NationStates Jolt Archive

Self-explanatory, really.

I think highly of Harald Hardraada ( Hard-council ).

Now that I've caused the death,
of 13 of mine enemies,
I kill without compunction,
and remember all my killings.
Treason must be scotched,
by fair means or by fouls.
For mighty oaks grow
from tiny acorns.

( Attributed to him )

No one was ever going to name HIM the Unready or the Meek... ;)

http://www.camelot4colors.com/pv1.GIF
King Arthur and Prince Valiant!!!

King Arthur and Prince Valiant!!!


As they said in Cornwall 500AD:

Arthur slept on that stone. He'll come again!

Um... Hardraada. Wasn't he the one Godwinson sent off before marching south to lose to William, in 1066, and thus never ruled Britain?

My favourite has to be Boudicca. Great woman, fought the Romans to the end, female leader of the Celtic patriarchic society in war, and died rather than getting captured...


[14.35] Boudicea, with her daughters before her in a chariot, went up to tribe after tribe, protesting that it was indeed usual for Britons to fight under the leadership of women. "But now," she said, "it is not as a woman descended from noble ancestry, but as one of the people that I am avenging lost freedom, my scourged body, the outraged chastity of my daughters. Roman lust has gone so far that not our very persons, nor even age or virginity, are left unpolluted. But heaven is on the side of a righteous vengeance; a legion which dared to fight has perished; the rest are hiding themselves in their camp, or are thinking anxiously of flight. They will not sustain even the din and the shout of so many thousands, much less our charge and our blows. If you weigh well the strength of the armies, and the causes of the war, you will see that in this battle you must conquer or die. This is a woman's resolve; as for men, they may live and be slaves."

Um... Hardraada. Wasn't he the one Godwinson sent off before marching south to lose to William, in 1066, and thus never ruled Britain?

My favourite has to be Boudicca. Great woman, fought the Romans to the end, female leader of the Celtic patriarchic society in war, and died rather than getting captured...


That was Harald Godwinson. ( some 20 years after Hardraada. )

Ah, yeah, good old Boudicca was great indeed 8:)

See, I don't know much about the Dark Age Kings. Ya know, what with it being the Dark Ages and all.

Hail Caesar! >_>;

That was Harald Godwinson. ( some 20 years after Hardraada. )

Ah, yeah, good old Boudicca was great indeed 8:)
Nope, Godwinson was the Confessor's successor who lost to William, but beat Harald Hardrada, King of Norway first.

Kam.... which Caesar?

As they said in Cornwall 500AD:
Arthur slept on that stone. He'll come again!
Interesting that the great leaders are only resting and not dead.

King Barbarossa is only sleeping, too - he shall return in Germany's greatest need ;)

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Barbarossasleeping.jpg

So why didn't he wake up 90-odd years ago then? :p

Boudicca never really ruled Britain, and she was a warm supporter of Rome, it was only because the governor of Anglia was such a collossal arsehole that she rebelled (he made it a slave province, gave Boudicca a public beating while her daughters were raped in front of her).


Go with Alfred the Great, he was pretty cool, and he had cake

Boudicca never really ruled Britain, and she was a warm supporter of Rome, it was only because the governor of Anglia was such a collossal arsehole that she rebelled (he made it a slave province, gave Boudicca a public beating while her daughters were raped in front of her).


Go with Alfred the Great, he was pretty cool, and he had cake
Alfred never really ruled Britain, he ruled it minus the Danelaw.

And Boudicca made a damn good showing against a far superior opposing military force, and burned Londinium, and so on... Boud was never a Roman supporter, that was her father.

So why didn't he wake up 90-odd years ago then? :p
Go figure. Guess it hasn't been Germany's greatest need back then, huh? :D

Alfred never really ruled Britain, he ruled it minus the Danelaw.

