I think it'd be cool to see you do a top 10 underrated general list, generals who maybe aren't the greatest but often get overlooked by historians. It would be cool to see who you come up with
That's essentially what I was trying to ask. People like Geronimo and Spartacus, who gave the victors a really hard time, might not be remembered much a few centuries later.
Good point. I believe many Metatron's subscribers have interest in history, and there's almost nothing one can say about Caesar or Alexander in a few minute video that wouldn't be commonly known to the audience. Personally I would rather listen about Aetius than Attila. How did he managed to gather all sorts of tribes and stop the hun war machine. He must have been a really good strategist.
@@CaptainDisappointing Possibly misspoke myself. He's more of a political hero than a general anyway, but I'm still not sure what Metatron is actually measuring. Clever commanders on the wrong side of history - at least at the time - might or might not count by being unsuccessful. And, generals on the right side of history who find themselves suppressing incompetent bandits probably don't get remembered either.
I disagree with your last pick. I think Subutai (Genghis Khan's top general) deserves that spot. Subutai was responsible for conquering more land, defeated the Rus with a reconnaissance force, and defeated both Poland and Hungary the two most powerful kingdoms in Central Europe at the same time by dividing his forces into three groups. Genghis Khan is a great leader do not get me wrong, but Subutai was present at many battles in which Genghis Khan wasn't, and he continued conquering after Genghis Khan’s death. Subutai could have kept raiding and pillaging Europe if not for the unrest back in Mongolia as no European army was large enough at the time to stand in his way.
Genghis Khan also united the mongols by defeating most of the tribes in battle, organized the army in a matter similar to modern armies and he also developed many of the tactics Subutai would use. Subutai was a great general, don't get me wrong, but Genghis Khan deserves most of the credit.
Nice one, bringing down that republic. No really, thanks alot. Really appreciate it. Who needs democracy anyway, it's only standing in the way of tough decisions
Hail Caesar... Btw, how do you feel being only at #5? I would have put you at at least #3, you doubled the size of the Roman Republic, you helped to spread the ideas of civilization to the know world, & you helped to make my ancestors (the Celts) valued members of Rome...
@@jotabeas22 he doubled the size of the Roman Republic, expanded it's tax base, increased the size of the Senate, & created the idea of the Constitutional Monarcy... And, Rome was a Republic, not a democracy... There is a difference you know... In a republic people who have a stake in the government can vote, in a democracy the mob rules... Demos in ancient greek is mob & cracy is rule, so rule by the mob... Or if you can vote for the government to pay you to sit around all day & watch RU-vid, you will... While the Romans did have Bread & Circuses, in todays world that is Public Aid & Broadcast TV...
@@trippsmythoftheaurigancoal8155 That's really damn cool but why are you telling me that, lad? I already know that. Also, the kind of things you are saying "rule by the mob" and "vote for the government to pay you to sit around" and all that; please do be careful not to get hurt, lad. Wouldn't want you to get cut on that sharp _E D G E_ would we now?
Ikr? I feel like people keep repeating themselves in those top, talk about about other people's for sake, the ottoman leader, Inca, Hongwu the founder of the Ming, The founder of the songhai empire or Timur for exemple
@@theghosthero6173 I agree. Timur the lame was a great military commander, but a bad ruler. If a conquered city revolted? Meh, let's siege it again (and this happened repeatedly)! You've got great commanders in later periods as well Metatron who are worth considering ! Interested to see if we would agree.
Subutai (1175-1248) was a Mongol general and the primary military strategist of Genghis Khan and Ögedei Khan. He directed more than 20 campaigns and won 65 pitched battles, during which he conquered or overran more territory than any other commander in history as part of the expansion of the Mongol Empire, the largest contiguous empire in human history.[1] He often gained victory by means of imaginative and sophisticated strategies and routinely coordinated movements of armies that operated hundreds of kilometers apart from each other. Subutai is well known for the geographical diversity and success of his expeditions, which took him from central Asia to the Russian steppe and into Europe. He is widely regarded as one of the greatest military commanders and strategists in history.
My list for best premodern generals/admirals (5,000 B.C. to 1,500 A.D) 1. Gengis Kahn 2. Alexander the Great 3. Jan Žižka 4. Wu Qi 5. Charles Martel 6. Gaius Julius Caesar 7. Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus 8. Hannibal Barca 9. Yi Sun-sin 10.Jean Parisot de Valette
Great list mate. I know that you can’t really satisfy everyone, due to the subjectivity of this topic, But one general that always comes to mind when I think about this subject, is Khalid Ibe Al-Walid; the undefeated Muslim general who never lost, despite never having the numerical or technological advantage.
@@ahmadhafizuddin9812 europeans colonized half of tge world... Christianity is something used for easy manipulation, same as islam... Dead people do not come back to life and pedophiles are not prophets
For Muslim commanders he's the best. For Christian commanders imo Jan zizka. Zizka I'd say was a better commander for the simple fact that he was completely blind for half of the hussite wars.
@Dragon50275 I hope you aren't serious because many of Thrawn's enemies at the time were widely recognized and/or respected for their skill as military tacticians and leaders most notably Crix Madine, Leia Organa and by extension Han Solo(though they were pre-occupied by the birth of their children), Carlist Rieekan, Ackbar, Airen Cracken, and many others. Heck loosely speaking you could throw Luke Skywalker and Wedge Antilles on that list as well.
