Who is the world's greatest battle strategist/conquerer?

Question

Not to glorify the deaths they caused, merely to discuss their impacts on the world.

Can anyone even hold a candle to Alexander?

Thanks for the really good answers from everyone so far, particularly MJR's. That was very thorough.

Answer 1

Genghis Khan!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan

Answer 2

As conquerors, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte all had great success. Alexander was also a fierce warrior and able strategist, as was Caesar. Other great battle commanders while not considered as conquerors were: Hannibal Barca, Trajan, Scipio Africanus, Gaius Marius, Pompey the Great, Saladin, Charlemagne, Frederick the Great, Edward III, Henry V, the Duke of Marlborough, Suvorov, the Duke of Wellington, Napoleon's marshals: Davout, Soult, Lannes, Massena, many more modern generals such as Rommel, von Manstein, Patton, etc...

Answer 3

Alexander was probably the greatest conqueror, Caesar's conquests, though, were almost as extensive and probably more significant. The areas Caesar conquered stayed in the Roman Empire for centuries. Alexander's empire fell apart in a few years, and most of the territories he conquered weren't permanently effected to a substantial degree.

I think the greatest general and strategist was a man whose name is much less well known, the Byzantine general Belisarius. I rate him above Caesar, Alexander, or Napoleon because he had far less to work with. The Roman Legions Caesar deployed were a superb instrument of war, and they won repeatedly, even when led by politicians who became battle leaders just to further their political ambitions, but had no military expertise. The same was true, to a lesser degree, of Alexander's phalanxes. The Byzantine armies were far weaker, and were often defeated under other generals, but when led by Belisarius were victorious nearly everywhere he fought.

Answer 4

While Alexander is the greatest general, probably because he suffered from some sort of mental disorder, the greatest strategist just above Napoleon is Hannibal.

The Roman Empire would be known as the Cathanginian Empire if Hannibal had not blinked after the battle of Cannae. Hannibal killed more Roman's and took more Roman land with the men he left Carthage with then any single force in the history of the indestructable empire. And he took the scenic route. Imagine the logistical problems he had to face in crossing the Alps with elephants. Imagine the charisma he must have had to push his troops through years of war in a land not their own and to become the stuff of scary stories to the Romans.

His battle formations and direction of troops made him unrivaled on the battlefield though at many times out numbered and giving up homefield advantage he became the one general the Roman's refused to face in open combat.

Hannibal would have single handedly taken over the mediterrianian had a) he'd taken Rome after killing 50,000 Romans at Cannae (the bloodiest battle in history) and b) Carthage had not played politics in the war which is what eventually defeated Hannibal, not the Romans.

Answer 5

As far as world impact, it is pretty much a toss up between Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great.

Genghis Khan's Empire was the largest the world has ever known and lasted (in part) for nearly 300 years. The Mongol Empire influenced culture and society from Eastern Europe to Japan, and from Northern Russia to Arabia and the Himalaya Mountains.

Alexander the Great's empire had more effect on Western Civilization, but it did not even last a lifetime.

Doc

Answer 6

1) Patton how far could he have gone given a free hand in france during 1944?

2) Rommel what could he have done had he more than 25% of the force required to win in africa plus his defense of france and the conquest of france.

3) zhukov the defender of russia and did well in the east prior to facing the germans

4) Paul Hausser for his tactical leadership of the II SS Panzer Corps, he restored the sagging front after Stalingrad and Kursk, beating Soviet Armies 7 times his size.

5) napolean master of land and sea warfare egypt and russian were his for a while. He was left chomping on the bit along the English Coast the same as Hitler tho.

6) thomas jackson, for his tactical victories in the Shenandoah Valley and Chancellorsville. He made bobby lee look good and if he was alive, could've won at Gettysburg too.

7) macarthur same as napolean but not the size of scale of conquest. A free hand could've won the Korean Conflict, either that or a direct confrontation with China...who knows?

8)Moltke first used the practice of mobility with railroads and the use of commanders to figure out the best way to take an objective

9)Sherman author the first demonstation of total warfare with march through the south to atlanta

10)genghis khan able to go from mongolia to europe a large undertaking considering his time. His empire was larger than Hitlers, Alexanders, and the Roman Empire combined.

11) charlemagne last big empire of europe until napolean. Without him, Europe would've been overrun by the Moors/Saracens (You'd be praying to Mecca each day).

12)Gauis Julius Caesar, especially for his exploits in Gaul and Britainnia...

Answer 7

ALEXANDER THE GREAT!!! DEFINITELY, NO DOUBT. A great conqueror is measured in the impact that he had in his time and the consequences that still affect our lives. Imagine if Alexander had never existed... the persians might very well have taken over Europe( they triued before, they could try again). Alexander not only removed the persin threat to europe, but also directed the greek civilisation to the east, and ensured a safe haven for the romans to develop nicely in italy ( and ultimatly most of europe and middle east). Had he lived for another ten years, who knows what effcets he might have had. Forget Napoleon, Genghis Khan and all the others. Their empires have come and gone, without livoing behind any notable sign of their presence. Alexander's empire "greeked" the eastern world, thus combining 2 great civilisations. He was the right man at the right place ant the right time, and he left a huge mark on the history of man-kind. ALEXANDER!!!!

Answer 8

Julius Caesar was Alexander III of Macedon's chief rival here. Plutarch paired them in his biograhies. In college, a pal and I debated who was greatest. I chose Alexander, while Paul chose Julius Caesar. Alexander conquered his known world and much of the unknown to India, so I do not see how anyone could ever equal that, unless he conquers Mars and Venus. We had interesting and educational discussions about such matters.

Answer 9

I'd say Napoleon. In the speed and the magnitude of his conquests, well I don't know anybody else like him. Not only that but he returned to his hometown after the so-called "300" days of inprisonment and conquered everything once more, this time without any weapons. Everybody just surrendered including his "roaylist" enemies who could shoot at him.

Answer 10

Scipio Africanus