| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Battles that Changed History
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Battles that Changed History

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7823
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Mar 2011 at 14:55

Originally posted by opuslola opuslola wrote:

If the War of Northern Agresssion did not change world history

I actually said it contained no world changing battles. eg if Lee won Gettysburg it would not have changed the end result.
Quote then what would have been the result if the South had successfully "retired" from the Union, without all of the blood-shed?  Would not the world today be much different?  Or what if the war was fought for but two years, and ended in a truce, with both sides brimming with war supplies?

Nothing. I can't see it making any difference long term. Not that this would ever have happened. It is also outside the terms of reference of the thread.

I could say, what if India rebelled against the British in 1788 instead of America? It would have made a far bigger difference but that's irrelevant to the thread because it never happened. There was no point at which world history turned upon a single battle.

I would volunteer two battles, the Battle of Yarmouk, and the Battle of Manikert. Which are the two most decisive battles in the end of the East Roman Empire.

Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 08 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Mar 2011 at 17:49
Originally posted by opuslola opuslola wrote:

If the War of Northern Agresssion did not change world history, then what would have been the result if the South had successfully "retired" from the Union, without all of the blood-shed?  Would not the world today be much different?  Or what if the war was fought for but two years, and ended in a truce, with both sides brimming with war supplies?
 
Think, that most of you could only/merely imagine the consequences that would have resulted in the world in general after either of those events.
 
Regards,
 
Ron
 
The civil war was complicated in such a way that only a clear cut victory would have resulted in a lasting peace and only the union could achieve that.
 
Even if Lee won in Gettysburg half the south by that time was firmly in the hand of the union and there was no way that the union would have given those lands up without a fight.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Mar 2011 at 21:41
It wasn't world changing - I agree with the arguments about the Civil War[1] - but it demonstrated that the North was not going to be find it easy: that was First Bull Run or First Manassas depending on your viewpoint. A win there for the North (as they expected) would probably have brought things to a close quicker. 
 
[1] Which my Georgia mother-in-law, a daughter of the Confederacy as well as of the Revolution, also called the war of Northern Aggression, though some of her metaphorical siblings prefered the War Between the States.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Mar 2011 at 23:10
My oh my, what a plethora of "unreconstructed" Johny Rebs are in our midsts. Apparently, Opus has eaten one too many bowls of the cereal served by Lola Granola and completely forgotten the probability of Andrew Jackson's reaction had he been president in 1861 and some South Carolina rabble had deluded themselves into attacking a federal facility! If what John Brown attempted in 1859 against the Federal Arsenal at Harper's Ferry was considered a criminal act (and hence "illegal"), how could one not consider the siege and assault of Fort Sumter an illegal action?
 
Anyway, from my end of the Southern lineage, one can not grasp the implications of the Civil War as anything other than the first example of retrograde Southern populism in American politics [now that statement will certainly stoke polemical flames]. To anyone familiar with the politics of the states that did attempt secession through rebellion in 1861 one can not but notice that between 1848 and 1860 control of local politics passes from the hands of the great landed magnates and merchants (whose sentiments were ever nationalist) to what my great-grandmother irreverently called the "up river trash" with respect to Louisiana--we will not even go into what she meant when she used the descriptive les kaintucks. That phenomenon has been amply studied for both South Carolina and Georgia, particularly the former, and few now dare argue what was fondly premised in 1950 by a historian at Duke:
 
Harold L. Schultz. Nationalism and Sectionalism in South Carolina: A Study of the Movement for Southern Independence 1852-1860. Durham: Duke University Press, 1950.
 
What is attempted here by Opuslola is little more than the same outrage Darryl F. Zanuck undertook with Margaret Mitchell's novel Gone With the Wind! There her Tara--a marginal up-river enterprise more akin to a frontier homestead--was turned into a palatial estate of rural splendor and aristocracy and the personage of Rhett Butler into a rogue who showed his roguishness by viewing secession as claptrap [when in fact as the only personage with undisputed "aristocratic Southern lineage", he was emblematic of his class' true sentiment].
 
 
 
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Tashfin View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tashfin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2011 at 01:30

I would add:

The battle of Ayn Jalut, where the Mongols (under Hulagu's lieutenant Ketbogha) suffered their first major defeat in history at the hands of the Mamluks (Qutuz and Baybars), and prevented the destruction of the last major Islamic power in the region (Mamluk Sultanate, with Cairo being the official seat of the revived (mostly ceremonial) Abbasid Caliphate after the destruction of Baghdad by Hulagu in 1258.
 
