Printable View
Taking from the Favorite historical figures idea thread
heres one...
if you were a simple warrior of history
what leaders, or generals would you most like to serve under, if you could....
they don't have to be a good military leader, or a good individual
as an example heres my list (in no particualar order)
Saladin
Flavius Aëtius
King William I
Queen Tomyris
Aleric
Rani Laximbai
Queen Boudica
Mutapa Matope
The Trung Sisters
Sir Isaac Brock
Wellington, George Washington, Leonidas, Pericles, King Alfred, King Jan sobieski,
Omar Bradly
A true general values his troops. but some causes are just worth it:2thumbsup:
Wellington, Saladin, Vartan Mamikonean, Patton, Philaretos, Bradley, Julius and Augustus Ceasar (Extremely Charismatic, both of them), Brian Boruma, Robert Bruce, Rodrigo Diaz de Bivar (El Cid), Charlemagne.
General Rhame of the 1st Infantry Division during Desert Storm. He had more concern of his troops then that of the enemy.
Other historical figures - not many, Maybe General Lee if he was fighting for the Union, and General Patton.
Edit: Spelling
Martin Luther King.
March to Washington, baby!
" I am not commanding you to assault. I am ordering you to die ! During the time we get killed, other forces and commanders may substitute us ! "
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, 25 April 1915, Conkbayırı, Çanakkale Defense
It would be pleasure to go for martyrdom under his commandment. That was one of the cornerstones of land battles of Çanakkale Defense in WWI. A band of soldiers retreating from a heavier number of enemy were stopped and positioned where they came across with Atatürk. After their stationing at where they were by the command of Atatürk, enemy was baffled so that they had stopped progressing, hence gaining the time needed for the arrival of 57th Pioneer Regiment there.
No need to look elsewhere for me. My history is full of ones who you'd be happy to die along with.
Malborough, Harrold Godwinson, Henry V, Edward III, Aethelstan, Heraclius, Richard the Lion Heart, Napoleon, Crommwell, El Cid, Alexander the Great, Charlamagne.
Mahatma Gandi, Martin Luther King
Any general who'd give me a motorbike.
Marlborough; he looked after his men.
Student, he was really concerned that his men would be used as para's not as ordinary infantry under some Nazi general, as they would lose then
With those who had the righteous cause.:knight:
Yigael Yadin, Moshe Dayan, Ariel Sharon, Yitzhak Rabin, Israel Tal \o
And as for peaceful marches: Mahatma Gandhi and MLK. :bow:
Henry V (I have a doctor's note excusing me from the "bloody flux" :laugh4: )
Macsen Wledig (of course! Brownie points for whoever knows the Latin name?)
Arthur quondam Rex que futurus
The Duke of Wellington
William T. Sherman
Julius Caeser
El Cid
Franco
Alexander the Great.
Forgot about the peace marches. I am wondering why you picked Crommie, Bopa.
And why Diablodelmar picked Franco.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bopa the Magyar
I hope you two fancy death by dehydration in the Arabian desert :whip:Quote:
Originally Posted by diablodelmar
:beam:
:dizzy2:Quote:
Originally Posted by diablodelmar
Cyrus the Younger/Xenophon.
Anabasis, the ultimate adventure story. I remember reading it as a kid and dreaming of singing the paean and the clash of bronze and steel.
Well, if I was a "simple warrior of history" I'd march with whoever had the power and authority at the time and place I lived. No one here has answered Hitler, but if I lived in Germany in the 1930-s I'd gladly march for a guy that told me that I belonged to the superior rase, and who promised me food and labour. It's easy to make smart choices once you've learnt the lesson.
Also, I think the people following earlier leaders had no real choice. Sure, Richard Couer de Lion might have been a charismatic figure in history, and a decent military commander, but I believe few would've followed him if they had the choice. People of older days viewed the world in a different way than we do today, so from that perspective, there's no answer to that question.
