Who are the greatest Germans in history?

Who were the greatest Germans in history ?

  • Frederick I Barbarossa

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • Johannes Gutenberg

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • Martin Luther

    Votes: 4 13.8%
  • Frederick II of Prussia

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Immanuel Kant

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Johann Wolfgang Goethe

    Votes: 3 10.3%
  • Alexander von Humboldt

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • The Grimm brothers

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • Ludwig van Beethoven

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • Carl Friedrich Gauss

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • Otto von Bismarck

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • Richard Wagner

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Karl Marx

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Friedrich Nietzsche

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • Max Planck

    Votes: 1 3.4%
  • Albert Einstein

    Votes: 6 20.7%
  • Manfred von Richthofen

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Michael Schumacher

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 5 17.2%

  • Total voters
    29
In what way? And why should a computer science student need to know about this Erich Maria Remark dude ;)? Never heard of the guy, lol (and I take pride in that).

Why would anyone take pride in ignorance of any kind, especially without even making any attempt to find out who he was?

Erich Maria Remarque:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Maria_Remarque

Why? Because through his books you can understand World War I and what that did to the psyche of an entire generation of Europe, and, more generally, about the terror of war.

If more people who hadn't experienced it had read it, and, more importantly, understood what he was trying to say, and understood what he was saying when writing about the Nazis, maybe we wouldn't have had World War II.

Maybe, if all of that had been understood, we'd be living in a better world today.

Sometimes I despair of you, Davef.
 
Why would anyone take pride in ignorance of any kind, especially without even making any attempt to find out who he was?

Erich Maria Remarque:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Maria_Remarque

Why? Because through his books you can understand World War I and what that did to the psyche of an entire generation of Europe, and, more generally, about the terror of war.

If more people who hadn't experienced it had read it, and, more importantly, understood what he was trying to say, and understood what he was saying when writing about the Nazis, maybe we wouldn't have had World War II.

Maybe, if all of that had been understood, we'd be living in a better world today.

Sometimes I despair of you, Davef.

Haha lol sorry, I wrote that first thing in the morning when I'm usually grouchy and incoherent. I'm not usually "up" until just after 12 pm.
 
Einstein was rather the greatest ethnically Jewish person in history, who happened to have German citizenship (until he was forced out by the German Nazis, after which he became a Jewish-American). Nietzsche claimed having ethnic Polish ancestry (perhaps it could rather be Sorbian, though):

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...rman-or-Polish?p=546128&viewfull=1#post546128

Friedrich Nietzsche claimed to be Polish on many occasions. He wrote for example:

1) "Und hiermit berühre ich die Frage der Rasse. Ich bin ein polnischer Edelmann pur sang, dem auch nicht ein Tropfen schlechtes Blut beigemischt ist, am wenigsten deutsches. Denke ich daran, wie oft ich unterwegs als Pole angeredet werde und von Polen selbst, wie selten man mich für einen Deutschen nimmt, so könnte es scheinen, dass ich nur zu den angesprenkelten Deutschen gehörte."

2) "Und doch waren meine Vorfahren polnische Edelleute: ich habe von daher viel Rassen-Instinkte im Leibe, wer weiss? Zuletzt gar noch das liberum veto."

3) "Ich danke dem Himmel, daß ich in allen meinen Instinkten Pole und nichts andres bin."

4) "Ich selbst bin immer noch Pole genug, um gegen Chopin den Rest der Musik hinzugeben."

5) "Meine Vorfahren waren polnische Edelleute, noch die Mutter meines Großvaters war Polin."

6) "Man hat mich gelehrt, die Herkunft meines Blutes und Namens auf polnische Edelleute zurückzuführen, welche Niëtzky hießen und etwa vor hundert Jahren ihre Heimat und ihren Adel aufgaben, unerträglichen religiösen Bedrückungen endlich weichend: es waren nämlich Protestanten."

And some more citations here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche#Citizenship,_nationality_and_ethnicity
 
Immanuel Kant

Ethnically he was a Curonian (a small Balto-Slavic ethnic group) from the Curonian Spit in East Prussia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curonians

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curonian_Spit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kursenieki#Famous_people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant#Biography

While scholars of Kant's life long accepted the claim, there is no evidence that Kant's paternal line was Scottish; it is more likely that the Kants got their name from the village of Kantwaggen (today part of Priekulė) and were of Curonian origin.[24][25]

So far we have:

Einstein - Jew
Nietzsche - Pole or Sorb
Kant - Curonian or Lithuanian
 
Arminius, his stand, against Roman occupation, preserved the Germanic culture, and ultimately led to the first men on the moon, and even Albert Einsteins education etc.
 
