Lushcrush wrote:knapplc wrote:Omaha Red Sox wrote:70/30 ...I thought it would be closer than this.
I'm not really surprised. Caesar's body of work outshines Khan's.
Thats your opinion ... not neccesarily a fact.
If you consider where each man started and where they were at the end of their life, Khan was greater.
Caesar - born to an aristocratic family with an avenue in place for his career in politics.
Khan - born in a felt tent to illiterate, religiously shamanistic nomads.
At his death, in terms of square miles conquered, he was the greatest conquerer of all time.
Khan did more with less than Caesar, leading me to consider him greater.
Caesar WAS born of a patrician family - but by blood only. They were very poor, and lived in the Roman slums for much of Caesar's childhood. He had to enter the military simply to have an chance of earning a living or to have any prayer of earning a seat on the Senate. It's not like his way was paved for him because of his family name. He had to earn everything he got.
So he joins the military and enters as an officer based on his blood, but he's shunned by the other nobility as a poor bumpkin. Almost immediately he wins recognition for his bravery, skill and grasp of military tactics, and swiftly rises through the ranks, earning the cursus honorum along the way.
Sure Khan's empire covered more square mileage than Caesar's - but square miles of what? The Russian Steppe? Nobody wanted it! The cities and lands laid at the feet of Khan were largely won by his generals while he was at home, too fat to ride a horse anymore. Caesar remained fit and "in fighting shape" his whole life.
Further, Khan's conquests were of lands ruled by men who largely did not trust their own military. They often took direct control over battles with disastrous consequences. And again, it was Khan's generals (Subedei in particular, who I nominated but who wasn't able to earn a seed in the tournament) who won the battles that gave Khan the bulk of his land.
Caesar, on the other hand, faced very qualified and at times brilliant military opponents. His conquest of the Gauls subjugated a people that had terrorized the Romans for hundreds of years. Caesar's victory was so complete and the Gauls were pacified so much that they were eventually absorbed into the empire. Caesar also fought - and won - the Roman Civil War, during which he defeated some of history's most brilliant generals, often while vastly outnumbered. His defeat of Pompey at Pharsalus was an absolutely brilliant victory, and his later defeat of Pharnaces II at the battle of Zela was one of history's most amazing victories.
Yes it is my opinion, but one I feel is borne out by the facts.