The Top 100 Generals of History

DSMyers1 · Sep 26, 2006

There have been many discussions of the greatest generals of history. In keeping with the tradition, I am posting my list here for discussion and criticism. I began this list after reading Michael Lee Lanning's Military 100, a listing of "influential" generals, which seems to have meant to Lannning "Anglo-American." I was originally planning to turn this collection of generals into a card game, but that is on the back burner at this point.

In creating this list, I borrowed extensively from Travis Congleton (AKA Congo) and from Spartan (AKA Spartan JKM), both of whom have posted their own lists on various forums. My list was initially posted on the AllEmpires forums (All Empires History Forum: Top 100 Generals), and I have modified the list based upon responses there. I consider that the list is good enough now to be shown here at Paradox Forums, where I have been active far longer.

Without further ado, here is the list:

Version 8 Beta 2 (See below for original list)

Code:

Rank	Name					Born	Died	Era		Country/People	Region
1	Temujin (Genghis Khan)			1167	1227	Medieval	Mongol		Central Asia
2	Alexander the Great			356 BC	323 BC	Ancient		Macedonia	Middle East
3	Napoleon Bonaparte			1769	1821	Imperial	France		Europe
4	Hannibal Barca				241 BC	183 BC	Ancient		Carthage	Mediterranean
5	Timur					1336	1405	Medieval	Turks		Middle East
6	Khalid ibn al-Walid			584	642	Medieval	Arabs		Middle East
7	Aleksandr Suvorov			1729	1800	Imperial	Russia		Eastern Europe
8	Jan Žižka				1370	1424	Gunpowder	Bohemia		Europe
9	Belisarius				505	565	Medieval	Byzantines	Mediterranean
10	John Churchill (Duke of Marlborough)	1650	1722	Gunpowder	England		Europe
11	Subotai					1176	1248	Medieval	Mongol		Central Asia
12	Gustav II Adolf				1594	1632	Gunpowder	Sweden		Europe
13	Scipio Africanus the Older		237 BC	183 BC	Ancient		Rome		Mediterranean
14	Gaius Julius Caesar			100 BC	44 BC	Ancient		Rome		Mediterranean
15	Eugene of Savoy				1663	1736	Gunpowder	Austria		Europe
16	Henri de La Tour d'Auvergne de Turenne	1611	1675	Gunpowder	France		Europe
17	Heraclius				575	641	Medieval	Byzantines	Middle East
18	Sir Arthur Wellesley (Duke of Wellington1769	1852	Imperial	England		Europe
19	Frederick II of Prussia			1712	1786	Imperial	Prussia		Europe
20	Maurice, comte de Saxe			1696	1750	Gunpowder	France		Europe
21	Raimondo Montecuccoli			1608	1680	Gunpowder	Austria		Europe
22	Philip II of Macedon			382 BC	336 BC	Ancient		Macedonia	Mediterranean
23	Stefan cel Mare (Stephen III)		1433	1504	Gunpowder	Moldavia	Mediterranean
24	Selim I					1470	1520	Gunpowder	Ottomans	Mediterranean
25	Gaius Marius				157 BC	86 BC	Ancient		Rome		Mediterranean
26	George Kastrioti (Skanderbeg)		1405	1468	Gunpowder	Albania		Mediterranean
27	Erich von Manstein			1887	1973	Modern		Germany		Europe
28	Nadir Shah				1688	1747	Gunpowder	Persia		Middle East
29	Robert Clive				1725	1774	Imperial	England		South Asia
30	Hán Xìn						196 BC	Ancient		China		East Asia
31	Gonzalo de Córdoba (El Gran Capitán)	1453	1515	Gunpowder	Spain		Europe
32	Helmuth Karl Bernhard von Moltke	1800	1891	Imperial	Prussia		Europe
33	Shapur I					272	Ancient		Persia		Middle East
34	Chandragupta Maurya				298 BC	Ancient		India		South Asia
35	Maurice of Nassau			1567	1625	Gunpowder	Netherlands	Europe
36	Heinz Wilhelm Guderian			1888	1954	Modern		Germany		Europe
37	Robert E. Lee				1807	1870	Imperial	Confederate	Americas
38	Louis Nicholas Davout			1770	1823	Imperial	France		Europe
39	Louis II de Bourbon, Prince de Condé	1621	1686	Gunpowder	France		Europe
40	Tiglath-Pileser III				727 BC	Ancient		Assyria		Middle East
41	Thutmose III					1540 BC	Ancient		Egypt		Middle East
