- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Alexander the great vs Genghis Khan
Posted on 11/22/17 at 1:43 pm to jmh5724
Posted on 11/22/17 at 1:43 pm to jmh5724
quote:
they never could penetrate the higher populated regions of Europe, India or China
the Mongols conquered China and the (at the time highly populated) Middle East. They were never defeated by a European army, and in fact a scouting force led by Subutai absolutely massacred the Russians. The Mongol forces that were in the process of overtaking Eastern Europe were recalled to Mongolia when Ghengis Khan died.
0
Posted on 11/22/17 at 1:44 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
Genghis Khan
Posted on 11/22/17 at 1:59 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
Battle of Pydna 168BC
38,600 Roman legion vs 43,000 Macedonian Phalanx
Roman casualty:100 killed
Macedonia casualty: 20,000 killed, 11000 captured
This battle brought an end to the mighty Phalanx (Macedonian version was the best) and proved once and for all the superiority of the legion. And warfare has evolved for another 1500 years. No match for the Mongols.
38,600 Roman legion vs 43,000 Macedonian Phalanx
Roman casualty:100 killed
Macedonia casualty: 20,000 killed, 11000 captured
This battle brought an end to the mighty Phalanx (Macedonian version was the best) and proved once and for all the superiority of the legion. And warfare has evolved for another 1500 years. No match for the Mongols.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:01 pm to junior
quote:are you trying to say Alexander couldn't beat Caesar? EL O frickING EL
Again, it was 1500 years later. The Greek phalanx couldn't beat the Romans much less the Mongols.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:05 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
You are 2 minutes late.
Look up.
Look up.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:06 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
If they have the same size armies on a terrain foreign to both armies who ya got? Personally, I'd go with Alexander no matter what as I believe he is the most gifted military mind to ever live
Are we talking with their armies as they were at the time they commanded them? If so, then GK. If both armies were equally armed with the then most modern stuff, Alexander.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:15 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Feigned flight had never before been used as a major tactic in warfare until the Mongols. And that tactic is what made them so effective.
Bro, that ain't even close to true.
Just off the top of my head, the Parthians at Carrhae and the Normans at Hastings both used a version of it.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:29 pm to beerJeep
If you are talking Alexander vs Ghengis Khan with the weaponry of their respective times, then the Mongols win in a cakewalk. But if you put them together at the time of the Mongols and with the innovations in weaponry that the Europeans were creating at the time, then I would say it's a toss up.
In ancient times, the cavalry was not used to the extent that it was even in Caesar's time. Plus by that time the Greeks would have learned a thing or two in light cavalry from fighting the Arabs who were very good on horse back. I think though the Mongol proficiency on horseback with the bow would have given them the edge until they would have entered into mountainous forested terrain where the numbers would be neutralized .
Where I think Alexander would have had an edge would be in the abilities of his subordinates like Ptolemy and most importantly Parmenio.....Alexander would trust Parmenio's instincts particularly at Gaugamela and the Granicius. I'm not really familiar with GK's subordinates
The Mongols would overwhelm you with their numbers, Alexander liked to use the art of surprise and doing the unexpected like the sudden attack.....and since Alexander was unusually smart, he would have learned and copied the Mongol's feigned flight strategy.
In ancient times, the cavalry was not used to the extent that it was even in Caesar's time. Plus by that time the Greeks would have learned a thing or two in light cavalry from fighting the Arabs who were very good on horse back. I think though the Mongol proficiency on horseback with the bow would have given them the edge until they would have entered into mountainous forested terrain where the numbers would be neutralized .
Where I think Alexander would have had an edge would be in the abilities of his subordinates like Ptolemy and most importantly Parmenio.....Alexander would trust Parmenio's instincts particularly at Gaugamela and the Granicius. I'm not really familiar with GK's subordinates
The Mongols would overwhelm you with their numbers, Alexander liked to use the art of surprise and doing the unexpected like the sudden attack.....and since Alexander was unusually smart, he would have learned and copied the Mongol's feigned flight strategy.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:33 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
are you trying to say Alexander couldn't beat Caesar? EL O frickING EL
Caesar was a gifted general and as bold as Alexander and every bit as brutal as Ghengis Khan......the Mongols knew of and had great respect for both
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:33 pm to Phat Phil
Alexander wasn't leading that army
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:51 pm to AbuTheMonkey
Ugh I need to choose better wording. It had never been used as effectively until the Mongols. The mix of their nomadic lifestyle (lived off the hose so we're phenomenal horsemen), the compound bow, and the steppe horse which was swift and ultra rugged made the feigned flight just absolutely devastating to a new level never seen before.
