Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

For everyone liking questions...

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929
  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: For everyone liking questions...
    Posted: 18-Jul-2007 at 12:43
Yes, but if you look at all the Prussian electors between the 30 years war and the accesion of Frederick the Great as the first Prussian king, they all made strides to break away from the Holy Roman yoke. Georg William and others made many important strides in opening Prussia up to a wider world beyond the confines of the Holy Roman court - the annexations of eastern Brandenburg/Kleve in the Polish-Lithunian commonwealth and the attraction of Prussia to the expelled Calvinists of the various Catholic areas of Europe also put Brandenburg/Hollenzellern/Prussia on the map.
Back to Top
Majkes View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Imperial Ambassador

Joined: 06-May-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1144
  Quote Majkes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2007 at 13:42
Originally posted by Earl Aster

Yes, but if you look at all the Prussian electors between the 30 years war and the accesion of Frederick the Great as the first Prussian king, they all made strides to break away from the Holy Roman yoke. Georg William and others made many important strides in opening Prussia up to a wider world beyond the confines of the Holy Roman court - the annexations of eastern Brandenburg/Kleve in the Polish-Lithunian commonwealth and the attraction of Prussia to the expelled Calvinists of the various Catholic areas of Europe also put Brandenburg/Hollenzellern/Prussia on the map.
 
You are wrong here cause Prussia was protestant since 1525. So they were out of Catholic church for a long time when thirty years war started. Don't know what You mean by " the annexations of eastern Brandenburg/Kleve in the Polish-Lithunian commonwealth" Could You explain it, please?
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2007 at 16:37
Ok, please don't take this one offtopic.
Back to Top
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929
  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2007 at 16:53
I've PMed him about it Rider, so don't worry. Any other questions that you want to look at? The one problem is that they are so vauge. I'm sure that if the other guys from the Asian and American sections came onto this, they would come up with loads of possible figures as well...
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 03:19
Well. I brought up all of those I needed answers for more but none you you did answer exactly those:


5) a queen... had power but didn't like ruling... enjoyed music and other pleasures... his husband ruled instead.. (XVI)


7) a king.. revered nothing...(XXIII)

8) a king... driven into the borders of insanity... perished when he committed an assault along with the entire force of the kingdom against an enemy impossibly strong (XXV)

10) a king... gave rule over to his successor very soon... practically right after coming to power... held the throne for a limited period of time.. (II)

16) a king... received power cause no brother or sister of him wanted it... was third in line of succession and yet got the throne... (IX)

17) a king... married late.. gathered legends and lore.. wrote books.. [
somewhat favoured seagoing] (IV)

19) a queen... only successor... was forced to marry... and by that gave away her power... (XXV)

20) a king... loved silver above all other things... (XV)



Edited by rider - 24-Jul-2007 at 15:45
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 07:49
 
Originally posted by Earl Aster

Yes, but if you look at all the Prussian electors between the 30 years war and the accesion of Frederick the Great as the first Prussian king
He wasn't the first Prussian king. That's why he was called Frederick II. His grandfather was Frederick I, and there was his father Frederick William I in between.
, they all made strides to break away from the Holy Roman yoke. Georg William and others made many important strides in opening Prussia up to a wider world beyond the confines of the Holy Roman court - the annexations of eastern Brandenburg/Kleve in the Polish-Lithunian commonwealth and the attraction of Prussia to the expelled Calvinists of the various Catholic areas of Europe also put Brandenburg/Hollenzellern/Prussia on the map.
I agree with that though. I said he wasn't too different from the policies of the previous Prussian kings, and you can push the family back further than that if you like. On the whole they provided a haven for religious minorities of all kinds, like the Netherlands.


Edited by gcle2003 - 19-Jul-2007 at 07:53
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224
  Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 09:12
For number 7, Frederick II HRE is a good example. Religious sceptic, actually rather opposed to the whole idea of religion (namely Christianity). Even got to the extent he was dubbed the Antichrist by the Pope....

Also, for number 10, here are two possibilities:
- Byzantine Emperor Alexander. Reigned for 13 months and died after a polo game.
- "Taichang Emperor". Zu Changluo reigned for under a month, then he died. 

Edited by Knights - 19-Jul-2007 at 09:18
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 11:36
Yes I think Frederick II HRE (neat way of expressing it) is a good candidate for that one.
 
As an outsider for no 10, loosely interpreting 'king' as we were told to, what about the 9th President of the United States, William Henry Harrison, came into office March 4 1841, died April 4 1841, having caught cold during his inauguration speech.
 
Which, some might say, was just payback for having delivered the longest Inaugural speech in US history. And not wearing his overcoat.
 