@Dragon50275 Crix Madine was the guy with the beard that was explaining the covert shuttle/Endor ground assault in ROTJ. Airen Cracken much like Madine performed and trained the Special Forces for the Rebels/New Republic. Garm Bel-Iblis who left the Rebels inevitably re-joined the New Republic was instrumental in Thrawn's defeat. Carlist Rieekan was the man in charge of the Hoth Echo Base in ESB and was one of the most intergral tacticians they had other than Ackbar and Dodonna.
@@hazardous0887 I'd assume he's whining about Genghis Khan being the only general from after the year 500, or so. As well as the fact that Sun Tzu and Cyrus are the only ones to make no incursions into Europe. Inevitable, really, given how little he narrowed it down, that biases would be pretty apparent. It would have been far better, imo to pick both a narrower timeframe (recorded history up to the beginning of modern history is waaayyyy too broad), and a geographical criteria (this list would be much better as a list of Mediterranean generals up to around 500 AD). As it is, most Asian and African contenders are overlooked (I don't, off the top of my head, personally know of any, though doubtlessly, they exist), as well as any medieval generals who might have deserved a spot (perhaps Charles Martel, Charlemagne, or Edward Longshanks, for instance). As it is, there are simply too many choices to do a half-decent job of picking ten.
@@baghoulio I mean technically Tullius did defeat Ulfric once before the game events, but Alduin interfered before he and the rebellion could meet their end.
@@Legendaryplaya Robin beat Grima and managed to avert an alternate future where he took over basically the entire world. In a way, the only thing that could stand in his way was himself.
Some of these choices are odd. Most are solid and we can argue 'til we're blue in the face whether they deserve the rank they received. However, three of them I feel don't belong on this list. Sun Tsu is an odd choice because there is no record, that I am aware of, existing of any battle he has led. He's a philosopher and a theoretical general. Mithradates is known for one battle. While impressive there are many other generals who did more for longer. Leonidas is known due to Spartan propaganda efforts and modern scholars have done much to show the Spartans in general have an inflated reputation. Not to mention the Greeks lost the battle of Thermopylae and that was one battle Leonidas was known for. To prove my above points I will name some other generals that have far outshone the above 3. Pyrrhus, Cincinnatus, Zhuge Liang, Belisarius, Subutai, Odaenathus, Antigonas, Tamerlane, Flavius Aetius, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and Nobunaga Oda are some examples that easily come to mind. I enjoy your videos. They always give me something to think about.
Emperor Julian would also be great to see on the list. He reorganized the Roman empire to its core, fought off all his enemies (francs, Persians) and is extremely underrated
I completely agree, those three should not be on the list. And all of your suggestions would of been much better. I'd like to see Titus Labienus on the list as well, he was a big contribution to Caesar's success in Gaul and was undefeated until he decided to have a conscience and oppose Caesar.
You shouldn’t forget Marius and Sulla, who defeated Jugurtha, Marius defeated the Kimbrians and Teutones and Sulla won impressive victories against Mithridates and conquered Rome. I don’t like him, but he was a military genius.
And Lucullus, Epaminondas, Saladin, Avidius Cassius, Seleucos. All of them were definitely better generals than Leonidas, because they actually archived something and proved themselves in more than just one brave last stand, on which historians are still unsure if it really served a purpose or was just stupid.
Although not a general, one of the most brilliant military commanders I've heard of is Admiral Yi Sun-sin. Not only for the tactics that he used to beta the Japanese time and time again, but also for the creation of the turtle-ship.
Without Khalid Ibn al-Walid, this list is not complete. He fought around 200 battles (both big and small battles) and was undefeated. He also defeated the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine) and the Persian Empire in Arabia, the Levant and in Iraq.
Belisarius, Oda Nobunaga, Xiang Yu, Alexander the Great, Pyrrhus, Leonidas, Hannibal Barca, Alkibiadis, Militiades, Epaminondas, Ranked according to military sins, such as ignoring numerical odds (from "severly outnumbered" to "why did they even bother?", extra points for stuff like repetition of said mistakes, winning regardless, creative taunts (...)), insane marching, extra difficult logistical support(/or being broke), creative fighting x my personal bias.
Belisarius was good but he is i think a bit overhyped (certainly because extra credit said that he was one of the most underrated general of history). If look closely his achievements (in their context) aren't that incredible.
@@pougetguillaume4632 "(certainly because extra credit said that he was one of the most underrated general of history)" Sry... who said that (name missing), and why does he/she get EXTRA credit for that?? It's not like belisar's life is a secret... "If look closely his achievements (in their context) aren't that incredible." Battle of Dara seems pretty impressive to me. + he defeate goths, vandals, persians afterwards, several times. And he has some pretty solid victories and draws. But that' not why he's top of my list. the reason he is that high on the list is, that most of the time his troops had been severly outnumbered (Ad Decimum he had like 5k more soldiers in total than the Vandals had elites. lol.), most of his army wasn't reliable or trustworthy and may have backstabbed him any time, he totally lacked the ressources (recruited troops, fleet, even funds were kinda meh, because spent on expensive mercenaries), the campaine(to defend italy from the xyz) itself was doomed from the start (17k men to defend westrome. lol.) and some of the tactical attacks and defenses could (and should^^) have gone south easily. That, and the fact he rarely did textbook deployment (instead went for the unheard off, unsual or strange when in doubt) and often used new variants of tactics give him a lot of extrapoints for the purpose of my list. No complaint about the overall strategic decisions though (apart from the war itself being totally dumb, of course^^). The only reason Nobunaga isn't top, is because he didn't pull those kind of thing too often (once. when he attack with a couple of thousands several tenthousands. at night.). Don't get me wrong, i do NOT think he is the best general (albeit certainly a very good one and definitly one of (maybe THE) the best in his time) on this list - he just happens to be the general who happens to meet my criteria (as stated in original comment) for "most entertaining general in ancient-late ancient history" best, in my opinion.
