Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
General Subutai by IRCSS General Subutai by IRCSS
I pay my full respect to the man who no one has heard of, yet he is probably the greatest general of all time. :salute: :salute: :salute: :salute: :salute:
Add a Comment:
 
:iconjomog369:
jomog369 Featured By Owner Jan 10, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Not just probably the greatest, he is the greatest genral in history. No other commander has ever faught as many engagements and remained undefeated. Ever Alexander of Macedon lost the first battle of Granicus River.
Reply
:iconphilhellenike:
Philhellenike Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
check your facts: He didn't lose. There is some evidence he almost lost. Nobody's quite sure why he switched strategies in the middle of the battle (I've heard three separate equally compelling theories).  The changes in the terrain that have happened in the last two thousand years make it difficult to say for sure what happened.  If he'd ever lost, he would have found himself at least with no army. More likely he would have found a knife in his back. He most certainly would not be called "the Great".  He was undefeated throughout his entire ten year reign, as well as before he became King. However, you are correct in saying that does not represent all that many engagements in comparison. While he fought an impressive number of battles given the short time period, the total count is low. What is more impressive about Alexander is that although he was severely outnumbered in every single battle he fought he still remained undefeated AND died of illness rather than in a battle. 
Reply
:iconjomog369:
jomog369 Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2016  Hobbyist Writer
Read Peter Green's biography of Alexander. There were two engagements at Granicus, not one, and Alexander lost the first one. Also, Alexander did threaten to kill any of his historians who presented him in a bad light. And it didn't hurt that he claimed to be the son of Zeus, so even a loss on his part wouldn't have been enough for his men to abandon the son of the king of Olympus. 
Reply
:iconphilhellenike:
Philhellenike Featured By Owner Aug 21, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
There were not two engagements. There were two parts of one battle. There was continuous fighting, and it was all on the same day. That counts as one battle in every circumstance I can think of; unless you're fishing for a reason to discredit someone. Threaten to kill historians who presented him in a bad light? no, he killed Kallisthenes because the guy led a conspiracy against him, for obvious reasons totally unrelated to his battle prowress.  A loss wouldn't have been enough for his men to abandon him? have you met a Greek, like ever? If he ever showed a sign of wavering they would have started doubting him immediately. Claims like that only work as long as people have a solid belief in them. I don't know who this Peter Green joker is, but he's not a very good historian lol. 
Reply
:iconjomog369:
jomog369 Featured By Owner Aug 23, 2016  Hobbyist Writer
        First, this is Peter Green, in case you decide to read a historian's work before judging their acumen, and jumping to conclusions.  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gr…

        Second, I have no reason to 'fish for a reason discredit' Alexander, especially about a battle that lacks much documentation, such as Granicus. I have no reason to do this, since I never said he was a poor leader, just that he wasn't the greatest general in history. Though he was human, and he did have a very big ego. 
        Yes, he deserves to be in the pantheon of great military leaders, but he isn't the greatest of all time, which was my point to begin with. Even if you manage to convince me that Granicus was one battle (doubtful), Alexander still doesn't reach the top slot for one very particular reason: his military was built from the ground up by Philip, his father. It was Philip who invented the new infantry, equipment, tactics and strategy; It was Philip who trained Alexander and the general officers who Alexander relied on during his campaigns; It was Philip who developed the logistics to make it all work. What Subutai Bahadur did with the Mongols what Philip had done with the Macedonians; Philip would have would have conquered like Subutai did, had he not been assassinated.
        Alexander was a brilliant commander, but he wasn't an innovator like his father or Subutai. There are generals who were undefeated, Khalid bin Waleed, Yue Fei, Jan Zizka, to name a few. But few innovated that way Subutai or Philip did. So even if you can prove that there was one battle of Granicus (Having done HEMA for years, and having trained in armor, I highly doubt that that both Granicus engagements occurred on the same day. The logistics don't add up to me.) Alexander just doesn't make the grade as greatest, even if he is close.
         And no, I don't think a loss would have been enough for his men to abandon them. I know a number of people who are Greek, but I don't know any Greeks from 2300 years ago. The modern incarnation of a culture doesn't automatically prove patterns about its ancient forbear. This is more especially the case when considering the beliefs of ancient people regarding the gods, and that those were soldiers under extreme psychological pressures. The veterans I've know, on the other hand, who've gone through much of what Alexander's men went through, convince me that his men wouldn't have abandoned him, even after a loss. 

        Third, and last, I wasn't able to find my source on Alexander threatening his historians. Since I can't cite my source, I'll concede the point, pending my finding the source.
Reply
:iconphilhellenike:
Philhellenike Featured By Owner Sep 2, 2016  Hobbyist General Artist
I didn't say you had a reason to fish for something to discredit him with: I said that your source did. Thank you for the interesting link. 
I would suggest however, that before you form a judgement about an event in history that you at least read several historians' books. Better yet, go back to the earliest available sources and take into account the writer's social position. For this reason I consider Plutarch to be the best source of information when it comes to Alexander. He was familiar with the culture: but had no reason to either unconditionally support nor to discredit Alexander. His position as a priest at the Delphic Oracle, meant that he had every reason in fact not to support any of the political factions of his day. But he did have to understand all of them: and he realized that to do that he needed to improve upon Arrian's notoriously biased account of Alexander. The book he produced was so good and so important that it became widely distributed later on. This is of course my opinion, which reflects my own biases: but this is also based on my many years of informal research on the subject.    
I did not say Alexander was the greatest in the world. I never even said he was the best general who has ever lived. Some people in the past have said that, but I am not. He was, for his time, innovative: enough so that his battles are still studied by cadets today. But his innovations were both good and not so good: he made several serious mistakes during battles over the course of his career and the Grannicus is one of those times when he made a big mistake. What is more remarkable about him is that his control over his army was more akin to what a modern general would experience than what was typical for his time. This can be chalked up to 1) his position as a frontline leader, a rarity in his time 2) his generally better than average battlefield communication and 3) the long years he and Philip had spent making this army into a cohesive force. Thus he had more ability to fix his mistakes than an average general: which saved his ass more than a few times. Alexander is great not just because of his military victories: but that is a different discussion.   
As to the logistical difficulties: yes I'm aware. But this too is a pattern with Alexander, which you would know if you spent any time researching him at all. Whomever Alexander had managing his logistics was a flipping genius and deserves most of the credit for his victories and campaign. 
No, patterns of a modern culture wouldn't tell us about an ancient forbear in all cases. But I'm not talking about all cases I'm talking about Greece. It should come as a surprise to exactly nobody that Greek culture hasn't fundamentally changed very much since ancient times. After all, that was enormously successful. If it's successful, why would you change it? 
Reply
:iconircss:
IRCSS Featured By Owner Jan 12, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
true but the reason why I said probably is because it is hard to determine the wroth of a general only base on numbers.
Reply
:iconmn63:
Mn63 Featured By Owner Dec 31, 2012
Great work.
Reply
:iconircss:
IRCSS Featured By Owner Dec 31, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thanks ^^
Reply
:iconmn63:
Mn63 Featured By Owner Dec 31, 2012
You are very welcome, and happy new year to you.
Reply
:iconircss:
IRCSS Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
How rude of me, I forgot O.O it's not my new year, but it is yours, so Happy new year to you too :D
Reply
:iconmn63:
Mn63 Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013
Thank you very much.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

Featured in Collections




Details

Submitted on
December 28, 2012
Image Size
5.8 MB
Resolution
2550×3473
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
843
Favourites
15 (who?)
Comments
12
Downloads
18
×