What's new

5 Ancient Battle that Change the World - Battle Of Alesia 52 BC


I think : Because every battle between two nations changed the world in one profound way or another. Battle of Alesia has no consequence for India, China, Indo-China,Persia, Middle East, and Central Asia ie 3/4 of known world at that time.
 
. .
This battle isn't ancient but comes after the classical ancient period. Battle of Tours 732 C.E. Had the outcome of that battle been different it would have changed world history forever.
 
.
Ah,agreed!
Maybe if there was no Roman empire than we would have never experienced that tragedy with Jesus (peace be upon him) as those selfish masses would never been left with any option to stop him.Jesus(A.S) would be unstoppable and we would be seeing a brilliant end of Christian history:)



Roman senator and historian Tacitus wrote of the crucifixion of Christ (Jesus) in the Annals, a history of the Roman Empire during the first century.
Regards

Tacitus wrote about persecution of Christian by Nero ,mentioning about Christ in context of belief of Christians. There is no mention about Christ in any secular literature,in Roman tax records, or among recordings of any Scientist, or Philosopher, or among any religious leaders of his time. Even Christian record of him starts with account of Paul. He may have been a story woven by Paul to start a cult.

This battle isn't ancient but comes after the classical ancient period. Battle of Tours 732 C.E. Had the outcome of that battle been different it would have changed world history forever.


There are thousands of battle like Battle of Tours which could have easily changed history, had they had different outcome.

That is why I think that this title of 5 battles which changed history is a pointless heading. Battle of Alesia did not had any effect on 3/4 of the world because Roman empire never affected 3/4 of old world in any profound way.

Most important battles are those which result in demographic or Religious change , as those changes are permanent @jhungary

Had Turks not massacred every Greek they could found in Asia Minor, Anatolia would have been a Hellenic province.

Had Mongols not massacred everything in their path in Central Asia, that region would never have become Mongoloid.

Conquest of Two Americas , as colonization of North America provided resource base for West to assert their supremacy.

Battle fought by Muhammad, and Umayyads.


and so on.....................
 
Last edited:
.
Tacitus wrote about persecution of Christian by Nero ,mentioning about Christ in context of belief of Christians. There is no mention about Christ in any secular literature,in Roman tax records, or among recordings of any Scientist, or Philosopher, or among any religious leaders of his time. Even Christian record of him starts with account of Paul. He may have been a story woven by Paul to start a cult.




There are thousands of battle like Battle of Tours which could have easily changed history, had they had different outcome.

That is why I think that this title of 5 battles which changed history is a pointless heading. Battle of Alesia did not had any effect on 3/4 of the world because Roman empire never affected 3/4 of old world in any profound way.

Most of important battles are those which resulted in demographic or Religious change , as those changes are permanent @jhungary

Had Turks not massacred every Greek they could found in Asia Minor, Anatolia would have been a Hellenic province.

Had Mongols not massacred everything in their path in Central Asia, that region would never have become Mongoloid.

Conquest of Two Americas , as colonization of North America provided resource base for West to assert their supremacy.

Battle fought by Muhammad, and Umayyads.


and so on.....................


There are thousands of battle like Battle of Tours which could have easily changed history, had they had different outcome.

No there are not. The fact that you think that tells me you don't know much about the battle.

Most of important battles are those which resulted in demographic or Religious change , as those changes are permanent

That's exactly what Battle of Tours would have done.
 
.
No there are not. The fact that you think that tells me you don't know much about the battle.


I know quite well about Battle of Tours, but also have a fair understanding about what is achievable and what is not.

Even if Franks had lost Battle of Tours, Muslims would have found it difficult to built upon that victory due to stretched supply lines, and would have been forced to withdraw south of Pyrenees sooner or later.There is a reason why muslims consider this battle as a minor skirmish.

In Europe, terrain negates advantage of cavalry over infantry, an advantage that made muslims successful to begin with. This has been proved by Romans, and after them by successful defence of Europe against Mongols, this battle, mercenary Swiss Pike armies with various European Kings, Agincourt et al.

That's exactly what Battle of Tours would have done.

This was core Christian territory. Barring a large scale massacre, there is not much chance of religious change. Religious demography did not changed much in Spain even after 900 Years of Islamic occupation.
 
