After receiving an Overwhelming Number of requests seeking insights into our Content Creation process, spanning from Stunning Visuals to Dynamic Animations, we present to you the pinnacle of Generating AI Powered Content. For more information visit: astragallery.com
But he told a false history, at least Julius' history. Julius Cezar was killed by Oligarchs who wanted to seize power just like todays oligarchs or neocons. He wanted to save the Rome from them.
I usually don't like AI art but this is art. It rose history from the mere detailing of facts to the glorious story of the warrior. This is holy. This is art.
@@slurp3194 I personally wouldn't say never, Justin taught me that one. But I do think AI poses a threat to society in a lot of ways. Humans tend to derive meaning from what they work for, and that "human touch" is what we live for. AI divorces us from mystery and meaning in the face of cold hard facts. But under the right guidance, maybe it can be used to create works such as the one above.
@@InnovativeSaint ai when it comes to art is super negative. Because ai companies use existing artists work to train the ai without any compensation. They use alot of talented artists work to make the ai study the work without any compensation or credit. Ai is stealing peoples work “labeling themselves as non profits” but profiting huge amounts of money from commercial licenses etc. Even with actors strike and writer’s strike they are trying to replace artists of all kind
I’ve heard the story of Napoleon knowing the location of his men but I have to think part of that is attributable the genius organization of Marshal Berthier.
It is Berthier is considered to be at least in my opinion the most comprehensive and effective staff officers ever exist. Staff officers are officers that control logistics, movements, organization etc… basically all the stuff that actually supplies and solidifies an army
All marshals contributed to Napoleon's Conquest. But basically, It is him who hand pick these great men. It's because of his genius and leadership that these great men follow him. With meritocracy and not bureaucracy these great marshals rise to ranks even if some are not born with nobility. That's how you become great. You surround yourself with great people. th-cam.com/video/5nj2leSnjr4/w-d-xo.html
@@nightowl9467it a give and take relationship, without his marshals help and talent napoleon had a much difficult time and without napoleons supervision hsi marshals aren't so good either, both parties need each other.
I was taught the Khan grew old and fell from his horse on a hunting trip. He died later due to his injuries and was able to have words with his sons, generals and wives.
i believe thats not the story of the Chingis Khaan in Mongolia there is a similar folk story that dipicts a Khan heir got killed when he was going hunting and fell of his horse and died
If the German man was smarter, and set aside pride to actually listen to his Generals, he may have been known as the man who conquered all of Europe leading the strongest fighting force we've ever seen 500 years from now.
Napoleon's Grande Armee (1805-1807) is the strongest fighting force of the last 200 years (soldiers and general wise). The German army wasn't all powerful but managed to really nail key elements.
@@vegetableman3911 There were many moments where his generals proposed a far better solution. They completely annihilated France with a military that Germany had started building only in 1936 after Versailles treaty literally made Germany destroy their own army. While Hitler made some cunning moves, a lot of it succeeded thanks to the brilliance on the battlegrounds themsleves by german generals. "We don't know where's the enemy" a line written by a french official when Germany was launching a blitzkrieg. In 20th century German generals were by far the most experienced and best. They were impeccable. If Hitler would've continued to trust his commanders, no doubt the war would have turned out very differently.
Fun fact about Napoleon.. when he was captured in battle in 1815 the British king decided to have Bonaparte exiled to ST. Helena in the southern Atlantic Ocean which is where he lived the rest of his life until his death in 1821.. ST. Helena is one of the most remote islands in the world and has a resident population of only about 6000.. and the house Napoleon stayed at is still standing on this island today and is probably the main tourist attraction on this outcropping.. it’s a place I’ve wanted to visit for years but is very hard to get transportation to.. 😅😊
There's just something about this time, these people and their exploits that is beyond cool and truly fascinating. Would love to see a video on the Trojan War with this AI content. Incredible.
Alexander wasnt as bad as u make him out to be, when his army was crossing the dessert and everyone was dying of thirst a scout spotted an oasis and came back with water in a helmet which he gave to Alexander to drink. Instead of taking a sip although he was parched he poured out the water in front of his people.
Stellar Sagas doesn't understand Alexander the Great at all. He led from the front, always charged in the thickest of the battle and never asked anything of his soldiers he wasn't prepared to do himself (as that story you mentioned illustrates). The young king was driven by curiosity and by the need to always be on the move (plus his upbringing played a enormous role in moulding his personality), not by type of ego as the author of this video dismissively claims. _He was a man, take him for all in all, _*_the world_*_ shall not look upon his like again_ .
David had a craving and said, “Oh that someone would give me water to drink from the well of Bethlehem which is by the gate!” So the three mighty men broke through the camp of the Philistines, and drew water from the well of Bethlehem which was by the gate, and took it and brought it to David. Nevertheless he would not drink it, but poured it out to the LORD; - 2 Samuel 23:15-16
@@ballerinarococo5002 Lol Alexander wasn't driven by his ego? You do realize the only reason he made his army cross the Gedrosian Desert is out of spite, right? He was enraged at their refusing to continue his conquests. Whilst Alexander was, indeed, erudite and of a curious mind; these traits took a LARGE backseat to his ambition. When he was a child, he was infatuated with The Illiad not because of the tales of adventure; but because of the greatness of Achilles. As a child he would continually haggle his father, Philip, for a chance to win glory on the battlefield; and was even quoted as telling Patroclus that he hated his father, because he thought that his father would end up leaving no glory left for Alexander himself to achieve. Once Alexander began his conquests, he proceeded to name every prosperous city he had conquered after himself. An act of curiosity, no doubt. (That's sarcasm btw) And even murders a loyal, decorated general of Macedon for questioning his authority and insinuating that his father was a better king (most tales state he did this while drunk, but nonetheless). Make no mistake, Alexander was a man of ambition & volition first & foremost; curiosity was just another tool in the arsenal, and Alexander had no need to "stay on the move" unless it led to conquest. Even before his death, he had drew up plans to subjugate all of Asia; not to "explore" it. He is not some Socrates or Marco Polo. He is Alexander, The Conqueror; The Great.
I have the same disease that Alexander is theorized to have died from. It’s called Gillian-barre syndrome. The immune system attacks the nervous system from the feet up and slowly, if not treated, will kill when it reaches your lungs or heart. He probably was conscious when paralyzed and either starved to death, suffocated from his lungs stopped working, or from the burial. Where ever that burial is we don’t know. It is a shocking and terrifying experience even today. I don’t know what he was thinking back then
Hey stellar sagas I have always enjoyed your utube shorts however your story telling videos like these has always been my fav keep uploading these types of videos Thank you !
I salute to my history teacher akhtar zaib, his classes were so good and he tried to give us as info as possible in the best way possible despite the syllabus and course. He is also on TH-cam by the name of POLITICS BY AKHTAR ZAIB.
