There are always two sides to history. Unfortunately, history has generally been written by the victor. As a result, only one viewpoint is told and exaggerations are made, but occasionally the other angle gets out there. It is then up to the student to determine what is authentic and what is mere fabrication. History shows that the following people were 10 of the most barbaric men who ever lived. Whether the general consensus on them is true or not, that’s for you to decide. Nonetheless, the facts that are known reveal 10 men who are corrupt in nature and will do anything or kill anyone to get what they want and often for sheer enjoyment. They personify the word “bloodthirsty.” At times, sharing traits with the most savage of beasts, these men prove that humans aren’t so different from animals.
Aguirre stands out as one of the most ruthless of the Spanish conquistadors. He arrived in Peru in 1544 and in 1560 joined an expedition of several hundred men led by Pedro de Ursua in search of El Dorado. Aguirre eventually turned against Ursua’s leadership and would have Ursua executed. The man who took over, Fernando de Guzman, would also soon be put to death. Aguirre declared “I am the Wrath of God” and took over the mission. Those who remained on the mission who were against him were executed. As he sailed down the Amazon, Aguirre slaughtered those who he met along the way. In 1561 he showed himself in open rebellion against the Spanish crown by seizing Isla Margarita, off the coast of present day Venezuela, from Spanish settlers. He was surrounded and captured at Barquisimeto. With his execution approaching, Aguirre reportedly murdered his own daughter to ensure that no one but him could love her.
One of the foremost professional soldiers of his day, Alba was the commander in chief of Charles V army. Despite diminishing trust in Alba, Charles’ heir, Phillip II sent Alba as an emissary to France to hold negotiations with Catherine de Medici. With an anti-Protestant policy, it is believed that Alba helped lay the groundwork for the massacre of French Protestants on St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1572. In 1567, Alba was dispatched as governor of the Spanish Netherlands following the outbreak of popular unrest. Determined to restore order swiftly and in a fierce fashion, Alba, with 12,000 soldiers, set up a Council of Troubles soon to be dubbed the Council of Blood. This council declared thousands of people guilty of rebelling and either exiled, imprisoned or executed them. Every class of society was hit, noble birth was often not enough to protect some. After entering Brussels, 22 of the town’s leading citizens were beheaded. Dozens more massacres were to follow. Alba’s brutal reaction to the rebellion only fueled more insurrections against the Spanish crown.
Robert of Geneva was brilliant intellectually and was born to a family very close to the church. In 1368, aged just 26, Robert became an archbishop. Pope Gregory IX recognized his talents and promoted him to cardinal in 1371. Serving under the Pope in Italy from 1376 to 1378, Robert was in charge of suppressing the Papal States from revolting against the authority of Rome. Robert hired Sylvester Budes, leader of a band of Breton mercenaries and Sir John Hawkwood, an infamous English soldier of fortune. In 1377, Hawkwood and the Bretons, financed by the papacy, captured the city of Cesena. Hawkwood was willing to pardon the revolting townspeople in return for surrender, but Robert overruled him, ordering they be put to the sword. The mercenaries wreaked havoc on the streets. Those who hid in the Church of St. Stephen were killed and the church itself was vandalized. The convent was broken into and the nuns were raped. Over 4,000 people were slaughtered. In 1378, Bartolomeo Prignano was elected as Pope Urban VI. Unhappy with the choice, the cardinals reconsidered and eventually nullified Urban’s election and opted to elect Robert as Pope Clement VII. Supported by King Charles V of France, Clement established Avignon as his residence. France, Scotland and various German states recognized Clement as the Pope while Urban governed from Rome, supported by Spain and the Italian states. And so the Great Schism began. Because it is not possible for the cardinals to nullify a papal election, Clement VII was eventually recognized by all as an antipope.
