Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Speculative History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Speculative History Speculative History Forum - Alternate History, What If Questions, Pseudo History, and anything outside the boundaries of mainstream historical research


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 19th, 2017, 03:16 AM   #11

Kevinmeath's Avatar
Acting Corporal
 
Joined: May 2011
From: Navan, Ireland
Posts: 12,658

Quote:
Originally Posted by norenxaq View Post
kev: the usual assumption with immortality is that one maintains one's youth
That is what the Goddess Eos assumed when she asked Zeus to make her mortal lover Tithonus immortal.

The capricious Zeus obliged --- but she didn't ask for eternal youth (lesson read the small print!).

He did a similar thing for Sibyl who wished for immortality.

Both wither into almost nothing each wishing for death.
Kevinmeath is online now  
Remove Ads
Old November 19th, 2017, 06:48 AM   #12
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,253

Just because a conqueror is immortal does not mean his armies are not. His armies could be defeated in theory leaving a very old man in a prison cell waiting for death that will never come.

----------
In any case -

Genghis would be in the running.
kazeuma is offline  
Old November 19th, 2017, 09:24 AM   #13

sailorsam's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Oct 2016
From: Merryland
Posts: 413

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomar View Post
Except of course for the plain fact that he DID try to "take India" and failed miserably...
IIRC he wasn't defeated on the battlefield, his troops decided that they'd had enough.
sailorsam is offline  
Old November 20th, 2017, 12:38 AM   #14
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 10,738

Quote:
Originally Posted by sailorsam View Post
IIRC he wasn't defeated on the battlefield, his troops decided that they'd had enough.
That's the propaganda spin..... Victorious armies rarely if ever throw in the towel... at the behest of the rank and file to boot

More likely they were being wittled down by attrition, diseases etc.... and the leadership understood the war was not going their way
tomar is online now  
Old November 20th, 2017, 04:00 AM   #15
Scholar
 
Joined: May 2016
From: Vatican occupied America
Posts: 757

Quote:
Originally Posted by janusdviveidis View Post
I could take over the world if I was immortal. I would use weapon called compound interest. After gazillion of years whole World would simply belong to me.
Lol no. Fractional reserve banking would crush long before you took over much. Say you were any of the banks in the Vatican's Global banking cartel. You have $1 you got from some stupid depositors paying them 1 to 3 cents interest, you will be lending out that $1 100 times and taking 10-35% interest on that $100. You'll also have the funds to manipulate markets and drive prices anyway you want to raking in 20-25% of the money anyone spends on anything globally. Andrew Jackson was right killing the bank was a noble act that atoned for all of his evils

It always was this the Vatican and their secret societies against the Sons of Liberty.

The Sons of Righteousness have always been greatly outnumbered by the Sons and disciples of Evil
Disciple of Sophia is offline  
Old December 22nd, 2017, 06:49 AM   #16
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2016
From: UK
Posts: 196

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaeva View Post
No one.

Even the most brilliant generals are constrained by logistics. They're also not infallible. Alexander would have eventually run into a defeat had he kept going.
Defeated? By who? You do realise their was NO army in 300 BC that could match the tactical acumen, leadership and discipline of Alexander's forces. It was the most powerful army in the world at the time comprised of professional soldiers that had been fighting and winning battles since Alexander was 16 years old. The only thing that would defeat Alexander is nature or another mutiny.

Last edited by TheMilitaryHistoryAddict; December 22nd, 2017 at 07:04 AM.
TheMilitaryHistoryAddict is offline  
Old December 22nd, 2017, 06:56 AM   #17
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2016
From: UK
Posts: 196

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomar View Post
That's the propaganda spin..... Victorious armies rarely if ever throw in the towel... at the behest of the rank and file to boot

More likely they were being wittled down by attrition, diseases etc.... and the leadership understood the war was not going their way
The Mongols consistently won battles in their invasion of Europe and yet they still throwed the towel in and left, does that mean that they were defeated? The same applies to Alexander in India.
TheMilitaryHistoryAddict is offline  
Old December 22nd, 2017, 08:30 AM   #18
Citizen
 
Joined: Sep 2015
From: ???
Posts: 20

Quote:
Defeated? By who? You do realise their was NO army in 300 BC that could match the tactical acumen, leadership and discipline of Alexander's forces. It was the most powerful army in the world at the time comprised of professional soldiers that had been fighting and winning battles since Alexander was 16 years old. The only thing that would defeat Alexander is nature or another mutiny.
To say there was no army that can stand before Alexander is purely nonsense. Whether you like it or not, i'm certain the Chinese Warring States armies will annihilate him and his army. Not to mention he will have to fight Bai Qi if he ever invade the Qin from Central Asia. Bai Qi was one of the greatest general that have ever live, i will say he was far more formidable than Alexander. Besides Bai Qi, Warring States China didn't lack any talented and militaristic generals that could easily match Alexander. Just because you don't know them didn't mean they don't exist. The Chinese Warring States weren't the corrupt, decaying, declining, and non-militaristic Song Dynasty. Even the corrupt and decaying Western Xia, Jin and Southern Song that try to kill each other manage to hold the Mongol for a total roughly three quarter of a century, in the case of Jin and Southern Song, they on many occasions not only beat back the Mongol invasion, but also manage to reclaim lots of territories that the Mongol had conquered. Warring States China were one hell of a monstrosity, they were far more militaristic than any other societies in the world at that time, and Alexander will have to face those states if he want to conquer the world. A defeat is a certain for him if he choose to invade.
Xiong Qiang is offline  
Old December 23rd, 2017, 01:11 PM   #19
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2017
From: Las Vegas, NV USA
Posts: 1,234

It you just mean the known world than someone who could have united the four great empires that stretched across Eurasia around 200 AD: Rome, Parthia, Gupta and Han.
stevev is offline  
Old December 23rd, 2017, 02:26 PM   #20

Dreamhunter's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 5,128
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by sailorsam View Post
IIRC he wasn't defeated on the battlefield, his troops decided that they'd had enough.
They were battle seasoned veterans, brave beyond compare but at the same time sensible enough, who understood that no army cud go on winning every battle forever.

And when they heard that they wud be facing the 10,000-elephant army of Nanda dynasty if they keep marching eastward, after having struggled to beat Purushottama's puny 100-elephant army at Hydaspes, they knew it was time to pack their bags & go home.
Dreamhunter is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Speculative History

Tags
general or conqueror, immortal



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best World War II General Terabyter War and Military History 59 March 26th, 2014 04:50 PM
Jeb Stuart: Immortal Confederate Cavalier tjadams American History 20 April 5th, 2013 03:46 PM
The 4 Billion-year-old immortal ghostexorcist Speculative History 17 February 5th, 2012 09:22 AM
Immortal Animal Toltec Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 10 June 19th, 2009 02:16 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.