Can you add me into this list? I was able to repel my mother-in-law from my home and drove her back to her barren wasteland and lived to tell the tale. Caused many a suffering personally from my wife, but I prevailed with utmost determination. I wish to be recognized.
Your tales of valor and bravery shall go down in history. May scribes and bards sing praises to your grace, and speak often of your majesty. For a man does not so easily repel disgruntled in-laws
Great job, all leaders should see this wether it’s in business,military or ministry. The one thing you see lacking from theses great leaders is humility and a relationship with the Almighty.
Me at 20: finished 4 yrs of highschool starting college as a freshman Alexander the Great at 20: i conquered 3/4 of the globe and expanded my empire of Macedonia. Me at 30: what the hell am i doing with my life?! 😢
You are perpetrating less evil than Alexander did. He is responsible for war death suffering .. and more left in his wake.. not peace after this death in the new empire. He is one of the worst people to live by this analysis. Aren’t you happy now that you haven’t sign what he did?
I have a book on Julius Caesar, I am about 173 pages into it & it has good references and the writer seems non-biased. I do question though why Julius Caesar is on the list of great conquerors. I think he is extremely overrated as a world conqueror, but extremely underrated as a politician. A lot of his maneuvering actually worked very well. If we compare him to somebody like Sulla, he gets points for being famous because he is a great what if question. What if he had lived? But Sulla succeeded in, crushing all of his enemies, defeated a large force that had beaten a sizeable Roman army ( they had greater accomplishments than the Gauls Caeser defeated), gained all the power and was able to retire to peace. Caeser was a good politician and certainly a great chess player when it came to power. But as far as conquering goes, he actually has a large advantage when he is in Gaul. Pompey was overrated, even according to contemporary sources he was a man who would take credit for victories he did not win. Caeser was arguably the best general out of the three men of the first triumvirate Crassus, Pompey and Caeser. Now in Egypt he had a bit more of a difficult position being in a foreign land, but was still at the advantage with being in the defensive position. Also his enemy was a young King, Ptolemy, who was not as experienced as Caeser. It was actually Ptolemy who would be given credit, if he succeeded, he would have been touted as a great general because Caeser was in a position of great advantage. Now I know that every battle is difficult and winning just because you should still deserves credit. I just do not feel Caeser should get as much credit as Alexander, Genghis, and Napoleon who were usually not only outnumbered but their opponents had equal or greater equipment. Side note, This is something that I feel movies do not go into detail when showing why Rome was so successful. It was not just better gear, but much better discipline. They were consistently prepared or preparing for war. They (Romans) are often shown walking around talking politics then all of a sudden they hop into war. I feel Caeser was great at laying ground work though. Many rulers like Alexander are good conquerors and so-so rulers we're not the best at preparing the next generation. Now in some cases they die prematurely, Caeser and Alexander both, but Caeser picked a winner by naming Augustus his heir. Edit: The book was Caeser, by Theodore Ayrault Dodge.
@Tracchofyre more difficulty than Genghis, I beg to differ, Genghis was stripped of everything as a boy and hunted at a young age. Vercingetorix did know Roman formation, and refused to face them because he knew they had the advantage on the battlefield. That is why he used ambush and scorched earth. Also Caesar had the German cavalry on his side in his war with the Gauls. They were the best cavalry and spoke the Gauls language and knew their ways which gave him a big edge. I remember Ariovistis , I simply left him out. He was actually trying not to engage with Caeser because of his religion he was told to only attack at a certain time. Caeser pressured him into battle and had him psyched out. Still a good accomplishment. At Alesia he was only outnumbered 5 to 1, those are not terrible odds when you are in a fortress with a superior military force ( superior in discipline, equipment and position) he also had balista and siege equipment, fighting barefoot and not heavily armoured Gauls. As for Pompey, I will post the reference later, some of his victories in the east were the ones where he took credit for accomplishments he did not do on his own.
why you ask? its the way with white people dude something only gets in their list if and only it was in europe. i mean come on. you count alexander as a great conqueror? he was a boy lover with daddy issues.
Chinggis Khan thought he is the one and only servant of God. This is why he said “I am the punishment of God...If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.”
Napoléon never had been captured by the british. He surrendered himself to them at Rochefort. He could escape to USA but somehow he didn't push toward this idea. He hoped to have a house in the countryside near London. This is what was planned. Even the Maitland agreed on this but at the end british govermnent decided to send him in a place remotely.
Ashoka the Great was also one of the Great Conquerors, he didn't die desiring for more. After realizing what is peace and humanity he spent the rest of his life preaching peacefulness and spreading peace, kind, humanity, and harmony in Buddhism to the rest of the world.
The common strength and ironically weakness for all 4 of them are that they were amazing warriors, conquerors and military leaders, yet they all failed in leading the country they created through their conquest. Alexander's Empire crumbled as soon as he died, Julius Caesar's Roman Dictatorship started a civil war immediately after his assassination, Genghis Khan's empire fractured into independent Khanates, none of which survived for more than 100 years. Last but not least, Napoleon conquered all of Europe except Russia, yet under his rule, the French people suffered due to non-stop warring with other countries, sanctioning Great Britain causing goods prices to skyrocket. Some men are born to conquer and some are born to rule. In each of the four cases, Alexander's general Seleucus ruled the largest extent of what was Alexander's Empire, Ptolemy ruled Egypt and both Empires lasted 200+ years. Caesar Augustus, while not known for his military prowess like his adopted father Julius Caesar, turned Rome into one of the greatest, if not the greatest empire humankind has ever known, setting the foundation for an empire that lasted almost 1500 years. Genghis Khan, descendants continued to rule small kingdoms and fiefdoms until the early modern age. While France did not crumble, through Napoleon's conquest, ideologies such as Nationalism, and other enlightenment ideas for the modern city state spread through Europe, which inspired the Unification of Italy, and the Unification of Germany. The same ideologies still are at the foundations of almost every Western country today. I truly believe that the impact left by each of these conquerors are greater than the conquests themselves. But once again, some men are meant to conquer, and some are meant to rule. Very rarely we have a leader that has both.
@@thierryfromgwada9312 no he wasn’t lol. He almost bankrupted France with his continental conquest and embargo on the British. Lost almost all of the French colonies, and France never really regained her strength after his stint as their ruler. Don’t believe everything you read about him, lot of it is romanticized.
@@HEEHEEBOII Have a quick research on Napoleon bro 😂 You don't know what you are talking about. All specialists say he was à good administrator, legistator, etc... Québec has been sold before NB, and he sold american territories to US. It didn't ruin France. The country get stronger. People are killed because of the allies, not because of Napoleon ! They have always broken treaties of peace, because they couldn't stand than french people decide about their future. How can you have a diplomatic relationship with someone who always want to betray you ?