42	Tr?n Hung Ð?o				1228	1300	Medieval	Vietnam		South Asia
43	Toyotomi Hideyoshi			1536	1598	Gunpowder	Japan		East Asia
44	Lucius Cornelius Sulla			138 BC 	78 BC	Ancient		Rome		Mediterranean
45	Yue Fei					1103	1142	Medieval	China		East Asia
46	Babur					1483	1530	Gunpowder	Mughal		South Asia
47	Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson		1824	1863	Imperial	Confederate	Americas
48	Janos Hunyadi				1387	1456	Gunpowder	Hungary		Europe
49	Duke of Parma (Alessandro Farnese)	1545	1592	Gunpowder	Spain		Europe
50	Leo III the Isaurian			685	741	Medieval	Byzantines	Mediterranean
51	Hamilcar Barca				270 BC	228 BC	Ancient		Carthage	Mediterranean
52	Simeon I the Great			864	927	Medieval	Bulgaria	Mediterranean
53	Winfield Scott				1786	1866	Imperial	United States	Americas
54	Nurhaci	1558					1626	Gunpowder	Manchu		East Asia
55	Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck		1870	1964	Modern		Germany		Africa
56	Charles XII				1682	1718	Gunpowder	Sweden		Europe
57	Oda Nobunaga				1534	1582	Gunpowder	Japan		East Asia
58	Shivaji Bhosle				1627	1680	Gunpowder	Maratha		South Asia
59	Francesco I Sforza			1401	1466	Gunpowder	Milan		Mediterranean
60	Stanislaw Koniecpolski			1590	1646	Gunpowder	Poland		Eastern Europe
61	Claude-Louis-Hector de Villars		1653	1734	Gunpowder	France		Europe
62	Louis Joseph de Bourbon, duc de Vendôme	1654	1712	Gunpowder	France		Europe
63	Georgy Zhukov				1896	1974	Modern		Russia		Eastern Europe
64	Aurelian (Lucius Domitius Aurelianus)	214	275	Ancient		Rome		Mediterranean
65	Epaminondas				418 BC	362 BC	Ancient		Greece		Mediterranean
66	Jan III Sobieski			1629	1696	Gunpowder	Poland		Eastern Europe
67	Alp Arslan				1029	1072	Medieval	Turks		Middle East
68	Constantine I the Great			272	337	Ancient		Rome		Mediterranean
69	Murad IV				1612	1640	Gunpowder	Ottomans	Mediterranean
70	Baibars					1223	1277	Medieval	Mamluke		Middle East
71	'Amr ibn al-'As				583	664	Medieval	Arabs		Middle East
72	Emperor Taizong of Tang (Li ShìMín)	599	649	Medieval	China		East Asia
73	Sargon of Akkad					2215 BC	Ancient		Akkad		Middle East
74	Suleiman I				1494	1566	Gunpowder	Ottomans	Mediterranean
75	Shaka Zulu				1787	1828	Imperial	Zulu		Africa
76	Charles Martel				688	741	Medieval	Franks		Europe
77	François de Montmorency-Bouteville	1628	1695	Gunpowder	France		Europe
78	Aleksandr Vasilevsky			1895	1977	Modern		Russia		Eastern Europe
79	Jebe						1225	Medieval	Mongol		Central Asia
80	David						965 BC	Ancient		Israel		Middle East
81	Lautaro (toqui)					1557	Gunpowder	Mapuche		Americas
82	Flavius Stilicho			359	408	Ancient		Rome		Mediterranean
83	André Masséna				1758	1817	Imperial	France		Europe
84	Mahmud of Ghazni			971	1030	Medieval	Ghazni		Middle East
85	Ulysses Simpson Grant			1822	1885	Imperial	United States	Americas
86	Carl Gustav Mannerheim			1867	1951	Modern		Finland		Eastern Europe
87	Uqba ibn Nafi				622	683	Medieval	Arabs		Middle East
88	Muhammad of Ghor			1162	1206	Medieval	Ghorids		South Asia
89	Gazi Evrenos					1417	Medieval	Ottomans	Mediterranean
90	Robert the Bruce			1274	1329	Medieval	Scotland	Europe
91	Mustafa Kemal				1881	1938	Modern		Turkey		Mediterranean
92	Albrecht Wallenstein			1583	1634	Gunpowder	Austria		Europe
93	Takeda Shingen				1521	1573	Gunpowder	Japan		East Asia
94	James Graham, 1st Marquess of Montrose	1612	1650	Gunpowder	Scotland	Europe
95	Pyotr Bagration				1765	1812	Imperial	Russia		Eastern Europe
96	Ranjit Singh				1780	1839	Imperial	Sikh		South Asia
97	Samudragupta				335	380	Ancient		India		South Asia
98	Michael the Brave			1558	1601	Gunpowder	Wallachia	Mediterranean
99	Ahmad Shah Durrani			1723	1773	Imperial	Afghan		South Asia
100	Edmund Allenby, 1st Viscount Allenby	1861	1936	Modern		England		Middle East

