# 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

Lacedaemonian said:
			
		

> 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

cymric said:
			
		

> 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. 



			
				andyn said:
			
		

> 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.


----------



## Drachir

Yes - the Battle of New Orleans - a meaningless contest fought two weeks after the peace treaty was signed.  Of course the Americans remember that battle - It was one of the few that they won.  They failed in every military objective in that war.  

 As I said, however, I find it almost impossible to pin down world history to just one battle.  Salamis, I agree changed world history, but so did the victories of Cyrus the Great that made the Persians the threat that they were.  Really the question of what battle rates number one is a conundrum that may be impossible to answer.


----------



## andyn

Agreed that it is difficult, but there are major battles that clearly shaped the world we live in.
Salamis, Hastings, Verdun, Stalingrad, Midway, Dien Bien Phu, The Horns of Hattin, the Tet offensive, Teutonborg forrest, The battle of Algiers, Trafalgar etc, etc


----------



## Drachir

The Horns of Hattin - now that is one I do not know.  Where and when was it and why was it important?


----------



## Tsujigiri

Sorry, Biggest *Military* Victory.....

Japan - Nagasaki and Hiroshima. 2 bombs....2 cities....ended the biggest war in human history.

You never specified a battle, although in relation to the Ancient World, it's still the biggest military victory.

I'm gonna go crawl back under my rock now before someone points out that the Spartans never had nuclear weapons...and that I'm being a wee bit silly.


----------



## andyn

The Atomic bombs were not dropped to end the war in Japan, but for the benefit of Russia.


----------



## Tsujigiri

andyn said:
			
		

> The Atomic bombs were not dropped to end the war in Japan, but for the benefit of Russia.



That makes a certain kind of sense, do you have any reference material I could read about it?


----------



## andyn

At hand no. The great Myth about the dropping the two Atomic bombs was that it would force the Japanese to Surrender. However, when the Empreror, decided to surrender, there was an attempted Military Coup to oust him, which narrowly failed. It is hardly mentioned in many history books.
Russia had several days before Entered the war against Japan and had successfully invaded Manchuria. There were fears she could also invade Japan or the rest of China. The bombs were dropped as a warning to Stalin, as Truman was more aware of the threat that Stalin posed, than Rosevelt.


----------



## Tsujigiri

I think I've read something about that before, I'll have to go digging tino tmy history books. Isn't that what began the nuclear arms race that escalated into the cold war?


----------



## Plo Addonnas

I'd have to say the Vikings sailing up the seine river and sacking Paris or When the Vikings sacked what they thought was Rome but turned out to be a different large Italian city.  They pretended that their leader was dead and that he was a Christian and they wanted him to have a Christian burial.  When they were allowed inside the city, their "dead" leader got up and the Vikings sacked the city.  Too bad it wasn't Rome.


----------



## Stalker

1. Byelorussian assault operation (Bagration) planned by Konstantin Rokossovsky (june, 1944). The result of operation. The *defending* army (Wehrmacht) during summer battles lost (KIA, wounded and POWs) over 900,000 men. The *attacking* army (Red Army) for the same period lost about 100,000 men. Group of armies "Center" was simply annihilated, Group of Armies "North" found itself "locked" in Baltic peninsula. Isn't that the gratest victory ever. Even in 1941 the victorious Wehrmach blowing army after army in the East Front, having POWs whose numbers were hundreds thousands (!!!) was anable to achieve such a score!

2. What about the Battle of Three Emperors at *Austerliz*?
3. *Cannae* - good choice resulting in total annihilation of Roman Army
4. Why not *Thermopilae*? The heroic death of Leonidas and his 300 spartans was strategic victory of the whole Greece.
4. Battle of *Pidna*. The end of Macedonia. What seemed to Perseus a victory resulted in the end in complete slaughter of Macedonian falanx.
5. Undoubtly, *Gaugamela* - the triumph of the Macedonian falanx led by Parmenion. Add to this, how badly the Persians outnumbered Greeks and Macedonians!!!
6. Battle of *Neva* (1240) another example of great victory with small force. 900 foot soldiers lead by knyaz Alexander Nevsky in brave and violent assault defeated completely the Swedish army that outnumbered them at least 12 times. Chronicles say the casualties of Russes were less than 20 men.
7. Battle of *Agincourt* (1415) - almost unpunished slaughter by English bowmen of the French Heavy cavalry.

