Your favourite historical personality

[Jodien]

Ask the pontians and armenians. o

Yeah we can ask. The pontian and greek issue about Ataturk was a population exchange with Greece, where the Muslims of Greece were deported to Turkey and the Greek of Turkey to Greece. Yes, it was a very traumatic event on cultures' behalf but it was an agreement between the two countries.

The thing about armenians was an entirely different issue. Ataturk was an ordinary officer in Gallipoli while the genocide was being executed by the Ottomans in the east.

Actually, Ataturk and Venizelos became best friends after the wars, their good relation reflected on the politics of the two countries for some time.

 

[Jodien]

Well,Suleyman was a few hundreds of years ago,and Hitler was 65 years ago,so they cant really be compared,and then,if we were going to say Suleyman was like Hitler,then that would probably be true for a lot of pre-20th century rulers...

I was talking about Selim, not Suleiman. And yeah, you're right there. Most of the rulers were brutal through the medieval times, but Selim was the singlemost brutal and violent ruler among the others of his office, if we only compare him to the other sultans of OE.

 

[qwertyuiop2]

Yeah we can ask. The pontian and greek issue about Ataturk was a population exchange with Greece, where the Muslims of Greece were deported to Turkey and the Greek of Turkey to Greece. Yes, it was a very traumatic event on cultures' behalf but it was an agreement between the two countries.

The thing about armenians was an entirely different issue. Ataturk was an ordinary officer in Gallipoli while the genocide was being executed by the Ottomans in the east.

Actually, Ataturk and Venizelos became best friends after the wars, their good relation reflected on the politics of the two countries for some time.

Κilling thousands of pontians was an agreement?

You are talking about the "population exchange" , which is a different thing. (And the turks didn't keep the agreement, but this is another topic).


Αnd the armenian genocide began when Abdul Hamid was a sultan, but the biggest part of massacres was done by the New Turks.

 

[okyriosy]

Κilling thousands of pontians was an agreement?

You are talking about the "population exchange" , which is a different thing. (And the turks didn't keep the agreement, but this is another topic).


Αnd the armenian genocide began when Abdul Hamid was a sultan, but the biggest part of massacres was done by the New Turks.

The fact that he played a major role in Balkan history makes him a truly important figure...

Anyway, my personal favorite is John III Doukas Vatatzes, an emperor of Nicaea 1221-1254 (a piece of the then dismantled Byzantine Empire)

He had a simple idea: Every one should earn money by working and producing...
This does not should really revolutionary nowadays, but for the Middle ages, for a society based on serfdom, it was. He even made his one wine!

[...] He also acquired herds of horses, cattle, sheep and pigs and several species of domesticated birds. From these he received a high income every year. He recommended not only his relatives but also the other nobles to do the same. He wanted everyone to meet his needs from his own sources, so as not to lay his hand like a predator on the assets of poor and weaker classes, so that the Roman government should be completely exempt from social injustice. Soon the stores were full, while roads and streets and paddocks and stables could barely fit any more animals or flocks of birds.

(Nicephorus Gregoras, Roman History II, 6, p. 42)

(Sorry for the quality of the translation)

 

[madcrashtestdummy]

Franklin finally getting some respect!

 

[qwertyuiop2]

The fact that he played a major role in Balkan history makes him a truly important figure...

Anyway, my personal favorite is John III Doukas Vatatzes, an emperor of Nicaea 1221-1254 (a piece of the then dismantled Byzantine Empire)

He had a simple idea: Every one should earn money by working and producing...
This does not should really revolutionary nowadays, but for the Middle ages, for a society based on serfdom, it was. He even made his one wine!


(Sorry for the quality of the translation)

He played a major role in the Balkan history, but he also committed a lot of crimes against humanity.

 

[okyriosy]

Franklin finally getting some respect!

Well Franklin lived some centuries later, he was living in the era of Enlightenment and he also visited France...

Ideas are, IMO, more important than the most brilliant campaign.
It is also quite interesting to find the roots of the democratic welfare state in the medieval and post-medieval centuries.
John III and a few other personalities really formed modern Europe.
I personally find astonishing that an emperor worked in the fields.

 

[unmerged(10262)]

Well Franklin lived some centuries later, he was living in the era of Enlightenment and he also visited France...

Ideas are, IMO, more important than the most brilliant campaign.
It is also quite interesting to find the roots of the democratic welfare state in the medieval and post-medieval centuries.
John III and a few other personalities really formed modern Europe.
I personally find astonishing that an emperor worked in the fields.

Reminds me of Sejong the Great. One of very very few kings that really did something immensely useful.

edit yes I am bitter Chinese student

 

[Swamp Rat]

Franklin finally getting some respect!

Who and what are you responding to??

 

[madcrashtestdummy]

Who and what are you responding to??

