History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedFamous Battles! -> Post Your Favourite

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 891011>
Author
Balaam View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar
Suspended

Joined: 12-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 1291
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Balaam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Dec-2007 at 03:48
Is voting still going for the last list? If so I'm gonna vote for the Battle of Changping.
Want your message here? PM me and you can have it!

Taking new requests for your message to be here!
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Webmaster
Webmaster
Avatar
AE Magazine Coordinator

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3294
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Dec-2007 at 06:02
Yes we are still voting Balaam. We should probably finish up the voting some time soon though.

Knights - Battle of Assaye

White Fare - Battle of Pavia

Jubelu - Battle of Mohi
- Battle of Patay
- Battle of Hittin
- Siege of Constantinople (which one, may I ask?)
- Battle of Acre
- Battle of Manzikert

Penelope - Battle of Pandosia (1 vote)

Omnipotence - Battle of Changping (1 vote)

Illirac - Great Stand on the Ugra River

Justinian - Battle of Guagamala

Sparten - Third Battle of Panipat

Harry Zhe - Kursk or Stalingrad

Darius of Parsa - Salamis

Back to Top
the japanese View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 15-Dec-2007
Location: Greece/Hellas
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote the japanese Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Dec-2007 at 12:12
So, firstly I would like to make a comment on one of the first posts who said about the Conquest of Instabul. This battle has almost nothing special. I say that because almost all the Byzantine Empire was under the control of Turks so then or later Instabul would fall in the hands of Turks. Moreover Moameth had no special plan for conquering Instabul. The great Turkish bombards made the job as they destroyed the hitted walls of the city which had no army to fight. Also a betrayal happened and the Byzantines lost. I can say that the efforts of Constantinos Palaiologos were great and he tried to keep the city with the heroic battle.
 
I have to say that the Battle of Marathon is the most significant battle ever. Miltiadis had a great plan which minimized the arithmetic power of Persians. Moreover, think about Athenians losing the battle. Imagine how different would be the history of Europe. All the battles you speak about now wouldn't exist. As the Marathon battle is not in the voting I vote for the Salamis naval battle.  


Edited by the japanese - 23-Dec-2007 at 12:14
Back to Top
Illirac View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-Jun-2007
Location: Ma vlast
Status: Offline
Points: 526
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illirac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Dec-2007 at 12:55
Originally posted by the japanese the japanese wrote:

 
I have to say that the Battle of Marathon is the most significant battle ever. Miltiadis had a great plan which minimized the arithmetic power of Persians. Moreover, think about Athenians losing the battle. Imagine how different would be the history of Europe. All the battles you speak about now wouldn't exist. 
 
Immagine if Cyrus the Great had not wined  Battle of Pteria and Battle of Thymbra there would be no Marathon
Immagine how different would be history of Europe if the Germans had won at Stalingrad and/or at Kursk  


Edited by Illirac - 23-Dec-2007 at 12:57
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Back to Top
the japanese View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 15-Dec-2007
Location: Greece/Hellas
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote the japanese Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Dec-2007 at 12:30

Dear "Illirac",

you compare the win of almost 10.000 Athenians and 1.000 warriors from Plataea against 20.000 powerful Persians, with the win of about 200.000 Russians against almost 90.000 exhausted and tired from the cold and the battles Germans ! Think a little about the amounts.
Let's suppose that Germans would win in Stalingrad.....Europe would maybe be under their control but we would still be one civilization : the European. We would still have our main religion : Christians. We would still have the same lifestyle. If Persians would win in Marathon there wouldn't be today the Eifel Tower in France, or the city of Venice in Italy. There would not be the Big Ben or the Canterbury Church. People in Europe would still fight with bombs and dozens of people would be killed.
So, each battle played it's own role in history of Europe and has it's own significance.
Sorry for my bad English. I would may be misunderstood because of this. Correct me if my views are false and the historic events are not like as I told.
-"the japanese" 