@@szarekhthesilent2047 i was talking about that extra credit ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-klq84Z9O4GU.html . If you look down in the comment section you will notice that the most praised general is belisarius (seriously just scroll down there's a fuck ton of comment asking for belisarius being in the top), so since there's a million views on extra credit's justinian serie and that they say he is an equivalent of napoleon but is unknown to the public, my theory is that a lot of people asking for belisarius just watched this and thought the same. Anyway belisarius is a very solid general (one of the best even) but making him a contender for a top 10 is dubious in my opinion. If you look at the war against the vandals a battle took place when he was marching to the vandal capital. The battle unfolded like that: vandals set a trap to sandwich the romans, but fortunatly (or rather luckily) roman cav manage to rout the weakest of the 2 forces, but even then the vandal had the upper hand, then the cav came back while the ennemy commander was unable to give order, the vandals got rekt. In this battle belisarius had only a minor impact, if the cav force hadn't routed the 1st vandal force the romans would have been in a terrible position (and would have likely lose). Belisarius has great feat under his belt and definitly is the best commander of the time, but one of the best of ALL TIME... i mean this exemple describes belisarius's carrier pretty well: "outgunned", outnumbered, with low odds of winning, smart maneuvers and (in my opinion) way too much luck (exemple of that luck: when he took back rome he fell in an ambush but managed to get back to the city, though the gate keeper didn't allowed him to go inside. So belisarius decided to make a last stand by charging with his remaining forces against his pursuiers and.... he won..... yeah he just won...... by charging them....... then of course they were disorganised but he just charged them with the idea of dying heroicly.... he never would have thought he could dispatch his foes..... but he did................ like that........ just by brute forcing his way through them........) belisarius's incredible feat are also due to that luck in my mind.
@@pougetguillaume4632 "Belisarius has great feat under his belt and definitly is the best commander of the time, but one of the best of ALL TIME... i mean this exemple describes belisarius's carrier pretty well: "outgunned", outnumbered, with low odds of winning, smart maneuvers and (in my opinion) way too much luck " Ehem... I said: "Don't get me wrong, i do NOT think he is the best general (albeit certainly a very good one and definitly one of (maybe THE) the best in his time) on this list - he just happens to be the general who happens to meet my criteria (as stated in original comment)" My criteria for this top 10 were: "Ranked according to military sins, such as ignoring numerical odds (from "severly outnumbered" to "why did they even bother?", extra points for stuff like repetition of said mistakes, winning regardless, creative taunts (...)), insane marching, extra difficult logistical support(/or being broke), creative fighting x my personal bias." Note, this does not mean I think he was a better general than those further down. Way more mistakes, the strategies He just fought more insane battles, made insane (or desperate) decision, that shouldn't have worked. and the still did. I mean, had he been my commander i'd deserted on day one, but ust reading about those maneuvers "stand by charging with his remaining forces against his pursuiers and.... he won..... yeah he just won...... by charging them...." Hillarious isn't it? The reason he is higher than Oda, is that he pulled that "screw-common sense or chances, let's ust try it" card very often, took battles that were basically lost
@@matthewkurt1433 yes actually khaled ibn al walid never lost a battle he won 28 battles and he was so smart he fought two of the strongest powers at that time at the same time
Given that modern history is generally regarded as beginning around 1500, I don't think Napoleon really needs an honorable mention for a list of pre-modern generals. If it were an all-time list, we'd easily see several of these picks knocked off by Gustavus Adolphus, Suvorov, and Napoleon, among others.
@@clara_corvus No. Modern greek is based on koine. Which is also greek, spoken in ancient times. Some local accents have retained some or most of the pre-koine ancient greek (rhodes, f.i.). and doesn't matter, as those names &titles mentioned here , would have nearly entirely the same pronounciation. Apart from that, he didn't pronounce in modern greek. or it would have been basilevs instead of basileus, f.i..
Nice list! But it seems Belisarius is forsaken once more :( His ghost now walking through slums of Istanbul, waiting for someone to feel his presence and embrace him once again.
My honorable mentions: - Zhuge Liang - Flavius Belesarius - Khalid ibn al-Walid (I quit at around 1350) Excellent list though, because I'm usually sceptical about these things. One should never doubt the Metatron
Are you kidding me. Khaled bin Waleed should be number one by a country mile. Never lost a battle against both world super powers at the time. With his own army being out manned and out gunned.
@@salahddinebensebane8429 Lel, Subotai went to a campaign with 60.000 men (all cavalry) and defeated all those who resisted him from now Mongolia to Middle-East then Georgia, Europe after defeating them went to Rus Principalities and defeated them all. Got ambushed by Volga Bulgars and still defeated them and then went back to Chinggis Khan. No commander did such campain with single army in one try. And no one accomplished such thing. During his campaign he most of time outnumbered by his enemies and still defeated his enemies. Died bcse of old age. He is the legend. Yes Khalid Ibn Walid is great but not as legendary as Subotai.
@@aslof1069 you clearly didn't her of his conquest of sassanid and bizantin but anyway l don't won't to start hating subotai because of his fans and l don't like to make people hate khalid because of me Maybe you are a mangolien so that's why you see subotai as legendary but as a Muslim l see khlid as legendary Édit l also consider subotai, as one of the greatest underted Generals of history l fell you man the west only now there comenders but they never herd of owers so we always try to let them now that we also have great comenders
He wasn't meant to win. He was supposed to make the Athenians and the rest city states some time to prepare for battle, while fighting an army at least 25 times larger than his. Instead, he stood his ground fighting restlessly for three days in a row and inflicting a significant wound on the Persian forces.