Basil II was a powerful and effective Byzantine ruler. Best described as a “hero-monster”, he was successful on all fronts and was perennially engaged in warfare. Basil ruled for 50 years and brought the Byzantine Empire to new heights, expanding it’s borders to it’s greatest extent. He Swiftly destroyed all who challenged his rule. This included rebelling landowners, his uncle and Arab invaders. Eventually he would cross paths with his enemy Tsar Samuel of Bulgaria whose own empire was swallowing up Byzantine territory. Struggling with his campaign in the beginning, Basil began to have steady success against the Bulgars. Basil would finally win a massive victory at the Battle of Kleidon on July 29, 1014 as his forces took the capital. As punishment, Basil lined up the captive Bulgar soldiers and had them blinded. He left one eye untouched for every hundred men so that the troops could find their way home. Reportedly 15,000 Bulgars, terrorized, wounded and blinded pathetically shuffled away. Tsar Samuel fainted after seeing his soldiers return and died of a stroke. Thus Basil II earned his epithet ‘Bulgar Slayer’ through this monstrous act.
Pasha was the key architect of the Armenian genocide, one of the largest genocides in modern history. Over 1 million people were massacred in the span of 2 years. A member of the Young Turks, Talat rose up and became one of the three Pashas who ruled the Ottoman government in 1913 until the end of the disastrous First World War. Many Muslim Turks came to see the rise in nationalism of the Christian Armenians as a threat to the existence of the Ottoman state. Programs had already been installed against Armenians in previous years with possibly hundreds of thousands dying. 30,000 died in the Adana massacre of 1909. Once entering World War One, the Ottoman’s endeavor ended in total failure. Russian and Armenian forces set up an Armenian mini-state in 1915 and thus Talat Pasha sought to punish them. Security forces rounded up 250 Armenian intellectuals and leaders in Istanbul in 1915, and eventually executed them. After passing a Deportation Law, Pasha ordered deportations and executions to be carried out against the whole Armenian population. During the deportations, conditions were deplorable and men were routinely separated from the rest and executed. Many prisoners were tortured and were victims of gruesome medical experiments. More died of hunger and thirst. In some instances victims would be crucified in imitation of Jesus as the perpetrators would say: “Now let your Christ come help you!” Others would have red-hot irons and pincers applied to their flesh. Out of a population of 2.5 million Armenians, between 1 and 1.5 million perished in this period. After the Ottoman collapse, Talat Pasha fled to Berlin and was subsequently murdered there in 1921. His assassin was an Armenian genocide survivor.
Issuing one of the first historically documented orders for genocide, von Trotha who was the commander in chief of German South-West Africa had to put down a major rebellion, led by the Herero tribe. With an army of 10,000, von Trotha surrounded the Herero in a single location on three sides. The only escape for the Herero was to enter the Kalahari Desert. The Herero numbered about 50,000 with 6,000 warriors. They could not compete with the German forces who had modern rifles, machine guns and artillery. As the surviving Hereros escaped into the desert as planned, von Trotha ordered all the watering holes to be poisoned. Fences were erected along the desert boundary with guard posts to watch for any who tried to escape. Anyone caught would be shot on sight. Eventually von Trotha would issue an Extermination Order. Those who were not shot on sight would be put into labor camps and pushed into slavery. Thousands of Herero died from overwork, disease or starvation. Many of the women were sexually abused. Only 15,000 out of the initial 80,000 Herero population remained alive. Due to the supposed inferiority, some Herero were the subject of medical experiments. Later, there was a Nama uprising and some 10,000 died. Another 9,000 were put into concentration camps. On von Trotha’s watch, the Herero and Nama tribes had all been eradicated.
A man of Jewish descent, Torquemada was the first inquisitor general in Spain. Torquemada convinced the government, led by Ferdinand and Isabella, that the presence of Jews, Muslims and recent false converts to Christianity in Spain represented a dangerous corruption of the true Catholic faith. Because of Torquemada, repressive laws were passed to force the expulsion of Spain’s non-Christian minorities. He received support from Pope Sixtus IV. Torquemada, now matching the authority of Ferdinand and Isabella themselves, oversaw the proclamation of the 28 articles listing the sins that the Inquisition aimed to purge. Identifying and exposing “Marranos” (Jews who had pretended to be Christian but continued to practice Judaism) was a main focus. Inquisitors were granted power to do whatever necessary to reveal the truth. This inevitably led to violent persecution. In February 1484 alone, 30 people in the city of Ciudad Real were found guilty of crimes and burnt alive. Between 1485 and 1501, 250 people were burnt in Toledo. In 1492, in Torquemada’s home town of Valladolid, 32 people were burnt. Declaring that Jews were a mortal threat, in 1492 Ferdinand and Isabella decreed that all Jews who had not converted to Christianity were to be expelled from Spain. About 40,000 left the country, many of them given sanctuary by the tolerant Islamic Ottomans in Istanbul and several other cities. Torquemada remained as inquisitor general believing that his work was not done. He became wealthy as well due to all that he had confiscated. He would eventually die in office after two decades of burning approximately two thousand people.
