>Is called "Napoleon of Iran"
>Lived 100 years ago before Napoleon
>>1216707
That's because it was called Napoleon of Persia by an historian, not iranians themselves. And there's nothing wrong with it because said historian was writing for westeners and so the comparison was useful.
He didn't betray a movement out of narcissism and manletism though?
That we coined way later. To be fair, he does look like Napoleon, except with the brains, without the legacy and without any fucking thing in common. He was just another nomad savage in Asia.
>>1216728
He came to preeminence as a Safavid loyalist/restorer and then decided he prefered to ditch that and become shah himself.
>>1216738
>nomad savage
Except he was not. Yes he has some Turkmen heritage but he was not a savage. He was like a Sassanid, more like Shapur I
>>1216740
Shanshah*
>>1216749
Not him but he was literally born and raised like a savage bandit. He was also an usurper and extremely irrational and brutal at the end of his life. He blinded his son and killed his companions. He was nothing like Shapur I who was a full-blooded persian king son of kings and probably kind of nice with his people considering he had a good relationship with Mani.
Look for another monarch to compare with Nader.
>>1216760
Timur was muslim
Nader was not
Thus Nader is smarter
Timur 0-1 Nader
>>1216770
>Nader tried his hardest to emulate Timur but was eventually killed by his own men, the sign of a truly shitty leader (like Darius III).
Timur 1000000 - Nader 0
>>1216757
Pretty sure that Safavid, Afsharid and Qajar monarchs called themselves only Shah. Shahanshah was recovered by the Pahlevi.
>>1216770
Nader was a muslim though? unless you are forcing the "Shiites are not Muslim" meme
>Nadir Shah of France