Arminius, his stand, against Roman occupation, preserved the Germanic culture, and ultimately led to the first men on the moon, and even Albert Einsteins education etc.

What complete and utter garbage. That's too stupid to even merit a detailed response.

As for Einstein, they didn't want him so they now don't get to claim him.
 
Well its only my own personal opinion.

I'm sure if the Romans prevailed it might of been different, but that is one of them big " If "s. You cannot change history, and from that event in AD9, Europe evolved, and developed in its own unique way, and this had great global consequence's that cannot be denied, as we still live with the effects today, and have done ever since.

'Rome' was never the centre of the world, and never could be, and Arminius proved it. The principles he stood up for then, are those we still live with today, especially in the Northern area's of Europe, ie 'independance', and a love of 'freedom'.

The same principles the English ( descendants of the Cherusci ) and the UK ,used recently, to decide not to live under a European Hammer.

Anyone that ignores the significance, and importance of his actions and its consequences, good and bad, must also be quite stupid 'in my opinion'.
 
Somebody’s Hero, is someone else’s Foe.
imo Arminius (a Roman Army Officer and a Citizen) was a Traitor, and he was also murdered by members of his own tribe.
He caused the slaughter of thousands of his people when eventually Rome went back for sweet Revenge. What a Traitor!
 
Somebody’s Hero, is someone else’s Foe.
imo Arminius was a Traitor, and he was also murdered by members of his own tribe.
He caused the slaughter of thousands of his people when eventually Rome went back for sweet Revenge. What a Traitor!

In preventing further advancements of the Roman Empire, he almost certainly saved many, many, more thousands, from certain death, and slavery.

He was believed to of been later poisoned by his own family around 21 AD, and there had been offers to the Roman's to poison Arminius, such as that from Adgandestrius of the recently Defeated Chatti tribe AD 15, and no doubt Rome may well of been involved with his death.

He was a Germanic Cherusci tribsman. He and his brother were forcibly removed from their family home when young around 9yrs old, by Roman imposed customs,and taken to Rome in 8 BC.

He was a victim of treachery, and a traitor to only those who tried to enslave and destroy his people, and those who supported it. He was never a Roman, but had to survive as one.

Arminius was never defeated by the Romans during the later German Wars against Germanicus AD14-16
 
I guess Karma is a B..ch.
Besides being German, Arminius was also a Roman Army Officer and a Roman Citizen.

Arminius lost against the Roman General Germanicus.
... Arminius escaped into the forest, and kept riding, as, behind him, Germanicus sent his legions into the fight. The struggle between 128,000 men went on for hours. “From nine in the morning until nightfall the enemy were slaughtered,” said Tacitus, “and ten miles were covered with arms and dead bodies.” Arminius’ army was routed. “It was a great victory, and without bloodshed to us,” Tacitus declared. But Arminius himself was still at large. ...
... Pushed into woods, trapped with their backs to the marsh, the tribesmen were slaughtered. At nightfall, the killing stopped. The Germans had been dislodged from the barrier and butchered in their thousands...
... Germanicus immediately regrouped his forces and led a new raid across the Rhine, this time returning with another of Varus’ Lost Eagles....

https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2017/12/01/germanicus-romes-revenge/
 
Last edited:
I guess Karma is a B..ch.
Besides being German, Arminius was also a Roman Army Officer and a Roman Citizen.

Arminius lost against the Roman General Germanicus.
... Arminius escaped into the forest, and kept riding, as, behind him, Germanicus sent his legions into the fight. The struggle between 128,000 men went on for hours. “From nine in the morning until nightfall the enemy were slaughtered,” said Tacitus, “and ten miles were covered with arms and dead bodies.” Arminius’ army was routed. “It was a great victory, and without bloodshed to us,” Tacitus declared. But Arminius himself was still at large. ...
... Pushed into woods, trapped with their backs to the marsh, the tribesmen were slaughtered. At nightfall, the killing stopped. The Germans had been dislodged from the barrier and butchered in their thousands...
... Germanicus immediately regrouped his forces and led a new raid across the Rhine, this time returning with another of Varus’ Lost Eagles....

https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2017/12/01/germanicus-romes-revenge/

I don't hold it against people that they fight against invaders of their territory. My own Celt-Ligurian ancestors fought the Romans, even if I think they were misguided. I don't, however, admire anyone who breaks his sworn oath, especially a soldier who betrays men with whom he served. A traitor he was.

The version being propagated by this poster is sheer fantasy and the fantasy of someone unschooled in history, even his own. For one thing, what did their freedom mean? It meant thousands of years of rule by despotic kings, up until the end of the First World War, in fact, and invasion after invasion of other nations to take their liberty from them. Also, of course, plunging Europe into the Dark Ages and retarding progress for at least a thousand years.

