Who was the most successful ruler in history?

Announcements Posted on
Four things that unis think matter more than league tables 08-12-2016
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Nikita Khrushchev perhaps
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Milo yiannopoulos because he rules the bedroom
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Elizabeth I. :yep:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Queen victoria
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Tarasis Kodisa Rousombladadiotes

    Spoiler:
    Show
    By the middle of the 5th Century the Roman Empire was on the verge of collapse. Its emperors were mere puppets, its armies were in chaos, and enemies were closing in on all sides. Unable to sustain itself, the West collapsed, plunging Europe into the Dark Ages. By all accounts, the East should have followed suit, and yet, unexpectedly, the Eastern emperor slipped free of his barbarian master and saved the tottering state.
    *
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Queen Victoria
    (Original post by sam1793)
    Queen victoria
    Why, out of interest? A strong lady, but didn't she do little ruling given she had little more power than our current Queen?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    Based on all of the factors of success combined overall: keeping their people in check, expanding their realm in terms of wealth and influence, securing their position in terms of uprisings, foreign enemies, etc.

    Again, this is overall and based on all the factors - just because a particular leader in history led great military campaigns does not mean their domestic leadership was any good.

    Who takes the top spot?
    Napoleon

    He rose from manning artillery to high command as a result of nothing but military genius. Eventually he became the monarch of France and Italy and the effective ruler of continental Europe.

    He repeatedly defeated coalitions of every other European power and massively expanded French territory.

    He poured into France the cultural achievements of these new places and revolutionised law and society at home and abroad. The Napoleonic Code is still in practice in France today.

    When finally defeated and imprisoned on an island the first time around, he escaped with 1000 men and with nothing else but the admiration his countrymen had for him persuaded the troops sent to seize him to join him, promptly taking back the country.

    They joined him because he was a good and decent man, who called his troops 'children' in contrast to Wellington who called them 'scum'. In defeat he was merciful.

    Very probably the greatest person to have ever lived.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adamski191)
    If I had to pick, it would be Alexander the Great. After all, he did bring an end to the tyranny of the Persians, created an empire from Albania to Afghanistan, and left behind a ginormous legacy that is still making an impact to this very day. He was never defeated in battle, he created numerous famous cities (Alexandria, Egypt, for example), built tons of monuments that we still cherish today, and died a hero. It's too bad he didn't live on for longer. Who knows what would have become of the Ancient, and our Modern, world if he had?
    Tbh, he was more of a disrupter than a ruler. He didn't live long enough to be what you might call a 'successful ruler' and when he was alive, he simply defeated armies and gathered territories like a maniacal stamp collector gone nuts with an army of fanatic hoplites to collect his examples. :teehee: He never stuck around to make much of a success of things, although to be fair, he did found some pretty cool cities, not least, Alexandria. Oh and naturally he made himself a God in some territories. :rolleyes:

    His real achievement was destroying, not ruling - the long-lived (before him) Persian Empire being the most important example.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airmed)
    Elizabeth I. :yep:
    She was very good at the crucial moment, when the Armada came in and domestically she tried to calm down the fervent religious in-fighting that was the norm in that period. However, I don't think she really did a lot beyond that, she mainly concentrated on killing perceived enemies (a bit less than her predecessors, but she was still quite the murderer), applying toxic chemicals to her skin and tormenting her female relatives.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    Why, out of interest? A strong lady, but didn't she do little ruling given she had little more power than our current Queen?
    By your own criteria:

    (Original post by Grand High Witch)
    keeping their people in check, expanding their realm in terms of wealth and influence, securing their position in terms of uprisings, foreign enemies, etc.
    She defied assassination attempts, had one of the longest reigns going, lead the country to being the pre eminent world power, largest empire ever, brought the industrial revolution to the world... in terms of "expanding their realm in terms of wealth and influence" no other world leader could come close.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Genghis
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Frederick II of Prussia.
    Yes, have to agree with this. In a large part because his achievements were not transitory.

    Guys like Justinian, Asoka, Caesar and Genghis Khan created extreme short term success, at the expense of an enduring legacy.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    she mainly concentrated on killing perceived enemies (a bit less than her predecessors, but she was still quite the murderer), applying toxic chemicals to her skin and tormenting her female relatives.
    AKA the female imperative.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    RAMESSES THE GREAT!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Edminzodo)
    RAMESSES THE GREAT!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    He was just good at PR. He lied on his Stele about his supposed great victory over the Hittites, actually they probably creamed him at Kadesh.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I think Ashoka (ancient India - died around 232BC) deserves a mention on this thread. He ticks a lot of OPs boxes (extending territories, accumulating wealth, etc) but he was also a man who changed from being a ruthless warlord into a philosopher and religious syncretist and a humanitarian. His rule was characterised by widening of prosperity to more than just the aristocracy, which tends to be unusual for most rulers.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashoka
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I think Ashoka (ancient India - died around 232BC) deserves a mention on this thread. He ticks a lot of OPs boxes (extending territories, accumulating wealth, etc) but he was also a man who changed from being a ruthless warlord into a philosopher and religious syncretist and a humanitarian. His rule was characterised by widening of prosperity to more than just the aristocracy, which tends to be unusual for most rulers.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashoka
    He was a repulsive heretic who was responsible for the ascendance of Buddhism and the sidelining of Masculine Hindu India. Without his demonic influence, India may well have been able to resist the Muslim invasions.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    There are simply too many factors and considerations to objectively assess this across all countries and all time periods.

    But rulers that I admire and who I think did a fairly decent job are Henry II of England, Edward I, Edward IV, Alfonso VIII of Castile and Ferdinand & Isabella of Spain.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    He was just good at PR. He lied on his Stele about his supposed great victory over the Hittites, actually they probably creamed him at Kadesh.
    Ssh . . . People don't need to know that . . . But in all seriousness, Egypt prospered under him and reached the peak of its international power after the peace treaty. You can argue that the borders weren't as expansive as they were under Tuthmosis III, but Ramesses II has left a legacy like no other.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What about Peter the Great? Or Catherine the Great? Russian rulers tend to get sidelined IMO.
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: October 12, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Do you think you'll achieve your predicted A Level grades?
Useful resources
Study resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.