Ed Ranks the 50 State Quarters, Part II: The Okay

I resume my ranking of the 50 state quarters, produced at five a year, for ten years, between 1999 and 2008. We now entire the realm of the "just okay" coins. They aren't the worst, and as we go along, they start to get "better."  In fact we'll end here at around #23, which means we're dipping a little bit into the top half. Still, nothing to be too proud of.

Enjoy the quarters! Or don't! I really can't force you to feel one way or the other. 

36. New York

• Depicted: Statue of Liberty, 11 stars, state outline with line tracing Hudson River and Erie Canal
• Caption: "Gateway to Freedom"
• Year Released: 2001
• Analysis: The Statue of Liberty and an outline of New York was all this coin needed, and everything else is too much. An outline of the Erie Canal? A waterway that hasn't been relevant since trains became a thing? Who cares? Also, like with New Hampshire, it decided that it needed to put a number of stars on the coin to depict which state it was to join the union (11th). Again, nobody cares.

35. Tennessee

• Depicted: Fiddle, trumpet, guitar, musical score, three stars
• Caption: "Musical Heritage"
• Year Released: 2002
• Analysis:Tennessee is acting like they invented all music with this coin. Whatever. Grand Ol' Opry. Elvis. Yeah, I guess you're somewhat associated with music. There are a lot of states in the south that could have a fiddle on it though. It's the universal musical instrument of rednecks.

34. Indiana

• Depicted: IndyCar, state outline, 19 stars
• Caption: "Crossroads of America"
• Year Released: 2002
• Analysis: I guess the Indianapolis 500 is the only thing this state has (other than the Terre Haute Federal prison's death chamber, which I can't imagine being put on a coin even though it would be AWESOME). What else was it going to put there? But let's be serious. Is Indiana really the crossroads of America? And isn't it dangerous for an IndyCar to be on the crossroads? Those things go way too fast for intersections.

33. Alabama

• Depicted: Helen Keller, a longleaf pine, branch, magnolia blossoms
• Caption: "Spirit of Courage", "Helen Keller" (in English and Braille)
• Year Released: 2003
• Analysis: Surprisingly, Helen Keller (despite being blind, deaf and mute) is actually still the most educated, well-spoken and literate person to ever come out of Alabama. Just watch and Alabama politician or listen to a Lyndyrd Skynyrd song and you'll know that's true. Also, Magnolias just like the Mississippi coin. I mean you get props to attempting to display a notably Alabaman that people actually like, and for putting braille on a coin, but honestly all I can think of now is Patty Duke screaming "Waaa waaa" in The Miracle Worker. The 1962 version, of course. She was Annie Sullivan in the 79 TV Movie version which had no reason to exist or ever be made. Seriously though, putting Braille on a coin is probably the most progressive thin that Alabama has ever done. I figured Alabama's coin would probably just be a burning cross.

32. Idaho

• Depicted: Peregrine falcon, state outline with star indicating location of Boise
• Caption: "Esto Perpetua" ("Let it Be Forever")
• Year Released: 2007
• Analysis: I'm not digging this one. I like hawks, but why is this, like, a bust of a hawk's top half, rather than an entire hawk in the air? Are busts of birds a big thing? I also don't think of hawks when I think of Idaho. I think of potatoes. Wisconsin at least had the courage and self-acceptance to recognize that it should have a big wheel of cheese on it (you'll see later), yet Idaho won't own up to only being famous for potatoes... and white supremacist Californians who retire there because there are "too many brown people" moving in? When I think of a hawk on a coin, I think that coin should belong to some sort of cool Middle Eastern country famous for falconry and Bedouins. Also, it looks like the giant hawk is about to eat the tiny Idaho on the coin. And why is Boise shown with a star? No other state that did an outline of it was like "and here is our capital!" This isn't a high school quiz. The bird looks cool, but it doesn't scream "Idaho" to me at all.

31. Kentucky

• Depicted: Thoroughbred racehorse behind fence, Bardstown Mansion, Federal Hill
• Caption: "My Old Kentucky Home"
• Year Released: 2001
• Analysis: Obviously Kentucky was going to depict a racehorse since it doesn't have the balls to display a jug of bourbon. This is an okay coin, but I'm not digging the mansion. It's too much. A horse on a farm would have been enough.I don't need the mansion. Or better yet, a depiction of a horse race, with two horses neck-and-neck. Seriously though... bourbon. That would be nice.

30. Hawaii

• Depicted: Statue of Kamehameha I with state outline
• Caption: "Ua Mau ke Ea o ka ʻĀina i ka Pono" ("The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness")
• Year Released: 2008
• Analysis: The final state, and the last of the state coins, belongs to Hawaii. As I implied when discussing why Oklahoma's coin failed, it was wise for Hawaii not to do a rainbow because that simply wont work on a coin. That being said, there were many better options to go with other than a depiction of a STATUE of Kamehameha. For example, why not try to actually directly depict Kamehameha instead of depicting a statue of him. There could have been dozens of other choices though. Beaches with palm trees. Plumeria flowers. Yellow Hibiscus flowers. Diamond Head State Monument (maybe in  the background, with a beach in the foreground). Some other notable volcano. Hula dancers with leis. Pineapples. Someone surfing (Duke Kahanamoku or Eddie Aikau, preferably. Bethany Hamilton getting her arm eaten off by a shark would probably be a bad choice). An outrigger, Hōkūleʻa, or other traditional Polynesian sailing vessel. Israel Kamakawiwoʻole playing a ukulele wouldn't have been a bad choice either.  Hawaii's coin isn't terrible, but it could have been much better (as later US Territories quarters from other Polynesian places like Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands would prove).

29. Utah

• Depicted: "Golden" spike, Locomotives Jupiter, No. 119, and the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad
• Caption: "Crossroads of the West"
• Year Released: X
• Analysis: Why does every state want to be "The Crossroads?" New Jersey was "Crossroads of the Revolution." Indiana was ""Crossroads of America." Now we have the "Crossroads of the West." Yes, the Transcontinental Railroad was indeed completed here, and the spike was put in the ground (which, of course, you can't tell is golden on this silver coin). It's like someone watched the film Wild, Wild West and thought it would be cool to have the golden spike ceremony depicted on this coin too. I dunno. Trains are cool, but this coin could have looked a lot more visually appealing.

28. Colorado

• Depicted: Longs Peak
• Caption: "Colorful Colorado"
• Year Released: 2006
• Analysis: Nothing like a silver monotone depiction of a boring mountainside (which would just be gray and brown anyway) being described as "colorful." It's not an ugly coin overall, but it's a little "blah." And it is not, at all, colorful. Again. Follow the "Oklahoma rule" and don't try to depict something colorful on a monotone palette. Also, this Longs Peak is so generic looking it could be a fictional rock formation.

27. New Jersey

• Depicted: Washington Crossing the Delaware
• Caption: "Crossroads of the Revolution"
• Year Released: 1999
• Analysis: It's a little odd that New Jersey chose Washington crossing the Delaware River as its choice, considering that the name of ANOTHER STATE is more prominent in the theme, and the crossing of the Delaware River also involves another state, Pennsylvania, from which Washington's plan was actually launched. In fairness though, yes, this Christmas-night surprise attack led to a victory against Hessian forces at the Battle of Trenton (in New Jersey) on the morning of December 26, so... yeah... New Jersey. Still though, this is mainly based on a depiction of the crossing from a famous painting, and there is just too much damn small, minute detail that doesn't really work on a small coin. If you look at it closely, you have to actually know and recognize the painting to be able to tell that this coin represents that event, because otherwise what's on the coin is just sort of blotchy and un-detailed. An ambitious choice that doesn't totally work. 

26. California

• Depicted: John Muir, California condor, Half Dome
• Caption: "John Muir," "Yosemite Valley"
• Year Released: 2005
• Analysis: Look, I'm an environmentally aware and considerate person who even took an environmental science course in college. I respect the decision to put John Muir on a coin. I even dedicated a weekend back in the day volunteering to do phone calls for the Sierra Club. Still though, California has so many options for what they could have put on their coin that I'm sort of disappointed that an old main staring at a rock is what they went with. And neither John Muir, nor the Half Dome (a feature in Yosemite National Park) are famous enough so that they can survive on their own, so this time the captions are absolutely needed so that people aren't asking "What the hell are these things?"  I'm not saying that California's coin should have been the Golden Gate Bridge, the Hollywood Sign, or Grauman's Chinese Theater. If they picked something from one specific California city rather than another, I could see how people from the other cities would be pissed. But even if going for some nice environmental scene, they could have picked some better choices. How about the redwoods? It might be hard to pull off that on a small coin, but it could be done. Even in Yosemite, the El Capitan cliff is more iconic than Half Dome (I'd argue) and could have been depicted instead. In fact, it WAS depicted later (in 2010) when they issued the America the Beautiful quarters based on National Parks. California blew this one like a struggling actress on a casting couch. Which, honestly, also could have been depicted on the coin as a more accurate representation of the state.

