More impactful battles

?

  • Battle of Teutoburg Forest (9AD)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Battle of Stamford Bridge (1066)

    Votes: 2 9.1%
  • Battle of Grunwald (1410)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Battle of Lutzen (1632)

    Votes: 2 9.1%
  • Battle of Vienna (1683)

    Votes: 12 54.5%
  • Battle of Tsushima (1905)

    Votes: 2 9.1%
  • Battle of the Marne (1914)

    Votes: 4 18.2%

  • Total voters
    22
Jun 2010
123
Fallingwater
#1
Between the following battles which had the biggest impact on the course of history?

Battle of Teutoburg Forest (9AD)
Battle of Stamford Bridge (1066)
Battle of Grunwald (1410)
Battle of Lutzen (1632)
Battle of Vienna (1683)
Battle of Tsushima (1905)
Battle of the Marne (1914)
 
#2
The decisive element to Teutoburg Forest is overrated. It did not stop the Romans campaigning across the Rhine. Indeed, Germanicus led successful punitive expeditions against the Germans responsible for the defeat, and trans-Rhenian campaigns continued to happen thereafter (e.g. Maximian in 287). I also can't think of any other possible instance where a single defeat ended Roman aspirations in a certain region. Rather, it seems that the Romans saw little value in pushing their control deeper into German lands. Roman military attentions across the Rhine seem to have consisted of punitive actions and exploiting divisions to play politics, but not conquest.

For the ancient world, one might argue that Rome's victory over Hasdrubal Barca at the Metaurus in 207 BC was one of the most decisive battles, since it prevented Hasdrubal (by virtue of his death and his army's destruction) from linking up with Hannibal and reviving the momentum of the Carthaginian war effort. Indeed, after that battle, Hannibal ceased doing much of anything and was slowly boxed up in the toe of Italy before being recalled to Africa. Then again, regarding the Metaurus as decisive means thinking it possible that Hannibal could have actually finished the war with a Carthaginian victory, which is a matter for debate.
 
Last edited:
Mar 2018
523
UK
#3
I, as I seem to be doing a lot these days, completely agree with Diocletian. Teutoberg Forest didn't really change much. Was Augustus really that interested in making Germania a full province? There wasn't a town large enough to even serve as a provincial capital. It's hard to civilise a place if there is no settlement to civilise!

As for the other battles, I see Vienna as a clear winner. If the Ottomans had won (or say, the coalition had never assembled) then things could have been very different indeed. In a pitched battle, the Jannisseries could well have won, it was being flanked as they were entering the city that sealed their fate. A victorious Ottoman army would have been very hard to dislodge. Vienna would have been heavily fortified and a fully Ottoman Danube would have been an easy to defend supply line and economic highway for them. Would the HRE have survived losing the Hapsburg homeland to Muslims? How would the balance of power in Eastern Europe change? How would Ottoman development itself have changed if it had clearer access into the 18th and 19th century to the heart of European technological development?

I can't see the other options even raising questions of the same magnitude.
 
#4
I, as I seem to be doing a lot these days, completely agree with Diocletian. Teutoberg Forest didn't really change much. Was Augustus really that interested in making Germania a full province? There wasn't a town large enough to even serve as a provincial capital. It's hard to civilise a place if there is no settlement to civilise!

As for the other battles, I see Vienna as a clear winner. If the Ottomans had won (or say, the coalition had never assembled) then things could have been very different indeed. In a pitched battle, the Jannisseries could well have won, it was being flanked as they were entering the city that sealed their fate. A victorious Ottoman army would have been very hard to dislodge. Vienna would have been heavily fortified and a fully Ottoman Danube would have been an easy to defend supply line and economic highway for them. Would the HRE have survived losing the Hapsburg homeland to Muslims? How would the balance of power in Eastern Europe change? How would Ottoman development itself have changed if it had clearer access into the 18th and 19th century to the heart of European technological development?

I can't see the other options even raising questions of the same magnitude.
Haha well, likewise, I now find myself agreeing with you on Vienna.

Regarding Teutoberg, it's also worth bearing in mind that Rome suffered worse defeats in terms of casualties than Teutoberg, and yet these defeats did not result in wars ending with Roman defeat. I'm thinking of Cannae, Arausio and Edessa (admittedly, Shapur probably did exaggerate the number of dead at Edessa, but we're still talking about a captured emperor). To think that Teutoberg had the long-term geopolitical impact that is sometimes attributed to it does not clock well with the trends.
 
Mar 2016
588
Australia
#6
I voted for Vienna because it's the most easy to imagine the immediate and enormous consequences of what would happen have happened if it had have been won by the Ottomans. But personally I would have placed the Battle of Leipzig (1813) on the list, as I'd consider it to be more impactful and significant than any other battle on this list, except maybe Vienna or Marne.
 
Feb 2016
4,180
Japan
#7
Vienna or Hastings most likely. Though Hastings might seem local.. all of Britain’s imperial drive stems from its Norman aristocracy. They don’t settle, Anglo-Saxon England goes on and history would be so different that you can’t even guess what it looks like.
 
Feb 2019
80
Serbia
#8
I'm split between Vienna and the Marne but I ended up voting for Marne. I think these are the only 2 battles on the list that can really compete. Others were impactful in their own right but not quite as much as these 2 on the general course of history. I think battles such as Leipzig, Verdun, Poltava, Hastings, Blenheim and maybe even Waterloo are better candidates for a list.
 
Nov 2010
7,336
Cornwall
#9
It's actually quite a complex idea. For example Blenheim obviously has resounded through history, but if you look at the aims of the War, it ended with a Bourbon on the Spanish throne.

Therefore you could argue it had no impact at all.
 
Likes: Olleus
Mar 2016
588
Australia
#10
It's actually quite a complex idea. For example Blenheim obviously has resounded through history, but if you look at the aims of the War, it ended with a Bourbon on the Spanish throne.

Therefore you could argue it had no impact at all.
Louis XIV obviously imagined a future where his grandson also inherited the throne of France (which would have happened only a couple of years after the war ended, since Louis's son and heir died an unexpectedly early death), and he spoke of the two kingdoms being united into a single superpower. But while a Bourbon did still get put on the throne of Spain, he renounced all claims to the throne of France, which ensured there would be no Franco-Spanish superstate.