Godfrey, the duke of Lower Lorraine, led the first crusade and was a brutal religious fundamentalist. In 1095 pope Urban II called for crusaders to assist Byzantine emperor Alexius I against Turkish forces attacking Christian Byzantium and to liberate Jerusalem from the Muslims. In 1096, Godfrey gathered an army of about 40,000 and declared that he was determined to avenge the blood of Jesus on the Jewish people. Godfrey’s reputation grew as the years went on. In 1098, Godfrey reportedly killed 150 Turks with only 12 knights. Later that year, he cut a Turk in half with a single, downward swipe of his sword. Finally in 1099, Godfrey took aim at Jerusalem. On Friday July 15th, Godfrey was one of the first crusaders to breach the city’s defenses via siege tower. After opening the gates, the crusaders charged into the city. With Muslim citizens fleeing to the al-Aqsa Mosque, Iftikhar ad-Dawla, the Fatimid governor of Jerusalem, made his last stand. On condition of surrender, Iftikhar and some of his solders were allowed to escape. For the next two days, the crusaders pillaged Muslim holy sites and slaughtered everyone left in the city regardless of whether they were combatants or civilians, Muslim or Jew. Victims were either burned to death or had their stomachs cut open with the belief that Muslims swallowed their gold. The Jews fled to a synagogue which the crusaders would burn down. Reportedly piles of heads, hands and feet were scattered throughout the city. Godfrey walked barefoot through the blood, his feet colored to his ankles in the blood of men, women and children. His fellow crusaders chose him to become the first Christian ruler of Jerusalem. He would die of plague a year later, his mission complete.
Beane was the head of an incestuous clan who lived off robbery, murder and cannibalism. Some historians suggest that he never existed and say that his story was propaganda created by the English demonizing the Scottish. The story goes that Alexander Beane left home, never showing an interest in work, with an equally unpleasant local woman. Once they arrived at Bennane Head, they set up home in a coastal cave hidden away from the view of passers-by. Over the next 25 years, Beane and the woman raised a family of about 8 sons and 6 daughters who bred together to produce 18 grandsons and 14 granddaughters. The family was raised without any notions of humanity. They preyed on travelers who traversed near their stretch of coast and would rob and kill their victims. The clan would then drag the victims body back to their cave where they dismembered the body and devour it. Leftovers were pickled and unwanted parts were disposed into the sea. Often times the remains would wash up onto the chore. Gradually suspicion arose among the locals. One night, the Beane clan attacked a married couple on horseback. The man managed to fight off the clan with a sword and pistol, but unfortunately his wife was knocked off the horse. She was immediately disemboweled and the Beane clan drank her blood. The man escaped and alarmed the locals of what had happened. King James VI of Scotland (James I of England) was notified not long afterwards. Hundreds of men and bloodhounds were sent after the clan. The bloodhounds tracked the scent of human flesh back to the cave. Upon entering, the men were hit with a putrid smell as they gazed upon the grisly image of dried flesh hanging from the walls and pickled body parts in barrels. The Beanes made no attempt to escape. They were executed without a trial. It was said that the clan had over a thousand victims.
