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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Medieval English Kings

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Poll Question: Who was the greatest medieval English King
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
7 [12.28%]
11 [19.30%]
14 [24.56%]
9 [15.79%]
16 [28.07%]
0 [0.00%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Exarchus View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 18-Jan-2005
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
  Quote Exarchus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Medieval English Kings
    Posted: 25-Jan-2005 at 07:49
Alfred the Great get my vote. Though English wasn't the term I would use to describe most of them, Alfred fits it perfectly, he was a good and pious man. Made the English fleet and exhanged ambassadors with India and maybe even China.
Vae victis!
Back to Top
Exarchus View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 18-Jan-2005
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
  Quote Exarchus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2005 at 07:53
I think what's affraiding Quetzacouatl is the term English king. I've been into several forum were the English often say half of France was English because English kings owned territories in France. The term English kings for them is abusive because they were Frenchmen (or rather from varios French provinces) who took over England but kept their land in France.  So the term English kings isn't appropriate. Though when we talk about the King of France, French kings is much more relevant. Because the Kingdom of France didn't falled to any foreign invaders.

Edited by Exarchus
Vae victis!
Back to Top
Dawn View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3148
  Quote Dawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2005 at 10:08
With the excepton of Alfred (whom you are not debating as being an english king) all the listed held the Title "King of England" thus they are English kings. The poll was not ment to discuss their heritage but there abilities to rule England - Britannia if you prefer.  
Back to Top
Exarchus View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 18-Jan-2005
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
  Quote Exarchus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2005 at 10:53
Originally posted by Dawn

With the excepton of Alfred (whom you are not debating as being an english king) all the listed held the Title "King of England" thus they are English kings. The poll was not ment to discuss their heritage but there abilities to rule England - Britannia if you prefer.  


King of England and English King are two different concept though. This is a question of semantic.

The hability to rule something (to use the expression here) doesn't mean you are the mentioned thing. Though there is a different thread over it I bet and that's a slighly different topic.

That you posted King of England in your title instead of English king it would have been correct. Afterall Victoria was Empress of India, and Alexander the Great was King of Persia.


Edited by Exarchus
Vae victis!
Back to Top
Dawn View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3148
  Quote Dawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2005 at 11:03
Please lets noy get into semetics of this, English can be a strange launguage, There is nothing wrong with the grammer of the title and to use the term in the way I did is also not incorrect or many other persons (including many books,web pages and encylopedias) are guilty of the same thing. so perhaps we can leave the wording alone( cause I can't change even if I wanted to) and return to the discusion about kings.  
Back to Top
Exarchus View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 18-Jan-2005
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
  Quote Exarchus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2005 at 11:11
Originally posted by Dawn

Please lets noy get into semetics of this, English can be a strange launguage, There is nothing wrong with the grammer of the title and to use the term in the way I did is also not incorrect or many other persons (including many books,web pages and encylopedias) are guilty of the same thing. so perhaps we can leave the wording alone( cause I can't change even if I wanted to) and return to the discusion about kings.  


Well, I don't know if it's just nervosity or simple mistakes. Though I won't hijack this thread so I'm stepping down here.
Vae victis!
Back to Top
Dawn View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3148
  Quote Dawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2005 at 11:15
I also agree that this is not very important in the whole of things and also agree to forget it.
Back to Top
Polish-UkrainianCanadian View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 05-Feb-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Polish-UkrainianCanadian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Feb-2005 at 13:08
I do favor Richard I, because he was a famous homosexual warrior. I am Homosexual, but then again William the Conqueror was really cool.
Back to Top
RED GUARD View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 06-Mar-2005
Location: China
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 292
  Quote RED GUARD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Mar-2005 at 09:06
           Richard?! He was just plain curel to the Muslims. And if he was such a "Lionheart", than why did he got captured by the Austrians?
          
        William the Conquered is getting my vote.
Quotes by your's turly:

"I came, I saw, and I conquered... but only for the weekend"

"This is my tank, this is my weapon, and this is my pride."

"Power comes from a barrel of a gun."

Back to Top
Exarchus View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 18-Jan-2005
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
  Quote Exarchus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Mar-2005 at 09:12
Richard the Lionheart was also very cruel toward the Gascons.

That's him who forfeited Normandy and Anjou to the French king at his death in exchange of Philip II help against his father.

That's that point Philip II used to confiscate Normandy and Anjou to John I with the support of the pope. Without this, Philip II would have certainly never got Normandy and Anjou.var SymRealOnLoad; var SymRealOnUnload; function SymOnUnload() { window.open = SymWinOpen; if(SymRealOnUnload != null) SymRealOnUnload(); } function SymOnLoad() { if(SymRealOnLoad != null) SymRealOnLoad(); window.open = SymRealWinOpen; SymRealOnUnload = window.onunload; window.onunload = SymOnUnload; } SymRealOnLoad = window.onload; window.onload = SymOnLoad; //-->
Vae victis!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Apr-2005 at 17:05

I would go for Athelstan, without him there would be no England. He reformed the law and for the first time played a major role in European affairs.

Got to say I can't see how Richard I gets into the poll - great warrior, awful king, or William - usurping the throne before starving 100 000 of your new subjects is not what great monarchs are made of

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123

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 0.107 seconds.