Here comes a historical paradox - 2 battles at Marengo and one battle of Waterloo. The point is that the first battle at Marengo was lost by the French to the Austrians. The French Army was commanded by Gen. Moreau and his Head of staff was *Gen. GROUCHY*!!!!
Then comes Napoleon's turn. When his army seems to be suffering defeat, at the last moment Gen. Desaix' corps arrives at the battlefield and things suddently changed for French victory! Then goes Waterloo - whom Napoleon sent to pursue battered Prussian troops? Grouchy!!! Did he have a better choice? He hoped Grouchy would become another Dezaix when he needed desperately his help. Instead of Grouchy Bluecher arrived .
In the first battle of Marengo Moreau was defeated, and Grouchy was his aide, in the battle of Waterloo Napoleon was defeated and his only hope was Crouchy, and the former failed him. Two battles were very alike but Grouchy unlike Dezaix was evidently a wrong man to help. *2 times!!!* True, God is inclined to whimsy.


----------



## zorcarepublic

Battle of Tsushima. The Russians sailed into the straits with 38 vessels--they left with only 3...

When? 1905, before aircraft were seriously considered weapons of war.


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

I think the biggest military victory was my recent resounding success against the insidous marshmallow people!

400 eaten with loss!


----------



## Stalker

zorcarepublic said:
			
		

> Battle of Tsushima. The Russians sailed into the straits with 38 vessels--they left with only 3...
> 
> When? 1905, before aircraft were seriously considered weapons of war.


True, Russia was completely unprepared to that war. Small but younger and much more argessive beast of prey dug its teeth into the ass of aged elephant.


----------



## Stalker

Winters_Sorrow said:
			
		

> I think the biggest military victory was my recent resounding success against the insidous marshmallow people!
> 
> 400 eaten with loss!


 
You are simply a giant. I wish you never to be defeated in such bloody battles!


----------



## Winters_Sorrow

Stalker said:
			
		

> You are simply a giant. I wish you never to be defeated in such bloody battles!


 
I outflanked them. Divide & Conquer!!

Qui Audet Vincit!


----------



## Stalker

Winters_Sorrow said:
			
		

> I outflanked them. Divide & Conquer!!
> 
> Qui Audet Vincit!


 
Veni vidi vi... ate


----------



## lucifer_principle

In terms of significance I would say the battle fought at chesapeake between franco Americans and britain, its one of the final moments of the American war of independence. Ah, Fabian strategy does work. To me its more like the war of the people, as back them Americans were pretty much people from all over the place and from all sorts of culture. Grandest battle will be the one on June 4-6, 1944. Most intelligent and strategic will be the cold war between the Russo-Americas, which might I add started right after WW2 and took many forms.


----------



## Boaz

I, Brian, Biggest Military Victory could be viewed in terms of 1) number of participants, 2) largest casualty difference, 3) most precise execution of tactics, or 4) greatest political/religious/social/cultural/racial historical impact.  Personally, I tend to gravitate towards the latter.

This topic is in the Ancient World Forum (and some have digressed into more recent eras) and I'll try to stay on topic (it's so hard sometimes).

Jericho.  A rag tag group of refugees gained their foothold in the Levant.
Troy.  Hellenistic culture is ensured as the dominant culuture of the region for the next two thousand years.
Israelite and Philistine battles.  Israel survives and expands.  We can see this legacy today.
Marathon.  Greece survives a terrible scare.
Salamis.  Persian expansion is halted.
Gaugamela.  Persian influence is subservient to Greek culture.
Zama.  Carthage and North African influence ended.  Rome is supreme in the Western Mediterranean.
Stamford Bridge/Hastings.  Viking imperial ambitions dashed, Saxon England ended, Norman England established.
Red Cliffs.  Cao Cao's expansion is halted.  Paved way for Shu dominance.
Chalons.  Attila is finally halted by Aetius and finally becomes politically vulnerable.
Tours.  Muslim expansion halted and Frankish nationalism is ignited.
Carrhae.  Roman expanion into the east is halted.
Pharsalus.  Caesar is victorious over Pompey.
Hydaspes River.  Even thought Alexander won, he suffered heavy losses and his troops voiced their displeasure.
The battle(s) of Narmer (Menes).  Narmer unified Lower and Upper Egypt to found the first dynasty.
Alesia.  Caesar not only survived, he finally crushed all unified Gallic resistance and freed him to look towards Rome.


