History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedMedieval 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%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Jamaica
Status: Offline
Points: 985
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Aug-2004 at 19:27

Quote Clovis,

Culture is a very loose term to attach to a fief at feudal times. It can be brandied around, and is a value-claim. Normans might have adopted some aspects of french culture, but their roots, in fact their immediate roots as with respect to 1066, can be traced to the Vikings and not to Charlemagne.

 THe Viking root is exaggerated. The norseman (not to confuse with norman as people from Normandy) were defeated at Chartre. But the viking were fast and mobile so unstoppable. So the Frank king gave the Norseman normandy in exchanged they helped stopping the viking raid. So they settled there, the vast majority were single men. Eventually they married into the much larger Gallic population and were thoroughly assimilated. 150 years, no trace of viking whatsoever, only story remains and some local tradition. But these people were more french than the Franks themselves, same language, same law, same architecture, same hair cut, same habit. These are the normans as Norman from normandy, the norsemen had long gone.

Quote You seem to use the Franks and French interchangeably. Under that usage, even the German people are French, since they too can claim descent under Charlemagne.

 Well we don't call ourselves French but Francais which is translated from latin Franci which literally means Franc (Frank). More like french are german because Germany/poland/Danube region was the heartland of europe, even the celt came from  there and the Teutons weren't for sure a Germanic tribe but more likely a Celtic tribes that ride along with Germanic tribe. Charlemagne was the king of the French (French) and emperor of the Holy empire, they  can claim Charlemagne as there Emperor but not as their king.

Quote On the Bayeux Tapestry, was not the army led by William, not only compromising Normans? I think the word Franci, was used to collectivise the entire army. WIlliam's Liege Lord was the King of France.

 And what army was the tapestry of Bayeux, the Tapestry is about the Norman conquest mate. And how can you differentiate a "franci" from Normandy and a "franci" from ile-de-france, if they all have the same characterics Frankish hair cut, all shaven and spoke the same language. From the English POV, they are all the same.



Quote I have nothing against the idea that the Normans might have brought some French influence into English courts, but i would disagree with the statement that the Normans were entirely francofied.

 You are wrong the normans weren't "Francofied" they were french. Most normans king of England couldn't even spoke a word of English.

Back to Top
fastspawn View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Singapore
Status: Offline
Points: 269
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fastspawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Aug-2004 at 01:33
Clovis if you want to continue this discussion, please post a new thread, and i will be happy to continue.

As of now, what you are saying that this French Culture you are talking about is a value-claim. I am sure many non-French people will dispute your claim.
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
AE Editor & Pet Platypus

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Estonia
Status: Offline
Points: 4720
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2004 at 04:48
Lionheart, for he acted in the Crusades.
Back to Top
Berosus View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 17-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 153
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Berosus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2004 at 18:38
I voted for Alfred; if it wasn't for him, the capital of England might be called Jorvik (the Viking name for York), and modern-day English would probably be nothing more than a dialect of Danish.  I would like to know why Henry III is on the list, inasmuch as most historians consider him a bad king, and why one of my favorites, Athelstan of the tenth century, isn't there.

Regarding the question Clovis brought up, here's what I said about it on one of my webpages:

"While we're on the subject of British royalty, note that George V was the first British monarch in several generations who was more English than anything else.  For most of the previous 1,400 years, England's dynasties were foreign in origin.  The Anglo-Saxons were German, the Normans were Vikings turned Frenchmen, the Plantagenets were all French, the Tudors were Welsh, the Stuarts were Scots, William III was Dutch, and the Hanoverians and Saxe-Coburg-Gothas were German again.  I'll venture that if there are any more dynastic changes in London, it will be Ireland's turn to have someone on the throne next time."
Nothing truly great is achieved through moderation.--Prof. M.A.R. Barker
Back to Top
fastspawn View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Singapore
Status: Offline
Points: 269
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fastspawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2004 at 21:28
i think dawn put in Henry III wrongly, it is meant to be Edward III. I would have voted for him, but i don't want to cast a vote for Henry III.
Back to Top
Herodotus View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 14-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 130
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Herodotus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2004 at 21:38

I voted for Alfred the Great for his brilliant diplomatic and military manuevering between the danes and the other saxon kingdoms, but Henry II was a very close second for his work with the common law.

I think you should have included King John I for the part he played in Magna Carta (though it was really done to curb his tyranny not with his assistance), King Henry for his brilliant victory over the french at Agincourt and the ensuing annexations, King Edward III for his victories at Crecy and Poitours (pardon the spelling, I take german), and King Richard III for his brilliant polital manuevering toward the end of the War of the Roses (He was an awful tyrant who was eventually overthrown, but he was a genius militarily and diplomatically)

Also, why do you have Henry III as one of the choices, i was'nt aware he really did anything?