I posted late at night and hadn't gotten to the newest page. It was a few pages back. Anyways, to defend my late night stupidity :wacko: , Franklin was a great man, and definetly one of my favorites. I think he is greatly underrated nowadays, especially when you consider how popular he was during his day. He may not be DaVinci status, but he's up there, and if you add in his personality and political accomplisments, definetly an important person in even todays world.

 

[Arilou]

Reminds me of Sejong the Great. One of very very few kings that really did something immensely useful.

edit yes I am bitter Chinese student

Not to rain on Sejong's parade, but is inventing a new script really that useful? More than wasting most of his subject's lives in futile wars, of course, but still.

 

[unmerged(10262)]

Not to rain on Sejong's parade, but is inventing a new script really that useful? More than wasting most of his subject's lives in futile wars, of course, but still.

Well so far he is the only ruler in the history of East Asia with the balls to change it (with the exception of Mao but he opted out later). It also remains virtually the only logical script in the world today as well. And the explicit goal with the reform was to increase literacy. Name one king that did something more useful? and just giving away his power dosent count

 

[unmerged(74659)]

Leon Trotsky.

 

[unmerged(116645)]

khalid ibn alwalid

never defeated and the battle he retreated in was probably one of the best retreat plans

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Leon Trotsky.

Explain your choice else there is no point in having threads like these.

 

[me987654]

I find it interesting how much the human mind is fascinated by horrible mass-murderers like Hitler, Stalin and Mao... I freely admit that I have always been very interested in reading about these types (particularly stalin and hitler)

Maybe it's the same nature that prevents us from averting our eyes from a disaster.. like a horrible auto accident.. you can't help but want to look


Although I suspect we'd have different feelings if we had experienced any of these types of rulers personally.

 

[unmerged(74659)]

Explain your choice else there is no point in having threads like these.

My fault, I just find his theories fascinating and some of the things he did was rather an impressive (rebuilding the red army for one) i just find some of the old Bolsheviks very interesting.

 

[unmerged(79089)]

Oh, so many to choose from...
Generals:
Brusilov - One of the few (if not only) competent Russian Generals of the Great War. Brusilov Offensive, pioneering tactics, etc.
Stilicho - Being (arguably) the last obstacle between Rome and the Barbarians swarming all about, he won battle after battle, racing from corner to corner of the Western Empire, defeating countless barbarians. Then he was considered a traitor by Honorius and executed for (among other things) being half barbarian. :O
Scipio Africanus - Roman Hannibal, what's not to love? Of course he doesn't have the under-dog factor, but I find his brilliance in command amazing.

Leaders:
Julian the Apostate - the last and most out of place pagan Roman Emperor. Maybe not so much a pagan as an Anti-Christian, his humourous attempts and stamping out christianity ultimately failed. Shame
Mohammad Mossadeq - Democratically elected Socialist. Nationalizes British Pretroleum assets. You can imagine the British and American didn't like that. Long story short, Shah comes to power, tortures tens of thousands, Revolution, etc.

 

[Lord Valentine]

Oh I hardly know where to begin.

Benito Mussolini: If you ask me a heavily undervalued personality. I thought of him as nothing else than a grotesque buffoon or Hitlers semi-comical sidekick until I actually read up on him. I found him to be a by far more complex and interesting personality than Hitler, who is well very one-dimensional and inhuman. Lacking the bloodthirstiness’ of say a Hitler, Stalin or a Mao and so much more interesting in his political views and theories (especially after he became a lot more contemplative after his fall from power in 1943) he to me is by far the most fascinating dictator of the 20th century.

Martin Luther: Martin Luther for me ranks as one of the greatest Germans of all time. Here is a man whose violent passion for the liberating theology that he had won in years of severe tribulations was so great that he was ready to proclaim it alone to a hostile world and against all earthly and temporal authority of his time.

Alexios Komnenos I and Philip II of Macedon: I have lumped these two together because they stand out for a kind of personality I in general admire and find fascinating: Great Reformers. Both took over states that seemed to be on the brink of total collapse and through smart, and persistent reform policies turned them into real regional powerhouses upon which their successor could build and did build.

Cicero: Cicero to me a is a very personal role-model. Here is a man who for all his shortcomings (like his oversized ego, incredible need for self-aggrandizement etc.) believed in his times version of "liberty" above everything else and was ready to give his live for it. Although he had only his voice and eloquence in an age where politics was made by those with swords he spoke out against despotism till the end and paid the price. Now a lot of people say "well he was a short-sighted fool because it was obvious that the Republic wasn’t working and did not solve the problems of it's time." But if sometime in the future we were to find out that Democracy and liberty are outdated and can't solve the problem of our time I would that I would have the moral courage of Cicero to stand up for liberty.

Marcus Aurelius and Frederick the Great: These two are once again typical for a kind of ruler I admire. High-minded, enlightened rulers who show that you do not have to be a Machiavelli to retain and effectively use power and that as a ruler your supreme duty is to see to the wellbeing of your subjects.

So that's my ten cents.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Posts about the Dolchstoßlegende moved to here