Mamluk failure at Ayn Jalut would have led to the loss of Egypt and probably North Africa to the Mongols and the consolidation of the Crusader state in Palestine, since the latter had an informal alliance with the Mongols.
 
Baybars and his successors went on to decisively defeat the Mongols in further engagements (Albustayn, Homs) and the remnants of Outremer.
 
 
 
Back to Top
Shingen The Ruler View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 01 Mar 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 51
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shingen The Ruler Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Apr 2011 at 06:05
Originally posted by Kirghiz Kirghiz wrote:

Battle of Segikahara.


Good pick. Although, it's Sekigahara. ;)
Back to Top
Tashfin View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tashfin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 08:31
Though mentioned in another thread, the Battle of Megiddo in 1918 was also very decisive and arguably shaped the history of the modern Middle East. It can be said that the Ottomans army was demoralised and exhausted before Allenby's onslaught, but the far reaching effects of the battle certainly can be felt even till today.
Back to Top
Joe View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 473
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 08:40
I say tuetoberg forest.

The Romans lost three legions and all their auxiliaries and horseman.

The Germans defeated a much superior force.

Augustus actually said in his will "don't make war east of the rhine"

It lead to the down fall of Rome when the Huns came and franks and goths basically marauded through out the Roman provinces.

The Romans probably would have conquered Germania and instituted Roman law, culture and so on but they didn't and it lead to a very obvious border. Though on could argue the "lack of technology" in the conquered areas or the "rhine is a better way to travel anyway and as a border. Thats lacking though the Romans were extremely extended and couldn't afford to potentially get their asses kicked again and then develop the land and people from bottom up.
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Location: MS, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 08:57
Here is Wikipedia's report about the battle of Manzikert.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Manzikert

To me, at least, this is nothing but folly!

But, all of you also have opinions.

I do see in the name of "Alp Arslen", some distinct Norse elements, do you?

If so, just why would anyone by that name be there? Was he a descendant of one of the Byzantine Guards?
Back to Top
Seko- View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11686
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seko- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 11:01
Opus if you care to comment on the battle please do so. If you care to comment as to why the Wiki article is absurd then do that as well. However, do not continue to suggest an alternative historical explanation outside of the Alternative History Subforum otherwise one would suspect that you are trolling.
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7823
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 11:28
Quote It lead to the down fall of Rome when the Huns came and franks and goths basically marauded through out the Roman provinces.
I don't think any battle lead to something that happened 400 years later.
Back to Top
Joe View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 473
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 11:44
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:

Quote It lead to the down fall of Rome when the Huns came and franks and goths basically marauded through out the Roman provinces.
I don't think any battle lead to something that happened 400 years later.

Thats not true a lot of battles have effected things thousands of years later. If the Romans had conquered the Germans centuries later the Franks and the Goths wouldn't have conquered their respective provinces around Rome. So basically what happened was a hot pot was brewing and it boiled over on Rome the battle is responsible.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 11:50
If Rome had conquered Germany then Rome would have fallen sooner. Germany was economically unprofitable and at the same time would have required vast reserves of manpower to garrison and control.

For Rome to effectively rule Germany, other fronts would have needed to be denuded of soldiers - opening the way for attacks on other fronts.

Attempting to control Germany would have simply meant the increased loss of men and treasure and would simply have accelerated the rate at which the empire went into decline.
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Location: MS, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 12:57
The above discourse reminds me of an old song, entitled "Going round in circles!

Perhaps it is this track?

http://new.music.yahoo.com/angie-contini/tracks/going-round-in-circles-song--218448458

But, possibly it is this;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un63LEAN22E&feature=related


But possibly my favorite Preston song is this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75-gcaA850g&feature=related

Yes!

Listen and enjoy!

There can never be enough music on any site.

So, I would suggest that before you go to bed you listen to "Sly" and some great "Yodeling" Please turn up the volume!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lVwsijzwVc

Especially regarding riots in 1971.

Regards,
Ronald (as I rock the night away)

Edited by opuslola - 19 Apr 2011 at 12:59
Back to Top
Seko- View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11686
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seko- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 13:05
and that will cost you troll!
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 13:15
Originally posted by Constantine XI Constantine XI wrote:

If Rome had conquered Germany then Rome would have fallen sooner. Germany was economically unprofitable and at the same time would have required vast reserves of manpower to garrison and control.

For Rome to effectively rule Germany, other fronts would have needed to be denuded of soldiers - opening the way for attacks on other fronts.

