Greatest general of the middle ages

May 2018
108
Bordeaux
#21
Like the poster above me said, you might get more interesting answers if you are more specific in your time period/region. The High and Late Medieval Eras were disproportionally dominated by Middle Eastern and Central Asian generals, while the Early Medieval Era was more evenly spread, with a greater focus on European and Roman generals. As such, I'll divide it into two distinct lists: Early Medieval, and High and Late Medieval. I'll also be listing them chronologically rather than based on a ranking.

Early Medieval (476 - 1066):
Narses (478 - 573)
Belisarius (500 - 565)
Maurice (539 - 602)
Heraclius (575 - 641)
Khalid Ibn al-Walid (585 - 642)
Charles Martel (688 - 741)
Charlemagne (742 - 814)
Otto the Great (912 - 973)
John Tzimiskes (925 - 976)
Basil the Bulgar-Slayer (957 - 1025)
Tughril (990 - 1063)
That list should be mostly Turk generals.
İf you want resarch them:
Mukan Khagan
Kapghan Khagan
Tonyukuk
Kultigin
Bayanchur Khagan
Bogu Khagan
Suluk Khagan
Mahmud of Ghaznivid
Chagri Beg
 
Mar 2016
946
Australia
#22
That list should be mostly Turk generals.
İf you want resarch them:
Mukan Khagan
Kapghan Khagan
Tonyukuk
Kultigin
Bayanchur Khagan
Bogu Khagan
Suluk Khagan
Mahmud of Ghaznivid
Chagri Beg
No, I'm happy with my list. I am no Turkophile that thinks Turkey is the greatest at everything. I went for a more balanced and unbiased list.
 

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
3,811
Slovenia
#23
Genghis and then also Timur, Khalid and Jan Zizka were first rate generals. I don't know where to put in Subutai, because also few others as Jebe, Muqali should be there somewhere.
 
May 2018
108
Bordeaux
#24
No, I'm happy with my list. I am no Turkophile that thinks Turkey is the greatest at everything. I went for a more balanced and unbiased list.
What a irritated answer.
Truth is generals in my list not just their trait became Turk,they also better tactic and strategic commander than combined of your list.
For example,you put Charlemagne to your list.
And ı say,your ordinary barbarian Charlemagne just can be slave of Medieval Turk marshals
İf you trust your info,we can discuss al that generals.
And you will see,your list full of euro-crap nothing more
 
Mar 2016
946
Australia
#25
What a irritated answer.
You write an arrogant and condescending post, and you'll get an irritated answer, that's how it works.

Truth is generals in my list not just their trait became Turk,they also better tactic and strategic commander than combined of your list.
And that's where we disagree. Don't arrogantly claim it's the "truth" as if your own biased opinion is objective fact. Personal preference is never factual.

For example,you put Charlemagne to your list.
And ı say,your ordinary barbarian Charlemagne just can be slave of Medieval Turk marshals
Charlemagne personally led military campaigns for the better part of 40 years and achieved overwhelming success on nearly all of them. I'd say that qualifies him to be considered a great general, even if the details of most of his battles are obscure or vague. Your claim that he is no better than a slave is an ignorant and pathetic thing to say. I'm surprised to see such disgusting language used on a forum otherwise as mature and intelligent as this one. You should take a hard look at how you write your posts.

İf you trust your info,we can discuss al that generals.
And you will see,your list full of euro-crap nothing more
So my list is "euro-crap and nothing more" even though there is an Arab general and a Turkic general on it? And on my 'High and Late Medieval Era' list there's a Kurdish general, two Mongol generals, an Egyptian general and a Central Asian general? Meanwhile the list you gave that was supposedly superior to mine is literally entirely made up of Turkic generals with barely any diversity?

Honestly, your comment was so rude and ignorant that I probably shouldn't have even dignified it with an answer, since your type of behaviour is not worthy of this site, but there you go.
 
Nov 2010
7,515
Cornwall
#26
I think he and Charles Martel never lost a battle (with the caveat that Martel officially lost his first battle, with a ragtag army as he had just escaped)
Not convinced. It's all a bit legendary and nobody knows how big the battle was at Tours. How powerful can an arab cavalry force way to the north and loaded with booty be? I doubt we know CM's full history anyway


I would add , Almanzor,.
Great shout. Probably the greatest of all surely? How can he not be? The only reason he wasn't in people's list is if they dont know about him


I considered consulting Wiki re "high" vs. late but am too lazy (this is a hobby, not my job lol).

I am guessing that the high Mid Ages must have (or should have if you've read Tuchman's "A Distant Mirror") ended right around 1300.....
Have another look :lol:

(Best avoided if we are honest, I don't think there's a black line)
 
Mar 2016
946
Australia
#29
I concur and kudos to you WAA. How hard was it to generate this list, do you think, relative to how difficult it might have been to generate a similar list re other historical periods?
For me the medieval era is probably the one I'm the most well-versed in when it comes to outstanding commanders, even though the area of most of my knowledge is on Western Europe and in this era - especially the High and Late eras - most great generals were from the East. The later you go in history the harder it gets to give all the credit for great victories or campaigns to just one single commander, since increasingly they would come to rely on talented subordinates to carry out a lot of their orders. But in the medieval era things were generally smaller in scale in terms of army sizes, so a single commander could exert more direct control.
 
Likes: BuckBradley