Ten great generals

[Dan D'Silva]

1. Darius III (just to have at least one surprise in my list, of course)
   

Well, I'm curious.

[Jona Lendering]

1. Darius III (just to have at least one surprise in my list, of course)
   

Well, I'm curious.

Oh it's logical: Darius may have lost the war, but he was a far better organizer. When Darius' large army was in Babylon, food was sold for normal prizes. When Alexander's smaller army was in the city, the prizes went sky high.

[diegis]

I need to propose some Getae/Dacians at first, as Burebista, who executed campaigns in half of Europe and created a Dacian proto-empire, or king Decebalus, who defeated Roman empire in its prime and forced them to pay him tribute (during Domitian era).

Among the Roman ones I have as favourites Cornelius Scipio Africanus and Caius Marius. Belisarius comes in mind too.

Then there is the obvious Hannibal, and then Alex the Great

But above all I will place Spartacus. He was probably the most complete soldier and warrior ever, and when I say soldier I mean general too.
Not just that he survived to varous battles and then to the fights as gladiator in the arena (I think in his time the gladiatorial games was still more close to funeral games then simple entertainment, and deaths was more usual), but he escaped with little over 70 men from there.
And in couple years, right in the teritory of Italia, he managed to gather an army of over 70,000 men, to train those people as much as possible and to lead them on the battlefield, scoring several victories over the Roman army.

Seeing the conditions in which he acted, starting with 73 people and raising his army thousand times in relatively short time, having mostly untrained soldiers, beside gladiators who was a minority among his troops but who wasnt trained however to fight in battle formations he had many slaves (obviously less or much less trained to fight then gladiators) and poor people (same situation, most of them with little to no military training), and fightng against the best army in the world at that time right at its home for few years I think his feats are extraordinary and unparalleled by any other general.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I have to say that although Belisarius has been "Forgotten" in this thread, I would personally not include him as a candidate. His campaigns did far more damage to the Italian and African Infrastructure than they did good. Besides he is an "overdone" character. Aetius was a far better general than him anyways.

Totilia the Goth (Gothic Wars of 540's and so) would be a far more interesting Character. We know a good bit about him from his Anti-Byzzie Campaigns.

[Sean Manning]

1. Darius III (just to have at least one surprise in my list, of course)
   

Well, I'm curious.

Oh it's logical: Darius may have lost the war, but he was a far better organizer. When Darius' large army was in Babylon, food was sold for normal prizes. When Alexander's smaller army was in the city, the prizes went sky high.

And both of his campaigns against Alexander went well until the battle. That is impressive, and anyone can lose two battles. It is a shame that we don't know for sure whether he was involved in regaining Egypt, or the politics behind his choice to fight at Gaugamela.

[Sean Manning]

What do you think? Judah the Maccabee? Belisarius? Scipio?

I think that we know a fair amount about one of the Tuthmosai (Tuthmoses IV?). One general from Europe who was neither a Greek nor a Roman might be fitting, but that is not my specialty so I can't suggest anyone.

[ValentinianVictrix]

Valentinian I, known as 'The last Great Warrior Emperor', now there was a man who knew how to deal with the barbarians!!!

[Theodosius the Great]

Marcus Antonius another possible but perhaps replace him with one of the most overlooked generals for some strange reason, Marcus Aggripa. Where would Octavian have been without him?

Aggripa is a worthy choice. I would also jettison Marcus Antonius (and Caesar) for someone like Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus. His conquest and organization of the eastern Roman Empire would outlast the Republic and the Western Roman Empire.

~Theo

[Q Rutilius]

Gaius Marius? It could not have been easy defeating such a large enemy.

[Timianus]

Mithrades

[Vindex]

Good call, Tim mile:

[Josho Brouwers]

Sargon the Great and Thutmose III would both be interesting, but sources are a problem, as you say.

Other suggestions: perhaps Cyrus the Great, as founder of the Persian Empire, or perhaps Cambyses II would be more deserving? I don't think either of them has been mentioned so far.

Edit: and what about Trajan?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I did a Project on Mithridates for Latin Class. Very worthy suggestion.

[Zachary Marotte]

I. Cyrus the Great
II. Xenophon
III. Thucydides
IV. Philip of Macedon
V. Xanthippus of Carthage
VI. Hannibal Barca
VII. Scipio Africanus
VIII. Marius
IX. The Parthian General Suren
X. Alaric of the Visigoths

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Mine would be (in chronological order from BC to AD)

I. I dont know what sources are avialible, but Hadadezer, who led a coalition of 12 nations against the Assyrians at the battle of Qarqar. The ability to organize said campaign has been compared to the Romans at Chalons
II. Cyrus - for his formation of the first great empire, next to China
III. Xenophon - His campaign into Persia is worthy of a Biography
IV. Phillip II of Macedon - Made way for Alexander
V. Phyrrus of Epirus - His campaigns in Southern Italy and use of Marching Camps and strategy was rather Brilliant.
VI. Mithridates - Fought Four Wars to stop the Roman Expansion into the East and was very successful.
VII. Pompey - Brilliant Strategist and Tactician, arguably better than Caesar
VIII. Trajan - Dacia and Parthia conquered, really enough said.
IX. Aurelian - Restabilized and Re-united the Roman Empire and made way for Diocletian
X. Flavius Aetius - Massive Record of Victories over various Barbarians, with the list topped by Chalons.