Favourite historical hero?

Remove all ads!

Ah, dear St. Joan d'Arc. I just read Mark Twain's biography of her. He said it was the best book he ever wrote, and I'm inclined to agree. Took him 12 years to research.

 

Jesus

on a different note: Snorri sturluson (without him no norse sagas thus no tolkien!) and every ordinary man fighting against any suppressor (be it wallace, willem van nassau, martin luther king or whoever!)

 

@Morgoth

I refuse to accept that you have to be dead to have made your mark in history!

Nelson Mandelas struggle took place at the same time as or even predates your two named Malcom X and Martin Luther King Jr., so how can that make them any more "historical"? Oh yeah, sorry they've been killed. Well that's a good reason. Not.

History refers to the past, and I was not the first one to bring up the hero's of the last century....

[Edit]
Definitions:

history (PAST EVENTS)
noun
(the study of or a record or story of) past events considered together, esp. events or developments of a particular period, country or subject

historical
adjective
Something that is historical is connected with the study or representation of things from the past.

Viking
(Annoyed of Basingstoke)

[Edit]

[ October 10, 2002, 18:40: Message edited by: Viking ]

 

Ulysses S. Grant
Abraham Lincoln
George Washington
JCDenton
Theodore Roosevelt

If you want to know why, read some history books.

 

Martin Luther King, Franklin D Roosevelt, and (I'm gonna be flamed to hell and back for this one) Winston Churchill.

Sammy LJ has also left a mark on MY history!

[ October 10, 2002, 21:43: Message edited by: Sir Yerril of Morningmist ]

 

Herostrat.


Oookay, I feel the need to explain this a little more.

This was the guy that set on fire The Temple of Artemis from Ephesus (one of the Seven Wonders Of The Ancient World). He had supposedly done it in order to be remembered by history.

I don't know about Napoleon, Patton, Wallace or Washington. They died, like all the others, their ideas survived, more or less, but none of them accomplished so clearly their desires.

Herostrat. After 23 centuries, I am writing down his name. He is a winner.

[ October 10, 2002, 22:55: Message edited by: r'Hant ]

 

Leonidas, King of Sparta
He led an army of 1000 men against a Persian army of 1000000 and he was defeated because of treason.

Erwin Rommel
A brave soldier, brilliant general, non-nazi, respected by friends and enemies

Achilles
He could choose between a short but glorius life and a long life but without glory. He chose the first one.

Hector
The archetype of the person, who is not brave by nature but because of dedication to his duty.

 

Fat Albert.

 

OMG!

Slim, that's just wrong. Wrong, I tell you!

I had completely forgotten about that cartoon until just now...

 

Rommel? The Nazi general? The one who kept Hitler in power for years because the Allies couldn't beat him in North Africa? That one?

 

William wallace, Braveheart, Odysseus and others.
Personal fav(REALLY cool guy): Leonidas. He really beet the **** out of those persians.

Padeen!

 

Shralph, not all Germans were Nazis, saying that is the same like saying that all the russians were commies, all afghans were Taliban and all Americans are corrupt

 

ff topic: What? Aren't all Americans corrupt? faints

 

Sharlp:
As I have already written, Rommel was not a nazi. He has fought for his country with bravery and honour and he has respected both his troops and the enemy troops.Do you Know that in North Africa he has reduced the water share of his own troops in order to give water to british POW? Also, Do you Know that he was one of the leaders of Hitler's assasination attempt and that he was forced to commit suicide after the failure of the assasination?

 

Keraptisdm, it might be a little while before JC is in the books !

I think that Martin Luther King Jr., Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Josef Stalin, Jesus, Napoleon and Bill Cosby are the greatest men ever. They all did something for mankind.

Stalin might confuse you, but he was the reason that the nazis lost the war. If he had just surrendered, then today all of Asia, Europe, and the rest of the world would be under Nazi control.

 

But on the other hand, Stalin did kill quite a few (to say the least) people. So although he did make sure we aren't living in the third Reich I wouldn't call him a hero!

 

Muhammad. He managed to unite an warlike people divided by a tribal society within one lifetime. He was persecuted by the Meccan elites from the day he started preaching, was exiled with his follwers to Yathrib (now known as Medina, the 'City of the Prophet'), fought for his existence with a band of followers incredibly outnumbered, and when he eventually triumphed and rode into Mecca at the head of a triumpant army, he showed his enemies mercy. Rather than kill those who had killed his followers, chased him from his home and tribe, and done their best to end his life, Muhammad allowed them to live in peace, whether they converted to his faith or not. Within his lifetime, he united the entire Arabian peninsula; within a hundred years of his death the empire would spread from Gibraltar to the Himalayas. The Arabs went from being pawns controlled by the Byzantines, Persians, and Abyssinians to a cohesive, independent people in one generation...something that truly impresses me.

 

Yeah, he also married a six-year-old and slept with her when she turned nine. Mohammed was a real peach.

And Rommel was a Nazi. The whole damn government consisted of Nazis. Oh, goody, he was humane to the POW's. Give him a medal.

He also fought to defend the country that was in the process of killing 12 million people! Yeah, maybe he was in on the attempt on Hitler's life, but so were a lot of other Nazis. They just knew that Hitler had started to screw up the war effort. Nothing more.

I have no idea how you can possibly defend a man who, although clearly an able general, was fighting to perpetuate a society based on the extermination of Jews, Catholics, blacks, homosexuals, and most any other minority you can think of. He didn't just "exist" at that time. He didn't just happen to be there following orders. He carried on a campaign that literally allowed a genocidal maniac and demagogue to remain in power.

Sorry to carry on for so long, but this is just amazing. I applaud most efforts to be politically incorrect and consider unfashionable views, but holy cow, man! You're talking about someone without whom millions of people would have avoided being gassed to death in ovens!

[ October 11, 2002, 22:42: Message edited by: Shralp ]

 

OK, let's suppose that you are right. Then according to your point of view:
1. General Lee must not be considered as a hero as well (All the american movies on civil war that I have watched presented him as a hero). He was defending a system, which was supporting slavery.
2. Field Marshal Zukhov (the general who drove germans back to Berlin). He was fighting for Stalin, an insane dictator. So he isn't a hero.
3. Winston Churchill. He has participated in Boers Wars, where the concentration camps made their first appearance and thousand of women and children died there.Therefore, he is no hero.
4. General Caster. He has commited a genocide against the Indians but he is considered as an american hero. According to your way of thinking he must be just a butcher.

Like or not, Rommel was not a nazi. You have to understand that the Germans, who served in Wehrmacht, were not nazis (at least the majority of them). They were fighting for their country, regardless of their regime.

 

Schralp:

Dude. The Nazi's owned a whole lot more people than just 12. Heck, the conservative numbers of Russians alone is that. And the liberal goes as high as 25.

If you concentrate on everyone's good side, then it's easy to find a role model. That's why Brittany Spears is sooooo popular!

Other than that, have a Coke and a smile. That's why Dr. Weil says. Or at least, that's what Dr. Weil says the South American indians do...

Details, details...

[edit: whooops. Forgot. I didn't know The Prophet married the girl at 6. I just figured he married her at 9. I guess the whole "grass on the field" thing wasn't so important back then... ]

[ October 12, 2002, 00:03: Message edited by: ejsmith ]