I am feeling kinda bad again because I read some history and learned that some sort of horrible thing happened to some people somewhere some time ago.
No, seriously, a bunch of random people died about 500 years ago and I feel bad for them.
So I am wondering, does anybody know any rulers or people of similar political magnitude from the middle ages or earlier who were not horrible murderers? A genuinely likable historical figure's ought to cheer me up.
I can vouch for Saladin, he's one of the only Muslims that both Christian and Islamic sources paint a good picture of. A ton of contemporary Christian scholars praised the guy, even as they were at war with him.
Richard the Lionheart wasn't really a good guy though. He WAS leading a Crusade... His brother John was "good", even though he was hated by his barons for losing Normandy to the French.
Knut (Cnut, Canute) the Great also wasn't that bad as far as ex-vikings go. He totally revitalized the English economy as well. From wikipedia, "Cnut maintained his power by uniting Danes and Englishmen under cultural bonds of wealth and custom, rather than by sheer brutality."
Past the middle ages, yes, but I know many people who consider Elizabeth the First to be one of the greatest English monarchs of all time. Take that as you will.
I wouldn't say anyone from the bible, because in many cases their existence is very debatable.
The way I see it, the issue with your concern is that the peaceful rulers never really got written about. I'm in school for history, specializing medieval history, and when reading old chronicles, you never really see peace written about, all you see is war. Peaceful years are mostly blank. Like the entry for 809 in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle:
A.D. 809 . This year was the sun eclipsed, precisely at eleven in
the morning, on the seventeenth day before the calends of August.
...And that's it. Compare that to A.D 825:
A.D. 825 . This year a battle was fought between the Welsh in
Cornwall and the people of Devonshire, at Camelford; and in the
course of the same year Egbert, king of the West-Saxons, and
Bernwulf, King of Mercia, fought a battle at Wilton, in which
Egbert gained the victory, but there was great slaughter on both
sides. Then sent he his son Ethelwulf into Kent, with a large
detachment from the main body of the army, accompanied by his
bishop, Elstan, and his alderman, Wulfherd; who drove Baldred,
the king, northward over the Thames. Whereupon the men of Kent
immediately submitted to him; as did also the inhabitants of
Surrey, and Sussex, and Essex; who had been unlawfully kept from
their allegiance by his relatives. The same year also, the king
of the East-Angles, and his subjects besought King Egbert to give
them peace and protection against the terror of the Mercians;
whose king, Bernwulf, they slew in the course of the same year.
So as you see, it's not that there weren't good rulers, it's that their deeds were never recorded because they were "boring."