Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Justinian
Chieftain
King of Númenor
Joined: 11-Nov-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1399
|
Quote Reply
Topic: The Top 100 Leaders in History Posted: 05-Mar-2008 at 06:55 |
Originally posted by Penelope
Originally posted by Justinian
Phillip II of Macedon certainly comes to mind
|
Yes, after ascending the throne, he found his kingdom virtually on the brink of collapse, and his neighbours, hovering like vultures poised to put an end to its existence. Not to mention the internal strife from pretenders who wanted to usurp the throne for themselves as well. Philioppos, at the tender age of 21, demonstrated his abilities, not only as a competent ruler, but as a skillful diplomat, many even consider him to have been one of the most skillful diplomats in history. In a little more than a year, he had crushed all pretenders, firmly establishing himself on the throne, pushed back the Paonians, and went on to bribe the kings of Illyria and Thrace in exchange for peace, so as to "buy" enough time to continue to implement his reforms, and reorganize the kingdom. |
Totally agree, he often is overshadowed because of who his son is, but he was a gifted individual, no doubts there. His manipulation/take over of the greeks is just amazing to read about.
|
"War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace."--Thomas Mann
|
|
DSMyers1
Colonel
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2008 at 17:14 |
I'm working on a numerical rating system to rank the leaders; so far it seems to be working well. I have put together a list that includes a good portion of the significant nations, though I haven't rated all of the different leaders. Here is a listing of the leaders I have collected so far, sorted by nation:
Name |
Country |
Ahmad Shah Durrani |
Afgan |
Sargon |
Akkad |
Mohammed |
Arabs |
Tiglath-Pileser III |
Assyria |
Tiglath-Pileser I |
Assyria |
Shamshi-Adad I |
Assyria |
Shalmaneser I |
Assyria |
Hammurabi |
Babylon |
Nebuchadrezzar II |
Babylon |
Nabopolassar |
Babylon |
Philip the Good |
Burgundy |
Hannibal Barca |
Carthage |
Hamilcar Barca |
Carthage |
Thutmose III |
Egypt |
Menes/Narmur |
Egypt |
Imhotep |
Egypt |
Djoser |
Egypt |
Senusret I |
Egypt |
Ramesses II |
Egypt |
Ptolemy I Soter |
Egypt |
Mentuhotep II |
Egypt |
Hatshepsut |
Egypt |
Amenhotep III |
Egypt |
Ahmose I |
Egypt |
Kutik-Inshushinak |
Elam |
Queen Elizabeth I |
England |
Winston Churchill |
England |
King Alfred the Great |
England |
Sir Francis Drake |
England |
Robert Clive |
England |
Oliver Cromwell |
England |
John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough |
England |
William Pitt the Elder |
England |
Edward III |
England |
Arthur Wellesley, Duke of
Wellington |
England |
Charlemagne |
France |
Philip Augustus |
France |
Louis XIV |
France |
Cardinal Richelieu |
France |
Jean d'Arc |
France |
Charles VII |
France |
Cardinal Mazarin |
France |
Napoleon |
France |
Charles de Gaulle |
France |
Solon |
Greece |
Epaminondas |
Greece |
Suppiluliuma I |
Hittite |
Chandragupta Maurya |
India |
Ashoka the Great |
India |
Moses |
Israel |
David |
Israel |
Joshua |
Israel |
Moshe Dayan |
Israel |
Judas Maccabeus |
Israel |
David Ben-Gurion |
Israel |
Solomon |
Israel |
Gudea |
Lagash |
Alyattes II |
Lydia |
Philip II |
Macedonia |
Alexander the Great |
Macedonia |
Cyaxares |
Media |
Ghengis Khan |
Mongols |
Piye |
Nubia |
Mithridates I |