Rais was a Breton who fought against the English, often serving alongside Joan of Arc. A year after Joan was burned at the stake, Rais retired from military service and returned to his family’s castle at Machecoul. From there, Rais began a campaign of sadistic sex murders, killing between 60 and 200 children. He preferred boys between the ages of 6 and 18. His victims were generally blue-eyed and blond-haired and were usually kidnapped from the village of Machecoul and the surrounding areas or lured to his castle. His first victim was a 12-year-old messenger who was hanged by his neck on a metal hook and raped before being put out of his misery. More and more children started to disappear and suspicion arose. Unfortunately, the locals were too terrified to go up against one of the most powerful men in France. Rais had a specially built chamber where he would restrain his victims while he proceeded with his grotesque sexual acts. He would kill them with a variety of methods which included dismemberment, decapitation and disembowelment. He enjoyed watching them die sometimes even laughing. After some difficulty, a case was finally brought up against him. Rais stated at his trial that he admired the heads and body parts of his more beautiful victims. Gilles was arrested in September of 1440 and indicted on 34 counts of murder. He would eventually confess to the murders under the threat of torture. Rais was found guilty of murder, sodomy and heresy. Gilles was hanged and then burned on October 16, 1440, along with two of his servants. Rais was granted the right of confession after expressing remorse. He refused to admit he was a devil worshipper and professed the strength of his faith. Gilles de Rais would become one of the first known serial killers in history. The guilt and conscience that he would show when not taken over by the urge to murder only confirmed how depraved and mentally disturbed this man was.






























majava i watched the film about what the japanese did to the chinese and it was disgusting for example cutting open pregnant women and killing the unborn babys,kicking babys around,experiments on people to make the plague,causing frost bite then heating up the body parts then ripping the skin off and taking childrens body parts and organs.Also to be honest the asians are evil,look at some of the leaders they have had kim jong il,emperor hirohito and mao zedong.
What about G W Bush and most of the american presidents
What the Japanese did to the Chinese was EVIL. disembowelling pregnant women, and experimenting on Chinese.. digusting. But The Americans did the exact same thing in My lai in Vietnam, and experimented on Soldiers, by exposing them to diseases, such as Anthrax, and DELIBERATELY, making them sick. And Ariel Sharon, The Butcher of Beirut, did the same thing, in Sabra and Shatila. So it`s not just Asians!
to ozhan: I know that things were not, in fact, perfect before or after the genocide. However, the fact of the matter is that there are many victms of genocides that have medical experiments done to them. Frankly, these terrible things are done to people regardless of the presence of a genocide.
I’m personally not a religious person so I do not chalk up the genocide to merely a difference in religious views. I believe a lot of it had to do with politics, money, nationality, culture, and yes, also religion.
My concern is people’s ability to deny any genocide that has overwhelming proof of having occurred. Honestly, it’s just very surprising in this day in age that people could and would deny it. It’s not even acceptable to utter those words about the Jewish Holocaust, yet the Armenian Genocide is not only frequently overlooked but pretty much ignored.
It would be just as unacceptable to ignore the Rwandan Genocide- or any large group of people being slaughtered, essentially, for being inferior in the eyes of their persecutors.
I find it hard to believe the Ottoman, which was short on everything inculding technologhy, medical staff and supplies, would have funded a research project wheather it is grusome or not. Can you provide me some non-armenian sources and save me from googling? Since you already completed your research, I’m still reading.
And if we return to list
“…victims would be crucified in imitation of Jesus as the perpetrators would say: “Now let your Christ come help you!”…” This also sounds weird since muslims believe and respect Jesus as a prohphet and as a messiah and crucification is/was a western tortue technique.
I’m questioning because as you know in the past some documents are proved to be forgiries by Armenians such as telgrams of Talat Pasha.
As far as I understand the Armenian independence movements were a product of the Allie’s subversion of Armenian leaders to weaken the Ottoman war effort.
This resulted in the relocation of many Armenians so that the Ottomans could concentrate on defending their country.
Many Armenians resorted to joining terrorist organisations at the behest of their Allied puppeteers and would attack Muslims throughout Eastern Anatolia in an attempt to further their goals.
