Wednesday, March 14, 2007

What's in a name?

One of my dear readers alerted me to an article about Alfred the Great and Ragnar Hairybreeks which made me think how colourful those old characters are in our minds, largely because of their titles. Ivar the Boneless, Ethelred the Unready and Edward the Confessor all paint a picture, although not necessarily an accurate picture. Ivar was said to be Boneless not because of impotence but because he had a cartilage problem and had to be carried everywhere. Ethelred was unprepared for the Vikings but "Unready" meant that he lacked advisers and Edward didn't confess to anything specific, he was simply devout. Now that the Commons wants to restructure the Lords, it should bring back titles like these: much more fun!

3 Comments:

Blogger kinglear said...

I always like Vlad the Impaler best myself

9:13 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmm..I think I could be Arthur the Indecisive, but on the other hand I'm not so sure...perhaps Pericles the Procrastinator is a better bet, but no need to rush these decisions...

Anyway, Kinglear and Whisperer, shouldn't we be manning the barricades to preserve that most endangered of species, 'The Lords', before yet more of this country's traditions are trashed by Nulabour?

Maybe we could 'Adopt an endangered Lord', rather like the 'Adopt a Furry Friend' scheme run by zoos and animal parks ?

7:33 pm  
Blogger Welshcakes Limoncello said...

Yes, much more fun! I didn't know Edward never "confessed" to anything. Thinking of titles - or appellations - I often wonder how poor old "bloody Mary" felt about hers. [I don't suppose it would comfort the devout, misguided soul to know that an alcoholic concoction was named after her!]

7:10 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home