History books, they are never where you expect them to be.
Ah that's right. It's holding up the shoddy Video table.
Printable View
History books, they are never where you expect them to be.
Ah that's right. It's holding up the shoddy Video table.
Yes, I was not attempting to 'diss' you for it. You really know a lot http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by [b
Edit: Nevermind, just read your post completely. ;)
Well I have to admit that reading about Vlad's life is a hell of alot more interesting than reading about Leopold I... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ons/gc-yes.gif
It's not a matter of disrespect Wizzy. I found it funny that so many people here,completely mislead by todays media, think that Vlad was such a huge figure in the antiottoman fight. He managed to win, but didn't made such a big difference. There were other romanian voievods that had much more better results, and the Habsburgs were indeed the ones to hold off the turks, although in 1683 they were saved by the polish, btw http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wink.gif
Yes indeed. Mmmmm hussars...
~Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg.../gc-pirate.gif
Actually saved by 2 armies:Quote:
Originally Posted by [b
1. King John III's Polish army
2. Duke Charles of Lorraine's Austro-German Imperial army (Lorrainers, Saxons, Bavarians, Swabians, Franconians, Thuringians, and the remnants of the Austrian army).
Of the total combined force, the Poles made up only about 1/3. They formed the right wing, the Austrians the left wing, and the German Imperials (Duke Charles) the center. Even though the Austro-Germans greatly outnumbered the Poles, John III was senior commander due to his royal rank; and at the critical moment, he led the combined Austro-German-Polish cavalry charge that shattered the Turkish lines, captured their camp, and finally ended the century-long threat against Vienna http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/cool.gif
Well yes, that's quite a good battle report.
why compare/contrast william wallace to vlad? Did you just pick two popular historical figures, or am i missing the connection. and why not add wonderwoman to your poll.
Check this out. wonderwoman had bullet deflecting bracers, a lasso of truth, and an invisible jet. she was very strong and quick. did vlad have a lasso? i dont think so. and there is no point in discussing who would look better in the star spangled metalic bikini. i frankly dont see how she isnt better than both vlad and wallace.
If you would have kept quiet, you would've remained a wise man.
Post edited
Because this is a history forum Obex, and WonderWoman is Fantasy.
I don't know why these two were chosen, nor do I care tbh.
Oh, and on an extra note, I hate sarcasm when used in an unfriendly context - keep from it.
This is for constructive arguments.
Edited by Ithaskar Fëarindel
First, I don't know what he wrote, but if Ithaskar interviened, than it surely was the case. So thank you, Ithaskar-san.
Well, I wasn't the one starting the thread. but I don't think it should die like this. Why were Wallace and Dracul chosen? I don't think the matter deserves an answer because of the way it was raised, but I'll indulge you: I asume that it is because of their popularity nowadays and because of the attention given to them. They weren't fighting in the same context nor were they contemporanies, but they bassically had the same goal: freedom. If I were to have started this thread, I would've chosen Robert the Bruce instead of Wallace, but he was not the main character in Braveheart http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...s/rolleyes.gif
Who historical figure do u preffer over the other?(and why)
I prefer William Wallace to Vlad Tepes because he would be less likely to impale me or nail things to my head. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif
Actually, someone should talk to Mel Gibson about doing a Braveheart sequel. Here's my treatment: William Wallace turns out to be an immortal from the Highlander series. Vlad Tepes is the vampire Dracula. In the 21st century, Wallace and Dracula meet in Los Angeles to fight for "the prize". There can be only one
Uhmm, harder to put a pike in someones chest and do all those rituals than chop a head http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/gc-no.gif
Oh,but I think it's better this way(my way)...Quote:
Originally Posted by [b
Why compare two personalities of the same culture?
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...c-glasses2.gif
No,no...of course not...not while I'm still here... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/gc-wall.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by [b
Well whats the problem... Wallace used a skirt and nothing under it and Vlad IMPALED people.
tough choice?... dont think so http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...s/bigthumb.gif
Vlad ofcourse
I'm with Vlad Tepes III on this one... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...gc-curtain.gif
His achievements in fending off the Turks are impressive. What fascinates me the most is his extensive use of fear and dread in order to get his way. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg.../gc-dizzy2.gif
This reminds me of some stuff I read online. A lot of folklore-stuff, but I'm sure it has historical merits..
In any case, it's still 'stuff' :)
Ten thousand were impaled in the Transylvanian city of Sibiu in 1460.
In 1459, on St. Bartholomew?s Day, Vlad III had thirty thousand of the merchants and boyars of the Transylvanian city of Brasov impaled. (he thought they were parasites)
I like the Turban-story :D
But there's plenty more unconfirmed stories about this man.
