Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Top 100 Generals

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1718192021 128>
Author
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1108
  Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Top 100 Generals
    Posted: 25-Sep-2006 at 23:36
DSMyers1, can you write the newest version of your list?
Back to Top
Timotheus View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 478
  Quote Timotheus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Sep-2006 at 23:59

Zizka is definitively one of the greatest generals to have walked the earth. I present for you two extracts from one of my research papers on the Hussites:



The story of the Hussites, though first the story of Hus, is primarily the story of Zizka. This remarkable man is unparalleled in military history for the range, scope, and enormity of his accomplishments. He conceived the idea of the modern tank in his war wagons, giant moving armored fortresses filled with crossbowmen and hand cannoneers. Despite the effectiveness of this tactic, it was largely forgotten to military scientists and only revived by different minds in the early 20th century. He was the first European to use artillery and guns in battle, instead of the previous use of them solely in sieges. To this day we use the words pistol, howitzer, and harquebus, each of which come from Czech words first applied in Zizkas day[1].

 

Aside from these innovations, the Hussites had little in the way of conventional medieval weapons; most of their weaponry, including the wagons, were converted from farming implements; Zizkas armies made great use of a modified agricultural flail. Besides this, he formed the first formal code of military conduct, applied the first form of the levee en masse, and two times turned back the best of Europe when they gathered in Crusade against his homeland (with three more crusades turned back by his successors). Most extraordinary of all, he conducted half of his career while completely blind a feat neither seen before nor repeated since.

 

The fortitude of the Hussites is incredible to note. A historian would be hard pressed to find a smaller, more ill equipped group that defeated a superior foe more often. Leonidas and the Spartans stood bravely against the Persians at Thermopylae for one battle, after which they all were dead. Lee and the Confederates made stunning victories over the course of the Civil War and ultimately held out for four years. From the death of Hus to the first Defenestration of Prague itself was four years, after which hostilities commenced in earnest; from there to the death of Zizka by the plague, unconquered, was another five; from there, the two priest-generals named Prokop, using for the most part Zizkas strategies, held out for another ten years until fellow Hussites in league with the Catholics defeated them at Lipany with their own tactics. Even then the movement was so strong, and the memory of the wars so fresh in Sigismunds mind, that for nearly two hundred more years the Hussites were granted freedom of religion.

 

All this occurred with the entirety of Europe (with the exception of Poland-Lithuania, which was for the most part neutral) and the wealth of the Roman Catholic Church was arrayed against them, so that in all five formal crusades, as well as unaffiliated assaults by Sigismund, were destroyed by the Hussites. Of the seventeen official battles of the Hussite Wars, only one before Lipany had ever been won by the Germans[2], and that one without Zizka or the Prokops present.


.

.

.


What then was Zizkas effect on the course of military science? His contributions are broad and remarkable. He realized the infantry revolution in the age of the mounted knight. His peasants, citizen-soldiers all, were as deadly with his innovative polearms as a German foot soldier with years of training. He also was a precursor of the gunpowder revolution; the Hussites made pistols and harquebuses for use within their famous wagons, and howitzers as field artillery. Previously, artillery was almost exclusively used in sieges; Zizka brought them onto the battlefield consistently, with great effect.

 

Still more importantly, he invented mobile armor; history books that have him record him as the first to use a tank. Wooden shutters were added to the outwardly sloping sides of the farmwagons for greater protection; these also doubled with the purpose of using chains to lock with other wagons to make a wagon fortress. The wagons would carry 18-21 men: 4-8 crossbowmen, 2 handgunners, 6-8 soldiers equipped with pikes or flails, 2 shield carriers and 2 drivers.[52] Naturally, not all of these would be in the wagon at the same time. Only the missile troops would be in there, for cover while firing; the flailmen would stand by for defense, the drivers would be caring for the horses directly behind the wagon so as to be ready in a moment to move the wagon, while the shield carriers defended the spaces in between the wagons, or the drivers and beasts when needed. Other times, wagons would carry larger artillery, for use in blasting the enemys formations into pieces.