@@raptorjesues1445 what did he achieve? Tell me how you would have fought differently if you were a spartan? It would have been a tactic that anyone would have used in his situation. That is not special. What is special is that it happened and that it gave Greeks great pride and hope.
@@tanegurnick5071 what makes Leonidas a great general is his ability to choose a good battlefield Which he did in Thermopylae Remember the greeks managed to hold the persians for 3 whole days before losing, and it's entirely because of the terrain, the passage at Thermopylae was narrow that meant that the persians couldn't take advantage of their huge numbers, the only reason the greeks lost was because of Ephialtes, no other reason, Leonidas choose the perfect position for the battle, not to mention that he fought with his men and stood with the rearguard knowing that he was going to die after he ordered the rest of the greeks to retreat, he was one of the first casualties after the persians surrounded the rest of the greeks making him a brave leader. He IS a great general and he DID achieve alot of things with his stance. I entirely understand why metatron put him in the list.
The amount of handicaps place upon Hannibal and his army during the leadup to the Battle of Zama effectively nullifies said battle as a way of pointing to Hannibal's inferiority to Scipio (especially considering that few, if any, of such handicaps were of Scipio's doing). At the end of the day, Hannibal did more, with less, for longer than Scipio. Hannibal>Scipio
Hannibal didn't want to fight the battle knowing it was going to be a loss and recommended discusing peace terms instead, . Surprisingly Hannibal nearly won the battle.
An interesting list - as far as Romans go,I always had a soft spot for Gaius Marius and Flavius Stilicho. Only change I would make is swapping 1 and 2.That's just a personal preference.
@@MrPSyman3 Lol, forget for a moment that this was only about pre-modern times. Still could have featured Khalid ibn Walid though. Dude is a absolute legend with more than a 100 won battles and 0 losses and lived way before Genghis Khan so could have easily been featured.
I dont know about no°1, Subotai was credited quite a lot for the conquest but whatever, he video was great as usual. It would be pretty nice to have a part 2 with 14th century+ generals
Interesting list very good. I still rate Alexander first because of his genius and I think he was significantly outnumbered in most of his serious battles like Issus and Guagemella . Also when he fought the mounted archers in Afghanistan . He had to change his tactics to defeat them then he incorporated them into his army and used them greatly . Genghis was also a genius and he built his army and then conquered a lot of territory. He certainly is in the top of the greatest generals of all time.
2:28 To my understanding, the plans for The Battle of Thermopylae, and where Leonidas was to fight was due to Themistocles leadership. I guess the history channel could be wrong, but according to the historians on the show, Themistocles was the one who developed the plan, it was his tactics that destroyed the Persian Navy, and later again it was his leadership which decisively crushed what remained of their navy forcing them to retreat back to Persia.
Yep, Metatron favored the Ancient Generals too much IMO. Generals like Skandenberg, Jan (Janos) Hunyadi, Stephen the Great, Jan Zizka, Alexander Nevsky, Piotr Dunin, Dmitry Donskoy, Edward III, and other medieval commanders deserve a mention.
Good video. But these types of lists are hard, because so many people have to be left out. Charlemagne, Saladin, Ramesses II and plenty of others, without even getting into the pre-modern. It might make more sense to do a Top 10 list by narrower time periods. The Top 10 ancient generals, Top 10 medieval generals, Top 10 Renaissance to pre-industrial era generals, etc. That would also allow for a fairer comparison. I mean, was Ghengis Khan a better general than Napoleon? How can you compare the two, given the huge gulf in time and technology between them. Would Ghengis Khan's tactics work in the 19th century against the artillery and disciplined musketry of European armies? Would Napoleon have been a good commander of knights, spearmen and archers back in the 13th century? Maybe they were so good they'd have adapted to the tactics of the day, but maybe they were only good in the context of their time.
+solid snake Khalid ibn al-Walid definitely deserves to be on this list, but not Salah ad-Din. I probably would have also put Subutai on this list over Genghis Khan. =/
- what's ya name? - Ahmed ibn Tariq ibn Mahmud ibn Hassan al Garadja. - So... Ibn. - No no no no. Ibn only means that I'm some1's son. Son of Tariq who is the son of Mahmud who is... - Yeah, that's exactly what I'm sayin'. It's Ibn. I got it.
This list focuses mostly on ancient history, so I'll mix my top 10 a bit: 1. Gaius Marius Battle of Vercelleae, Marian Reforms 2. Genghis Khan Battle of Yehuling, conquering of most of Asia and Eastern Europe 3. Julius Caesar Battle of Alesia, conquering of Gaul 4. Gustav Adolphus Battle of Breitenfeld, precursor of Combined Arms Warfare 5. Napoleon Battle of Austerlitz, conquering of most of 19th century continental Europe 6. Alexander the Great Battle of Gaugamela, conquering of most of southwestern Asia 7. Georgij Zhukov Battle of Moscow, Marshal of the Red Army in WW2 8. Heinz Guderian Battle of France, Operation Barbarossa 9. Flavius Belisarius "re-conquered" most of the former Western Roman Empire during the Renovatio Imperii 10. Timur Battle of Ancyra, successful invasion of Anatolia
Thank you Metatron, a very good video with great presentation! You asked for listeners' lists, here's mine, ancient through medieval: 10 Aurelian 9 Tuthmose III 8 Saladin 7 Caesar 6 Timur 5 Belisarius 4 Genghis Khan 3 Hannibal 2 Scipio Africanus 1 Alexander
Napoleon #1 for me considering he was against ALL of the super powers at once, and Alexander #2 for conquering all he did while only being 30!!! Imagine if he lived to 65 like Ghengis….. Truly incredible.
