Great Commanders in History
- Thread starter fieldmarshal
- Start date
- Status
PullerRommel
New Member
True and for the most part they still fought buffoons after the the good Union generals arrived.
But i think if Stonewall wouldnt of died there would of been a very different outcome
But i think if Stonewall wouldnt of died there would of been a very different outcome
Chhatrapti Shivaji (king shivaji of the marathas)(1627- 1680)
i wud say Shivaji was the greatest commander in history. He started a kigndom from zilch.. zero.
whats more he made it flourish.Recognised the importance of Moutains and fortified them makin huge armies of the mughals and adilshah ineffective against them.
he gave the people of India a new and just King to look up to.
He laid the foundations of the great Maratha Empire which continued to rule india (and even captured the red fort at one time)
the maratha empire at its peak stretched from Karnataka to Attock( pakistan)
Long live King Shivaji!
i wud say Shivaji was the greatest commander in history. He started a kigndom from zilch.. zero.
whats more he made it flourish.Recognised the importance of Moutains and fortified them makin huge armies of the mughals and adilshah ineffective against them.
he gave the people of India a new and just King to look up to.
He laid the foundations of the great Maratha Empire which continued to rule india (and even captured the red fort at one time)
the maratha empire at its peak stretched from Karnataka to Attock( pakistan)
Long live King Shivaji!
fockewulf190
New Member
Where is Lionadas, 300 against 200000 persians, and he nearly defeated them if not for that betrayal. ( i am not sure if that part of the story was a legend and a myth and not real) But well to command 300 soldires against 200000 and then give them the confidence to fight and then have the mind to choose a battlefield of his choice. I donno if he had got 45000 to 50000 men under him, would he had been like Alexander?
Regards
Regards
To give credit where there is credit, there was also a few thousand other Greeks from other city states that fought alongside Leonidas. In addition, the 300 also brought over 1,300 slaves of their own possession to fight alongside with them. The slaves also died in the process.
An interesting historical footnote is that Xerxes here is also the same king who is named Ashaerus in the Bible, who would later wed and made a Jewish woman named Esther his queen.
FutureTank
Banned Member
Misunderstanding
What is also forgotten is that they didn't face 200,000 Persians but only a few dozen at any one time because they were defending a very narrow pass that could be defended by about 14 spearmen shoulder-to-shoulder. The Persians made an offer for them to surrender, maybe a couple of charges to try and scare them out of their position, and then, as any intelligent commander would, looked for the indirect approach, and found a guide to show them the back way in.
So a rather ho-hum wasted effort which most other contingent commanders recognized, and therefore left early.
So as you see the 'ground' was not commander's choice, and of a limited defensive value.
Cheers
Greg
Actually there were well over 300 to start with, and when most of the others left, there were still 700 left. What is forgotten is that 300 refers to the spear armed Spartans, who were backed up by 400 archers.
What is also forgotten is that they didn't face 200,000 Persians but only a few dozen at any one time because they were defending a very narrow pass that could be defended by about 14 spearmen shoulder-to-shoulder. The Persians made an offer for them to surrender, maybe a couple of charges to try and scare them out of their position, and then, as any intelligent commander would, looked for the indirect approach, and found a guide to show them the back way in.
So a rather ho-hum wasted effort which most other contingent commanders recognized, and therefore left early.
So as you see the 'ground' was not commander's choice, and of a limited defensive value.
Cheers
Greg
Quite a few names have been mentioned in previous threads. A non historian will always say that Napoleon was the greatest commander in history. Indeed he was a great tactician, but then the argument: he lost at waterloo, appears. And then people are in doubt! They think of somebody else, for instance Alexander the great and his heroic battle against Darius III. Though he also lost a battle in India!
It’s hard to evaluate who a great commander is. I've seen somebody write that Hannibal Barca was the greatest commander in history because he almost conquered Rome. "ALMOST" This statement is controversial. He won the battles, cannae, trebia, trasimene, due to the help of his powerful elephants. So is he really a great commander or a person who uses his resources well.
