No, it isn't. Deserts don't have good farm land and aren't rich lands, while Iran was very rich and fertile.
Besides, few armies before a hundred years ago operated in true desert.
Printable View
No, it isn't. Deserts don't have good farm land and aren't rich lands, while Iran was very rich and fertile.
Besides, few armies before a hundred years ago operated in true desert.
Not really, I was just stating some facts/observations.......don't really know where I'm going with this myself actually ~:cheers:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
When? He took heavy casualties, and hurt himself bad, but he still "WON".Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
But he had to turn back, correct? Didn't his troops rebel against him?
Well, sort of. They refused to go on. But remember that at this point the Macedonian soldiers were thousands of miles away from their homes and families. Alexander had managed to persuade his soldiers to go on when they wanted to turn back many times before India. India was simply too far away from Macedon. I don't think that any general of that time could have made his soldiers march on at that point, and only Alexander could have persuaded them to go as far as they did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steppe Merc
Alexander is the best ~:)
(although Napoleon and Genghis Khan weren't exactly bad generals, either. Why wasn't Caesar one of the options?)
Sure he had to turn back, but that doesnt mean he lost a battle. His soldiers had gone father away from greece than probably anybody before them. Nobody can keep going to battle forever. plus alexander suffered a wound that would lead to his death.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steppe Merc
But isn't a mark of a general about their troops loyalty? Not that Alex didn't inspire loyalty, but didn't he make some foolish dessisions regarding the troops and their morality, in particular favoring Persian culture, or something like that? Not that I blame him, but he should lose some points due to his troops mutiny.
A mark of a good general is the ability to win battles and conquer land, things which Alexander did incredibly well. As I said, no general could have made his soldiers fight on as far away from their homes as Alexander did.
As Marcellus said, no general in that situation could have made their troops move on. Greeks were fiercely indepndent at the time and NOBODY could have made them go on. If anybody could have done it, it would have been alexander, but he was in a horrible state at the time. He had suffered a horrible injury(that would have probably killed most men) and his good "freind" had died.
Mmm. Well, I don't think anyone can deffinitely say if no other general could get there troops to move on.
And yes, that was a weakness, the Greeks independence. Which is why it was smart that he started incorporating the Persians and other Easterners in his army, IMO.
I cant definatly say it, but i believe. And now you pointed out another great ablility of him.
For people saing he just inherited an awesome army and that it, you guys are complely wrong. Sure he did inherit an awesome army, but he used it to its fullest extent and always exploited his enemies weaknesses. Just because one has the macedonian phanlanx pikeman and companion cavalry doesnt mean you will win battles. Alexander's succesors proved that there were many weaknesses to the system, but they never showed when used by alexander.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he use more cavalry, lighter armies during his Afghanistan and surrounding area campaigns? And didn't he lose some against the Scythian nomads? Sorry, I mainly only know about his Persian campaigns, and a bit about his Indian campaign.
Don't get me wrong, I hardly think that Alexander was a slouch, I think he was a great general, especially for his use of cavalry, which other Greeks didn't know how to use (well except for Thessalians).
My comment was more aimed at some others who say alexander simply inherited his army.Quote:
Don't get me wrong, I hardly think that Alexander was a slouch, I think he was a great general, especially for his use of cavalry, which other Greeks didn't know how to use (well except for Thessalians).
He might have lost, but from what i have heard he never lost, but i could be wrong.
Quote:
But Alexander did not do much in the way of innovation, and was far too impulsive.
Being impulsive was one of his greatest qualities. He always did exactly opposite of what other generals though he would do, which made them always make some kind of mistake.
It showed just how much determination he had.Quote:
His greatest innovative feat was the causeway to reach Tyre.. and one could say that was a bit of a blunt tactic.
Umm Steppe Merc I don't get what your point is.
Yes some of his troops were against him in the mid-campaign. They were murdered.
Yes some of his troops wanted to turn back because of exahustion and the fact that they were scared of the Indian lands. They wre made to walk on anyhow.
It is only he encountered heavy losses(in troops) in India that Alexander decided to turn back. He never lost a battle, you could at least admit that Steppe, because I don't follow what your point is.
I agree with Orda.
But then, this is rather entertaining. But I would like a poll to list more people myself.