But alas, you caught me and my shitty phrasing
But alas, you caught me and my shitty phrasing
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:53 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
Where I think Alexander would have had an edge would be in the abilities of his subordinates like Ptolemy and most importantly Parmenio.....Alexander would trust Parmenio's instincts particularly at Gaugamela and the Granicius. I'm not really familiar with GK's subordinates
There are some who argue that Subutai is the greatest military mind the world has ever seen.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 2:56 pm to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
He would've got shite on by Alexander as well. The guy conquered lands from Greece to India in 8 years
Bruh genghis conquered China, the Middle East and parts of Eastern Europe
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 3:01 pm
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:36 pm to kingbob
quote:
Ghengis has major technological improvements on his side like the trebuchet, compound bow, and stirrup. Genghis wins 99/100.
The trebuchet is a siege engine, not a major help on an actual battlefield though they can still do damage. In fact Alexander the Great is considered one of the first people to use siege engines on the battlefield instead of only during sieges. The trebuchet was also around in Alexander's time though pretty much only in Asia at that point.
The compound bow wasn't created til 1966, I think you're thinking of the recurve or composite bow both of which were around long before Alexander. Alexander employed Cretan archers who used the scythian recurve and the cretan composite bow.
The massibe advantage Ghengis Khan has is that the Mongol army was between 100k-130k while the Macedonian army was around 30k-45k. It would take some very good tactics on Alexander's part to take on an army 2-4x the size of his own.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:37 pm to Dire Wolf
quote:it took multiple generations to conquer all of the Mongol Empire. Genghis was a great warrior and general I just don't believe he was in Alexander's level
Bruh genghis conquered China, the Middle East and parts of Eastern Europe
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:39 pm to MLCLyons
quote:all of this is correct. In my op I said the armys are equal size for this very purpose.
The compound bow wasn't created til 1966, I think you're thinking of the recurve or composite bow both of which were around long before Alexander. Alexander employed Cretan archers who used the scythian recurve and the cretan composite bow.
The massibe advantage Ghengis Khan has is that the Mongol army was between 100k-130k while the Macedonian army was around 30k-45k. It would take some very good tactics on Alexander's part to take on an army 2-4x the size of his own.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:41 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
There are some who argue that Subutai is the greatest military mind the world has ever seen.
I'll have to read up on him. I've read up on a whole lot of generals and conquerors, they are always fascinating. They tend to have one thing in common, overall....aside from egos, they always had something to prove. Alexander was constantly trying to prove his worth to his father, Napoleon was constantly just trying to prove his worth because of his low birth. Same with Grant.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:52 pm to celltech1981
quote:
bruh do you even mongol empire?
wrath of the khans
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:53 pm to PeteRose
quote:
PeteRose
quote:
I wonder what the Vegas line would be.
ISWYDT
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:53 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
I'll have to read up on him. I've read up on a whole lot of generals and conquerors, they are always fascinating. They tend to have one thing in common, overall....aside from egos, they always had something to prove. Alexander was constantly trying to prove his worth to his father, Napoleon was constantly just trying to prove his worth because of his low birth. Same with Grant.
That actually fits Subutai as well. Low birth. Not even technically a Mongol (was a Siberian). Didn't grow up riding on a horse. Managed to get in early with Temujin when the clan still only ruled a few tribes.
I wouldn't sell Ghengis Khan's subordinates short one bit. They were every bit as good as any group of subordinates that any general has ever had. The Mongols were pretty fiercely meritocratic in their early years. Google The Four Dogs of Temujin. One of his very best generals was a guy that he had actually defeated earlier in his career and then took him on because he was supposedly impressed with his ability.
Subutai, in particular, is probably best known to us in the West because he was the driving force behind the devastating monster that tore all the way through eastern Europe very nearly into Austria. He virtually invented the modern concept of huge sweeping, multi-prong, complex maneuvers with strategic reserves, deftly coordinated command and control, and an extraordinarily effective intelligence network.
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 3:58 pm
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News