Print Page | Close Window

Famous Battles! -> Post Your Favourite

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: All Battles Project
Forum Discription: Forum for the All Battles military history project
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=16956
Printed Date: 01-Dec-2021 at 15:44
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Famous Battles! -> Post Your Favourite
Posted By: alexandruu
Subject: Famous Battles! -> Post Your Favourite
Date Posted: 06-Jan-2007 at 07:19
Hello
 
I was thinking about structuring the info about the great battles of history through this post.
 
My idea is that each of us could very briefly describe his favorite battle, and, at the end of each week, the other forumers will choose one single battle to be presented in full detail. After that, the writer will receive grades, concerning his literary style, variety of information, and novelty of his approach.
 
Ex:
 
Contantinius briefly presents the battle of Manzikert,
Cezar - the battle of Tapae,
I briefly present the battle of Thermopylae
 
After a week, most of the forumers choose Tapae, and Cezar starts writing a most-appealing scenario about that military encounter, his story getting various grades from the readers.
 
What say you ? 



Replies:
Posted By: Ikki
Date Posted: 06-Jan-2007 at 10:28
I present the Battle of La Matanza de Acentejo-1494, the greatest defeat of the spaniards in their oversea expansion LOL

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


Posted By: konstantinius
Date Posted: 06-Jan-2007 at 20:00
I present the Battle Of The Standard, fought on 22 August 1138, between an invading Scottish army under the leadership of King David I and a conglomeration of Anglo-Norman forces under Thurstan, Archibishop of York. Not a large or particularly famous battle, but one I'm well familiar with since I've researched it for table-top, miniature wargaming purposes.   

-------------
" I do disagree with what you say but I'll defend to my death your right to do so."


Posted By: Ikki
Date Posted: 06-Jan-2007 at 20:32
Time ago alexandruu there were a post similar to this (in fact, hundreds althought less originals), where each forumer provide with good info about their favourite battle. Of course, all the great battles was presented. Demons what i'm saying! The new generations have the right of open this type of post, like others do before us LOL

But excuse me if i presented a less known event, isn't a joke but a trully interest.


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


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 06-Jan-2007 at 23:09
I present the Battle of Ilipa. Over 50,000 Carthaginians and Allies under Hasdrubal Gisgo up against about 45,000 Romans and Spanish under Publius Scipio (Africanus). A definitive victory would all but end Scipio's campaign in Iberia and greatly further the Carthaginian standing in the 2nd Punic War. Scipio wins an absolutely outstanding victory, baffling Hasdrubal before the forces had even engaged. 


Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 07-Jan-2007 at 00:21
Can we also include sieges?


Posted By: last_janissary
Date Posted: 07-Jan-2007 at 06:58
Conquest of İstanbul...

-------------
http://www.ilkerozer.net



Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 07-Jan-2007 at 15:53
Originally posted by Penelope

Can we also include sieges?
Of course; if it is your favorite battle.


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 08-Jan-2007 at 09:06
Have we determined when 'the end of the week' is? i.e. When are we going to decide on who elaborates on their chosen battle? So far, my choice for the battle to be presented in more detail would have to be The Battle of the Standard presented by Konstantinius. 


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 08-Jan-2007 at 12:59
Originally posted by Knights

Have we determined when 'the end of the week' is? i.e. When are we going to decide on who elaborates on their chosen battle? So far, my choice for the battle to be presented in more detail would have to be The Battle of the Standard presented by Konstantinius. 
 
Well, I guess it would be best to set our time according to the first post - Ikki's, on the 6th of January.
 
So, let the battles pouring in until the 11th of January, and we'll decide which one will be thouroughly described until the 13th; the winner will post his story on the 13th or 14th. 
 
By the way, if I'll get to write a storym, I'm going to tell you about the battle of Vaslui - 1475 - where at least 100.000 Ottomans faced 50.000 Moldavians at the most.


Posted By: Slick
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2007 at 02:26
I present the Battle of Sekigahara, where Tokugawa Ieyasu decisively defeated Ishida Mitsunari in the struggle for conquest of Japan.


-------------
"Dai Ichi Dai Man Dai Kichi"


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2007 at 08:33
Gentlemen, please make your choice.
 
I choose the battle of Illipa, to be story-told by Knights.
 


Posted By: Ikki
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2007 at 11:33
My vote for the Battle of Standard presented by Konstantinous.

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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2007 at 12:11
I vote for the Battle of Standard.

I would present the Battle of Kalka where a Mongol force defeated a gathered force from all Rus states (at least from most).


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


Posted By: ulrich von hutten
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2007 at 14:29
Sorry, but you may know my point of view.
 
The most important battle ever, was the battle at the fields of the stupidity.
Where the truth, sincerity, respect were fighting against the honor, religion, arragonce and ignorance. the first named obviously lost this fight.


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

http://imageshack.us">


Posted By: Ikki
Date Posted: 16-Jan-2007 at 17:30
oh ulrich you know that you are fighting a very hard war

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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2007 at 13:17
All right, gentlemen,  the winner is...
 
Konstantinius !,
 
with the battle of Standard.
 
Konstantinius, please write a detailed story about the battle, and we will give grades after that.
 
Can't wait ! Clap


Posted By: konstantinius
Date Posted: 17-Jan-2007 at 19:17
Roger that. Report to be posted by end of this weekend (sorry, school started today, situation a little chaotic). Question: should I post on this thread, under "Medieval Europe", or on a separate thread under "Military History". Cheers, thanks for the honors. 

-------------
" I do disagree with what you say but I'll defend to my death your right to do so."


Posted By: AlbinoAlien
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2007 at 11:13

hmmm for those of us that are a little *coughs* new to the battle please give a bit of background to it?|



-------------
people are the emotions of other people


(im not albino..or pale!)

.....or an alien..


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2007 at 11:47
Originally posted by AlbinoAlien

hmmm for those of us that are a little *coughs* new to the battle please give a bit of background to it?|

 
We'll be waiting for Konstantinius's post regarding the battle. I think it belongs on the Medieval History forum. We'll talk about it there, and then go back to the Military History page for the next battle.
 
 


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2007 at 13:05
No, I'd suggest you to post it on this topic. Would keep things all here, easy to see and read.



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


Posted By: konstantinius
Date Posted: 20-Jan-2007 at 01:42
So, here is OK with everyone then?

