Leaders we don't want.

[plasmacannon]

Henry V works too.
I was thinking of the Robin Hood stories when I wrote that, but, yes, historically, Henry V won a great battle vs the French with fewer numbers, because, he has many, many longbowmen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt

 

[The Almighty dF]

Meiji, maybe? Not exactly associated with the Japan of bizarre little widgets for yuppies, but he does get a lot of the credit for his nation's industrialization and modernization.


Richard? I'd prefer Henry II or Henry V. Though admittedly Richard has better name recognition, thanks to the Robin Hood legend.

Maybe William the Conqueror...

All this talk of alternate leaders for civs is probably irrelevant, though, since Firaxis seems to be reverting to the Civ3 "leader = civ" model. Disappointing, but I can see why there might be practical reasons for doing so, given the lavish effort they're putting into each leader.

I'd vote Richard I simply because the Crusades are such an interesting era, and Richard really helps represent them (maybe have Richard I -and- Saladin.)

 

[Dachs]

Henry VII for king of England

 

[Arakhor]

What did Henry VII do that was so notable, other than win the Battle of Bosworth, begin the short-lived Tudor dynasty and be known as a frugal economist?