@@Heisenberg2974 Genghis didn’t fight like Alexander did, Alexander had 8 battle wounds that we know of and never lost a battle unlike ghengis. Genghis lived almost to his 70’s, Alexander only 32! Subutai also carried genghis. Alexander the Great over genghis all day.
Vietnam we also have many outstanding talented generals. Typically, Tran Hung Dao who chased three times invaded Dai Viet. Quang Trung who defeated 29,000 Chinese troops (China). Vo Nguyen Giap, the commander of the Vietnamese People's Army, drove the French colonialists and American Imperialists out of the country, in addition to being a master of guerrilla warfare.
The top 11 Generals in Word History is 11. Frederick the Great 10. Pyrrhus 9. Attila the Hun, 8. Sun Tzu 7. Napoleon Bonaparte, 6. Belisarius, 5. Hannibal Barca, 4. Julio Caesar 3. Cyrus II the Great 2. Genghis Khan 1. Great Alexander. Very good video but Napoleon, Belisarius and Pyrrhus it is great Military Genius in our time.
Though not as well known as the generals on this list, 2 other generals that i feel are worth mentioning are Korean General Yi Sun Shin, who essentially had to learn how to command a navy in a short amount of time after he was thrust into the position during Korea's preparations for an inevitable Japanese invasion. The only thing that down plays his achievements a bit was that the Japanese naval doctrine at the time. The naval doctrine reflected those tactics used in super ancient times before like the idea of using massive projectiles to take down ships from afar was more effective than just boarding ships and fighting a land battle on ships. the other general is Ming General Qi Jiguang, who had to essentially learn how to train troops (and win battles with them) on his own under a pretty corrupt Ming government at the time in order to not only beat Wako Pirates that were plaguing the coast, but fend off China's northern tribes. The Ming government would later just store his manuals and forget all the lessons that he learned and return to being corrupt and having an ineffective army until Japan comes knocking on the door, but by that time it signaled the start of the end of the dynasty. the 2 generals may not have achieved as much as those on the list, but these 2 I kinda admire due to the environment and governments each had to deal with at the time, cause during their respective times, their governments were kinda whats the word, backwards and corrupt. i mean when the governments believe that some dude who memorized Confucian classics and only did paperwork their entire lives could lead an army better than a career soldier, ya know they got problems.
Hm, I think Leonidas certainly doesn't belong to this list. Also Sun Tzu and Kourosh are questionable. Kourosh was more a fantastic statesman than a particularly capable general. I would seriously consider Belisarius or Charlemagne
I have to agree here. The Spartans at the hot gates got flanked and the Persians sacked Athens anyway. How the Achemenids took so many powers is always attributed to some unique strategem, but I am inclined to believe the Shananshah won more through politics than warfare. Not to say he didn't wreck some of his enemies, but we really only have the Father of Lies to go with here in the west.
@@Deridus Ariobarzanes held off Alexander the Great for much longer in a similar situation like Leonidas, though Dariush III wasn't able to to mount a proper relief force to bail him out. The conquest of Alexander the Great is another proof that Achaemenid shahanshahs traditionally weren't exactly good generals (Khashayar certainly didn't seem to be the most competent either…). They were skilled politicians and the federal empire system was very effective, but their military skills were debatable. In fact it would have been better if Alexander survived, as he most likely would have founded a Macedonian dynasty of the Persian empire as he was starting to adapt to the Persian style of government. And yeah, Herodotus is not really the reliable source we want. Though we also have Xenophon. Although Herodotus did not really lie, he just chose not to verify anything and just reported the stories with his own commentary. For example he didn't believe in the circumnavigation of africa by the phoenicians because of their reports about the position of the sun. However, he accidentally delivered proof just because of that detail.
it's not top 10 Strategists HERE IS 3 things Generals need to be a good general and here is Leonidas' Score with each. 1: Being able to keep the troops Morale up and wanting to fight until they lay dead on the ground: 10/10 Leonidas was a genius at this don't deny it 2: Tactics, But knowing the landscape and using it to your advantage this is what Leonidas did he knew Persians didn't know about the path behind the mountains (until a traitor came along) so Leonidas used it to his advantage: 7.5/10 3: Strike Fear into the enemy with comebacks (It may not seem important but when you say these things to show the enemy your not afraid to die it makes them nervous): 8/10
@@Nazdreg1 Cyrus the great control 2 out 3 of the known world Cyrus the great is one of the best military commander in history if not the greatest in history never lost a battle conquered Median empire, Neo-Babylonian Empire , Lydian empire, Gandhara Kingdom or empire was powerful state , Elam , ancient Phoenicia ,Cyrus' Conquest of Elam Part of the Wars of Cyrus the Great also beat Iranic nomads and others created the most powerful empire of is time the biggest the world has seen in that time Cyrus was outnumber many time for example Cyrus defeated Lydians three times. He won the battle of Pteria while he had 20 000 to 30 000 soldiers but Lydians had 90 000 to 95 000 He won the battle of Thymbra while he had 49 000 to 50 000 soldiers but Lydians had 105 000 to 110 000 soldiers. He conquered Sardis and defeated the Ionians. He established a large empire 10 years(or less) and rulled over it for 30 years. Cyrus the great was outnumbered in half of his battles. He never lost a war Cyrus defeated and conquered the 2 most powerful empires of is time tell me one military commander that conquered 2 most powerful empires of there time at there height the Medes and Babylonians were at the height of their power) AT HEIGHT OF THEIR POWER Alexander never beat Iranian empire at their height of their power) Hannibal Barca couldn’t even conquered Rome before Rome was empire and Alexander didn’t beat the Iranian empire at height Cyrus actually beat the most powerful Empires of is time at there height
Tsubodai was Genghis Khan's favourite general, and lived to participate in more conquest than Genghis did. Imo he's the greater military mind of the two.