-------------
" I do disagree with what you say but I'll defend to my death your right to do so."


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 20-Jan-2007 at 05:30
Yeh that's fine...go aheadSmile


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 21-Jan-2007 at 07:58
Yep, you should go ahead already...

And post it here then.


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


Posted By: konstantinius
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2007 at 03:20

                                         The Battle of the Standard, 22 August 1138

 

            King Henry I of England died heirless in Normandy on 1 December 1135. Twice before his death Henry had extracted an oath from his leading barons and clergy that they should respect the rights of his daughter Mathilda—widow of emperor Henry V and presently wife of Count Geoffrey of Anjou—to the succession of the English throne. It is pointless to discuss here the legal implications of an oath extracted in the 12th c., an era where the rules of inheritance where just beginning to become formalized. Whatever the case might be Stephen, Count of Boulogne, nephew of Henry I and a grandson of William the Conqueror, decides to disregard his own oath, leaves Normandy for England, and is crowned de facto king of said country in London by William, archbishop of Canterbury on 22 December 1135. This arbitrary coronation will not be recognized by a large number of the English and Norman barons. Whether this is done out of a sense of legitimacy and obligation to their oath or the nobility’s self-serving ambition is beyond the scope of this short essay. The fact of the matter is that for the remaining 19 years of Stephen’s reign England will be ravaged by annual conflicts along the width and breadth of the country that will pit Stephen and the forces of the crown against Empress Mathilda, the Angevine camp, and their supporters in England and Normandy.

           Within the context of this wider conflict David, King of the Scots, invades the northern English counties in 1136 in the interest of the Empress but is  induced to negotiations and the signing of an agreement by the arrival in the north of king Stephen at the head of a formidable array. Displaying the same ease with which Stephen had violated his own oath to king Henry, King David will nevertheless return to the north of England in April of 1138, besiege the castle at Wark with part of his force, and proceed to lay waste most of Northumberland and the land around Durham. These deprivations of the country-side and its folk are lamented in the chronicles of Richard of Hexham who interestingly describes the Scots as “pagans” and “heathen”. This perhaps can be understood if we keep in mind that Richard is the prior at Hexham, whose own church is apparently violated and pillaged by the “ruffian Picts”. The implication here is clear: such men who violate some monasteries and extort blood money from others—the monastery at Tynemouth having been obliged to pay twenty-seven marks of silver in order to avoid the fate dealt at Hexham—cannot possibly be Christians, regardless how Christianized their names and their king’s court might be. With king Stephen tied up fighting the barons in the south of England, the Scottish host will continue their ineffective siege of Wark throughout the Spring and early Summer, having been augmented in strength by the defection of a prominent Norman, Eustace fitz John,and his forces to the Scottish standard, as well as levies from the west of the Pennines—the old kingdom of Strathclyde. With his forces thus increased, King David will turn over the siege at Wark to the turncoat fitz John and proceed south, reaching the line of the Tees sometime in mid-August. Here he is further reinforced with Picts from Galloway his army now reaching considerable strength for the era; however we must assume that it is much less than the 26,000 mentioned in the chronicles of Richard of Hexham—even half as many is probably still a little too big for the standards of the time. What about the English response to the threat from the north? Up to this point the highlight of English resistance seems to be the spirited defense of Wark by its garrison under the leadership of its gifted commander Jordan de Bussey whose determined efforts “set at naught and rendered useless all of the king’s—David—endeavors”. The first action is taken not by a military person but by Archbishop Thurstan of York who summons a council of local magnates attended by prominent Norman tenants of the English crown such as Ilbert de Lacy, William de Percy, Count William of Aumale as well as Scots such as Robert Bruce and Bernard de Balliol. Apparently during this council the Archbishop called for something close to a religious crusade against the barbarous Scots who up to this point have been ravaging the country-side and desecrating its religious shrines. The barons, heartened by the words of the Archbishop and the arrival of a small contingent of troops sent by King Stephen as reinforcements, decide to fight. The English host assembles at York and consists of the feudal mounted contingents of the barons as well as the civic militias of York, Beverley, and Rippon. The religious nature of the whole enterprise is reinforced by the three great banners hoisted on a wagon that flew over the entire English host: the banners of St. Peter of York, St. John of Beverley, and St. Wilfred of Rippon. The army will set out from York marching north along the Great North Road as far as Thirsk where an attempt will be made to reach a compromise with the Scottish king. The Scots, being in position to acquire the entire Northumberland by force, reject the English offer. It is now that further Norman reinforcements will arrive from Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire—presumably the mounted contingents of the barons in command—lead by Robert de Ferrers and William Peverel, a veteran of Henry I’s campaigns to pacify his own barons—another example of the strange mixing-up of allegiances and nationalities to be encountered on both sides of the conflict. There is not a single reference as to the numbers involved in the English army but we assume that they are roughly equal to that of their opponents. Upon receiving word from scouts that the Scots are moving south, the unknown overall commander of the northern English army orders the array to break camp and march out from Thirsk on the night of the 21st. Since the battle starts in the early hours of the 22nd we can asses, based on conjecture alone, that perhaps the English embark on a forced night march through dense fog in order to surprise the unsuspecting Scottish host and thus gain a tactical advantage. At any rate, the Scots either had warning of the English advance or had themselves set off as early as their adversaries because no such surprise is achieved. Whatever the case might be, both armies are now set on a collision course along the Great North Road, certain to run into each other in a few hours’ time. The English will arrive first on the battlefield and start deploying some time before 6 am on the 22nd to the right of the road along the crest of a flanking hill. How long the deployment takes is lost in historical obscurity—i.e. lack of sources. Richard of Hexham informs us in regards to the English order of battle that “The greater part of the knights, then dismounting, became foot soldiers, a chosen body of whom, interspersed with archers, were arranged in the front rank.” The Hexham chronicler goes on to relate that the remainder of the knights and barons are arranged in a sort of guarde d’ honor around the wagon-standard which is positioned on the very top of the hill and behind the main formation in order to provide an obvious point of inspiration and rallying for the troops: “Some of them soon erected, in the center of a frame which they brought, the mast of a ship, to which they gave the name of the Standard; whence those lines of Hugh Sotevagina, archdeacon of York: Our gallant stand by all confest,/ Be this the Standard’s fight;/ Where death or victory the test,/ that proved the warrior’s might.”  It is reasonable to assume—Oman and Beeler also seem to concur on this—that the English formed a deep, dismounted rectangle with knights/archers on the front ranks, the rest of the knights around the Standard in the middle, and the shire levies on the flanks and behind them. About 400 yards to the rear and on the reverse slope a small number of knights were placed to guard the horses of the now dismounted Anglo-Normans. The disposition of the English deployment is totally defensive and makes clear that this is a stance on their part with no intention to pursuit a victorious outcome.