Parthia |
Cyrus the Great |
Persia |
Harpagus |
Persia |
Darius I |
Persia |
Cambyses II |
Persia |
Nadir Shah |
Persia |
Ismail I |
Persia |
Abbas I |
Persia |
Augustus Caesar |
Rome |
Scipio Africanus |
Rome |
Julius Caesar |
Rome |
Trajan |
Rome |
Mark Antony |
Rome |
Lucius Cornelius Sulla |
Rome |
Gaius Marius |
Rome |
Constantine I |
Rome |
Peter the Great |
Russia |
Ivan I |
Russia |
Catherine the Great |
Russia |
Shapur II |
Sassanid |
Khosrau I |
Sassanid |
Seleucus I Nicator |
Seleucid |
George Washington |
United States |
Abraham Lincoln |
United States |
James Madison |
United States |
Thomas Jefferson |
United States |
Benjamin Franklin |
United States |
Franklin Roosevelt |
United States |
Theodore Roosevelt |
United States |
Dwight D. Eisenhower |
United States |
Andrew Jackson |
United States |
Douglas MacArthur |
United States |
Ronald Reagan |
United States |
Ur-Nammu |
Ur |
|
|
DSMyers1
Colonel
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2008 at 17:18 |
Obviously, I have many, many nations/peoples to go and not all of those above are comprehensive. I was just starting in the ancient times and preparing to work forward. Anyway, the top 40 from just those nations looks like this, using the numerical method:
Rank |
Name |
Country |
1 |
Ghengis Khan |
Mongols |
2 |
Mohammed |
Arabs |
3 |
George Washington |
United States |
4 |
Sargon |
Akkad |
5 |
Cyrus the Great |
Persia |
6 |
Queen Elizabeth I |
England |
7 |
Augustus Caesar |
Rome |
8 |
Charlemagne |
France |
9 |
Philip II |
Macedonia |
10 |
Philip Augustus |
France |
11 |
Winston Churchill |
England |
12 |
Peter the Great |
Russia |
13 |
Louis XIV |
France |
14 |
King Alfred the Great |
England |
15 |
Moses |
Israel |
16 |
Ivan I |
Russia |
17 |
Cardinal Richelieu |
France |
18 |
Hammurabi |
Babylon |
19 |
David |
Israel |
20 |
Sir Francis Drake |
England |
21 |
Philip the Good |
Burgundy |
22 |
Scipio Africanus |
Rome |
23 |
Solon |
Greece |
24 |
Chandragupta Maurya |
India |
25 |
Thutmose III |
Egypt |
26 |
Abraham Lincoln |
United States |
27 |
Epaminondas |
Greece |
28 |
James Madison |
United States |
29 |
Jean d'Arc |
France |
30 |
Charles VII |
France |
31 |
Robert Clive |
England |
32 |
Oliver Cromwell |
England |
33 |
John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough |
England |
34 |
Menes/Narmur |
Egypt |
35 |
Julius Caesar |
Rome |
36 |
William Pitt the Elder |
England |
37 |
Joshua |
Israel |
38 |
Edward III |
England |
39 |
Thomas Jefferson |
United States |
40 |
Benjamin Franklin |
United States |
Edited by DSMyers1 - 08-Mar-2008 at 17:21
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2008 at 17:35 |
What is the criteria which makes a leader great of not? Also how did you judge what a leader is, Moshe Dayan was not a leader of Israel he was involved in the millitary. Maccabeus and Joshua are Jewish heroes, not necessarilly "leaders", there are similar examples of national heroes for many nations. William Pitt was sucessful however, I don't see how he can be regarded one of the top 100 leaders in history. Sir Francis Drake was answerable to Queen Elizabeth, in what sense was he a leader?
Is it just their martial tendencies? or also their cultural impact, level of justic and law, patronage of the arts, architectural projects...
Edited by Bulldog - 08-Mar-2008 at 17:48
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2008 at 18:07 |
No Gandi? Lenin? Suleyman the Magnificent?
