Who is your least favourite historical figure and why?

Discussion in 'History' started by jennyRater, Jan 24, 2005.

  1. Hapsburg Hellenistic polytheist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,225
    No, nero wasn't that horrible of a ruler. He was not as bad as he's made out to be. Most of the "evil incarnate" bullshit comes from those that hated him, and those that he persecuted. Biased sources. He actually helped people himself, when rome caught fire. He was out there, on the front of the disaster, helping his people.
    Constantine killed more people and caused more division in Rome than Nero ever did.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. devils_reject Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    659
    Nero manipulated people a lot including the christians but he indirectly has a large part to play in the popularity of christianity, whether that is good or bad is anyone's opinion. All great figures whether good or bad are simply too large for me to have a least favorite. I would modestly say Stalin, at least hitler had a dream
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. dixonmassey Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,151
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Victor E Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    181
    I know I'm answering this very late (quoting from page 1) but anyways..

    Maybe, maybe not. He's definatly worse than budda, because budda has never affected me in any ways (I live in an european country) mohammed on the other hand is causing big troubles still today.. Or at least the religion he supports does!

    I think I'd rate mohammed and jesus equal.
     
  8. darkraven Registered Member

    Messages:
    7
    um i think that that Pol POt is the worst, jsut becasue he was so gay
     
  9. fuzzywuz Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    51
    William Biddlesworth....faceless bureaucrat, alphabetizes mortgage defaults somewhere in London....prolly.
     
  10. fuzzywuz Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    51
    William Biddlesworth....faceless bureaucrat, alphabetizes mortgage defaults somewhere in London....prolly. how banal is evil.
     
  11. c20H25N3o Shiny Heart of a Shiny Child Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,017
    Ivan the Terrible - The guy fried people in giant frying pans!!!
     
  12. River Ape Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,152
    The topic of Sawney Bean came up in conversation with some friends today, and I recalled that he had been mentioned in this thread.

    Now, what I want to know is this: Do Scots REALLY believe this fantastic story? Do they not find it beyond belief? Are they just trying to fool simple Sassenachs and others? Or do they really believe there is some historic foundation for the story?

    What does it say about the lurid imaginations of Scots that they invent tales of this sort!!!
     
  13. Xylene Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,398
    Sawney and Elizabeth Bean did exist, actually--they were tracked down and apprehended (after eating people for 30 years) in early 1435, and executed without trial at the Tollbooth in Ediburgh in March of that year. James IV was the King of Scotland at the time, and he personally led about 400 men across from Edinburgh to catch these bastards.
     
  14. River Ape Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,152
    But Xylene, how do you KNOW??? Are there contemporary records? When is the story first recorded? Did they leave a recipe book? Are you not a jot suspicious of such a tale?

    I should like to hear the views of others.
     
  15. Xylene Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,398
    I assume there are contemporary records--I first read about the Bean clan in the book "historical mysteries" about 30 years ago. The Scots are very good at keeping records. Also, try to Google Bean Clan Cannibals and see what you come up with.
     
  16. corequin Registered Member

    Messages:
    1
    There's so many! Figures traditionally recognized as good like Abraham Lincoln was actually useless in my eyes because he barely cared about slave rights and the south would be better off gone anyways.
    Then there is Robespierre, so hated, but he tried to ban religion, and epitomized my desire for revenge against the stupidity of the church, and similar reactionaries. Good!

    My most hated living is Osama bin Laden, and only a little part of that has to do with 9/11. He is a despicable spokes-alien of the terrible Sharia law system. I'm a liberal and stereotypically should sympathize with Islam but I do not. They treat their people as disgustingly as our own Westboro Baptist Church. But on a ubiquitous, national, continental level.

    Historically, I hate Saint John Chrysostom. Another terrible man, but, of course, regarded as a saint by the catholic church like all good racists and hate-inspiring jackasses.
     
  17. Carcano Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,865
    Anyone called 'The Great'...as in Alexander the Great, was probably only great at slaughtering people.
     
  18. tim840 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,653
  19. Mr. Hamtastic whackawhackado! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,492
    Freud

    Nonthinking elitist bastard, whose own desire to fuck his mother and kill his father colored his every thought. More time has been wasted on useless thought based on his personal demons and then inhumanly applied to humanity than I can really fathom.
     
  20. G. F. Schleebenhorst England != UK Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,213
    Slavery is the strong exploiting the weak. That's called....nature. If slavery is nasty then just about everything is nasty.
     

Share This Page