25. Wyoming

• Depicted: Bucking Horse and Rider
• Caption: "The Equality State"
• Year Released: 2007
• Analysis: Wyoming is definitely the Equality State. Unless you're a woman. Or Black. Or Hispanic. Or anything other than a white, conservative male. But other than that, totally the Equality State. Also, this coin is trying too hard to be like "Yeah, we're cowboys!" Texas avoided such an obvious depiction, but Wyoming couldn't resist it. It doesn't even look like a proper depiction of a cowboy that someone put a lot of work into. It looks like a silhouette of a cowboy that would appear in neon on the side of a saloon and/or strip club called "Annie Oakley's Roadhouse." I appreciate the simplicity and the concept, but this is a straight up middle-of-the-road state coin.

24. Kansas

• Depicted:  Bison, sunflowers
• Caption: None
• Year Released: 2005
• Analysis: A bison is a damn fine thing to put on a coin, such as the iconic "Buffalo nickel." However, this bison is at an odd angle. And the sunflower isn't totally needed. Still, Kansas at least had the common sense to know that their depiction was straight forward and didn't need a caption like "American Bison." People in Texas are like "Durrr, what is this? Oh yeah! The Lone Star State... because it says so!" Kansas kept it simple, but the design of the bison could have been a bit sleeker. And without those weird legs that vanish into the grass and therefore look like odd chicken drumsticks. Or perhaps... buffalo wings? *rimshot?* Seriously though, Clark Kent should have been on the Kansas coin. Everyone knows that.

23. Washington

• Depicted: Salmon leaping in front of Mount Rainier
• Caption: "The Evergreen State"
• Year Released: 2007
• Analysis: The salmon is cool, but the depiction of Mount Rainier could have been done a little better. I know it's hard to depict a snow-capped mountain on a one-color coin, but this coin especially doesn't do a good job. Not a terrible coin, but not a great one either. That's why it's here in the middle at #23. Also, the little "sploosh" of water under the fish doesn't look right either on a small coin. 

That's it for now. Next time we get to coins that are finally good ones and maybe I'll stop making fun of them so much. I hope that makes you feel better, in case you were feeling bad for the quarters.

Ed Ranks the 50 State Quarters, Part I: The Worst

When ranking the counties of New Hampshire last time, I recalled the story of the Old Man of the Mountain, a dumb thing that appeared on NH's state coin in 2000 and then summarily collapsed to the ground in 2003. That made me think back fondly of the time that I ranked the state quarters. Then I thought to myself... "Hey, wait a minute! Did I actually rank the state quarters? I'm pretty sure I did, right?" Well, I looked into the archives, and I apparently did not. Oh, I've ranked the states before. And I've ranked coins too. Euro coins. Circulating US coins. And so I've mentioned the state quarters before, but I haven't actually ranked them.

This needs to be remedied, now.

Since there are 50 of them, I'm dividing this into multiple parts. How many? Four! Which is a weird number, because 50 isn't divisible by 4. I mean it is. But not as a whole number. Whatever. By the time we get to the end of this whole thing, it will all be fine. Anyway, here are he 14 worst coins, ranking between #50 and #37.

50. South Dakota

• Depicted: Mount Rushmore, ring-necked pheasant, wheat
• Caption: None
• Year Released: 2006
• Analysis: South Dakota really had no choice other than Mount Rushmore for their coin, because there is literally nothing else to do in South Dakota. This is the only thing it is famous for. Even then, slamming four faces onto one coin (including a face which is already on the other side of the coin) is a bit much, and leads to a sloppy / poorly detailed representation. And why the hell is this pheasant flying? Did the person who make this coin know anything about pheasants at all? Yes, they obviously can fly. Short distances. But pheasants are famous for being ground birds. Showing one flying on a coin is dumb. It's not their natural habitat. Why not show George Washington scuba diving on a coin? Because he isn't famous for scuba diving. Nor are pheasants famous for flying. In fact, they are specifically famous for NOT flying. And when they do, they flap their wings wildly to go a short distance to get the hell away from a hunter (most likely) or other predator. They don't have their wings beautifully spread out like their gliding magestically. It was like the person who designed this coin was forced to add a pheasant, but the only empty space on the coin was in the air above Mt. Rushmore, so he just put the bird in the air for no reason. Bad coin. Worst coin! I hate this coin so much. Mainly because the stupid pheasant.

49. Illinois

• Depicted: "Young" Abraham Lincoln, a farm scene, Chicago skyline with the Sears Tower, an outline of the state, and 21 stars (11 on left, 10 on right, depicting the
• Caption: "Land of Lincoln",  "21st state/century"
• Year Released: 2003
• Analysis: Waaaaaay too much going on with this coin. Of course there is Lincoln, which is fine. But why (allegedly) young Lincoln instead of bearded President Lincoln? According to official US Mint sources, it's supposed to represent "how Abraham Lincoln must have looked forward to his new career in law from his job as a young rail-splitter." Seriously though... what? Abe Lincoln isn't famous because he was a rail-splitter or lawyer. It was because he became PRESIDENT and won the Civil War. And even then, Illinois didn't commit all the way to "young" Lincoln, because they still give him a sort of old face to make him look more Lincoln-like. The official sources also always note specifically that there are 11 stars on the left and 10 on the right instead of simply saying "21 stars." Why the 11-10 breakdown? I have been unable to find any specific explanation of why the US Mint always says "11 on the left, 10 on the right" instead of just saying "21." At first you might think it has something to do with a divided Union and the Civil War, but it doesn't because there were 34 states by the time of the Civil War, not 21. And yes, it is the 21st state. And yes, 2003 was near the beginning of the 21st Century. I suppose that minor coincidence was important enough to note on the coin like it was somehow important. "OH! We were the 21st State, and now it's the 21st Century! How fortuitous! The symbolism!" Eat a dick. This coin is a HOT. FUCKING. MESS. Add to all that other disasters like the silhouette of a farm and the skyline of Chicago as some sort of hacky "we are both rural AND urban" message. Lame. Plus the Sears Tower had already been demoted to SECOND tallest building in the world by the time this coin came out (the Petronas Towers in Malaysia surpassed it in 1998, and by the next year in 2004 Sears would drop to #3 after Taipei 101 was completed). All and all, a garbage coin. One of the worst. I'm angry at how bad this coin is. 

 48. Connecticut

• Depicted: The Charter Oak, a tree in the state.
• Caption: "The Charter Oak"
• Year Released: 1999
• Analysis: The last of the original five 1999 coins, representing the first five states to join the United States via ratifying the Constitution, was Connecticut. They put a dumb, old oak tree on it. With no leaves. This coin is lame. This is about as bad as a coin can get. They only chose it because the tree is sort of round from the one angle and coins are round, so they thought it would fit. At least I assume. You have a big tree. Whoop-dee-doo.

47. New Hampshire

• Depicted: Old Man of the Mountain, nine stars
• Caption: "Old Man of the Mountain", "Live Free or Die"
• Year Released: 2000
• Analysis: Speaking of bad coins, this was the bad coin that reminded me to do this ranking. It is a very stupid coin. The Old Man of the Mountain doesn't look that much like a face, and it was never that famous (nor geologically stable, apparently). I'm not sure what could have gone on this coin instead, but New Hamsphire could have done something else.Maybe the boat from the State Seal. A covered bridge? I dunno. I'm not being paid to think of what should go on a coin. Someone else, however, was. And this was the best garbage they could come up with.

46. Michigan

• Depicted: State outline, outline of the Great Lakes
• Caption:  "Great Lakes State"
• Year Released: 2004
• Analysis: This is the textbook definition of a poorly designed state quarter. It's dumb and looks ugly. It tries to focus both on the state itself (filled in) and the Great Lakes (hollow, and including Lake Erie - which has no phsyical contact with the State of Michigan at all). In the end, the outline of the lakes (as depicted here) looks like a horn-nosed, angry horse with a penis that took two large dumps on the ground behind it. Seriously. It looks like that. Don't you see it? The state itself is almost an afterthought. And there is no need to write "Great Lakes State" on the coin. We get it. This is, simply put, a poorly thought-out coin design.