Without the resources to transport the Armenians as well as revisionists would like, the Ottoman government had the Armenians relocated as best they could in an attempt to stop them slaughtering innocent Muslims and civilians. (I’ve seen photos of Armenian atrocities – Muslims with their heads tied to their legs until they died, woman with their foetuses cut out of them and left at the side of the road)
During the relocation process some Ottoman officials went too far in their mistreatment but this was certainly not government policy. I do not condone any extraneous mistreatment that may have been directed at the Ottomans but understand why they’d behave like that given the Armenian crimes.
EDIT: Last line should say “directed at the Armenians” not “directed at the Armenians.”
Jesus Christ, what is wrong with me!?
EDIT: EDIT should say: “directed at the Armenians” not “directed at the Ottomans.”
ozhan: What sources in particular do you need? I went to the library at my college and began to research the topic. This was years ago, however, all of the books I read were Western sources. A few were even written by Americans.
I’m still quite confused about your position in all of this…I realize it may not be one that is simply black and white, but what are you trying to say by statements that imply Armenians stretch the truth and have even downright lied about the incident?
Frankly, who cares if anyone forged telegrams from talat? The fact of the matter remains that he was a horrific human being that deserved worse than he received. I do not condone murder, but there were dozens of attempts on Hitler’s life…personally, I’m accepting of that. People who are evil should not live.
As I stated previously, this isn’t about numbers or bureaucratic crap. It’s simply that people were murdered because of who they were.
If you do not believe that this occurred, then I wish you the best- certainly more than you’ll need to read some book. If that’s what it comes down to, then there’s simply no proving it to those like you.
The act of forging of telagrams are nothing to do with Talat Pasa. It shows that sometimes Armenians resort to lie about the incident.
In school they dont teach anything about Armenia (I’m Turkish if you havent already figured it out
And in my childhood, it wasnt even an important topic for public. As a child, my view was simple as it can be. When it hit the mainstream, I took interest. And as i read more, my views evoled. Last year, in my university libary, finally they gathered the books about Armenia in one category and bought more books so my job got easier.
For the sake of argument lets say i accept that Turks killed 1,5 million men, women, children with guns, swords, tortue… And in your previous comments you say you accept the suffering, Armenians inflected on muslim population. So your words of “It’s simply that people were murdered because of who they were.” dont go well with your previous attidue. So i guess i understood you wrong earlier.
“…I’m still quite confused about your position in all of this…” My current view is:
I see this issue as a human tragedy, I mourn for both muslims and armenians. I blame politics of allies; divede and conquer. I blame Armenian leaders for their over zelaous passion. I blame those for seeding distrust between Turks and Armenians. I believe deaths of Armenians during relocationing by lack of suplies and lack of proper protection against bandits cannot put as evil acts of goverment. For that I blame weakness of Ottoman empire. Turkish goverment had nothing to gain from a distrust between people, in fact the conflict weaken the empire even more. Although induvual people, civilians may took revenge on Armenians I believe the goverment spent resources to protect but failed.
I dont reject suffering or deaths of Armenians. I’m focusing on the reason. Famine, bandits, low man power and suplies of empire, civilians who wants to take revenge, soldiers who abused his possition.
Armenians leaders started a rebellion and people followed them bu who wouldnt? I mean who wouldnt want to be indepence? But since they werent majority, since they relay too much on Russia (which would abondan them), the rebellion failed and the people of Armenia paid the price with relocation.
You cannot just say “…It’s simply that people were murdered because of who they were…” The tragedy wasnt that simple. I mourn for both muslims and armenians.
@Voltaire (73):
Well, racist or not, I think you will need to learn some “facts”.
The British never “ended” the rule of Maharajas nor India was full of savages ever. The British rather “nurtured” these maharajas for their own good. Read the “Drain Theory” by Dada Bhai Nauroji”.
They built those roads and bridges for their own good not because they wanted to do something good for Indians. Akbar’s annual revenue was more than the total treasury of England in the 1500s. They looted India and fueled several communal riots (Divide and rule). They kept India out of Industrial revolution causing it to become backward.
@Ozhan
This is your version (typically Turkish):
“Famine, bandits, low man power and suplies of empire, civilians who wants to take revenge, soldiers who abused his possition.”