Beisdes, I think few people today would chose to go to war at all, and if they had to, I can't se why you'd pick a war were you could die from a wound in the hand thanks to infection when you could go to a modern war with modern healthcare, medicine and surgery.
Just take El Cid for example, who really thinks that waging war against Al-Andalus (which had a very rich and flourishing culture and was about 500 years ahead of the Christians when it came to science) is a thing worth dying for?
So I'll just answe: Depends on when and where I lived. If I lived in England around the mid 14th century, I'd have little choice but to follow Edward III in his campaigns into France etc.
Leonidas.
But I'll re-iterate my sentiments from another thread. Without looking up the exact post, I believe I said that I would fight in any war, as long as I believed in the cause. But even then... we all gotta die at some point, may as well die a hero, with sword (or gun, I suppose) in hand.
Alexander the Great
Caesar
Attila (not because he cared for his men, but a Hun under Attila had most chance of surviving Catalonian fields)
Montgomory
Xenophon
Magnus Maximus. ~:cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by macsen rufus
Sir Isaac Brock - He was a soldier and a leader. He fought on the same field as his men, not in a tent some ways behind the battle.
Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck - Obviously. A brilliant tactician who was also a soldier, not a parade-ground officer.
Robert Guiscard
Bohemond I
Roger the Great Count
Guillaume Bras-de-fer
Karl Martell
Theodoric the Goth
Lysander
Al-Afdal Shahanshah (for no reason, really, I hate Saladin. HATE.)
Cao Cao
If Machiavelli had ever commanded an army, I'd be under him.
Carloman
Cyrus the Great
Henry V (of England)
Richard the Lionheart
Karl XII (of Sweden)
Admiral Sandy Woodward/Colonel Chris Keeble (both Falklands war)
Napoleon
Peter the Great (of Russia)
Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich (the elder)
Normanophile that I am :D
Mostly extremely charismatic and competent generals, many were formidable warriors, themselves. (particularly the large succession of Normans)
John Carol Chodkiewicz
He was very strict but honest and he never lost war :)
Monty? I wouldn't want to march with him, imo he's far too arrogant. Sacrificed about 10,000 men for his own personal glory, blamed the Poles, and considered it a victory.Quote:
Montgomory
See, if one was Canadian, Monty was practically the enemy. He threw away Canadian troops (good ones too) like used tissue.
Not just Canadian troops m8
he knew there were 2 SS Panzer Division at Arnhem (he said so later), but still wanted it to go on, as (and this is what he didn't tell) he wanted to be the first in Berlin.
Pity Prince Bernhard is dead and doesn't visit this forum, he could give you loads of examples. I still like these quotes:
Monty: "I consider Market Garden 90& succesfull."
Bernhard: "My country can never afford a succes of Montgomery again"
:bounce:
Could´t think of anybody I would march for....
Well...maybe....Monty Python on their quest for the Holy Grail.
We have a winner - well done Evil Maniac!
:2thumbsup:Quote:
Magnus Maximus.
Virtual brownies somewhere in your browser's cookie folder :clown:
Hmm. Add Hector to that list of mine. :yes:
Whatever...I'll just pick a few:
Gustav II Adolf
Karl XI
Karl XII (although I don't really fancy an everlasting, pointless, war that ends with me freezing and starving to death in Ukraine)
Robert Bruce (Wallace was only lucky to win at Stirling, Bruce had some skill at least judging from Bannockburn)
Any Welsh prince and Owain Glyndwr
Edward I
Edward III
Frederick I (Barbarossa)
Frederick of Prussia
Johann Tserclaes Tilly
Albrecht von Wallenstien
Ottavia Piccolomini
Charles I (the Bold)
Belisarius
Julius Caesar
"Saladin"
Alexander Nevskij
Oliver Cromwell
Béla IV (never liked Genghis...)
