This guy has decided to enter one of my favourite subjects, history! Now let me start with this fellow...
CHXTA, do u remember that william wallace was even betrayed by his own country man while he was fighting for their freedom.
By the time Wallace was born, King Alexander III had reigned over Scotland for over twenty years. His rule had seen a period of peace and economic stability, and he had successfully fended off continuing English claims to suzerainty. However Alexander died in 1286 leaving no surviving heir. King Edward I of England took advantage of this potential instability by arranging the Treaty of Birgham with the lords of Scotland, betrothing Margaret (Alexander's nearest surviving relative who was 4 at the time) to his son, Edward II, on the understanding that Scotland would preserve its status as a separate nation. But Margaret fell ill and died at only 8 years old (1290) on her way from her native Norway to Scotland. A number of claimants to the Scottish throne came forward almost immediately.
Contrary to popular belief, John Balliol had a right to the throne since he was next in line to Margaret.
However, the Scots deemed it desirable to have an independent arbitrator to determine the issue — in order to avoid accusations of bias. The Scots invited King Edward I of England to decide the royal succession. Instead of coming as an independent arbitrator, he arrived at the Anglo-Scottish border with a large army and announced that he had come as an overlord to solve a dispute in a vassal state, forcing each potential king to pay homage to him and removed the Stone of Destiny from Scone Palace, the stone on which all of the Kings of Scots had been crowned.
Stop basing your historical assumptions of William Wallace on
Braveheart. Get to know the real background of the story. Wallace was not a commoner. His father was a titled man. Wallace didn't start a war because someone wanted to mess his wife and then killed her. The real truth is this: two English soldiers challenged Wallace in the Lanark marketplace regarding his catching of fish. The argument escalated into a brawl in which the two soldiers were killed. The authorities issued a warrant for his arrest shortly thereafter. Wallace then murdered Sir William Heselrig, the English Sheriff of Lanark, in May 1297, and dismembered his corpse.
Do you know that Wallace never met Isabella, Edward II's wife? She was 13 when Wallace was executed! The man was a brigand, a murderer and all sorts of other things, but last I checked he wasn't a paedophile...
But then I digress. The point of this is that the Scotland into which Wallace was born had no sense of identity. There was no knowledge of who was what, and you have to understand that those were feudal times,
when people had no national identity since they were all serfs. People in those days paid allegiance to whomsoever their overlord paid allegiance to, not to their country. Technically, Wallace was not a traitor to England since he never paid allegiance to the king of England, but in backing Robert the Bruce for the Scottish throne, he backed the wrong horse, Robert was next in line for the throne
after Balliol and Monet(hope I got the spelling of the name right), but since both had agreed to pay tribute to the more powerful king to the south (Edward) Wallace decided to pitch his tent with the person who hadn't made that decision.
Once again, back in those days, nations were vested in individuals, the king who was annointed by God. There was no treason as far as a king's actions went. If we look at it in such absolute terms as this: Balliol was the rightful king, Balliol for reasons of political expediency decided to pay tribute to England, Wallace went against Balliol, then
Wallace was the traitor and got what was coming to him!
theres no struggle without betrayal and opposition even by beloved brothers.
I can't fault you on that one, we human beings are so inately selfish that people would always tend to think of their own gain before thinking of the gain of the collective...
brutus gave ceaser his last stab,
Brutus was Caesar's protegee. But within the context of Roman history at the time, his action is understandable. Let me give you a little background on said Roman history...
According to Roman legend, Rome was founded on April 21, 753 BC by twins descendents of the Trojan prince Aeneas, Romulus and Remus. Romulus, whose name inspired the name Rome, killed Remus in a quarrel over where their new city would be located, and became the first of seven Kings of Rome.
The Roman Republic was established around 510 BC, when the last of the seven king of Rome, Tarquin the Proud, was deposed, and a system based on annually-elected magistrates was established. The most important magistrates were the two consuls, who together exercised executive authority, but had to contend with the Senate, which grew in size and power with the establishment of the Republic. The magistracies were originally restricted to the elite patricians, but were later opened to common people, or plebs.
The Romans gradually subdued the other peoples on the Italian peninsula, including the Etruscans. The last threat to Roman hegemony in Italy came when Tarentum, a major Greek colony, enlisted the aid of Pyrrhus of Epirus in 282 BC, but this effort failed as well. The Romans secured their conquests by founding Roman colonies in strategic areas, and established stable control over the region. In the second half of the 3rd century BC, Rome clashed with Carthage in the first two Punic wars. These wars resulted in Rome's first overseas conquests, of Sicily and Hispania, and the rise of Rome as a significant imperial power. After defeating the Macedonian and Seleucid Empires in the 2nd century BC, the Romans became the masters of the Mediterranean Sea.
But foreign dominance led to internal strife. Senators became rich at the provinces' expense, but soldiers, mostly small farmers, were away from home longer and could not maintain their land, and the increased reliance on foreign slaves reduced the availablility of paid work. The Senate squabbled perpetually, repeatedly blocking important land reforms. Violent gangs of the urban unemployed, controlled by rival Senators, intimidated the electorate by violence. The denial of Roman citizenship to allied Italian cities led to the Social War of 91-88 BC. The military reforms of Marius resulted in soldiers often having more loyalty to their commander than to the city, and a powerful general could hold the city and Senate ransom. This culminated in Sulla's brutal dictatorship of 81-79 BC.