            King David and his army arrive shortly thereafter and begin to deploy under the gaze of their enemies across the road. Initially, the Scottish king plans to match the English deployment by dismounting his own knights, place them in the front rank and, supported by archers behind, use them as an armored fist to punch a hole in the Northumbrian formation which then could be exploited by his lesser-armored but furiously impetuous Galwegian and Pictish warbands. The Picts from Galloway, however, are having none of this: they insistently demand that they be put in the front line despite their total lack of armor and heavy weapons. Their claims to their ancient right of occupying the very center of the attacking formation must be so vociferous that eventually King David reluctantly and with great irritation has to concede to a very unusual development in the annals of ancient/medieval combat: a complete re-deployment in the field of battle and in the presence of the formed ranks of the enemy army. One cannot help but wonder what thoughts must have been going on in the minds of the individuals in the Anglo-Norman ranks as they watch their opponents shuffle and shove on the plain below them. A mounted charge by the Anglo-Norman cavalry followed by a general advance of the whole army might have wreaked havoc amongst the disorganized Scottish ranks; however no such action is undertaken—presumably the re-organization of the English army in order to charge might have taken as long as that of their opponents—and finally the Scots will organize in three distinct groups: in the center the wild Galwegians intermixed with some archers for support; the right wing is commanded by the king’s son Henry and it seems to have been intended as the main striking force. It comprises of the levies from Cumbria, some archers, as well as the majority of the English and Norman knights from the Lowlands. It seems probable that these latter remain mounted. The left wing is made up entirely of Lowland and western Highlands foot while King David, in an unusual for the era move, maintains a reserve directly behind the main line consisting of the crack knights of his own bodyguard—now dismounted to match their Norman counterparts on the hill, including the King himself—plus foot from Moray and the eastern Highlands. Thus arranged, and at a predisposed command, the Scottish host will start to slowly move forward towards the hill. The battle opened with a charge uphill of the Pictish center to the accompaniment of wild screams and yells. Though the archers among them must have taken a tremendous toll, the impetus of the charge carries them all the way up the hill to the English line and for a moment a penetration is made; however, the mailed Norman knights seem to have repulsed the initial charge and now the Galwegians retreat back down-slope. Time and again the Highlanders will charge the English line with the same fatal results. At this point in the battle, and seemingly at no orders from anyone, Prince Henry launches the Scottish right wing against the English left. The cavalry will outdistance its infantry support, crash into the line of the shire levies behind the knights, cut their way through them, and emerge greatly diminished in numbers at the back of the northerner’s line. Here a critical opportunity is missed by the Scots: had the knights reined in and attacked from behind, the Northumbrians could have broken. But instead the Scottish cavalry will head straight ahead towards the picketed horses and the small horse guard that lays 400 yards behind the main English line. In the meantime the English will close their ranks and repulse Henry’s infantry who are now, panting and out of breath, finally coming to blows with their enemies. Henry and his few remaining knights, realizing that the opportunity has been lost and in order to get away, will throw away their insignia and mingle with their opponents from whom they are indistinguishable in arms and equipment. Meanwhile the Galwegians in the center are in head-long retreat having lost both their chiefs, Donald and Ulgerich; the Scottish infantry on the right will soon follow them after their half-hearted attempt to keep up with Henry’s impetuous cavalry. The day is now lost for the Scots. King David will order his reserve forward—way too late to have any real impact on the battle--only to find himself deserted by the infantry who, having witnessed the fate of their center and right, have no stomach for any further fighting: they simply turn around and begin to withdraw from the field. Soon the king and his Anglo-Norman bodyguard will be the only Scottish forces left on the field. Seeing the hopelessness of their situation, they’ll send for their horse, mount, and depart. By 9 am it is all over. The defensive disposition of the English deployment is the only thing that prevents a general slaughter of the Scottish army: there will be no attempt to pursuit and the disorganized Scots will be allowed to fall back towards Carlisle with all semblance of organization gone from their ranks. Had the English pursuit, few of the invaders would ever see their homes again. Casualties among the English seem to have been insignificant with only one man of note having been killed, a brother of Ilbert de Lacy.

            From the point of view of the military historian this is a battle of lost opportunities for the Scots: twice King David failed to commit the reserve at critical points during the battle, first upon the initial penetration of the Galwegians and secondly after Prince Henry managed to break through the English line with his knights. Had the reserve been committed then against the shaken English line or had the Scottish cavalry turned to hit from behind instead of going for the horses, the outcome would be unknown. What would have happened had King David followed his initial deployment plan also lies in the realm of conjecture; instead, the battle commenced with courageous but undisciplined charges against heavy infantry with missile support entrenched on high ground: rarely the recipe for success in a situation like this. On the other hand the battle is a testimony to the fact that eleventh and twelfth century Normans were not committed to always fighting on horseback and were likely to adopt the tactical disposition that best suited the particular situation.

            As an aftermath, and since the English army disbands quickly after the battle despite the few casualties, King David will rejoin his forces who are still besieging Wark. The garrison reaches such severe straights from the ongoing siege that by the beginning of November the only provisions left within Wark consist of one live horse and one preserved in salt. Recognizing the impossibility of the situation the lord of the place, Walter Espec, orders the garrison to surrender and the heroic defenders are allowed to leave the castle under arms in recognition of their valiant efforts at defending the place. The fact that King David lost a major pitched battle but still managed to reorganize the Anglo-Scottish frontier to his favor—on the other end of the border the town and castle of Carlisle are also in Scottish hands by virtue of the treaty of 1136-- testify towards the inadequacy of the Anglo-Norman fortifications along the northern border as well as the extent of King Stephen’s involvement in the south. In 1139, and in order to pacify his northern neighbor, King Stephen will grant King David’s son Henry all of Northumberland with the exception of the castles at Bamborough and Newcastle. The situation will remain as such in the north until an energetic Henry II will take advantage of the minority of the Scottish king Malcolm IV—son of David I who dies in 1153—to restore English ownership of Northumberland, Cumbria, and Westmoreland as well as regain the key fortress of Carlisle all of which had been extracted from Stephen at the height of his difficulties during the civil wars.

