Best and worst British monarchs?

by **Stormaen** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:21 pm

Who, in your opinion, are the best and worst British monarchs? When I say "British" I mean either pre- or post-Union monarchs and pre- or post-1066 monarchs in England.

The Best
I think, for me, the best British monarch was Alfred the Great. His rule formalised the Anglo-Saxon system of justice, local government and taxation later adapted into common law by Henry I, leaving a lasting legacy we feel even today. Unfortunately, his descendants didn't fare so well so history has largely forgotten him and his achievements.

Honourable mentions: Henry II, Edward I, Henry V, Elizabeth I, Victoria and Elizabeth II.

The Worst
Admittedly, there's a lot more choice for this category! However, weighing up all the options, I think that John is the worst of a bad bunch. He was so bad that in 1216, the Barons revolting against John actually declared Prince Louis of France (later Louis VIII) as King of England...

Dishonourable mentions: Stephen, Edward II, Mary I, Charles I, James VII/II, George IV and Edward VIII.

by **Rhodisia** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:23 pm

George III was a major asshole. Fuck him.

by **Sebastianbourg** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:44 pm

Rhodisia wrote:George III was a major asshole. Fuck him.

We've had worse.

by **Soviet Haaregrad** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:45 pm

The Good: Alfred The Great, Canute, Oliver Cromwell, Elizabeth I, Victoria, John I (Magna Carta ftw).

The Bad: Charles I, Richard II.

The Ugly: William the Bastard, Henry Tudor.

by **Vassenor** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:47 pm

Rhodisia wrote:George III was a major asshole. Fuck him.

He was also clinically insane.

by **Solorni** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:47 pm

The best: William III simply because he was Dutch. Go dutch!

by **Valaran** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:49 pm

I think a Dishonourable mention should also go to Henry VI, for messing up the entire list of success of Henry V, ruining the economy, and who's inept leadership helped to spark the wars of the roses for the latter half of the 15th century.

Probably not the worst (it wasn't all his fault - he had a mental illness at one point), but certainly bad enough to deserve a footnote of criticism.

by **Sebastianbourg** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:49 pm

Best: Alfred the Great, Canute, Henry VIII (I like him for some reason even though I'm Catholic)
Worst: Edward VIII (he abdicated for stupid reasons), Mary I (too violent for my liking), Charles I
Practically (bad) monarchs but not quite: Oliver and Richard Cromwell

by **Sebastianbourg** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:50 pm

Vassenor wrote:
Rhodisia wrote:George III was a major asshole. Fuck him.

He was also clinically insane.

Porphyria supposedly.

by **Sebastianbourg** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:51 pm

Soviet Haaregrad wrote:The Good: Alfred The Great, Canute, Oliver Cromwell, Elizabeth I, Victoria.

The Bad: Charles I.

The Ugly: William the Bastard, Henry Tudor.

I wouldn't use the words 'monarch' and 'good' to describe him.

by **Brillnuck** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:54 pm

Soviet Haaregrad wrote:The Good: Alfred The Great, Canute, Oliver Cromwell, Elizabeth I, Victoria.

The Bad: Charles I.

The Ugly: William the Bastard, Henry Tudor.

Agreed.

by **Soviet Haaregrad** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:06 pm

Sebastianbourg wrote:
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:The Good: Alfred The Great, Canute, Oliver Cromwell, Elizabeth I, Victoria.

The Bad: Charles I.

The Ugly: William the Bastard, Henry Tudor.

I would use the words 'monarch' and 'good' to describe him.

His qualifications as a monarch are debatable.

by **Solorni** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:07 pm

Oliver Cromwell was kind of insane though... like how he wanted to bring the Jews back to Britain so that he could later convert them and bring about the third coming of Jesus....

by **Soviet Haaregrad** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:12 pm

Solorni wrote:Oliver Cromwell was kind of insane though... like how he wanted to bring the Jews back to Britain so that he could later convert them and bring about the third coming of Jesus....

Lots of good leaders had crazy ideas. Crazy, horrible ideas one possesses but never are able to act upon don't really form part of one's legacy, or at the very least they don't overshadow the good things those people actually accomplished.

by **Risottia** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:14 pm

I think the best was George VI.

by **Solorni** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:14 pm

Soviet Haaregrad wrote:
Solorni wrote:Oliver Cromwell was kind of insane though... like how he wanted to bring the Jews back to Britain so that he could later convert them and bring about the third coming of Jesus....

Lots of good leaders had crazy ideas. Crazy, horrible ideas one possesses but never are able to act upon don't really form part of one's legacy, or at the very least they don't overshadow the good things those people actually accomplished.

And what good did Cromwell accomplish?

by **Smig** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:15 pm

No-one's mentioned Mary I, my choice for worst, who was a bigot and a religious extremist.

For best, I'd say it's Elizabeth I for being the exact opposite of Mary.

Also, Cromwell wasn't a monarch. He was a republican.

by **Sebastianbourg** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:20 pm

Smig wrote:No-one's mentioned Mary I, my choice for worst, who was a bigot and a religious extremist.

For best, I'd say it's Elizabeth I for being the exact opposite of Mary.

Also, Cromwell wasn't a monarch. He was a republican.

I for one mentioned Mary along with the OP and some others.

by **Sebastianbourg** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:21 pm

Soviet Haaregrad wrote:
Sebastianbourg wrote:I would use the words 'monarch' and 'good' to describe him.

His qualifications as a monarch are debatable.

He was offered the Crown while Lord Protector but he declined it after thinking about it for six weeks and while in the post of Lord Protector he was a king in all but name.

by **Soviet Haaregrad** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:38 pm

Solorni wrote:And what good did Cromwell accomplish?

Well, there was that little issue with Charles... :unsure:

Sebastianbourg wrote:
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:
His qualifications as a monarch are debatable.

He was offered the Crown while Lord Protector but he declined it after thinking about it for six weeks and while in the post of Lord Protector he was a king in all but name.

I'm aware. My comment was to underscore that the issue of Cromwell being monarch was debatable, the issue of him being good was not. I assumed 'would' was a typo and that you meant 'wouldn't'.

by **Conscentia** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:39 pm

Nomination for Worst: William the Conqueror
Harrying of the North; usurping the crown from it's rightful heir; destruction of native culture; destruction of native language; theft of land; imposed continental feudalism in England; massacre at his coronation (those admittedly, his guards were probably to blame).

Best? I don't know. Cnut the Great maybe? Did the Scots have any good monarchs?

by **Sebastianbourg** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:41 pm

Soviet Haaregrad wrote:I assumed 'would' was a typo and that you meant 'wouldn't'.

Indeed it was.

by **Angleter** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:43 pm

Rhodisia wrote:George III was a major asshole. Fuck him.

What, specifically, did he do wrong?

by **The Liberated Territories** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:54 pm

Cromwell. Long live the Republic biches!

by **Sebastianbourg** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 1:56 pm

The Liberated Territories wrote:Cromwell. Long live the Republic biches!

The Commonwealth.

Best and worst British monarchs?

Best and worst British monarchs?

Who is online