Edited by the japanese - 24-Dec-2007 at 12:33
Back to Top
Poppy View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 23-Dec-2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Poppy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Dec-2007 at 13:27
Must say I am totally fascinated by the battles of the Gallipoli Campaign in 1915.  This is due to the fact that this was a complete sham from start to finish.  Australia's baptism of fire, as a nation, was it all worth it?  The inefficient allied high command...was it all their fault or were the Turks just stronger than their ignorant, racist research suggested?  I guess we will never know but the scale of the casualties and extreme bloopers on this front made it a huge failure, hence why I find myself asking questions and studying it more
Back to Top
Samara View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl
Avatar

Joined: 26-Dec-2007
Location: Russian Federation
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Samara Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2007 at 11:05
Wagram, Napoleon is attacked by Austrain and England force, their forces are divised in Spain, Deutsh and Italy, in difficult , he won the decisive Battle of Wagram against more numerous Austrian.

The French army of the 1809 campaign was significantly different from that of earlier campaigns. Despite military success almost everywhere, Napoleon's need for manpower had grown since 1805-7, partly because of casualties in those campaigns, partly to enforce the Continental System against Britain, and partly because of the continuing military commitment in Spain. His armies therefore included a substantial proportion of conscripts who had received much of their training on the march from their regimental depots in France. It also included significant foreign contingents, notably from the Confederation of the Rhine, of varying quality. Napoleon had also expanded the Imperial Guard by establishing the Young Guard, a formation comprising the best of the recruits from each year's intake. These factors all tended to reduce the quality of the average line infantry formation available in 1809 compared to those with which the Emperor had defeated Austria in 1805, and at a number of points in the campaign, this lack of experience showed in diminished tactical and formational agility. The cavalry, particularly the heavy cavalry, was still excellent. The artillery was in the process of switching to a new system based on 6-pounder and 12-pounder pieces only. Previously the artillery had used 4- and 8-pounder pieces as well, and the net effect of the change was to reduce slightly the average weight of projectile in the army as a whole. Despite this, the artillery was always effectively handled and the standardisation of gun types was of great assistance logistically.

The Austrian army was a polyglot force comprising "Hungarian" regiments, recruited from the federated Kingdom of Hungary and "German" regiments, recruited from elsewhere in the empire whether ethnically German or not. Unique to the Austrian army, there also existed Grenz infantry regiments, recruited from the Military Frontier with the Ottoman Empire. These troops were less well adapted to traditional line infantry tactics, but were among the best marksmen in the army and were excellent skirmishers. Despite Charles' attempts at reform, the army was still slow-moving and tactically inflexible, had never really mastered the corps d'armée system used by the French, and tended to fill senior positions with members of the aristocracy of uncertain military ability. For the 1809 campaign the regular army was augmented by Landwehr (militia) infantry battalions. In theory 170 such were raised, but only 70 ever actually mustered, most poorly equipped. Seventeen served at Wagram where, brigaded with regular units, they fought unexpectedly well. There were also insurrectio troops - raised under an ancient power of emergency levy - whose performance was patchy. The cavalry lacked the French cavalry's ability to operate tactically en masse, in brigade, division and even corps-sized manouevres. Austrian cavalry instead mostly fought in squadron- or regiment-sized "penny packets" to support infantry, rather than as a decisive force in itself. Austrian cuirassiers wore a breastplate, which put them at a disadvantage in combat against French cuirassiers who had backplates too, but gave them the edge over France's élite carabinier heavy cavalry, who wore no armour at all. The Austrian light cavalry were far more successful, with the Austrian uhlans proving so effective that several French dragoon regiments were subsequently converted to the use of the lance. The Austrians also had regiments of hussars, all recruited from Hungary. Most armies in 1809 had such units, but they were largely conventional light cavalry re-uniformed in flamboyant hussar style for recruiting purposes. Austria's hussars were the authentic Hungarian article, however, and proved to be their best raiding troops throughout the Napoleonic Wars. Unlike the French army, Austria had no élite units comparable to the Imperial Guard. The artillery had made great strides in doctrine and practice since 1805 and instead of dispersing guns ineffectually all along the line had started to use them en masse, in grand batteries, like the French.