 

 

 

 

 

                                              Works Cited List:

 

Beeler, John. Warfare in England, 1066-1189. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1966.

 

Stevenson, Joseph. “Richard of Hexham’s Battle of the Standard”. http://www.deremilitari.org/ - www.deremilitari.org .  01/22/07. http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/hexham - http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/hexham

 

Gravett, Chrisropher. Norman Stone Castles: Europe 950-1204. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2004

 



-------------
" I do disagree with what you say but I'll defend to my death your right to do so."


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2007 at 03:54
Thank you Konstantinius for that great detailed look at the Battle of the Standard - it is an interesting read. Clap. I guess that marks the beginning of a new week of Battle/Siege presentations by members. We'll see who gets voted to do a detailed account this time.
So to commence, I present the Arausio.  Two  mighty Germanic Tribes of  about 200,000 met a Roman Army of 80,000 legionnaires(+20-30,000 auxiliaries. A massive Roman defeat was the outcome, with over 100,000 Romans dead. This is arguably the highest Roman loss of lives in a single day's battle.

- Knights -


Posted By: Slick
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2007 at 04:25
Well, if we can choose another one then I'll pick the 'Battle of Chi Bi [Red Cliffs].' It was the most decisive battle of China's Three Kingdoms period, and was fought between the forces of Cao Cao, Sun Quan and Liu Bei.
 
I'll wait to see what other battles people post, although Arausio seems interesting, especially given how decisive a defeat it appears to be for the Romans...
 
And now I read the Battle of the Standard. :)
 
Heh, uphill charges are never a good idea. Clap


-------------
"Dai Ichi Dai Man Dai Kichi"


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2007 at 11:13
Well, as far as I know, Teutoburg and Cannae have been considered as the 'most romans died in a single day events'.

But Arausio sounds good (my vote).

I would however present Kulikovo where the fate of Serbia was decided.


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


Posted By: Praetor
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2007 at 11:45
I'm afraid you are only half right Rider (assuming we discount Byzantine battles) Cannae and  Arausio are the two worst Roman defeats in terms of sheer number of men lost( Teutoburg's importance is far greater than the sum of Roman's killed though). Though I have heard varying estimates for Arausio many are as Knights said over a 100000.........As for Teutoburg there weren't even 30000 Romans at Teutoburg!

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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2007 at 12:52
Well, Teutoburg was a devastating day to the Empire.. far more devastating....


And Carrhae as well. Forgot that one.


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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2007 at 15:23
Konstantinius told us a great story. A battle that I have never heard about until now.
 
The next battle will be selected until the 27th of January. Please hold your votes until all the "competitors" are in.
 
I'll be writing about the battle of Varna, during which the Polish king Wladislaw IIIrd faced the menacing lines of the Ottoman army. 


Posted By: Ikki
Date Posted: 22-Jan-2007 at 17:17
Originally posted by konstantinius

                                  

...



Wohah!!! Great knostantinius, i recommend put a few images and imself will call to the administrators for launch this review to our magazine as article, great work!


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


Posted By: Praetor
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2007 at 00:05
Originally posted by rider

Well, Teutoburg was a devastating day to the Empire.. far more devastating....


As I said the importance of Teutoburg is far greater than the sum of all the Roman casualties from the battle. However it is clearly incorrect to say it was one of the two bloodiest battles in Roman history.


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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 23-Jan-2007 at 14:32
Well, I as an editor would say that the Military forum is too busy a place to launch it as a full part of the Magazine. We could however incorporate it into the Main Site, if you wish so Konstantinius.

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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 25-Jan-2007 at 12:15
Ok,
So far, we have 
 
- battle of Arausio
- battle of Chi Bi
- battle of  Varna and
- battle of Kulikovo
 
Anybody else in the contest ?


Posted By: konstantinius
Date Posted: 26-Jan-2007 at 18:23
If no one else enters another option, I vote for Arausio. And I'll be honored if my small  article is used wherever deemed appropriate by the mods. So, Rider, you have complete permission to post it anywhere on the site that it will seem to fit. Cheers.

-------------
" I do disagree with what you say but I'll defend to my death your right to do so."


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 27-Jan-2007 at 02:59
Thanks, Konstantinius (a difficult name to spell.... missed it three times).

As I said already, Arausio is where my vote will go.


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


Posted By: Slick
Date Posted: 27-Jan-2007 at 03:31
I'll vote for Varna, actually. I don't know much about Poland's military history, although I've always liked those winged hussars they had...

-------------
"Dai Ichi Dai Man Dai Kichi"


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 27-Jan-2007 at 07:35
I'll put my vote on Kulikovo.
 
Let's count the votes and decide who is the winner Monday, the 29th. Is it ok ? 


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 27-Jan-2007 at 12:59
Okay it is.

BTW, do you all agree to the fact that all stories uploaded here would be uploaded on the Main Site and one each month published in the Magazine?


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


Posted By: Ikki
Date Posted: 27-Jan-2007 at 13:24
Originally posted by rider

Okay it is.

BTW, do you all agree to the fact that all stories uploaded here would be uploaded on the Main Site and one each month published in the Magazine?


No, all not, if somebody write a good quality article and people like you rider with "contacts" Wink see it, or the fellows propose any article because is good, i think that is a good idea that the editorial staff look the article (and decide), but automatically, no.


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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 27-Jan-2007 at 16:42
I am The Contact in reality...

But I suspect that the writings here will be automatically of good quality.


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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 28-Jan-2007 at 09:40
I also think that the chosen battles will be of very good quality; their posting onto the Magazine will be a prize for the writers.
 
Score until now:
 
Arausio - 2 votes
Kulikovo - 1 vote
Varna - 1 vote
 
Vote your favourite battle !


Posted By: Batu
Date Posted: 28-Jan-2007 at 14:55
i vote for Varna

-------------
A wizard is never late,nor he is early he arrives exactly when he means to :) ( Gandalf the White in the Third Age of History Empire Of Istari )


Posted By: Liudovik_Nemski
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2007 at 10:58
Battle of Adrianople on April 14,1205 A.D.

