... there is no real place for the great (or it must be because of his size) here. THat seem something that you could only decide afterwards, and mostly LONG afterwards. And especially for the obscure country with not many real historical rulers it seems to me that when such a country suddenly comes up with a 'the Great' ruler that no one ever heard of before, the nick has been the product of literature and legend and these did mostly come into existence in the 19th century.
Another thing is that many of such rulers were not really loved in their time - they were often despotic, warlike and decimated the ruling class. After the death of such monarch the country was often destroyed by wars, high taxation and political disorder. I cannot really imagine that the people and ruling elites especially thought right at the moment about such a ruler as 'the Great'. That usually came much later when he was being evaluated against other rulers who achieved nothing (and when people did not anymore think about the destruction of wars and taxations but about the glory of their nation in another victorious war).

w_mullender · May 5, 2003

The exception to your rule being Charlemagne, he was the hero of the middle ages.

Kasperus · May 5, 2003

Well, the heroism was created by poetry rather than greatness, not to mention that there are historians who don`t even believe that Charlemagne existed.

But indeed, the person of Charlemagne was not created in the 19th century and there are more exceptions like that obviously. Since I didn`t mention it as a 'rule'.

unmerged(10995) · May 5, 2003

Portugal don't have a "the great" king. The closer we have is "the conqueror", the nickname of our first king: D. Afonso Henriques.

unmerged(1057) · May 5, 2003

Hmm..I don´t think we in Sweden have labeled one of our own Kings great..but I think that the Germans actually call Gustavus Adolphus der Grosse..hmm..whether it be his size..or his political greatness...

Ape · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Wasa
Hmm..I don´t think we in Sweden have labeled one of our own Kings great..but I think that the Germans actually call Gustavus Adolphus der Grosse..hmm..whether it be his size..or his political greatness...

No your wrong, after GIIAs death, Riksdagen (Parliment) awarded him with "the Great".

unmerged(1057) · May 5, 2003

Originally posted by Ape
No your wrong, after GIIAs death, Riksdagen (Parliment) awarded him with "the Great".

Maybe so..but nowadays no one says so...

A Great thread!

Narf!

Human Rights Advisor of Atilla

CEO Vandelay Industries

Disinherited Knight

Field Marshmallow

Human Rights Advisor of Atilla

Field Marshmallow

Human Rights Advisor of Atilla

Field Marshal

Disinherited Knight

Lt. General

Narf!

Field Marshal

Field Marshmallow

Human Rights Advisor of Atilla

Field Marshmallow

Bad News Herald

Disinherited Knight

Norrlänning

Disinherited Knight