Apparently, I'm a coward.

Thursday, October 27, 2005
Hehehe... via Three Rounds Brisk I found the Which Historic General Are You? Test. In light of MeaninglessHotAir's Grant v Sherman thread there was no way I could pass up taking it.

Turns out I'm a cowardly Julius Ceasar. I scored 15% on unorthodoxity (is that a word?), 55% on ruthlessness, 86% on tactics and a whopping 0% on Guts. Look at the bright side, if we ever share a foxhole together you'll have plenty of elbow room after I skeedaddle.


Knucklehead said...

King Edward I. I'll draw and quarter your arse in a NY minute, dear Braveheart.

Silly, but amusing, test. Just one flaw is that if you happen to know a bit about what they're poking around at and pick the winning tactic (or avoid the losing one) you lose "unorthodoxy" points - as if "unorthodoxy" is really something that is particularly valuable in a military commander (or leader of whatever sort).

Those leaders who succeed and become known as "unorthodox" aren't so much unorthodox as they are early adopters of tactics and techniques which will become the new orthodoxy.

flenser said...

Julius Caesar

Scored 57 Wisdom, 73 Tactics, 53 Guts, and 55 Ruthlessness.

It also says than I scored higher than 36% on guts, so it looks as if these numbers are constantly changing as more people take the test.

Since ambi and I are both Caesars, we will have to control the army on alternate days, in true Roman style. (How did those guys ever win anything with that setup?)

vnjagvet said...

U.S. Grant - 68 Wisdom, 58 Tactics, 64 Guts, and 44 Ruthlessness. I noticed that the percentile scores compare you with folks of your age and gender. My "guts" percentile was over 99%!!! Considering Grant's "butcher bill" you all might consider asking for a transfer out of my unit. I will not hold it against anyone should they do so.

I guess that explains my affinity to Grant.

MeaninglessHotAir said...

King Edward I
You scored 64 Wisdom, 65 Tactics, 39 Guts, and 61 Ruthlessness!
Or rather, King Edward the Longshanks if you've seen Braveheart. You, like Edward, are incredibly smart and shrewd, but you win at any costs....

I guess I've never seen the point of fighting a war, watching people die, and not trying to win. S... or get off the pot.

RogerA said...

Vercingnetorix; 74 wisdom, 54 tactics, 47 guts, 56 ruthlessness

BTW--I have been watching Rome on HBO (mostly porn with an overlay of history, but I do love this period of Roman History)--My question of the day: why do directors feel compelled to give Romans british accents--why dont they speak like a godfather movie? After all........

vnjagvet said...

Rog, MHA, Knuck, Ambi and Flenser:

Looks like we have the makings of a pretty good general staff here.

Caesar's tactics, Edward I's all around shrewdness and ruthless prowess, Vercingnetorix's wisdom and Grant's guts. Bring on them vandals.

Knucklehead said...

Talk about the Devil's Generals!

Hows come y'all were so low on the ruthlessness scores? Suck it up, willya.

Rick Ballard said...

Scipio Africanus - any of you guys seen any Carthaginians around?

chuck said...

George Washington :
66 Wisdom
77 Tactics
52 Guts
40 Ruthlessness

I'd only rather be Scipio Africanus.

ambisinistral said...

Wait a second, when did orthodoxy get turned into wisdom in this test? Now, not only am I a quivering liver in the courage department, but I'm a moron to boot.

Man, I knew I should have bombed that orphanage and not hidden behind the rock. I think you guys better put me in charge of the chow hall or something else that isn't to critical.

gumshoe1 said...

anyone else get the feeling
the test was written by a kid who's
never been near the military?

the criteria(ruthlessness?in war??) are clearly written
from an armchair perspective.

William Wallace

Scored 64 Wisdom, 73 Tactics,
65 Guts, and 46 Ruthlessness.

Rick Ballard said...


I thought the test reflected a bit too much sensitivity. There wasn't one question concerning the effectiveness of razing a city and selling the inhabitants into slavery.

gumshoe1 said...

rick -

i'd put the questions about
"adverse publicity"
under the same heading.

the test-writer not only
can't imagine a battlefield
*without* MSM critques
and UN tut-tutting after-the-fact,
he/she hasn't read enough history
to imagine such a thing.