45. Louisiana

• Depicted: Brown pelican; trumpet with musical notes, outline of Louisiana Purchase on map of US
• Caption:  "Louisiana Purchase"
• Year Released: 2002
• Analysis: Another train-wreck of a design that focuses more on territory that isn't even part of the state it's supposed to represent. Louisiana is an awesome state, and its coin should have just been Louis Armstrong blowing a trumpet. Maybe a pelican is okay too. But the Louisiana Purchase, highlighting territory that has not actually been part of "Louisiana" for well over two centuries...  that's just dumb. I expected better of this state. This coin is not that appealing at all. Stick to the boot of Lousiana and leave the rest of the Midwest out of this.

44. Oklahoma

• Depicted: Scissor-tailed flycatcher and firewheel (Gaillardia pulchella, aka "Indian Blanket") flower
• Caption: None
• Year Released: 2008
• Analysis: The Scissor-tailed flycatcher is an ugly bird (or at least depicted as ugly on this coin), and the brightly-colored firewheel flower (which is visually appealing in person) totally goes to waste on a silver coin without vibrant color. Hawaii didn't try to depict a rainbow on its coin. Why? Because rainbows are literally multiple colors, and coins are silver. That was smart. Trying to depict a colorful flower on a monochromatic coin is a bad idea. Really, anything sort of depicting farmland or a vague sence of "the West" would have been a better choice for Oklahoma. A barn. A windmill. Bison (again, there are a lot of states that already had bison before 2008). An open field with a rancher. An outline of the state itself. Or even a scene from the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical. All those things would have been better than this nonsense.

43. West Virginia

• Depicted: New River Gorge Bridge
• Caption: "New River Gorge"
• Year Released: 2005
• Analysis: There is absolutely nothing to do in West Virginia except for meth and your family members, therefore it's not surprising that West Virginia's options for things to depict on its coin are limited to "a bridge over a gorge." This is a very dull and uninteresting coin. It's not totally hideous. The gorge is probably somewhat impressive looking in real life. But in this depiction on a 0.955 inch coin? Not so much.

42. Mississippi

• Depicted: Two magnolia blossoms
• Caption: "The Magnolia State"
• Year Released: 2002
• Analysis: Mississippi put magnolias on their coin because they certainly couldn't put literacy on it. This is a really boring coin. They're not even the only racist, illiterate state in the South that threw a Magnolia on it. And the faux cursive writing is bad too. No, the flowers on this goint don't necessarily look "ugly." It's just that this coin does absolutely nothing for me. 

41. Maryland

• Depicted: Dome of the Maryland State House, white oak clusters
• Caption: "The Old Line State"
• Year Released: 2000
• Analysis: As much as I don't want to shit on my home state of Maryland (which has the BEST FLAG by the way), this has to be one of the shittiest, least interesting state quarters there is. The dome of the legislature building in Annapolis? Some oak branches? And Maryland intrestingly has two nicknames: "The Old Line State" and "Free State." Of the two, "Free State" is obviously the one that sounds better. The "Old Line" refers to the Maryland 400, members of the 1st Maryland Regiment who held their ground (or, held the "line") at the Battle of Long Island, and were nearly completely massacred, in order to protect a RETREATING George Washington to let him escape. Hardly the proudest moment in US history. "Free State" admittedly has its problems too (Maryland ironically being a slave state in the Union during the Civil War, as the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to the States in rebellion), but at least it sounds inspiring. Anyway, this coin blows. YOU SHOULD HAVE PUT A GOD DAMNED BLUE CRAB ON THIS COIN, MARYLAND! Who fucked this obvious decision up? The fact that there is no depiction of the Chesapeake Bay and a crab (or at least a heron) is dumb as hell.

40. Delaware

• Depicted: Caesar Rodney (a signer of the Declaration of Independence) on horseback
• Caption: "The First State" and "Caesar Rodney"
• Year Released: 1999
• Analysis: At first glance you might ask, "Is this Paul Revere?" The answer is "No," because Paul Revere is not from Delaware, and they had to put "Caesar Rodney" on the coin itself because nobody knows who the hell this is. Seriously. He's not that famous. Is he involved with some famous incident riding on a horse? Not particularly. He was a member of the Delaware militia though. The coin appears to simply be based on the statue of Caesar Rodney in Rodney Square, Wilmington. Oh, did I say "in" Rodney Square? Because I meant to that "that USED TO BE IN" Rodney Square, since it was removed in June 2020 during the nationwide protects and statue removals following the murder of George Floyd. Yeah, you see, Caesar Rodney has a wee bit of an "owned slaves" problem. Not that the man on the other side of the quarter didn't have his own slavery issues. Delaware has to, of course, also remind us that it's the "first" state, which is like their only claim to fame ever, other than 46th President Joe Biden. Yeah, I'm calling it.

39. Massachusetts

• Depicted: The Minute Man statue, state outline
• Caption: "The Bay State"
• Year Released: 2000
• Analysis: Unlike other states who had a literal "outline" of their state, Massachusetts fill in the outside so it's entirely shaded. They also have a depiction of a somewhat famous Minuteman statue, representing the patriots who fought at the Battle of Concord. It's a pretty lame statue, depicted at a pretty lame angle, overall making for a pretty boring coin. Also, "Bay State" is a pretty boring nickname. Lots of states have bays, Massachusetts. You're not special.

38. Iowa

• Depicted: Schoolhouse with teacher and students planting a tree (based on the Grant Wood painting Arbor Day)
• Caption: "Foundation in Education", "Grant Wood"
• Year Released: 2004
• Analysis: No. This is a bad coin. Is Grant Wood really the most famous Iowan you could think of? There is nothing about Iowa that screams "school!" either. Everyone knows that Iowa's coin should have been corn. The second Wisconsin put corn on their coin, Iowa should have said "back off, that's ours!"

37. Vermont

• Depicted: Maple trees with sap buckets, Camel's Hump Mountain
• Caption: "Freedom and Unity"
• Year Released: 2001
• Analysis: Maple syrup is awesome, and someone tapping it from a tree sounds like exactly what should be on a Vermont coin. As for this actual coin though... I don't like it. Some other design would have been better. Two weird trees. A guy's scarf blowing in the wind. I'm not digging it.

That's it for now. Next time, we go to coins that are "just okay" instead of the worst. I hope you're waiting with gleeful anticipation.

Ed Ranks Counties of New Hampshire

Hey look everyone! NEW HAMPSHIRE!

New Hampshire is the fourth best state in the country. It has ten counties. Here they are, ranked. How? By a myriad of factors, including:

• Any notable / large cities
• Overall population size (do people actually live here?)
• Area (does it have a lot of land or is it a wee thing?)
• Age (is it one of the "Original 5" counties? Did it come later?) 
• Coolness of county name (that's got to be worth something)
• Is there anything to do (Beyond just having large cities in general, are there National Parks? Notable historic sites? Places listed on the National Register of Historic Places? Can I go fishing or see a museum or something?)

So here we go. Live Free or Die, bitches.

10. Belknap

There isn't much going for Belknap County. It's one of the two newest counties (along with Carroll, though "new" is a relative term, since it broke away from parts of Merrimack and Strafford counties way back in 1840). Add to that it's the second-smallest county, has only the 7th highest population of all the counties, and has no significant cities in it (the county seat is Laconia, with a population of just 15,951 at the 2010 census). There are no national parks in Belknap County, and no National Historic Landmarks either (being the ONLY county in all of NH with no National Historic Landmark). The National Register of Historic Places lists 45 places in Belknap, but that's the second least of any county. In summary: small, newer, and not jack shit to do. Named after Jeremy Belknap, an obscure historian.

9. Coos

This courthouse is about as exciting as this county gets.

Coos is lucky that Belknap sucks so much, or else it would be at the bottom. It ranks dead last of the ten counties in New Hampshire for population size and has the least number of registered National Historic Places. And let's be honest, it has the worst name too. Coos. Coos?! It's supposedly an Algonquian word meaning "small pines," and while I hate to hate on a county for using a Native American name, "Coos" sounds less like a First Peoples word and more like a rooster noise. The only saving graces for Coos county is that it is the largest of all the counties and part of the Appalachian Trail runs though it. So that sort of counts as them having a park, right? At least you can do something there.

