RMweb Premium OnTheBranchline Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 (edited) Considering some historians portray him as a tyrant. im focused more on the name deciding/decision process and the reaction to the name. Edited April 18 by OnTheBranchline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 2 minutes ago, OnTheBranchline said: Considering some historians portray him as a tyrant. im focused more on the name deciding/decision process and the reaction to the name. I would hardly think so, especially as there is a statue of him outside the House of Commons. He's part of the UK's transition to Parliamentary Democracy. 1 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnofwessex Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 I would have thought that Clive of India was far worse 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Saunders Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 Your trying to judge yesterday by the revisionist standards of today! The country was not long out of the war and was still rebuilding at the time and yesterdays heroes are todays monsters. 2 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul H Vigor Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 Yes. I understand it rocked-the-boat in 1660! 1 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium OnTheBranchline Posted April 18 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 5 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said: Your trying to judge yesterday by the revisionist standards of today! The country was not long out of the war and was still rebuilding at the time and yesterdays heroes are todays monsters. I didn't judge anything - I simply said that other people have different viewpoints. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 King John was a right so and so, !! Henry VIII also, one of England’s most famous monarchs was a foul-tempered, gluttonous, bloodthirsty tyrant who, as well as ordering the executions of two of the women who had the misfortune to marry him, had an estimated 57,000 people executed during his 36-year reign. Any more "Bad 'uns", not neccesarily Kings ? Brit15 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 12 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said: Your trying to judge yesterday by the revisionist standards of today! The country was not long out of the war and was still rebuilding at the time and yesterdays heroes are todays monsters. 'Todays Monsters'; only in some peoples opinions. Others have differing opinions. Has thus been and probably always shall be. Phil 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PeterStiles Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 I'll never forgive Cromwell for abolishing Christmas! Image me that, no time of the year to buy people Train Sets! 1 1 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold phil_sutters Posted April 18 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 18 Depends on one's viewpoint - King Richard 1 led the English knights on the Crusades against the Muslims. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 Don't think there has ever been a Loco named Beeching? 1 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Welchester Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 When the GWR named 2905, it was claimed that only they could class Lady Macbeth as a Saint. 1 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PeterStiles Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 Just now, phil_sutters said: Crusades Oh yes... Let's all rush off to Jerusalem to fight a war... How's that going for you? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PeterStiles Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 I think I'll stop now. This thread can only end up too political. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 34001 and 34003 were hated by their respective Footy Fans. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 Just now, PeterStiles said: I think I'll stop now. This thread can only end up too political. Nah, not if you keep to the funny side of things. How about all the Clans having to be shedded very carefully Geographically for example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 Don't mention 61663 or 61664 unless you know where you are in Merseyside. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 60536 might be controversial in certain company? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Jeremy Cumberland Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 The kings were pretty uncontentious. There are (and were at the time) things to be said against quite a lot of them, but the sequence of monarchs is pretty much set in stone, including King Edward V (6016), who never actually reigned. King James II (6008) was so unpopular the British parliament invited the Dutch over to invade the country and turf him out, and really you can't get much worse than that. I don't know that Oliver Cromwell has ever been actively disliked or disapporved of by the estabishment. Certainly there are families even today who can say what side they were on in the Civil War, but he does not seem to have been a bad ruler. I note that there has never been a locomotive named after the Duke of Cumberland. His statue in Cavendish Square, London, was removed in 1868, so reviled had he become in the century or so since his death. We have a Prince William (47798), but that is named after someone else entirely. There is also a 7¼ inch miniature locomotive design "Sweet William", based in the 5 inch "Sweet Pea", which might ultimately be said to be derived from "Butcher" Cumberland, but the naming of the flower after him is disputed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AY Mod Posted April 18 Moderators Share Posted April 18 14 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said: Don't think there has ever been a Loco named Beeching? 10 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium OnTheBranchline Posted April 18 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 17 minutes ago, Welchester said: When the GWR named 2905, it was claimed that only they could class Lady Macbeth as a Saint. The loco got nervous about spots being on her. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PeterStiles Posted April 18 RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 6 minutes ago, OnTheBranchline said: about spots being Tch tch "About being spotted"... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drduncan Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 54 minutes ago, melmerby said: I would hardly think so, especially as there is a statue of him outside the House of Commons. He's part of the UK's transition to Parliamentary Democracy. Well, apart from replacing the the post civil war parliamentary crypto republican democracy with a military dictatorship… I always thought that his statue was there as a warning to politicians about the dangers of generals with a large standing army, time on their hands and a grievance or several. He’s why the British parliament resisted having a standing army and righty put their faith in the Royal Navy! DrDuncan 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium OnTheBranchline Posted April 18 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 6 minutes ago, drduncan said: Well, apart from replacing the the post civil war parliamentary crypto republican democracy with a military dictatorship… I always thought that his statue was there as a warning to politicians about the dangers of generals with a large standing army, time on their hands and a grievance or several. He’s why the British parliament resisted having a standing army and righty put their faith in the Royal Navy! DrDuncan "Meet the new boss Same as the old boss" We Won't Get Fooled Again - The Who 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium OnTheBranchline Posted April 18 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted April 18 9 minutes ago, PeterStiles said: Tch tch "About being spotted"... No, that's Lady Godiva... I'll get my coat. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now