There were more great generals in Chinese history who had more military performance than Sun Tzu, yet I think most of you may never heard of. My own list (without ranking of superiority): Timurd: The cruel and ambitious nomadic leader never lost a battle in his life, which is an achievement that neither Genghis Khan or Subutai had achieved. The only thing you can doubt is he had similar casualty when compared with his enemy in Battle of Ankara when he had a larger army. Khalid ibn Walid: The Sword of Islam never failed. His victory at Yarmouk was great, yet his invasion of Persia was even more impressive, when he used 19000 troops to storm the enemy several times larger in series of battles. He only had a battle ended in tie, when the commanders before him died in battle and the battle was nearly lost before he took control. Scorpio: Rome has many great generals, yet Scorpio never lost and defeated Hannibal, the greatest enemy of Rome (although Hannibal had a strategic disadvantage and he should not be responsible for Battle of Zama）. This is an achievement that Caesar did not manage to get. Alexander: Arguably the best military of Western history, who was honored by his enemies as god of war. Li Jing: The best general of Tang Dynasty who viewed as Vessavana in Buddhism. Li Jing never lost a battle in his military career and could defeat his enemies with a much smaller force. His most influential victory was conquering Gokturk Empire within 3 months and captured their Khan. Wu Qi: A great strategist and statesman in Warring States, whose book was viewed an equivalent to Sun Tzu’s Art of War. There were many great generals in Warring States who had similar abilities, yet no one can be like Wu Qi since wherever he served, the kingdom would rise to be a hegemon. Epaminondis: The great Theban General and statesman lad his state wining every battle they fought until his death. His Ethelon Tactic was practiced countless times by military leaders around the world. Do not get me wrong. I also believe that generals like Caesar, Genghis Khan or Napoleon would be great that was very close and comparable to the guys on my list. However, this is subjective and I think they had somewhat made mistakes in their military career. There were also other great generals that you may hear less often , yet they were no less strong, like Sharpur I, Abu Muslim，Surena, Charles Martel, Bai Qi, Liu Yu, Tuoba Tao, Li Shimin.
The fact that Napoleon isn’t even your number 1 let alone not in your list just shows you have incredible bias or outright stupid ranking. Don’t get me wrong people can disagree but Napoleon as a general is unmatched. It’s impossible to compare and ranking generals from different periods as war always evolves alongside society but there is one general that is above all. He doesn’t have these exaggerated titles that are often propaganda such as “undefeated” or “won a hundred battles” etc etc. he did neither. However, he was alive 2 centuries ago and for that reason we know so much about his battles and unlike the past he was in a period that had a population boom with massive armies and endless battles. He proved himself with a larger and smaller army, in different climates, etc. his abilities as a politician was his downfall but as a military commander/strategist he is unmatched and the fact that you haven’t included him in your list makes your list pointless. Seems you’ve often gone for generals who haven’t seen as many battles as Napoleon and just listed all the generals who apparently “never lost” which shows a lack of knowledge in history and military strategy. Most of whom in your list is undefeated but it seems you don’t understand the entire picture as undefeated means nothing. Napoleon could’ve gone undefeated in any time period before the 16th century where warfare changed completely. All the generals you’ve picked lived in periods that had concentrated almost sole/singular battles a “do” or “die” situation which is something that wasn’t really a thing during the Napoleonic wars. Just look at the amount of battles, army sizes, total casualties in the Napoleonic wars. I don’t know the real figures but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was more battles between 1789 - 1815 than in the life time of all the generals you mentioned. Having fought over 60 battles as the commanding general, which is easily more than any general you’ve listed and only lost 4 , drawn 4 and won 52 battles shows you his ability. He was someone who could hit you lightning fast most often by overwhelming with more or less soldiers. His restructuring or the French army was something that was later further developed and is still in practice to a certain extent. His understanding of his own capabilities and his enemies was unmatched. I mean I could go on, but as a military commander he is a genius and most historians and military officers of present agree. His only downfall was his politically capabilities and temper. Had he acquired those skills then we would all be speaking French right now.
@@guneytopal1713 I doubt if Napoleon will agree with you since he himself was a huge fan of Alexandra and also said something like he was unable to achieve his achievements...Napoleon is definitely a great general and probably the best of his age, but it is hard to say that he is the best of all time. Many generals had fought more battles. It is just not all of them were well recorded as in 19th Century. Wu Qi, for example, fought 76 battles, with 64 victories and 12 draws (no defeats). Napoleon, though won many victories,lost more than 4 battles as I know, including 2nd Battle of Bassano, Battle of Caldiero, Battle of Aspern-Essling, Battle of Krasnoi, Battle of Leipzig, Battle of Laon, Battle of Arcis-sur-Aube, Battle of Waterloo. There are just more military leaders in history that had higher win rate.
Or Subutai - the Mongol general who did most of the conquering who was undefeated in battle and conquered over 30 nations. Or Khalid ibn al-Walid, who beat both the Eastern Romans and the Persians. Or Xiang Yu, Han Xin, Sun Bin, etc - generals who have better documentation than Sun Tzu.
Great video! Thank you for the upload. Suggestion: You sound a bit hissy, and a slight echo. Either a different mixing or a new microphone could fix that up.
