Harald I Quotes
I make the solemn vow, and take God to witness, who made me and rules over all things, that never shall I clip or comb my hair until I have subdued the whole of Norway, … or if not, have died in the attempt
Thus was Norway formed into a single kingdom. He married another woman, Asa, and several years later after he had unified Norway, Gyda too became his wife.
Harald I, c. 850-933, [Harold Fairhair], King of Norway, Oath he swore when Gydathe woman he wished to marry rejected him having thought him too petty a king only ruling over a few districts much like a modern warlord, c. 865
Sourced by: Eigen's Political and Historical Quotations
Jinnah had whipped up his followers to violence so that Muslims were attacking Sikh and Hindu neighborhoods, burning them and murdering many occupants in different parts of India to intimidate the Indian Governmental Ruling Congress Party, The British Colonial Indian officials and the politicians in London to create a Muslim state—Pakistan—with all the territory that they demanded. Many Muslims were in turn killed in retaliatory attacks. The American diplomats and most English politicians tried to persuade Jinnah to compromise on the division of land and resources. Jinnah saw no reason at the time for compromise. However the internecine violence became so brutal and extensive that even Jinnah was shocked. The British would not be intimidated nor would the Indian Congress party and Jinnah was forced to compromise. Even with that, there were over 2 million Indians killed by the time the partition was complete. Jinnah and most other leaders were not willing to die themselves, but they were able to convince enough of their coreligionists to die.
He persuaded many other rulers to join the Indian Union when India became Independent.
Al-Hakam’s reign was particularly bloody during which he beheaded thousands of dissidents. The son developed a nervous tic said to be the result of watching all the bloody executions.
Ultranationalist Secret Organization. Unlike the Italian Black hand for whom it was named, the Serbs were not interested in money. The were a right wing death squad that assassinated all who opposed a single, unitary, Serbian nation. Dimitrijevic was executed in 1917.
Centuries later leaders have studied this speech and the actions taken by Elizabeth as the epitome of model leadership and morale building at a time of crisis. What made the event more dramatic were two monarchial norms of the time understood by all the citizens. Monarchs did not open themselves to the risk of very close proximity to their armies with only a handful of retainers. A dissident military commander could kill or capture the monarch as most soldiers had little loyalty to anyone but the commander who paid them. Second, monarchs usually abandoned battlefields where the outcome was uncertain and if not present certainly stayed away. Elizabeth in breaking both these norms was taking obvious risks with her own life (as a women for whom it was even more unexpected) and welfare to share the immediate fate of her subjects. It explains why an absolute monarch was extremely popular with her subjects—great leadership.
The fear of civil war amongst the colonies if they were free from Britain was substantial. There were a number of potential conflict flash points of which slavery was one. See {619100}
He didn’t quite conquer the whole world, but he did control most of it. One substantial difference between him and others, is that the Mongols were not interested in managing an Empire, All they wanted was an annual payment of tribute, and if that were forthcoming, the left the conquered cities and kingdoms to their own management and governance.
Russia had partitioned Poland into a Western part inhabited by Poles and many ethnic Germans, and an Eastern part of Poles and ethnic Russians. The latter was made part of Czarist Russia.
At the time, some Palestinian Arabs claimed exclusive rights to the territory on the grounds that Arabs had dominated the area for the longest period of time. They gave no credence to the fact that the Jews had dominated the area and it was the center of their kingdom for many years before—that Jews had constantly lived in the area of longer than the Arabs, nor did they give any credence to the fact that the Christians had conquered the area from the Muslims during the Crusades.
In 1848 a number of revolutions flared throughout Europe with a call for democracy rather than monarchy. The Prussian king was one of those who really believed that he was selected by God to rule, was very frightened and tried to enlist the Queen and England to present a united front against the revolutionaries. England, which had already had a strong functioning parliament and extensive voting suffrage, protected most of the rights of its citizens and was a Constitutional Monarchy where there were limits to the power of the monarch. Further, Victoria was extremely popular and in many ways was far ahead of the electorate in terms of modern democratic reforms. So she was not in the panic of many of the other crowned heads of Europe were in. Somewhat following the example of England, King William IV allowed a parliament and minimized the strong military role that characterized Prussia. Most of the 1848 revolutions failed to sieze governments but, as with Prussia, forced reforms in what was a long movement to European democracy that would take another 150 years. Note also the logic about religion. Since the revolutionists did not believe in the divine right of kings, they opposed God’s will on earth. Therefore, they opposed God and must be atheists. Almost all counter revolutionary accusations included the claim—often not true—that the revolutionaries were atheists.
Even in modern times many politicians the world over agree with Davis’s point that for a government to function well, the nation must have a homogenous citizenship. This is especially true of dictatorships where control of a uniform culture and populous is easier than if it is diverse nation. In modern times, the three greatest economic and scientific powers, the United States, The Soviet Union, and China were and are multicultural societies with different ethnicities, races, religions, and cultures among their sitizenry.
Many wonder why Bolivar did not attempt to unify much of South America into a single federated state once they had thrown off the yoke of Spanish colonialism. This was his reason.
What makes the situation even more complicated is that most of the land of the Middle East has been governed by a succession of Empires who may have drawn the lines differently from the previous governing dynasty. For example, the land that is Israel today, has been governed by Egyptians, Greeks, Jews, Romans, various Arab dynasties, Turkey, England, and the Jews again. Turkey governed it for the longest period.
During the American Revolution many patriot clerics argued against the monarchy by claiming that God has given Kings to the Ancient Jews—who had a type of Republic—as a punishment. Therefore monarchy is to be avoided.
Shlomo ben Yitzchak
Harald I Fairhair (Old Norse: Haraldr inn hárfagri; Norwegian: Harald hårfagre; putatively c. 850 – c. 932) is portrayed by medieval Norwegian historians as the first King of Norway. According to traditions current in Norway and Iceland in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, he reigned from c. 872 to 930. Supposedly, two of his sons, Eric Bloodaxe and Haakon the Good, succeeded Harald to become kings after his death.
