Jump to content
CoinPeople.com

First Monarch ?


Eagleeye
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know these will be totally retarded questions to the many CP-ers who are knowledgable in this area but here goes...

 

What was the name of the first British Monarch--(as we know them now)--as in Elizabeth II, George VI, Victoria, Etc.......?

And how much do the most common of his coins generally go for ?

 

I've just had a quasi-facination with this recently and the net is'nt really telling me what i need to know.

 

 

Thx :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First British monarch was James I (aka James VI of Scotland).

 

First English monarch, then Egbert's your man. Although there are other contender's for this, Offa of Mercia had much of the important part of England under his power just prior to Egbert's reign. Other contenders are Egbert's decendents; Alfred the Great, Æthelstan and Edgar. Needless to say England was definately a unified country when Edgar died, which was long before William the Conqueror's father was even a twinkle in his father's eye.

 

First Scottish monarch, then i'd be thinking Kenneth McAlpin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Egbert (802-839)

Known as the first King of All England, he was forced into exile at the court of Charlemagne, by the powerful Offa, King of Mercia. Egbert returned to England in 802 and was recognized as king of Wessex. He defeated the rival Mercians at the battle of Ellendun in 825. In 829, the Northumbrians accepted his overlordship and he was proclaimed "Bretwalda" or sole ruler of Britain.

IMO and historical text!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
Guest Aidan Work

The first British monarch was actually Queen Anne,as it was during her reign (1701/2-14) that the Kingdoms of England & Scotland were united as the United Kingdom of Great Britain.

 

King James VI of Scotland/I of England was the first monarch to be the legal ruler of both England & Scotland.Both countries remained as separate kingdoms,as did Ireland.

 

Aidan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
Guest Aidan Work

Northern Ireland (or 'Ulster',as it is commonly known as) was established as a separate country in 1921.King George V was the first King of Northern Ireland as well as the King of Ireland,in addition to being King of Great Britain & the Dominions & Emperor of India.

 

Aidan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 years later...

So Vespasian was ruler of Scotland? That's part of what being the ruler of "Britain" would entail. England is only a part of Britain. My recollection is the Romans never did manage to subdue the Scots. I don't remember whether they were ever able to capture Wales.

 

I would guess you want the name of the first monarch to be king of England, Wales, and Scotland simultaneously (Or alternatively, you just meant to say "England"), and I don't know who that is; but I know it was earlier than the United Kingdom was formed--all that did was put England, Wales and Scotland under the same parliament; they already had the same monarch.

 

It's also true that those earlier emperors would have denied vociferously that they were monarchs; they were first citizens for life instead. A distinction without a difference to be sure, but Rome was proud of being a res publica after having overthown its ancient monarchy several hundred years earlier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Vespasian was ruler of Scotland? That's part of what being the ruler of "Britain" would entail. England is only a part of Britain. My recollection is the Romans never did manage to subdue the Scots. I don't remember whether they were ever able to capture Wales.

 

I would guess you want the name of the first monarch to be king of England, Wales, and Scotland simultaneously (Or alternatively, you just meant to say "England"), and I don't know who that is; but I know it was earlier than the United Kingdom was formed--all that did was put England, Wales and Scotland under the same parliament; they already had the same monarch.

 

 

It's also true that those earlier emperors would have denied vociferously that they were monarchs; they were first citizens for life instead. A distinction without a difference to be sure, but Rome was proud of being a res publica after having overthown its ancient monarchy several hundred years earlier

To the Romans Scotland was Caledonia not part of Britannia, Roman Britain was only England & Wales(Wales they conquered and they also slaughtered the Druids in their sanctuary on Anglesey), whilst it is true the Early Emperors retained the fiction of a republic their holding of both pontifex maximus & imperium maximus plus being princeps for life meant in reality that they were monarchs, a rose by another name is still a rose.

 

Britain is England & Wales, Great Britain is Britain & Scotland which was formed in 1707, The UK was Great Britain & Ireland which was formed in 1801.

943060.jpg

By J.G.Hancock for P.Kempson,The Creation of the United Kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland Jan Ist 1801. Also the new century as seen by Father Time receiving a new Hour-Glass.39mm Bronze BHM#526

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I just talked to a UK expatriate... and apparently the word "Britain" has a very nebulous meaning. ("Great Britain" means the island, England, Scotland and Wales, and Edward I "Longshanks" gets the win there as being the first to rule the whole thing, apparently.) Go back far enough and "Britain" could include Brittany in France, since it was inhabited (and still is) by Celts of the Breton tribe.

 

The UK currently consists of "Great Britain and Northern Ireland."

 

I was certainly thinking of "The Island of Great Britain" when I wrote my reply. So I made a mistake there, but I am not sure what the right answer actually is. I don't know what the original poster meant by it; I know a lot of Americans sloppily use it as a synonym for the UK (and for that matter, a lot use "England" as as synonym too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Well, I just talked to a UK expatriate... and apparently the word "Britain" has a very nebulous meaning. ("Great Britain" means the island, England, Scotland and Wales, and Edward I "Longshanks" gets the win there as being the first to rule the whole thing, apparently.) Go back far enough and "Britain" could include Brittany in France, since it was inhabited (and still is) by Celts of the Breton tribe.

 

The UK currently consists of "Great Britain and Northern Ireland."

 

I was certainly thinking of "The Island of Great Britain" when I wrote my reply. So I made a mistake there, but I am not sure what the right answer actually is. I don't know what the original poster meant by it; I know a lot of Americans sloppily use it as a synonym for the UK (and for that matter, a lot use "England" as as synonym too).

 

Some of us in England have been known to use England and Britain interchangeably; it really annoys the Scottish, Irish and Welsh (and with good reason too) - not that we do it on purpose it's just misuse of the term Britain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And just to complicate things more:

 

You know how the Irish will complain about the "bloody Brits" from time to time (meaning the UK)? Someone told me once that the Manx will actually complain in the same way but use the word "English." They think of themselves as the real Britons, the Celts who lived there originally. The English are those doggone johnny-come-lately (4-500s AD) German invaders.

 

Can't really say they don't have a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...German invaders.

 

Now we could start a whole new debate! :grin: This period is referred to as the Migration Period but there is much academic resistance to term it either 'invasion' or 'migration'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was trying to put it the way the Manx were thinking of it. But yes. The further you go back, the more you realize that no matter who you are or where you are, SOMEONE back there seized the real estate that eventually you ended up owning, from someone else. (With very, very few exceptions--I don't believe even the North American "First Nations" are necessarily simon pure here; they had 15,000 years to war on each other before Europeans arrived.) You may have bought it from someone who bought it from someone who bought it from someone, etc.... but go back far enough, the land was forcibly taken from someone else by conquest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...