Attempting to control Germany would have simply meant the increased loss of men and treasure and would simply have accelerated the rate at which the empire went into decline.
 
The pereception that the Romans would have had to "occupy" the hinterlands north of the Danube and East of the Rhine absent some remunerative returns is of course belied by Roman activity in Dacia and the Balkans. CIX is essentially correct that Rome could retrieve what it needed from the region without the outrageous expense of political control. That where such action was required, the Romans were ready to act was emphasized by the activities of Trajan nearly a century after the consolidation of the German frontier along the Rhine/Danube axis.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 13:23
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Originally posted by Constantine XI Constantine XI wrote:

If Rome had conquered Germany then Rome would have fallen sooner. Germany was economically unprofitable and at the same time would have required vast reserves of manpower to garrison and control.

For Rome to effectively rule Germany, other fronts would have needed to be denuded of soldiers - opening the way for attacks on other fronts.

Attempting to control Germany would have simply meant the increased loss of men and treasure and would simply have accelerated the rate at which the empire went into decline.
 
The pereception that the Romans would have had to "occupy" the hinterlands north of the Danube and East of the Rhine absent some remunerative returns is of course belied by Roman activity in Dacia and the Balkans. CIX is essentially correct that Rome could retrieve what it needed from the region without the outrageous expense of political control. That where such action was required, the Romans were ready to act was emphasized by the activities of Trajan nearly a century after the consolidation of the German frontier along the Rhine/Danube axis.


Exactly.

Why send Roman legions to put down recalcitrant Germans when you can get friendly Germans do do it. Why built the infrastructure to extract raw materials when you can trade cheaply made civilised goods for them instead.

The mountainous terrain of Dacia afforded the Romans the opportunity to construct some stubbornly defensible holdings that stood the tests of time against one wave of eastern marauders after another. The forest and swamps of Germany were far less able to serve as a bastion to entrenched colonists.
Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 3326
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 21:13
Originally posted by Seko Seko wrote:

and that will cost you troll!


Achtung! Double standards detected :)
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Barcelona
Status: Offline
Points: 3227
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 21:36
Originally posted by Anton Anton wrote:

Originally posted by Seko Seko wrote:

and that will cost you troll!


Achtung! Double standards detected :)


A glaring double standard alright. Just be honest, give the banning reason as 'we don't like you'.
http://xkcd.com/15/



Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. ~George Bernard Shaw
Back to Top
Tashfin View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tashfin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 22:20
I would throw in the First Battle of Panipat (1526), the results of which led to the establishment of the Mughal Empire in India. The Mughal leader Babur's army of 12,000 Mughal, Afghan and Pathan soldiers (supported by 5000 Indian auxilliaries) defeated  the Delhi sultanate army of Sultan Ibrahim Lodi which was a 100,000+ force (supported by 300 elephants).
 
The battle was also one of the first in history to use gunpowder and field artillery (by the Mughals), Babur had a park of 24 field artillery, supported by matchlock arquebusiers which/whom he placed behind wagons in the centre of the field with cavalry on the wings. The Lodi army was devastated by the Mughal firepower and then routed by the cavalry charging from the wings.
 
The battle led to the foundation of the Mughal Empire that dominated the subcontinent for the next two hundred years until its decline in the 18th century which coincided with the rise of British dominance.
 
There were also two further battles, no less important in different ways, (1556) and (1761), the former was fought against the Afghan Suri dynasty, after the 'Suri interegnum' that ruled most of northern India in the period 1540-1555 to restore the Mughal state by the young Akbar and his regent Bairam Khan.
 
The latter, in 1761, was a massive encounter between the Afghan Empire under Ahmad Shah Durrani, supporting the weak Mughal Imperial remnants against the Maratha Empire. The Marathas were utterly defeated in this epic battle, and their power was broken for over 10 years. However the Afghans did not stay to consolidate their gains, leaving the Mughal Empire to continue to wither away and this led to a power vaccum in India that was filled by the British East India Company.
Back to Top
Tashfin View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tashfin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 22:36
^ That is two further battles in Panipat, the second battle (1556) and the third (1761). So three epic and decisive battles fought on the same field.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2011 at 23:48
Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Originally posted by Anton Anton wrote:

Originally posted by Seko Seko wrote:

and that will cost you troll!


Achtung! Double standards detected :)


A glaring double standard alright. Just be honest, give the banning reason as 'we don't like you'.


Posting irrelevant music clips in serious threads as well as derailing nearly every one he participates in, harassing several of our members via PM even when asked to stop, continued ad hominem attacks in response to serious points of discussion, name calling members of staff directly after being warned....

opus well and truly had it coming.

