Most unfulfilled potential
Forsakia
09-05-2006, 21:43
Slightly different slant on the same topic
Which historical figure could have had the biggest effect on history, but didn't?
Heron-Marked Warriors
09-05-2006, 21:44
Some guy/gal we've never heard of
Pantygraigwen
09-05-2006, 21:49
Slightly different slant on the same topic
Which historical figure could have had the biggest effect on history, but didn't?
Well, if those rogue white guys hadn't got that time machine and gone back and changed the past so that the Zulu World Imperiocracy never existed, Emperor Shaka IVth would have got a mention...
IL Ruffino
09-05-2006, 21:51
Kennedy?
Drunk commies deleted
09-05-2006, 21:52
Well the Roman Soldier who killed Archimedes kind of cut his potential short.
Um... Dave... You know who I mean. Big chap. Had hair.
Well 2 years ago I was going to raise an army and murder the ant people but I didn't so technically the answer could be me....but also I beleive Kurt Cobain was going to cure cancer before blowing his brains out.
What a stupid question - how are we supposed to know who could have made the biggest impact on history but didnt?
AB Again
09-05-2006, 22:01
Let us try and be generous here. We cannot possibly know who had the most unfulfilled potential, but we can have an opinion as to which historical figure, that we know of, had less effect on history than they should have had.
I would vote for Charlemagne. He ruled almost all of Western Euope but has left an almost non existent legacy. It seems to me that history would not be greatly different if he had never existed. (I could of course be wrong as no doubt some history buff will prove. :) )
I would vote for Charlemagne. He ruled almost all of Western Euope but has left an almost non existent legacy. It seems to me that history would not be greatly different if he had never existed. (I could of course be wrong as no doubt some history buff will prove. :) )
Well, he could be regarded as the founder of the Holy Roman Empire, which had a fairly strong effect on European history.
Although I don't know enough about him or the Empire to go into any more detail...
Lenin. If he hadn't died so early on in the Soviet Era, Stalins power would've weakened considerably, thereby leading to a less totalarian government when, even if, Stalin takes over when Lenin dies.
Alexander the Great's children?
Skinny87
10-05-2006, 02:16
I'm going to go with a relatively unknown person here.
Huey Long
Leidenschaft
10-05-2006, 02:22
We'll never know. It would be some guy that was a genious in anything he did, came up with 7 ways to end world hunger, politics and crime. Somethin like that :)
Ooo! I've got one! Rufus from Bill and Ted!
Mikesburg
10-05-2006, 03:16
Trying to pick someone who 'might' have had a great effect on history is obviously a bit of a stretch.
How about an influential person who might have done 'more' if fate hadn't intervened? I often wonder what would have happened if Julius Caesar had survived his assassination attempt on the Ides of March. Would he have made his invasion of Parthia? Would it have been succesful, and how much different would the world have been if Rome had stretched out into the middle-east and beyond?
Or would Caesar have further degenerated into worse tyranny, naming Caesarion the next in line to a new Roman/Egyptian Dynasty?