And this is the truth:
The Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire began a systematic genocide of its Armenian citizens – an unarmed Christian minority population. More than a million Armenians were exterminated through direct killing, starvation, torture, and forced death marches.
Ozhan you are a typical Turkish genocide denier. Brainwashed by your Turkish schools and blinded by the typical Islamo-Turkish patriotism. Shame on you. Why don’t you sign here “www.iexpectanapology.com” – like many of your fellow countrymen?
@Shadow Lord
You know in my country of birth we have a typical word for you guys – it’s called “Gutmensch”. There’s not much point in talking to you, because you will never change your mind anyway – so I don’t really know why I’m doing this.
“The British never ended the rule of Maharajas”
Ofc course they did. About 2/3 of India were ruled by the British directly, 1/3 indirectly through Maharajas. So in fact the British were the new rulers – you doubt that?!
“nor India was full of savages ever.”
Nor ofc it wasn’t. In fact no country ever was. About 10.000 BC humanity fell down from heaven with democracy, philosophy, science and the water closet. I think they landed in India…
“They built those roads and bridges for their own good not because they wanted to do something good for Indians.”
Wow that’s finally sth half-true. Ofc they’ve built it for themselves. But in the end it benefited the Indians as well. A good example how egoistic intentions lead to sth good (with you Gutmenschen it’s the other way round).
“They looted India”
That’s true again. But before that all Indians were rich and lived happily ever after? No the Maharajas looted their countrymen as well. Not to mention the caste system etc. etc.
“They kept India out of Industrial revolution causing it to become backward.”
Ah come on this is so stupid. You really believe that?! Going backward from what? From a caste system with Maharajas? Fact is the British invented the Industrial revolution. You are talking like India invented the Industrial revolution and British stole it from the Indians when in fact the Indians got to know the Industrial revolution and many, many other things only through the British. Ofc the British didn’t hand their achievements and technologies to India on a silver plate – but through the decades the British introduced them to their system and taught them how to get things done. I’m sure the British learnt sth from the Indians as well. For example that nonviolent resistance can be very effective
@Voltaire (133):
I kinda like your sarcasm. After all you are good only at that.:D
“There’s not much point in talking to you, because you will never change your mind anyway – so I don’t really know why I’m doing this”
Expected. You guys never know what you do or why you do.
“So in fact the British were the new rulers – you doubt that?!”
Oh really? Ever heard of Zamindari system? Introduced by moguls and abused by the British. Maharajas were far better than Zamindars. The system was abolished only after independence – not by the British.
“But in the end it benefited the Indians as well.”
Oh really? Yeah I am walking on those bridges right now. Without which I might have to swim across all the rivers to travel. Please make some sense! It benefited only for few years after independence. We are not solely surviving on those so called bridges or dams. You really need to read the Drain Theory. They constructed all that for their benefit with our money.
“…I think they landed in India…”
Seriously, you gotcha read some history of ancient India. You guys were learning to hunt animals when we were writing Artha Shastra and doing maths.:P
“But before that all Indians were rich and lived happily ever after?”
In deed they were. For any country/empires there are always good rulers and bad rulers. Go and read about some of the great empires in india like Mauryan, Vijayanagar, Chola, Chalukya, Pallava.
“You are talking like India invented the Industrial revolution”
Participation is different from invention. Whoever invented it, many countries that are developed today participated in industrial revolution. Whereas India was still a colonial economy.
“….and taught them how to get things done.”
Like corruption?
@Voltaire (132):
How can you say unarmed when the majority of Armenian men were armed? Way before the techir law.
Brainwashed by school? They dont teach ANYTHING about the issue in schools! (I graduated from high school at 2004.)
If goverment began a systematic genocide, why they left Istanbul armenians alone (except some ringleaders) and left their churches open and funcitiong?
Why after teshir law, goverment made trials and exucuted soldiers for mistreating Armenians?
Why goverment took care of orphnas who were result of techir law?
Why many armenians survived and arrived the destination cities of techir law?
Why Malta trial (1919) which lasted 2,5 years done by British empire (number one enemy of Ottoman Empire) with Armenian scholars, during the occupation of anatolia, had to realese the Ottoman officials for lack of evidence?
