NationStates Jolt Archive

Who was the greatest Englishman?

Who was the greatest Englishman?

John Donne. I really have no good basis for that opinion but I felt like posting anyway. :p

Why is Elizabeth the First not on this poll? Or do you mean 'Englishman' literally, and not just to mean 'someone from England'?

EDIT* Why, out of interest, have you included Henry the VIII and Captain Cook? The Cappie was a courageous person, but hardly a contender for being the best Englishman. And if you want a good male Tudor monarch, Henry VII is a better bet IMO. He's just not as well known since he never had a weight problem... :D

I said Isaac Newton. He did a lot of great things for us. Sure, he was a bit of a wacko, but still...

Why is Elizabeth the First not on this poll? Or do you mean 'Englishman' literally, and not just to mean 'someone from England'?

EDIT* Why, out of interest, have you included Henry the VIII and Captain Cook? The Cappie was a courageous person, but hardly a contender for being the best Englishman. And if you want a good male Tudor monarch, Henry VII is a better bet IMO. He's just not as well known since he never had a weight problem... :D

Because I was limited to 9 +"other" options...

Why is Elizabeth the First not on this poll? Or do you mean 'Englishman' literally, and not just to mean 'someone from England'?

EDIT* Why, out of interest, have you included Henry the VIII and Captain Cook? The Cappie was a courageous person, but hardly a contender for being the best Englishman. And if you want a good male Tudor monarch, Henry VII is a better bet IMO. He's just not as well known since he never had a weight problem... :D

Or six wives. :)

Thomas Moore.

And, warped as it may seem, but because of the lack of options, my choice is other: John Locke

Wasn't John Locke a Scot?

Or six wives. :)
Or, according to one foreign ambassador, a neck that was 'rather long and thick'.

Or, according to one foreign ambassador, a neck that was 'rather long and thick'.

Then it is indeed fortunate it was not he who had to be beheaded. They might have had to whack it a few times before it finally came off...

John Locke was, for formulating the ideas of liberty that so much of the Anglo-American world was built upon, and later, much of the world.

Wasn't John Locke a Scot?
Nope (http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/constitution/locke-bio.html), not unless Bristol was part of Scotland in 1632. Perchance you are thinking of Adam Smith (http://www.heartoscotland.com/Categories/adam-smith.htm) or David Hume (http://www.scottishdocuments.com/content/famousscots.asp?whichscot=21)? (They are among my favorite Scotsmen, which I may do a poll on as well...)

Nope (http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/constitution/locke-bio.html), not unless Bristol was part of Scotland in 1632. Perchance you are thinking of Adam Smith (http://www.heartoscotland.com/Categories/adam-smith.htm) or David Hume (http://www.scottishdocuments.com/content/famousscots.asp?whichscot=21)? (They are among my favorite Scotsmen, which I may do a poll on as well...)

ok, thanks. It's been a while since I studied the enlightenment!!
I remember being impressed at the time about the amount of creative thinkers that have come out of Scotland... even if Locke wasn't among them.

Probably Captain James Cook, he not only founded my Country, but also fulfilled another prophecy of Israel.

Why is Elizabeth the First not on this poll? Or do you mean 'Englishman' literally, and not just to mean 'someone from England'?

EDIT* Why, out of interest, have you included Henry the VIII and Captain Cook? The Cappie was a courageous person, but hardly a contender for being the best Englishman. And if you want a good male Tudor monarch, Henry VII is a better bet IMO. He's just not as well known since he never had a weight problem... :D

Here Here

And what about Henry V hmmmmmmmmm

Here Here

And what about Henry V hmmmmmmmmm

He's better than most on that list, but my vote goes to Lord Nelson.

Does Churchill really count as an Englishmen?

He was 1/2 American......

Does Churchill really count as an Englishmen?

He was 1/2 American......
Churchill was as English as George Washington was American. Er... yeah.

Edmund Blackadder was the greatest. No question.

You could have saved some space by leaving St George out - he certainly wasn't English and probably never set foot in England in his life. We don't know with any certainty where he was born, but we do know he was a Roman soldier and that he died at Lydda in Palestine in 250 AD. His legendary dragonslaying took place (in the oldest versions of the story) at Silene in Lybia.