Several thousand soldiers dead along with 300 slaughtered european knights by the bulgars of Tzar Kaloyan.Plus-the latin emperor was captured and jailed in Turnovo.I've entered in his tower 2 times-it stil standsSmile.

Battle of Anchiallus August 20,917 A.D.

110 000 byzantines agains 70 000 bulgars.Casualties:70 000 byzantines,20 000 bulgars.It's called the battle of the century-The Byzantine historian Paulus Deacon says that 75 years after this military catastrophe the field at Anchialus was still covered with tens of thousands of Roman skeletons.

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


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2007 at 14:08
I'm all for Kulikovo at the momentWink

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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2007 at 14:10
Then Kulikovo, Varna and Arausio have two votes...

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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2007 at 14:28
Originally posted by rider

Then Kulikovo, Varna and Arausio have two votes...
Than. we'll be waiting for one final, decisive vote, until tommorow.


Posted By: Ikki
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2007 at 14:47
My vote for Varna, we have a strong legion of the polish-hungarian alliance in this forum, about this event only can be done a great article Thumbs%20Up



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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2007 at 15:19
Then it is Varna if no one decides to even the balance with either Kulikovo or Arausio. 

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


Posted By: pekau
Date Posted: 29-Jan-2007 at 16:02

One of the most awkard, bloody, confusing, and (leader-general conflict) of all time: Stalingrad.



-------------
http://swagbucks.com/refer/Malachi">      
   
Join us.


Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2007 at 03:32
Originally posted by rider

Then it is Varna if no one decides to even the balance with either Kulikovo or Arausio. 
Well, Varna is also the next battle in the "Hungarian battles topic". I am planing to post this week.


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2007 at 03:35
Varna it is then. We look forward to reading a wonderful description of the battle within, should we say the next week? No rush though. 

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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 30-Jan-2007 at 08:00
Thank you all very much. I'm going to post the story of Varna early next week.


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2007 at 10:57
Looking forward to it... Wait, this week or next week?

Perhaps we could start another round while you are writing?


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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2007 at 13:31
The idea was to keep everybody focused on a single moment in time, so I think that starting a new contest before this one's over would dilute the attention given to the story.


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 01-Feb-2007 at 14:57
Okay...

[the real idea for my post, was to bump the topic :d]


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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 05:48
 
The Battle of Varna - November 10th 1444
 
--------------
 
The story I'm about to tell is seldom given attention compared to other epic-battles of the High Middle Ages (Kosovopolje, Nicopolis, or Mohacs), but, as we are about to see, this event was a turning point, that sent shockwaves in time, shockwaves that were felt at the Second Battle of Kosovo in 1448, Constantinople in 1453, Vaslui in 1475, and even at Mohacs and Vienna in the early 16th century.  

The time was November 1444, and the gods demanded for blood. The ideal place to satisfy their bloodlust would have seemed to be the Balkans - the battleground of the ancient Greeks, Macedonians, Thracians, Sarmatians, Romans, and Bulgars, that was still a chessboard for famous battles. Any chessboard needs 2 high-kings, and this time the gods picked the Polish Vladislaw IIIrd and the Ottoman Murad IInd, 2 great men that lead huge kingdoms, and kept them by force. Given the importance of their showdown, we should take a closer look at their moral portraits and achievements. The Polish king was a very ambitious, powerfull character, that managed to maintain under his iron fist 2 great kingdoms - Poland and Hungary, thanks to his ancestry. He came to power when he was only 10, but the rigorous training and his overly-competitive edge made him a formidable opponent at only 21 years of age. The Turk was also a very capable leader, and, similar to his rival, came to power at a very early age. Murad IInd extended the borders of the Ottoman Empire, by annexing Anatolia and Serbia, and was determined to put Venice, Hungary, the Romanian Voievodates and even Poland under Muslim control. Inspiring power and resilience, this strong character will prove to be a rock to hard to brake by Wladislaw's courage.

Driven by his need for power, Wladislaw rallied an army to help him destroy the Ottoman threat in the Balkans. This army was a coalition of Poles, Hungarians, Rutens, Bulgarians, Walachians, Papal Knights, and others, suming up to 25.000 men. The Turkish response was to summon a very large army, of almost 100.000 warriors, to behead the Polish Dragon. The 2 massive forces moved slowly, like two giant land-beasts across the continent, until they finaly came face to face near the fortress of Varna (present-day Bulgaria), where they made the final battle preparations.

Before the battle, the king examined the enemy positions, and realised in horror that the Turks had at least 4 times more soldiers. That's why he called a meeting, in order to make the best decision regarding the battle. In the war room stood John Hunyady, the Cardinal Cesarini, Michael Szilagyi and the Polish King. While the Cardinal asked for a very defensive formation, Hunyady (who was by far the most experienced warrior in the room) replied that "To escape is impossible, to surrender is unthinkable. Let us fight with bravery and honor our arms".

Let us now dig deeper into the past, to find out what was the historical context of the battle. In the middle of the 15th century, the Ottoman empire was still at his dawn, and Europe was sank in intrigue and war, as usual. Poland was a very powerfull state, that greatly extended its influence after the victory of Grunewald, and, boosted by the new alliance with Hungary, was claiming the title as "the most powerfull state in Eastern Europe". The Turkish threat had been recognized earlier, after the defeat of the last crusade at the battle of Nicopolis. That is why the Pope Eugene IVth demanded new actions against "the infidels", and even financed attacks against the Ottoman-held fortresses and settlements in the South of the Danube river. The voice of the Pope commanded that the 10 years peace treaty signed between Hungary and the Turks in 1444 to only last for 5 months, and that the tides of war to ravage again the Balkans. The European plan was excellent - the Polish-led alliance would sweep the enemy of Bulgaria, Albania and Greece, while the Venetian fleet would deny the crossing of enemy reinforcements across the Bosphorus. Unfortunately, the plan failed miserably, and the Italian fleet (Genovese in fact) not only "missed" its goal, but also helped the Sultan's army to cross the strait. That's why, even before the battle started, dark clouds were gathered above Wladislaw's forces.