(In order they occurred to me) Pyrrhus, Alexander the Great, *Belasarius*, Hannibal, Julius Caesar, Scipio Africanus, Charlemagne, Richard I, Henry V, Gen Wellesley, Alexander Nevsky, Napoleon Bonaparte, Gen George Washington, Gen George S. Patton, Genghis Khan/Subutai, Tamerlane, Han Xin These are the guys that everyone should study. Some were especially good at battlefield tactics while others were excellent long-campaign strategists.
@Mythical Myth hhhhhhh im sorry i think i didnt make my make my openion clear when i said 'he is to stupid to put him there ' i ment that the person who made the video was to stupid to put khaled ibn al walid
Good analysis, Raf! Looking forward to the next series of top ten most effective generals, time-wise. How fortunate are we who have discovered your channel...
How about a part two? Jan Zizka undefeaded in Battle, with mostly peasents against far more numerous Cussaders. Also he was one of the first to use small arms firearms in battle.
@@Joshua_23 yes, but Kwon Yul in particular won three important battles outnumbered by the enemy and with an inferior equipment. He was *a sort of* Leonidas, with the difference that he and his men won again and again against very strong and ferocious enemies
@@bfstek22 "pre-modern" is used to describe the "medieval" civilizations during the modern era, like the Edo Period in Japan, the late Joseon Dynasty in Korea or the late Ming and Qing dynasty in China
This list is too Euro-centric, I would say. There are many Asian generals who are better than many on this list. Many missing Asian generals like Khalid al-Walid, Subutai, Saladin, Baibar, Timur Tamerlane , Babur, Suleiman the Magnificent,Takeda Shingen.
Here's a brief history on army ranks. There's actually three levels of officers. Company grade, field grade and general grade. They are commanded by "Captains" or Heads. They are assisted by "Lieutenants" or place holders. The third in command are the "Sergeants" or servants. So with the field officers. A regiment is commanded by a Captain (Head) of the Column or Colonel. He is assisted by the Lieutenant Colonel. The third in command is the Sergeant Major, high servant, now called Major. So in the general officers level. The overall commander is the Captain-General, Head of everything or overall head. He is assisted by the Lieutenant-General, overall place holder. The third in command is the Sergeant Major General. High servant of everything. The captains and lieutenants were gentlemen and the sergeants were commoners.
Do you know about Viriato? He was the most important leader of the Lusitanian resistance against the Romans in the Iberian peninsula. The Lusitanians stood out to the romans by their bravery and their skills in guerrilla war, keeping in mind that they were warriors and shepherds from a very mountainous region. Viriato kept fighting on his campaign for approximately 11 years, and then he was assassinated by three men from allied Baetica in exchange for land and money. According to legend, these 3 men when heading back to the roman camp (or Rome?) they were told: "Rome does not pay to traitors", and were killed instantly.
Leonidas lost the battle of the hot gates and failed to slow the Persians enough to matter. Darius still burned Athens. I'm shocked he would put him on this list. We only even know his name because Herodotus(who constantly exaggerated and sometimes flat out lied.) was a fan boy.
@@jotabeas22 1: Being able to keep the troops Morale up and wanting to fight until they lay dead on the ground: 10/10 Leonidas was a genius at this don't deny it 2: Tactics, But knowing the landscape and using it to your advantage this is what Leonidas did he knew Persians didn't know about the path behind the mountains (until a traitor came along) so Leonidas used it to his advantage: 7.5/10 3: Strike Fear into the enemy with comebacks (It may not seem important but when you say these things to show the enemy your not afraid to die it makes them nervous): 8/10
My top ten is: 10. William The Conquerer 9. Leonidas 8. Sun Tzu 7.Julius Caesar 6. Alexander the Great 5. Attila The Hun 4. Scipio Africanus 3. Date Masamune 2. Genghis Khan 1. Hannibal Barca
My list is similar to Metatron (minus Sun Tzu, because there is no certainty he existed), but I rank Alexander as 1 and Genghis Khan as 2. And the reason is simple: Alexander never lost, no matter what, while Genghis Khan did lose several battles in his youth, when he was trying to unite the tribes of Mongolia. Alexander is the only big conqueror that never experienced defeat, so that puts him above Genghis Khan in my list.
Every war is fought in relative terms, that being said, Vo Nguyen Giap has to be considered as a top ten General of all time, his expertise at conventional and especially guerilla warfare tactics, and his ability to inspire his people are unquestioned!
What about Pyrrhus the great? Even Hannibal placed him second after Alexander the great. He fought in the wars of the diadochi and in Italy against the Romans and the Carthaginians at the same time.
Not a bad list, just in my opinion, the Korean general Yi sun shin should have been on this list:HE never lost a battle, because he always knew what he knew and had and what he did not(like superior cannons to lesser bows, etc) and always knew where he was fighting and who he was fighting.
Khalid ibn-al Walid never lost a battle and won more than most of the generals. Saladin Ayyubid stopped the crusaders and took Jerusalem, Mecca and Medina. Subutai was like Genghis Khan 2
Kingdom of Georgia was in it's prime at that time when Mongols came. Legit the first time we ever went on offensive and established vassal states. We were preparing to join the Crusade and then out of nowhere Mongols came. That was 13th century. The damage they caused in the course of 80 years, we still have not recovered from that today. Genghis was an absolute mastermind.
You should make a video about ancient greatest admirals in history too, the Athenian navy had quite the upset victory against the Persians... there's also the amazing Korean admiral Yi. Extra history has a great series of videos detailing Admiral Yi's accomplishments.