@Ozhan (135):
There are a lot of first-hand accounts in the paper “The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915-1916” which was compiled just after the war as an official investigation into the matter. And there are a lot of other first-hand accounts by Americans, Germans and Turks if you are willing to look for them. The problem is that since the Turkish language was Latinised, the average Turk can’t go and read Turkish accounts on that period and are restricted to trusting translations.
As to the Malta Trails, they were abandoned (many without even going to trail) because of the threat made by the “Ankara government“, which was firmly opposed to the trails. They threatened the lives of the remaining British prisoners still in Turkey:
“…should any of the detainees either already brought or yet to be brought to Istanbul be executed, even at the order of the vile Istanbul government, we would seriously consider executing all British prisoners in our custody.” – Mustafa Kemal 4.9.1919
As Britain released the Malta exiles the “Ankara government” realised their British prisoners…
@Yawyack (136):
trail = trial.
@Listverse:
I’m trying to post a reply to Shadow Lord but whatever reason no matter how I edit and re-phrase it, it ends up being sent to moderation and not posting on the site. I’ve no idea what the red-flag could be. This isn’t the first time its done this, as it has done it on other threads in the past too. And in the past they never ended up being accepted and posted. Could you please sort out this problem.
@Shadow Lord
The Maharajas did decline in both number and power under British rule. Not sure why you are denying this.
India was a politically fragmented place and was not as wealthy or advanced as you are making out. Otherwise how else do you think two small rainy islands, with a population of 40 million, on the other side of the Earth could not only gain a foothold but eventually dominate a subcontinent with a population of 700-800 million?
@Shadow Lord
“They looted India”
Your implication of looting implies that all they did was go around stealing. What about the universities, schools, railways, roads, telegraph lines they built? Sure British companies and the government tried to earn money from the lands they operated in. Companies and governments still do that. Britain was very obsessed with their notion of Capitalism to create wealth. Though you maybe interested to know that the East India Company lost vast amounts of money and had to rely on excessive loans from the British government.
“Expected. You guys never know what you do or why you do.”
What does this mean?
““But in the end it benefited the Indians as well.”
Oh really? Yeah I am walking on those bridges right now. Without which I might have to swim across all the rivers to travel. Please make some sense! It benefited only for few years after independence.”
Only a few years after independence? So they didn’t benefit Indians before independence? And they don’t continue to benefit? Eh?
“Seriously, you gotcha read some history of ancient India. You guys were learning to hunt animals when we were writing Artha Shastra and doing maths.:P “
He was actually joking. But for your information the British isles nor Europe were hunter-gatherers at this time. They were not in the Stone Age! That line shows unbelievable amounts of ignorance. It’s the equivalent of me saying, as the Europeans arrived in India they were all living in straw and mud huts.
And please don’t personally include yourself in the achievements of other people.
““But before that all Indians were rich and lived happily ever after?”
In deed they were. For any country/empires there are always good rulers and bad rulers. Go and read about some of the great empires in india like Mauryan, Vijayanagar, Chola, Chalukya, Pallava.”
Erm, what? They were all happy and rich? How are those empires (and note the word “empires”) any more benevolent than those that Britain and Portugal ruled? How did they spread universal wealth, were they socialist empires with free healthcare and unemployment benefits? How did they do the impossible task of keeping everyone happy? Surely if these empires had subjects (note the word “subjects”) as happy and rich as you are making out then they would never have fallen, right?
“Participation is different from invention. Whoever invented it, many countries that are developed today participated in industrial revolution. Whereas India was still a colonial economy.”
You just mentioned the Zamindari system. So surely it was a part-feudal economy? You also mentioned the Maharajas so surely there were plenty (and large) semi-independent states? Could they not have established their own industrial revolution? Why didn’t it happen in the states where the East India Company had not reached at that time? Was it a “colonial economy” that held back your neighbours in China from participating in the industrial revolution? Oh no wait they were independent from European power’s rule…
“Like corruption?”
So there was no corruption before Britain arrived right? Sorry I must just have being mistaken by all those great palaces of the Maharajas compared with the squalor and famine the peasantry suffered from.