 

The general Hussite strategy was to provoke the enemy to attack with artillery fire, then let loose a barrage of crossbow bolts and bullets from the handguns at the enemy. Often they would utilize high ground to prevent cavalry attacks, causing the knights to move forward slowly in heavy armor. When the enemy was sufficiently weakened and demoralized, the wagon formation would be parted and the cavalry and infantry would strike hard at the flanks, all the while keeping up a bombardment in the center from the wagons. The enemy would be forced to withdraw, and an unusually high percentage of knights, who could not flee quickly without their horses, would be left on the field to be mopped up by the victorious Hussites.[53] As the wars progressed and the luster of the Hussite victories increased, dread played an ever-increasing role in deciding the battles, as is evidenced at Domazlice. Only fellow Hussites, using Hussite tactics, were able to finally sunder the movement and destroy it in battle.

 

The wagons would also be used offensively. Several groups of wagons would form lines, columns and squares, and advance on the enemy with the army in the middle. The Hussite would have been previously instructed in how the wagons were deployed, but the enemy, being unable to see over the wagons, would be thoroughly confused when they got into the maze, and would be easily cut to pieces with flails.[54]

 

Zizkas successes were not unnoticed by the rest of Europe. Infantry began to replace the mounted knight as the main player in battles; gunpowder was used increasingly in Western wars. The Germans tried to emulate the war wagon; however, they lacked certain factors that made wagons work: first, commanders with the skill of Zizka or Prokop; second, the rolling plains of Eastern Europe relatively uninterrupted by mountains, streams, and forests; third, a well trained, well disciplined infantry force. By the time infantry began to make its impact on the rest of Europe, artillery would begin to use iron projectiles rather than stone ones, and wooden armor became ineffective. It was not until the turn of the 19th century that the armored tank was developed with metal armor, reviving Zizkas tradition.[55]

 

How much can we be sure that it was the Hussites who influenced these decisions, and they were not reached by simple trends that would have been reached anyway? Fairly sure; the Hussite army was dreaded in the 15th century, well-remembered in the 16th, and well written about from then on. Only with the World Wars has a new chapter in military history come, distracting our attention from Zizka; he was well written about in past times. Even if others came up with his ideas independently, it is remarkable that he came up with them all in such a short time, with such a disability, and such an army.

 

Zizkas effect on history cannot be denied. He preserved the Hussite movement at its critical hour, ensuring its survival into the 17th century; Martin Luther would meet with Hussites and be surprised with how much he agreed with them,[56] encouraging him greatly in his architecture of the Reformation. The Hussite Wars shook up Central European politics, causing a shift in power for Sigismunds Hungary, increasingly seen as ineffective, to Hapsburg Austria. And in Hussitisms dying breath, it started the Thirty Years War, which finally brought religious tolerance to Germany.

 

In conclusion, Jan Zizka, one of the most remarkable generals who ever lived, and the Hussite movement he shepherded after the death of its father Hus, had large effect on military history and military science. His contributions cannot be denied, and the effect of those contributions on others thinking can be little questioned. The historical imprint of such a small movement on such a large area of history is surely one of the most outstanding feats of history.


[1] From Czech pťala, houfnice, and hkovnice. Stephen Turnbull, The Hussite Wars 1419-36, pp. 35-37. Confirmed in American Heritage Dictionary.

[2] Thomas A. Fudge, The Crusade against Heretics in Bohemia, 1418-1437, map 3 p. xxii.

[54] Turnbull, p. 39-40.



Edited by Timotheus - 26-Sep-2006 at 00:01
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1108
  Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Sep-2006 at 00:18
Originally posted by Timotheus

He was the first European to use artillery and guns in battle, instead of the previous use of them solely in sieges.
 
Timotheus, can you write the first battle when Zizka used artillery?
Back to Top
Emperor Barbarossa View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Jul-2005
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Emperor Barbarossa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Sep-2006 at 09:29

Zizka first used artillery at the Battle of Nekmer in 1419.


Back to Top
DSMyers1 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
  Quote DSMyers1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Sep-2006 at 10:04
Okay, everyone: here is the latest edition of the list.  There were two additions to the list: Skanderbeg at #33 and Wolter von Plettenberg at #83.  I bumped off Nurhaci and Lucius Septimius Severus.