Easy answer, Oliver Cromwell. Killed a King, formed the British Commonwealth, made the Parliament the instrument of Government, etc...

Easy answer, Oliver Cromwell. Killed a King, formed the British Commonwealth, made the Parliament the instrument of Government, etc...
Cromwell dismissed the Parliament shortly after coming to power, ruling as the dictator of England until his death. He was also a genocidal maniac, but he did overhaul the navy and maritime laws thus creating the foundation for the worldwide British Empire and its dominance of the seas.

Cromwell dismissed the Parliament shortly after coming to power, ruling as the dictator of England until his death. He was also a genocidal maniac, but he did overhaul the navy and maritime laws thus creating the foundation for the worldwide British Empire and its dominance of the seas.

True enough, but he then reintroduced parliament without the prebyterian monarchists so as to use parliament in order to support his position

William Blackstone :cool:

True enough, but he then reintroduced parliament without the prebyterian monarchists so as to use parliament in order to support his position
Actually he never reintroduced parliament... when King Charles was defeated the Presbyterians had already been marginalized in England and removed from Parliament. The remaining Parliament were all republicanists and Puritans, but even then they did not always back Cromwell's policies so Cromwell disbanded Parliament, which did not do anything until after his death.

Actually he never reintroduced parliament... when King Charles was defeated the Presbyterians had already been marginalized in England and removed from Parliament. The remaining Parliament were all republicanists and Puritans, but even then they did not always back Cromwell's policies so Cromwell disbanded Parliament, which did not do anything until after his death.

Actually Cromwell did reintroduce Parliament, it was known (strangely) as the second Parliament. It was this Parliament that with "Lamberts consent formed the instrument of government though which Parliament was protected at last" from both himself and following monarchs!

Benjamin Disraeli

Saint George was by no means English. Ethnicly he'd be a semite so Jewish or Arab.

No Lord Palmerston?

No Pip the Elder?

Whhhhhat!?

Actually Cromwell did reintroduce Parliament, it was known (strangely) as the second Parliament. It was this Parliament that with "Lamberts consent formed the instrument of government though which Parliament was protected at last" from both himself and following monarchs!
The whole English Civil War episode may have strengthened the role of Parliament in the long run, but Cromwell himself did not actively and willingly strengthen the institution, though his totalitarian ways probably encouraged future Englishmen to trust Parliament rather than a monarch figure like the King or a Lord Portector. In Cromwell's time Parliament was a nonentity. Sure the Parliamentarians met, but they did not do anything. Cromwell could get his money however he wanted, even if there wasn't a parliament. It was by no means a viable "instrument of government" during Cromwell's time, though it later became stronger and stronger. England was a dictatorship organized into military garrisons and all the real power lay in Cromwell and his military officers.

It's a toughie. Depends on how you weight personal achievement against hindsight. And of course whether you value culture over science over the ability to kick arse.

Off that list, perhaps Cook. But I chose 'other'. Not sure who.

St. George is also the patron saint of Moscow and a lot of other places, not just England.

Who was the greatest Englishman?



...
Saint George?
...

Well, he certainly wasn't an englishman.

The whole English Civil War episode may have strengthened the role of Parliament in the long run, but Cromwell himself did not actively and willingly strengthen the institution, though his totalitarian ways probably encouraged future Englishmen to trust Parliament rather than a monarch figure like the King or a Lord Portector. In Cromwell's time Parliament was a nonentity. Sure the Parliamentarians met, but they did not do anything. Cromwell could get his money however he wanted, even if there wasn't a parliament. It was by no means a viable "instrument of government" during Cromwell's time, though it later became stronger and stronger. England was a dictatorship organized into military garrisons and all the real power lay in Cromwell and his military officers.

Cromwell did strengthen Parliament before he died because of one major factor, he couldn't see any single person that could lead the country after his death. He had hoped to leave it to his son, but he eventually thought very little of him.
Cromwell was however merely an individual of his time. He acted, originally, with what he felt was Parliaments best interest however I agree that he certainly wielded the power within the country. Unlike a Dictator however, Cromwell did require Parliaments support to pass any laws, it just so happened that he also wielded the power to disband Parliament (like any prior Monarch from the Tudor and Stuart periods)
Also, if Parliament was now trusted by the people why would they then allow Charles I's heir to assume the throne after Cromwell's death!