Bertrand du Guesclin
Jeanne d'Arc
Some of these are really odd picks I know (all of them are to be honest) as none of them had 100% success during their career.
Charlemagne!! Didn't have to think about that one!
Alex - though, I'd prefer to ride. And get to see more of the known world than pretty much anyone else alive at the time. Oh, and have a pretty good chance of acquiring much wealth &c.
Pompey, though I'd ditch him after his Eastern campaign. Much the same reasons as above.
Lieutenant Chard. Wouldn't mind a gong...
Otherwise though, I'll stick with present day western armies... for preference, oh, I dunno, AAC or cav. With a healthy dose of US kit (they do know how to pamper their soldiers better than we).
Julius Caesar
Rogers
Grant
Forrest
Bradley
Hackworth
among "furriners:"
Boru
Hannibal
Sulla
Kesselring
Lawrence
Clive
Haig (sorry, bad joke. NFW)
Richard a decent military commander? How about the greatest military commander of his generation. Id gladly grab a sword and fight in his adventures.Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
Other then him id say Gauis Julius Caesar. The 30-50 mile marches a day would be pretty rough. But he was one hell of a general and his soldiers became very very well off.
On the healthcare part. Im sure in centurys to come, there will be a cure from cancer, viruses ect ect. Then they will say "Who would want to die from things you can cure with modern medicine?".
Also:
Temujin
Jochi
Subedei
Oh yes, I merely meant that there were many unsuccesful raids on the French coast "orchestrated" by Britain's favorite idiot (Not Blair, mind you this is before he screwed everything up) cost the Canadians many elite fighting units that trained with the SAS and SBS I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stig
If it was not for the damn stubborness of you Limeys, Montgomery would be widly recognised as one of the worst Commanders ever. He didn't care for any human life.
Gah. I'm surprised Nobody has said anything of Admiral Nelson!
"England expects that every man WILL DO HIS DUTY!":2thumbsup:
Genghis or Attila.
Oh, and Naughtius Maximus.
Ah yes, but wouldn't that be sailing rather than marching.:juggle2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wakizashi
What a load of rubbish. It's very difficult to like Montgomery as a person, but I have never heard of him being accused of deliberately wasting men's lives in any sensible history. In fact, the opposite was more probably the case, with his concern for his troops' lives causing him to be occasionally over-cautious. He had served in the blood-bath of WWI and he had been horrified at the casual slaughter and attitudes to it by the high command.Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishArmenian
Market Garden was the one occasion when he was over-bold, with an ill-prepared plan of action. However, his own original plan had not been nearly as ambitious as the final one for the operation, which was championed by Ike and others at the top of Allied command.
I've also never heard of any Canadian resentment against Montgomery, although there will doubtless be a few whingers. They even named schools after him. The troops under his command were fiercely loyal to him because he was a common soldier's general. He may not have the 'romantic' dash of a Patton, but I'd say that Patton was far more profligate with the lives of his men.
Montgomery was also praised by German generals, especially when he stepped in and re-organized US troops during the so-called 'Battle of the Bulge'. His problems with the US generals are well documented, yet he had a high regard for Eisenhauer, and for the ordinary American soldier whom he praised fulsomely.
Monty may not have been perfect, but he was in fact a bloody good general.
I might be shot by certain forum members if I stated mine. :sweatdrop:
Alfred
Harold Godwinson
Pompey
Hanabal
Charles the Great
Richard the Lionheart
Henry V
Monty
Henry VIII
Thats pretty much my order of preference as well. I'd put in our Once and Future King but I can't prove he existed, so he's not historical.
Nothing new here:
- Aethelstan
- Alfred the Great
- Rodrigo Diaz de Bivar
Hitler? Stalin? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexanderofmacedon
Why would anyone march with either?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmic
I mean, you are almost certainly guaranteed for death. -.-"
Personally, I seriously doubt anyone here actually have the guts to go on all those old and ancient military marches they patriotically declare they would. Never mind the fighting and the gore, first you gotta know what's in it for the usual marching day and the usual lodgings and food: diseased, uncomfortable, unhygienic, dangerous, Spartan discipline for some armies, and ruinously chaotic situation in others.