Major moves: I raised Suvorov, Wellington and Selim I.  I lowered Suleiman somewhat, as Selim takes his place.  There are some other minor changes, but I don't remember what they are.

The list:

Ranking Name Born Died Country
1 Alexander the Great 356 323 Macedonia
2 Napoleon Bonaparte 1769 1821 France
3 Temujin (Genghis Khan) 1167 1227 Mongols
4 Hannibal Barca 241 183 Carthage
5 Frederick II of Prussia 1712 1786 Prussia
6 John Churchill (Duke of Marlborough) 1650 1722 England
7 Belisarios 505 565 Byzantines
8 Henri de La Tour d'Auvergne de Turenne 1611 1675 France
9 Gustav II Adolf 1594 1632 Sweden
10 Caius Julius Caesar 100 BC 44 BC Rome
11 Subotai   1248 Mongols
12 Timur 1336 1405 Turks
13 Aleksandr Suvorov 1729 1800 Russia
14 Philip II of Macedon 382 BC 336 BC Macedonia
15 Jan ika 1370 1424 Bohemia
16 Eugene of Savoy 1663 1736 Austria
17 Heraclius 575 641 Byzantines
18 Raimondo Montecuccoli 1608 1680 Austria
19 Scipio Africanus the Older 237 BC 183 BC Rome
20 Helmuth Karl Bernhard von Moltke 1800 1891 Prussia
21 Gaius Marius 157 BC 86 BC Rome
22 Cyrus the Great 590 BC 529 BC Persia
23 Sir Arthur Wellesley (Duke of Wellington) 1769 1852 England
24 Maurice, comte de Saxe 1696 1750 France
25 Louis Nicholas Davout 1770 1823 France
26 Erich von Manstein 1887 1973 Germany
27 Thutmose III   ca 1540 BC Egypt
28 Heinz Wilhelm Guderian 1888 1954 Germany
29 Khalid ibn al-Walid 584 642 Arabs
30 Selim I 1470 1520 Ottomans
31 Epaminondas 418 BC 362 BC Greece
32 Louis II de Bourbon, Prince de Cond 1621 1686 France
33 George Kastrioti (Skanderbeg) 1405 1468 Albania
34 Leo III the Isaurian 685 741 Byzantines
35 Hn Xn   196 BC China
36 Gonzalo Fernndez de Crdoba (El Gran Capitn) 1453 1515 Spain
37 Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck 1870 1964 Germany
38 Lucius Cornelius Sulla 138 BC  78 BC Rome
39 Winfield Scott 1786 1866 United States
40 Suleiman I 1494 1566 Ottomans
41 Albrecht Wallenstein 1583 1634 Austria
42 Takeda Shingen 1521 1573 Japan
43 Nadir Shah 1688 1747 Persia
44 Konstantin Rokossovsky 1896 1968 Russia
45 Alexius I Komnenos 1048 1118 Byzantines
46 Oliver Cromwell 1599 1658 England
47 Maurice of Nassau 1567 1625 Netherlands
48 Tiglath-Pileser III   727 BC Assyria
49 Janos Hunyadi 1387 1456 Hungary
50 Duke of Parma (Alessandro Farnese) 1545 1592 Spain
51 Robert E. Lee 1807 1870 Confederate
52 Yue Fei 1103 1142 China
53 Toyotomi Hideyoshi 1536 1598 Japan
54 Narses 478 573 Byzantines
55 Oda Nobunaga 1534 1582 Japan
56 Aurelian (Lucius Domitius Aurelianus) 214 275 Rome
57 Claude-Louis-Hector de Villars 1653 1734 France
58 William Joseph Slim 1891 1970 England
59 Charles XII 1682 1718 Sweden
60 Babur 1483 1530 Mughal
61 Jan III Sobieski 1629 1696 Poland
62 Georgy Zhukov 1896 1974 Russia
63 Qi Jiguang 1528 1588 China
64 Andr Massna 1758 1817 France
65 Robert Guiscard 1015 1085 Normandy
66 Erwin Rommel 1891 1944 Germany
67 Stanisław Koniecpolski 1590 1646 Poland
68 George S. Patton 1885 1945 United States
69 Emperor Taizong of Tang (Lĭ ShMn) 599 649 China
70 Flavius Stilicho 359 408 Rome
71 Jean Lannes 1769 1809 France
72 Charlemagne 742 814 France
73 Ulysses Simpson Grant 1822 1885 United States
74 Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson 1824 1863 Confederate
75 Kangxi 1654 1722 China
76 Shapur I   272 Persia
77 Marcus Claudius Marcellus 268 BC 208 BC Rome
78 Johan t'Serclaes, Count of Tilly 1559 1632 Austria
79 Sebastien Le prestre de Vauban 1633 1707 France
80 Franois Henri de Montmorency-Bouteville (Luxembourg) 1628 1695 France
81 David   965 BC Israel
82 Constantine I the Great 272 337 Rome
83 Wolter von Plettenberg 1450 1535 Livonian Order
84 Sun Tzu 400 BC 330 BC China
85 Archduke Charles of Austria 1771 1847 Austria
86 Alp Arslan 1029 1072 Turks
87 Jebe   1225 Mongols
88 Pyotr Bagration 1765 1812 Russia
89 Shaka Zulu 1787 1828 Zulu
90 Mahmud of Ghazni 971 1030 Ghazni
91 William T. Sherman 1820 1891 United States
92 Sonni Ali   1492 Songhai
93 Henry V 1387 1422 England
94 Chandragupta Maurya   298 BC India
95 Saladin  1138 1193 Arabs
96 Sher Shah Suri 1472 1545 Afgan
97 Rajaraja Chola I   1014 Chola
98 Pyrrhus of Epirus 312 BC 272 BC Greece
99 Nathanael Greene 1742 1786 United States
100 William the Conqueror 1027 1087 Normandy

