This came up in a discussion I was having. Thought I would present it here because I think it's an interesting off-topic discussion The topic initially concerned Temujin (aka Genghis Khan), and focused on the destruction he caused in eastern Europe. We moved to other military conquerors, like Alexander the Great, and everyone had more of a mix of admiration and respect for Alexander, to go along with the recognition of some of the horrible things he did. My view is that this stems from those of us in the discussion being of Western ancestry. Alexander conquered his immediate area, then struck out east, conquering as he went. Temujin did the opposite. So from a standpoint of European history, Alexander is more revered and Temujin is hated. But in Mongolia, Temujin is revered. I don't think Alexander ever made it up there, but I suspect that in the histories of Persia and India, Alexander doesn't get favorable treatment. Of course, you can't separate the barbarism from either man, but both of them were also forward-thinking in ways (Temujin especially) and accomplished some really astounding things. What do you guys think? Does Temujin get a bad rap in the West? Or should Alexander be thought of as worse than he is generally considered? Or maybe they were both brutal killers, and that outweighs any positive accomplishments they brought to their people. Interesting characters for historial novels. I have the first of Conn Iggulden's books on Temujin, but I haven't read it.