Scipio Africanus, Roman general in the third Punic war, humiliated Hannibal. At the battle of Zama, Hannibal tried to disrupt the Roman Army by launching his elephants at its centre. Scipio ordered a blare of trumpets along his entire front line when the charging elephants were almost on top of his men. The noise terrified the elephants and confused them so that they ran into their own lines. That is what makes a great commander! Studying the movements and tactics of the enemy and using it against them.
So my list of the greatest commanders would be:
Alexander the Great - Battle of Gaugamela
Scipio Africanus - Battle of Zama
Genghis Khan - Battle of the Indus
Henry V - Battle of Agincourt
Frederick the Great - Battle of Leuthen
George Washington - Battle of Princeton
Napoleon Bonaparte - Battle of Wagram
Robert E. Lee - Battle of Chancellorsville
Tomoyuki Yamashita - Battle of Singapore
Erwin Rommel - Battle of Gazala
Erich von Manstein - Third Battle of Kharkov
Moshe Dayan - The Sinai Campaign
Some people might say that this list has errors. There are far more commanders like Gonzalo de Cordoba, Gustavus Adolphus, Wellington, William Slim or Douglas Mac Arthur who have potential to be on the list. However I reduced the list on these 12 men, due to a few criteria. Some American citizens would say that Lee is not worthy to be in the list. However I chose him, due to the fact that he studied the territory on which he fought like, Napoleon and Wellington in order to choose the right tactics and therefore estimate his chances. Every commander in my list had won his battle due to right tactics and strategies on the ground.
It’s hard to evaluate who a great commander is. I've seen somebody write that Hannibal Barca was the greatest commander in history because he almost conquered Rome. "ALMOST" This statement is controversial. He won the battles, cannae, trebia, trasimene, due to the help of his powerful elephants. So is he really a great commander or a person who uses his resources well.
Scipio Africanus, Roman general in the third Punic war, humiliated Hannibal. At the battle of Zama, Hannibal tried to disrupt the Roman Army by launching his elephants at its centre. Scipio ordered a blare of trumpets along his entire front line when the charging elephants were almost on top of his men. The noise terrified the elephants and confused them so that they ran into their own lines. That is what makes a great commander! Studying the movements and tactics of the enemy and using it against them.
So my list of the greatest commanders would be:
Alexander the Great - Battle of Gaugamela
Scipio Africanus - Battle of Zama
Genghis Khan - Battle of the Indus
Henry V - Battle of Agincourt
Frederick the Great - Battle of Leuthen
George Washington - Battle of Princeton
Napoleon Bonaparte - Battle of Wagram
Robert E. Lee - Battle of Chancellorsville
Tomoyuki Yamashita - Battle of Singapore
Erwin Rommel - Battle of Gazala
Erich von Manstein - Third Battle of Kharkov
Moshe Dayan - The Sinai Campaign
Some people might say that this list has errors. There are far more commanders like Gonzalo de Cordoba, Gustavus Adolphus, Wellington, William Slim or Douglas Mac Arthur who have potential to be on the list. However I reduced the list on these 12 men, due to a few criteria. Some American citizens would say that Lee is not worthy to be in the list. However I chose him, due to the fact that he studied the territory on which he fought like, Napoleon and Wellington in order to choose the right tactics and therefore estimate his chances. Every commander in my list had won his battle due to right tactics and strategies on the ground.
Furthmore its intresting how people are influenced through the movies. names like Leonaidos from "300" and General Tadamichi Kuribayashi from "letters from iwo jima" appear. future tank is right. it was more like 4200 vs somewhat 15000 persians & 250 vs 500 ships. I will asume that the name "Henri Guisan" will appear somewhat soon. lol
Last edited:
Erwin Rommel
Hannibal
Alexander the Great
Robert E. Lee
Napoleon Bonaparte
Erich Von Manstein
Zhukov
Douglas B. MacArthur
Belisarius
Julius Caesar
George Washington
Topping all would be Genghiz Khan. As a family, his sons and grandsons alone can merit their places as among the greatest military commanders in history.
Hannibal
Alexander the Great
Robert E. Lee
Napoleon Bonaparte
Erich Von Manstein
Zhukov
Douglas B. MacArthur
Belisarius
Julius Caesar
George Washington
Topping all would be Genghiz Khan. As a family, his sons and grandsons alone can merit their places as among the greatest military commanders in history.
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
MacArthur and Belasarius get in there and Scipio Africanus doesnt?????
Narrow the field - Post WWII Great Commanders:
General Võ Nguyên Giáp – Outstanding tactician responsible for the defeat of two first world powers (France and US) from 1946 – 75
Field Marshal Sir Gerald Walter Robert Templer – His tactics against the communists are still regarded as a model for counter-insurgency warfare.
General Yitzhak Rabin – 1967, six - day war, Israel defeated the combined efforts of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.
Major-General Jeremy Moore – 1982 Successful retaking of the Falklands despite the longest logistics tail in recorded history
General Norman Schwarzkopf – 1990 – Text book execution of a combined all-arms use of maximum force resulting in minimal casualties on the allied side.
General Võ Nguyên Giáp – Outstanding tactician responsible for the defeat of two first world powers (France and US) from 1946 – 75
Field Marshal Sir Gerald Walter Robert Templer – His tactics against the communists are still regarded as a model for counter-insurgency warfare.
General Yitzhak Rabin – 1967, six - day war, Israel defeated the combined efforts of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria.
Major-General Jeremy Moore – 1982 Successful retaking of the Falklands despite the longest logistics tail in recorded history
General Norman Schwarzkopf – 1990 – Text book execution of a combined all-arms use of maximum force resulting in minimal casualties on the allied side.
There are too many great commanders to list. Why not just list more of them.
Subotai -- The right arm of Genghiz Khan. Taking his achievements alone, this guy overran more territory than anyone in history. The size and extent of the Mongol Empire owes as much to Subutai as to Genghiz Khan.
This is why I put the Khan as tops---more than any general, king or emperor in history, Genghiz Khan knows how to pick and surround himself with the best ever "dream team" of generals and strategists in all of history, and then impart these skills to his sons and successors.
The "Sword of Allah" Khalid Ibn al Walid---The sheer extent of the early Islamic empire owes as much as to him as to Mohammed.
Flavius Stilicho --- Probably the last great Roman general. A lot of the leaders being listed are those who were there and enjoyed the rise and peak of their nations. Here is a general fighting to the very end at the fall of the Roman Empire where everything was unraveling internally and externally. Yet this guy consistently saved Rome's [ Admin: Text deleted, Request to "self-edit" ignored ], again and again, by beating enemies that greatly outnumbered him, most notably Alaric the Vandal. Although in the end, it was a hopeless cause. The fact that he was a Christian and half a German by blood was easy for those envious to plot against him and his own sense of honor didn't help. Like many great and yet tragic generals, he was slain by his own compatriots.
Last edited by a moderator:
Crobato - can you please go back and self edit your thread so that we don't continue to have anthropology lessons on body parts. 
I will re-open the thread once you have done this. I'll give you a few hours to fix it up otherwise you'll incur a 3 day ban when I re-open the thread.
I have made this very very clear over the last week or so, all please pay attention to language in future.
PM the mods, web or report the post when you're done so that we pick up the change.
I will re-open the thread once you have done this. I'll give you a few hours to fix it up otherwise you'll incur a 3 day ban when I re-open the thread.
I have made this very very clear over the last week or so, all please pay attention to language in future.
PM the mods, web or report the post when you're done so that we pick up the change.
- Status