Watchmojo made a list about this, but I figure Languish can easily improve on theirs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urzWY6sqVGw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urzWY6sqVGw)
(Their list)
10 Frederick the Great
9 Haile Selassie
8 Tutankhamun
7 Peter the Great
6 Hammurabi
5 Charlemagne
4 Cyrus the Great
3 Alexander the Great
2 Henry VIII
1 Louis XIV
Setting aside the apparent arbitrary decision to disqualify some "Emperors" and "Khans" from their list of kings while allowing other "Emperors" and "Pharaohs", how do they manage to put Louis and Henry over Alexander? :wacko:
My list would look more like this:
1 Alexander
2 Genghis Khan
3 Qin Shi Huang
4 Caesar Augustus
5 Henry VIII
6 Tamerlane
7 Hammurabi
8 Louis XIV
9 Charlemagne
10 Shah Jahan
Thoughts?
Famous? Hirohito would have to go on there somewhere.
If their list is "famous" kings which I take to mean, "names a large number of average Joes have heard", I'm surprised they include Cyrus the Great or Haile Salassie, but not Richard the Lionheart (who was admittedly a crappy King of England, but is still famous).
Regarding Richard, I think his fame will vary highly depending on the standard used- very high on simple name recognition, but going down steeply if you expect people to know something about him. Same for Ivan the Terrible. Their interesting nicknames make them memorable.
David and Solomon?
Jesus.
Alternatively, the top ten greatest monarchs as per http://listverse.com/2010/08/11/top-10-greatest-monarchs/ (surely a peer reviewed, authoritative source :P ).
10 - Suleiman the Magnificent
09 - James I of England
08 - John III of Poland-Lithuania
07 - Meiji of Japan
06 - Gustav II Adolf of Sweden
05 - Augustus of Rome
04 - Cyrus II of Persia
03 - Frederick II of Prussia
02 - Victoria of the United Kingdom
01 - Louis XIV of France
Slightly better list, but I don't think I would consider Victoria great - she was the symbol of her times, but not much of an active participant. I would probably replace her with Peter the Great.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 06, 2014, 02:39:46 AM
Regarding Richard, I think his fame will vary highly depending on the standard used- very high on simple name recognition, but going down steeply if you expect people to know something about him. Same for Ivan the Terrible. Their interesting nicknames make them memorable.
But the same is true for Tutankhamen. He's known because of his tomb; otherwise he would have been a footnote in the lists of Pharaohs.
Also Karl V needs to go on those lists.
Assuming you mean Carlos V, he'd probably make my top 20.
Louis XIV doesn't strike me as an extremely famous monarch.
Quote from: Syt on September 06, 2014, 03:07:36 AM
Alternatively, the top ten greatest monarchs as per http://listverse.com/2010/08/11/top-10-greatest-monarchs/ (surely a peer reviewed, authoritative source :P ).
10 - Suleiman the Magnificent
09 - James I of England
08 - John III of Poland-Lithuania
07 - Meiji of Japan
06 - Gustav II Adolf of Sweden
05 - Augustus of Rome
04 - Cyrus II of Persia
03 - Frederick II of Prussia
02 - Victoria of the United Kingdom
01 - Louis XIV of France
Slightly better list, but I don't think I would consider Victoria great - she was the symbol of her times, but not much of an active participant. I would probably replace her with Peter the Great.
Seriously? James I??? And not Henry VIII (admittedly not an ideal but much better than James I) or Elizabeth I?
Likewise, for Poland John III was an extremely crappy king - he was a good military commander, but as a monarch was attrocious. Casimir the Great or Stefan Bathory were much better.
James I successfully unified the crown.
Henry VII bankrupted the country, lost every war he was involved in, had to deal with numerous internal revolts and broke with Rome. The man was a tyrant of the worst sort.
Liz should probably be on there. But that's more an indication of the poor quality of most monarchs than anything else.
Henry VIII doesn't belong anywhere near a list of good kings.
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 06, 2014, 06:47:16 AM
James I successfully unified the crown.
Henry VII bankrupted the country, lost every war he was involved in, had to deal with numerous internal revolts and broke with Rome. The man was a tyrant of the worst sort.
Liz should probably be on there. But that's more an indication of the poor quality of most monarchs than anything else.
All of which are actions that would help qualify you as famous.
Hell, if you go to every other english heritage managed site,visitors learn it's probably a ruin because of Henry VIII.
I'm with Marty here, to most people Henry and Elizabeth will be more familar/know than James I. And I'd probably rank Charles I over James I as well.
The James I list is of the 'greatest', not most famous.
No doubt Henry's on the latter.
I only read one biography of James I but he didn't strike me as so great.
Quote from: Syt on September 06, 2014, 01:48:36 AM
If their list is "famous" kings which I take to mean, "names a large number of average Joes have heard", I'm surprised they include Cyrus the Great or Haile Salassie, but not Richard the Lionheart (who was admittedly a crappy King of England, but is still famous).