On the morning of November 10th 1444, the 2 armies lined up in front of the fortress of Varna, determined to obliterate the enemy. The mixed European forces were a very imbalanced mix of cavalry and infantry, the mounted troops making over 60% of the total force. On the right wing, the Christians placed the papal knights, Croatian soldiers, and German mercenaries, led by Cesarini and Jan Dominek of Varadin, while the left wing - consisted of Hungarian and German mercenaries, along with Romanians from Transylvania. The center was being held  by the King and Hunyady, with their knights.

The Turks had the fanatical janissary corps in the center (some 40.000 men), while azeps, akincis beslis and Spahs held the left wing. The right wing was comprised of kapikulu warriors and Spahis of Rumelia.  

The dark clouds that metaphoricaly gathered above Wladislaw's army became very real just before the battle started - in a dark irony, nature smashed against each other huge cloud formations, setting an apocalyptic scenery to a hellish battle.

Lightings pierced the skies, and thunders defeaned the soldiers, while heavy rain started whiping both Poles and Turks. While the storm was getting stronger, the Ottoman forces started advancing - it was the point of no return.

 The Chrsitians watched in terror as the firs tidal wave of akingis was larger than their entire army. The soldiers packed together, and awaited in fear the first charge. The Turks quickly passed over the muddy terrain, and engaged the left wing of the Polish army. Still, even if they had a huge number advantage (4:1 on that side), they were lacking in both offensive and defensive equipment. That's why, when the Chrstian cannons and handguns started firing, the achingii lost heart. The German mercenaries rained death upon them until they broke, and, as the wave started to dissipate, the victorious knights charged against the routing enemies. Fueled by and honor, the Germans and Italians slashed and guned down many of the Turkish attackers. But, the tides of war are almost never mono-valent. The Ottoman commander Kardza Bey charged the European forces from the flank, leading the light Arab cavalry and the Spahs detachment. The Turkish strike was like a hammer blow to the papal knights, who were swamped and slaughtered by the colossal numbers of enemies (over 10.000). Seeing that his chance hang by a thread, Wladislaw ordered the Walachian cavalry to engage the enemy. Immediately, the fast, powerfull horses from the Romanian stables, made their entry on the battlefield, and, just as the Turks surprised and routed the European mercenaries, they broke the back of the Anatolain Spakhs, and pursued the survivors into the Ottoman camp; they pillaged it, and than left the battle scene.
 
While the Romanian cavalry was engaging its Arab counterpart, the Christian right wing was under attack by both Turkish infantry and cavalry, that slowly bu surely consumed the Polish forces. That's why the king sent forward the knights of Joan Hunyady, while himself preparing for one final, desparate charge. Hunyady's men, clad in shining armour, with fire in their eyes and molten led in their veins, started an avalanche-like charge, that cut thrugh the enemy lines like a hot knife through butter. The heavily-armoured knights slashed their way through the Turkish flags, routing them almost instantly. The akincis, spakshs and beslii were running in terror as the Hungarian forces hunted them down mercilessly.
 
There was no escape. The horrified worshipers of Allah were destined to die that day. That's what Hunyady thought. That's what set the European soldier's hearts alight, that's what the Ottoman soldiers were afraid of, and, surely, that's what the King thought when he ordered the decisive charge of his own bodyguards against the enemy center. Clad in iron, riding on the best horses of Poland, descendants of the legendary Sarmatian knights, the King's guard was a view to remeber.
 
500 tons of steel and flesh roled, lances extended, against the frightened janissary corps. To better understand the effect of such a charge, we must bear in mind that the horses used were very heavy, their speed was high, and all that energy was concentrated in the knights spears. That's why when the Turkish soldiers felt the ground shaking under the King's charge, they must have seen him as a lightning bolt, cast among them. But, unlike normal lightning bolts, that only last a second, this one became more powerfull and deadlier by the minute. The knights, driven by a berskerker rage, cut large paths through the janissary lines, the king leading the way towards the Sultan's tent. Like tigers amongst wolves, the Poles caused rampage in their haste, disgorging the pride of the Turkish forces.
 
Wladislaw was at the peak of his power - the Romanian cavalry took the enemy camp, the Ottoman left wing was melting under Hunyady's hammer-blow charge, and the Janissaries started to route beneath his own devastating attack. it was as though the Archangel Michael had descended from Heaven, and stroke terror into the hearts of the infidels. The proud son of Wladislaw IInd and Sofia of Halshany appeared to be destined to rule an even larger empire, and to ascend to higher levels of glory. It looked like the Christian cross had beaten the Muslim Crescent Moon.
 
But the ways of the gods are not to be judged by the mortals. As in many events in history, this one took a completely different turn because of one single decision - that of the King to separate from his men, and to carve his path towards the Sultan. Wladislaw, already battered by spears and swords, was in a personal killing spree. He drove his horse faster than the other knights, and quickly got himself surrounded by the janissaries. Still griping his sword, the king hacked from right to left everything in his path, obsessed to find his eternal glory by spilling the blood of the Muslim leader. That's when the eyes of Kodza Hazar - one of the Turkish janissaries- crossed with those of the king. The Ottoman soldier pierced Wladislaw's horse with his spear, and, because of the sudden fall, the King felt helplessly to the ground. Hazar's eyes glowed as he stroke the fallen king with his sword, beheading him instantly. The death of the king sent ripples through his knights spines, and gave breath to the shattered Ottoman army. The Christians started to run in terror, and not even Hunyady couldn't re-organize the European forces.  In full dissaray, horrified by what would happen to them if the would be caught, they all fled the field.
 
The Christian Archangel gave way to his Islamic counterpart - the war-Angel Azrael, that  bloodlusted the spakhs and fanatized the janissaries to run all over the field, through mud, blood and water, to capture as many Christians as they could. And, indeed, over 3000 men were captured...

The storm ended as the last Christian knight was fleeing, and as the first tortures were being applied to the prisoners. The cruelty of the battle didn't compare to the sadism exhibited after it. Some knights were impaled, others were roasted or boiled alive. For 3 days, the prisoners suffered the worst tortures the Turks could conceive, rising the death toll of the Polish Alliance to over 13000 men.

Of course, the Turks had also suffered great loses, over 20.000 spaksh, achingii and beslii being killed. But that matters less. What matters the most is that the Ottoman army proved once again that it could stand against the best European forces, and that it is ready to assault the heart of Eastern Europe. The crushing victory of the Ottomans also symbolicaly proved that Islam had once again triumphed against Christianity.  