Oh, and one more thing: I tend to discount any endorsements of people for generals from their nation, and to put more stock in people endorsing generals from nations their nation was historically at odds with (e.g. I probably would not put much stock in a Turk endorsing Ataturk, but a Greek endorsing Ataturk as a great general would really make me take note.)

Enjoy, and I look forward to your (constructive) discussion and criticism!

Excel Version of the List (sortable, with macros!)

My Criteria:

Evaluation of Generals
These are the primary facets to consider in evaluating generals’ skills:
1. Individual battlefield inspirational leadership—leadership of the soldier

a. Exemplary work/Personal bravery
b. Motivation
c. Discipline
d. Equipment (and hence innovation in equipment)
e. Logistics (small scale)
2. Tactical mastery—gaining success on the battlefield

a. Maneuver
b. Anticipation
c. Timing
d. Deception of intentions
e. Organization of army
f. Selection of ground for battle
g. Disposition of troops
h. Reconnaissance
i. Evaluating options
j. Audacity at proper times
k. Understanding the enemy
2.5. (Less important) Siege mastery—gaining success in sieges

a. Logistics
b. Engineering
c. Timing
d. Intelligence gathering
e. Motivation of troops
3. Strategic mastery—gaining success in campaign through maneuver or battle

a. Logistics
b. Maneuver on large scale
c. Understanding opportunities
d. Diplomacy with allied armies/generals
e. Forcing battle when necessary
f. Obtaining results from victories in battles
g. Limiting fallout from defeats in battles
h. Choosing when to siege and when to bypass strong points
i. Large-scale organization of army(s)
j. Audacity at proper times
k. Evaluating the enemy’s options
l. Defense—fortifications
4. Grand strategic mastery—gaining victory/the ends desired through the military campaigns (political victory/conquest)

a. Diplomacy with allies and foes
b. Intelligence gathering
c. Understanding when to go to war
d. Playing off rivalries
e. Properly using strategic victories
f. Choosing proper goals for campaigns
g. Peace negotiations
h. Pacification of inhabitants conquered

All of these must be considered in relation to:

1. The relative strength of each side in each of these 4 facets
2. The skill of opponents
3. The economy with which victory in each of these 4 facets was one (in money, destruction of property, and manpower).
4. Where the general was limited by influences out of his control (for instance, many generals had no opportunity to exhibit facet #4, grand strategy).
5. Where generals were stabbed in the back/not supported by their own nations—see Barca, Hannibal.
6. Whether the methods in which victories were gained were innovative or common practice (a small influence, but perhaps should be considered).
7. The time scale of victories

EDIT: The original list I posted here, for reference:

Ranking Name
1 Alexander the Great
2 Napoleon Bonaparte
3 Temujin (Genghis Khan)
4 Hannibal Barca
5 Frederick II of Prussia
6 John Churchill (Duke of Marlborough)
7 Belisarios
8 Henri de La Tour d'Auvergne de Turenne
9 Gustav II Adolf
10 Caius Julius Caesar
11 Subotai
12 Timur
13 Aleksandr Suvorov
14 Philip II of Macedon
15 Jan Žižka
16 Eugene of Savoy
17 Heraclius
18 Raimondo Montecuccoli
19 Scipio Africanus the Older
20 Helmuth Karl Bernhard von Moltke
21 Gaius Marius
22 Cyrus the Great
23 Sir Arthur Wellesley (Duke of Wellington)
24 Maurice, comte de Saxe
25 Louis Nicholas Davout
26 Erich von Manstein
27 Thutmose III
28 Heinz Wilhelm Guderian
29 Khalid ibn al-Walid
30 Selim I
31 Epaminondas
32 Louis II de Bourbon, Prince de Condé
33 George Kastrioti (Skanderbeg)
34 Leo III the Isaurian
35 Hán Xìn
36 Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba (El Gran Capitán)
37 Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck
38 Lucius Cornelius Sulla
39 Winfield Scott
40 Suleiman I
41 Albrecht Wallenstein
42 Takeda Shingen
43 Nadir Shah
44 Konstantin Rokossovsky
45 Alexius I Komnenos
46 Oliver Cromwell
47 Maurice of Nassau
48 Tiglath-Pileser III
49 Janos Hunyadi
50 Duke of Parma (Alessandro Farnese)
51 Robert E. Lee
52 Yue Fei
53 Toyotomi Hideyoshi
54 Narses
55 Oda Nobunaga
56 Aurelian (Lucius Domitius Aurelianus)
57 Claude-Louis-Hector de Villars
58 William Joseph Slim
59 Charles XII
60 Babur
61 Jan III Sobieski
62 Georgy Zhukov
63 Qi Jiguang
64 André Masséna
65 Robert Guiscard
66 Erwin Rommel
67 Stanisław Koniecpolski
68 George S. Patton
69 Emperor Taizong of Tang (Lĭ ShìMín)
70 Flavius Stilicho
71 Jean Lannes
72 Charlemagne
73 Ulysses Simpson Grant
74 Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson
75 Kangxi
76 Shapur I
77 Marcus Claudius Marcellus
78 Johan t'Serclaes, Count of Tilly
79 Sebastien Le prestre de Vauban
80 François Henri de Montmorency-Bouteville (Luxembourg)
81 David
82 Constantine I the Great
83 Wolter von Plettenberg
84 Sun Tzu
85 Archduke Charles of Austria
86 Alp Arslan
87 Jebe
88 Pyotr Bagration
89 Shaka Zulu
90 Mahmud of Ghazni
91 William T. Sherman
92 Sonni Ali
93 Henry V
94 Chandragupta Maurya
95 Saladin
96 Sher Shah Suri
97 Rajaraja Chola I
98 Pyrrhus of Epirus
99 Nathanael Greene
100 William the Conqueror

EDIT 2: Here is a post from page 12 or so giving some criteria used (not all inclusive):

DSMyers1 said:
Honestly, I have no quantitative criteria. That list on page 4 of this thread is not comprehensive. I look at tactical skill and strategic skill above all else--then I look at innovation, political skill, and results. To measure tactical skill and strategic skill, I look at their opponents and the "degree of difficulty" and I also look at the economy with which they achieved their ends.

That's about my logic; unlike my Top 100 Leaders ranking over on AllEmpires, this is not quantitative. I am swayed by people's opinions; that is how I have put together a list that most people like.

I do try to remove the "leadership" role from the "general" role for those who were more great leaders than great generals--e.g. Attila, George Washington. As you say, I am looking at battlefield and campaign results rather than political ends. For that reason, I don't have military theorists on here for the most part, though I did have Sun Tzu on for a while. Nor do I have Vauban, the best siege artist around.

To summarize the criteria:

1: Tactical (battlefield) and Strategic (campaign) skill.
2: Political skill, Innovation, and Results (victories, long-term impact, etc.).

To measure the first look at:
1. Degree of Difficulty of successes (look at the opponents)
2. The economy with which those successes were obtained

And another look at how to evaluate:

A post on All Empires said:
But who goes to number 1? Napoleon lost, Hannibal lost. Is Temujin really that good? I don't like putting him above Alexander. Here's the way I look at those two:

1. Generalship Category 1: Personal leadership/direct command of soldiers/leadership in battle itself

* This is what great lieutenants exhibit, leadership in the heat of battle, inspiring the soldiers.
* Alexander was top of the class
* Temujin (I think) was also very good at this
* Another example of a great one in this category: Davout.

