Biggest military victory?

[Brian G Turner]

It was suggested in another thread that the Battle of Cannae was one of the biggest military victories of the ancient world, because of the extensive slaughter of the Roman army.

However, I am far more a partial to praising Alexander, either in his battle against Darius at the Gracchus, else the second pitched battle by the Tigris.

At Cannae, Hannibal soundly defeated the Roman army, but completely failed to capitalise on his gain by marching on defenceless Rome.

Alexander, on the other hand, take a small army, took them into unfamiliar territory, and faced a much larger army - but roundly defeated it on both occassions by following a simply military edict - "cut the head from the snake". In other words, destroy the enemy's center of command and the enemy loses all organisation. By charging at Darius's chariots Alexander forced the enemy general to flee, and this army broke up with him. Alexander was able to capitalise on both victories by taking the reigns of the Persian Empire directly. His conquest was skilled and complete.

However...let's open this up into a discussion on what makes for a great military victory, especially with regards to the ancient world.

 

[Lacedaemonian]

Thermopylae always springs to mind. I am overjoyed that you mentioned Alexander, all of his battles were particularly impressive either against great odds or through sheer genius. A debate resulting in an agreed greatest war victory ever would be fun.

 

[Hypes]

Iraq, hands down.

 

[Lacedaemonian]

Belgium holding 90% of German army for two weeks at the begining of the Great War, thus defeating the Schlieffen plan.

 

[Lacedaemonian]

The Battle of Agincourt 1415:
An exhausted, sick and starving English army are faced by a confident foe outnumbering them four to one. Forced into battle and against all odds, they anihilate the French and kill the Dauphin.

French army 30,000. English army 5900.

Losses: The French lost 10,000 men, the English lost 100 men.

And we also got the two finger salute from this battle!

 

[Foxbat]

Somebody once said that Tactics is the art of how to fight a battle and Strategy is where and when to fight.

On what makes a battle, I think we need to seperate Strategy and Tactics. Yes, Hannibal's strategy was a mess but his tactics were sound. He applied the principle of maximum contact whilst minimising the Roman efforts to do the same. He also used innovative techniques with regards to his cavalry which allowed him to completely surround a Roman force twice the size of his army and completely slaughter it.

For an innovative cavalry technique - please read - that he actually managed to keep them disciplined and not allowing them to run off into the sunset chasing the enemy cavalry.

In a single battle, he was masterful but in the role as a Theatre Commander was left wanting. Despite this, I stick to my previous conviction that Cannae was the daddy of them all.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Thermopylae as a great victory? For the Persians?

Keeping on the ancient world theme...(ahem)...I certainly agree that Hannibal was excellent on a scenario basis. But a point I was trying to raise was in comparison to Alexander - who excelled in both counts.

Of course, far too little credit has been given to Alexander's dad, Phillip, who is one of the most under-rated military geniuses of the ancient world. He effectively and single-handedly re-invented arms and tactics for the period, and turned what was effectively a hillbilly backwater into the master of the civilised splendours of the Greek world. There's an argument to be made that this in itself was a far more skilled feat than any of Alexander's, whose were perhaps better remembered simply on the basis of scale.

 

[Foxbat]

Another battle that has always impressed me is Aliesia (not sure about the spelling) where Julius Ceasar built a 'Tactical Doughnut' around the town - one set of walls to keep the Gauls inside and another set to prevent a relief force from succeeding. In this way he managed to hold off a superior (but less disciplined) force.

Certainly, I agree Philip is under-rated. He basically provided the framework and springboard for Alexander's future conquests. No doubt about it.

 

[Lacedaemonian]

And best not forget Parmenion who basically achieved all that Philip and alexander have been accredited.

 

[Cricket]

Hmmm, this is interesting. I do not know all about these battles, just some. I see, however, the topic is about the greatest ancient battle. So, I will ask myself this question first (before I ask my father for the answer, hehe, he will know it.)....What was the most important ancient battle?......In terms of what....its effect to today?

Then the answer is simple, to me. Joshua, and the many battles that lead to the capture of the land that would become Israel.

Why? Because, whether we are christian or jew or not, if we live in the western world today, what is the culture we live in, and what has had so much effect on us since the earliest of times, even to ancient times. We can see what is called western culture, could be called, maybe, Christian and Jewish, so much has been the influence. By taking over that land after leaving Egypt, and establishing the nation, he laid the ground work for all to follow in the next centuries that so influences our culture today....such as the bible being written, and the laws, and Jesus.....whether we agree or not...that is not important....it is the impact for today only that is important.

It holds little interest for people who like to study military history, however, because the battles were not romantic. There were no great armies with nice uniforms and weapons, only the shepard and religious man fighting with the most primitive of spear and shield if any. Now, hundreds of years later, even thousands later, what they started impacts us still. Democracy in Greece even, we know about, because of what started then. How? Because even much later, when Rome became christian, there was clamour to discover and maintain the ancient greek writings for their classical value.