----------



## Brian G Turner

Good list of battles, boaz.


----------



## Blue Mythril

> Troy.  Hellenistic culture is ensured as the dominant culuture of the region for the next two thousand years.


I'd tack that one under their victories over the Persians personally 

Wow this is a really good topic, I'm going to have to go away and think on this for a while, I'll edit this post later... Though i will say that i agree with Boaz in terms of the greater significance of the battle being the most important concideration.


----------



## Boaz

I went back and reread my post.  Boy, I sound like a self-proclaimed expert on the subject.  Sorry.  I'm not an expert.  I just tend to pontificate and presume to think every thought in my head is pure genius.

Those were just my thoughts.  A real expert could point out the real battles of historical significance... and point out the small tactics (or trivia) that decided the course of history.


----------



## Stalker

Why? I liked your previous post, Boaz! 
Don't be too shy, pal!


----------



## Foxbat

> Alesia. Caesar not only survived, he finally crushed all unified Gallic resistance and freed him to look towards Rome


 Very true.  But it was the manner of his victory over  that made it so impressive. He built what can only be descibed as a tactical doughnut - an inner wall to surround and attack Alesia from and an outer wall to repell the forces trying to relieve the siege. Very clever


----------



## GOLLUM

I've enjoyed reading the posts on this thread but 2 quick observations just
to be a bit different:

1. Any "military" conflict will normally result in loss of life so how is this a Victory? more like a loss to humanity I woud've thought....

2. You can't really define the biggest or most of something when you think about it because in the future a bigger or more significant battle may yet take place. Obviously we're looking here at the biggest so far just like I say Erikson is my No .1 fantasy author so far..

Ok back to posting all, I just thought I'd be a little left of centre for a moment and Boaz I thought you're list was a good one!!!....


----------



## Boaz

Thanks, Gollum.  I failed to mention the battle of the Teutoburg forest, iirc.  I think this was when Tiberius was emperor... the Germans annihilated two entire legions (or something to that effect) and the Romans decided that the frontier ended there.

You know I really wonder about the battles, the cultures, and the peoples that are forgotten in antiquity or that took place far from recorded Western history.  This is one of the themes of books like LOTR, _Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies_, and _Eternity in their Hearts_, and movies such as _Dances with Wolves_, _The Emerald Forest_, and _The Scorpion King._

The battle or battles of Narmer (his Egyptian name, while Menes is his Hellenized name, iirc) to unify upper and lower Egypt.  

What struggles took place that launched the Polynesians out into the Pacific Ocean?

It would be fascinating to have an in depth history of the clash between the San and Banu peoples in African history.

If the Basque people's language is different from all others... where did they come from?  Were they pushed to the edge of the sea by the Spanish, the Romans, the Visigoths, the Moors?  Or did they land there and carve out a home?

Did the Aborigines of Australia fight each other before the Europeans arrived?

What battles are being fought today deep in the jungles of the Amazon and New Guinea?

Do you all remember the conversation that Aragorn and Eowyn when she begs him leave to join his warband on the Paths of the Dead?  It goes something like this...

*Aragorn:*  Your place is here with your people.  You are in charge and you cannot shirk your duty.  Only your uncle can allow you to go.
*Eowyn:* But, I've trained with sword and shield... and you know you'll need every able body you can get to help.
*Aragorn:*  Look, we are going off to die.
*Eowyn:* I'm not afraid.
*Aragorn:* If we die, you'll still have the chance to fight... defending your homes in the last defence.
*Eowyn:* All you are saying is that women should cook and then die brutal deaths when you no longer need us!
*Argorn:* Even if no one is left to sing of your last fight, it not be any less heroic.

My apologies to Prof. Tolkien for that paraphrase.

There are so many unrecorded struggles and heroes that we will never know about, but that does not make them less heroic, just unknown.


----------



## Stalker

> What struggles took place that launched the Polynesians out into the Pacific Ocean?


That's an extremely interesting question. Polinesians were the bravest seamen in human history. To prove this point, it's enough to look at the map: from New Zealand to Easter Island and up to Hawaii all over Pacifics. And that done in frail catamarans. 



> If the Basque people's language is different from all others... where did they come from? Were they pushed to the edge of the sea by the Spanish, the Romans, the Visigoths, the Moors? Or did they land there and carve out a home?


