MAD, BAD & BRITISH; Mass Murderers, Torturers, Tyrants ...Our History Is Littered with Truly Evil Men and Women. So Why Does the List of Worst-Ever Britons, Picked by Historians This Week, Leave out So Many of the REAL Villains?

Daily Mail (London), December 28, 2005 | Go to article overview

MAD, BAD & BRITISH; Mass Murderers, Torturers, Tyrants ...Our History Is Littered with Truly Evil Men and Women. So Why Does the List of Worst-Ever Britons, Picked by Historians This Week, Leave out So Many of the REAL Villains?


Byline: MAX HASTINGS

HOW we love a villain. 'When you grow up, my son, I hope you're a bum like your father was,' urged one of Rodgers and Hammerstein's characters in Carousel, 'cos a good man ain't no fun.' These days, the Christian saints rouse little enthusiasm, even among believers.

But scoundrels send a frisson of excitement through almost all of us.

This week, the BBC History Magazine has published a list of allegedly the ten worst people in Britain during the past 1,000 years - one for each century - as nominated by some tame historians. The roster includes King John, Thomas Becket, Jack The Ripper and Oswald Mosley.

Many of the figures chosen reflect the fatuous judgment of the academics concerned, rather than the shortcomings of their subjects. Thomas Becket may have been a bad Archbishop of Canterbury, but it is hard to suggest convincingly that he was the embodiment of evil.

Oswald Mosley, founder of the Blackshirts, was an ugly phenomenon - but the wickedest Briton of the 20th century?

Surely only an especially silly feminist Leftie could say so. Mosley never gained widespread public support, and ended his public life where he deserved, in Wormwood Scrubs.

Kim Philby, who betrayed countless British agents to the Soviets during the Cold War, was responsible for far more deaths than Mosley.

If criminals such as Jack The Ripper are eligible, the past 100 years have produced plenty of mass murderers. Some terrible people have done terrible things in our various wars.

Yet the interesting questions for our purposes are: what makes us judge some people to be villains, and why do we cherish their memories? 'History is not what you thought. It is what you can remember,' declared Sellar and Yeatman in 1066 And All That.

If we recall the lives of any Roman emperors, it is much more likely to be monsters of iniquity such as Nero or Caligula than good chaps such as Hadrian, who merely built walls.

Hollywood has made endless movies about Captain Bligh of the Bounty - the cruise ship captain from hell whose crew mutineered - and none that I can recall about Captain Cook, a good person who discovered lots of places including Australia, which we should forgive him for.

THANKS to the performances of Charles Laughton and Robert Shaw on screen, we are happy to take to our hearts Henry VIII, who would nowadays be up to his neck in prosecutions for wife murder and writs from the Child Support Agency.

But we take no interest in, say, Queen Anne, who had lots of babies who died and sponsored a rather nice line in homes and furniture.

It is amazing how popular a villain you can be if you are good at something people admire, such as football. Then you will be forgiven every other kind of failing, as George Best would testify.

Take the knights of the Middle Ages. Forget about fluttering banners and the Round Table - they were brutal thugs who tried to behave honourably to each other, but treated everyone else appallingly. Any prisoner they captured who was unlikely to fetch a ransom was killed on the spot.

In battle, they could whack away merrily at each other, safe behind all that armour, while massacring underfoot any number of hapless peasants who could not afford breastplates.

The biggest beneficiary of this chivalry nonsense was Richard I, the so- called Lionheart. His brother, King John, is widely thought to have ruled England rather better than Richard.

John was uncommonly clean, for one thing. We know that in 1209, he took eight baths in five months, during an era when even most monarchs thought once a year was enough.

But John has been roundly rubbished by history, because he was a rotten games player and not much use with a lance.

By contrast, Richard - who almost ruined England to pay for his Crusades and then his ransom after carelessly getting captured in Austria - became tremendously popular because of his prowess in armour. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

MAD, BAD & BRITISH; Mass Murderers, Torturers, Tyrants ...Our History Is Littered with Truly Evil Men and Women. So Why Does the List of Worst-Ever Britons, Picked by Historians This Week, Leave out So Many of the REAL Villains?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.