It's hard to say who the "greatest" English person of all time is. I actually voted for Shakespeare myself because a handful of the other options have historical credibility thanks to the benefit of hindsight.

I'm quite the Benjamin Disraeli fan but there are also figures who never quite achieved the dizzy heights of English glory (Ld. Liverpool, Randolph Churchill Henry VII, Ld. Asquith etc.) who often go unrecognised but whose contributions were remarkable. Although I'm aware he wasn't English, William III's arrival on the throne in 1688 put Britain on the path to parliamentary democracy and limited monarchy and to the freedoms we enjoy today.

I think it depends on what the individual's perception of "greatness" is, Shakespeare help the English language to develop, but would it have done it without him?

Shakespear but no Chaucer?

And why isn't Oscar Wilde there?!

You and your conventional best englishmen :p

And why isn't Oscar Wilde there?!


Possibly because he was Irish?

Shakespeare, since he was a man of the arts and his plays are still played (wow).

Churchil is a good second since he was the man that did not surrender ("only blood sweat and tears") and was on the Western front the most important factor. Thank you "albion"" :) A men in wich homecountry the flanders fields puppies are spelled daily on the graves around Ypres (our first war together in the 20th c.) will never forget this.

Cromwell did strengthen Parliament before he died because of one major factor, he couldn't see any single person that could lead the country after his death. He had hoped to leave it to his son, but he eventually thought very little of him.
Cromwell was however merely an individual of his time. He acted, originally, with what he felt was Parliaments best interest however I agree that he certainly wielded the power within the country. Unlike a Dictator however, Cromwell did require Parliaments support to pass any laws, it just so happened that he also wielded the power to disband Parliament (like any prior Monarch from the Tudor and Stuart periods)
Asking Parliament for money and support was just a formality... even today most dictatorships in the world technically "require" legislative support for laws. That doesnt mean anything though... it is just a ploy to fool the masses into thinking something lawful and democratic is going on when in reality the strongman is in total control. Parliament had even less power than before Cromwell because in CHarles's day Parliament at least could call up an army while under Cromwell's rule the military was completely under control of the de facto monarch - Cromwell.

Also, if Parliament was now trusted by the people why would they then allow Charles I's heir to assume the throne after Cromwell's death!
People were tired of Cromwell's rule longed for the old days when there was a king and parliament, instead of all power concentrated in the hands of a puritan dictator. England has always had a king and the people were uncomfortable with living under Cromwell's radical government and preferred the familiarity of having a king and court. Besides, the king of England was the head of the Anglican church and most English Christians were obliged by their faith to support the king. The restoration of the monarchy doesn't mean Parliament is weaker though... in fact Parliament got new powers including control of the royal army, making it stronger than both when Charles i was king and when Cromwell was Protector. Ever since the bad experiences with monarchical tyranny and Cromwellian oppression the Parliament, viewed as a moderate force, has been getting stronger and more policy-making has been entrusted to Parliament instead of the king.

Possibly because he was Irish?

Yeah, and Georgey over there is the epidimy of englishness :p

Yeah, and Georgey over there is the epidimy of englishness :p

Yup: I already pointed this out in post #33.

Asking Parliament for money and support was just a formality... even today most dictatorships in the world technically "require" legislative support for laws. That doesnt mean anything though... it is just a ploy to fool the masses into thinking something lawful and democratic is going on when in reality the strongman is in total control. Parliament had even less power than before Cromwell because in CHarles's day Parliament at least could call up an army while under Cromwell's rule the military was completely under control of the de facto monarch - Cromwell.


People were tired of Cromwell's rule longed for the old days when there was a king and parliament, instead of all power concentrated in the hands of a puritan dictator. England has always had a king and the people were uncomfortable with living under Cromwell's radical government and preferred the familiarity of having a king and court. Besides, the king of England was the head of the Anglican church and most English Christians were obliged by their faith to support the king. The restoration of the monarchy doesn't mean Parliament is weaker though... in fact Parliament got new powers including control of the royal army, making it stronger than both when Charles i was king and when Cromwell was Protector. Ever since the bad experiences with monarchical tyranny and Cromwellian oppression the Parliament, viewed as a moderate force, has been getting stronger and more policy-making has been entrusted to Parliament instead of the king.

