Sticksboi05 Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 Ok, we have Hannibal of Carthage, Alexander the Great, Scipio Africanus, Julius Caesar and Pyrrhus of Epirus. Who was the greatest commander of them all (poll) For the thread, discuss if they were all put on a battlefield with equal troops/technology, who comes out the victor. If you've got another nominee, post it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted July 12, 2009 Author Share Posted July 12, 2009 No opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 No motha****in Patton? *Edit - There was no "Classical" stipulation before I posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted July 12, 2009 Author Share Posted July 12, 2009 No motha****in Patton? No, completely different eras as zoony pointed out yesterday. All these guys are B.C. and comparing them to 1920-1940's general is too difficult/unrealistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsTerps26 Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 fail thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan133 Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 fail thread. this thread is full of win, I have no clue what you're talking about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 These are all good choices. And even though I am a big fan of Julius Caesar and I think his campaigns, as an example, in Gaul were fantastic (ex: the siege at Alesia -- double-wall enclosure and attacked by a quarter million men), Alexander's dismantling of the Persian empire and conquering much of the "known world," from Eqypt to parts of India, was a feat unrivaled in antiquity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 No, completely different eras as zoony pointed out yesterday. All these guys are B.C. and comparing them to 1920-1940's general is too difficult/unrealistic. Not only that, but basic battlefield tactics were influenced by these men. For example, Hannibal and the envelopment tactic at Cannae, or Alexander and his use of the Companions as shock cavalry troops, especially in feints. If you want to read an early treatise on total war, read Julius Caesar's "Gallic Campaigns." If you want to learn how to operate in the field, foraging off the land, note the strategy used by Hannibal as he ranged across Italy for years. What does Pyrrhus of Epirus teach us? That winning a battle does not always translate into victory. And Scipio Africanus demonstrated how to beat a foe -- by going for the jugular and making the enemy fight on his terms. All these men have invaluable lessons to lend to a modern battlefield officer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 These are all good choices. And even though I am a big fan of Julius Caesar and I think his campaigns, as an example, in Gaul were fantastic (ex: the siege at Alesia -- double-wall enclosure and attacked by a quarter million men), Alexander's dismantling of the Persian empire and conquering much of the "known world," from Eqypt to parts of India, was a feat unrivaled in antiquity. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Caesar...the storie I read about his victories are amazing. One particular battle was when the Romans were retreating...Caesar ran forward alone. His troops saw their leader taking on troops and they rallied and won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryman of the North Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 that is a good list however you should google Iskander Bey. all of your choices fought on equal or better terms than their opponents. going on this list I would probably choose Caesar , alexander achieved more but Caesar was unrivalled at boosting morale and this line "For the thread, discuss if they were all put on a battlefield with equal troops/technology, who comes out the victor." shows that Alexander would lose his biggest advantage and that was the tactical superiority of having superior equipment training and discipline (only the roman legions would approach him in those categories.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Alexander the Great gets my vote. He was a great tactician who's battle techniques still stand true today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejaydana Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Just out of curiosity (and cuz i'm 'ignant'), what does the 'classical' reference here entail (time period? If so what's the range)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Just out of curiosity (and cuz i'm 'ignant'), what does the 'classical' reference here entail (time period? If so what's the range)? For this debate, I would say around the birth of Christ or when Octavian becoming Augustus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 that is a good list however you should google Iskander Bey. all of your choices fought on equal or better terms than their opponents. going on this list I would probably choose Caesar , alexander achieved more but Caesar was unrivalled at boosting morale and this line "For the thread, discuss if they were all put on a battlefield with equal troops/technology, who comes out the victor." shows that Alexander would lose his biggest advantage and that was the tactical superiority of having superior equipment training and discipline (only the roman legions would approach him in those categories.) He may be a great commander, but he is probably a different time period for the individuals that we're discussing. But I've never heard of him before, so a cool bit of info! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpillian Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Alexander, without a doubt. No one has done what he did since he did it (:silly). Hannibal would get my second place vote. Surviving as long as he did, claiming victory after victory, with virtually no support from Carthage, and on Rome's turf -- craziness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 I make no claims of being a history or military buff, but I found it interesting when looking online that I found this guy at at the top of a list of military commaders, yet I haven't seen anyone on this board mention him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Okay, so I know they are different eras, but I'm curious who conquered more... Alexander the Great or Ghengis Khan? Anyone know? As for the list, I don't know if I could choose. I think I would rule out Julius Caesar though simply because he was the benefactor of superior equipment and tactics that he wasn't necessarily responsible for. But I think you could make the case that he was the greatest General/Politician of the era and even all time... the grab for power that he made within the bloated beurocracy of the Roman Senate might be one of the most impressive political maneuverings throughout world history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Okay, so I know they are different eras, but I'm curious who conquered more... Alexander the Great or Ghengis Khan? Anyone know? Genghis Khan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boofMcboof Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Zhuge Liang should be mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 The most amazing thing about Alexander TG was that he did everything before the age of 33. Wow, do I feel lazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpillian Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Genghis Khan. I think a cogent argument could be made readily for either ATG or GK. One point in favor of Alexander was the way his conquest "Hellenized" the area he conquered. I think you can argue that his conquest ended up being much more constructive for the peoples he conquered. My impression is that Genghis Khan's campaigns were much more destructive, and in the end didn't result in much of long lasting influences. Perhaps it's purely due to the nature of the areas each influenced? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 The most amazing thing about Alexander TG was that he did everything before the age of 33. Wow, do I feel lazy Slacker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Okay, so I know they are different eras, but I'm curious who conquered more... Alexander the Great or Ghengis Khan? Anyone know?As for the list, I don't know if I could choose. I think I would rule out Julius Caesar though simply because he was the benefactor of superior equipment and tactics that he wasn't necessarily responsible for. But I think you could make the case that he was the greatest General/Politician of the era and even all time... the grab for power that he made within the bloated beurocracy of the Roman Senate might be one of the most impressive political maneuverings throughout world history I am not sure if I would agree with that. Many generals take advantage of some tactic or equipment that may be superior to their enemy; that doesn't mean they are any less skilled then other commanders. Also, keep in mind that Alexander was also using knowledge and a military organization that he inherited from his father, Philip the II. He just didn't organize the Macedonian army out of ether, since much of that credit needs to be given to his father (who was a fine general in his own right). They, in turn, were also building upon the Greek military tradition. As a pure tactician, Alexander is amazing and probably the best on the list. As far as encompassing strategy and politics, Julius Caesar was, as you said, probably the greatest of his era. He was definitely a good, solid tactician, often fighting outnumbered against a determined foe, both on land and sea. And it is rare to see a siege that's more unique than the situation at Alesia. Both men share a trait of personal bravery, often fighting in the forefront to inspire and rally the troops. There are several examples of this from the fighting in Gaul (which is where I get my name -- Baculus was a Legio XII Primus Pilus under Julius Caesar), when Caesar had to rally the troops against a barbarian ambush. Out of all these generals, though, it is an advantage to actually read about Julius Caesar's conquests from accounts written by his hand, where we can learn specific details about the battles, tactics, and the overall campaign. There are few examples from history in which we have an actual blow-by-blow campaign from the Ancient Period written by the general who commanded the events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 I make no claims of being a history or military buff, but I found it interesting when looking online that I found this guy at at the top of a list of military commaders, yet I haven't seen anyone on this board mention him. Cyrus was definitely an excellent leader, but I guess we don't know enough about his overall strategy to compare him against these men. That's the problem with some other great generals (from different time periods): A lack of details to their specific battlefield maneuverings or techniques. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.