Historian Reacts - Top 20 Battles That Changed History

Check out the VTH Podcast

#History #reaction

00:00 Introduction
02:02 Actium
04:28 Yorktown
07:00 Badr
08:34 Cannae
10:20 Hattin
11:56 Adwa
13:30 Vienna 1683
16:18 Constantinople
17:31 Hsupeng
19:11 Orleans
22:08 Tours
23:50 The Somme
25:39 Gettysburg
27:48 Cajamarca
29:08 Waterloo
31:03 Hastings
32:15 Marathon
33:39 Gaugamela
36:40 Stalingrad

[CHIP]

Trafalgar needs to be there. It ensures British domination of the seas so that it can’t be invaded from Napoleon or the Nazis as well as itself controlling its colonies for over a century afterwards

[ishanp]

Siege of Baghdad by Gengis Khan’s forces which at that time was like London of the 19th century. It effectively ended the Islamic Golden Age and opened the door for the West to the Mongolians HAS to be a top 3 battle. If anyone is interested, look into it. Honestly it’s beyond insane.

[BlakeWR]

I believe the Battle of Trafalgar deserved a mention. It was really the only time Napolean was beaten at or near the height of his power in a straight up battle. It also secured Britain's stranglehold of the seas and ensured their dominance of it for the next 140 years.

[tomphillips]

I love how the narrator nails "Tours" and "Martel", but completely Americanizes "Orleans".

[dirk]

Although Waterloo was absolutely a great battle, I'd put much more importance on the battle of Leibzig.

[Adila]

One battle I would add would be the naval Battle of Tsushima in 1905. Imperial Russia was humiliated and Japan gained a lot of prestige and influence in Asia. Arguably also led to Japan's hubris and defeat in WW2.

[emilocfc]

For me the Battle of Austerlitz (Battle of the three emperors) for me is so high on my list, because it displayed how much advanced the french army was ahead of everyone else, and it literally was the decisive battle that ended the Holy Roman Empire which had existed for more than 1000 years!

[JPISME]

I’m surprised battle of Alesia wasn’t mentioned. Brought Gaul under Roman control and made Caesar the hero who had the support to cross the rubicon.

[stokerino]

When I think of Cannae I don't just think of its immediate influence on Rome, but also how much it has influenced military strategy down the centuries as leaders have studied it and been inspired to try and recreate it. Not to say that some other victory-against-the-odds wouldn't have been just have lauded had Cannae not happened, but it has something of a unique pedestal in history.

[brianhall]

I think there's a difference between "if it had gone differently" and "COULD it have gone differently." Some of these kinda feel like they were always leaning in one direction and that there was less of a chance of it ACTUALLY being different.

[christopherfleming]

The French relief of the Siege of Orleans took place in May of 1429. The Battle of Agincourt took place in 1415 and Henry V died in 1422, fourteen and seven years before Orleans respectively. The significance of the French victory was that it shattered the myth of invincibility that had surrounded the English since Agincourt.

[mikecoe]

The battle of Cannae is important both from a military history perspective but also from a geo political perspective. After the battle, the Romans were terrified that the Carthaginian army could simply walk into Rome, so they completely changed how their society works to prepare a defense. It’s outrageously significant for the modern world.

[samrevlej]

There's a reason I find top 10s historically pointless, although entertaining to watch and discuss, especially with battles. Singular events like battles are always surrounded in context, and it's difficult to separate them from that context to compare and contrast them with others. Instinctively we think that modern battles like Stalingrad or Ludendorff's offensive in 1918 are more important to world history than Actium, but we're informed by our recency bias. When we think of one decisive battle in the Napoleonic Wars, we think of Waterloo because it's the final one, but we've been influenced by generations of European romantics, French and other, magnifying a confrontation that was essentially, as you've said, already decided in Russia.

Also, WatchMojo is just pretty bad.

(This is not a judgement on your part for your choice of video, your commentary is always great and deepens the discussion; this is just a personal taste of mine.)

Anyway, thank you for your work, as always.

[andreaspapaioannou]

The fall of Constantinople in 1453 was going to happen anyways but the sack of Constantinople by the crusaders in 1204 was what doomed the empire they never recovered

[arnie]

The Marian reforms had more impact on the Roman Army operationally and tactically than Cannae did. While Cannae did seem to make Hannibal into a boogy man and was certainly worthy of study for any military man or historian I think Marius would still have reformed the army, then Caesar and then Augustus after ECT. The Roman army was constantly evolving

[ClawedAsh]

I feel like with the Battle of Tours, it can't be understated how the fact Charles Martel winning changed the landscape of Europe, partly due to it allowing his son, Pepin the Short, to become King of Francia, and his Grandson, Charlemagne, to become Emperor. Without Martel winning the Battle of Tours you don't get Charlemagne, whose own Empire, and its divisions, basically shaped European history. You can draw a line between how Charlemagne's Empire was divided and the rivalry between France and Germany throughout most of European history

[joshuawindsor-knox]

If I had to go with one battle from the Western Front of WW1 I would go with the First Battle of Marne, if the Germans won they at bare minimum would be able to place Paris under siege and more than likely they would capture it. I don't know if it ends the Western Front but France would be far weaker and I think if Germany wins at the Marne they probably win WW1.

[cuso]

I think it is a bit unfair that counting battle of Tours while discounting siege of Constantinople. It is true that losing Constantinople would not lead Umayyad conquering the whole Europe. But neither battle of Tours will. Umayyad at this point was at its peak. If they took Constantinople, they might conquer most of east Roman Empire easily. That is a huge chunk of Eastern and Southern Europe. Given that Umayyad invested way more resources in the front against East Roman than Iberian front, lost of Constantinople might lead to a quick conquest in Balkan at least. That would be an Ottoman Empire 700 years earlier. And speaking of importance of Constantinople at that time. I think it is the last bastion of Byzantium as they lost all eastern territory and its Balkan province was constantly under raid of Umayyad and Slavs. Losing the city would strip their economic and military capability to further defend against any foreign enemy.

[scyven]

The battle on the forest moon of Endor..pretty big 👍

[analysisbychris]

The Battle of Salamis deserves to be up there! I appreciate that they gave a shoutout to multiple pivotal battles in the Greco-Persian Wars, but I think the Greek navies' success at Salamis against the Persians matches or even succeeds that of the land campaign. It changed the political map but also led directly to the spread of Greek culture and seeds of democracy. Without a dominant Athenian naval empire, Greek culture doesn't spread far and wide.

I also would consider Dunkirk – the consequences are way more debatable, but as we know the German victory was 100% pyrrhic. If the Panzers had simply kept rolling and crushed the British Expeditionary Force... who knows?