Back to Top
Timotheus View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 478
  Quote Timotheus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Sep-2006 at 22:01
Originally posted by Emperor Barbarossa

Zizka first used artillery at the Battle of Nekmer in 1419.



Actually, that was the first battle where he used the Wagenburg. The earliest the houfnice - howitzer - is recorded to be used is at Usti-nad-Labem in 1426, by which time Zizka had been dead two years. However, it is almost certain that they had been developed previously, and it is very likely that Zizka used them or a smaller version at Nebovidy in early 1422 (at which time Zizka had been blind for half a year.)


Edited by Timotheus - 26-Sep-2006 at 22:02
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1108
  Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Sep-2006 at 23:02
Originally posted by Timotheus


Actually, that was the first battle where he used the Wagenburg. The earliest the houfnice - howitzer - is recorded to be used is at Usti-nad-Labem in 1426, by which time Zizka had been dead two years. However, it is almost certain that they had been developed previously, and it is very likely that Zizka used them or a smaller version at Nebovidy in early 1422 (at which time Zizka had been blind for half a year.)
 
Ok, thanks.
I asked about it, because I think that I can give you an interesting information. AFAIK Zizka fought in the battle of Grunwald 1410 (he was a mercenary soldier in the Polish army). In this battle, Teutonic Knights used arillery in the field. So, it seems that Zizka didn't invent 'field cannons', but he copied them from Teutonic Knights.
On the other hand, it might be also interesting for you, that the idea of war-tabor was copied and developed by the Poles, Cossacks, Russians and other Eastern nations/countries, and it was used until 18th c.


Edited by ataman - 26-Sep-2006 at 23:05
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1108
  Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Sep-2006 at 23:15
Originally posted by DSMyers1

 
46. Oliver Cromwell
 
 
Originally posted by DSMyers1

I certainly agree that Ataturk was a good leader, easily on the top 100 leaders.  However, I do not believe that he was a good enough general to be on the top 100 general's list.  He led well in the Gallipoli campaign, but the war for independence was hardly a full-fledged war on standard terms.  It was very political in nature, and Ataturk proved himself astute politically.  But this list is discussing generals who fought battles and campaigns.  Ataturk was more a politician than a truly great general.
 
DSMyers1, I wonder why you have Cromwell (who was most of all a good leader) on the list, while there is no Ataturk.