Good Video and good job, However, you should note that Alexander's death was quite a shady affair and at present days no one knows what happened to his tomb. You can't just claim he overdrank his way to death as there are other records suggesting a different ending (Check the Pamphlet). Because of the way he fought the whole world he conquered recognised him as a walking god, son of Zeus- Ammon, a descendent of Achilies from his mother line, not some drunkard party animal with nasty sexual habits (Another painful thing people are doing to history...). Even Ceaser is said to have shed tears over how little he accomplished compared to Alexander by the time he was the same age as him. You depict him as a man focused on himself only, however every land he conquered he treated as Macedon (Greek Macedon). Records claim he was even more generous towards his soldiers. According to many transcripts from Arrian, Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus, Quintus Curtius Rufus, and Justin, He brought Hellenic culture, education and military training among many other things to Asia and towards the cities that submitted to him he was very generous. He was criticized by his generals for being too lenient towards the conquered nations. Please consider all possible outcomes before stating that a person was like this or like that. Thank you for your efforts with the video. Looking forward to something more critically analysed and not so one-sidedly viewed as records on events in history are often multiple and statements on the subject should be more academic or neutral as it is commonly known. For example, why would someone definitely state that he leaves his empire to the Strongest when he has a pregnant wife that may give birth to a male hair and there were also other relatives overseas. To the strongest kind of benefit his own generals who later split his empire between them after his death and guess what? All of Alexander's relatives, wives and kids (all of them even the ones from mistresses) somehow died mysteriously... just consider all possible outcomes, please guys. Napoleon is also said to have admired Alexander. I can say some things about Napoleon and Chenghis that you are too one-sided on as well but I think I've made up my point and this is becoming too big of a read...
I always wish to know more things/informations about history. I would like to watch more videos just like this video. Please keep sharing with us your great collections about history.
For sure Darius have a place here but the video was made from wester unhistorian. Julius Ceasar I don't know how much can be here. Also he show Alexander as narcissistic and Gengis Khan as modest but he didn't read ancient literature. Alexander yes was really good, good as god, but he respected every culture. Gengis on the other hand he destroyed everything behind him. Alexander conquered the greatest armies of the time and unite culture as all the scientific creation start at the Hellenistic age after Alexander's conquest. But Gengis who conquered twice land as Alexander he conquered empty land, poor villages and villagers who couldn't protect themselves. He lost from Hungarians by the way as Mongols lost by Indians and totally humiliated by Japanese. Well that countries had real army not Siberian primitive villages. Also Ivan the terrible, Hannibal Barca, Ramses the 2nd, Sargon of Akkad, Constantine the great and many many others who there was better generals than Ceasar, Gengis snd Napoleon but was less lucky and different environment. Come on you think Mongols had a chance against British empire? Don't be fool
Curious, why Hernan Cortes and Francisco Pizarro are not on this list? Both actually conquered vast Empires with less than 10k soldiers and limited logistics. I would put them in the list of top conquerors as well. Abu Bakr and the Arab conquests of the Byzantine and Sassanid Empires also gets little love.
@@breezylandscape9777 not really. More to it than the 5th grade education taught in it. There were massive battles thst are not talked about. The Conquistadors did get help from local natives though.
I am a young person, and I absolutely love this type of content and would love to make visuals like this for a TH-cam channel of my own. I saw their Astra Gallery course, but, it costs a lot for me - $129. I am pleading with anyone who has bought their course, to please share with me: especially the scripting and storytelling process. It will mean a lot to me🥺🙏
not the khan. alexander and napoleons empires were gone after their death. ceaser was never the emperor. but khan probably died with the most happiness. i mean he had to. most of his life was a mess. but he was peaceful in death
Courage , Loyalty, Sacrifice, Dignity, genuine and romance. That's the perfect combination baby. The perfect combination. Just the perfect combination.
If i choose one from those 4 deaths. I would choose Genghis khan is. Biggest land empire, Generals Friends Families with me. My people sees me like Demigod. My Sons & Grandsons keep stretching my empire and caring my legacy. That death just better.
The version I read of gengis khans death was after marrying his gazillionth wife he drank so much he died I prefer this version because it makes me crack up (I dunno why)
I have it from a reliable source that Napoleon's last words, France, the Army, Head of the Army, Josephine, meant that he wanted France to put Josephine as the head of the Army. But he forgot that he had already out-lived her. 🤪
@@hieulechi2548 The foolish logo says it all. 😂 But my classmates and I hotly debated our history teacher long ago, about this same interpretation. It left the whole class laughing.
genghis can is not a conqueror he is a warlord he don't have goal to exapand he wants only resources and trade but the problem is envoy getting killed every time.
nice. but all conquerors knew that. thats why they fought with courage. its the name that lives on forever. plus, this is shit world. no one wants to live forever.
Alexander is the greatest above them all if he won't die prematurely this is absolute power unlike others with weak government system Alexander didn't make it but for sure his record can erase those who die in their 60s
Lol! Alexander was nothing but a slaughterer. Look at the cyrus the great. A great legacy.. A father of middle east.... Cyurus more praised than Alexander cos cyrus Was more than a king
Lmao he didn't even lead single battle by himself directly, all he do is ride on horse on battle and all troops of his army lead by his general, meanwhile Genghis khan conquer more area than Napolean, Julius Caesar and Alexander the geh , he revolutinazed whole Mongolia and create most powerful strategy and tactics
Genghis only started conquering in his 50's. That's how long it took to unite all the Mongols and turn it into the great horde that would conquer the world. Out of these 4 he is the one that made his own army and conquered the most land and was the most feared. Everyone should be fighting for second spot after him.
the quality of the land is a factor to a bunch of fuc k ing sand mounted together is as worth as my shizt even less because my shzit can fertilize the land now sand is just fuc k ing useless , napoleon conquered a continent with tens of millions even hundreds of millions, julius caesar toppled over the super power of the time , one man against the world's strongest superpower and khalid bin al waleed Conquered the great mount of sand with 0 people in the middle of nowhere , fought 2 weakened empires and took several years at even conquering weakened empires with no armies to fight back?
The first great conqueror who subdued much of the known world in the Middle East is: Nebuchadnezzar, apart from Babylon, became known as a legacy for his hanging gardens, he was before Alexander the Great, only to note that he made the first great empire of humanity.
