View Single Post
Old 21st September 2007, 06:58 PM   #49 (permalink)
Senior Member
thaddeus6th's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 3,222
Re: Greatest Warrior and Greatest Military Genius before 1900

Ours. And yes, I may well be biased.

Look at it this way, things that grow quickly tend to die quickly. Oak trees take bloody ages to reach full size, whereas buckler fern is much swifter, and grass quicker still. But the oak lives the longest.

Mind you, Rome did pretty well too. (Although that's complicated because of the various political systems and the division of the empire).

Back to greatest general: I think the criteria shouldn't just be success, but capability. That's why Hannibal wins. He did the most with the least means. I know Alexander faced far more Persians than Hannibal did Romans, but the Persians were largely rubbish compared to the Romans who were hard as nails. In addition, the Romans learnt from their mistakes.
thaddeus6th is online now   Reply With Quote