You scored as Batman, the Dark Knight. As the Dark Knight of Gotham, Batman is a vigilante who deals out his own brand of justice to the criminals and corrupt of the city. He follows his own code and is often misunderstood. He has few friends or allies, but finds comfort in his cause.
Batman, the Dark Knight -- 83%
El Zorro -- 79%
Captain Jack Sparrow -- 79%
James Bond, Agent 007 -- 79%
Neo, the "One" -- 79%
Lara Croft -- 71%
Maximus -- 71%
Indiana Jones -- 67%
William Wallace -- 67%
The Amazing Spider-Man -- 63%
Which Action Hero Would You Be? v. 2.0
created with QuizFarm.com
Hmm, I'd rather be Zorro, but Batman is OK.
8 comments:
Ah, but since Batman is inspired by Zorro (the movie he and his parents watched the night they were shot in front of him was The Mask of Zorro) you hereby get both after a fashion!
Me William Wallace (88%), followed by Maximus (79%), then big drop to a bunch of others at 54% equal, including Spider-Man, Zorro, Batman. Depressingly predictable (me, not the quiz, which is really rather fun). No, I don't hate the English!
Did you show a predilection for wearing a kilt? That would probably be a big factor in matching William Wallace.
I've nothing against Wallace, but I objected strongly to the film Braveheart (on grounds of historical inaccuracy), so I was trying to avoid getting him.
Anyway, we should all realise that it's all the fault of the Normans. It was the Scottish aristocracy (Normans) that perpetrated the Highland clearances, and the Normans that William Wallace and Robert the Bruce were fighting against. And the English aristocracy have been Norman ever since the Battle of Hastings. And they're all inbred, so they're still Norman.
Actually have to disagree there - while English aristrocracy (and indeed the nasty King) were largely Norman, this was not the case in Scotland, there was no Norman conquest here. There were, however, inter-marriages between some Normans and the native Scottish aristocracy which introduced them and some of their customs into the Scottish realm.
History is sketchy on Wallace but it is unlikeloy he was fighting specifically against Norman culture, more against any other power attempting to subjugate the land; there may also have been personal motivations as well. Bruce on the other hand has as many motives as he had changes of heart, giving alleagiance to Edward, withdrawing it, giving it, withdrawing it...
The primary motivation for Bruce (and his family as a whole) seems to have been a thirst for the crown, not do do battle with Normans (mnay of whom would have been friends of his at both courts). It is only after he is on the run (when we get the possibly apocraphyl spider and the cave scene) that he seems to change and become the hero he would enter into history as.
In some ways Bruce follows some of the classical ideas of the mythic hero - starts off either reluctant or downright hostile to the Quest, is either indifferent or else out for selfish ends, gets the Call, tries, fails, endures much hardship which forges the character into the Conquering Hero.
On a related topic my own clan, Gordon, are a mix of native Celts and Normans - some of the Gordon knights who fought with Bruce at Bannockburn and elsewhere were almost certainly Norman in extraction (de Gorduin). Rewarded richly for their service by Bruce they would grow to be almost as important as the Stewarts by medieval times, so he certainly had nothing against Normans per se. Although it is also worth noting many Normans who married into the Scottish aristocracy, although they brought some new customs to the Scottish court circle, mostly adapted to their new land and became as Scottish as the natives (which is why many are painted eating deep fried pie and chips).
Oh and Bravehear - yes, historical lunacy simply. However on terms of a simple big movie epic, like El Cid, it is a great ride. And much as the bad history pains me on the plus side I sold vastly more Scottish history books on the back of that movie and the interest it raised, so I sometimes think Scots historians should be grateful to it for raising interest in the real subject both at home and abroad.
OK, I blame the aristocracy.
Good point about Braveheart.
Graham is a tranferred surname, originally a place-name drawn from or connected to Grantham in Lincolnshire (birthplace of one M. Thatcher - so pleased), and thought, from most of the popular books on names I've looked at, to have moved to Scotland around the 13th century with the Normans.
Remember reading Magnusson's and Harvie's one-volume histories of Scotland and being struck by how the Wars of Independence were as much an internecine as a national conflict. The heid bummers all seemed to be related to one another - cue Blackadder quote: "I'm as British as Queen Victoria!"
From what I know of it - admittedly, little - the Clearances were carried out by the Highland clan chiefs with quite as much enthusiasm as the big landowners and their factors.
Good job I didn't get any of the superheroes - I'd be crap at concealing my (fortunately not terribly secret) identity. The kilt question counted, but I suspect not having a setting between peace and nuke had something to do with it as well.
Thought I'drop a line or two on this thread -
William Wallace came from Norman ancestry on both sides of his family and his father was a Baron. Thus, he grew up in an aristocratic household - definitely NOT one to paint his face blue, or wear a kilt, or live in a common croft house.
He may have not had rank, but he would have grown up training to fight and would have been very comfortable wielding a sword; unlike the rustics who were paying his father rent as crofters do.
*All* of the Scottish nobility that counted for anything were either Norman or had taken on Norman ways, as the Normans by that time had long dominated Scottish government. They were initially invited to move in and take over most of the estates because they were percieved by the monarchy as having superior warrior tactics and technology as well as a more efficient administrative system than the old native culture. Thus, they had the force of law, if the older clan system could combine with their feudalism in the more Gaelic areas and the Borders. This was done to protect against the English, who, if also dominated by Norman society, were considered to be different.
Now then, this should set the story straight.
Thanks Wallace!
Right, so William Wallace was a Norman fighting against some more Normans?
Y'see - I said it was all the fault of the Normans...
Post a Comment