Before Aryan tribes came to Europe it was populated by Iberians. So Basque nation may be one of few shards of protoaryan Europeans. BTW, in 70s, the phylologists from Tbilisi (Georgia) and their colleagues from Basconia found that many words in Georgian and Basquian might have the same origin, and the grammar also had common features (but that was not enought to make them fall into the same linguistic group).


----------



## Brian G Turner

GOLLUM said:
			
		

> I've enjoyed reading the posts on this thread but 2 quick observations just
> to be a bit different:
> 
> 1. Any "military" conflict will normally result in loss of life so how is this a Victory? more like a loss to humanity I woud've thought....
> 
> 2. You can't really define the biggest or most of something when you think about it because in the future a bigger or more significant battle may yet take place. Obviously we're looking here at the biggest so far just like I say Erikson is my No .1 fantasy author so far..



Conflict usually requires an aggressor (which can depend upon viewpoint) so the diminished threat of that aggressor can often be a source of celebration - and the act of neutralising aggression can have far-reaching historical consequences.

I don't think anybody here is celebrating the loss of life, as much as simply recognising those moments in history of significance and impact.



			
				Boaz said:
			
		

> Thanks, Gollum. I failed to mention the battle of the Teutoburg forest, iirc. I think this was when Tiberius was emperor... the Germans annihilated two entire legions (or something to that effect) and the Romans decided that the frontier ended there.



Was under Augustus - I think it's Tacitus describes Augustus tramping about the halls of Rome yelling "Varus! Give me back my legions!"


----------



## Stalker

And the result of that unfortunate battle was that Rome afterwards ceased all serious attempts to occupy Germany to the east of the Rhine (the last attempt one was undertaken during Marcus Aurelius' reign - so called Marcoman war but it was not accomplished properly because of the Emperor's death) and thus that was the beginning of its fall. That was propbably the first time in history Romans violate the rule of their own - never forgive those who defeated them and never to negociate with them. Augustus had then all means to bring that war against Arminius to its logical end but he didn't want to...


----------



## GOLLUM

I said:
			
		

> Conflict usually requires an aggressor (which can depend upon viewpoint) so the diminished threat of that aggressor can often be a source of celebration - and the act of neutralising aggression can have far-reaching historical consequences.
> 
> I don't think anybody here is celebrating the loss of life, as much as simply recognising those moments in history of significance and impact.


Point taken Brian, I was just trying to take a certain point of view and see what reaction I would get actually.... 

Slightly mischevous perhaps but I liked the way you defended your POV... 

I'll see if I can come up with any significant history-turnning battles not mentioned yet.


----------



## Brian G Turner

Nah, it's a decent point to make - it's much easier to grapple with the abstracts of history than the human effect. Possibly why history appears much more interested in exploring the everyday details of historical life these days, than simply repeating the politics.


----------



## GOLLUM

HMMM.. that's an interesting point you make. You know for a humble tea boy you're certainly full of surpirses...


----------



## evanescentdream

Biggest victory? It's got to be Caesar winning at Alesia against Vercingetorix.


----------



## Boaz

I was perusing this thread and I came across Stalker's comments on Operation Bagration... I know Brian's original post desired discussion to revolve around ancient times, but I think this is very interesting.


Stalker said:


> 1. Byelorussian assault operation (Bagration) planned by Konstantin Rokossovsky (june, 1944). The result of operation. The *defending* army (Wehrmacht) during summer battles lost (KIA, wounded and POWs) over 900,000 men. The *attacking* army (Red Army) for the same period lost about 100,000 men. Group of armies "Center" was simply annihilated, Group of Armies "North" found itself "locked" in Baltic peninsula. Isn't that the gratest victory ever. Even in 1941 the victorious Wehrmach blowing army after army in the East Front, having POWs whose numbers were hundreds thousands (!!!) was anable to achieve such a score!


Just last week, a friend of mine came back from a tour in Afghanistan. As we were talking culture and history, he mentioned Operation Bagration. Since I was unfamiliar with it, I had to look it up.

Stakler is right, the numbers are mind boggling.  During a two month offensive, the Russians finally successfully employed maskirovka, mobility, and manpower to give the Germans their worst defeat.