Last edited:
.
What's so funny about the "holy roman empire converting to christianity" ?,

maybe i didn't phrase if properly , i should have said , german barbarians converting to christianity , i was merely being polite with christianity and german barbarians
it is fact that the so called holy roman empire , which comprised of what is germany today , paved the way for the entire europe to convert to catholicism , Not Rome , trajan , or jesus

anyhow the Romans captured the sassanid king's harem you can read about it on wiki , i'm not making it up @Taygibay , but they never fully conquered persia , as they intended to do like Alexander ,

also Ctesiphon was built on a model similar to Persepolis , it was NOT a big city with everything that @flamer84 suggests , it's in iraq you can visit and see there are no traces of a big city with walls , citadels , theaters and etc. :lol:


When the parthians defeated romans in the battle of harran in modern day turkey they shoved molten gold down the roman general's throat , That 's not the only thing persians did , they also took the true cross jesus was crucified on from romans , and they managed to siege constantinopol , though it was not a successful siege , it inspired the ottoman turks to do the same thing some centuries later ,

persians were also the only major empire to sack Jerusalem twice , some suggest the siege of constantinopol was a diversion to lure romans away from Jerusalem given the religious nature of late persian-roman wars , so you see they were nothing like the Border wars @flamer84 tries to suggest.
 
.
I will say this ONE LAST TIME, guys,

DEBATE THE BATTLE NOT THE TITLE

Please do open your own thread if you want to debate whether or not ROMAN Rmpire Change the world, this is about BATTLE OF ALESIA.
 
.
fact is pre-islamic persians killed more christians than any Jihadi , mamluk or turk ever did , that didn't happen in a border war :lol:

----------------------------------------------------


The battle of carrahae and the defeat of Rome at the hands of parthians is so significant that it is featured in all total war video games , IT IS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT DEFEAT OF ROME , no one denies that
 
.
I know quite well about Battle of Tours, but also have a fair understanding about what is achievable and what is not.

Even if Franks had lost Battle of Tours, Muslims would have found it difficult to built upon that victory due to stretched supply lines, and would have been forced to withdraw south of Pyrenees sooner or later.There is a reason why muslims consider this battle as a minor skirmish.

In Europe, terrain negates advantage of cavalry over infantry, an advantage that made muslims successful to begin with. This has been proved by Romans, and after them by successful defence of Europe against Mongols, this battle, mercenary Swiss Pike armies with various European Kings, Agincourt et al.



This was core Christian territory. Barring a large scale massacre, there is not much chance of religious change. Religious demography did not changed much in Spain even after 900 Years of Islamic occupation.


Even if Franks had lost Battle of Tours, Muslims would have found it difficult to built upon that victory due to stretched supply lines,

Supply lines? These are armies on the move they bring whatever they will use with them, its not like they needed to replenish supplies to fight battles. Food is available, they can plunder and get supplies in France and live off the land. Besides, there base was in Spain not far.

Religious demography did not changed much in Spain even after 900 Years of Islamic occupation.

Different dynasty would have taken control in France, the dynasty that was ruling in Spain for the most part was more tolerant of different religions.

In Europe, terrain negates advantage of cavalry over infantry,

No, but some terrain may mitigate the effectiveness of cavalry, what mitigated the effectiveness of Muslim cavalry in Battle of Tours was partially terrain but mostly tactical defense (phalanx) of Martel's infantry which the Muslim cavalry couldn't break through.

successful defence of Europe against Mongols

What successful defense of Europe against Mongols? Yeah there were a few battles Europeans won, but overall Mongols crushed eastern Europe and left the continent, they weren't driven out by European military defense. Europeans used city walls to defend against Mongols, but Mongols had heavy guns and artillery. Mongol advancement in Europe ended for several reasons, Mongol civil war, death of Khan Ogedei, and Muslims beating back the Mongols in the Middle East.
 
.
@jhungary ,I am now free,and love the threads u have put up in the meantime .:tup:

The battle of carrahae and the defeat of Rome at the hands of parthians is so significant that it is featured in all total war video games , IT IS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT DEFEAT OF ROME , no one denies that

Carrhae,adrianopole and teutoborg forest.3 most significant.
 
.
@jhungary ,I am now free,and love the threads u have put up in the meantime .:tup:



Carrhae,adrianopole and teutoborg forest.3 most significant.