And how did Britain export corruption? Seriously how did Britain make the modern Indian officials corrupt?
@Shadow Lord
The Zamindari system just goes to show how far behind India was compared to Europe and the Americas. For those that don’t know it’s the equivalent of medieval feudalism.
Sorry about all the individual posts everyone. It was the only way I could find out what the red flag was. Post 140 really should have being at the end of post 138. Sorry.
I actually think that India was better off when we still ruled the place. Before we took over India, under Elizabeth I, the place was a slum. I mean, the minute we left, they started to kill one another. there still fighting over Kashmir, Pakistan is full of Islamic jihadis, the People in Idia live in absolutely disgusting conditions, while there leaders live a life of riley.. Damn shame we aren`t there! And we were awful in India. we eradicated the Thuggee Cult, and crushed fanatics, during the Mutiny. If I were an Indian, I`d be begging for us back.
Sawney Beane (and tribe)were fictional put up as anti scottish propoganda… check it out..
17th century urban legend
Those who still deny the armenian massacre sicken me and disgust me. There is very very clear evidence of the transportation and execution of the armenian people all over the place. Turkey still denies the atrocities because of the racist government that is still in power, in the 60′s when a left wing liberal government came into power for one term, they apologised for the massacre and admitted it happened and that it shouldnt have done. When they were no longer in power, the next government who is still in power today, renounced this apology and essentially said “erm, i know they have apologised and everything but now we are back in power, we are going to deny it ever happened again.”
Turkey shouldnt be allowed in the EU until they admit and apologise for this horrendous genocide which definately did happen. The only people who deny such an event are Turks.
Tzar Samoil was a Macedonian tsar not Bulgarian. He lived in Macedonia. Bulgarians are Turkish-Tatarian tribe.
@vladimir (145):
Samuel was declared the Emperor (or Tsar if you prefer) of Bulgaria. The classical Macedonian kingdom died when the Romans defeated it and subjugated the region. The modern region of Macedonia was apart of the Bulgarian Empire. Samuel was Bulgarian despite being from the Macedonian region, just like Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are British even though they are from the Scottish region.
Interestingly, the Byzantine Theme of Macedonia which was created 200 years before Samuel’s reign was actually situated in modern Bulgaria and Greece and not FYROM.
the list is missing many people such as Hitler and stalin
and who said that Islam is viloent I think it is un true
compare to all 1 out of all !!
Are you retarded? The Title is lesser known savages in history not MOST EVIL PEOPLE IN HISTORY. Some people just can’t read anymore.
I thought the Gilles de Rais fella was pretty well known. Very interesting list, I do love my savages.
Have you herd of Baron Urgen Von Sternberg? He killed millions of people and conquered Mongolia. Gilles de Rais might not be well known by people who don’t study evil people, but if you do, he is well known. I agree that Torquemada, Pasha, Godfrey, and Lothar von Trotha belong on this list. I knew these guys already, but that is because I read a lot of books on evil people, otherwise, I would never know them.
Armenian people racist .. Ottoman archives, historical documents, in particular, not for the genocide of Armenians in the region where their rebellion against the government says was sent to. rebelled so why? Ottoman Empire and many of the state with the help of Russia’s territory, because the state wanted to build! genocide, which claimed that the state made them today, actually killed the peasants for the sake of this goal. close to the massacre of Khojaly genocide in history, but what is? This is evidenced massacre of the Armenian community suffered the barbarity of defending Azerbaijani Turks. village of Khojaly, just like thousands of Turks were killed by that ***** nation. did not get its share of the shame that society says they were killed. Looked at pictures of the Armenian genocide museum in the center of Kars! Extracted carved bellies TURKISH WOMEN BABIES! Is not this a genocide Get the document you! carved into the eyes of the peasants burned children Khojaly massacre, just as they have raped this nation for everyone! I hate the Armenians because they do, they used to cover the religion of Jesus. Christianity, the Jews are guilty of many shows as you like! God’s justice is infinite! Their penalty will they share in the genocide. geopolitical Interests of the community to take a not-guilty to the offense of their own actions can not be accepted!