People from nomidic places or a primtive nations, name things as it is, they don't give cute names for savagry If it's bad they know it and say it and if it's good, they know and say it Maybe this is the only noble attribute such people have before their descendants get brainwashed by the nomenclature of civilization and major cities
not many actually. alexander and ceaser were only small conquerors. none of theor armies exceeded 100k actually alxander army wasnt even 50k. and in the time of napoleon least number of people died too. but chingghis khan's campaign was the one that changed the fate of the world. he killed so many people and raped so much that today the carbon footprint and the DNA of 1/16th of men would totally be different if he didnt exist.
and how different would the world be without them this is just a lesson that there can't be any bad with no good nd any good with nothing bad genghis khan maybe genocided millions but he paved the way for the biggest scientific advancements in the history of mankind with the freed trade and freedom of thought Alexander the great i can see his intentions were good but in the end they ended up bad with the collapse of the macedonian empire Julius caesar never wanted to make a roman empire but in the end the ones who made it happen were his assassins who thought he wanted to make a monarchy And napoleon just like alexander the great ended up like him but didn't get the same luxury of dying like alexander did
@@peterthesneakybastar the name for the word emperor from europe to the middle east was made onto his image His name was turned into the word emperor to this day And the roman empire changed the world forever
I have no idea why you didn't mention them but: Umar ibn al-Khattab was the greatest conqueror, and Khalid ibn al-walid was the greatest military commander to ever exist. Europeans have just twisted the facts, and made it hard to separate right from wrong.
How large were the area they conquered? You can win 1000 times but if all those victories gave you only a small patch of land, that only makes you a conqueror, not a great conqueror.
dude chinghis khan was the greatest conqeror ever. not your stupid khalid or whatever. he unified and made a decent army out of a bunch of stubborn, nomadic and uneducated tribes and brought the end to golden age of muslims. he had the whole silk road under his control. how many in the history did that? none but him.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
After receiving an Overwhelming Number of requests seeking insights into our Content Creation process, spanning from Stunning Visuals to Dynamic Animations, we present to you the pinnacle of Generating AI Powered Content.
For more information visit: astragallery.com
What about Kalid Ibn Waleed
Liked the video. Wish you added another well know General from history. Hannibal Barca.
Akshoka the great
Are the Editing tools free?
@@sudiptochakma3351th-cam.com/users/shortsD-aBTKnHQFY?si=qNhr3-ZosjPxXuxA kanalıma gel
If history class was like this. All students will love history and get 10/10 for their exams.
Why were they so good looking!
I know funny like when they make Jesus look like a super model
But he told a false history, at least Julius' history.
Julius Cezar was killed by Oligarchs who wanted to seize power just like todays oligarchs or neocons. He wanted to save the Rome from them.
@@ernestb7055 And in doing so, he wanted More. More than what the World was. The World was a Republic and After Caesar it became an Empire.
Fr fr, I love history!
I usually don't like AI art but this is art.
It rose history from the mere detailing of facts to the glorious story of the warrior.
This is holy. This is art.
Ai is never positive its stealing existing artists work and making money for a massive corp. thats sad
@@slurp3194 I personally wouldn't say never, Justin taught me that one. But I do think AI poses a threat to society in a lot of ways. Humans tend to derive meaning from what they work for, and that "human touch" is what we live for. AI divorces us from mystery and meaning in the face of cold hard facts. But under the right guidance, maybe it can be used to create works such as the one above.
@@InnovativeSaint ai when it comes to art is super negative. Because ai companies use existing artists work to train the ai without any compensation. They use alot of talented artists work to make the ai study the work without any compensation or credit. Ai is stealing peoples work “labeling themselves as non profits” but profiting huge amounts of money from commercial licenses etc. Even with actors strike and writer’s strike they are trying to replace artists of all kind
@@InnovativeSaintth-cam.com/users/shortsD-aBTKnHQFY?si=qNhr3-ZosjPxXuxA
@@slurp3194th-cam.com/users/shortsD-aBTKnHQFY?si=qNhr3-ZosjPxXuxA
I’ve heard the story of Napoleon knowing the location of his men but I have to think part of that is attributable the genius organization of Marshal Berthier.
It is Berthier is considered to be at least in my opinion the most comprehensive and effective staff officers ever exist. Staff officers are officers that control logistics, movements, organization etc… basically all the stuff that actually supplies and solidifies an army
All marshals contributed to Napoleon's Conquest. But basically, It is him who hand pick these great men. It's because of his genius and leadership that these great men follow him. With meritocracy and not bureaucracy these great marshals rise to ranks even if some are not born with nobility. That's how you become great. You surround yourself with great people. th-cam.com/video/5nj2leSnjr4/w-d-xo.html
@@nightowl9467it a give and take relationship, without his marshals help and talent napoleon had a much difficult time and without napoleons supervision hsi marshals aren't so good either, both parties need each other.
Most people with a time machine: Let's help this guy so his empire doesn't fall
Me with a time machine: HE'S STILL ALIVE! DON'T BURY HIM!
😂😂
The generals would bury you with him because they already want to rule 😂😂😂
I feel this way in telling Napoleon not to invade Russia
th-cam.com/users/shortsD-aBTKnHQFY?si=qNhr3-ZosjPxXuxA
Just keep him from getting drunk in the first place.
I was taught the Khan grew old and fell from his horse on a hunting trip. He died later due to his injuries and was able to have words with his sons, generals and wives.
Death is rarely that peaceful
i believe thats not the story of the Chingis Khaan
in Mongolia there is a similar folk story that dipicts a Khan heir got killed when he was going hunting and fell of his horse and died
@@dakreakeskiez7447 who was his heir was it jochi?
Don't make folk stories 😂😂@@dakreakeskiez7447
@@AlexanderHernandez-tq8kqhe equally sit up his kingsom between his kids
History is like reading a story, a story which lore is real life, thats why i like it
Irl lore is insane when you think about what a single person can do to affect the course of history for generations to come
Yup …history actually made me wanna be a author and story teller
If the German man was smarter, and set aside pride to actually listen to his Generals, he may have been known as the man who conquered all of Europe leading the strongest fighting force we've ever seen 500 years from now.
I doubt that listening to his generals would have won the war, in the end, some tactical victories may have delayed defeat, but not reversed it.
He was Austrian, not German
Napoleon's Grande Armee (1805-1807) is the strongest fighting force of the last 200 years (soldiers and general wise). The German army wasn't all powerful but managed to really nail key elements.
@@krzysztof9711he gained the German Nationality
@@vegetableman3911 There were many moments where his generals proposed a far better solution. They completely annihilated France with a military that Germany had started building only in 1936 after Versailles treaty literally made Germany destroy their own army. While Hitler made some cunning moves, a lot of it succeeded thanks to the brilliance on the battlegrounds themsleves by german generals. "We don't know where's the enemy" a line written by a french official when Germany was launching a blitzkrieg. In 20th century German generals were by far the most experienced and best. They were impeccable. If Hitler would've continued to trust his commanders, no doubt the war would have turned out very differently.