"The Golden Cup"
Vlad Dracula was known throughout his land for his fierce insistence on honesty and order. Thieves seldom dared practice their trade within his domain, for they knew that the stake awaited any who were caught. Vlad was so confident in the effectiveness of his law that he laced a golden cup on display in the central square of Tirgoviste. The cup was never stolen and remained entirely unmolested throughout Vlad Dracula?s reign.
But he was also able to reward people.
"The Polish Nobleman"
Benedict de Boithor, a Polish nobleman in the service of the King of Hungary, visited Vlad Dracula at Tirgoviste in September of 1458. At dinner one evening Vlad ordered a golden spear brought and set up directly in front of the royal envoy. Vlad then asked the envoy if he knew why this spear had been set up. Benedict replied that he imagined some boyar had offended the prince and that Vlad intended to honor him. Vlad responded that the spear had, in fact, been set up in honor of his noble, Polish guest. The Pole then responded that if he had done anything to deserve death that Vlad should do as he thought best. Vlad Dracula was greatly pleased by this answer, showered him with gifts, and declared that had he answered in any other manner he would have been immediately impaled.
And.. what a true badass. Sadistic and plain scary-looking
http://www.donlinke.com/images/Vlad/...rig_edit-x.jpg
Btw. he really LIKED to impale people. Although impalement was Vlad Dracula?s favorite method of torture, it was by no means his only method. The list of tortures employed by this cruel prince reads like an inventory of hell?s tools: nails in heads, cutting off of limbs, blinding, strangulation, burning, cutting off of noses and ears, mutilation of sexual organs (especially in the case of women), scalping, skinning, exposure to the elements or to wild animals, and burning alive.
I wouldn't want to meet this man in a dark alley. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg.../gc-party2.gif
How about a compromise...Quote:
Originally Posted by [b
First you chop head, then you post it on an oversized toothpick http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif
~Wiz
Good ideeaQuote:
Originally Posted by [b
Shigawire, both those stories are true. Especially the first http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif
Just like to note that most of the worst stuff about him was made up by the king of hungary at the time as an excuse for his backstapping imprisonation of vlad. Who was the hero of europe for his defeat of the turks.
IT should also be stated that the city vlad had had impaled or sent into slavery had buried his brotherALIVE You'd be pissed too if your brother had been buried alive. He was chained into a grave and then buried just so you know. When vlad took power he had his brother taken to the surface, his brother face in absolute agony and fear and filled with dirt.
Vlad. I mean were any Vampires made about Wally?
Go Vlad Tzepes It was a night attack and he dressed his few soldiers in ottoman uniforms. The confusion was huge and the Turks continued slashing each other long after the valachian troops withdrew.~:thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by [b
All my respect to Will Wallace, but I go for Vlad the Impaler (as a Romanian, I agree I might be a little biased on this matter http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wave.gif ).
BTW - he was, indeed, depicted as one cruel ruler, but brutality and cruelty towards ennemies and hostages was quite common during Middle Age. Impaling was one of the methods used to strike terror in your ennemies.
My vote goes to Vlad the Impaler. Nice guy to have around if you need to impale someone, specialy ottomans.
Vlad/ Wallace is a damn Scotsman And Vlad is a cooler naem (never heard of vlad tho, so cant make a tacticl comp[arison.
-Capo
Vlad is the historical figure "Dracula" was based on. He was a true badass, and impaled people on pikes, hence his nickname, "Vlad the Impaler." He wins over some never-bathes-because-he's-too-busy-fighting-the-English Scotsman. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wink.gif
I read up on Vlad. He stills kicks the scotchmans ass.
-Capo
No actually the historically dracula and the vampire have nothing to do with each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by [b
Dracul in a.... (whatever is spoken in wallachia, I think its romananian) means both "Dragon" and "Devil" THe suffix a means "son of".
Vlad the 3rds father was made "Knight of the Imperial Dragon" and there had Dracul added to the end of his name, and as such his son got Dracula added to his name.
Bram stoker got the idea from the concept that vampires were the son of a devil which he got out of a romanian (?) dectionary and thats how he got the name of his character.
One huge coincidence. But none the less a coincindence.
It's romanian language, Ef.
And "Dracul" means only "Devil". Taht's all. The name derived from the Dragon Order of Vlad's father, but "Dragon" in romanian is just like in english, "Dragon".
I remember playing an old warcraft III style game called Dracula(AKA:Vlad Tepes)thats the only game thats was at least historically accurate,becuase in it you don't fight wolves,bats,skeletons and zombies but Turks
i vote for Wallace because i've never seen countless BS myths about Wallace being perpetuated all throughout today's pop culture
i do however, see countless BS myths about Vlad being perpetuated all throughout today's pop culture.
if Vlad was really so great, then there would be NO NEED for anyone to make up myths about him.
based on this, i conclude that Wallace would massacre Vlad.
Before "Braveheart" only a few people knew who William Wallace was. Everybody knows Vlad the Impaler and his more famous personae Dracula. Nuff said... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...evalcheers.gif