And so ends a story forged from ambition, fought with courage, and ended in hate and bloodlust. 

-------------------------
 
This is it. I should have given more details, but I lacked the time...
 


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 06:04
Originally posted by alexandruu

...Battle of Varna...
 
This is it. I should have given more details, but I lacked the time...
 

Don't worry, yet another exceptional description nevertheless. Well Done Alexandruu.

As for my battle this time, I am going to go with the Battle of Agincourt, 1415. Fought between the French force under Charles D'Ablret and the outnumbered and dysentery-ravaged English Army of Henry V. May I alarm you though, if mine is selected for the detailed response in the end, I will need at least a week to complete the overview. Thanks.

- Knights -


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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 14:41
I would suggest the choice of Kulikovo for the second time.

Good review, Alexandruu.

And Alex (K.), you might write it immediately, then you don't have to wait with it. If it isn't selected... I get it (Mag).


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


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 14:45
OK. I think I shall vote for Kulikovo as I did last time - I am intent on getting this battle reviewed, and by Rider! This is subject to unlikely change, but for now, Kulikovo. I'll start putting together a plan, in case mine does get chosen. 

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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 04-Feb-2007 at 14:48
Originally posted by Knights

OK. I think I shall vote for Kulikovo as I did last time - I am intent on getting this battle reviewed, and by Rider! This is subject to unlikely change, but for now, Kulikovo. I'll start putting together a plan, in case mine does get chosen. 


Lol... I have it written you know... so the next time I log in after the final yes vote, it is up and for reading..


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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 06:20
Pekau,
 
this is not a usual thread about great battles. In here, each of us very briefly presents a story, and, if it is voted by the other forumers, it is enlarged.
 
If you would like to wirte about a batle, be kind and wait until all the votes are in. If your brief story (by brief story I mean 2 rows max) has the most votes, we will gladly read it and talk about it.
 
Until than, please don't post any more full-reviews.
 
 
 


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 09:18
Nor should you copy these directly from Wikipedia. I am sure that that wasn't the point of this. Therefore, your post has been hidden from the view of all others, except you and all the moderators.

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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 12:15
Ok guys,
 
Let the battle-story proposals pour in !
 
So far, we have Rider's review of Kulikovo and Knight's story about Agincourt.
 
If my story will be voted, I'll be writing about the battle of Vaslui (Moldavia 1475), during which Stephen the Great faced the Ottoman army.


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 05-Feb-2007 at 13:37
I will once more pull my vote in favour of Knights's selection: Let it be Agincourt.

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


Posted By: Slick
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 00:01
I'm re-nominating Sekigahara again. :)

-------------
"Dai Ichi Dai Man Dai Kichi"


Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 01:55
Varna has also been one of my favourite battles...i never know why, it was a great loss to Poland and even greater one to the Balkans and Hungary. I think the tragedy of the battle attracts me to it, the young king being talked into a further battle and promised support that never came. I think I wrote about this battle before. not me acctually but a description form chronicles of jan dlugosz... I'll tryt o find them.


Posted By: Sarmata
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 02:07
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6540&KW=&PID=121479#121479


Posted By: Raider
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 09:22
Well, I have also posted a description about the battle of Varna in the "Notable Hungarian battles" topic.
 
This reconstruction of events differs from one in this topic. So It might interest you.


Posted By: Batu
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 12:21
my vote goes to Kulikovo

-------------
A wizard is never late,nor he is early he arrives exactly when he means to :) ( Gandalf the White in the Third Age of History Empire Of Istari )


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 13:35
Then we have:

Kulikovo - 2
Agincourt - 1 vote
Vaslui
Sekigahara

I promise that if you take Sekigahara for the third vote, then I'll vote for it. Just now remembered where I knew it from.


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


Posted By: Slick
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 15:24
I'll vote for Vaslui. Interested in Peter and the Ottomans. It's a double winner...

-------------
"Dai Ichi Dai Man Dai Kichi"


Posted By: Praetor
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 18:21
I vote for Kulikovo - an excellent example of a mongol defeat despite the numerical superiority of the mongol forces! (such examples are very rare as you would imagine) Plus single combats are really coolCool

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


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2007 at 18:28
Looks like the votes stand at:
 
Kulikovo - 3
Agincourt - 1
Vaslui - 1
Sekigahara - 0
 
At this stage, we will be hearing from Rider on the Battle of Kulikovo.


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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 07-Feb-2007 at 11:29
I know that Knights talked you into this Praetor!

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


Posted By: konstantinius
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 03:10
Good posts! Sorry, I've been busy with school. It'sprobably pointless at this point, but i'll cast my vote for Sekigahara to "even" out a bit towards the Asian side. It's not all about Europe, you knowLOLCool 

-------------
" I do disagree with what you say but I'll defend to my death your right to do so."


Posted By: Praetor
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 06:01
Originally posted by rider

I know that Knights talked you into this Praetor!


Knights didn't talk me into this, however I did suggest it with someone else in mindWink


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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 14:12
Kulikovo - 3
Agincourt - 0
Vaslui -
1
Sekigahara
- 2

Changed my vote to Sekigahara, couldn't resist.


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


Posted By: hugoestr
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 14:15
Sekigahara

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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 14:20
Then we have a tie:

Kulikovo - 3
Agincourt - 0
Sekigahara - 3
Vaslui - 1

Do you understand all, that with a tie, you get two articles? But I suspect knights wants Kulikovo as the single winner...


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


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2007 at 14:26
But does Knights harness the power to do so?? Big%20smile Two battles are always better than one Wink

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


Posted By: pekau
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2007 at 03:20
Originally posted by rider

Nor should you copy these directly from Wikipedia. I am sure that that wasn't the point of this. Therefore, your post has been hidden from the view of all others, except you and all the moderators.
 
My bad. I thought referencing it might justify... oh what matter. Sorry~


-------------
http://swagbucks.com/refer/Malachi">      
   
Join us.