8. Carroll

Like Belknap, Carroll is one of the johnny-come-lately counties, dating from the mid 19th-century. Also like Belknap, it has a very low population, no real significant cities, and is lacking in very many historic sites or things to do. However, like the aforementioned Coos County, the Appalachian Trail runs through Carroll County, so there is at least one thing to do here. That, of course, being to walk on a trail to leave Carroll County. Interestingly, the county is named for exactly who I thought it would be - Charles Carroll of Carrollton, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. From Maryland. Who had nothing at all to do with New Hampshire. At all. I suppose the interesting fact about Charles Carroll is that he was the last surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence, since he lived until 1832. Maybe his old ass gained a sort of celebrity status for simply living that long and NH decided to pay a tribute to him 8 years after he died for some reason.

7. Sullivan

NPS: Sure, I guess this sculptor's house can be a park.

Discounting the Appalachian Trail that runs across much of the east coast, the only other National Park in all of New Hampshire belongs to Sullivan County - which boasts the Saint-Gaudens National Historical Park (the home, gardens, and studios of Augustus Saint-Gaudens, 1848–1907, one of the mos famous US sculptures famous for Standing Lincoln, the Robert Gould Shaw Memorial, and Diana of the Tower). But beyond that and the Salmon P. Chase (a famous anti-slavery activist, 1860 Presidential candidate, and later Supreme Court Chief Justice) Birthplace and Boyhood Home, I can't say there is a lot else to do in Sullivan County. After Coos it's the second least populated county, and its seat (Newport, though not the famous one) has only 6,507 residents. It was named after a guy named John Sullivan, but not the bare-fisted boxer with that name. There are like a million people with that name. This one was the third and fifth governor of New Hampshire, with someone else serving a term between him (like how Grover Cleveland sandwiched Benjamin Harrison... metaphorically only, I hope).

6. Strafford

Strafford is one of the "Original Five" counties of New Hampsire, which is worth something. Not much though, given that it's the smallest of all the counties in New Hampshire, and has the second least nationally registered historic places after Coos (just 45). It's also got a super boring name, being named after William Wentworth, 2nd Earl of Strafford (you'd think they'd have renamed it after we won the war). In every other aspect, Strafford falls about right in the middle of the statistics. It's about in the middle of the counties for population, and its most notable city, Dover (again, not the famous one), is merely the 5th largest city in the state. It's safe to say based on just how middling this county is, it gets ranked near the middle.

5. Grafton

You can always look at trees in the fall. So there's that.

As with Strafford, Grafton is one of the OG five countries and is named after a British aristocrat... in this case, Augustus FitzRoy, 3rd Duke of Grafton, who actually became Prime Minister of Great Britain the year before this county was founded in 1769. He wasn't a particularly good Prime Minister, and had to step down after only two years after France stole Corsica from Britain, leaving a vacancy that would be filled by the much more famous Lord North of US Revolutionary War fame. I digress. The county though.  Exactly in the middle (five out of ten) in terms of population, National Historic Landmarks, and sites the National Register of Historic Places. Large in land size (the second largest after Coo) but lacks in notable cities, with the county seat of Haverhill's mere 4500 residents being only the 79th most populated city in the state. Hanover is also in Grafton county though, with twice the population and Dartmouth University. That's worth something, right? Not that the The Epic of American Civilization mural by socialist painter José Clemente Orozco (on campus at Dartmouth) is going to be a driving factor to make you go there. Balance the few negatives and positives with the rest of the "meh" and you get the county that is exactly the middle most interesting county in New Hampshire. And HEY! Remember that "Old Man of the Mountain" rock face that was so important that New Hampshire put it on its State Quarter (then the whole thing collapsed)? Yeah, that was in Grafton County. By the way, this reminds me that I need to rank the 50 state quarters. *makes note*

4. Cheshire

Not named after the cat from Alice in Wonderland (who obviously hadn't been invented yet), Cheshire is instead simply named after the county in England. Okay. Boring. What else you got for me, Cheshire County, NH? It's one of the original 1769 counties, so okay on that. It's sixth place of the ten counties both in terms of population and land area, has no parks or really notable large cities. Everything about this is screaming that it should place lower than fourth place (maybe... you know... sixth!) So why is it here? Because of National Register of Historic Places listings! It tops all the ten counties in New Hampshire with 153 registered historic places! Exciting, huh? I mean, not particularly. If you look at a listing of what those places are, you'll see that they're mainly just old houses, churches, bridges, halls and courthouses, farms and homesteads, etc. Still, Cheshire has 153 of them, which is much more than Coos with its mere 31. Just think how boring the other counties must be if they can't even point to 153 old houses and bridges like Cheshire can.

3. Merrimack

Not #1, but state capital as a consolation prize.

Merrimack! Great name, by the way. Second best name overall. Fun! Named after the Merrimack River, this county only popped up in the 19th century when it was cut away from parts of Hillsborough and Rockingham counties. Those names don't seem familiar to you? Well, I guess I've given away what #1 and #2 are then. And there is good reason why this county is ranked among its high-ranking neighbor counties that it was pulled away from. It's the only of the counties not among the original five that ranks among them. There are lots of reasons why this should be the third-highest ranked county. It's got the third highest population. It's got the third largest land area. It's county seat, Concord (yes, finally for one the actual city you're thinking of, and the actual capital of New Hampshire!) is the third largest city in the state. It's got landmarks (e.g. the Daniel Webster Family Home) and it's got historic places (e.g. the Franklin Pierce House, where the President of the United States lived and died... or at least it HAD this historic place, until it burned down in 1981, oh well, whatever). Anyway, Merrimack County is cool. Because it's all dressed in black, black, black. With silver buttons, buttons, buttons...

2. Hillsborough

Hillsborough has a lot going for it and hypothetically COULD be the #1 county in New Hampshire for a lot of reasons. Biggest population? Check! Human beings actually live in this place, rather than trees! In fact, the two largest cities in the entire state, Manchester and Nashua, are BOTH in this county. In fact, Manchester is larger than any other city in all of Maine and Vermont as well, making it the most populous place in all of northern New England (the 2019 population estimate is 112,673).  Hillsborough is also one of the original five counties of New Hampshire, is a decent size (fifth largest), it's name is fairly cool (though, again, after an English aristocrat - Wills Hill, Earl of Hillsborough, who served as the first Secretary of State for the Colonies), and it's loaded with landmarks (the childhood home of Franklin Pierce, the historic MacDowell Colony for artists) and registered historic sites (the Frank Lloyd Wright-designed Zimmerman House, the Currier Gallery of Art).

1. Rockingham

YESSS! Water! And lighthouses! HUZZAH!

HELL YEAH! ROCKINGHAM! Look, first and foremost, this is clearly the best name and is obviously named after Charles Watson-Wentworth, 2nd Marquess of Rockingham, who fought against the Jacobites in their uprising and later became Prime Minister of Britain twice, notable enough so that the faction of  the political party he controlled came to be known as the "Rockingham Whigs." How awesome of a name is Rockingham? Very awesome. And how awesome is the county named after him? Also very! Though it's only seventh in size, it's second in population (right behind Hillsbourough) and also has some of the largest cities in the state (Derry, Salem, and Portsmouth). Historic sites? A ton of them! 129 in total (the second most), including highlights such as the Robert Frost Homestead (obviously the home of the poet), and the John Paul Jones House (the American Revolutionary War naval hero John Paul Jones lived here while supervising construction of a new battleship, the America). Battleship... you ask! Yes! While you might generally think of New Hamshpire as being landlocked, a tiny bit of NH does stretch out and touch the Atlantic Ocean to make sure that Massachusetts and Maine never actually touch one another... and that stretch of land is 100% Rockingham County! (Though to be fair to Strafford County, the Piscataqua River that forms the boundary of Maine and New Hampshire also dumps off a lot of water into the Great Bay, meaning that Strafford does also have some bayfront land, if not coastal). The addition of a coastline equals a million more things to do than other counties. Islands! This county has islands!!! Take, for example, the Isles of Shoals. Plus AWESOME LIGHTHOUSES! Oh, and as for the list of National Historic Landmarks in New Hampshire counties... Rockingham blows all other counties away with a massive 12 landmarks! The entire state only has 23, meaning that over half are all in this county. That list of landmarks includes the aforementioned Frost and John Paul Jones houses, and the homes of Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, and Matthew Thornton (all three signers of the Declaration of Independence ACTUALLY FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE). Yeah, Rockingham is where it's at, people.