None of you would survive a week. :idea2:
Second that plus there is a vivid illustration of e.g. Greek style battles in John Keegan´s "Histroy of Warfare". Well as I stated...i ilkie hiking, but hate fighting...expect with my digital troops on the field of fun....Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiochusIII
@ AlexanderofMacedon: I never got the point of Germanophil people of your style [nothing against beer fans, Würstel fans or the like].....here we call them "ewig Gestrige"....
As I said, Great Migrations raiding: none of the danger, all of the fun ~;)
Mandela,
Martin Luther King Jr.,
Gandhi
Datu Lapu Lapu, fought against Magellan and his invaders
Andres Bonifacio, fought against the colonial oppression and slavery of Spain
Geurilla soldiers fighting against the invasion of the Philippines against the Japanese in WWII
Julius Caesar,
Septimius Severus,
Belisarius,
Basil II,
Emperor Constantine XI, in the fall of Constantinople
Saladin,
Cao Cao, from the romance of the three kingdoms era
It would be an interesting experience (albiet a harrowing one) of marching with the leaders of the age of Antiquity to the Medieval Ages, from the intrigue that was the Three Kingdoms to the professional armies of the Romans in late Antiquity to the defense of the great city of Constantine.
If I lived in harsh times such as the colonial Philippines or in WWII, I would definitely help defend my home from such murderers.
In situations like Martin Luther King Jr. and the like, I would definitely march for such a cause.
Ultimately Innocentius has it right..
That said, my top five would be;
Edgar Aetheling
Charlemagne
Genghis Khan
Mohammed
Penda
Whoever has a just cause
or whoever has a good win/loss ratio
or whoever has enough gold to pay me
In that order
Sounds like a challenge. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiochusIII
General Norman "Dutch" Cota!
The finest infantry division commander of WWII IMO. His leadership was always directed from where infantry soldiers appreciate it-at the front line. Anyone who could have taken the "Bloody" 28th infantry from the Hertugen Forest, and keep them together through the Ardennes campaign where they delayed the entire 5th Panzer Army long enough to allow the 101st Airborne to get into position at Bastogne is alright with me.
Vasily Chuikov's style was pretty frontline - at one point the oil tank above his CP was hit, and he coolly replied to a concerned HQ that he was where it was brightest. For much of Stalingrad his "Army" strength wasn't much more than a division, if that. Holding together a front that was never more than 200 yards in depth, with no line of retreat, horrendously difficult to resupply, and for much of the time split into several surrounded pockets, long enough for Uranus to be planned (not executed - the holding action began before it was even conceived) and carried out. The 62nd Army was a legend in its time, its commander fittingly the man who took the eventual German surrender in Berlin.Quote:
Originally Posted by rotorgun
I don't know if this goes along with the marching but I would have loved to fly in the Jasta 11 with Manfred von Richthofen.
A Soviet Army was a division -- a Soviet Front was the equivalent of a Western Army or Army Group, IIRC.Quote:
For much of Stalingrad his "Army" strength wasn't much more than a division
Rather a corps... Western division was equal to soviet corps, corps of soviet army and so on.:book:
Without a shadow of a doubt, id love to March under Sir Arthur Wellesley (Later the Duke Wellington).
And id be a rifleman :D
Been reading the Richard Sharpe novels? :book:
Caesar Augustus, Julius Caesar, Ghenghis Khan, Kublai Khan, Flavius Aetius, Alexander the Great, Scipio Africanus, Hannibal, Saladin, King Henry the Fifth (I think, whichever one fought at Agincourt), Giuseppe Garibaldi, Napoleon
Marshal Graziani, his entire force surrendered to a British force about 1/10 the size after very few shots were fired. My survivability would be very high indeed! :2thumbsup:
Leonadius, Alexander, Constantine.
