Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 30th, 2013, 05:54 PM   #1
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jan 2013
From: Minas Tirith
Posts: 299
What is the worst battle of your favorite General?


A favorite of Mine is Frederick the Great. His worst battle,IMO,was Kunersdorf. It started out well for Frederick attacking the flank of the Russian positions. Frederick's brother Henry wanted Him to stop after pounding the Russian flanks but Frederick wanted to press the advantage. His cavalry took huge losses and was routed. Prussian cavalry commander Von Seydlitz was severely wounded and Frederick himself was almost captured
DS1967 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:01 PM   #2
.
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: Valles Marineris, Mars
Posts: 4,833

Battle of Getttysburg.
Gorge123 is offline  
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:15 PM   #3

emperor of seleucid's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2012
From: Arche Seleukeia
Posts: 2,374

Seleucus actually never lost a battle. This was due to his near perfect skill, revealed in the second Diadochi War, of waiting for the right moment and rushing to battle. Although, the Babylonian Wars were the toughest Challenge for Seleucus since he had to face the most powerful man in the world, Antigonus.
emperor of seleucid is offline  
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:16 PM   #4

Salah's Avatar
Baltimorean
Blog of the Year
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: Maryland
Posts: 23,286
Blog Entries: 182

Gergovia for my favorite ancient general, Julius Caesar.

Cold Harbor for my favorite modern general, US Grant.
Salah is offline  
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:18 PM   #5
Lecturer
 
Joined: Jan 2013
From: Minas Tirith
Posts: 299

Quote:
Originally Posted by emperor of seleucid View Post
Seleucus actually never lost a battle. This was due to his near perfect skill, revealed in the second Diadochi War, of waiting for the right moment and rushing to battle. Although, the Babylonian Wars were the toughest Challenge for Seleucus since he had to face the most powerful man in the world, Antigonus.

Didn't He lose to Chandragupta Maurya?
DS1967 is offline  
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:21 PM   #6

Salah's Avatar
Baltimorean
Blog of the Year
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: Maryland
Posts: 23,286
Blog Entries: 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by DS1967 View Post
Didn't He lose to Chandragupta Maurya?
His campaign across the Indus was considered a failure, though it is unclear as to whether he was openly defeated.
Salah is offline  
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:26 PM   #7

Apachewarlord's Avatar
Chief idiot
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Hippy town U.S.A.!
Posts: 5,690
Blog Entries: 2

Hmmmm, not sure if Geronimo really counts as a general. He fought very few actual "Battles". Out of all the battles he did have he never fought a bad one. One time he was surrounded by six hundred men and in a pure stroke of genius escaped. So I won't say him, cause he didn't have a bad battle. So far I haven't found a general I know enough about to actually like.
Apachewarlord is offline  
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:29 PM   #8

emperor of seleucid's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2012
From: Arche Seleukeia
Posts: 2,374

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salah View Post
His campaign across the Indus was considered a failure, though it is unclear as to whether he was openly defeated.
It wasn't a failure. He made an alliance with Chandragupta. In addition, Chandragupta gave him 500 elephants, which were invaluable to Seleucus in the Diadochi wars and some of them even ended up in Pyhrus's army. And as for the lands that Seleucid supposedly ceded, they were mostly Indian land that Alexander had previously conquered and their allegiance were nominal at best.

Now think about it, if Chandragupta beat Seleucus, why would he let Seleucus's entire army leave intact, make an alliance with Seleucus, and give him 500 elephants. Chandragupta had 600,000 infantry. Seleucus isn't the type of the person to engage such an army. We can't take Appian's words as facts due to the fact that Appian hundreds of years later, does not go in detail, and the conclusions of multiple sources show that Seleucus did not suffer any defeats.
emperor of seleucid is offline  
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:46 PM   #9

Tuthmosis III's Avatar
Kulturphilosoph
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: the middle ground
Posts: 3,680
Blog Entries: 6

The closest I have to a "favorite" general is Washington (from when I first discovered military history at a young age). Long Island was a sad affair indeed.
Tuthmosis III is offline  
Old January 30th, 2013, 06:46 PM   #10

Salah's Avatar
Baltimorean
Blog of the Year
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: Maryland
Posts: 23,286
Blog Entries: 182

Quote:
Originally Posted by emperor of seleucid View Post
And as for the lands that Seleucid supposedly ceded, they were mostly Indian land that Alexander had previously conquered and their allegiance were nominal at best.
Is this your opinion, or do you have a source to back it up?

Quote:
Originally Posted by emperor of seleucid View Post
Now think about it, if Chandragupta beat Seleucus, why would he let Seleucus's entire army leave intact, make an alliance with Seleucus, and give him 500 elephants. Chandragupta had 600,000 infantry. Seleucus isn't the type of the person to engage such an army.
All I said is that the campaign was evidently a failure; it has been hypothesized that Seleucus was defeated in battle, but there are no ancient sources to confirm or deny that.

At any rate, you seem to be contradicting yourself. By stating that he 'isn't the type of person to engage such an army' you are apparently implying that Seleucus was not willing to risk a battle with Chandragupta. Cowing before a numerically superior army, and then ceding territory to its ruler, sounds very much like the failure of any kind of offensive campaign.

Quote:
Originally Posted by emperor of seleucid View Post
We can't take Appian's words as facts due to the fact that Appian hundreds of years later, does not go in detail, and the conclusions of multiple sources show that Seleucus did not suffer any defeats.
Again, all I said was that the campaign was a failure. Michael Grant, a leading modern classicist, seems to back me up in From Alexander to Cleopatra, in which he specifically states that Seleucus was 'unable to dislodge' the Mauryan army.

Based on the grounds by which you dismiss Appian, why should we give any consideration at all to any ancient historian?
Salah is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
battle, general, worst



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who is your favorite general and why pruittj744 War and Military History 166 March 25th, 2014 09:01 AM
Who was your favorite General of the Three Kingdom's Era? Semjax Asian History 12 August 4th, 2011 03:02 AM
Who is your favorite general pruittj744 War and Military History 18 March 15th, 2011 12:59 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.