But here's the kicker... the Wehrmacht did not crumble and surrender.  The Russians still had to earn every mile on the way to Berlin.  Could any other army have survived a defeat that catastrophic?  Back in 1917, the Russians themselves mutinied rather than continue a bad war.  I'm shocked the Wehrmacht never mutinied. 

It is reminiscent of Cannae.  But do we remember that Cannae (Summer 216 BC) happened after Trebia (December 218 BC) and Lake Trasimene (Summer 217 BC)?  At Trebia, Hannibal inflicted over 20,000 casualties on a Roman army of 40,000.  And at Lake Trasimene, the Romans lost over 75% of their 40,000 strong army.  In both battles, the Carthaginian's losses were few.  How did the Romans carry on?  Throughout history the conventional wisdom is to sue for peace after military disasters.

Once again, I'll state that I'm not trained in history nor military strategy... I'm just an ethusiast.


----------



## thaddeus6th

At that stage the Romans were pathologically patriotic. In the end, Hannibal just ended up teaching them how strategy and tactics work, but almost any other nation would've surrendered after Cannae, or at least sued for peace.

How about the Battles of Arausio or Tigranocerta?

The former was the last major defeat the Cimbri tribe inflicted upon the Romans (it's the Romans' own fault. The Cimbri accidentally wandered into Roman territory, asked to settle, agreed to leave and were then attacked by a Roman army which they obliterated. Arausio happened some time later). Two Roman leaders utterly failed to co-operate and they suffered losses comparable with Cannae.

At Tigranocerta the numbers are unclear, but the Romans were probably outnumbered 2 or 3 to 1 (maybe more) and, naturally, attacked. Anything from 10 to 100,000 of the enemy (King Tigranes' various forces) were slaughtered.

However, I did just add the two above for the sake of variety and novelty. If we're confining our thoughts to just the battlefield alone, I'd have to go with Cannae. Considering a wider picture, then perhaps Manzikert, which seemed to mark the inexorable decline of Byzantium, ranks higher.


----------



## Boaz

thad, Sometimes we tend to look at the numbers involved and say, "That's the biggest", and we forget that the political fallout may be the most important factor.  The examples I noted earlier, Trebia and Trasimene, put Qunitus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus in charge as Consul, but after the Romans tired of his strategy, they sent out their army to die at Cannae.  The disaster at Cannae vaulted Fabius back to the fore, this time as dictator.

And it is for the political fallout that Aurasio was so important.  The costly Roman defeat propelled Gaius Marius back to the Consulship. Marius had already begun his reformation of the army, but his words carried more weight after Aurasio.  And without Marius, we might not have had Sulla.  Without Sulla, we might not have had Caesar.  Each man assumed more and more power.  Each man seemed to do what was needed at the moment.  The army gave each man more personal loyalty than it gave to the state.  Each man ended up marching on Rome.

Aurasio was a victory for the Cimbri and Teutones, but Rome was the nation changed from the battle.  Thanks for the reminder, thad.


----------



## Gramm838

My choice would be be Scipio's destruction of the Carthaginian army while they were asleep outside Carthage - set fire to their sleeping mats and destroyed their Army once and for all, and basically ended the Carthaginian Empire

Oh, and what about Austerlitz with Boney at his best, or on the same day (I think), Nelson at Trafalgar?


----------



## thaddeus6th

Didn't Sulla rather act against the trend of the times by resigning as dictator after he'd rejigged the constitution to give tribunes more power (which had steadily been eroded), in a bid to make the republic stronger? I could be entirely wrong (despite it being a well-documented period I've not read much about it).

Hmm. I thought Quintus Fabius Maximus was dictator between Trasimene and Cannae?

On Marius, I read an interesting book entitled The Crisis of Rome: The Jugurthine and Northern Wars and the Rise of Marius, which is a bit of a mouthful. Enjoyed reading it though, especially as late republic is an era of which I know little. My review's here:
http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/review-crisis-of-rome-jugurthine-and.html


----------



## paranoid marvin

Modern, Finland holding off the Soviet Union.

In the past, Agincourt has to be up there. A rag-tag of English soldiers beats the elite of the French. The nglish estimated losses of 100 or so with the French losing over 4000. That's just about as comprehensive as it gets.

Less well known is the British victory in Portugal/Spain. The Brits somehow managed (in secret) to construct an inpenetrable line between Portugal and Spain called the Lines of Torres Vadres. Eventually this fantastic achievement brought about the downfall of one of the greatest generals of all time.


----------