[edit] Battle of Wagram

By the day of the battle, Lobau Island was a massive warehouse and Napoleon was ready to move out. His plan was to create a diversion to the north of Lobau, in the same area as the battle of Aspern-Essling had been fought, that would pin the Austrians in place. Crossing the Danube east of that point, he hoped to swinging his army around the Austrian flank in a right hook that would encircle it against the Danube. Charles, for his part, recognised that Napoleon would have to cross the river in much the same place as previously. Rather than defend at the river bank or on the Marchfeld itself - whose broken terrain he thought would offer too much advantage to the French light troops - he pulled most of his army back behind the Russbach and formed a V-shaped line nearly twelve miles long, anchored in the west on Süssenbrunn, at the apex on Wagram and Aderklaa, and in the east on Markgrafneusiedl.

Using a fortified bridgehead, Napoleon started a full-scale crossing of the island with his 190,000 men on the night of 5th-6th July. His army was composed mainly of 4th Corps under Massena, the Saxon 9th Corps under Bernadotte, Oudinot's 3rd Corps and Davout's 3rd Corps. Additionally present were the Imperial Guard and the reserve cavalry, with Eugene and MacDonald each commanding an Italian corps, and General Wrede's Bavarian contingent, which mached 120 miles in 6 days to arrive on the second day. On the other side of the Marchfeld, Archduke Charles had neglected to concentrate every man available. One-third of Kollowrat's Corps was not recalled, VII Corps was left to the north-west as a reserve upon which to rally, the Archduke John's 15,000 men were allowed to loiter at Pressburg and other formations were left doing little useful in Galicia and Bohemia. Had all these troops been recalled, Charles would have faced Napoleon with over 60,000 more troops than he actually did. The force he did have was composed of Nordman's advanced guard corps, Bellegarde's 1st Corps, Hechingen's 2nd Corps, Kollowrat's 3rd Corps, 4th Corps under Orsini-Rosenberg, Klenau's 6th Corps (Klenau took over command of this formation from Hiller on the eve of the battle), Liechtenstein's reserve corps and reserve forces of cavalry. Marshal Berthier, Napoleon's chief of staff, when giving orders to the various corps, accidentally assigned the same bridge to two of them. Although a very long delay ensued, Davout, Massena and Oudinot and their corps were across. Bernadotte and his Saxons joined them, and on the 5th of July, Napoleon began his deployment near Aspern and Essling.

Artillery smashed up the area around the two towns whilst the French army deployed. A few outpost divisions under generals Nordmann and Klenau were sent reeling back, Nordmann's troops suffering 50% losses but remaining cohesive and effective. By noon all of the area around Aspern and Essling was in the hands of the French. By late afternoon, the French army formed a semicircle with Masséna on the extreme left, Bernadotte, Eugčne and Oudinot in the centre, and Davout on the right flank, with two extra brigades of cavalry to cover his own right against the anticipated arrival of the Archduke John. At around 6 o'clock, in an attempt to decide the battle in a single day and to prevent the Austrian reserves under Archduke John coming up, Napoleon ordered an attack on the Austrian centre along the line of the Russbach. This extemporised attack was poorly co-ordinated and went in piecemeal. Although it initially carried the high ground beyond Wagram, the attack faltered under the heavy Austrian fire and was bloodily repulsed. Austrian counterattacks then retook all the lost ground. In a foretaste of the following day's fighting, the encounters in the streets and hedgerows of Aderklaa were fierce and characterised by friendly-fire incidents, as French troops followed Saxons into action and mistook their white uniforms for those of the Austrians.