Haile Salassie gets a nod for being around during boomer's lifetimes. I queried my mother, her husband and her friend this morning. All 3 knew him but not Peter, Frederick or Cyrus.
And reggae :contract:
Quote from: garbon on September 06, 2014, 07:44:58 AM
I only read one biography of James I but he didn't strike me as so great.
I'd argue that Charles II was better than James I, if you are looking for a Stuart to enshrine.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 06, 2014, 06:48:34 AM
Henry VIII doesn't belong anywhere near a list of good kings.
Actually I think this is a little too forceful. He may have been a petty tyrant, but his reign was fairly peaceful by the standards of the time, and firmly asserting the primacy of state over church was a good thing ultimately.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 06, 2014, 03:16:42 AM
Assuming you mean Carlos V, he'd probably make my top 20.
I'd replace Queen Victoria to put him on that list. Victoria was a figurehead monarch (and a shrew), when she acted on her own volition it caused potential constitutional crisises, and whatever few things good she did, it was Albert's doing. After he died all she did was grieve for forty years. Hardly a 'great' monarch. Whatever greatness she acquired, others did it for her. :hmm:
Come to think of it, scratch that; It should be Prince Albert on the list, instead of Queen Victoria.
Quote from: grumbler on September 06, 2014, 09:09:50 AM
Quote from: garbon on September 06, 2014, 07:44:58 AM
I only read one biography of James I but he didn't strike me as so great.
I'd argue that Charles II was better than James I, if you are looking for a Stuart to enshrine.
No love for James II, I see. :cry:
How about Queen Anne?
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 06, 2014, 06:47:16 AM
James I successfully unified the crown.
Henry VII bankrupted the country, lost every war he was involved in, had to deal with numerous internal revolts and broke with Rome. The man was a tyrant of the worst sort.
Liz should probably be on there. But that's more an indication of the poor quality of most monarchs than anything else.
Lots of of Kings successfully unified the crown in their countries. If you are looking at a top 10 or top 20, that barely ranks as a reason to put someone on that list.
I think English speakers over estimate the familiarity of non-English speakers with English monarchs. I'd say a better measure is how well recognized the particular monarch is outside of his (or her) home country, and outside their particular cultural sphere. Otherwise, the top 10 is going be a big list of Chinese emperors with Princess Di (never mind that she wasn't a Queen) and Hirohito of Japan on the strength of the elementary education and pop-knowledge of one billion Chinese.
Though, I suppose one billion Indians may have a better familiarity with British monarchs, so that could skew it. Though I doubt they're much aware of James I or II.
I was in a remote mountain village in Nepal two years ago and in one of the restaurants there was a poster of Will and Kate. I wouldn't be surprised if they are the most famous "monarchs" at the moment.
Surprised all you snot-nosed, over-educated Languish history fascists don't have Henri IV listed anywhere.
Quote from: Zanza on September 06, 2014, 10:39:39 AM
I was in a remote mountain village in Nepal two years ago and in one of the restaurants there was a poster of Will and Kate.
That's great, but did you get the headpiece?
Quote from: Jacob on September 06, 2014, 10:21:10 AM
Lots of of Kings successfully unified the crown in their countries. If you are looking at a top 10 or top 20, that barely ranks as a reason to put someone on that list.
I think English speakers over estimate the familiarity of non-English speakers with English monarchs. I'd say a better measure is how well recognized the particular monarch is outside of his (or her) home country, and outside their particular cultural sphere. Otherwise, the top 10 is going be a big list of Chinese emperors with Princess Di (never mind that she wasn't a Queen) and Hirohito of Japan on the strength of the elementary education and pop-knowledge of one billion Chinese.
Though, I suppose one billion Indians may have a better familiarity with British monarchs, so that could skew it. Though I doubt they're much aware of James I or II.
It's of greatest, not most famous and, as I say, frankly there's slim pickings before the modern age. James successfully unified two countries which lasted until the present day (for the next ten days or so at least) which is rarer. His legacy's mixed because it also laid the ground for the Civil War, but he managed to work two separate political systems and keep both countries at peace and out of expensive foreign wars for the best part of 40 years. I've always felt he would've avoided the civil war as someone who was a bit more adept than Charles. In addition there's a big expansion of Empire under his reign.
I'm no great fan and it's a very low bar - as I say the best monarchs are figureheads - but I can't think of many greater before him (ALFRED!) or after.
You're right about knowledge though, I'd guess the most famous British monarchs are the women. If I had to guess I'd say Elizabeth II is probably the world's most famous monarch. Victoria was the face of the British Empire and a Bollywood director has done two biopics of Elizabeth I, plus other cameos like Shakespeare in Love.
QuoteSurprised all you snot-nosed, over-educated Languish history fascists don't have Henri IV listed anywhere.
:wub: The greatest.
QuoteI was in a remote mountain village in Nepal two years ago and in one of the restaurants there was a poster of Will and Kate. I wouldn't be surprised if they are the most famous "monarchs" at the moment.
That's not forgetting the Pacific Islanders who worship Prince Philip.
Patrick McGoohan as Longshanks.