In the mid-1st century BC, three men, Julius Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus, formed a secret pact—the First Triumvirate—to control the Republic. After Caesar's conquest of Gaul, a stand-off between Caesar and the Senate led to civil war, with Pompey leading the Senate's forces. Caesar emerged victorious, and was made dictator for life.
In 42 BC, Caesar was assassinated by senators fearing that Caesar sought to restore the monarchy, and a Second Triumvirate, consisting of Caesar's designated heir, Octavius, and his former supporters, Mark Antony and Lepidus, took power. However, this alliance too soon descended into a struggle for dominance. Lepidus was exiled, and when Octavius defeated Antony and Cleopatra of Egypt at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, he became the undisputed ruler of Rome.
The point is that the senators were right in their fears about Caesar. He wanted undisputed power
a la that of a King. He didn't get it, but his nephew did, and when Octavius became Augustus the emperor, the senate's powers were whittled down!
A good current issue to use and compare Caesar's ambition at the time is Abacha's (and/or Obasanjo's) 'life president' bid. Do you support it? That is the kind of thing that Brutus, Cassius and Cicero decided to fight against!
alexandera the great killed by his own men
Is that so? In 323 BC, Alexander died of a mysterious illness in the palace of Nebuchadrezzar II of Babylon. He was just one month shy of attaining 33 years of age. Various theories have been proposed for the cause of his death which include sickness that followed a drinking party, or a relapse of the malaria he had contracted in 336 BC.
What is certain is that on May 29 323 BC, Alexander participated in a banquet organized by his friend Medius of Larissa. After some heavy drinking, immediately or after a bath, he was forced to bed badly ill. The troops started rumors, more and more anxious, and on June 9, the generals decided to let the soldiers see their king alive one last time. They were admitted to his presence one at a time, while the king, too ill to speak, confined himself to move his hand. The day after, Alexander was dead.
and so on and so forth. but they usually say that the end justifies the means. u shuld be ashamed of yourself if u don't kw hw to speak your mother tongue, this is not an insult or wot ever bt its not right. i am married to an english girl and told she speaks igbo at least so well to relate with my people back home.
Bite me, but I never said that I can't speak Igbo. I said that my accent is such that people in the village tell me that I speak Igbo with an English accent. And if a child can't speak his 'mother' tongue, who do you blame? Him? Or his parents who didn't speak it to him? My father doesn't speak Igbo well
maya tovarish, he was born and bred on Lagos Island and speaks Yoruba better than Uncle Sege. The only reason we spoke Igbo in any form at home was because of my mother, so what are you talking about? If language is your issue, I speak 6 so what are we saying?
i have visited a family in lagos and was suprise that this family regardless of their status do their morning prayer in igbo and still read igbo bible.the kids were all born in lagos and grew up in lagos but speak igbo and yoruba fluently.
That could easily have been my family, except that we grew up in Benin, not Lagos, so substitution, out: Yoruba, in: Edo!
why let your cultrure which is your identity erode.its not funny,if u lose your language,u have lost your identity trust me.
Not all the time. Michael Burke III can't speak German, but it hasn't prevented him from becoming one of the world's foremost experts on German history and ancient Germanic culture. The harsh fact is this: language and culture are like people, dynamic. They live and die if they are non-competitive. Only 3 languages spoken now are still spoken in the form they were spoken 2000 years ago: Berber, Arabic and Arhamaic. All other languages have evolved, and/or died!
calabar, asaba,rivers bla bla bla,if u remember wot happened during the death of ken sarowiwa, the rivers regrected ever betraying the civil war. go dwn and ask the poor majority of these ethnic group,they will tell u that they are tired of nigeria.this is because they have found knowledge in the words of aldous wisely holmes"" experience is not what happens to one but what man does with what happens to him""
Once again, vintage Igbo arrogance. Who said they regret betraying the civil war? Can you provide us with links to that effect? And get one thing right, there is no ethnic group such as Rivers. The people who were affected during the Saro-Wiwa thing are the Ogoni people,
and they have never aligned themselves with Igbo people. During the war it was from Ogoni land that 3 Marine Commando began their assault on Biafra from the South!
get down to the grass root and see that people are suffering in nigeria,the ibos just like the isrealites want to go and will surely make it. i am happy that u are an ibo man and glad that i met u,i just want to tell u wot the envelope told the stamp as stated by raynald decker "stamp stick on me and we will go places" the stamp and the envelope existed for 200 years without knowing each other,but when they were brought together by decker,the stamp sticked on the envelope and thus started travelling the world round. let us come together and we will go places.remember, "" any wrong decision will be a reality today but a regrect morrow and posterity will not forgive us""
Firstly, the 'grassroots' that are suffering in Nigeria are not only Igbo people! Take a trip around the country (the only states I am yet to visit for more than 2 days are Kebbi, Ogun, Akwa Ibom, Gombe, Katsina and Jigawa). Every part of Nigeria has serious issues. Trust me on this: people in Yobe for example have it far worse than any person in the entire Eastern Nigeria! So what are we talking about?
Yes, still Igbo, but I prefer to classify myself as Nigerian before classifying myself as Igbo. Never heard of this Decker fellow whom you just quoted, but I can tell you this: you talk of a wrong decision. Breaking away from Nigeria would be a wrong decision.
![Nairaland [Nigerian Forum] Home](http://www.nairaland.com/Themes/default/images/english/home.gif)
Author
