Conquer Club

Well, King-General's, EDward IV of England prob one of the greatest. Never lost a battle.

Richard I prob one of the all time greats as well, although a less good king.
You can prob tell British history is more my thing!

suggs wrote:Well, King-General's, EDward IV of England prob one of the greatest. Never lost a battle.

Richard I prob one of the all time greats as well, although a less good king.
YOu can prob tell British history is more my thing!

Yeah, wasn't Richard only in England for like 8 months or something?

muy_thaiguy wrote:

suggs wrote:Well, King-General's, EDward IV of England prob one of the greatest. Never lost a battle.

Richard I prob one of the all time greats as well, although a less good king.
YOu can prob tell British history is more my thing!

Yeah, wasn't Richard only in England for like 8 months or something?

Yeh about that. He declared he would sell the Kingdom to fun the battle in the East if only he could find a buyer.

My favorite Richard I fact was that the primary reason he was captured on the way back through Europe (a-la Robin Hood mythology) was because whilst in the Holy Land he inexplicably tore down and stamped upon an Austrian flag. Wonderful.

Yep, although in a way that just reflects the strength of the Angevin empire-his dad, Henry II spent half his reign out of england.
It was also because by then England had overtaken Normandy as the most stable part of the Empire, and thus needed less of the old direct "feudal" (Sorry!) face to face kingship approach.
He would have been a better king if he hadnt been killed at a slighlty akward moment, thus leaving John with a foreign policy nightmare.

I dont know much about him, but apparantly Darius I of Persia was a very fine General/King too.

My favorite English king is Henry VIII. He ruled ruthlessly and had four wifes. That's always good for an individual, right?

ignotus wrote:My favorite English king is Henry VIII. He ruled ruthlessly and had four wifes. That's always good for an individual, right?

And he loved a good chicken drumstick.

Guiscard wrote:

ignotus wrote:My favorite English king is Henry VIII. He ruled ruthlessly and had four wifes. That's always good for an individual, right?

And he loved a good chicken drumstick.

Yes, I forgot to mention that.

Six wives. What an animal he was!
Bit of a rubbish king though. Squandered the Tudor inheritance, isolated England from Europe (the Reformation), and poisoned the succession question for seventy odd years.
Cool beard though.

suggs wrote:Six wives. What an animal he was!
Bit of a rubbish king though. Squandered the Tudor inheritance, isolated England from Europe (the Reformation), and poisoned the succession question for seventy odd years.
Cool beard though.

Who's your candidate for favorite king, then?

I do think I'd have to plum for good old William the Conquerer/Bastard.

suggs wrote:Six wives. What an animal he was!
Bit of a rubbish king though. Squandered the Tudor inheritance, isolated England from Europe (the Reformation), and poisoned the succession question for seventy odd years.
Cool beard though.

Yes, six... I probably have dyslexia or something. I meant to write six and I wrote four.

He was a selfish egoist, that's true.

George III is up there. Not a "great" king, but a very decent bloke who wrestled with some immense questiions, and who presided over the fall of one empire and the beginning of another one.
But i like a bit of controversy, so I'd go for King John-an extremely cunning man!
How come William I? Bit of a flat track bully...??!!

I'd nominate Harold Godwinson. After marching an army from London to York in something like 8 days, he took the vikings completely by surprise and routed them. Then all the way back south again to Hastings. Which he very nearly won. He may have been King(in name at least) for less than a year but it was a very active reign.

Oh, favorite King/General. I'd say King David. He was a decent general, and ushered in a golden age for Israel.

Man i love history it sucks though because im a Jr in high school and i have already taken all the history classes offered at my school....American History and World History. I hate how History is like completely forgotten about but yea as much as i love history i dont think i would major in it because i dont they type of jobs you can get and they probably dont pay much. But my favorite aspects of history arent as much focused on time periods as much as people. Like i love the revolutionaries Che and Lenin and especially that guy in tienamen square to me thats just the most pure form of revolutionism(is that even a word?) because he wasnt politically motivated or anything he didnt gain anything out of it he just didn't want to see his people killed and oppressed anymore so he stared down a F'N TANK! that man just man i dont know he's one of my heros

The Gunslinger wrote:Man i love history it sucks though because im a Jr in high school and i have already taken all the history classes offered at my school....American History and World History. I hate how History is like completely forgotten about but yea as much as i love history i dont think i would major in it because i dont they type of jobs you can get and they probably dont pay much. But my favorite aspects of history arent as much focused on time periods as much as people. Like i love the revolutionaries Che and Lenin and especially that guy in tienamen square to me thats just the most pure form of revolutionism(is that even a word?) because he wasnt politically motivated or anything he didnt gain anything out of it he just didn't want to see his people killed and oppressed anymore so he stared down a F'N TANK! that man just man i dont know he's one of my heros

I feel ya man, I took all my history classes too, (Except Medieval which I'm taking next semester).

