My favorite historical figure is none other then the hero King of England who packed much into his short reign which we spoke of here: https://discourse.chaos-dwarfs.com/t/7936
Brilliant tactician, brilliant strategist (perhaps the first modern general), pious, intelligent, unyielding, patron of music, patron of law reform, helped end the schism in the church, had the Holy Roman Emperor visit HIM, immortalized by the Bard as the paragon of medieval kingship, and oh yeah he kicked the cr*p out of the French his entire reign, no more so then at Agincourt.
So what better way to celebrate a victory when hours before the French thought all they had to do as march onto the field!? Why sing of course:
Branagh’s version was pretty darn good, there was some things I didn’t like. This however is a magnificent shot.
For those wondering here are the words to Non Nobis
“Not to us, O Lord, not to us,
But to your Name give glory”.
While not sung this well in real life at the time, Henry did in fact have his soldiers sing it. All the more telling that after victory he placed the glory not to his name, but in doing do inadvertently did, nearly 600 years later. Of course a he became an iconic figure within a generation of his death, if not his own lifetime.
I also like Eisenhower: History does not long entrust the care of liberty to the weak or the timid.
… and Eisenhower was far from Militant too. A great war leader, and a good President both. Then we had U.S. Grant ( in the previous century) who was a great war leader, but is one of the least regarded Presidencies ever (cabinet is often blamed).
For Non-American leaders the first one that pops into my head is DeGaulle and he’s controversial at best. Then again I juse woke up, so I’ll probably think of more General to Leaders later.
Took Russia from a poor agrarian separated society and built a Modern Infrastructure (for the time), formed a representative advisory council to his rule, formed a competing economic stance against Western Europe and was ahead of the game, Formed a regimented and disciplined Military from untrained civilian militias, Formed a Modern Navy (again for the time) from the ground up with no previous Russian Naval Tradition.
All of this he achieved in the first 20 years of his reign… Imagine taking a country like Namibia and making it a modern first world nation in 2 decades… thats basically what he did.
Willmark: I believe that's a Roman saying. ... and Eisenhower was far from Militant too. A great war leader, and a good President both. Then we had U.S. Grant ( in the previous century) who was a great war leader, but is one of the least regarded Presidencies ever (cabinet is often blamed).
swissdictator
For Non-American leaders the first one that pops into my head is DeGaulle and he's controversial at best. Then again I juse woke up, so I'll probably think of more General to Leaders later.
swissdictator
DeGaulle was a fart in the wind, all hot air, nothing of substance. The rest of the world wonders why the US has anti-french feelings look no further then him.
Besides, it’s all about Winston Churchill. No man steered his public through a stressful time better than he. He prevented panic and made all feel safe and prepared at the same time. Good lad
well i think it so funny that amercans bash the french!! if it wasn't for the french we still be own by the english!!
Kera foehunter
France supported us not for any great desire to see us become independent, but to suit there own needs: namely revenge for on the English for losing King William's War, Queen Anne's War, King George's War and the French and Indian Wars thereby booting them pout of North America.
well i think it so funny that amercans bash the french!!
if it wasn't for the french we still be own by the english!!
and look two hundred years ago a small country called america bankrumt the french
it so funny how history repeats it self!!
btw Tecumseh is a great leader !! the best non amercan Leader /general !!
Kera foehunter
Thank you!
Finally someone with a brain on that side of the ocean.
I've lost count of the amount of times I've wanted to shout down some american 'cause they get all worked up and snooty about saving the French in WW2.
America totally owed them that much. And I'm not even a particularly big fan of the French, I got enough studying French for 5 years in high-school.
There's so many great men (and women! though we don't get many of them in the books yes) for a personal favourite. Marshal Mannerheim Great general and great statesman. In fact they are making a movie about him so even americans might get a chance for some edumaction.:P
In fairness, it was the Britons that saved france, then America had to save us (wanted to say help us, but in honesty, we were on the backleg and would’ve wiped before losing, but would’ve lost without their intervention).
DeGaulle was a fart in the wind, all hot air, nothing of substance. The rest of the world wonders why the US has anti-french feelings look no further then him.
Willmark
Interesting comment, so I went and looked him up on wikipedia...
Fought the nazis and vichy france: yeah pretty good in general
Asserted French economic and political self-determination: good for France, and everybody wants that for their countries, in general, so otherwise neutral imo
Advocate for pan-European nationalism: reminds me of Nasser and pan-Arabism, so again, pretty much ethically neutral but good for France in the long run it seems
Nuclear Armament: not cool, but lots of people have nuclear arms, and they're not cool either
Ended the Algerian war+occupation: Good, although unlikely motivated by ethics so much as pragmatism - that's the way it goes sometimes
"Vive le Quebec libre!": Well, as a Canadian, definitely not cool - I strongly disagree with him here...
So in general, seems to have been pretty influential for France, potentially in opposition to American interest in political domination of post-war Europe? Fair enough, although I'm not sure that "opposition to US" is the same thing as "nothing of substance"
RE: Henry the V: He and the play are very awesome indeed. I love the Kenneth Branagh version....altho I haven't seen it in years so that may be over-generous...
DeGaulle was a fart in the wind, all hot air, nothing of substance. The rest of the world wonders why the US has anti-french feelings look no further then him.
Willmark
So in general, seems to have been pretty influential for France, potentially in opposition to American interest in political domination of post-war Europe? Fair enough, although I'm not sure that "opposition to US" is the same thing as "nothing of substance"
Khan!
I seem to recall seeing a program on Discovery which explained why he was so disliked in America. IIRC he really made a nuisance of himself to Roosevelt and the american leadership. He and the other "free French" leaders were more interested in post-war succession than conducting the war. I don't recall it at the moment but there was some thing he did that really ticked Roosevelt off. In fact america was looking to another French general for a French leader but he was either assassinated or outmanoeuvred by DeGaulle. It was Churchill and the British who realised that if they wanted any kind of French involvement they would eventually have to be DeGaulle.
Well, if it were’t for Churchill, America would’nt have known about the war until Japan attacked. He’d been sending messages to Roosevelt the whole time from something all his underlings assumed was his private toilet