Reflecting on the tactical position, Charles determined that the shorter front of the French position and their greater depth would enable Napoleon to attack and break his line almost anywhere he chose. To forestall this, he issued orders for a dawn general attack on both French flanks and the centre. One attack, against the right, was a feint to draw French reserves away. The real attack was aimed at the French left around the village of Aderklaa. Had this plan succeeded, it would have resulted in a veritable Cannae as the French were encircled with a river at their backs. The length of the Austrian front, poor staffwork, and Archduke John's non-arrival prevented any such success. At 4am the following day, the Austrians first attacks went in against the French right flank. Poorly co-ordinated, this attack was stopped by Davout's men. On the left, however, two Austrian corps succeeded in throwing back Bernadotte's 9th Corps. Bernadotte had abandoned Aderklaa without orders and this key village fell to the Austrians without a shot. Advancing past the village, the Austrians broke the Saxons, who fled the field with Bernadotte galloping in front of them trying to rally them. Napoleon met Bernadotte as he was doing this and dismissed him from command of his corps on the spot. To stem the Austrian attack, Napoleon created a Grand Battery of 112 cannon which poured shot into the advancing Austrian formations. Masséna's Corps then wheeled south and executed a five-mile march south, within gunshot of the Austrian positions, to fall upon Klenau's left flank as he fought his way into Napoleon's left rear. This stabilised the French left. Meanwhile, on the French right flank, things were going better, with Oudinot and Davout advancing towards the village of Markgrafsneusiedl. A large conflict erupted around the village and Davout's Corps forced back the troops under Orsini-Rosenberg and eventually took the village around 3pm, turning the Austrian left.

A major attack was now launched against the Austrian advancing centre by General MacDonald, for which he was granted a Marshal's baton on the field of battle. MacDonald formed 27 battalions into a hollow column about 8,000 strong and launched this formation at the Austrian centre. The Austrians responded with intense artillery fire and local charges by their light cavalry. Hussar general Lasalle rode to Macdonald's support with French light cavalry, but was killed doing so. After ferocious fighting at bayonet point, Macdonald's attack ground to a halt without breaking through the Austrian centre. He succeeded, however, in preventing Charles from reinforcing his left flank, and the Austrians now began to evacuate the position, falling back in an orderly fashion towards Znaim to the north-west.

Exhausted by forty hours of marching and fighting, the French army followed rather than pursued Charles.


"All is loose, just the honour"

Francis in the battle of Pavia
Back to Top
Sun Tzu View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 31-Oct-2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sun Tzu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2008 at 13:49

1) Coral Sea- First naval battle that involved the aircraft carrier, future of Naval warfare.

2) Thermopylae- Classic fight to the death for the Spartans trying to buy time for their allies, and glory for themselves.
 
3) Tsushima- small Japanese force defeats Russian horde, Russians lost due to lack of logistics.
 
4) Arbela (60,000)? Greeks defeat 100,000 + Persians
 
5) Manzikert- beginning of the end of th Byzantine Empire.
 
6) Agincourt- the beginning of the end of the armoured knight - ending of the Feudal ages.
 
7) Diu- decline of Ottoman Naval power by a smaller but different fleet of Portugese warships against Turkish Galleons.
 
There are more, but I will stop there.
Sun Tzu

All warfare is based on deception - Sun Tzu
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 1106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2008 at 14:33
Originally posted by Sun Tzu Sun Tzu wrote:

6) Agincourt- the beginning of the end of the armoured knight - ending of the Feudal ages.
 
"Feudal ages" in Europe lasted until the second half of 19th c., while the end of armoured knight happend only 360 years after the battle of Agincourt (quite long period of decline, don't you think Wink?)


Edited by ataman - 07-Jan-2008 at 14:35
Back to Top
deadkenny View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 21-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 994
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote deadkenny Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Feb-2008 at 16:42
Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

Originally posted by Sun Tzu Sun Tzu wrote:

6) Agincourt- the beginning of the end of the armoured knight - ending of the Feudal ages.
 
"Feudal ages" in Europe lasted until the second half of 19th c., while the end of armoured knight happend only 360 years after the battle of Agincourt (quite long period of decline, don't you think Wink?)
 
Generally the 'Feudal Ages' in Europe are considered to have lasted until the 14th century.  Although certainly feudalism still existed (in places), the first half of the 19th century is not considered to be part of the 'Feudal Age' in Europe.


Edited by deadkenny - 02-Feb-2008 at 16:43
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana
Back to Top
Catalán View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Jan-2008
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catalán Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Feb-2008 at 19:40
Originally posted by Ikki Ikki wrote:

I present the Battle of La Matanza de Acentejo-1494, the greatest defeat of the spaniards in their oversea expansion LOL
 
I think that belongs to Annual (1921).
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 1106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Feb-2008 at 04:58
Originally posted by deadkenny deadkenny wrote:

Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

Originally posted by Sun Tzu Sun Tzu wrote:

6) Agincourt- the beginning of the end of the armoured knight - ending of the Feudal ages.
 