Of course, a lot of peoples try to propagate fantasy for nationalistic purposes. However, it's incumbent on us here as people trying to use reason and logic to look at the facts.

These are the facts:

"The popular notion that Arminius drove the Romans out of Germania east of the Rhine is a fallacy, though. Roman legions were back in force six years after the battle, wreaking havoc and winning major battles. The discovery last year of an ancient battlefield some 100 kilometers east of Kalkriese, near the town ofKalefeld south of Hanover, testifies to Roman military presence deep in hostile Germania as late as the third century AD."It's typically German to say world history was shaped on German soil," said Bendikowski. "We know that this was one battle among many and that there was a range of factors behind Rome's eventual retreat to the Rhine. Everyone who needed this myth regarded it as the turning point of history. For many it remains the turning point. But it wasn't.""

That's from Spiegel, by the way.

http://www.spiegel.de/international...ls-myth-that-created-the-nation-a-644913.html

The prior objectionable posts exhibit the kind of simplification and dumbing down of history which can so often be found on the internet. The reality is that the Empire reached the height at which it could be reasonably maintained. It's the same reason the Romans retreated to Hadrian's Wall. What lay beyond that was worth the strain expansion would have put on the Empire? The truth? Not much.
 
Arminius, his stand, against Roman occupation, preserved the Germanic culture, and ultimately led to the first men on the moon, and even Albert Einsteins education etc.

Looool Arminius = spaceman

12 IQ
 
For me, the answer is Beethoven or Nietzsche. For more knowledgeable Germanophiles, the answer is almost always Goethe.
 
There were many bloody confrontations between Arminius and Germanicus, between AD13-17 but neither claimed outright victory, and Arminius was actually wounded during one of these. Germanicus was later pulled from Germany back to Rome on the promise of him receiving a Triumph, by Tiberious, who was fearfull of another Varus dissaster. Once Germanicus was recalled to Rome, Tiberius put a halt to any further incursions into Germanic territory, and the Rhine became the established Eastern flank of the Roman Empire, in Northern Europe.

Tactitus wrote his Annals between 115 Ad and 120 AD, He was not even born untill 56/57 AD, and he is known to be careless regarding his writings of military history etc.

One thing is certain, the Roman Empire ended at the Rhine, after AD 16/17, as a direct response to the fears and actions of Arminius. The result was that early Northern European History and culture continued to develope independantly, and seperatley to those within the Roman influence.

There is no evidence Arminius swore an oath to Rome at nine years of age. His loyalty was to his people, and his ancestors, as was the Germanic custom.

He was a loyal Cherusci tribesman, and what did his freedom mean ?, it meant he had a choice.

Regarding the reasons the Romans built the Wall, it was the very same reason they later built the Limes in Germany etc, they had lost thousands of men, including possibly one complete legion the 9th Hispanic I believe, and had to retreat to defensive areas of safety.

Hadrian himself ordered an extra, 3,000 troops to Britain from Germania, at the beginning of his reign, due to suffering military losses (AD117 ). The military threats became so serious a worry and concern for him that he actually came to Britain himself in AD122, bringing an additional Legion the 6th, ( 5,000 troops) and directed the 'Defensive' Wall to be built.

Following the simple fact that Britain is also an Island,and any trade or visit to the island had to be by sea, usually by sail. In sailing to Britain they had to follow the winds, often they would be forced around the island, much like the later viking fleets, and the well known Spanish armada, which was forced around the North of the island to travel South. ( predominant winds in Britain are from the South West )

It seems strange that the Romans would not secure storm ports for their fleets etc around these Northern area's, and leave a main route into and out of Britain undefended. I believe they had little choice and were forced to abandon the further Northern Area's of Britain, as they were clearly on the defensive, as the building of Hadrian's Wall confirmed.

Archaeological evidence is also now supporting this theory as the most likely.

Without the actions of 'Arminius ' Germany, would never of existed today, and the question would never of been asked, and wether you like it or not that is fact, not fantasy.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't Arminius born in what is now the Netherlands?

If so, this would make him Dutch rather than German.
 
Wasn't Arminius born in what is now the Netherlands?
,
If so, this would make him Dutch rather than German.

North West Germania, in the area of Hanover, modern Germany. The 'Cherusci' did later mix with the Frisian, and Saxon tribes in the area of today's Netherlands, and they would eventually then move, to settle in the South and East of England.
 
I’ve always found Widukind’s stand against Charlemagne during the Saxon wars as a very impressive and very Germanic last stand. A very sad story.
 

This thread has been viewed 47540 times.

Back
Top