Fun fact about Napoleon.. when he was captured in battle in 1815 the British king decided to have Bonaparte exiled to ST. Helena in the southern Atlantic Ocean which is where he lived the rest of his life until his death in 1821.. ST. Helena is one of the most remote islands in the world and has a resident population of only about 6000.. and the house Napoleon stayed at is still standing on this island today and is probably the main tourist attraction on this outcropping.. it’s a place I’ve wanted to visit for years but is very hard to get transportation to.. 😅😊
So what's the plan for a sneak in? 😊
There's just something about this time, these people and their exploits that is beyond cool and truly fascinating. Would love to see a video on the Trojan War with this AI content. Incredible.
th-cam.com/users/shortsD-aBTKnHQFY?si=qNhr3-ZosjPxXuxA
Alexander wasnt as bad as u make him out to be, when his army was crossing the dessert and everyone was dying of thirst a scout spotted an oasis and came back with water in a helmet which he gave to Alexander to drink. Instead of taking a sip although he was parched he poured out the water in front of his people.
Stellar Sagas doesn't understand Alexander the Great at all. He led from the front, always charged in the thickest of the battle and never asked anything of his soldiers he wasn't prepared to do himself (as that story you mentioned illustrates). The young king was driven by curiosity and by the need to always be on the move (plus his upbringing played a enormous role in moulding his personality), not by type of ego as the author of this video dismissively claims. _He was a man, take him for all in all, _*_the world_*_ shall not look upon his like again_ .
fr, this guy needs to end the Alexander slander
instead of sharing it?
David had a craving and said, “Oh that someone would give me water to drink from the well of Bethlehem which is by the gate!” So the three mighty men broke through the camp of the Philistines, and drew water from the well of Bethlehem which was by the gate, and took it and brought it to David. Nevertheless he would not drink it, but poured it out to the LORD;
- 2 Samuel 23:15-16
@@ballerinarococo5002 Lol Alexander wasn't driven by his ego? You do realize the only reason he made his army cross the Gedrosian Desert is out of spite, right? He was enraged at their refusing to continue his conquests. Whilst Alexander was, indeed, erudite and of a curious mind; these traits took a LARGE backseat to his ambition. When he was a child, he was infatuated with The Illiad not because of the tales of adventure; but because of the greatness of Achilles.
As a child he would continually haggle his father, Philip, for a chance to win glory on the battlefield; and was even quoted as telling Patroclus that he hated his father, because he thought that his father would end up leaving no glory left for Alexander himself to achieve.
Once Alexander began his conquests, he proceeded to name every prosperous city he had conquered after himself. An act of curiosity, no doubt. (That's sarcasm btw) And even murders a loyal, decorated general of Macedon for questioning his authority and insinuating that his father was a better king (most tales state he did this while drunk, but nonetheless).
Make no mistake, Alexander was a man of ambition & volition first & foremost; curiosity was just another tool in the arsenal, and Alexander had no need to "stay on the move" unless it led to conquest. Even before his death, he had drew up plans to subjugate all of Asia; not to "explore" it. He is not some Socrates or Marco Polo. He is Alexander, The Conqueror; The Great.
I have the same disease that Alexander is theorized to have died from. It’s called Gillian-barre syndrome. The immune system attacks the nervous system from the feet up and slowly, if not treated, will kill when it reaches your lungs or heart. He probably was conscious when paralyzed and either starved to death, suffocated from his lungs stopped working, or from the burial. Where ever that burial is we don’t know. It is a shocking and terrifying experience even today. I don’t know what he was thinking back then
I think I've heard about this in the book Tuesday With Morrie
Yeah Alexander is fictional character never existed
"THE CROWN OF FRANCE WAS FALLEN ON GROUND,I PICKED IT UP WITH MY SWORD" ~NAPOLEON BONAPAR`TE
Hey stellar sagas I have always enjoyed your utube shorts however your story telling videos like these has always been my fav keep uploading these types of videos
Thank you !
I salute to my history teacher akhtar zaib, his classes were so good and he tried to give us as info as possible in the best way possible despite the syllabus and course. He is also on TH-cam by the name of POLITICS BY AKHTAR ZAIB.
I am into the the theorie that Alexander was poisoned by his own Generals to avoid an another grueling Campaign in Arabia Peninsula.
dude no one was intrested in arabia at that time. that shithole was more backward than vikings at that time
very unlikely he would've ventured into Arabia. I believe he was planning a campaign in the west at the time of his death.
i dont find any reason he would conquer a barren land with few thousand nomadic people that bear no threat or significance at the time.
@@LordHellRaiserr isn't that what I said? In an impolite way?
I believe he was poisned by chankya
Can you add me into this list? I was able to repel my mother-in-law from my home and drove her back to her barren wasteland and lived to tell the tale. Caused many a suffering personally from my wife, but I prevailed with utmost determination. I wish to be recognized.
Your tales of valor and bravery shall go down in history. May scribes and bards sing praises to your grace, and speak often of your majesty. For a man does not so easily repel disgruntled in-laws
Great job, all leaders should see this wether it’s in business,military or ministry. The one thing you see lacking from theses great leaders is humility and a relationship with the Almighty.
True but Alexander had humility, although he was a Pagan
These vids, this channel, and above all the voice is amazing
Me at 20: finished 4 yrs of highschool starting college as a freshman
Alexander the Great at 20: i conquered 3/4 of the globe and expanded my empire of Macedonia.
Me at 30: what the hell am i doing with my life?! 😢
Right 😂
You are perpetrating less evil than Alexander did. He is responsible for war death suffering .. and more left in his wake.. not peace after this death in the new empire. He is one of the worst people to live by this analysis. Aren’t you happy now that you haven’t sign what he did?
@@patinho5589 Yea, but, the Persians were assholes!
@@SplendidFactor everyone was and pretty much still is. Depending on the benchmark.
Alexander the Great at 30: oh wait, he didn't make it to 30. So you win there!
Intriguing video... I always look foward to your posts
I became a fan of yours after watching your videos. And indeed it is nothing less than a movie.❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
I have a book on Julius Caesar, I am about 173 pages into it & it has good references and the writer seems non-biased. I do question though why Julius Caesar is on the list of great conquerors. I think he is extremely overrated as a world conqueror, but extremely underrated as a politician. A lot of his maneuvering actually worked very well. If we compare him to somebody like Sulla, he gets points for being famous because he is a great what if question. What if he had lived? But Sulla succeeded in, crushing all of his enemies, defeated a large force that had beaten a sizeable Roman army ( they had greater accomplishments than the Gauls Caeser defeated), gained all the power and was able to retire to peace. Caeser was a good politician and certainly a great chess player when it came to power. But as far as conquering goes, he actually has a large advantage when he is in Gaul. Pompey was overrated, even according to contemporary sources he was a man who would take credit for victories he did not win. Caeser was arguably the best general out of the three men of the first triumvirate Crassus, Pompey and Caeser. Now in Egypt he had a bit more of a difficult position being in a foreign land, but was still at the advantage with being in the defensive position. Also his enemy was a young King, Ptolemy, who was not as experienced as Caeser. It was actually Ptolemy who would be given credit, if he succeeded, he would have been touted as a great general because Caeser was in a position of great advantage. Now I know that every battle is difficult and winning just because you should still deserves credit. I just do not feel Caeser should get as much credit as Alexander, Genghis, and Napoleon who were usually not only outnumbered but their opponents had equal or greater equipment.