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 14:16
Aren't there such for number 10 that abdicated?
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224
  Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 16:11
As in, rather than dying, handed over to the successor while still alive (after only ruling for a very short period of time)? I'll see what i can find...
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 16:38
Not exactly. The one I am talking about lived for a great while longer. This means that the person abdicated due to unwillingness to rule.

Kinda may remind of that English king...
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224
  Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Jul-2007 at 16:49
Well King Edward VIII of England abdicated, but more because he wanted to marry Wallis rather than unwillingness to rule. I see what you mean now, and will continue searching...
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 10:17
If dictators count as 'kings' then how about Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, Dictator of Rome in 458 BCE? Established as dictator to resist invasion from other tribes, he beat them in 16 days, and then gave up the dictatorship to go back to his farm.
 
Then he did the same thing again in 439.
 
Maybe he doesn't count because he didn't give his power to a successor, but returned it to the republic.
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 13:06
Well, I believe it does count. Thanks a lot Gcle.
Back to Top
Aster Thrax Eupator View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929
  Quote Aster Thrax Eupator Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 15:20

I strongly disagree (at least in the Roman republican context) 

If dictators count as 'kings' then how about Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus, Dictator of Rome in 458 BCE? Established as dictator to resist invasion from other tribes, he beat them in 16 days, and then gave up the dictatorship to go back to his farm.

Then he did the same thing again in 439.

Maybe he doesn't count because he didn't give his power to a successor, but returned it to the republic.

All the Roman dictators cannot be considered kings. The office of dictator was an element of the republican constitution and they still used republican systems to rule. A king has to have an entire system based on his "divine right" to rule - a court, church etc. The Roman emperor wasn't even a king (until Septimus Serevus)- he combined the office of Dictator (for life) with Pontifex Maximus, Legatus and Censor. The whole principle of "king" only existed in Rome from the 7 kings to all the emperors past Septimus Serevus. Besides, Republican "dictators" were not "dictators" in our sense of the word - they were still under the authority of the Censors and the Senate - the only difference was that they had "imperium" for the duration of the crisis, took command of all the legions, had more leverage over the senate and could pass acts without the senate. The very fact that there was a senate that had elected him clearly shows that he wasn't a king.

...As I've said before, these questions are just to vauge to answer properly.

8) a king... driven into the borders of insanity... perished when he committed an assault along with the entire force of the kingdom against an enemy impossibly strong (XXV)

this could be a long shot, but Hannibal was enraged by the Romans, and after he escaped from Carthage ran from court to court to try and persuade Diodachi kings to make war against them. He took a vast Carthaginian army right to hell and back (despite the protestations of Hanno and the Carthaginian assembly) and twice got Carthage into war. He was a brilliant strategist, but that does seem to be a rather odd move. Also, Rome by the 2nd and 3rd Carthaginian wars, and by Marius's reforms was much more superior to Carthage.

Or perhaps Kasier Wilheim II? He was known to be quite eccentric, unrealistically nationalist and obsessed by war. He suffered from chronic depression and was ridiculed by his family when young because of his weakness and his lame arm. He attempted to attack Russia and France simueltaneously whilst relying on the Schlieffen plan, which didnt really work

Or perhaps Adolph Hitler? Thats an easy one

 

Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 16:35
Weren't the Marian reforms after the beating of the legions by the Cimbri and Teutones (so around 115 BC) rather than the Carthaginian times?

Now, I (and gcle) know very well that Roman dictator doesn't equal a king. However, taken as a very loose term depicted a constitutional monarch, it fits the criteria.
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224
  Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Jul-2007 at 19:43
Of course Cincinnatus or any dictator for the matter, is a "sole ruler", and thus a loose variation of "king". Thus, that criteria is filled. Also, Rider's right in saying that the Marian reforms were a good 30 or so years after the Third Punic War, so yes, the Roman army at that stage was A LOT stronger than the non-existent Carthaginian Army Wink
Hannibal I don't think is valid for 8) as he is not a king, or sole ruler and he was not driven into insanity, or even the borders of it. Furthermore, Hannibal did not perish during or even directly after his assault and took only a small portion of his kingdom as soldiers (One, because the Senate did not permit a large number of reinforcements or initials for him, and two, because most of his army was composed of mercenaries rather than Carthaginians). Plus, he proved that the Romans were not impossibly strong, and did it in a breathtaking fashion. Of course, later they pulled through, but if all had gone to plan, Rome was a dead state. Hence, they weren't really impossibly strong. Nevertheless, I see where you're coming from, and a lot of these are just too vague...


Edited by Knights - 20-Jul-2007 at 19:46
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.