But hey, thanks for your vote of confidence in our efforts to stop people polluting this forum because they want to behave like a hyperactive 6 year old.


Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
Kaveh ye Ahangar

Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Location: MidX,Engelistan
Status: Offline
Points: 12490
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2011 at 00:52
Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Originally posted by Anton Anton wrote:

Originally posted by Seko Seko wrote:

and that will cost you troll!


Achtung! Double standards detected :)


A glaring double standard alright. Just be honest, give the banning reason as 'we don't like you'.


Nothing against Op but just but to suggest Alp Arslan is a Norse name...
"There was glory in pissing, Corabb decided as he watched the stream curve out and make that familiar but unique sound as it hit the ground." So true.
Back to Top
Seko- View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11686
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seko- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2011 at 01:13
I will add that Opus is a character and brought amusement to some of us along with harassment. Now if someone has a better idea for discipline then let me know what that is. I surely think a ban will diminish the trolling, harassment, irrelevant postings and ad hominem attacks from one particular member. This is a good way to maintain the forum's integrity too. In addition, I see this is an issue for the usual suspects. Likability has no part to play in this though it doesn't hurt. Abiding by our rules does however.
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3602
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2011 at 05:09
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Originally posted by Anton Anton wrote:

Originally posted by Seko Seko wrote:

and that will cost you troll!


Achtung! Double standards detected :)


A glaring double standard alright. Just be honest, give the banning reason as 'we don't like you'.


Nothing against Op but just but to suggest Alp Arslan is a Norse name...

Well, alp-arsle does mean mountain-arse, but I guess that's not what he meant..
Back to Top
Seko- View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11686
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seko- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2011 at 05:32
Nice. Shades of the Chronicles of Narnia. The next movie should be called the Norse Code - starring the Alp Arslan (Mountain Lion) brother of Aslan.



Edited by Seko - 20 Apr 2011 at 05:32
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2011 at 00:42
We've had a statement with respect to the Indian sub-continent and Panipat (in whichever of its manifestations) as a "battle that changed History". Did it? One could simply assert that the encounter changed dynasties but did little to change the substance of what came after as a reflection of what was before. Is there not really a problem with methodology in viewing battles as catalysts for change rather than as confirmation of illusory objectives that go against more important Historical forces? One of course could posit that Midway and D-Day did change the socio-political character of the United States in that it transformed a rather introspective society into the advocate of policies that were once anathema to ingrained outlooks.  

Edited by drgonzaga - 21 Apr 2011 at 01:18
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Tashfin View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tashfin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2011 at 01:13

In terms of Panipat, once can argue that it marked a significant change in regional history. Prior to the Mughals the sub-continent was divided between an ailing Sultanate of Delhi and various regional powers such as the Rajputs, Gujarat etc. The Mughal Empire led  to greater unity based on the establishment of a more unifrom and cohesive administration than which had been seen before, the legacy of which continued well after the decline of the Mughal state and into the period of Company Rule.

Maybe Plassey and Buxar were more 'history changing' in that they heralded the complete  change in the balance of power from 'local' forces to those of a foreign/western colonial power, in fact, in essense a corporate body representing that power.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 08 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2011 at 01:27
Originally posted by Tashfin Tashfin wrote:

Though mentioned in another thread, the Battle of Megiddo in 1918 was also very decisive and arguably shaped the history of the modern Middle East. It can be said that the Ottomans army was demoralised and exhausted before Allenby's onslaught, but the far reaching effects of the battle certainly can be felt even till today.
 
The battle was insignificant. The Turks were already retreating everywhere and the British simply to make this faster by attacking.
 
Even if the Turks won this battle the war was over.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
Kaveh ye Ahangar

Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Location: MidX,Engelistan
Status: Offline
Points: 12490
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2011 at 02:12
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Originally posted by Anton Anton wrote:

Originally posted by Seko Seko wrote:

and that will cost you troll!


Achtung! Double standards detected :)


A glaring double standard alright. Just be honest, give the banning reason as 'we don't like you'.


Nothing against Op but just but to suggest Alp Arslan is a Norse name...

Well, alp-arsle does mean mountain-arse, but I guess that's not what he meant..


  Cyrus etymology!  Turkic is a branch of Nordic which is a branch of Germanic which is ultimately of course, a branch of Iranic.


"There was glory in pissing, Corabb decided as he watched the stream curve out and make that familiar but unique sound as it hit the ground." So true.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.110 seconds.