Leonidas? Really? I am sorry, as much as I like the battle at the Thermopylae there are scholars who question his decision to fight in a place that could get sorrounded through that famous secret path. I mean, his strategy in general was great, the spot he chose for it was less so. I also think that there are many more generals who have a better claim to fame than Leonidas. He only had the Thermopylae to his credits, a battle that he lost. Heck, there was Themistocles (!!!) who was much much more important and more successful in battle than Leonidas, and he was indefinitely more important for the victory of the Greeks in general (I think he even was very much against choosing the Thermopylae as the battlefield. If so, history is very much in his favour). If not for him and his victory at Salamis the Spartans probably wouldn't have stepped outside the Peloponnese after the Thermopylae. Then there were generals like Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus or Lucius Cornelius Sulla (he essentially did what Caesar did and under comparable circumstances, but a few decades before him) or Trajan, and there are probably many more in Roman history alone. Don't get me wrong. I enjoy your content, of course including this video, and this is your opinion, but I think that Leonidas wasn't a good choice. And now I hate myself because I commented on a top 10 list knowing full that it is kind of stupid to watch them or to make them (if they are intended seriously) because there is no way you could pick the 10 best things on any subject. There is just too much to choose from. Personally I don't have a top 10 list of anything because of that reason. I'll shut up now 😉 keep up the good work.
How can sun tzu be at the bottom when centuries after his death his book, a product of his wisdom, heavily influenced the major battles of modern times even vietnam war?
I think you gave too little credit to other medieval European Generals like Charlemagne, Edward the III of England and Enry V of England and other who deserved some credit
@@karlmarx7333 I don't know, William fought only in one major battle and Harald was defeted and died at Stanford Bridge, but I think that Richard and Saladin are worth mentioning
If anything, he gives way too little credit to non-European generals. it's surprise that he didn't mention Subutai, the actual Mongol general who did much of the conquering for the Mongols (Genghis Khan was more of a leader rather than a general). Subutai conquered over 30 nations and never lost a battle. He also didn't mention Khalid ibn al-Walid, the general who defeated both the Eastern Roman Empire and Persian Sassanid Empire to help create the first Islamic Caliphate. Or Xiang Yu, Han Xin, Sun Bin, Yue Fei, etc - Chinese generals who all have better documentation than the semi-historical Sun Tzu. etc
I know this is completely unrelated to the video, but I have been wondering about this for many years and found few results. How did the Japanese of Ancient Japan stay warm in the winter, and by extension, how did Samurai stay warm in a winter setting? I understand that you might be busy with other ideas but if you could please take the time to make a video about this, I would GREATLY appreciate it. Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I hope you have a good day!
I would like to recommend you someone who is not on this list. Our own Vietnamese National Hero, Trần Hưng Đạo who was the Grand Marshall of the Viet Kingdom during the 3 Mongol's Invasion of Vietnam
You missed someone very important: Subutai was a major innovator in the art of war, and his later campaigns demonstrated an unprecedented level of complexity and strategy not seen again until World War II. In the invasions of China, Russia, and Europe, Subutai routinely coordinated armies of ~100,000 men across frontages separated by 500-1,000 km and between 3 and 5 separate army groups.
@@aslof1069 Russia was an area, not a nation during the mongol invasion. The Rus Principalities once had been united under the Kievan Rus, but by the time of the mongols, they were dozens of small independent nations always fighting each other, but usually grouping up against foreign invaders. When the mongol came, Novgorod, Vladimir and Kiev were the 3 strongest Rus nations and were all rivals. Novgorod never fought an actual battle against the mongols, but won a few skirmishes and for some reason, the mongol turned back before reaching it. During the actual invasion of Europe begining in the 1240's and 1250's. Alexander Nevsky, accepted as Prince of Novgorod to have the great northern pricipality pay tribute, but due to him impressing the mongols as well as his great diplomatic skills, Novgorod remained politically fully independent. Alexander ruled over all 3 great Rus during his life, his status with the mongols earned better conditions for Vladimir and Kiev. Also, Novgorod got consecutively attacked by the Swedes and Teutons, while managing tensions with the mongols who wanted more tha tribute. He is the sole rus I know off who had some measure of succes against the Mongol Empire before it shattered (he led successful skirmishes and like I said really impressed them, so much that they apparently tried to recruit him).
@@nathanc939 Alexander Nevsky is just lucky because Mongols had a law that if anyone who surrenders without any struggle they are spared and will have their properties and its people under his control. This is why Mongols did not burn those principalities. Before that, most of the Rus cities etc were all burned and Mongols made a great example of them. This is why he surrendered. Usually, Mongols chose the person who will be in command. Nevsky was a well honoured person by his people. Thus, he remained on his seat and he had duty to report all the news to Mongol Empire and to send soldiers to. They became vassal. So I will say, before saying something you have to read history from many other sources. As I see you just read Russian side. But you missed Mongol, Korean, MIddle Eastern, European Historians.
As much as I love this channel, this list makes no sense. Sun Tzu is barely top 10 in Chinese history, how come he is the world's top 10? Khalid ibn ah Walid and Bai Qi should definitely be in here. And leonidas? Seriously?
Yo dude love the video as a basic list but you should do a series of top ten generals for each couple of centuries. As there are to many awsome comanders through time. As always thanks for the vid man.
1st will be Subedei's Army they smashed all Russian Principalities then destroyed European crusaders, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria then fought with middle eastern armies without going back at all. It was just forward conquest full of victory.
10.Julius Caesar 9.Scipio Africanus 8.Alexander Suvorov 7.Hannibal Barca 6.Khalid Ibn Al Walid 5.Timur 4.Cyrus The Great 3.Napoleon Bonaparte 2.Alexander The Great 1.Genghis Khan