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2007 at 10:16
Originally posted by Knights

But does Knights harness the power to do so?? Big%20smile Two battles are always better than one Wink


But what if I find one to post more for Sekigahara? Then you have failed once more...LOLLOL


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


Posted By: Slick
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2007 at 15:29
Sekigahara tied? o_0
 
Well, this is unexpected. I suppose I'll write up a summary sometime later. Right now I'm afraid it will be difficult. For the last few days, I've been home with a high fever and some other ailments. Dead
 
If I don't get to it immediately and Kulikovo gets finished, I wouldn't mind if you kept voting for stuff while I was getting better. Sorry for the trouble. :(


-------------
"Dai Ichi Dai Man Dai Kichi"


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2007 at 17:53
I have written it quite some time ago... but the tie isn't certain. Let's call it a day at Saturday (tomorrow, or actually today), 20.00 PM GMT...

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


Posted By: Richard
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 01:19
the Battle of Thermopylae
Simply because it is the best example of how well a small force of well
trained,equiped troops can use  the terrain to maximise an army's potential.
And also, because of the courage it takes to stand your ground against such odds.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 01:46
Well I'd vote Kulikovo, if you're still accepting votes.

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


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 01:56
This is absolute action! Kulikovo gets another vote taking it one vote ahead of Sekigahara! That means it's 4 for Kulikovo and 3 for Sekigahara...will there be another vote...who knows! What do you say Mr.Rider, do we wait for another day, or is Kulikovo the winner?

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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 08:47
Let's wait for another day.

I know that you had Zaitsev vote for it...


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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 14:40
Originally posted by rider

Let's wait for another day.

I know that you had Zaitsev vote for it...
 
I want a clear winner. I vote for Kulikovo.


Posted By: morticia
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 16:09
Sekigahara

-------------
"Morty

Trust in God: She will provide." -- Emmeline Pankhurst


Posted By: Majkes
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 16:33
Sekigahara


Posted By: Slick
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 18:05
So much for the clear winner...
 
Alright, I'll change my vote from Vaslui to Kulikovo. Hopefully that will boost it to the lead for a bit...


-------------
"Dai Ichi Dai Man Dai Kichi"


Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2007 at 19:12
Kulikovo - 6
Sekigahara - 5
Is that enough of a lead for you Slick? What do you think Rider, when do we cut off?


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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2007 at 12:44
HOWWWW!!!!!! Impossible... Good work Morty and Hugoestr and Majkes....

I'll submit (but I will have my revenge).


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


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2007 at 12:45

Background

During the 14th century, the power of Muscowy grew, while the Golden Horde became weaker and weaker. On the second half of the 14th century, there were around 25 different khans, of whom a large number was killed by his competitors. During these troubled times, the Horde was united by commander Mamai. By these times, Muscowy rarely listened to the orders of the khan and the khan saw it fit to punish the Rus for it. On 1378, the Mongol armies assaulted Muscowy and the whole of Russia with it.

He was confronted by a Muscowian army, led by Dmitri Ivanovich, grandson of Ivan Kalita. The armies met on the lands of Rjazan, besides River Vozh. This Mongol army was defeated by the Russian forces and it retreated. The Khan, however escpaed and gathered a new army. He also ordered a treaty with the Lithuanians, for their assistance. Khan Mamai also counted on the Kniaz of Rjazan, Oleg, who had sided with the Mongols. Oleg wanted the lands of Muscowy for himself and Lithuania, and that was the reason for his servitude of the Horde.

In the august of 1380, the Khan made way to Russia, but the Russian dukes had unexpectedly united against the growing threat.

The Battle of Kulikovo

Again it was Dmitri Ivanovich, who stood in the lead of the armies of Russia (or more correctly, Muscowy and allied princedoms). The army was made up of the forces and levy of Suzdal, Brjansk, Rostov, Jaroslavl, Kostroma and Beloozero. Smaller detachments came even from Ukraine and Belorussia. The peasants, although barely armed, were numerous. The force that assembled alltogether, is assumed to around 150 000 men, but it might have been quite a bit smaller. Yet it was for that time, the single largest army Russia had ever gathered.

The plan of Dmitri was to hold the battle outside Muscowian territories. He quickly had his army move towards the River Don. They built bridges to cross the river and after crossing, Dmitri supposedly ordered the destruction of the bridges to show that there was no way for retreat.

The armies lined up in the fog. The Russian forces were placed so, that, the contignents’ flanks were protected by Smolka River, deep slopes and forests. A part of the army was left into the woods as for ambushing purposes. The fog quickly vanished and the larger army of the enemy was sighted. The Russian first lines assaulted the enemy daringly, and they were led to combat by Dmitri. Within short time, the whole of Russian vanguard was destroyed, although some of the greatest warriors (along with kniaz Dmitri) returned to the main army.

Now the forces of Mamai assaulted forward as a thick mass. „Spears broke as straws, arrows came down as rain, dust shadowed sunlight, swords flashed as lightning, men fell as crop before the scythes.“ is a description by a Russian chronicler of this battle.

The Russians decided to break through the enemy center, although a Mongol force had crossed River Smolka and was attacking the Russian left flank with fury. The Mongols were gaining the upper hand. The left flank started retreating and the Mongols, seeing the opportunity, quickly began to surround the center. The ambushers wanted to help the others, but their commander, voievode Bobrok held them back saying: „It is not yet the time!“ Mamai thought that victory was close.

Yet now was the time, and the ambushing squad assaulted the Mongols and crushed them. The remnant of Russian forces regrouped and assaulted once more. Khan thought it better to run, and the Russians gave him a decent chase. For the victory at the Fields of Kulikovo, Dmitri Ivanovich gained the nickname of Donskoi.

Aftermath

Although the battle didn’t overthrow the Mongol rule, it certainly helped in doing so. Two years later, after Kulikovo, a new Khan striekd and burnt down Muscowy. Despite the fact that the city was almost completely destroyed, the Russian peoples had understood their power in unity. Soon, the Mongol powers were completely destroyed and they left the whole of Europe alone.



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


Posted By: alexandruu
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2007 at 14:15
Cool battle !
 
Rider, what can you tell us about the casualties ? Were they realy as high as wikipedia states (tens of thousands of dead on each side)


Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2007 at 15:00
i don't think they were counted.. but i would suspect it be true. Russian casualties higher...

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


Posted By: Slick
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2007 at 19:30
Yeah, nice summary. I've never heard of Kulikovo, though I'm reading about the Mongols and stuff recently. Impressive how Dmitri turned a near defeat into a victory...
 
Hey, third times the charm anyways. When I'm feeling better I'll re-submit Sekigahara for consideration again Rider. ;)


-------------
"Dai Ichi Dai Man Dai Kichi"



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com