"Feudal ages" in Europe lasted until the second half of 19th c., while the end of armoured knight happend only 360 years after the battle of Agincourt (quite long period of decline, don't you think Wink?)
 
Generally the 'Feudal Ages' in Europe are considered to have lasted until the 14th century.  Although certainly feudalism still existed (in places), the first half of the 19th century is not considered to be part of the 'Feudal Age' in Europe.
 
In the biggest European country (I mean in Russia), feudalism existed until the second half of 19th c. It's not my fault that most of Western Europeans recognize the borders of Europe somewhere in the middle of this continent Wink.
Back to Top
deadkenny View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 21-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 994
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote deadkenny Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Feb-2008 at 13:06
Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

In the biggest European country (I mean in Russia), feudalism existed until the second half of 19th c. It's not my fault that most of Western Europeans recognize the borders of Europe somewhere in the middle of this continent Wink.


From the time of the Mongol conquest, if not before, Russia was viewed as being on the 'periphery' of 'Europe' by most Europeans - considered to be 'Asiatic' to some extent.  In any case, the name of historical 'Ages' is typically based on the most advanced developments, once they become sufficiently widespread.  So, for example, when the 'Bronze Age' is considered to have ended and the 'Iron Age' to have begun, it doesn't mean that everyone had switched from bronze to iron.  It just means that the more 'recent' development of the use of iron had become reasonable widespread.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 1106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Feb-2008 at 13:55
Originally posted by deadkenny deadkenny wrote:


From the time of the Mongol conquest, if not before, Russia was viewed as being on the 'periphery' of 'Europe' by most Europeans - considered to be 'Asiatic' to some extent. 
 
So?
From the 16th c. Russians considered their country as a "third Rome".
Are we talking about perception of people or about facts?
Europe has its own, exact depicted borders. The centrum of Europe is close to Vilnius. In 19th c. it was Russia. Western bordes of Russia were many hundreds km to the west from the centrum of Europe. In that century, Russia occupied most of European continent and was European superpower. It is hardly to say that it was a 'periphery' of Europe.
 
Originally posted by deadkenny deadkenny wrote:

In any case, the name of historical 'Ages' is typically based on the most advanced developments, once they become sufficiently widespread. 
 
Ok, so I can say that most of Europe lasted in feudal ages until the second half of 19th c.


Edited by ataman - 03-Feb-2008 at 13:56
Back to Top
deadkenny View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 21-Aug-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 994
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote deadkenny Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Feb-2008 at 14:27

Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

So?

From the 16th c. Russians considered their country as a "third Rome".

Are we talking about perception of people or about facts?

Europe has its own, exact depicted borders. The centrum of Europe is close to Vilnius. In 19th c. it was Russia. Western bordes of Russia were many hundreds km to the west from the centrum of Europe. In that century, Russia occupied most of European continent and was European superpower. It is hardly to say that it was a 'periphery' of Europe.

 



I was talking about the perception of much of Europe, including Russians themselves to some extent, and any sort of 'objective reality.  Part of Peter the Great's 'vision' with his 'window on the west' was to integrate Russia more with Europe, i.e. reduce their 'seperateness'.  As you say, in geographic terms 'Europe' has a specific meaning and most (at least prior to the conquest of Siberia) of Russia was in 'Europe' in that sense (even after the eastward expansion, most of the population was still in 'Europe'). 


Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

Ok, so I can say that most of Europe lasted in feudal ages until the second half of 19th c.


 Most?  Well I suppose it depends on how you define it.  Certainly much of Europe remained under a system that could be traced directly back to feudalism, although even in Russia is had evolved somewhat.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana
Back to Top
Bandeirante View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 24-Jan-2008
Location: Brazil-Brasil
Status: Offline
Points: 60
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bandeirante Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Feb-2008 at 13:27
Second Battle of Guararapes, Pernambuco, Brazil 
 
On 18 February 1649 a Dutch force of 3500 men occupied the Guararapes. The Portuguese commander Francisco Barreto marched against them with a force of 2600 men and the subsequent battle of 19 February was a overwhelming victory for the Portuguese, and the Dutch left 957 dead.