But, it started with Joshua, and blowing the trumpets to bring down the walls of Jericho.

Okay. Thats all I know. My father says I win a shining new dime for thinking deeply. Hehe.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I had to look him up - it's the old bloke from the Alexander campaign - certainly a figure to remember when you're reading about Alexander. But how much of the actual innovations were his own, though?

Btw - I'll chip in with Cyrus the Great - also pretty underrated. After all, when faced with laying siege to the fortified city of Babylon, he instead took the unprecented step of diverting the Euphrates which ran through it - then marched his army along the river bed and into the soft underbelly of the city. Darn clever.

 

[Cricket]

Oh...we posted almost the same time, Brian. My opinion is above your last.
Hehe.

 

[Ivo]

Belgium holding 90% of German army for two weeks at the begining of the Great War, thus defeating the Schlieffen plan.

I've always been impressed with their efforts. Considering it happened relatively in the modern age it makes it even more impressive. Good call!

 

[cymric]

Brian I must disagree with your assesment of Thermopalye being a persian victory. The spartans held the pass for 6 days, and grecce only needed three to position their forces. 300 hundred spartans slaughtered 10,000 persians( every one of the Immortals ). Even though the persians did take the pass and march onward to greece proper, just think of what this acutally did to the persian army. The first real resistance they faced from the greeks they where highly outclassed. This caused poor morale in the persian Army, Fear of the greek hoplite, and allowed the time for rest of the greeks to get there act together for the coming war. I think of thermopalye like most Americans think of the Battle of the Alamo. A defiant and tragic stand that allowed the greeks to win.

 

[Lacedaemonian]

Exactly what I was about to post - touche! The greatest battle ever in my mind, it makes me weep when i think about it...

 

[Brian G Turner]

Brian I must disagree with your assesment of Thermopalye being a persian victory. The spartans held the pass for 6 days, and grecce only needed three to position their forces. 300 hundred spartans slaughtered 10,000 persians( every one of the Immortals ). Even though the persians did take the pass and march onward to greece proper, just think of what this acutally did to the persian army. The first real resistance they faced from the greeks they where highly outclassed. This caused poor morale in the persian Army, Fear of the greek hoplite, and allowed the time for rest of the greeks to get there act together for the coming war. I think of thermopalye like most Americans think of the Battle of the Alamo. A defiant and tragic stand that allowed the greeks to win.

But...that's part of the point that's missed. It wasn't just 300 Spartans by themselves. They were simply the leading part of a coalition force of around 10,000-15,000 Greeks.

But the film - and something of romanticism - likes to pretend the supporting thousands from smaller Greek states, such as Thespiae - never existed.

 

[andyn]

No Brian there was a combined Greek force of 3,000 at Thermopalye against over a million. The Spartans were the key element. Without them there would have been no Greek force at Thermopalye.
Also by Leonidas, the Spartan King bringing himself and his personal bodyguard to the battlefield, he guarenteed Spartan involvement in the war.
The most important battle was The Battle Salamis, where the combined Greek fleet defeated the more numerous Persian fleet, which ended The Persian invasion of Greece and prevented a Persian advance into Western Europe.
Victory at Salamis guaranteed the development of Western Society and the growth of Democracy.
No battle ever came close, in importance, everything else was about conquest or personnal aggrandisment. Joshua's conquest of Cannae was actually Genocide.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Hi andyn and welcome to the chronicles network.

No Brian there was a combined Greek force of 3,000 at Thermopalye against over a million.

Those numbers differ greatly from any prior estimates I've seen - though to be fair it's difficult to rationalise any precise numbers anyway.

Worth perhaps a read of the Wikipedia entry on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae

 

[Drachir]

There seems to be a great deal of emphasis on Eurpean history in answering this question, but it should not be forgotten that there were impotant victories in China, India, Japan, and the Americas for that matter. In order to answer the question properly one must consider whether or not the victory significantly changed the course of world history. Using that criteria I would discount all of Hannibal's victories, brilliant though they were - after all, he eventually was defeated by Rome. He may have slowed the Romans down, but he did not stop them.

As for modern battles such as in Iraq it is too early to assess their influence. If I might as a Canadian, I would like to point out that the battles fought in the War of 1812 prevented the United States from controlling Canada. If the United States had controlled 80% or North America it might have had a profound effect on American and world history.

 

[andyn]

I accept your point Drachir. Unfortunately, i do not know enough about Chinese, American or Indian History. However if you take into account your criteria about changing world History then Salamis has to be the battle. The Persians had just sacked Athens and burnt it to the ground, but it's population had fled. The Persians were now ready to march into Sparta. With his fleet destroyed, Darius abandoned his designs on conquest of Greece and returned to Persia.
The war of 1812 we here very little of from the Americans other than the Battle Of New Orleans, which they won. Obviously it had a significant impact on the development of North American Continent.