Edited by ataman - 27-Sep-2006 at 01:25
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 03:15
Dear Lord, how can you put Conde in no.32!!!?? He deserves to be in the top 20 at least. After all, he was defeated only by one man - Turenne, and not to forget, that Conde was the firs leader to defeat the spanish tercio for 150 years!
 
And Sun Tzu!!! This man had 99 battles without a loss! What do you have to say about that!? The Macedonian also hed no loss, but, he had, none mor than 10 majour battles!
 
And further more, what does Alexius Comnenos have to do with military leaders??? He was a great diplomat, but not a military specialist!


Edited by Belizarius - 27-Sep-2006 at 03:19
Back to Top
DSMyers1 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
  Quote DSMyers1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 08:56
Originally posted by ataman

 
DSMyers1, I wonder why you have Cromwell (who was most of all a good leader) on the list, while there is no Ataturk.


He was a good general as well, and was a leader in reforming the army. He won a number of the battles of the civil war by his skill as a general.

Originally posted by Belizarius


Dear Lord, how can you put Conde in no.32!!!?? He deserves to be in the top 20 at least. After all, he was defeated only by one man - Turenne, and not to forget, that Conde was the firs leader to defeat the spanish tercio for 150 years!
 
And Sun Tzu!!! This man had 99 battles without a loss! What do you have to say about that!? The Macedonian also hed no loss, but, he had, none mor than 10 majour battles!
 
And further more, what does Alexius Comnenos have to do with military leaders??? He was a great diplomat, but not a military specialist!


Conde was a skilled tactician, one of the best ever--his battlefield genious was extraordinary.  But his strategy was rather poor.  He often risked battle when it was clearly unnecessary, and a simple maneuver could have obtained his objective.  He loved battles for the glory therein.  Thus, he let his own desire for glory decrease his skill as a general.  Turenne, on the other hand, and Montecucolli, both never fought a battle unless it was absolutely necessary, thus yielding a much greater chance of winning the campaign.  Conde failed on several campaigns because of his over-eagerness to fight battles, thus decreasing his strength.  That is why I have him so low.

All the sources I have read indicated that we do not have information on Sun Tzu's actual battles and campaigning, other than a few very peripheral mentions.  Is there really good information discussing his battles and campaigns somewhere?

And I do not have Alexius Comnenos on my list, for obvious reasons.

Back to Top
tsar View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai

Suspended

Joined: 12-May-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 132
  Quote tsar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 09:33
1.Tsar Simeon "The Great"
Back to Top
DSMyers1 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
  Quote DSMyers1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 13:04
Originally posted by tsar

1.Tsar Simeon "The Great"


It looks like Simeon had some great victories over the Byzantines.  Could you direct me to some good sources about his campaigns?
Back to Top
EGETRK View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 16-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 300
  Quote EGETRK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 14:16
1.Mustafa Kemal ATATRK...This is something that every foreign poliitics were acceptin-g...
The lands of the of the West may be armored with walls of steel,
But I have borders guarded by the mighty chest of a believer...
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 14:36
Could we compare the top 3 to decide who comes top.
 
What are there major achievements and disadvantages. Who won the most battles, who has the least losses, also the win to loss ratios, difficulty of terrain captured, tactics, strategies, innovation etc etc.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
DSMyers1 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
  Quote DSMyers1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 15:39
There are four generals with at least some claim to the top: Alexander, Napoleon, Genghis Khan, and Hannibal
From my database:

Ranking Name Born Died Country Birthplace Tactical Skill Grand Strategy Logistics Innovation Charisma Diplomacy Scale of Conquests Difficulty Impact
1 Alexander the Great 356 323 Macedonia Macedonia 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1
2 Napoleon Bonaparte 1769 1821 France Corsica 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1
3 Temujin (Genghis Khan) 1167 1227 Mongols NE Mongolia 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1
4 Hannibal Barca 241 183 Carthage Carthage 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 3


