Alright, so this thread is for tyrants, cruel political leaders who got a taste of their own medicine in the end.

One is Emperor Basil, a Byzantine ruler. He defeated a Bulgarian army and had their eyes gouged out. Then, he himself was defeated by a Muslim army years later and had his own eyes gouged out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronikos_I_Komnenos

His actions

His arrival was soon followed by a massacre of the Latin inhabitants of the city, which was focused on the Venetian merchants who virtually controlled the economy of the city. The massacre resulted in the deaths of 80,000 "Latins". He was believed to have arranged the poisoning of Alexios II's elder sister Maria the Porphyrogenita and her husband Renier of Montferrat, although Maria herself had encouraged him to intervene. The poisoner was said to be the eunuch Pterygeonites. Soon afterwards he had the empress Maria imprisoned and then killed (forcing a signature from the child Emperor Alexius to put his mother to death), by Pterygeonites and the hetaireiarches Constantine Tripsychos. Alexios II was compelled to acknowledge Andronikos as colleague in the empire and was then quickly put to death in turn; the killing was carried out by Tripsychos, Theodore Dadibrenos and Stephen Hagiochristophorites.[2]

His short reign was characterized by strong and harsh measures. He resolved to suppress many abuses, but above all things, to check feudalism and limit the power of the nobles, who were rivals for his throne. The people, who felt the severity of his laws, at the same time acknowledged their justice and found themselves protected from the rapacity of their superiors who had grown corrupt under the opulent and mercurial rule of Manuel I. However, as Andronikos' rule went on, the Emperor became increasingly paranoid and violent - in September 1185, Andronikos ordered the execution of all prisoners, exiles and their families for collusion with the invaders - and the Byzantine Empire descended into a terror state. The aristocrats in turn were infuriated against him.

His fate:

Isaac handed him over to the city mob and for three days he was exposed to their fury and resentment, remaining for that period tied to a post and beaten. His right hand was cut off, his teeth and hair were pulled out, one of his eyes was gouged out, and, among many other sufferings, boiling water was thrown in his face, punishment probably associated to his handsomness and life of licentiosity. At last, led to the Hippodrome of Constantinople, he was hung up by the feet between two pillars, and two Latin soldiers competed as to whose sword would penetrate his body more deeply, and finally his body, according to the representation of his death, was torn apart. He died on September 12, 1185. At the news of the emperor's death, his son and co-emperor John was murdered by his own troops in Thrace.

One is Emperor Basil, a Byzantine ruler. He defeated a Bulgarian army and had their eyes gouged out. Then, he himself was defeated by a Muslim army years later and had his own eyes gouged out.

Are you talking about Basil II, who after the battle of Kleidon is said to have blinded 99% of the Bulgarian prisoners and removed one eye from all the rest to lead them home? He died of natural causes as far as I know. Also, he wasn't any more tyrannical than most Byzantine emperors, and a lot less tyrannical than plenty. He certainly wasn't a cruel political leader. He ruled pretty well and the empire is considered to have gone through one of its strongest periods under him. The story about the blinding of the thousands of Bulgarians is by no means certain and there are good reasons to suppose that Basil did not enjoy nearly such a decisive victory against the Bulgarians at that point; in fact the legend of his "Bulgar-slaying" heroics developed after his death, and the story of the immense victory, the cruel triumph, and the fatal heart attack it gave Samuel, the Bulgarian leader, are probably just part of that legend. Have a look here (http://www.roman-emperors.org/basilii.htm) for more.

If, however, you mean Basil I, he was a bit of a nutcase, but he ruled surprisingly well, and didn't blind any Bulgarians that we know of. He died in a hunting accident.

I think we would do well to allow such cruel punishments to tarnish the name of heartless men. I don't care if you were the "greatest" ruler in your country's history, if you went around blinding people, you deserve to have your name ruined by it.

True, but as I pointed out, he probably didn't. There's also the problem that pretty much all ancient and medieval rulers did things that we would today consider atrocities; should we conclude that they were all appalling tyrants? Perhaps so, but then we lose the ability to to judge between them.

Two that I can think of are Robespierre and Nicolae Ceauşescu.

Two that I can think of are Robespierre and Nicolae Ceauşescu.

The latter was my obvious first thought as I am almost personally (through my family) connected to the deeds of this man. :)

Yeah wierd history facts for yah. Karma? KARMA??????

True, but as I pointed out, he probably didn't.

I didn't mean him specifically, I meant any ruler. The evils of Titus and Vespasian in Iudea are just as wrong as those of Xerxes at the Hellespont, as those by von Weichs in Yugoslavia.

There's also the problem that pretty much all ancient and medieval rulers did things that we would today consider atrocities; should we conclude that they were all appalling tyrants?

Yes. Torture is evil. Fullstop.

Perhaps so, but then we lose the ability to to judge between them.

I don't see why it would become impossible to compare/contrast them. We are simply lowering the bar as a whole.

True, but as I pointed out, he probably didn't. There's also the problem that pretty much all ancient and medieval rulers did things that we would today consider atrocities; should we conclude that they were all appalling tyrants? Perhaps so, but then we lose the ability to to judge between them.


Yes, if they kill in the name of their power, they are tyrants and I haven't lost any ability to judge between them.

Dunno about your link. I have a book that states he was captured in a battle against an eastern foe in which one of his generals betrayed him. and not sent his army in to help him, but rather fled. His enemies new a clause that no roman emperor can rule while blind, so they blinded him and released him. He was succeeded and died in Yugoslavia I believe.

He was succeeded and died in Yugoslavia I believe.

A time traveler, eh? Neat trick.

I kid, I kiid.