The five most important battles of all times.

[LightSpectra]

Or would they?

Actually, I dunno. I just wanted to make that point.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

But observe the butterfly effect: the Battle of Vienna is what popularized coffee in the western world, and therefore cafes, and therefore cafe intellectuals, and ultimately Trotskyism.

We can also, therefore, blame the Turks for French chauvinism and souffles.

 

[Masada]

But observe the butterfly effect: the Battle of Vienna is what popularized coffee in the western world, and therefore cafes, and therefore cafe intellectuals, and ultimately Trotskyism.

What doing is no better than titling with imaginary windmills: and its not materially any different from me dismissing the whole discipline of history as popular dross on the basis of what I see on the shelves at my local bookstore. If I trusted that my local bookshop was representative of all history had to offer the only logical conclusion I could arrive at would be that "Constantine I destroyed Paganism!1!1" So, if you want to keep stereotyping, I'm more than willing to play but if you want have even a shred of intellectual credibility left go read Dachs Titanomachia or something because its obvious that Dachs' historical knoweldge far outstrips your own and yet he doesn't seem to have quite the same issues you have.

 

[LightSpectra]

What doing is no better than titling with imaginary windmills: and its not materially any different from me dismissing the whole discipline of history as popular dross on the basis of what I see on the shelves at my local bookstore. If I trusted that my local bookshop was representative of all history had to offer the only logical conclusion I could arrive at would be that "Constantine I destroyed Paganism!1!1" So, if you want to keep stereotyping, I'm more than willing to play but if you want have even a shred of intellectual credibility left go read Dachs Titanomachia or something because its obvious that Dachs' historical knoweldge far outstrips your own and yet he doesn't seem to have quite the same issues you have.

Apparently my satire should be more conspicuous next time.

 

[Masada]

Apparently my satire should be more conspicuous next time.

The near constant: "ALT HISTORY IS EVAL" subtext in a great many of your posts was much to subtle for this dumb Maori, I'll admit.

 

[BananaLee]

The most important battles of all time are the ones with Zheng He in it.

 

[vogtmurr]

The most important battles of all time are the ones with Zheng He in it.

That reminds me I shall have to cover Zheng He's biography too.
It's too bad we couldn't do an alt-hist with Zheng He vs. Nelson, but we could probably stage a Portuguese-Spanish confrontation with Almeida in the Indian Ocean.

 

[frekk]

1. Siege of Tenochtitlan.
2. Battle of Gravelines (1588)
3. Battle of the Plains of Abraham
4. Battle of Trafalgar
5. Spring Offensive, 1918

 

[Grimberht]

Which battles(not wars) do you think effected the outcome of human civilization the most?

5. Soviet(or allied) victory at stalingrad

IMO, Kursk was more important... The Nazy still had some chances of winning before that battle. Plus if i'm not mistaken, it was the largest battle mankind ever experienced.. each side had nearly a million man concentrated in a farely small area.

At some point, they were over a 1000 tanks fighting in a 3 sq Km area!

2.) Wolfes victory at Quebec in 1759

Overrated the French didnt really fight... for them Quebec was lost anyway and a minor battlefield. Plus Wolf was plain stupid.. he went on a suicide mission and won only cause they let them win. Beside, it most be the only 10 minutes fight where BOTH general died.

3.) Charles Martel's Franks defeating the Moors at Tours

This wasnt a real battle either. Charles Martel who NEEDED legitimacy, mainly cause he put himself in power plundering churchs claimed to save christianity... in fact the invasion was a razzia of a "few" Moors who where looking to get some bounty at Tours St-Martin rich church (in lack of a better word in english). Arab we're strongly out number in Spain, barely able to keep themself in power AND the razzia was motivated by the arab General cause one of his officer had went rogue. Even the Roman church denied the "heroic" deed of Martel at first, but after thing went sour with the Constantinople patriarch.. Rome (who seeked Charlemagne protection) needed a Historical Hero and started the "propaganda". Then came the Crusade and then the building of the "French" nationalism.... (Source Levi-Provençal)

5.)1453 Constantinople: Fall of Byzantines led to flow of knowledge westwards, thus being one factor in the "Renaissance"

Yup, that was big... but I would had the incredible tolerance of the Ottomans... they didnt burn or destroyed anything that didnt make it in the byzantine exode, thus keeping it alive. They even barely "translate" the actual name of Constatinople which the local (like it had been the case for Rome) called their city... THE City (Urbs) which translate into Istanbul.

 

[Heraclius49]

1. Siege of Tenochtitlan.

Personally I think that the Aztecs would have eventually have been conquered by Spain regardless of what happened here. The technology gap was just to great for the Aztecs to ever successfully resist the tide of colonization.

3. Battle of the Plains of Abraham

See above post^

But I would like to add that the British have alreay owned the Naval end of the war with Hawke's victory at Quieberon (sp) Bay. The French really lost any chance of winning the 7 years war after that.

4. Battle of Trafalgar

This has already been discussed. Check Top Ten Greatest Generals of all time thread.

5. Spring Offensive, 1918

This was desperation on the German's part. They had already pretty much lost the war at this point. Although this contains one of my favorite battles of all time: Belleau Wood. Yay Marines!

 

[LightSpectra]

The French only lost seven ships at Quiberon Bay. Not a catastrophic loss by any means. It was the Siege of Louisbourg that sealed the fate of New France.

The most important battle in history was the Battle of the Urgh and Ahhr tribes in 190,000 BC.

 

[Heraclius49]

The French only lost seven ships at Quiberon Bay. Not a catastrophic loss by any means. It was the Siege of Louisbourg that sealed the fate of New France.