Side note, This is something that I feel movies do not go into detail when showing why Rome was so successful. It was not just better gear, but much better discipline. They were consistently prepared or preparing for war. They (Romans) are often shown walking around talking politics then all of a sudden they hop into war.
I feel Caeser was great at laying ground work though. Many rulers like Alexander are good conquerors and so-so rulers we're not the best at preparing the next generation. Now in some cases they die prematurely, Caeser and Alexander both, but Caeser picked a winner by naming Augustus his heir.
Edit: The book was Caeser, by Theodore Ayrault Dodge.
@Tracchofyre more difficulty than Genghis, I beg to differ, Genghis was stripped of everything as a boy and hunted at a young age. Vercingetorix did know Roman formation, and refused to face them because he knew they had the advantage on the battlefield. That is why he used ambush and scorched earth. Also Caesar had the German cavalry on his side in his war with the Gauls. They were the best cavalry and spoke the Gauls language and knew their ways which gave him a big edge. I remember Ariovistis , I simply left him out. He was actually trying not to engage with Caeser because of his religion he was told to only attack at a certain time. Caeser pressured him into battle and had him psyched out. Still a good accomplishment.
At Alesia he was only outnumbered 5 to 1, those are not terrible odds when you are in a fortress with a superior military force ( superior in discipline, equipment and position) he also had balista and siege equipment, fighting barefoot and not heavily armoured Gauls.
As for Pompey, I will post the reference later, some of his victories in the east were the ones where he took credit for accomplishments he did not do on his own.
why you ask? its the way with white people dude something only gets in their list if and only it was in europe. i mean come on. you count alexander as a great conqueror? he was a boy lover with daddy issues.
Bro what’s the name of the book? It’d be nice if one could get it on phone.
Cyrus the Great and Timur don’t exist according to those TH-cam video
Explain to me why none of the men are Black? If lebron james spread his seed he will make superior humans just a thought
the voice, music, graphics all perfect
Chinggis Khan thought he is the one and only servant of God.
This is why he said “I am the punishment of God...If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.”
He pretty much just destroyed every area he went through even those which were peaceful
@@azmathussain754 that is what liars say, and brainwash people
@@azmathussain754
He respected those who surrendered to him immediately. But woe to those who resisted.
you misquote it. the original saying had 'the heavens' not 'god'
It's a misquote. He never worshiped God's but the sky, The real quote is actually Heavens, not God.
Napoléon never had been captured by the british. He surrendered himself to them at Rochefort. He could escape to USA but somehow he didn't push toward this idea. He hoped to have a house in the countryside near London. This is what was planned. Even the Maitland agreed on this but at the end british govermnent decided to send him in a place remotely.
Ashoka the Great was also one of the Great Conquerors, he didn't die desiring for more. After realizing what is peace and humanity he spent the rest of his life preaching peacefulness and spreading peace, kind, humanity, and harmony in Buddhism to the rest of the world.
The common strength and ironically weakness for all 4 of them are that they were amazing warriors, conquerors and military leaders, yet they all failed in leading the country they created through their conquest. Alexander's Empire crumbled as soon as he died, Julius Caesar's Roman Dictatorship started a civil war immediately after his assassination, Genghis Khan's empire fractured into independent Khanates, none of which survived for more than 100 years. Last but not least, Napoleon conquered all of Europe except Russia, yet under his rule, the French people suffered due to non-stop warring with other countries, sanctioning Great Britain causing goods prices to skyrocket.
Some men are born to conquer and some are born to rule. In each of the four cases, Alexander's general Seleucus ruled the largest extent of what was Alexander's Empire, Ptolemy ruled Egypt and both Empires lasted 200+ years. Caesar Augustus, while not known for his military prowess like his adopted father Julius Caesar, turned Rome into one of the greatest, if not the greatest empire humankind has ever known, setting the foundation for an empire that lasted almost 1500 years. Genghis Khan, descendants continued to rule small kingdoms and fiefdoms until the early modern age. While France did not crumble, through Napoleon's conquest, ideologies such as Nationalism, and other enlightenment ideas for the modern city state spread through Europe, which inspired the Unification of Italy, and the Unification of Germany. The same ideologies still are at the foundations of almost every Western country today.
I truly believe that the impact left by each of these conquerors are greater than the conquests themselves. But once again, some men are meant to conquer, and some are meant to rule. Very rarely we have a leader that has both.
Napoleon was good in both : conquer and rule.
@@thierryfromgwada9312 no he wasn’t lol. He almost bankrupted France with his continental conquest and embargo on the British. Lost almost all of the French colonies, and France never really regained her strength after his stint as their ruler. Don’t believe everything you read about him, lot of it is romanticized.
@@HEEHEEBOII Have a quick research on Napoleon bro 😂
You don't know what you are talking about. All specialists say he was à good administrator, legistator, etc...
Québec has been sold before NB, and he sold american territories to US.
It didn't ruin France. The country get stronger.
People are killed because of the allies, not because of Napoleon !
They have always broken treaties of peace, because they couldn't stand than french people decide about their future. How can you have a diplomatic relationship with someone who always want to betray you ?
@@thierryfromgwada9312i wish you a really nice day from Saudi Arabia
I wish you a really good life from Saudi Arabia
Good Video and good job, However, you should note that Alexander's death was quite a shady affair and at present days no one knows what happened to his tomb. You can't just claim he overdrank his way to death as there are other records suggesting a different ending (Check the Pamphlet). Because of the way he fought the whole world he conquered recognised him as a walking god, son of Zeus- Ammon, a descendent of Achilies from his mother line, not some drunkard party animal with nasty sexual habits (Another painful thing people are doing to history...). Even Ceaser is said to have shed tears over how little he accomplished compared to Alexander by the time he was the same age as him. You depict him as a man focused on himself only, however every land he conquered he treated as Macedon (Greek Macedon). Records claim he was even more generous towards his soldiers. According to many transcripts from Arrian, Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus, Quintus Curtius Rufus, and Justin, He brought Hellenic culture, education and military training among many other things to Asia and towards the cities that submitted to him he was very generous. He was criticized by his generals for being too lenient towards the conquered nations. Please consider all possible outcomes before stating that a person was like this or like that. Thank you for your efforts with the video. Looking forward to something more critically analysed and not so one-sidedly viewed as records on events in history are often multiple and statements on the subject should be more academic or neutral as it is commonly known. For example, why would someone definitely state that he leaves his empire to the Strongest when he has a pregnant wife that may give birth to a male hair and there were also other relatives overseas. To the strongest kind of benefit his own generals who later split his empire between them after his death and guess what? All of Alexander's relatives, wives and kids (all of them even the ones from mistresses) somehow died mysteriously... just consider all possible outcomes, please guys. Napoleon is also said to have admired Alexander. I can say some things about Napoleon and Chenghis that you are too one-sided on as well but I think I've made up my point and this is becoming too big of a read...
