who was the better military leader, Alexander th great, Napoleon Bonaparte, or Ghengis Khan?

Answer 1

First of all, I'm going to rule out Napoleon. At first, he managed to lead civilian armies in combat, but as time progressed, he lost touch with that and tried to rely on large numbers of conscripts, which hurt in his invasion of Russia and in later battles.

It's pretty much a draw between Alexander and Genghis. Both leaders commanded the loyalty of their troops, which is how I define a great military leader. Successful battles simply means that one is a great tactician, but for both the Macedonians to take on the Persian Empire and will, and for the Mongols to conquer China and other lands, the leader needed the support of their troops, and the converse holds true. A leader that supports his troops builds a strong army regardless of size.

If I had to apply a tie-breaker, I'd give it to Genghis. Alexander was perhaps the better ruler, and if he had time might have forged a empire that would survive his death. Genghis was more into conquest than administration, but his empire survived him with his grandson Kublai Khan being one of the better rulers of that era.

Answer 2

My vote is on The universal King, Ghengis khan he was a incredible leader ture he could be brutal and barabric in battle but he was a gentle man that enjoyed peace and organized civilication until he was push again to fight by the persians
and the proof is in the pudding
Ghengis's empire was four times bigger than alexander's and twice as large as the roman empire.

Answer 3

This is a repeat question. Furthermore many people here although the mean well, are givving false information to support what the say. I wish more people what real fact actually participated in these questions. It would take me an hour to correct all the mistakes of the aother missinformed people that answered this.

To put it simple the 3 leaders were all great is some ways and all of them had flaws. Unfortunately most people here look at some facts with more emotional zeal than others.

Answer 4

Undoubtedly Genghis Khan, even the armies of Alexander was undefeated, but he did have a few setbacks, like for example when his army was tired after the battle with the Indian king Purshottama (commonly called Porus), in that battle he also could have died, coz an arrow plunged into his left lung. However, Genghis Khan strided from the plains of Mongolia to built the largest territory conqured by any man in History. The only empire that was larger than his in history was the British Empire ruled by Queen of Britain (like she even moved a muscle!), and was not bulit by a single person in cosequtive battles. But, speaking of empires as a whole it wasn't that great, but military yes.

Answer 5

Hmmm, I should have to say that for sheer size of empire, it would have to be a toss-up between Alexander and Ghengis Khan. I suppose that, if it were a question of size, then Ghengis Khan would win, but one must admit that Alexander was a military genius in his own right - his victory at Gaugamela is still remembered in history.

Their chief failing was that they were unable to truly hold and consolidate their respective empires so that it would remain standing even when they passed on.

Answer 6

George S. Patton
November 11, 1885 - December 21, 1945

Not in the question, but he took on forces that were better trained and better equipped. All because he had the unwavering support of his subordinates and had superior tactics. Maybe his commanders didn't agree with his way of wagging war but he got the job done were others would have failed. Both the enemies and his men feared and admired him and if that isn't a good military leader if not the best then i dint know what is.

Answer 7

None of them established an empire that had any great staying power. I'd rate them Alexander, Genghis Khan, then Bonaparte.

There are other military leaders in history with better records, such as Belisarius, Sherman, Marlborough, & Guderian.

I'd rate Julius Ceasar above the three you mentioned because unlike Bonaparte he improved over time & unlike all three his Empire endured.

Answer 8

I'm going to go out on a limb and say Alexander the Great because he managed to conquer most of the known world (at that time) when he was in his 20s and early 30s...at an age when most of us would be either in college or preparing for a career.

He also named some 70 cities after himself, too.

Answer 9

Ghengis Khan- he organized the Mongols and his rule was unified.

Answer 10

Alexander the great Built a better empire, I dont think napoleon will be recalled for anything more then failure and exile.