Carrhae was the private adventure of Crassus,many in Rome celebrated his defeat.Teutonburg was important,not so significant though,however much pain it might have caused Augustus personally,as it didn't impact the Empire so directly.Adrianopole,YES,now that was decisive....a Roman Army led by its emperor is defeated in the inner provinces of the Empire,its leader dead and its borders left open for marauders.

Supply lines? These are armies on the move they bring whatever they will use with them, its not like they needed to replenish supplies to fight battles. Food is available, they can plunder and get supplies in France and live off the land. Besides, there base was in Spain not far.



Different dynasty would have taken control in France, the dynasty that was ruling in Spain for the most part was more tolerant of different religions.



No, but some terrain may mitigate the effectiveness of cavalry, what mitigated the effectiveness of Muslim cavalry in Battle of Tours was partially terrain but mostly tactical defense (phalanx) of Martel's infantry which the Muslim cavalry couldn't break through.



What successful defense of Europe against Mongols? Yeah there were a few battles Europeans won, but overall Mongols crushed eastern Europe and left the continent, they weren't driven out by European military defense. Europeans used city walls to defend against Mongols, but Mongols had heavy guns and artillery. Mongol advancement in Europe ended for several reasons, Mongol civil war, death of Khan Ogedei, and Muslims beating back the Mongols in the Middle East.


If the Franks would have lost at Tours ,there was no organised state in shape to resist Muslim incursions anymore.What Martel had on the battlefield that day was arguably the only professional force of soldiers in Europe at that time.Loose that on the battlefield and you loose Europe.I am part of the camp that sees this battle as a very decisive one.I think the Muslims lost this one due to several factors:the training of the Franks (Martel prepared them exactly for this kind of battle) and because they've underestimated their European oponents,thinking that they were the same as the Visigoths they've encountered in Spain,just a feudal peasant army gathered around its lord,which they were not,the Franks were a formidable force reshaping Europe at that time.
 
.
@jhungary you didn't mention me in his opening post ! :pissed:

And I thought that he considered me his little brother ! :cry:

Come on you still can't be cross with me for beating you silly in a game of football ! :whistle:

And when I say football...I mean 'FOOTBALL' - yup the one thats played with the 'foot' ! :tongue:

Simple oversight lol
 
.
@jhungary ,I am now free,and love the threads u have put up in the meantime .:tup:



Carrhae,adrianopole and teutoborg forest.3 most significant.

lol, now I am a bit busy, can you wait for about 2 weeks??

And I will do an adrianopole battle report later and I have done the teutoburg forest lol

I was thinking about Carrhae and Pharsalus and the latter wins out :)
 
.
Carrhae was the private adventure of Crassus,many in Rome celebrated his defeat.Teutonburg was important,not so significant though,however much pain it might have caused Augustus personally,as it didn't impact the Empire so directly.Adrianopole,YES,now that was decisive....a Roman Army led by its emperor is defeated in the inner provinces of the Empire,its leader dead and its borders left open for marauders.




If the Franks would have lost at Tours ,there was no organised state in shape to resist Muslim incursions anymore.What Martel had on the battlefield that day was arguably the only professional force of soldiers in Europe at that time.Loose that on the battlefield and you loose Europe.I am part of the camp that sees this battle as a very decisive one.I think the Muslims lost this one due to several factors:the training of the Franks (Martel prepared them exactly for this kind of battle) and because they've underestimated their European oponents,thinking that they were the same as the Visigoths they've encountered in Spain,just a feudal peasant army gathered around its lord,which they were not,the Franks were a formidable force reshaping Europe at that time.

Carrhae stopped rome's eastward expansion at the parthian border,though there were many more rome-persian wars to come the frontiers remained largely intact.
Teutoborg made the romans think further expansion into germania over the rhine was not worth it.This led to a distinct german identity and eventually served as a base for migration of germanic tribes centuries later.


I agree tours was decisive,but its generally considered a medieval battle.Ancient era ends 475 ad i think.

lol, now I am a bit busy, can you wait for about 2 weeks??

And I will do an adrianopole battle report later and I have done the teutoburg forest lol

I was thinking about Carrhae and Pharsalus and the latter wins out :)

Sure np.You do those.I'm going to continue my 1940 blitzkrieg france battle report.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom