Greatest Conqueror Ever

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Heresson!



-=Vel=-

Thank You. Tell me your state to let me give it to You as a fief when I conquer it.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


His father conquered Greece.

Stop being a nit - yes, we know that - but after Philip's death the Greek city states revolted en masse and Alexander was forced to subdue them, which he did in a lightening campaign.

This was the first test of his leadership and generalship - and probably most importantly consolidated his kingship against pretenders.

One of Alexander's most remarkable qualities was his ability to sum up a situation and act decisively. Sounds easy but he makes the right decision in battle after battle and then acts quickly on his insights. The ability to quickly sum up and act separates great generals from the rest.

This is really what brings Darius undone. Alexander constantly wrong foots him even when Darius has got into a winning position. Future generals from Caesar through to Napoleon all studied his battles with admiration.

The fact that he was only in his late teens and early 20's during his most famous victories makes it all the more remarkable. He was probably helped greatly by his father's generals and his veteran army but at the end of the day it is Alexander who calls the shots.

Another legendary quality was his fearlessness in battle. He led the cavalry and it was the Macedonian shock cavalry that won the battles with hair raising charges into the mass of the enemy.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by OliverFA
Were are Pizarro? And Cortes?

Numerous factors, only one of which was smallpox, make his victories much less likely to indicate some military genius.

A good comparison would be Iraq - do you think the generals who planned the attack were military geniuses?

[Heresson]

Heraclius was a great conqueror. He got the empire consisting of roman Africa and several isolated points in Balkans, Italy and Greece, and reconquered Anatoly, Armenia, Syria, part of Mesopotamia, Egypt - but He lost most of it to Arabs soon.
Basilios Bulgaroktonos was a great general too.
Of Turks, Orchan, Murad II, Selim the Cruel and many others.
In Poland, I can only say Boleslaw Chrobry, who conquared Czechs/Moravians, Slovakians, subdued militarily Ruthenia (Ukraine/Russia/Byelorus), conquered some other stuff such as southern half of former democratic Germany, parts of Prussia. But this was only regional.
Gustav Adolph?
Charlemagne?

[Velociryx]

South Carolina, good sir...and a fine fief it shall be!

-=Vel=-

[Heresson]

You and your sons will inherit South Karolina. As my loyal vassal, I grant You North Karolina too, but only for You, your sons will return it to the Empire.
Heresson dixit

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by OliverFA
I disagree. But anyway, this is your thread.

In that case, were is Smallpox the Conqueror?

Right up there with bubonic plague and Spanish influenza.

The bubonic plague gets the 14th Century as its own, to keep in perpetuity, and Spanish Influenza gets the first half of the 20th Century for finishing off the job that WWI started, and reaching more places (Spitsbergen, the Canadian Arctic, and isolated South Pacific islands).

Cortes and Pizarro were undoubtedly helped by European introduced diseases, and not just smallpox (as the Spanish noted, one of their African slaves had brought a live dose with him) and also by diseases nowadays not thought fatal, such as measles, but also the enmity of conquered peoples in Central and South America to the Aztec and Inca rulers.


The Aztecs had only relatively recently imposed their dominion on others in Central America, so there were ready made allies for the conquistadors. Similarly in the Incan Empire, there had been a civil war and the conquest of other states which made for eager allies for the Spanish.

Diseases brought along trading routes from Central America to the furthermost Incan outposts softened up the empire for the Spanish.

It should be said the Mongols had similar luck in defeating the Khwarizm khanate who had alienated a good many of their subjects through the use of despotic rule and tyrannical local governors.

[Solomwi]

Pizarro was a freaking idiot. He gave up the element of surprise and goodwill of the natives byattacking and looting the first little village they came to after leaving San Mateo Bay, for a very small financial gain. Disease and the Inca civil war were his best friends.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Heresson
Heraclius was a great conqueror. He got the empire consisting of roman Africa and several isolated points in Balkans, Italy and Greece, and reconquered Anatoly, Armenia, Syria, part of Mesopotamia, Egypt - but He lost most of it to Arabs soon.
Basilios Bulgaroktonos was a great general too.
Of Turks, Orchan, Murad II, Selim the Cruel and many others.
In Poland, I can only say Boleslaw Chrobry, who conquared Czechs/Moravians, Slovakians, subdued militarily Ruthenia (Ukraine/Russia/Byelorus), conquered some other stuff such as southern half of former democratic Germany, parts of Prussia. But this was only regional.
Gustav Adolph?
Charlemagne?

Speaking of the Romans of that era, I think that Belisarius was great as well.

[Heresson]

Oh, yes, but He wouldn't have conquered Italy without Narses.

[Velociryx]

H-man, you're on!

-=Vel=-

[Heresson]

and out, and in, and below, and up, and in between. Heresson is everywhere. Heresson is.

[Velociryx]

(an aside to Heresson)
You know...the whole reason I set up my home network (3 workstations so far) is so we could get some KILLER EU2 games going...

-=Vel=-

[Heresson]

Ah, I can't play EU2 right now. I'm learning for an important exam. uh uh what am I doing here?

[Velociryx]

Give in to the power of the Dark Side...

-=Vel=-