Under Charles though Parliament could call up the Army the Armies primary responsibility was to the King (as it is to the Queen today). The reason Cromwell was able to use his 'new model army' against the King was because Cromwell knew and agreed with many of the Armies Generals.

For the most part, the English population didn't see any real differences between Cromwell or the Monarchy (primarily because they were even more ignorant of politics than they are today, though they had the excuse of limited education) as Cromwell acted like a Monarch himself. However, by the end of his 'reign' Cromwell had instilled the power of Government into Parliament. This is still felt today under the present Parliament of the UK.

I am not saying that Cromwell was a nice guy, that I would disagree with. I do feel though that he was one of the greatest Englishmen because of his achievements, most of which are still felt to the present day.

Thomas Paine.

I'd vote for Robert Owen, founder of British Socialism ...or Owenism depending on your view.

Who was the greatest Englishman?
Charlie Chaplin.
John Wycliffe.
Tom Paine.

My top three

I'd vote for Robert Owen, founder of British Socialism ...or Owenism depending on your view.

Ah, but Owen was Welsh, not English.

I'd vote for Robert Owen, founder of British Socialism ...or Owenism depending on your view.
Bloody technocrat.

Ah, but Owen was Welsh, not English.
Well, technically Wales is part of England.

I would say William Shakespear. But I have to admitt that I always favour the writers over the politicans - at least in the nations where I know about them.
But that Shakespear was a the greatest writer of England and certainly one of the greatest of Europe is absolutely clear. So my vote goes for him.

Well, technically Wales is part of England.

No, technically Wales is part of the UK. England is part of the UK, too.

Abiezer Coppe or John Lilliburne.

Henry II
Henry V
Flemming
Raleigh
Lord Nelson
"Eddie the Eagle"
Victoria
Chaucer (my pick)

Edmund Blackadder without a doubt!!!
but seriously i'd have to vote for a person who isn't on that list, anyone heard of Isambard Kingdom Brunel? I thought not:)

Henry II
Henry V
Flemming
Raleigh
Lord Nelson
"Eddie the Eagle"
Victoria
Chaucer (my pick)

If you mean Alexander Fleming, the I-can't-be-bothered-cleaning-my-glassware discoverer of penicillin -- he was Scottish. And if you want to get picky (and I do :)), Henry II was French.

No, technically Wales is part of the UK. England is part of the UK, too.
Wales was conquered by England centuries back, making it part of England. Scotland and England became a Union after two acts of Parliament (Union of the Crowns, and Union of the Parliaments)

Wales was conquered by England centuries back, making it part of England. Scotland and England became a Union after two acts of Parliament (Union of the Crowns, and Union of the Parliaments)

Edward I did conquer Wales, but then he made his son Edward Prince of Wales (a title previously held by Llewellyn ap Gruffydd, who had previously accepted Henry III of England as his feudal superior). Feudally speaking, Wales was a principality, i.e. an area ruled by a prince. The English conquest did not make it a part of England; rather, it became a territory ruled by a prince who was a vassal of the English king and who also happened to be the king's eldest son. Not the same thing as absorbing it into the kingdom of England. The territorial holdings of the English kings and their relatives were not the same thing as "England". Edward I was Duke of Aquitaine, for example: he held the territory, but it was never a part of England.

The Welsh border marked, and still marks, the point where England ends and Wales begins. Essentially, although Wales has been ruled by England since the late 13th century, it still exists as a distinct and separate area outside of England.

My choice is Lord Nelson.

Of course I am a warmongering fool but Nelson's strategies were brilliant. His charisma was also amazing. Even the roughest, dirtiest sailors were quite fond of him, despite being nearly opposite. He was short, small, slightly effeminate, not your idea of inspiring.

Anyone heard of Isambard Kingdom Brunel? I thought not:)

I have! He was that Victorian Engineer guy. I saw parts of his thing on that "Greatest Britons" show a while ago.

John Locke, of course.

His ideas of life, liberty and property led directly to Jefferson's Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.