Ed Ranks Potential New Names for the Washington NFL Team

RIP Sean Taylor

Sometimes I try to be topical with my rankings, but as of late I have totally failed. Part of the reason why is that I pre-wrote a bunch of these a while ago, and simply had them auto-upload in the future. Another reason is that I've been lazy and barely writing them at all.  But hey, I'm writing and uploading this one the same day, so we might as well pretend that it's moderately topical.

The Washington Redskins announced that they were going to drop ("retire") their name, but that's all they have done. So far, they haven't said a new name. Which leaves me able to throw up 20 suggestions here. Most of them are not from me, but are names that have have bandied about by the press, blogs, the Twitters, etc. Many of them are very stupid. And who knows?  Maybe there will be a complete wild card out of left field (why am I using a baseball analogy for an NFL team?) and it will get some strange name that nobody predicted.

Anyway, here are the top 20, ranked:


20. Washington Anything Else Native American-Inspired - Many people are sort of missing the point and saying, "Ah, well, the team name itself is a racial slur, so that's the problem." They might suggest that re-naming them to something less slur-ey, but still evocative of Native Americans, is okay. For instance, keep the old arrow helmet and call them the "Arrows," or pic a specific tribe, etc. This really won't make anyone but a few idiots who don't understand why the name change is happening in the first place happy, will it? Also, just cutting the team name down to 'Skins will not be good enough, because everyone knows what it's short for.

19. Washington US Armed Forces That Have Been Systemically Infiltrated by White Nationalists - In many of the articles about the name change, people "inside" the organization have leaked that universally-hated douchenozzle owner Dan Snyder wants the new name to "support the military."  While people leaking this probably have ideas like "Warriors," "Generals," and "RedTails" in their minds(see below), if they want to be completely accurate, the new Washington team might as well go ahead and point out that the US military has been almost completely co-opted by white supremacists. While this is an accurate team name that reflects the current state of the US military, it is also a very poor team name that will not be chosen.

18. Washington Monuments - Just what we need, a goddamn pun based on a phallic symbol. That should go over well. Just imagine what the mascot would be. A big, pointy cock.

17. Washington Lincolns - This is stupid and makes no sense. Outsiders who are not from DC basically only know, "Durr... the President lives in DC! Let's name the team after a President!" Then, in a desperate attempt to try to find a President who wasn't a racist and/or didn't own slaves, they go, "Lincoln is pretty safe, right?" Lincoln is from Illinois though, so let Illinois keep him. Lincoln only lived in DC for a few years and got shot there, so it's probably not really his favorite city either. Oh, and also if you're specifically trying to name him after a president who wasn't racist, Lincoln is not your man either.

Presidents? You mean VAN BURENS!!!

16. Washington Presidents - Same as above, but this time accepting the fact that there is no actual President these days who is non-controversial enough to be name checked without someone objecting, so this meek suggestion simply promotes the idea of the President. Guess what, non-DC'ers, we don't really give a shit about the douchey outsiders who live here for a few years in a dumb, white house.


15. Washington Americans - How lazy is this bullshit name? People suggesting it are totally going through the minimal effort.

14. Washington Defenders - Co-opting the name of the recently aborted XFL Team that couldn't last two months is a silly idea, and you should feel silly for suggesting it. Plus wouldn't Dan Synder have to give Vince McMahon money? That's like robbing Stalin to pay Pol Pot. Yes. Vince McMahon is the Pol Pot of "sports."

13. Washington Renegades - Wait. Another XFL Team? People are just dumb when they make these suggestions. Plus "Renegades" definitely sounds like a team name that should belong in a B-league that nobody cares about.

12. Washington Pigskins - Because "pigskin" is a term meaning football. Har har. This supposed "joke" has been thrown around for years, and has never been particularly funny, nor is it a particularly good name. Usually by this point in ranking something, in the middle, the names go from "bad" to "okay," and then a little later down they actually get "good." That will not be the case here. You're about to see 20 bad suggestions, all ranging from "godawful" to "only moderately terrible."

11. Washington Federals - Again, this is a dumb name suggested by DC outsiders who understand nothing about DC's culture or people, and have a vague understanding that DC is the capital of the nation and where much of the Federal government is located. DC natives actually sort of resent and do not give a shit about all of that nonsense. Whenever people talk about "DC insiders" or "inside the Beltway" politics, the people being referred to are almost universally douchebag assholes who are not from inside the beltway. This name would do absoltely nothing to appeal to the local DC area fanbase. Even Federal govenment employees look at this name and are like "meh."

Healthcare? Nope! Have a team name instead!

10. Washington Veterans - Again, along the idea of the leaked word that they new team name will support the military, Washington Veterans has been tossed around. I mean, good sentiment and everything to support or veterans... but as a team name? Ah, well, both in the context of military veterans and "veterans" on an NFL team, the name indicates "old people." Just imagine all the lame jokes and puns that will be made about it by terrible ESPN sportscasters. This is especially bad when you remember that Dan Syner's MO for is entire reign in charge of the team has been to sign or trade for old, out-of-shape, past their prime veterans who were good years ago. When involving trades, that usually means Snyder traded young future stars or draft picks in order to get the has-beens. Overall, this would be a bad choice. Maybe instead of naming a football team after US military veterans, the US should instead, you know, provide veterans with some healthcare or something.

9. Washington Sentinels - While naming an NFL team after a fictional team in a Keanu Reeves film might sound hilarious, you might be surprised to learn that this is a very stupid idea. But then again, the NHL created a "Might Ducks" team after those movies, so common sense is not always at the forefronts of people's minds when naming teams.

8. Washington Senators - The "Sentinels" team name in The Replacements was almost certainly inspired by the real-life former Washington Senators team that existed in the MLB twice. And then left DC twice. The first time they left to become the Minnesota Twins, and the next time they left to become the Texas Rangers. Naming a team after a team that ditched your city to leave town TWICE is probably not the best idea, especially if you believe in cursed names.

7. Washington Generals - At a first glance, this name isn't all that terrible. It name checks the military, and is enough of a "soft pun" to refer to the fact that George Washington (for whom the city was named) was a General (General Washington - Washington Generals - get it?!) without being too direct. Several years ago, I even saw a mock-up logo of it which sort of looked like the old 'Skins logo, but replacing the face with an image of George Washington. Alas, for those of you that might remember - the Washington Generals also happens to be the name of a long-existing exhibition basketball team that regularly plays against, and loses to, the Harlem Globetrotters. Yes, "Washington Generals" specifically already exists as the name of a team which has a sole purpose to lose to another, better team. If you thought making fun of the team for having the name "Veterans" would be bad, just imagine all the hot take jokes about them being renamed for a team that is designed to lose. Although, again, for the Redskins, this actually might be the most apropos and accurate name.  And this isn't even mentioning that subtly name-checking George Washington would be re-naming the team after yet another dead slave owner.

Great. More effin' birds.

6. Washington Redhawks - We now begin a series of "Reds" all in a row. You'll see them. A lot, and I mean A LOT of the ideas for new team names are based on the idea of keeping the team name as "Red____." Why? Perhaps to try to save a little bit of the "history," or at the very least to keep the "Hail to the Red___" song going. There are far many suggestions than just the ones I include here, but of the Red____'s that I'm including, Redhawks has to be the worst. The last thing we need is another damn NFL team named after a stinking bird. Eagles. Falcons. Seahawks. Ravens. Cardinals. And the name Redhawks just screams "we are a college football team."  There was also a Sioux Chief named "Red Hawk," so that doesn't help the matter much either.

5. Washington Red Wolves - Another one of the Red___'s, moderately better than Redhawks, but still pretty meaningless. Apparently Kevin Durant came out saying that he liked it, if that matters. It doesn't. At least it's not a bird. The historical range of the red wolf species (canis rufus), actually includes the southeastern United States, and where Washington, DC actually is. Will you see any red wolves hanging around the area these days? Nope! They're basically extinct in the wild beyond a few places where they've been reintroduced. But then again, we've already learned that Washington's NFL franchise has no problem naming themselves after a native population that was totally massacred and forced out by white people.