2. Generalship Category 2: Battles/Tactical Skill/Overall direction of the battlefield/winning battles

* Both Alexander and Temujin were excellent battlefield generals, never losing any significant battles.
* Another example of a great one in this category: Conde.

3. Generalship Category 3: Campaigns/Winning overall campaigns/accomplishing objectives economically

* Both Alexander and Temujin won their campaigns
* Another example of a great one in this category: Montecuccolli.

4. Generalship Category 4: Expanding empire/Subjugating lands/Political expansion.

* This level of generalship is more political, and requires a certain level of authority to even use it.
* Both Alexander and Temujin successfully expanded their empires (vastly).
* Another example of a great one in this category: Caesar.

That, I think, looks at the 4 levels of generalship, from corps command up to empire command. Obviously, many on this list did not have opportunity to exhibit all of those levels of skill. I think Category 2 and Category 3 are most important for inclusion on this list. A fifth category, Category 0, would be the equipping of an individual soldier, innovation in arms and organization--essentially logistics. Both excelled in this as well, though Alexander inherited some from his father.

Thus we see that these are approximately even across the board. So, looking outside of the basic traits:

* Time scale. Alexander showed his skills for a far shorter time and accomplished everything far faster. (You can look at it either way).
* What they started with. Alexander had things set up for him better.
* Who they fought. Persians for Alexander; Chinese and Khwarizmians (?) for Genghis, besides uniting the Mongols. (I think that's about even).
* Area conquered. Alexander conquered most of the known world; Genghis a smaller proportion but a larger area.
* Their legacy--Alexander's empire fell/split, Genghis's continued to expand. (Should this be counted on them?)

Essentially, they are equal. I go with Alexander on the tie-break, due to the speed at which he accomplished his work and his slightly superior (in my opinion) battlefield leadership and tactical acumen.

Genghis will move up to #2 in the next list to come out.

unmerged(10915) · Sep 26, 2006

Except to agree that Belisarius deserves to be "up there", i would like to know the reasoning behind ranking Caesar that high? Sure, he was a gifted general, but ranking among the absolutely most skilled military leaders in history?

unmerged(44118) · Sep 26, 2006

Hey you left out Carl Gustav von Mannerheim

Skarion · Sep 26, 2006

I demand Axel von Fersen to be on that list!

Considered by Washington the greatest general in the American civil war, played important parts of Gustav III's plots and almost escaped with the French royalties from the reveloution.

[Not 100% serieus*]

DSMyers1 · Sep 26, 2006

Mulliman said:
Except to agree that Belisarius deserves to be "up there", i would like to know the reasoning behind ranking Caesar that high? Sure, he was a gifted general, but ranking among the absolutely most skilled military leaders in history?

Caesar's ranking is quite difficult to pin down, and I have moved him around quite a bit. I don't put much stock in his Gallic wars, as he was fighting an enemy of inferior technology and military training, but his skill in handling the civil wars, particularly his spanish campaigns, was exemplary. It is truly remarkable how divided people are on his military skill; some praise him as the best ever, and others denigrate his skill, and say that many other Roman generals were superior. I have had him as low as 20th and as high as about 8th. I feel that his successes on such a wide range of battlefields, in so many conditions, warrant the high ranking.

german general said:
Hey you left out Carl Gustav von Mannerheim

Ah yes, Mannerheim. I seriously considered him for the list, and truly his exploits were remarkable. I am not sure that he quite makes the list, though. Could you present a case for his inclusion?

Avernite · Sep 26, 2006

No Attila the Hun?

Even though, yes, he had some advantages, he did scare all of Europe for quite some time.

I'd also want to raise Maurice of Nassau, especially in siege warfare. But you're not gonna take note.

And finally Henry V. He did pummel the French rather seriously, yet barely makes the list, while quite a few high-ups hardly ring a bell at all.

DSMyers1 · Sep 26, 2006

Avernite said:
No Attila the Hun?

Even though, yes, he had some advantages, he did scare all of Europe for quite some time.

I'd also want to raise Maurice of Nassau, especially in siege warfare. But you're not gonna take note.

And finally Henry V. He did pummel the French rather seriously, yet barely makes the list, while quite a few high-ups hardly ring a bell at all.

