These are the prime contenders: Alexander, Hannibal, the Qin Emperor, Caesar, Augustus, Muhammad, Charlemagne, Genghis Khan, Kublai Khan, Tsar Peter, Frederick the Great of Prussia, Napoleon, Bismarck, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao.You may not like all these men, but they are all among history's greatest men. And they were all very serious personalities. None of them was a silly man. They all evinced a stone cold gravitas. To be great, or just to change anything in a serious way, you have to a serious person, a man of gravitas.You may charge that these men killed, they shed blood. But what of it? Doing this is part of being a great man.You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.If men of this caliber didn't exist, and instead everyone were a peacenik, there would never be progress and we'd be cavemen.The cost of progress, over millennia, is measured in megadeaths and even gigadeaths. But in the end, more people benefit than those who suffered, and the joy wrought from the historical process exceeds the suffering involved.
>>526467521Hadrian. He kicked the kikes ass and didn't give 2 shits. AND the kikes couldn't do anything but seethe.
>>526467521Donald J Trump
Killed LOTS of those pieces of shit back then too. Wish he coulda killed them all and we wouldn't have ANY of these problems today.
Plato
>Who is the Greatest Man in History?Me
>>526467521Also, to the peaceniks offended by Great Men's penchant for killing: Remember it is Great Wars, like the World Wars and Napoleon Wars and the Thirty Years War, that keep societies levelheaded and people grounded in reality. A very long peace breeds severe decadence and is immediately followed by a hard decline, like this era today when a Great War has not occurred in eighty years, or like Rome in the first century after the reigns of the Five Good Emperors. Without regular and hard warfare, the kind which affects the entire population of each belligerent country (hence the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars do not count, and neither Vietnam, which too was relatively small and did not entail mass hardship for the American home front), people become hyper-individualistic, lose the spirit of collective effort and sacrifice, and society falls apart. Horrible behavior becomes common among ordinary people.It is largescale wars that make us humane, compassionate, willing to work together and not take advantage of each other. Wars keep society from dying. Hardship and mass death are the prices we must pay to be moral and decent and, thus, to survive long term. For although war is deadly for so many, an untreated decadence causes extinction.The world today, sad state it is in, is due for a Great and Regenerative War. And after it is done and the fallen buried, the survivors shall once again know the value of peace, prosperity, and being good to one another.
>>526467595Hadrian is a major world figure, but not at the level of the men I listed in the OP. He is of secondary rank in history.
>>526467521King Nigger.He got Nobel Peace Prize
>>526467595>better than Trajan, luckier than AugustusPublius Aelius was one of a kind
>>526467861Your *Opinion* is discarded.Hadrian is #1
>>526467688Intellectuals are important, and perhaps change the world even more than the greatest political and military leaders and conquerors. But they do not strike anyone as "great." Greatness is towering, mighty, commanding of respect based on fear. Greatness is found in the political-military realm and thus among the men of state and of war.
>>526467521Friederich Hölderlin
>>526467521Jesus. Not even a Christfag but he basically subjugated an entire continent for 2000 years and then the world. Domination wise no one beats him.
>>526467925Hadrian truly is not comparable to Alexander, Caesar, Genghis, or Napoleon, and to so many others as well.
>>526467861His many accomplishments beg to differ
>>526467521Non-religiously, Alexander
>>526467935>Intellectuals are not greatOnly for those who cannot seehttps://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/54933/ode-
>>526467521George Washington
>>526467990All of your beloved sucked kike cock. Hadrian did not coddle them. Hadrian killed them by the 100's of thousands. Now, fuck off.
>>526467521Hadrian
>>526467521It's by far Imperator Caesar Divi Filius Augustus, Pontifex Maximus, Consul XIII, Imperator XXI, Tribuniciae Potestatis XXXVII, Pater Patriae. Second would be Alexander III the Great of Macedon, and the third is a tie between many men, mostly Romans.
in terms of military figures no one is even close to touching ghengis khan. certainly not nepo babies like ceasar or alexander. not napoleons dumbass who got BTFO and watched his empire crumble while he was still alive. ghengis went from a nobody in a barren land of horse fuckers to dominating entire continents worth of civilizations with every material advantage against him
jesus christif he doesn't count then unironically xi, made a bunch of peasants into the worlds prime superpower within a lifetime
>>526467521My wife's bvll!
>>526467521Napoleon.
>>526467521People like Napoleon, Stalin, Churchill or Hitler belong in shit tier because they left their countries destroyed and even today they haven't yet recovered. I think Augustus fits the bill better than Caesar
>>526467765This guy and me
>>526467901>>526468586Gaius Plinius Secundus mentions to Vespasian in the beginning of Historis Naturalis, "Marcus Tullis, whos genius is beyond all competition". That being said, he says Caesar could dictate multiple messages at the same time to multiple scribes, and whos statesmanship and intellect was unparalleled, coupled with his military lead in fighting 50 pitched battles and wiping 1,192,000 people in his career.Pliny also mentions GnaeusPompeiusMagnus Imperator, who>recovered Sicily>conquered/subjugated all africa>subjugated 876 cities - from the Alps to the borders of furthest Spain>ended Roman civil war>overall defeated, routed, put to the sword, or subjugated, 12,278,000 men>sunk or captured over 846 vessels>received as Allies over 1,395 cities and fortresses>conquered all countries from Maeotis to the Red SeaIt seems these two stand out as individuals to Pliny the Elder as the standard of the definition 'Great Men'.Hitler was also Great
>>526468742>in terms of military figures no one is even close to touching ghengis khan. certainly not nepo babies like ceasar or alexander. not napoleons dumbass who got BTFO and watched his empire crumble while he was still alive. ghengis went from a nobody in a barren land of horse fuckers to dominating entire continents worth of civilizations with every material advantage against himThis is a good assessment. Indeed Genghis Kham may have the strongest claim to the title of Greatest Man in History.
>>526469069>People like Napoleon, Stalin, Churchill or Hitler belong in shit tier because they left their countries destroyed and even today they haven't yet recovered.This is mostly true.France since 1815 has never been as powerful as it was before then.Russia since 1953 did maintain its power for a while, really until 1989, so I don't think you can put Stalin in this category. He was a success. Gorbachev is the one who failed.Britain since 1945 has been in steep decline.Germany since 1945 has been in decline, becoming very powerful again after reunification but losing a lot of power in the last decade or so.
>>526470485Is this the ghengis george khan with blue eyes and rosy cheeks, or the ghengis khan with a thin black twisty villainous moustache
>>526470468>>overall defeated, routed, put to the sword, or subjugated, 12,278,000 menPompey killed 12 million men? In battle? How?
>>526467521Jesus
>>526467521Charles De Gaullejust wait
>>52647065612 million was maybe a third of the Roman population during the Late Republic, or more than a third. So 12 million *men* would be more than half of the men in Roman territory. I don't see how it's possible he killed this many, even if many were outside of Rome domain.
>>526470656You've strong opinions for someone who cannot comprehend your own hand written quote properlyThe sentences/figures given are literally direct quoted from Pliny the Elder
Quoted and listed in that exact order
>>526470831And ancient historians exaggerated numbers.The Persian army was supposedly two million when Alexander fought them, but there is no way it was that big.