Well said sir
Alexander has been the only conqueror that other rulers or kings use as a standard of leadership.
Any movie to watch under this
He was a man, take him for all in all, *the world* shall not look upon his like again.
Alexander looked up to Cyrus
Okay, I never imagined Hayden Christensen as Alexander, but now I do...
Never before have I thought Napoleon was hot
@@LisaDiazAppleLisahe isn’t lol, this video just makes him look more glorious.
All of them were seen as ugly or average except Alexander the Great he was described as a very good looking man with a well built physique.
@@robzsarmy5471didn’t Julius Caesar’s men sometimes refer to him as a bald whoremonger
@@LisaDiazAppleLisa It's AI art. Everyone looks hot. Shrek himself would be a sexy beast.
Im a life long history buff particularly of the Rome and love these and the art is phenomenal
A true Great,..never conquered.
A true Great...won by defending what his own...and never defeated.
these guys were inspiration to me ❤
Khalid the undefeated hero❤
I always wish to know more things/informations about history. I would like to watch more videos just like this video. Please keep sharing with us your great collections about history.
"You too, Marcus." Julius Cesar
Last word
Et tu brute
Cyrus the great and nader shah definitely should've been in this video. Maybe part 2?
Also Umer , khalid bin waleed, ❤
Exactly Cyrus and Darius should’ve been there
You mean Nader Shah (The Napoleon of Persia)?
@@husainatuasesay-jp6tl yes
For sure Darius have a place here but the video was made from wester unhistorian. Julius Ceasar I don't know how much can be here. Also he show Alexander as narcissistic and Gengis Khan as modest but he didn't read ancient literature. Alexander yes was really good, good as god, but he respected every culture. Gengis on the other hand he destroyed everything behind him. Alexander conquered the greatest armies of the time and unite culture as all the scientific creation start at the Hellenistic age after Alexander's conquest. But Gengis who conquered twice land as Alexander he conquered empty land, poor villages and villagers who couldn't protect themselves. He lost from Hungarians by the way as Mongols lost by Indians and totally humiliated by Japanese. Well that countries had real army not Siberian primitive villages.
Also Ivan the terrible, Hannibal Barca, Ramses the 2nd, Sargon of Akkad, Constantine the great and many many others who there was better generals than Ceasar, Gengis snd Napoleon but was less lucky and different environment. Come on you think Mongols had a chance against British empire? Don't be fool
Genghis Khan conquered the most and lived till old age. Yes he probably was not a good man but damn!
Only one other military genius studied war like Napoleon Bonaparte. "War. I study the art of war, work to perfect it." - Grand Admiral Thrawn
this was beautiful
This was well Produced, Great data, I am impress, 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾🙏🙏💎👑🌟⭐️👍
Curious, why Hernan Cortes and Francisco Pizarro are not on this list? Both actually conquered vast Empires with less than 10k soldiers and limited logistics. I would put them in the list of top conquerors as well. Abu Bakr and the Arab conquests of the Byzantine and Sassanid Empires also gets little love.
Because technically the disease killed the Incas and Aztecs and whatnot. Somewhere along the lines of that.
While Pizarro and Cortes were walking empty lands, Ermak conquered Siberia with less than 1k soldiers.
@@breezylandscape9777 not really. More to it than the 5th grade education taught in it. There were massive battles thst are not talked about. The Conquistadors did get help from local natives though.
Hannibal Barca, Ramses II, Qin Shi huang, Attila The Hun.
They conquered civilizations that were technilogically inferior to them. These 4 are much more impressive.
I am a young person, and I absolutely love this type of content and would love to make visuals like this for a TH-cam channel of my own. I saw their Astra Gallery course, but, it costs a lot for me - $129. I am pleading with anyone who has bought their course, to please share with me: especially the scripting and storytelling process. It will mean a lot to me🥺🙏
"They all died desiring but one thing the love for more".
not the khan. alexander and napoleons empires were gone after their death. ceaser was never the emperor. but khan probably died with the most happiness. i mean he had to. most of his life was a mess. but he was peaceful in death
Amazing video. One of my favorites on TH-cam.
A King is coming and His name is Jesus Christ 🙏 🙌 ❤
Hallelujah 🙌🏻 🥳
Hallelujah
To save kids and women of Palestine Gaza. He is our prophet ❤ we muslims love Jesus 😊
Amen 🙌🙏
A very good documentary. The video editing is next level.
Damn, Alexander looks like a model.
He did in reality too
Courage , Loyalty, Sacrifice, Dignity, genuine and romance.
That's the perfect combination baby.
The perfect combination.
Just the perfect combination.
Story telling is fascinating want to know which application or software use in it 😮
Love the visuals!
Will you make a separate video for Han Wudi and Tang Taizong. Their success are comparable to these four.
Beautiful cinematography
We can also talk about Qin Shihuang, Attila the hun, Charlemagne and (yes, sadly) Hitler.
Elite level editing and narration ❤💯
literally gained the world and lost his soul
Very interesting !
If i choose one from those 4 deaths. I would choose Genghis khan is.
Biggest land empire, Generals Friends Families with me. My people sees me like Demigod. My Sons & Grandsons keep stretching my empire and caring my legacy.
That death just better.
Ghengis Khan was savage AF
The version I read of gengis khans death was after marrying his gazillionth wife he drank so much he died
I prefer this version because it makes me crack up (I dunno why)
The graphics are outstanding! I enjoyed it very much.
I have it from a reliable source that Napoleon's last words, France, the Army, Head of the Army, Josephine, meant that he wanted France to put Josephine as the head of the Army. But he forgot that he had already out-lived her.
🤪
I am not sure if you are joking 😅
but I think he meant that those things are what matters to him the most. 😊
@@hieulechi2548
The foolish logo says it all. 😂
But my classmates and I hotly debated our history teacher long ago, about this same interpretation. It left the whole class laughing.
This video was made beautifully.
They really hit us with the "Jangis Khan"
thats the correct way to pronounce it
That is how you pronounce it
@@joellu8202 correct way say is Chingis Khan.
@@cba2make1up no it isn’t😂 not even close. Gengis isn’t close either but don’t make stuff up
@@MilaneseMoon ..yes it is. It is close. The comment right above you even showed you how it's spelled. Google is your friend.