Attila is at 108 on my roster of generals at the moment. I would definitely put him on a list of the top leaders of all time, but this is about generalship. He did not show any brilliance as a battlefield commander or a campaign strategist.

Maurice of Nassau... I would consider moving him up, if you could give a good argument. I am not very well acquainted with his campaigns, though I have studied the 80 years war quite a bit. But look--I already have him a few spots above Parma.

Henry V, had he lived longer and completed his exploits, he could have united France and England, and been a top 10 general of all time. But he didn't live long enough, and his exploits had little lasting effect.

Veldmaarschalk · Sep 26, 2006

39 Winfield Scott

Should he really be so high on this list ?

unmerged(23409) · Sep 26, 2006

What did Alexander the Great do that was so amazing? I could have conquered the Persian Empire myself with the army that Alexander had when King Phillip died. How does winning a couple of battles against an inferior Persian army top Napoleon's genius in defeating all of continental europe continuously for a decade, or Hannibal masterfully beating the Romans time and time again in Italy itself?

unmerged(19363) · Sep 26, 2006

I chuckle that Patton makes the list while you know who doesn't, considering how many debates there have been about them on this forum.

Interesting so many American civil war generals make the list, yet so few from WWII.

unmerged(17581) · Sep 26, 2006

So naval leaders are completely excluded?

Viking · Sep 26, 2006

66 out of 100 Roman or Occidental generals... This list is bullshit...

Arilou · Sep 26, 2006

(e.g. I probably would not put much stock in a Turk endorsing Ataturk, but a Greek endorsing Ataturk as a great general would really make me take note.)

I'd just point out that this isn't really a good idea: Making your enemy look better than he is after all improves your own standing as well (if you win you are even better, if you lose it's not so bad to lose to a really good general)

The romans did that a lot, btw. "Oh yeah, he was the next Alexander. By the way, we beat him."

I'm curious what exactly you use for criteria, innovativeness? Winning against great odds? Actual scale of success?

SecondReich · Sep 27, 2006

Boney should be first.

curtis · Sep 27, 2006

Veldmaarschalk said:
Should he really be so high on this list ?

He soundly defeated the Mexicans at Veracruz and every battle on the way to capuring Mexico City and then devised the Union's Anaconda Plan at the outset of the Civil War. You decide.

Finnish Dragon · Sep 27, 2006

I don´t like this kind of lists. They are always very subjective. The author of the list will make the choices and then he explains why someone is better than another person.

I don´t think it is fair to compare generals from different eras. How one can compare Hannibal to Moltke Sr. for example? I can´t compare them. I know that both of them were excellent generals but we should really know how good were their enemies. We can compare them to other generals from their era and decide of those other generals were good or bad.

unmerged(8399) · Sep 27, 2006

I think a list by periods could be much more meaningful. I am surprised not to see Tilly in the list, and to see GA II so high.
An aditional thought, I myself rate generals not so much by their results, but by what they were able to do wtih what they had at hand, in this regard Saxe should be clearly at a higher place than Frederic II.
Another consideration is strategy, Farnese won almost no battle but he didn´t have to because the way he so cleverly outmanouvered enemies, he was probably the best strategist ever, however he is only 50 in the list.
Another name missing is Lucullus, he was at his time very highly regarded precisely because his achievements with a very low quality army.

unmerged(18239) · Sep 27, 2006

Daniel, where are great generals like Akbar (whom conquered allmost 80% of India) and Sher Khan?

ComradeOm · Sep 27, 2006

Out of curiosity, is there any documented evidence of Sun Tzu actually commanding men in battle? Or do we only have his little book to go on?

Otherwise I would put far more WWII Germans, and a few Russians, in the upper reaches of the list. That's not to say that I agree with rating generals from completely different eras against each other.

Arilou said:
The romans did that a lot, btw. "Oh yeah, he was the next Alexander. By the way, we beat him."

:rofl:

Fornadan · Sep 27, 2006

Taizong of Tang should be higher up

The Top 100 Generals of History

Major

Im The Young Cow Man

Captain

Field Marshal

Major

Field Marshal

Major

Cool Cat

LevePalestinaKrossaSionis men

Colonel

AARlander

Godfather of Forts

Irken Tallest

Grand Theogonist

Citizen Commisar

Field Marshal

Colonel

Lt.-Colonel of Guerillas

Field Marshal

Lt. General