The most important battle in history was the Battle of the Urgh and Ahhr tribes in 190,000 BC.

Although you are right about the siege of Louisburg, Quiberon Bay was pretty important. Up until that point the British Navy was on the Defensive. This battle turned the Naval war around a gave them momentum. It also ended the French hope of blockading the British mainland.

 

[vogtmurr]

IMO, Kursk was more important... The Nazy still had some chances of winning before that battle. Plus if i'm not mistaken, it was the largest battle mankind ever experienced.. each side had nearly a million man concentrated in a farely small area.

At some point, they were over a 1000 tanks fighting in a 3 sq Km area!

Kursk was more crazy and desparate than Stalingrad, and shouldn't have happened if they pulled out in time. Pretty epic though.

Overrated the French didnt really fight... for them Quebec was lost anyway and a minor battlefield. Plus Wolf was plain stupid.. he went on a suicide mission and won only cause they let them win.

erm, yes France didn't exactly support its colony.

Beside, it most be the only 10 minutes fight where BOTH general died.

10 minutes between a couple thousand underfed musketmen is probably all it takes, but it decided a long campaign with some interesting twists.

This wasnt a real battle either. Charles Martel who NEEDED legitimacy, mainly cause he put himself in power plundering churchs claimed to save christianity... in fact the invasion was a razzia of a "few" Moors who where looking to get some bounty at Tours St-Martin rich church (in lack of a better word in english). Arab we're strongly out number in Spain, barely able to keep themself in power AND the razzia was motivated by the arab General cause one of his officer had went rogue. Even the Roman church denied the "heroic" deed of Martel at first, but after thing went sour with the Constantinople patriarch.. Rome (who seeked Charlemagne protection) needed a Historical Hero and started the "propaganda". Then came the Crusade and then the building of the "French" nationalism.... (Source Levi-Provençal)

dude, you should study both Arab and French ethnic history some more.

Yup, that was big... but I would had the incredible tolerance of the Ottomans... they didnt burn or destroyed anything that didnt make it in the byzantine exode, thus keeping it alive. They even barely "translate" the actual name of Constatinople which the local (like it had been the case for Rome) called their city... THE City (Urbs) which translate into Istanbul.

how so big ? It was closure, but the 'flow to the west' had already started. Development would have continued in parallel.
And sure why wouldn't the Ottomans take a prize city as their capital, they already had for Bursa and Adrianople.

 

[wideyedwanderer]

One battle that I have to mention is Sekigahara (1600.) This determined who would rule Japan, the Toyotomi's or the Tokugawa's. Had the Toyotomi's won, it's likely Japan would've had a very different foreign policy from Toku's closed-door. The shape of Japanese history would've been completely different, meaning, Japan might not have turned into the aggressive imperialists it was at the start of the 20th century, meaning, a major component of world war 2 might not have happened. Not the most important battle in history, but I'd say in the top 10 or 15.

The siege of Constantinople in 1453 was important, but I believe the Byzantines were already weak by that time, so it was really more symbolic than it was important. I'd say the Battle of Manzikert was more important.

 

[Masada]

Yup, that was big... but I would had the incredible tolerance of the Ottomans... they didnt burn or destroyed anything that didnt make it in the byzantine exode, thus keeping it alive. They even barely "translate" the actual name of Constatinople which the local (like it had been the case for Rome) called their city... THE City (Urbs) which translate into Istanbul.

That's false.

The Sultan let his men pillage Constantinople for three days prescribed my Muslim tradition for a city that had resisted capture. They ransacked most of the Churches, houses and shops, destroying as much as they stole. They killed many of the citizens, particularly the remaining Italians, before starting to enslave the rest. Only two districts in the northwest and southwest, the quarters of Phanar ("Lighthouse) and Studius, were evidently allowed to surrender and remain intact, along with Genoese Galta. Their inhabitants ransomed some of the captives. The Sultan freed a few others, but executed the highest Byzantine officials.

Warren Treadgold, A History of the Byzantine State and Society.

The siege of Constantinople in 1453 was important, but I believe the Byzantines were already weak by that time, so it was really more symbolic than it was important. I'd say the Battle of Manzikert was more important.

It was only important because it set off a civil war which gutted the empire. The actual battle was comparatively unimportant and the winner didn't do much to capitalize on it.

 

[say1988]

IMO, Kursk was more important... The Nazy still had some chances of winning before that battle. Plus if i'm not mistaken, it was the largest battle mankind ever experienced.. each side had nearly a million man concentrated in a farely small area.

While Kursk may have been strategically more important, the effects of Stalingrad went much deeper. The morale affects of destroying the German 6th Army cannot be ignored, from a Soviet, German, or Western position.

 

[LightSpectra]

While Kursk may have been strategically more important, the effects of Stalingrad went much deeper. The morale affects of destroying the German 6th Army cannot be ignored, from a Soviet, German, or Western position.

The effects of being close to annihilating a Soviet army and then being pulled away at the last moment is also pretty damaging to the officers' collective morale.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

You surely aren't referring to Kursk with that statement. Both Manstein and von Kluge were hopelessly and utterly screwed before anything even began.

 

[LightSpectra]

You surely aren't referring to Kursk with that statement. Both Manstein and von Kluge were hopelessly and utterly screwed before anything even began.

Not according to Manstein himself. I believe he went as far as to say that had Hitler not attempted to micromanage it, the Axis could've won the Eastern Front.

Whether or not that's true is highly disputable, but nevertheless it had a large blow to the morale of the German officer corps.

 

[Masada]

Yeah, Manstein would totally have said that. He was also screwed before the battle started.