And Boudicca made a damn good showing against a far superior opposing military force, and burned Londinium, and so on... Boud was never a Roman supporter, that was her father.
True, but most of the ones that did rule the whole of Britain were pretty rubbish. Hmm, Canute anyone? *bets someone gets the waves/sea story wrong

I think we'll have to agree to disagree (or spend hours flaming each other, whichever's good for you), from what I've read/seen of British history, Boudicca was a supporter of Rome before the whole enslavement, beating, and rape scenario

No-one ruled Britian in its entirety before 1707 and the Union of the Crowns

Alfred the Great. 871-899

Burning cakes was not his major achievement, despite the legends.

He defeated the Danes and brought peace to Wessex and then set about having books translated from Latin and recording historical events.

A summary here (http://www.timeref.com/hpr1050.htm).

No-one ruled Britian in its entirety before 1707 and the Union of the Crowns
They did, back as far Edward I the Scottish king Balliol had paid homage to the English one, and they ruled Ireland at some point as well (but I can't remember exact dates of when they did and didn't).

No one ruled "Britain" per se, but they ruled England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland.

Alfred the Great. 871-899

Burning cakes was not his major achievement, despite the legends.

He defeated the Danes and brought peace to Wessex and then set about having books translated from Latin and recording historical events.

A summary here (http://www.timeref.com/hpr1050.htm).
I know, but I get distracted by cake...

True, but most of the ones that did rule the whole of Britain were pretty rubbish. Hmm, Canute anyone? *bets someone gets the waves/sea story wrong
You mean the nice man who proved to his subjects he wasn't god by showing them he couldn't turn back the waves? I know the story too...

You mean the nice man who proved to his subjects he wasn't god by showing them he couldn't turn back the waves? I know the story too...
yay, someone got it right:D rather than thinking he has stupid and arrogant

They did, back as far Edward I the Scottish king Balliol had paid homage to the English one, and they ruled Ireland at some point as well (but I can't remember exact dates of when they did and didn't).

No one ruled "Britain" per se, but they ruled England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland.

Edward I never "conquered" Scotland he occupied it by force and certainly did not control much outside the lowlands and Aberdeenshire

In fact his occupation of Scotland did not last very long as his son was comprehensively routed at the battle of Bannockburn in 1314.

If you occupy somewhere by force then you effectively rule it. And like I said, the King preceding that was King Balliol (John I think) who had paid homage to Edward as a subject king.

Yes his son was defeated, but since Edward I had the scottish king (and many of the powerful nobles) paying homage to him, then I'd say that counts as ruling.

John Balliol paid homage to Edward I for the lands he held in England (at this time many nobles held lands both in England and Scotland).
There is a marked difference between a short term military occupation and of a country and ruling a country.

John Balliol paid homage to Edward I for the lands he held in England (at this time many nobles held lands both in England and Scotland).
There is a marked difference between a short term military occupation and of a country and ruling a country.
Edward I treated Scotland as a conquered land and Balliol as a vassal. And Balliol accepted it, suggesting that was the relationship. Whether he paid homage only on the lands in England or on behalf of Scotland is where your and my recollections of history differ.

EDITED:
Anyway, didn't James I/VI rule both England and Scotland in 1603?

going to slope off for a bit, nice debating with you, may be back later.

sorry you are abolutely right _ I can't think why I put in 1707 which is the Act of Union. Must be this cold I've got making me stupid.

Of Britain or In Britain.
They don't have to rule the entire lot.

( The King of (the) Donnoni would fit in quite nicely, as would Hardraada who had only bits in the cold end of Scotland + claims in Northumbria. )

I think it makes more sense to continue on the basis on "in" not "of"

I cannot decide - it's got to be either King Arthur (or whatever smelly Romano-British warlord inspired his legend), Offa of Mercia, Canute the Great, or Harold Godwinson (whom I like, because I don't like the Normans).

How about one of the roman emperors eg hadrian ? - they brought peace, stability, new technology and built masses of infrastructure much of which survives to this day.

Definitely Edward the Confessor - he built the first abbey at Westmintser, precipitated the entire norman invasion through leaving the crown to Harold Godwinson and, despite being an extremely devout fellow, on his accension deprived his mother of all her estates because she neglected him as a child. What a guy!

Either that or Edward's father, Ethelred the Unready, mainly because of his name.

Cerdic, first King of Wessex in AD 534.