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
DSMyers1
Colonel
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2008 at 18:26 |
Originally posted by Bulldog
No Gandi? Lenin? Suleyman the Magnificent?
|
You haven't read this thread, Bulldog... In response to your previous post, a leader can be in any position, as long as they strengthen their nation by their actions. The evaluation criteria has been discussed at length on the first page or two--essentially, one looks at the nation before and after the leader's life/leadership time (that's about 75%) and then you look at what heights the leader led the nation to in his life (that's about 25%). As clearly stated in my last two posts, I haven't even gotten to half of the nations of note in collecting leaders yet...thus the absences you mention.
|
|
Bulldog
Caliph
Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Mar-2008 at 20:04 |
Sorry me and my big mouth
|
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine
|
|
Justinian
Chieftain
King of Númenor
Joined: 11-Nov-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1399
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2008 at 00:09 |
Based on your ranking where is Alexander the Great? I would think he would be at the top for sure. I also think Louis XI should be considered. He was really the one to build the foundations for modern france: recover from the Hundred years war, foreign policy etc. etc.
|
"War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace."--Thomas Mann
|
|
Panther
General
Joined: 20-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 818
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2008 at 01:34 |
Originally posted by pinguin
With respect to the best American president, I admire Jefferson and Roosevelt, and I dissagree with the case of Lincoln. That was a very bloody war that perhaps a more skillful President could have avoided or stopped.
|
I disagree with your opinion pinguin. A more skillful politican or not being able too avoid the war, i rather extremely doubt it! Lincoln's election was the spark that finally lit the flames of the Civil War, it was a long time in coming! The only way he probably could have avoided the war, was probably by putting a bullet in his brain shortly after he took office? Even then quite a few wouldn't be appeased with that gesture!
In Amerindian figures, my favorite from the U.S. is Crazy horse, that got a monument bigger than any president
|
I'm rather partial too Quanah Parker myself.
|
|
DSMyers1
Colonel
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2008 at 02:04 |
Originally posted by Justinian
Based on your ranking where is Alexander the Great? I would think he would be at the top for sure. I also think Louis XI should be considered. He was really the one to build the foundations for modern france: recover from the Hundred years war, foreign policy etc. etc. |
Alexander took a Significant Power (Macedonia) to The Greatest Power in the World. That's not quite as big a step as his father took (Nobody to Great Power) and his work didn't last past his death. Since a large part of my decision is based on the trajectory of the nation, he loses some points for its short duration. I will look into Louis XI. I'm not an expert on French Monarchs... Oh--and you can't accuse me of bias against Alexander--he's number 1 on the Top 100 Generals thread
Edited by DSMyers1 - 09-Mar-2008 at 02:05
|
|
DSMyers1
Colonel
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2008 at 02:16 |
For anyone who wants to see or critique my numerical formula for analyzing the top leaders, here is the formula in PDF: Top 100 Leaders FormulaIt was my endeavor to create an objective method for looking at the top leaders, and I customized it to get results I felt comfortable with. In case you're wondering how I would end up with such a convoluted formula--I'm an engineer. It's my job.
Edited by DSMyers1 - 09-Mar-2008 at 02:27
|
|
Penelope
Chieftain
Alia Atreides
Joined: 26-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2008 at 18:44 |
DsMyers1, i think that placing Philip II in the top 10 was very fair and accurate, and i also agree that Alexander The Great should not be on the list. He may have been the greatest conqueror, but he wasnt the greatest of administrators. He simply inherited Macedonia, a nation that Philip had shaped and molded into the most powerful nation on earth. So on this rare occasion in forum history, it is the Father who will shine, not the son.
|
|
Aster Thrax Eupator
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 18-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1929
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2008 at 18:57 |
Well said Penelope! In any case, the Persian empire was in shamles by the time that Alexander III "the great" marched across it, so was Greece - Xenophon's "the Persian expedition" is testimony to this. Moreover, the Macedonian phalanx had been formed by Philip II, but I must point out here that it's often been said that Alexander never won one of his battles with his phalanx, it was mainly his cavalry and other skirmishers who dealt the killer blow, so we can't take Philip II's military ingeunity into the question - I would mainly put his ability to internal secure Macedon as his key trait.