 

 

"Dieu est un comédien jouant à une assistance trop effrayée de rire."
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."
-Francois Marie Arouet, Voltaire

Back to Top
Dawn View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Valkyrie

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3161
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Sep-2004 at 23:15

Originally posted by fastspawn fastspawn wrote:

i think dawn put in Henry III wrongly, it is meant to be Edward III. I would have voted for him, but i don't want to cast a vote for Henry III.

Yes henry III was intended to be Edward III but after I posted it and was reading it through I discovered I could not edit it. (First time I made a poll) So you can either ignor poor old Henry or pretend that he is Edward and vote for him.

Back to Top
korten View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 02-Sep-2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote korten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2004 at 22:30
I cast my vote for Longshangs. Parlamentary reforms ,codyfying laws in Westminster Status.After "weathercock" king Henry III he fought and won the war against the baronial opposition with Simon the Monfort as a leader.Partycipated in Louis yhe Saint Crusade.Taks to his military skills whatever was left over from crusaders survived.When in Syria established Order of St Edward.Knights from this Order didn't achieve to much.After return conquered Wellsh. Very succesfully defended continental part of Plantagenets realm against Philip the Fair. Using sytuation in Scotland after the death of king Alexander III and Maiden of Norvay first "took
Scotkand Under his protection" with king John Bailol as a puppet,and later as a ruler.
I think he made big error not crowning himself as a king of Scotland .That move could takej away any political rights from Robert of Bruce. Battle of Falkirk against William Wallace is probably one of maqsterpices of medieval military art. But one thing about poor old Henry. He called his sons Edward and Edmund .These names are anglo-saxons and were used in the ruling dynasty first time since the Conqueror
Back to Top
Degredado View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Portugal
Status: Offline
Points: 369
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Degredado Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2004 at 12:42
I voted for Henry the second, but I wonder, why isn't King Stephen on the list?
Vou votar nas putas. Estou farto de votar nos filhos delas
Back to Top
cattus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Status: Offline
Points: 1803
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cattus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2004 at 12:55
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl Quetzalcoatl wrote:


 When was William the conqueror a frenchman an English knight. William was the son of a frenchwoman and another french norman who has like a small scandinavian ancestry. Even the lion heart wasn't English blood but of French decent.


Is Napoleon french?
Back to Top
Abyssmal Fiend View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2004
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Abyssmal Fiend Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Oct-2004 at 16:26

I'm not sure whether to pick Leopold(Or Leopard, depending on translation) of Austria, Edward Longshanks (The first), or Richard the Lion-hearted.

Longshanks was a good king because he noticed the power in the Welsh Longbow, and adapted it to his army. It made a huge difference (Can you imagine the English at Agincourt agains the French "Paladins" without longbows?), so he's worthy of it.

Richard the Lion-Hearted is possibly the most well-known of the three I like, so I won't bother to drill his life into your head.

Leopold had a much more modest reign, and I'm not sure whether it's Saxon-Austrian Pride that makes me vote for him or because of the way he tricked Richard, captured him, and handed him over to the German Emperor. He's somewhat insidious, but a good leader nonetheless.

 


Di! Ecce hora! Uxor mea me necabit!
Back to Top
Belisarius View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 1296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Dec-2004 at 15:16

Henry I.

I personally quite dislike Richard the Lionhearted. Despite being known as a capable commander, he was also known for his cruelty in battle.

Back to Top
pytheas View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 14-Dec-2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 130
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pytheas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Dec-2004 at 22:42

I voted for Alfred.  As stated before, by others he acted as gardian of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms and kept the Danes at bay.  There are many other very able Medieval English kings that could have been listed going further into Anglo-Saxon history.  Culturally speaking I feel that the Irish monastaries really should be given most of the credit for preserving knowledge and culture in the British Isles, not to mention the rest of western Europe.  Kings came and went like the ash and dust they were.  It was the early Irish, and later Anglish (sic) monks that should be given the most votes.  But then again if the Romans hadn't invaded in the first place, I'm sure British history would have been much different.  Nothing like a little civilization forced on you at gladius point, eh?  And why limit ourselves to Kings, and only England?  I personally find some of the greatest leaders to have been Welsh like Llywelln The Great, Llywelln the Last, and Owain the Great.  Of course who can compete with the Triovantes prince Caracatus who defied Rome itself?  Then you have Queen Elizabeth I, whom built and reigned over "A" (not the) Golden Age of England.

-Pytheas 

Truth is a variant based upon perception. Ignorance is derived from a lack of insight into others' perspectives.
Back to Top
Dawn View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Valkyrie

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3161
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2004 at 09:32

ahh the "Llywellns" They did give the  kings of the time a bad time. Tough suckers those guys. If you care to post some more info on them that would be Great.

As to ElizabethI(one of my personnal favorites) she was discounted because of the time frame she ruled in ,not medieval.