4. Washington Red Tails - Again with the Red____, this time, the Red Tails would represent the Tuskegee Airmen, a group of African-American United States Army Air Forces servicemen during World War II. This would be a 180 from "let's fetishize an oppressed native population as warriors, many of whom object to the team name as a racial slur" to "let's honor a US minority group." Though the team would barely have to change their song and could claim a victory here, and does indeed "honor the military" as suggested, one major problem rests with the fact that the Red Tails themselves have absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH DC. Would the Red Tails be a great team name for a team in Alabama? Yes. It would. But DC? I mean... there should at least be some connection, right? Although... then again... we do have the Utah Jazz, named after the Utah's famed role in the invention of jazz music, right?  I know, I know, the team moved from New Orleans. Still. If you're starting fresh with a new name, shouldn't having some local connection be important? Naming them the Red Tails would be perfectly okay, I suppose.

This seems like normal behavior and dress.

3. Washington Hogs (or Red Hogs, War Hogs, etc) - Those Redskins fans who choose not to play dress up as another culture often dress up as pigs and call themselves the "Hogettes," in reference to the "Hogs," the Redskins Offensive Line from the 1980s and early 1990s run by the late O-Line coach Joe Bugel. This is a nostalgic term for fans of the team, because this is the last time that the team was actually good and won Superbowls. And when it comes to a pig-related nickname, "Hogs" is infinitely better than the stupid "Pigskins." Some have suggested adding to the Hogs moniker, to make it the Red Hogs (fitting the mentioned Red____  theme) or the War Hogs. I'm not quite sure why the additional syllable is needed, but it is most likely suggested again to keep the "Hail to the Red___" thing going (or in the case of War Hogs, at least Hail to the War Hogs, which would still fit the rhythm of the song). The War Hogs idea might also fit with the "warrior" idea that the team claims it promotes, as well as the "saluting the military" check box that supposedly exists, while at the same time recognizing one of the only eras of the team that was actually good. This idea isn't the worst in the world. And as I'm typing it it's growing on me. Whatever. Maybe.

2. Washington Warriors - This is the one that everyone keeps talking about, and say will end up as the likely team name. Dan Snyder apparently tried to use the team name before for an Arena football team that never got up and running, it still evokes the same "warrior spirit" that the Redskins always claimed that their name represented, and the name also checks all the boxes as being dedicated to the troops, etc. "Warriors" has been used in the past for teams that also used Native American imagery in the past - the Golden State Warriors were once the Philadelphia Warriors, and used a racist Native American caricature as their logo, and then briefly used a Native American headdress as their logo when they moved to San Francisco in the 60's before quickly abandoning all connection to that imagery. Fortunately, the word "warrior" is generic enough so that it doesn't have to evoke any one culture. Some might still have a problem with this and argue that it's simply "secretly" referring to Native American warriors, but to me that's an argument too far. That's like saying that all consumption of beef needs to be banned by using the existence of Arbys as the only evidence. It's also alliterative! Washington Warriors! WW! Fun? Eh. Whatever. This is probably going to be the name picked anyway, according to all of the info leakers out there and speculators.

1. Washington Football Club (F.C.) - You know what, fuck it! Let's just go the way of international football (soccer) clubs by calling the Washington team Washington F.C. or F.C. Washington. The best name might be no name at all. "United" is another common name for teams which don't have names, though the DC United of MLS have already taken that moniker. Bold move, Cotton? I'm not sure. This can be like the years that Prince didn't have a name, and was such a symbol. Hell, Washington could just create some weird androgynous symbol too. They can be the "Outis" of the NFL. Whatever.

Ed Ranks Classical Music Composers, Part II

Photo from an actual historic event with Beethoven. Not a film.

Whattup? I'm still ranking the greatest 20 Classical Music Composers of all time, with this second and final part being the top 10... the best of the best!

And yeah, I realize that the whole pace of posting updates every 4 days has fallen out of whack, and it's been much longer than that. Oh well.

A few things to note and/or remind you about, carrying over from Part I, in case you've forgotten:

• I know, like, nothing about classical music.
• I don't particularly like or enjoy classical music.
• No, George Gershwin isn't ranked, as the guy who composed Porgy and Bess can't possibly count as a "Classical" musician. Deal with it.
• Based on the two factors above, I did a modest amount of research. But not a ton. Whatever. 
• How am I ranking these people? By a number of factors, including how many major / memorable works they have (e.g. their "catalogue"), their continued or enduring fame (despite how they might have been regarded at the time), notable historical and/or cultural legacies, and so on. I'm not writing them all here. This isn't an IRS audit. Leave me alone.
• Based on the above, I assigned a crap load of composers multiple rankings based on those factors, and then averaged those rankings to create a "final" ranking. Those final rankings will  appear as an "Average Ranking" that has a number. So, for example, both #9 and #10 (Chopin and Tchaikovsky), on average, ranked at 9.7.
• Full disclosure: I usually avoid looking at other people's rankings if I'm making my own, but this time I did to get some general ideas. In the end, other peoples' rankings did work into the math that I used to rank, though the most important factor I looked at was how often other people included certain composers on their lists. So while one ranking I saw said that György Ligeti was one of the greatest composers of all time, zero other rankings I found listed that dude so high, so I could sort of throw him out and focus my efforts on researching and ranking those who most agreed to be included among the ranks of the greatest.

Oh, and also, originally I was only going to do the top 10. But I spent so much time doing math and crunching numbers on people I eventually eliminated from the top 10 that I decided I might as well do 20. 

So who is the best of the best according to me, my arbitrary feelings about something I know very little about, and a bit of math that I mixed in? Here you go:

9. / 10. Frédéric Chopin & Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (TIE)

Gangsta pose

Frédéric Chopin

• Nationality: Polish
• Lifetime: 1 March 1810 – 17 October 1849
• Notable Works: "Funeral March" of Piano Sonata No. 2 (1840); Fantaisie-Impromptu (1834, published posthumously in 1855); Nocturnes in E-flat major, Op. 9, No. 2 (1832)
• Average Ranking: 9.7
• Discussion: Part of me thought that I should do an arbitrary tie-breaker to break any ties here, but then again, I'm basing this all on math, and math said that Chopin and Tchaikovsky were tied. Let's start with Chopin. A famed solo piano writer, he was a child prodigy who left his homeland of Poland early to find greatness and fame in France (and to date George Sand, who is a woman, by the way, in case you are confused by that). You've obviously heard of Chopin and know he's one of the greats. Why? Well, now that you're in the Top 10, you're hanging out with the big boys with those famous jams you all know and love. The Funeral March, of course, is super-mega-famous. It's a memorable song, but nobody ever wants it played for them. You know. Because they're dead. If you want something a little more energetic and less depressing, you can instead listen to the famous Fantaisie-Impromptu (though it's only less depressing if you ignore that it was released after he died fairly young at 39). Or maybe take the sleepy/dreamy sounding Nocturne in E Flat Major (Op. 9 No. 2), which, yeah... I'm yawning listening to it. Chopin is a good enough composer to want to name an okay airport and an excellent vodka after. When you think of the great "Romantic" composers, you gotta put Chopin up there, while thinking about how much more he could have done if he lived longer.

Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky

Seems like he'd be fun at parties

• Nationality: Russian
• Lifetime: 7 May 1840 – 6 November 1893
• Notable Works: The Nutcracker (1892); Swan Lake (especially Swan Lake Suite Op. 20, 1876); The Sleeping Beauty (1889).
• Average Ranking: 9.7
• Discussion: Even if you don't know the name and know little about classical music, you know (or know of) Tchaikovsky's work simply by me saying the words "Nutcracker" and "Swan Lake." The most famous Russian composer of all time, Tchaikovsky is the king of classical ballet music. Other might have famous liturgical and choral music. Others might have famous operas. But Tchaikovsky is Mr. Ballet, for sure. He did symphonies and he did operas too, so he had a prolific catalog of work that fans of classical music love. But if you're looking for things that have lasting, memorable pop culture significance to this day, then you are probably gonna go for something like his Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy. 40% of all revenue from ballet in America comes from annual Christmas productions of The Nutcracker alone. As with many people on this list, though he's obviously famous now, at the time many people were like "just who is this lame dude?" Russians thought he was too western European, and western Europeans thought he was too Russian, leaving him stuck in the middle. He also didn't follow the "rules" set up by the "Viennese Masters," leading to more criticism. Guess he had the last laugh because this dude pretty much owns Christmas now.

8. Igor Stravinsky

Not John Waters. I promise.

