Napoleon or Alexander?

[Filch20]

So, I have to do a report and it has to be about : (name) is the Greatest (adjective like leader or writer) in European History. I am stuck between writing about either Napoleon/Alexander the Great (other choices are also welcome) as the greatest military leaders/commanders. Hannibal is a possible third option but Carthage is geographically in Africa so I don't know. I'm asking you who, in your opinion, is the better military leader and why?
Also, how do I put a poll in?

[Drakedeath]

Hannibal fought most of his battles in Europe. He's part of European history as such.

At the bottom of the post screen, you'll see "Post a Poll". Use that.

[Filch20]

Hannibal fought most of his battles in Europe. He's part of European history as such.

At the bottom of the post screen, you'll see "Post a Poll". Use that.

Umm.. sorry if i sound stupid, but I don't see any Post a Poll option when I try editing this thread or creating a new thread.

[Rilsaur]

Do they have to originate from Europe, or just fight most/some of their battles there. if it has to be battles, Alexander would be a shoddy choice as he fought his most famous & triumphant battles in Asia.

[Filch20]

They are supposed to originate from Europe and do something that affects Europe basically. This is why I was questioning my choice of Hannibal because culturally and ethnically; North Africans were very similar to European Mediterranean countries. But geographically, they are technically not in Europe.

[★Bandiera Rossa☭]

Umm.. sorry if i sound stupid, but I don't see any Post a Poll option when I try editing this thread or creating a new thread.

I believe you have to have a certain amount of posts before you can make a poll.

[Seleucos of Olympia]

At the bottom of the post screen, you'll see "Post a Poll". Use that.

Polls are no longer allowed in Vestigia Vestutatis.

As for the original question, Alexander won a land war in Asia. 'Nuff said.

[A Demented Goldfish]

This thread is gonna get closed very soon

[Rilsaur]

you could use Hannibal I suppose, as it was because of the Punic Wars that Rome became an empire. Though that is debatable.

[scougall9]

do Vercingetorix, he was a swell guy.....you do know who he is right? : P

[Warhammster]

I would say Spartacus, Gustavus Adolphus the Great or Fredrick the Great.

If you are more looking for heroes I would recommend Vlad Tepes, Hernando Cortez or Heinz Guderian.

[Timur_the_Lame]

Definately Alexander. He was amazing at all three forms of battle (seige, open, and guerrilla) which is more than ANY of these other generals can say. plus he has been the gage of greatness ever since. Also, Alcibiades (Pellopenessian war), Caesar, Hannibal, and Fredrick the Great deserve a say. but i would have to go with Alexander as he is their gage of greatness

[Filch20]

He was amazing at all three forms of battle (seige, open, and guerrilla)

LOL that just made me think of a bunch of phalangites sitting in a tree waiting to jump on a persian soldier. But I think I am going to do Alexander because I am just more interested in ancient warfare.

[mikelewis]

I would definately check out Alcibiades of Athens. He was not only the greatest warrior of his time he was also a politician, philosopher and philanthropist. Check out this page http://www.biographybase.com/biography/Alcibiades.html. It gives you a brief history of him. He was also a peer of Socrates.

[Timur_the_Lame]

I would definately check out Alcibiades of Athens. He was not only the greatest warrior of his time he was also a politician, philosopher and philanthropist. Check out this page http://www.biographybase.com/biography/Alcibiades.html. It gives you a brief history of him. He was also a peer of Socrates.

haha what u looked up Alcibiades after i said him? lolz its cool. btw, there is a great book, with him as an important character, called Tides of War about the Pellopennesian Wars. but yeah Napoleon was a great general (I laugh at all of u saying he wasnt) but he was mediocre compared to Alexander.

[leseras]

haha what u looked up Alcibiades after i said him? lolz its cool. btw, there is a great book, with him as an important character, called Tides of War about the Pellopennesian Wars. but yeah Napoleon was a great general (I laugh at all of u saying he wasnt) but he was mediocre compared to Alexander.

Which is prescisely why he should write about alexander.

[Timur_the_Lame]

Which is prescisely why he should write about alexander.

i did say alexander...read my posts

[Ichirou989]

LOL, and here I am clicking on this link thinking you were asking whether you should buy the old Alexander expansion to RTW or get the new Napoleon Total War.

This probably should have been asked in the Vestigia Vetustatis forum and pick the brains of the history buffs...like say here for example: Need Help with History Homework?

[Visiar]

Napoleon can't really compare to Alexander, but you must think that Napoleon faced tougher opponents. Even so, he did take a large part of Europe.

[|Sith| Max]

To be fairly crude the reason napoleon won was because he
A. Spammed artillery,
B. brought a of cheap inf and zergrushed the opposing army before they could reload after the first volley. even with this tactic the French still lost 20 % of their soldiers in most battles they won.

I believe that means i'd do Alexander.