James I - 1,700,000,000
Queen Elizabeth I - 56,000,000
Queen Anne - 39,500,000
Queen Victoria - 26,200,000
King David - 24,700,000
Henry VIII - 13,100,000
Alexander the Great - 12,300,000
Peter the Great - 11,700,000
Charles V - 10,100,000
Genghis Khan - 8,880,000
Charlemagne - 7,390,000
King Solomon - 4,590,000
Louis XIV - 4,540,000
Haile Selassie - 4,460,000
Edward Longshanks - 4,050,000
Shah Jahan - 3,880,000
Cyrus the Great - 2,250,000
Tutankhamun - 2,090,000
Frederick the Great - 2,760,000
Tamerlane - 1,520,000
Gustavus II Aldolphus - 1,130,000
Richard the Lionheart - 1,260,000
Hammurabi - 1,210,000
Henri IV - 1,180,000
Ivan the Terrible - 946,000
Qin Shi Huang - 808,000
Meiji Emperor - 799,000
Augustus - 535,000
Sulemain the Magnificent - 375,000
John III of Poland - 112,000
Google searches, refined until no other options suggested and wikilink to correct wiki link in side window.. apparently "Lionheart" the van Damm movie generates a lot of links.
I think the 1.7 billion hits for King James are bible related, so are the 24M King David and 4M King Solomon ones as well. I mis-spelled John Sobieski first time round as "Jon III" getting 46 million AGOT relate hits.
Quote from: Viking on September 07, 2014, 05:19:29 AM
Google searches, refined until no other options suggested and wikilink to correct wiki link in side window.. apparently "Lionheart" the van Damm movie generates a lot of links.
That's gonna have a big language/cultural bias though. I.e. a search for "Isabel de Castilla" gives me 14 million hits, while "Isabella of Castille" just 350k (I haven't done much refining so your mileage may vary).
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 06, 2014, 08:40:48 PM
QuoteSurprised all you snot-nosed, over-educated Languish history fascists don't have Henri IV listed anywhere.
:wub: The greatest.
At least somebody has his head on straight around here.
Quote from: celedhring on September 07, 2014, 09:02:58 AM
Quote from: Viking on September 07, 2014, 05:19:29 AM
Google searches, refined until no other options suggested and wikilink to correct wiki link in side window.. apparently "Lionheart" the van Damm movie generates a lot of links.
That's gonna have a big language/cultural bias though. I.e. a search for "Isabel de Castilla" gives me 14 million hits, while "Isabella of Castille" just 350k (I haven't done much refining so your mileage may vary).
The number of search results isn't stable either. I just typed in "James I" and got 2.13 million results, without the quotation marks I got 1.94 billion results, which isn't the number Viking got.
Quote from: Zanza on September 07, 2014, 02:51:38 PM
The number of search results isn't stable either. I just typed in "James I" and got 2.13 million results, without the quotation marks I got 1.94 billion results, which isn't the number Viking got.
Not to forget he's James VI of Scotland too :P
Quote from: Viking on September 07, 2014, 05:19:29 AM
James I - 1,700,000,000
Queen Elizabeth I - 56,000,000
Queen Anne - 39,500,000
Queen Victoria - 26,200,000
King David - 24,700,000
Henry VIII - 13,100,000
Alexander the Great - 12,300,000
Peter the Great - 11,700,000
Charles V - 10,100,000
Genghis Khan - 8,880,000
Charlemagne - 7,390,000
King Solomon - 4,590,000
Louis XIV - 4,540,000
Haile Selassie - 4,460,000
Edward Longshanks - 4,050,000
Shah Jahan - 3,880,000
Cyrus the Great - 2,250,000
Tutankhamun - 2,090,000
Frederick the Great - 2,760,000
Tamerlane - 1,520,000
Gustavus II Aldolphus - 1,130,000
Richard the Lionheart - 1,260,000
Hammurabi - 1,210,000
Henri IV - 1,180,000
Ivan the Terrible - 946,000
Qin Shi Huang - 808,000
Meiji Emperor - 799,000
Augustus - 535,000
Sulemain the Magnificent - 375,000
John III of Poland - 112,000
Google searches, refined until no other options suggested and wikilink to correct wiki link in side window.. apparently "Lionheart" the van Damm movie generates a lot of links.
I think the 1.7 billion hits for King James are bible related, so are the 24M King David and 4M King Solomon ones as well. I mis-spelled John Sobieski first time round as "Jon III" getting 46 million AGOT relate hits.
Viking your methodology is shite. Googling for James I gives nearly 2 billion, whereas googling for James gives just 211 million, so google is incorporating searches for capital i. Some of your other 'results' might be similarly affected.
Quote from: Ideologue on September 06, 2014, 08:31:09 PM
Quote from: Zanza on September 06, 2014, 10:39:39 AM
I was in a remote mountain village in Nepal two years ago and in one of the restaurants there was a poster of Will and Kate.
That's great, but did you get the headpiece?
He lost the drinking game.
Any list without Elvis sucks.