What would you say about Charles V? By all accounts, his ability to rule was very limited, but despite opposition he managed to defeat the Munster rebels at Frankhausen, the French and their allies at Pavia, and the Schmakaldic league at Muhlburg. Moreover, he manged to keep this now crumbling empire on it's toes for the Hapsburg-Valois wars, and successfully managed to influence the pope enough to get him to condemn the French for
their alliance with the Ottoman empire (when in actuallity, Clement VII was pleased of any assistance the French could give to prevent Italy being overrun by Hapsburg client states)
and preventing Henry VIII to divorce from Katherine of Aragon. I know that this was due to the sack of Rome, which he didn't actually engineer himself, but he did manage to turn the situation to his advantage. It seems he just suffered from very bad luck more than anything - he managed to do so much for this crumbling state, which is ironic considering that the Haspburg sucession made him one of the most powerful rulers that Europe had ever seen.
|
|
Tore The Dog
Knight
Joined: 08-Feb-2008
Location: Sweden
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 74
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2008 at 19:18 |
Axel Oxenstierna This man is the major factor to Swedish Empire in 1600 cetury , by people forgotten , by historians , a national hero.
Skilled diplomat and warrior , Lord High chancelor to Gustavius Adolphus II and Queen Christina.
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Mar-2008 at 20:47 |
Originally posted by DSMyers1
Obviously, I have many, many nations/peoples to go and not all of those above are comprehensive. I was just starting in the ancient times and preparing to work forward. Anyway, the top 40 from just those nations looks like this, using the numerical method:
Rank |
Name |
Country |
1 |
Ghengis Khan |
Mongols |
2 |
Mohammed |
Arabs |
3 |
George Washington |
United States |
4 |
Sargon |
Akkad |
5 |
Cyrus the Great |
Persia |
6 |
Queen Elizabeth I |
England |
7 |
Augustus Caesar |
Rome |
8 |
Charlemagne |
France |
9 |
Philip II |
Macedonia |
10 |
Philip Augustus |
France |
11 |
Winston Churchill |
England |
12 |
Peter the Great |
Russia |
13 |
Louis XIV |
France |
14 |
King Alfred the Great |
England |
15 |
Moses |
Israel |
16 |
Ivan I |
Russia |
17 |
Cardinal Richelieu |
France |
18 |
Hammurabi |
Babylon |
19 |
David |
Israel |
20 |
Sir Francis Drake |
England |
21 |
Philip the Good |
Burgundy |
22 |
Scipio Africanus |
Rome |
23 |
Solon |
Greece |
24 |
Chandragupta Maurya |
India |
25 |
Thutmose III |
Egypt |
26 |
Abraham Lincoln |
United States |
27 |
Epaminondas |
Greece |
28 |
James Madison |
United States |
29 |
Jean d'Arc |
France |
30 |
Charles VII |
France |
31 |
Robert Clive |
England |
32 |
Oliver Cromwell |
England |
33 |
John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough |
England |
34 |
Menes/Narmur |
Egypt |
35 |
Julius Caesar |
Rome |
36 |
William Pitt the Elder |
England |
37 |
Joshua |
Israel |
38 |
Edward III |
England |
39 |
Thomas Jefferson |
United States |
40 |
Benjamin Franklin |
United States |
|
I am afraid, a ranking that includes Francis Drake and Chandragupta Maurya (who is?) but that purposely excludes Jesus, Saint Paul, Columbus, Queen Isabel of Spain and all Amerindian leaders is, in my oppinion, not only extremelly biassed but worthless
With respect to Latin Americans outside rankings, I don't get concerned at all. We are accustommed to be ignored, always
Edited by pinguin - 09-Mar-2008 at 20:52
|
|
Panther
General
Joined: 20-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 818
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Mar-2008 at 01:01 |
Originally posted by pinguin
With respect to Latin Americans outside rankings, I don't get concerned at all. We are accustommed to be ignored, always
|
Latin who...? Do they even exist?
( ***cough, cough*** Ahem...)
|
|
DSMyers1
Colonel
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-Mar-2008 at 11:27 |
Yes, yes Panther, Pinguin. I know. As I've said, that list of 40 is of less than half of the nations in history. I was starting with the nations I'd already done. I haven't worked on those you mentioned, yet, Pinguin. Though, as I've mentioned, I'm not going to put Jesus on the list as he was not the leader of a single nation.
|
|
Justinian
Chieftain
King of Númenor
Joined: 11-Nov-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1399
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Mar-2008 at 02:29 |
Originally posted by DSMyers1
Originally posted by Justinian
Based on your ranking where is Alexander the Great? I would think he would be at the top for sure. I also think Louis XI should be considered. He was really the one to build the foundations for modern france: recover from the Hundred years war, foreign policy etc. etc. |
Alexander took a Significant Power (Macedonia) to The Greatest Power in the World. That's not quite as big a step as his father took (Nobody to Great Power) and his work didn't last past his death. Since a large part of my decision is based on the trajectory of the nation, he loses some points for its short duration.