Im a historian myself i teach history I'm glad to see these heroes of old
I'm super early,wow
Whats disappointing is that Alexander died to fricking kidney failure
Well made. Good job
OK but where is the Khalid ibn Al walid in the list.
Man this was a great video. The way you say everything was great. Good work.
genghis can is not a conqueror he is a warlord he don't have goal to exapand he wants only resources and trade but the problem is envoy getting killed every time.
Wow you're exactly right🥹
@@munkhmunkh1020i wish you a really nice day from Saudi Arabia
Image is so nice in quality and suitable for story
Nobody deserves the title "The great" better than Genghis Khan.
The greatest conquered that ever lived.
So glad to find you in my recomendations
The greatest conqueror of all times is the Lord Jesus Christ
Amen
Amen.
That’s right for God is the greatest conqueror
Dude got hung by random Jews after making thousands Believe in his bullshit.
@@jordancallahan5343Yet, he still manages to take his whole influence throughout the world even after 2000 years.
I hope one day I can create content like this. Very interesting and inspiring content
i thought that gheghis khan quote was from conan the barbarian 😂
Very nice mj photos. Very beautiful.
You forgot about the 5th great conqueror.
Ragnar Lothbrok
Who died in a pit of snakes.
he was a great man at conquering ice
its a shame we dont have him today i really needed more ice cubes at my fridge rn
New subscriber here
No one is immortal
nice. but all conquerors knew that. thats why they fought with courage. its the name that lives on forever. plus, this is shit world. no one wants to live forever.
This makes me love history alot❤😊
Alexander is the greatest above them all
if he won't die prematurely
this is absolute power
unlike others with weak government system
Alexander didn't make it but for sure his record can erase those who die in their 60s
Lol! Alexander was nothing but a slaughterer.
Look at the cyrus the great. A great legacy.. A father of middle east.... Cyurus more praised than Alexander cos cyrus Was more than a king
Lmao he didn't even lead single battle by himself directly, all he do is ride on horse on battle and all troops of his army lead by his general, meanwhile Genghis khan conquer more area than Napolean, Julius Caesar and Alexander the geh , he revolutinazed whole Mongolia and create most powerful strategy and tactics
@@wavehixeno4915 "Alexander the geh" lmao
Genghis only started conquering in his 50's. That's how long it took to unite all the Mongols and turn it into the great horde that would conquer the world. Out of these 4 he is the one that made his own army and conquered the most land and was the most feared. Everyone should be fighting for second spot after him.
@@wavehixeno4915And meanwhile Alexander revolutionized the World. Gehges Khan ain’t nothing compared to the Great. Malaka
Wow. What a great way to put it!
Khalid bin Al-Waleed is missing. He conquered more than Julius and Napoleon
the quality of the land is a factor to a bunch of fuc k ing sand mounted together is as worth as my shizt even less because my shzit can fertilize the land now sand is just fuc k ing useless , napoleon conquered a continent with tens of millions even hundreds of millions, julius caesar toppled over the super power of the time , one man against the world's strongest superpower and khalid bin al waleed
Conquered the great mount of sand with 0 people in the middle of nowhere , fought 2 weakened empires
and took several years at even conquering weakened empires with no armies to fight back?
The first great conqueror who subdued much of the known world in the Middle East is: Nebuchadnezzar, apart from Babylon, became known as a legacy for his hanging gardens, he was before Alexander the Great, only to note that he made the first great empire of humanity.
Genghis Khan was too much.
He be like, "I ain't no messiah. I know I'm a piece of sh*t"
People from nomidic places or a primtive nations, name things as it is, they don't give cute names for savagry
If it's bad they know it and say it and if it's good, they know and say it
Maybe this is the only noble attribute such people have before their descendants get brainwashed by the nomenclature of civilization and major cities
Wrong Genghis Khan was a man of principles. He was the greatest conqueror earth ever witnessed
What animation do you add? I want to use it in my videos
Imagine how many people in history have died in the wars caused by these 4men, how many women raped, how many children orphaned?
not many actually. alexander and ceaser were only small conquerors. none of theor armies exceeded 100k actually alxander army wasnt even 50k. and in the time of napoleon least number of people died too. but chingghis khan's campaign was the one that changed the fate of the world. he killed so many people and raped so much that today the carbon footprint and the DNA of 1/16th of men would totally be different if he didnt exist.
la grande armee never raped anyone 😁
Hippity hoppity women are property
and how different would the world be without them
this is just a lesson that there can't be any bad with no good nd any good with nothing bad
genghis khan maybe genocided millions but he paved the way for the biggest scientific advancements in the history of mankind with the freed trade and freedom of thought
Alexander the great i can see his intentions were good but in the end they ended up bad with the collapse of the macedonian empire
Julius caesar never wanted to make a roman empire but in the end the ones who made it happen were his assassins who thought he wanted to make a monarchy
And napoleon just like alexander the great ended up like him but didn't get the same luxury of dying like alexander did
good and bad they aren't the opposite they are the same and they will always be their only difference is time and when one of them happens
Alexander the Great was a man ahead of his time and has been my historical crush until now
Genghis Khan is better
Everyone's going to die that's it
Greed has no boundaries until it feeds on itself!
Out of all of these, I would argue that Caesar left the greatest legacy, perhaps of all time, but certainly of these four.
Pretty sure every historian in the world would argue he’s the least impressive and impactful one in here by far.
@@peterthesneakybastar least impressive, maybe. But his LEGACY was the greatest out of all of them
@@peterthesneakybastar the name for the word emperor from europe to the middle east was made onto his image
His name was turned into the word emperor to this day
And the roman empire changed the world forever
Julius Caesar accomplishments were unbelievable! ⚔🛡
I have no idea why you didn't mention them but:
Umar ibn al-Khattab was the greatest conqueror,
and Khalid ibn al-walid was the greatest military commander to ever exist.
Europeans have just twisted the facts, and made it hard to separate right from wrong.
How large were the area they conquered? You can win 1000 times but if all those victories gave you only a small patch of land, that only makes you a conqueror, not a great conqueror.
Every for them is the greatest as long it is a muslim. They are a cult rejoicing for small achievements which are only exploited from weak empires.
dude chinghis khan was the greatest conqeror ever. not your stupid khalid or whatever. he unified and made a decent army out of a bunch of stubborn, nomadic and uneducated tribes and brought the end to golden age of muslims. he had the whole silk road under his control. how many in the history did that? none but him.
Namer the first Pharaoh Egypt to unity upper Egypt To Lower Egypt.
So he unified a single country. That makes him a great conqueror?
I love this🎉
8 mnts well spent. Good Job
magnificent picture, good job
Moral of the story: Nothing in this world is permanent
Mr. Won't Listen to Anybody was the best part.
Too much of everything will kill you