On another note, my favourite generals would be Caesar, Alexander, and Hannibal

AndrewLC wrote:

The Gunslinger wrote:Man i love history it sucks though because im a Jr in high school and i have already taken all the history classes offered at my school....American History and World History. I hate how History is like completely forgotten about but yea as much as i love history i dont think i would major in it because i dont they type of jobs you can get and they probably dont pay much. But my favorite aspects of history arent as much focused on time periods as much as people. Like i love the revolutionaries Che and Lenin and especially that guy in tienamen square to me thats just the most pure form of revolutionism(is that even a word?) because he wasnt politically motivated or anything he didnt gain anything out of it he just didn't want to see his people killed and oppressed anymore so he stared down a F'N TANK! that man just man i dont know he's one of my heros

I feel ya man, I took all my history classes too, (Except Medieval which I'm taking next semester).

On another note, my favourite generals would be Caesar, Alexander, and Hannibal

Hopefully High School will be kinder with the history classes Gunslinger. It was for me.
Alex, I agree with those generals, but Pompey, to me, is a bit better of a general then Caeser was. Even though he lost to Caeser, he was a great general for sure.

The Gunslinger wrote:Man i love history it sucks though because im a Jr in high school and i have already taken all the history classes offered at my school....American History and World History. I hate how History is like completely forgotten about but yea as much as i love history i dont think i would major in it because i dont they type of jobs you can get and they probably dont pay much. But my favorite aspects of history arent as much focused on time periods as much as people. Like i love the revolutionaries Che and Lenin and especially that guy in tienamen square to me thats just the most pure form of revolutionism(is that even a word?) because he wasnt politically motivated or anything he didnt gain anything out of it he just didn't want to see his people killed and oppressed anymore so he stared down a F'N TANK! that man just man i dont know he's one of my heros

Love your passon.
And many people who do degrees in history go on to make a big pile of cash in banking, stock broking, the law etc. So you can ge rich and be true to history at the same time.
That guy in Tianamen must have been one of the bravest men who ever lived.
Good on yer.

Hi I was wondering if anyone could help me on the topic of Annales History. I have to do an assessed essay on 'History with the Politics left out' What do you make of this assessment of Annales approaches to the study of History? and do not know what to put. If anyone knows anything or could help, that would be greatly appreciated .

nagerous wrote:Hi I was wondering if anyone could help me on the topic of Annales History. I have to do an assessed essay on 'History with the Politics left out' What do you make of this assessment of Annales approaches to the study of History? and do not know what to put. If anyone knows anything or could help, that would be greatly appreciated .

Certainly not my strong point, apart from the contributions of people like Bloch to medieval history...

Have they given you a reading list? What information or research have you done so far? If you like I could pass on the introductory document we give the undergrads studying the historiography course at Leeds...

nagerous wrote:Hi I was wondering if anyone could help me on the topic of Annales History. I have to do an assessed essay on 'History with the Politics left out' What do you make of this assessment of Annales approaches to the study of History? and do not know what to put. If anyone knows anything or could help, that would be greatly appreciated .

Well, at some point you could be "clever" and point out, that although the annales "school" concentrated on the social and economic, the irony was that they were very politically motivated-to be blunt, its left wing histry, history from below. And then get some stuff off E>H. Carr about the historian never being able to escape his political prejudices.
Like all history through a prism, you end up with a distorted viewpoint.

suggs wrote:

nagerous wrote:Hi I was wondering if anyone could help me on the topic of Annales History. I have to do an assessed essay on 'History with the Politics left out' What do you make of this assessment of Annales approaches to the study of History? and do not know what to put. If anyone knows anything or could help, that would be greatly appreciated .

Well, at some point you could be "clever" and point out, that although the annales "school" concentrated on the social and economic, the irony was that they were very politically motivated-to be blunt, its left wing histry, history from below. And then get some stuff off E>H. Carr about the historian never being able to escape his political prejudices.
Like all history through a prism, you end up with a distorted viewpoint.

Yeh thats certainly a good point to include. Try and get in some biographical stuff about Bloch's upbringing in the Alsace, the tussle between French and German etc. etc.