Back to Top
pytheas View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 14-Dec-2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 130
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pytheas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2004 at 13:00

I liken Llywelln Fawr (The Great) to other Celtic, if I can loosely apply that term, leaders.  Of course Caracatus did not live in Medieval times, but many archaeologists and anthropologists (myself included in both camps), consider the definitions of time periods to be fluid and ill-defined.  Many of the cultural frameworks noted in Pre-Roman, Iron Age Europe, and specifically in Britain continued to grow and evolve.  The early Christian (Xpty) Church adopted MANY countless elements of pre-christian culture and religion into the Church's belief system.  One need only look at the Christian calander and research the Saints and the cult of the saints to realize that people worshiping a Holy Spring were only continuing in the tradition of the Celtic/Germanic forefathers.  Returning to the subject of the Llywellns and other Welsh princes, there are some great books to begin a search of the history of the great land of Wales.  Please refer to the list below.

1. Davies, John.  A History of Wales.  Penguin Books, 1993.

2.  Walker, David.  Medieval Wales.  Cambridge Medieval Books, 1996.

Also for some good fiction on the subject look up the author Sharon Kay Penman and the first of three books about Medieval Wales is entitled Here Be Dragons

Truth is a variant based upon perception. Ignorance is derived from a lack of insight into others' perspectives.
Back to Top
Dawn View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Valkyrie

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3161
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2004 at 14:27

"but many archaeologists and anthropologists (myself included in both camps), consider the definitions of time periods to be fluid and ill-defined" 

For sure, particularly when refering to the medieval period. The professionals can't agree when it started and when it ended how could the rest of us. The comment Queen E was just for the sake of this forum ( the time frame was limited to 1450 IIRC) and the poll. There are many features of the Tudor era particullarly the earlly part were Medieval.

 

As to the Penman books I have read them and liked them although I found her to be a little long winded at times. How accurate are they as far as the history goes?They seemed not to bad. The others you mentioned I have not read( my god a history book on Britian I don't have. My husband is not going to like this  Have to look for them.   

Back to Top
pytheas View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 14-Dec-2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 130
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pytheas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2004 at 14:48

Dawn,

As for the Penman books, they were for the most part pretty accuarate concerning the overall history.  When she strays from the historical "truth", she has been pretty good about noting the fictionalized parts of the book at the end, citing poetic license, of course.  I too found her a bit long-winded, but aren't all of us interested in history/archaeology?

I understood where you were coming from with your remark about Queen Elizabeth, I just like to go off on tangents, especially when it comes to the Medieval-ness of something.  By the way, read you article on the Roman invasion of Britain.  Liked it.  Although I missed the famous show down between Claudius and Caracatus in Rome.  How magnaminous of Claudius to spare the poor barbarian!

Truth is a variant based upon perception. Ignorance is derived from a lack of insight into others' perspectives.
Back to Top
pytheas View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 14-Dec-2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 130
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pytheas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2004 at 15:07

Had to look up the exact quote of Caracatus facing off Claudius in Rome:

"Why," Caracatus siad taking in all the grandior of Rome, "with all these great possessions, do you still covet our poor huts?" (Potter & Johns).

Potter, T.W and Catherine Johns. Roman Britain.  Barnes & Noble books, 2002.

I am uterlly facsinated by the Iron Age (pardon the use of yet another flimsy temporal lable) and the interaction of these groups with the Classical World.  Not to mention the cultural continuity leading into the Medieval period.  I strongly believe we can not understand one period without taking the surounding eras into account.

Cheers. 

Truth is a variant based upon perception. Ignorance is derived from a lack of insight into others' perspectives.
Back to Top
Dawn View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Valkyrie

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3161
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dawn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2004 at 14:56
Originally posted by pytheas pytheas wrote:

  By the way, read you article on the Roman invasion of Britain.  Liked it.  Although I missed the famous show down between Claudius and Caracatus in Rome.  How magnaminous of Claudius to spare the poor barbarian!

Your right I should have included it. Well i can always do a revision on it and add that part. I really am an amature at this particulairly writting but ever once in a while I get the urdge to(mostly in the winter).I'm thinking on doing one on the war f the roses but it will hae to wait until after the new year. There is another article around here somewhere that I wrote on the black death but I'm not sure where it got to.  Are you a writer? they love to post articles written by members. 

Back to Top
pytheas View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 14-Dec-2004
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 130
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pytheas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2004 at 00:53

Dawn,

Yeah I write both fiction and non-fiction.  I got a univ. degree in archaeology and concentration in history, so I had to do research and write papers all the time.  Now I conduct research for my fiction writing based on history/archaeology.  Ive currently got two major fiction book projects going.  I have a fairly extensive personal library to work from, but also use the local university library for further research.  Luckily a couple of my friends are still students there so I can even do interlibrary loan, which helps tremendously.  My interests are wide throughout time and regions.  One topic close to me right now is prehistoric Spain--there's a forum in Ancient Civilizations that I wrote in response to a question regarding who was active in the region prior to the Romans and Carthaginians.

Truth is a variant based upon perception. Ignorance is derived from a lack of insight into others' perspectives.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.