Rank War Side Opponents Theater
Monarch Macedonian Conquests Macedonia Persia Middle East
Monarch Napoleonic Wars France Austria, Prussia, England, Russia Europe
Monarch Mongol Conquests Mongols Mongols, China, Kara Khitay, Khwarezm, Kiev Asia
General Punic Wars Carthage Rome Spain, Italy


New Num Era Skill/Innovation Battles Rivals
1 Ancient Combined Arms Army, Complex Tactics Granicus, Issus, Guagamela Darius III
2 Imperial Forcing Battle Austerlitz, Jena-Auerstedt, Leipzig, Waterloo Wellington, Archduke Charles, Blucher
3 Medieval Ruthless Mongol Horde Numerous  
4 Ancient Father of Strategy/Reserves/Management Trebia, Lake Trasimene, Cannae, Zama Fabius Maximus, Scipio Africanus

Back to Top
Travis Congleton View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 200
  Quote Travis Congleton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 16:04
DSMyers1, thanks for adding ol' Hannibal.  I found it difficult comparing Napoleon with the likes of Temujin and Alexander.
Back to Top
Timotheus View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 478
  Quote Timotheus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 21:04
Originally posted by ataman

Ok, thanks.
I asked about it, because I think that I can give you an interesting information. AFAIK Zizka fought in the battle of Grunwald 1410 (he was a mercenary soldier in the Polish army). In this battle, Teutonic Knights used arillery in the field. So, it seems that Zizka didn't invent 'field cannons', but he copied them from Teutonic Knights.
On the other hand, it might be also interesting for you, that the idea of war-tabor was copied and developed by the Poles, Cossacks, Russians and other Eastern nations/countries, and it was used until 18th c.


Yes, I know about Zizka fighting under Sokol at Grunwald -- in fact, most sources site it as the place where he lost his first eye (some sources say a childhood accident, and one or two 19th century texts actually have him at Agincourt! Fighting for the English of course, a premonition of his own contributions to the downfall of the night -- not, like the other famously blind Bohemian, King John, fighting for the French. The tale, though amusing, is very doubtful.) However, that is interesting information about the Teutonic Knights using field artillery at Tannenberg. I'm seeing it now in the Wikipedia article, but I had it from a fairly good source (Turnbull and also Radio Prague) that Zizka was the first to use artillery in battle. Perhaps he was the first to use an extensive system of it.

I am also aware of other countries using the war wagon system -- quite often it was with Bohemian mercenaries arming them! If you want quality, hire the best, I suppose  LOLhttp://www.warfareeast.co.uk/main/Warwagons.htm is a very interesting page on the use of war-wagons in Eastern Europe and why they were usually only used there.


Edited by Timotheus - 27-Sep-2006 at 21:05
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 23:30
No offence DSMyers1, you are clearly doing a great job, but I still find the latest list still a little bit populist & celebrity-based in some choices.Smile

Edited by Kapikulu - 27-Sep-2006 at 23:32
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 23:36
Originally posted by Timotheus

He was the first European to use artillery and guns in battle, instead of the previous use of them solely in sieges.
 
No he wasn't the first one...There were some examples of this in Europe before him if the first date of his artillery usage in battle is 1414 Battle of Nekmer as Emperor Barbarossa says..
 
Some certain knowledge I know of, Ottomans were using artillery in battlefield in First Battle of Kosovo,1389...I am sure others were doing that as well..
 
But artillery, which was still not a super fort-destroying heavy siege element at the era, was just used in battlefields in light forms to make the foes afraid,rather than as a damage-inflicting tool...It still had like a century to evolve into fort&castle destroying machinery, and another more century to come into field artillery formation.
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1108
  Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Sep-2006 at 23:54
Originally posted by Kapikulu

No offence DSMyers1, you are clearly doing a great job, but I still find the latest list still a little bit populist & celebrity-based in some choices.Smile
 
I agree with Kapikulu.
 
DSMyers1, IMHO Cromwell should be excluded from the list. He was a very important person for England - but only for England. Who copied Cromwell's military reforms? Nobody, because it was Cromwell who copied European military art. What are Cromwell's military achievements? He won some minor battles in the English Civil War... I really can't understand why you value him so much. There are tens generals from other countries who had more interesting and more important achievements than Cromwell.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1718192021 128>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.