The Second Battle of Guararapes was the second and decisive battle in a conflict called Pernanbucana Insurrection, between Dutch and Portuguese forces in 1649 at Pernambuco, ending the Dutch occupation of Brazil.

Though the Dutch West India Company fielded a larger, better equipped force, they suffered morale problems as most of their army was made up of mercenaries from Europe (primarily Germany) who felt no real passion for the war in Brazil, as opposed to the Natives and Luso-Brazilian settlers who considered Brazil to be their home and were fighting for a patriotic cause. The Dutch force was also unused to fighting in the dense jungle and humid conditions of the country, wearing thick, brightly coloured European clothing and heavy metal armour which inhibited their dexterity. Contemporary accounts describe Dutch troops at the battle as "pale and sickly". The Dutch army at Guararapes were armed with pikes, cannon and an assortment of bladed weapons. It is thought by historians that the use of short blades by the Dutch was an attempt to imitate previously successful Portuguese weaponry and tactics.

The Luso-Brazilian force was made up of an assortment of natives, blacks and whites who knew, and had experience fighting in, the difficult Brazilian terrain. They would weaken Dutch troops with fusillades of musketfire from behind trees, and then charge with męlée weapons.

The Dutch had expected the enemy to march down the well established coastal roads, and thus formed a lines of defence covering these roads. However, the Luso-Brazilian force used a series of minor trails to reach Pernambuco, appearing out of the wetlands to the west and Guararapes hills (from which the battle derived its name) and flanking the Dutch. After several hours of fighting, the Dutch retreated northwards to Recife, leaving their artillery behind. Following the Dutch retreat, the Portuguese army marched into Pernambuco.

Back to Top
Sun Tzu View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 31-Oct-2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sun Tzu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Feb-2008 at 16:25
Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

Originally posted by deadkenny deadkenny wrote:

Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

Originally posted by Sun Tzu Sun Tzu wrote:

6) Agincourt- the beginning of the end of the armoured knight - ending of the Feudal ages.
 
"Feudal ages" in Europe lasted until the second half of 19th c., while the end of armoured knight happend only 360 years after the battle of Agincourt (quite long period of decline, don't you think Wink?)
 
Generally the 'Feudal Ages' in Europe are considered to have lasted until the 14th century.  Although certainly feudalism still existed (in places), the first half of the 19th century is not considered to be part of the 'Feudal Age' in Europe.
 
In the biggest European country (I mean in Russia), feudalism existed until the second half of 19th c. It's not my fault that most of Western Europeans recognize the borders of Europe somewhere in the middle of this continent Wink.
 
Ok what I meant by the end of the Feudal ages meant that the knights, soldiers who were generally characterized as being things that made up the Feudal ages. They were being replaced by larger professional armies that would characterize modern warfare. You are right, it wasn't the end of the feudal ages, but that battle was probably one of the main factors's that did usher in the decline of the Feudal ages.
Sun Tzu

All warfare is based on deception - Sun Tzu
Back to Top
Jonathan4290 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Mar-2008
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jonathan4290 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Mar-2008 at 03:33
If voting is still on, mine's for Mohi where Mongols own Hungarians. What're the numbers on this battle, the ranges I've read are: Mongols 15,000-30,000, Hungarians: 20,000-100,000 Confused
Like great battles? How about when they're animated for easy viewing?
Visit my site, The Art of Battle: Animated Battle Maps at www.theartofbattle.com.
Back to Top
Knights View Drop Down
Webmaster
Webmaster
Avatar
AE Magazine Coordinator

Joined: 23-Oct-2006
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3294
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Knights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Mar-2008 at 05:37
OK. The thread has become a bit sporadic and disjointed in nature. I think, seeing as the 'voting' has kind of faded into obscurity, that you can mention battles you like, and if you want, feel free to write an overview -detailed or brief- and post it in the thread. Exceptional entries could even be put in the magazine. That should work better than how the thread is now.