• Nationality: Russian
• Lifetime: 17 June 1882 – 6 April 1971
• Notable Works: The Firebird (1910), Petrushka (1911); The Rite of Spring (1913); The Rake's Progress (1947)
• Average Ranking: 9.6
• Discussion: My numbers crunching gave Stravinsky a 0.1 point lead over Tchaikovsky and Chopin, so for all purposes he's essentially tied with those two as well. I said that Tchaikovsky was the "most famous" Russian composer of all time, and he is, but Stravinsky narrowly edges him here. Why? Well, Stravinsky is widely considered one of the most important conductors of the 20th century (this dude was alive the same year Dirty Harry came out!) because he had such stylistic diversity and continued to adapt and change his music over different "phases." While many classical musicians did the same through their career, Stravinsky is credited with being a "musical revolutionary who pushed the boundaries of musical design" and who "transformed the way in which subsequent composers thought about rhythmic structure." Pretty bold statements copy/pasted from Wikipedia there! As with his Russian colleague, he is most famous for three ballets (mentioned above) made early in his career between 1910 and 1913. The last of those three, The Rite of Spring, was controversial at the time (nearly causing a riot for its depiction of pagan sacrifice of virgins and shit) and a source of many of the quotes about how he was such a transformative figure. It wouldn't be the last time he was controversial... hell, he eventually moved to America and was arrested in Boston for daring to re-harmonize the National Anthem. Also in America, he's have his most successful opera, The Rake's Progress, before bouncing back and forth between the US and the USSR and even writing an elegy for JFK after his assassination. In the end, Stravinsky's 0.1 point advantage over Tchaikovsky comes from the fact that he was beginning of something new (the Modern period) rather than the end of something old (the Romantic period). His 1971 death means that he's the most recently living person who makes my ranking, and also the only one who lived long enough to see animated dinosaurs fight to his own music.

7. Joseph Haydn

Or maybe George Washington?

• Nationality: Austrian
• Lifetime:31 March 1732 – 31 May 1809
• Notable Works: String Quartets (esp. Op. 64 "The Lark," 1790); The Creation (1798); The Seasons (1801); Symphony No. 94 (1792); Symphony No. 103 ("Drumroll", 1795)
• Average Ranking: 9.3
• Discussion: Hayden has been given a lot of titles, including "Father of the Symphony" and "Father of the String Quartet." That is a lot to live up to. Does he live up to those titles? I don't know. Whatever. Let's just keep going and get this ranking over with. Hayden is known for being instrumental (ha, pun?) in the development of  music such as the piano trio, concerto, and piano sonata. He rolled with the big time crew in Austria, being a friend and mentor of Mozart, and a tutor of Beethoven. He was one of the most important figures in the development of classical style the 18th century (as you'd think someone would be if they were called the Father of the Symphony). The list of "notable works" above is just a small sampling of the eleventy million iconic works of his. Unlike other starving artists on this list who gained fame after death, Haydn became a big deal in his lifetime and was the equivalent of a rockstar. Nowadays if you talk about famous Viennese composers (sometimes called "The Vienna Four"), Haydn might rank at the bottom of the four (as he does on my ranking). However, during his lifetime he was a BFD.

 6. Johannes Brahms

Unlike his lullaby, this picture will not lull you to sleep

• Nationality: German
• Lifetime: 7 May 1833 – 3 April 1897
• Notable Works: Hungarian Dance No. 5 (1879); Symphony No. 1 (1876); A German Requiem (1866);  Wiegenlied (AKA "Brahms' Lullaby"; "Cradle Song", Op. 49, No. 4, 1868).
• Average Ranking: 8
• Discussion: Brahms is the reason why I had to say Schumann was "often" considered the greatest of the Romantic Era German composers (way back at #17). Before the "Three B's" were Bears, Beets and Battlestar Gallatica, they were Bach, Beethoven and Brahms. Though not Hungarian himself, he did collaborate with Hungarian violinist Ede Reményi, which led to his Hungarian Dance No. 5, a work so iconic that it's basically the Hungarian National anthem (note: it's not). Go ahead and click the link for that one. You'll certainly be like, "Oh yeah. I've heard that before! Quintessential gypsy music!" Going back to the Three B's, Brahms was seen as the spiritual successor to Beethoven, so much so that his own Symphony No. 1 was sometimes called Beethoven's Symphony No. 10. To many, that's meant as a giant complement. To others, it's sort of meant to indicate that he was a bit of a copycat who freely stole from Beethoven's style. He was the OG sampler before hip hop came along, I suppose. But the most famous and well known work of his is simply usually called Brahms' Lullaby, and is instantly recognizable to anyone who has a child or who was once a child themselves (e.g. EVERY ONE). Yes. You know that one. Everyone knows that lullaby. If the Brahms estate got paid for every time someone sung this to a baby, he would be a super duper trillionaire. And don't you think it's a little crazy that the same guy who wrote the most famous lullaby sung to babies is also the same guy who wrote that crazy gypsy dance tune? Because I do. That is range, my people.

5. Franz Schubert

5th greatest composer... or dorky accountant?

• Nationality: Austrian
• Lifetime: 31 January 1797 – 19 November 1828
• Notable Works: The "Trout Quintet" (1819, released posthumously 1829); Symphony No.8  (aka the "Unfinished Symphony," 1822); "Ave Maria" (aka "Ellens dritter Gesang", Op. 52, No. 6, 1825) 
• Average Ranking: 7.6
• Discussion: Top 5 time! Will this be controversial? I don't know. According to my math, no. At least not #5 and #4, which I'm sure people who know stuff about classical music will go (yeah, I suppose that's right). The Top 3, on the other hand, might lead to violent unrest, the likes unseen since Stravinsky made a bunch of Parisians watch a pagan Russian sacrifice dance ballet. I briefly mentioned the "Vienna Four" before, and Schubert is one of them (along with Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.  Despite his short lifetime (he died at 31), Schubert left behind a vast catalog of work, including more than 600 secular vocal works, seven complete symphonies, sacred music, operas, incidental music, and a massive body of piano and chamber music. So there. Schubert. Another guy I know very little about and am unqualified to rank. But here we are. Why am I still writing this? Oh yeah, like our boy Stravinsky, Shubert's Ave Maria also gets a Fantasia appearce. Though, unlike the Stravs, Schubert was long dead. So yeah. Fantasia referenced twice now. Fun. I promise not to mention it again even though a number of the other pieces of music references throughout this ranking are also in it.

4. Richard Wagner

This man has seen some bar fights

• Nationality: German
• Lifetime: 22 May 1813 – 13 February 1883
• Notable Works: The Ring Cycle (Der Ring des Nibelungen, 1867), most notably "Ride of the Valkyries",  the beginning of act 3 of Die Walküre, the second of the four operas in the Ring Cycle) ; Tristan und Isolde (1865)
• Average Ranking: 5.9167
• Discussion: Wagner is sometimes included with the other "Romantic" composers (especially) the German ones, although he defied that label by revolutionizing his works through a concept known as "Gesamtkunstwerk" ("total work of art"), by which, according to the undeniably and always accurate Wikipedia, "he sought to synthesize the poetic, visual, musical and dramatic arts, with music subsidiary to drama." Dude was a workhorse, and unlike most opera composers, Wagner wrote both the libretto and the music for each of his stage works. He's most famous for his operas, and his four most famous operas are lumped together as "The Ring Cycle," which are all pretty famous, although the aforementioned Ride of the Valkyries is the one that is much more famous than all others. Another reason he's often not included as a traditional "Romatic" composer is that his Tristan und Isolde is often described as marking the beginning of the "Modern" era of music. I know "Modern" and "Classical" seem like antonyms, but you're just going to have to accept that this oxymoron like you accept "Jump Shrimp." Wagner pulls ahead of the others to finish just outside of the top 3. Up to now. There should be not much debate. The top three, however, are going to be a sticky and contentious one. 

 

THE BIG THREE: Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart. How do I rank them?

Okay, time to get down to brass tacks. These three guys are the most famous, and you should absolutely expect these three names to be the top three names. In alphabetical order, they are Johann Sebastian Bach, Ludwig van Beethoven, and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Each has a dozen reasons why they should be ranked #1. But, as with the Highlander, there can be only one. As with all the others, I ranked various factors about their catalogs of work and legacy and tried to create some sort of average ranking of where they fell all things combined. In the end, the spread between the person who ranked at #1 and #3 was a mere HALF OF ONE POINT. So it really, really could have gone any way. What way was it though? Whelp...

