Commander

Was Edward the Longshanks really the most ruthless King of England that ever lived?

Belisarius

William I [the conquerer] and Henry VIII , rate as candidates. William for the "Harrowing of the North" and Henry for the "Pilgrimage of Grace" and the "Rough Wooing"

kahn

William the Conquerer defeated the English at Hastings and took over the throne, but what did he do after that that would label him as a ruthless leader?

Was it just that he was a foreign ruler?

Belisarius

He slaughtered approximately 150, 000 of his new "subjects" who weren't that keen to have a Norman King. Basically he broght fire and sword to the Midlands and North of England, who were basically Danish/ex-Viking settlers, in 1069-70. Check out Wikipedia "Harrying of the North" for a reasonable account.

Nikd

In my oppinion Edward Longsans, the nickname "Hammer of Scotland" was not given accidentaly.

Belisarius

Despite all the rubbish you see in Braveheart, Edward I was asked to arbitrate the Scottish sucession after the death of the Scots King Alexander III. He NEGOTIATED a Scottish recognition of English overlordship, and chose John Baliol as king in 1290. The new Scottish King then promptly allied himself with France [gee, thanks John!] England's old enemy. Cue English invasion and conquest. So how was that ruthless?

Nikd

To be more precise, after the death of King Alexander of Scotlan (who fell from his horse) succesor was his 3 y.o. daughter who was drougned in a ship sink.
So remained 2 main rivals the Baliols and the Bruce who called Edward to settle as judge the difference (in a court where each side was represented wiht 20 lawyers each), Edward see that he has the oppurtuninty to intervent in Scotlands affairs, faithfull in the principal "divide and rule" he made King of the Baliols knewing that the Bruce would not accept this and so Scotland NEVER be united against England, and not only this but it was more than sure that the Baliols or the Bruce will call for English help when things was going bas, Longsans was no a fair and good boy !!

And in this forum we have much more resources then Hollywood movies to learn history (take a look at the topic history links for a quick refference).

Belisarius

The question asks, "who was the most ruthless". I never suggested he was a saint, just not particularly ruthless in the mores of the times he lived. Compared with William the Conqueror and Henry VIII, he was a "boy scout". For that matter, if you look at English Rulers as opposed to Kings and Queens, there's always Oliver Cromwell to consider.

By the way there were 12 Scottish claimants in total, 14 if you count the Kings of France and Edward himself who cheekily put his own claim in, because he could! :wink:

finrod

Its simple. The most ruthless ruler in England was Oliver Cromwell. Think of the massacres in England, Scotland and Cornwall and selling a lot of the survivors as white slaves in Barbados.

Toltec

William was certainly the biggest barstard, but does amout of blood spilt = ruthlessness?

What's is the criteria for ruthlessness?

Henry II killed his own brothers.