Regards,

- Knights -

Back to Top
Darius of Parsa View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 03-Oct-2007
Status: Offline
Points: 589
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Darius of Parsa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Mar-2008 at 00:28
I have already voted - but I felt as if I should post another... The Battle of the Persian Gate.  
 
 

 

The Battle of the Persian Gate was one of the most successful last stands in all of history.  A small Persian force was able to hold off Alexander the Great’s military machine for thirty days.  The last Achaemenid Persian army was lead by Ariobarzan, a remarkable commander; some say even a better commander than Alexander himself. -

Ariobarzan was appointed satrap of Persis by the Darius III, the Great King of Persia.  Ancient texts have never written of the state before this time, there is no reason for historians to believe there was a Persis satrap prior to 355 B.C.  However, it is known that Darius traveled further east to recruit another army to launch against Alexander and his successful Macedonian soldiers.  The Great King may have recognized that Persepolis was of no further use, or he knew that there was no strong garrison to stop Alexander.  Darius had learned this earlier at Guagamela, where a smaller Macedonian army ultimately defeated his Persian armed forces.  Whatever the case, Darius trusted Ariobarzan to defend Persepolis as long as he could, to purchase time for the Great King to create another army.

            Ariobarzan consulted with his military advisors.  The new governor may have consulted with his board about where he should make a stand, how many men would fight, how many the enemy was capable of sending, what tactics should be used, what tactics the enemy might use, what weaponry he should employ, and how they might use them.  All of these things were key in any battle.  Where to fight the battle was by far the most essential.  The fighting men were not as skilled as the professional Macedonian soldiers were, nor were their weapons as powerful or readily available.  The only advantage the Persians had was the terrain and the weather, and they planned to use it to their full benefit.  The board advised Ariobarzan to fight at the Persian Gates, a narrow pass in the Zargos Mountains.  It was winter, and during the season only a few routes are usable, in other words Ariobarzan knew Alexander was going to lead his men through the Persian Gates, and he planned to fight there. The beginning of the pass was quite wide, but narrows noticeably at that point, shrinking down to only a few meters wide.  Thus being the perfect position to stage an ambush.

            Prior to the battle, Alexander had defeated the Uxians, a nearby Iranian tribe.  Mistakenly, he though that after be subdued the Uxians, the Persian tribes would submit to the Macedonian king correspondingly.  Alexander split his army into two parts, one was to march down the Royal Road led by Parmenion, and the other was sent through the Persian Gates, led by Alexander the Great himself. 

Alexander entered the pass at full march, but was forced to slow his pace as the pass became narrow and more dangerous.  The Persian occupied a position above the pass further east.  Alexander marched in the east-southeast direction, until the pass abruptly turned left, leading Alexander into the Persian snare.  The front line discovered a a wall built by Ariobarzan months earlier.  The Macedonians were trapped; they could not advance forward because of the wall built by the Persians.  The hidden Persian forces, ready to get a taste of Macedonian blood, launched a shower of projectiles from either side of the pass. Each of Alexander’s men saw what was directly in front of them.  When arrows pelted the front section of the Macedonian army, they had no idea how many Persians there were, or how far the Persian line stretched down either side of the pass.  The back section did not know about the bloodshed in the front part of the army or about Ariobarzan’s fortification.  The Macedonians suffered heavy casualties, loosing hundreds of men at a time.  Alexander retreated out of the pass, with little or no success against the

            Persians.  Modern historians estimate that Ariobarzan held the pass for a month, before being surrounded by the Macedonians.  Philotas and Alexander succeeded in a rear attack.  It is still debated on how they found an alternative rout around the Persian position.  Some historians say that a Persian sheepherder led Alexander around Ariobarzan’s line.  The Persians were had no defense against the professional Macedonian soldiers beyond this point, the advantage of high ground had been stolen from them.

            It is said that Ariobarzan died during the last stand against Alexander.  Other historians agree that Alexander and his companions caught the Persian commander.  There was nothing stopping Alexander and his army from reaching Persepolis.  Alexander burned the city to the ground four months later.

 

-Darius of Parsa



Edited by Darius of Parsa - 05-Mar-2008 at 00:35
What is the officer problem?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 891011>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.