3. Johann Sebastian Bach

A portrait creaming to become a meme.

• Nationality: German
• Lifetime: 31 March 1685 – 28 July 1750
• Notable Works: Brandenburg Concertos (1721), especially Concerto No. 3 in G major, BWV 1048 ("Allegro");  Orchestral Suite No. 3 in D-Major ("Air," 1730-ish); The Concerto for Two Violins in D minor, BWV 1043 "Vivaci" (written between 1717 and 1723); Toccata and Fugue in D Minor, BWV 565 (unknown date).
• Average Ranking: 2.334
• Discussion: So, Bach is #1 on almost every list I looked at. Remember when I referenced those rankings where composers ranked the greatest composers of all time? Almost universally, Bach came in at #1 on all of them (though, oddly, I could also find one Top 10 that didn't even include Bach in it at all... let's call that data noise to be ignored though). I am sure that, to fellow composers, Bach is the best. There are a lot of reasons why he should come it at #1. The first and foremost should be that there absolutely would be no Beethoven or Mozart without Bach. Since he came before them, he was an inspiration for the compositions to come. Bach is basically the daddy of the German style, and is credited for his mastery of counterpoint, harmonic organization, and adaptation of rhythms, forms, and textures from places like Italy and France. Bach's compositions include hundreds of cantatas, Latin church music, Passions, oratorios, motets, adapted Lutheran hymns, concertos, suites, orchestras, and other chamber music. He wrote extensively for the organ (which he is most famous for), but also wrote a number of things for other keyboard instruments (e.g. harpsichord) and violin. If you click any of the links I linked to above, you will recognize the works. Hell, Toccata and Fugue in D Minor, BWV 565 is basically like "default vampire/horror/villain music" these days. His massive amount of work goes well beyond what I'm talking about here, and could easily get him the #1 spot (as most composers day he deserves). In is lifetime, he was as renowned as other contemporaries (such as one hit wonder Handel), but his reputation soon faded after. However, he definitely and directly inspired and was venerated by others on this list, including Haydn (who owned manuscript copies of Bach's Well-Tempered Clavier, 1722), Mozart (who owned a copy of one of Bach's motets), and Beethoven (who played the entire Well-Tempered Clavier by the age of 11 and described Bach as "the progenitor of harmony"). So why isn't BAch #1 instead of the two guys who rode his nutsack? Well, because I say the two nutsack riders would eventually go on to be even more famous and notable. See now. This is the type of scholarly analysis you can't get by following any ranking made by notable composers themselves. 

2. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

As seen on those chocolates

• Nationality: Austrian
• Lifetime: 27 January 1756 – 5 December 1791
• Notable Works: Requiem in D Minor, K. 626 (1791), especially III. Sequentia f. "Lacrymosa"; Piano Concerto No. 21 in C major, K. 46 (1785), esp. movement 2 "Andante"; Eine kleine Nachtmusik (Serenade No. 13 for strings in G major), K. 525, (1787), esp. movement 1 "Allegro"; The Magic Flute (1791); and many, many, many more. See more of them in the "Discussion" section below.
• Average Ranking: 2.307
• Discussion: One reason why Mozart could have been #1 instead of #2 was that my wife kept telling me again and again that he should be #1. Well, sorry ma coquette, but the math said that he was #2 (but only by 0.473 of a point). The difference between #2 and #1 was likely him, you know, dying at age 35 before he had a chance to have a long career. Imagine how much he could have written if he didn't die young! Well, before he died, he accomplished a lot. Let's start at the end, with his Requiem in D Minor that I mentioned as the most preeminent of his notable works. It was actually unfinished at the time of his death, and Franz Xaver Süssmayr had to finish it off from scraps of Mozart's notes. The Lacrimosa Dies Illa part is all Mozart though, for sure! From that time of his death we work backwards and get all sorts of other memorable classics that remain well-known to this day. They're all up there in that section. Go listen to them. Allegro is so famous that I remember it being used in cartoons all the time, and even ads for cartoons (to me, the lyrics to it still go "LOO-Ney TUNES! You'll find them all on Nick!"). Speaking of Allegros, there is also the Symphony No. 40 in G minor, K. 550: I. Allegro Molto (c. 1788), which is not quite as famous, but is still up there. We could also talk about Piano Sonata No. 11 in A major, K. 331: III. Rondo Alla Turca (1784), sometimes called the "Turkish March" and famous on its own. And how could I leave examples of Mozart without talking about about his The Magic Flute opera, especially its famous Overture (The Magic Flute was basically his final fully completed operatic work, debuting just months before his death). This man had more what in hindsight would be called "number one hits" than the Beatles, and was also presumably bigger than Jesus. Mozart was a child prodigy and gained fame, but it was in his later years (if early 30's can be called "later") in Vienna when he had most of his biggest works and best-known symphonies, concertos, and operas, and most of his unfinished Requiem. In his short life he composed more than 600 works, many of where are "acknowledged as pinnacles of symphonic, concertante, chamber, operatic, and choral music." He is considered by almost everyone to be among the greatest classical composers of all time, and was only getting better towards what would be his unfortunately premature end (his cause of death is still unknown, with many theories).

1. Ludwig van Beethoven

That hair! Dude should do Pantene Pro V ads.

• Nationality: German
• Lifetime: Baptised 17 December 1770 – 26 March 1827
• Notable Works: Für Elise (composed 1810, pub 1867); Moonlight Sonata (aka  Piano Sonata No. 14 in C♯ minor "Quasi una fantasia", 1801); Symphony No. 5 in C, Op. 67, esp. its famed  "Fate Motif" (1808); Symphony No. 9 in D minor, Op. 125 "Choral", especially Movement IV ("Ode to Joy") (1824); Egmont Overture, Op 84. (1810), or the similar Coriolan Overture, Op 64 (1807), and so on.
• Average Ranking: 1.8333
• Discussion: Someone had to be #1, and I came up with Beethoven. Some reasons why? His music is likely the most famous and commonly performed classical still played today. He's like the Shakespeare of music. His music represented a transfer from the "Classical" period to the "Romantic" period, meaning he was a harbinger of change and something new. Unlike the shorter-lived Mozart, his longer lifespan and time composing meant that he put together a ton of work which can now be cateogorized in "Early" (pre-1802), "Middle" or "Heroic" (1802 to 1812), and "Late" (1812 to his death) periods. The latter period in which he was still composing work while increasingly (and famously) suffering from deafness. Each of the periods have thier own, unique characteristics. So let's talk about some of the most famous works. First off, the instantly recognizable Für Elise (For Elise), arguably Beethoven's most renowned and loved work, was never published in his lifetime, and was only discovered 40 years after his death. Nobody knows who the hell Elise was either, or why it inspired Beethoven to drop such a hot piano jam. She's basically the Mona Lisa of Classical Music, with many theories as to who the "real" Elise was that inspired the man. Moonlight Sonata, meanwhile, was popular in Beethoven's day, and is known to be dedicated to his his pupil, Countess Giulietta Guicciardi, with whom he was enchanted and fell in love with (and one of the candidates thought to be the subject of Beethoven's famous "Immortal Beloved" letter, which I previously talked about when Ranking Gary Oldman roles, though the conclusion of the identity of the Beloved from that movie is supported by absolutely no one). The link to the Moonlight Sonata section above in the "Notable Works" section went to the whole thing, however you might want to skip ahead to Movement 3, which is like a super recognizable musical piece within an already super recognizable musical piece. Like Inception. While I'm still talking about movies instead of Beethoven. Beethoven's Fifth, and its Fate Motif (the famous DUN-DUN-DUN-DUNNNN!) can't go without mentioning here. So there. I just did mention it.  And speaking of things I have to mention, Beethoven's Ninth Symphony absolutely needs a name drop, and I'm just going to have my link drop directly to 12:52 into this YouTube video to make sure you hear the Classical Music money shot that is so important it's what the bank robbers hear when they break into the vault in Die Hard. Oh. I think I'm talking about movies again instead of Beethoven. At any rate, his catalog of 722 work written over forty-five years (his earliest he wrote when he was 12) gives him a mathematical edge over Mozart (who I honestly thought was going to rank #1) and Bach (who the composers still say is the best, but what do they know?)

There you go, folks. It's Beethoven. Now enjoy him playing music in a mall.