I will look into Louis XI. I'm not an expert on French Monarchs...
Oh--and you can't accuse me of bias against Alexander--he's number 1 on the Top 100 Generals thread
|
Okay, I see where you're coming from. I'd point out the Macedonian successor states lasted for hundreds of years; and were formed from Alexander's conquests, without him they don't exist. But I'll leave it at that, and you're right I can't complain about number 1 on the top 100 generals thread.
|
"War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace."--Thomas Mann
|
|
DSMyers1
Colonel
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 603
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Mar-2008 at 11:33 |
Any body who wants to help out with the quantifying of leaders, feel free to do so. Read the Formula PDF I put together a few posts back. Here is an example leader with the numbers included:
Name |
Country |
Before |
After |
Duration |
High Point |
Impact |
Opposition |
Rating |
Ghengis Khan |
Mongols |
0 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
64.0 |
The idea is that this is a fairly objective approach, and thus the leaders from many eras can be compared. Copied from the Formula Sheet, here are what the numerical ratings correspond to:
Levels
|
Power/Trajectory
|
Duration (at trajectory after
leader or 1 worse)
|
0
|
Downward,
Collapsing, Non-existent (Mongol Tribes @ 1000AD)
|
Collapses
at Death (Alexander the Great)
|
1
|
Minor State or
Deteriorating Larger (Israel
before conquest of Canaan)
|
Collapses
within 25 years (Philip the Good)
|
2
|
Medium State w/o much
Power (France
before Jean d'Arc)
|
Collapses
within 50 years (Sargon of Akkad?)
|
3
|
Significant
Power (US after Washington)
|
Collapses
within 100 years (Winston Churchillpresent)
|
4
|
Great
Power (England before Pitt
and Wellington)
|
Collapses
within 200 years (Louis XIV)
|
5
|
Greatest
in World (Persia
after Cyrus)
|
200+
(George Washington)
|
Levels
|
Impact of Leader
|
Opposition Caliber
|
0
|
0% It
really wasn't them (Means rating of 0)
|
Opposition?
(Why on list?)
|
1
|
20% They
helped (Insignificant leadermaybe Henry Knox)
|
Fragmentary
(Not sure of an example)
|
2
|
40% A
significant leader (Thomas Jefferson)
|
Small
Powers (Theodore Roosevelt)
|
3
|
60% Most
important in change (Charles VII of France)
|
Significant
Powers (Abraham Lincoln)
|
4
|
80%
Dominant leader, with a little help (Genghis Khan)
|
Great
Powers (Cardinal Richelieu)
|
5
|
100% Him
and him alone (Philip II of Macedon)
|
Greatest
Power/Great Coalition (Queen Elizabeth I)
|
I tried to give examples of who would be rated at each number for each of the 4 scales of 0 to 5, but I'm not sure I got them all right--I did them off the top of my head. Those ratings are then plugged into the formula to give an overall rating that goes from 0 to 100. I suspect Genghis Khan's 64 may be hard to beat, though Mohammed was at 62 and I may tweak the values or the formula some time. Third place thus far was George Washington at 46, then Sargon at 44 and Cyrus at 43. I would REALLY appreciate people picking a nation and rating its leaders based on that criteria above, like the example for Ghengis Khan!I am pretty busy and only have time to work on this much on the weekends. This shouldn't be that hard to do... If you don't want to calculate the overall rating formula, just give the values in the various categories to me and I'll plug them into my spreadsheet. A few random examples:
Robert
Clive
|
England
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
4
|
5
|
3
|
24.9
|
|
Arthur
Wellesley, Duke of Wellington
|
England
|
4
|
5
|
4
|
5
|
3
|
5
|
17.8
|
|
Have fun!
|
|
Knights
Caliph
suspended
Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: AUSTRALIA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3224
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Mar-2008 at 11:47 |
Von Ranke would be happy. Seems we are doing things very empirically...
|
|