Pericles, without question.
Julian the Apostate, most likely. Just in the hopes that I could keep him from taking that fatal spear hit during his campaign against the Sassanids, and keep him alive long enough to really let his suppression of christianity take root.
1. George Rogers Clark
2. Sir William Johnson
3. Hennery Morgan
4. Hugh O'Neal /Red Hugh O'Donnell
5. Nathan Bedford Forrest
6. Omar Bradley
7. Francis Marion
8. John Singleton Mosby
9. Xenophon
10. Robert the Bruce
This has little to do with what they fought for and more about what they were able to achieve….at least in some part of their careers
All causes and heroic notions are a waist. Soldiers fight for the man next to them. You want a commander willing to suffer the same fate as you and keep distractions to a minimum while trying to get through the mess you find your self in.
If there's no good cause to march, why not just stay home?Quote:
All causes and heroic notions are a waist. Soldiers fight for the man next to them. You want a commander willing to suffer the same fate as you and keep distractions to a minimum while trying to get through the mess you find your self in.
Since most times, the King's men/the secret police would come knocking on your door. Then you'd be lucky if you got to march:whip:Quote:
Originally Posted by Musashi
Yes, but the question is who would you choose to march with.
Hmmm nice question.
I suppose I'd march with Napoleon Bonaparte. This was a man that could really inspire his troops and I suppose I'd be under his spell too.
I'd march with myself~make that Napoleon.
Guderian, Raus, Rommel(In Africa), Dietrich, and Kesselring are all on the list, but Manstein would be my first choice.
Grant. Preferably, in Sedgewick's corps.
Ottavia Piccolomini? Maybe Prince Eugene wasn't the only one with gender issues :D
I'd like to meet:
Hywel Dda
Llewellyn the Last
Harold Godwinson
King John (the truly great English king)
Eleanor of Aquitaine
Saladin
Lorenzo de Medici
Cromwell
Banastre Tarleton
Marlborough and his crossdressing sidekick Eugene
Which time? In '43 or '45?Quote:
Originally Posted by pleasy
1940.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cangrande
Operation Compass
Graziani didn't surrender in 1940, although many of his troops were forced to. He was fortunate to escape and resigned his commission in '41 in disgrace after his defeat. He saw no further action until '43 when he stayed loyal to Mussolini and the RSI. He surrendered to the Americans in '45 to avoid summary execution by the Partisans.
The original post said that his force surrendered. With the army in enemy hands, what happens to its general is of little consequence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cangrande
Wellington during his Indian campaigns would have been an interesting leader.
That's an interesting list, Cangrande. Some are a wee bit baffling, but any Medici's a good Medici. :2thumbsup: Well.. almost.
Pompous, self-important, scheming, power-hungry, and the spit of his father to boot. That said, he certainly had his good points, and no body can deny that England's had worse men in the king department. Honestly wouldn't have marched with him though. Walking from London to York in 5 days only to have your head lopped off by some hairy bloke with an axe? Bugger that!Quote:
Originally Posted by a few people
Unless that was subtle sarcasm, that just confuses the arse off me. :laugh4: He might not have been as bad as some romanticists would paint him, but he was bloody brimming with flaws, and was such a bastard to everything with a pulse that I wouldn't touch him with a barge-pole.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cangrande
Who you'd like to meet though? Good question, and probably warrants an entirely seperate thread!
There was just a hint of irony in my selcting John :D
Militarily, yeah he was a bit of a disaster but his domestic reforms helped pave the way for the successes of his descendants.
Really? In that case shouldn't it have been 'I'd march with all the blokes who surrendered...', rather than Graziani who didn't and went on to lead his men to death and destruction? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
1. Vicomte de Turenne
2. Louis II de Bourbon, prince de Conde