Azi
Who would you think is better than the three listed?
not that there is someone better , but in the list there is someone that doesnt deserve to be there in my opinion , like Gengis Khan but if so then the list should include many more.... more important and great Generals could be included .... Hannibal , Scipion , Richard Lionheart , Saladin, Nobunaga, Trajan , Caesar , Arminius , Viriato , Vercingetorix , Sertorius , Surena , Germanicus , etc etc ....
Who was the greatest general?
I don't know why it is discussed. It's obvious!
Alexandros o Megas!!! :charge: ~D
~:cheers:
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Atlantis
Caesar
Please don't be angry , it is just an opinion (worked on it some 10 years of reading) , and I have posted the reasons above
:book:
A mutiny is not exactly a plus on his record, nor is the fact that he had to turn back due to losses. A loss is still a loss, even though you might not have lost a battle, if you turn back, it's still a loss.Quote:
Umm Steppe Merc I don't get what your point is.
Yes some of his troops were against him in the mid-campaign. They were murdered.
Yes some of his troops wanted to turn back because of exahustion and the fact that they were scared of the Indian lands. They wre made to walk on anyhow.
It is only he encountered heavy losses(in troops) in India that Alexander decided to turn back. He never lost a battle, you could at least admit that Steppe, because I don't follow what your point is.
And what about his campaigns agains the Sakae (possibly, not sure)? I could have sworn he lost against them...
Prom, I know you like your Romans, but they couldn't have dreamed about doing the stuff Chingis did. They were too slow and plodding, and they could never have done the Khawarizm campaign. He was a great general, who used far superior tactics to everyone else, before or after.
Deary me - Napoleon is so under rated. The biggest empire in terms of Europe, ever with troops of very similar quality and being outnumbered both on battles and campaigns.... Yet no big vote for him. Ah well. :book:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
You can be lucky one's , maybe twice , but forever ?
Ok lets report the opinion of a real historian , and opinion of the many academicals ....
From Andrea FedrianQuote:
About great Generals....
Even to the profane as to the expert the first names that we recognize when speacking of great
Conquerors ....
are the ones of
Alexander the great , Napoleon, Gengiz Khan , Attila , Julius Caesar
We recognize...when we speack of
great Generals
Alexander the Great , Napoleon , Scipion the African , Hannibal and Julius Caesar ...
We must elencate When we talk about
Tactician
Scipion , Hannibal , Napoleon , Alexander
When we instead talk about
Strategist
Napoleon , Alexander , Caesar , Scipion
And also we recognize as
innovators
Caius Marius ,Philippus , Gengiz Khan , Scipion , Napoleon
We recognize as instead
Ubeated leaders on field
Alexander the great , Duke of Malborough , Scipion the African
As someone who
Ever winning leaders in wars
Caesar , Alexander , Scipion
As charismatic Leader that go the power of having his men voted to him up the end ...Blind faith in the leader , quality of a true
Commander of troops
Caesar , Napoleon ....
Now we can all take our conclusions ....
Well...
Alexander was in 6 of the 8 categories
Napoleon was also in 6 out of 8
Genghis Kahn was in 2 of the 8.
So based only on these eight categories, Alexander and Napoleon win.
But Napoleon lost his war, and I'm not prepared to call someone who lost the war he was fighting the greatest general in history.
So it's Alexander then ~D
Never heard about this historian , never the less , Caesar got 5 "points" and he is not in the poll , Temuchin (I like to call him like that) got 2 "points" only and he is leading in the poll................................................... :book:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
Huh ??
Phirhus was killed by a jug on his head , so ? Hanibaal said that he was the second General ever (until hes times)
Remember Kennedy , Ghandi , King , Rabin , Lenon and on and on - the fact that all of them were assassinated makes them what ? so now you are saying that Caesar was not lucky ? please choose an argument... ~;)
I agree with you on that , never understood why Phirhus was or is , considered so a great , maybe someone know's the unswear ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
"Another victory like that and we are lost" (Phirhus of Epirus)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
There is only one objective system of measuring one's battle skills - his success !.......so simple ! even when he had setbacks , he always , that is , always , got the upper hand - always !
Btw , all ancient historians said that Caesar knew about the plot against him and did not care (I am sure you have read it) :book:
caesar44, please do NOT misspell my name! This is a King's warning! :furious3: If you don't comply with, I will throw to you a roofing tile!!!Quote:
Phirhus was killed by a jug on his head
~D ~;)