What do you think?
Rate this book
Twenty Decisive Battles of the World
The shape of history, as historians themselves admit, has often been decided, not by 'movements' or economics or assemblies, but by the individual actions of man on the battlefield. Throughout the ages, the course of events and the very fiber of men's minds have been the products of the clash of arms. Sir Edward Creasy's classic study of Fifteen Decisive Battles has been the popular authority on the historical decisiveness of military action - from the thrill of Greek democracy's victory on the plain of Marathon 2,500 years ago to the stand of the stubborn red-coated British at Waterloo that consigned the Napoleonic dream to exile and death.
Now, in this authoritative and lavish refurbishing of Sir Edward's masterpiece. Lieutenant Colonel Joseph B. Mitchell has completed the march of military events to the present day with the inclusion of five decision-compelling battles of the last one hundred years. For this work, Colonel Mitchell has corroborated and, where necessary, corrected the facts and descriptions of Sir Edward's original text, as well as modernized his language. To complete this task and to make the volume truly useful as a work of permanent reference, the descriptions of each battle are accompanied by detailed, newly drawn, two-color maps and diagrams designed to make the tactics and strategy of the struggles readily comprehensible. The resulting Twenty Decisive Battles of the World stands as a monument of modern historical writing, indispensable to the shelves of experts as well as general readers.
Now, in this authoritative and lavish refurbishing of Sir Edward's masterpiece. Lieutenant Colonel Joseph B. Mitchell has completed the march of military events to the present day with the inclusion of five decision-compelling battles of the last one hundred years. For this work, Colonel Mitchell has corroborated and, where necessary, corrected the facts and descriptions of Sir Edward's original text, as well as modernized his language. To complete this task and to make the volume truly useful as a work of permanent reference, the descriptions of each battle are accompanied by detailed, newly drawn, two-color maps and diagrams designed to make the tactics and strategy of the struggles readily comprehensible. The resulting Twenty Decisive Battles of the World stands as a monument of modern historical writing, indispensable to the shelves of experts as well as general readers.
365 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1964
6 people are currently reading
47 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
December 18, 2019
When Augustus Caesar became the ruler of the Roman Empire... the people wanted peace after 20 years of civil war and anarchy. In the 200 years since the Second Punic War, Roman citizens had lost their pride in their army and now avoided the burdens of military service. Gone were the days when free men vied with each other in devotion to their country. No longer was the bearing of arms considered a privilege rather than a duty; no longer was it a disgraceful punishment to be denied that right.
It was now a professional army; Augustus recognized this fact. [He] also recognized the auxiliaries, recruited from the best men of the empire who were not Roman citizens. They were less well paid than the Romans, but upon discharge they received a bounty and were granted the Roman franchise for themselves, their wives and their children. The result was a highly trained, efficient army that successfully guarded Rome against invasion for hundreds of years, but behind it there was almost nothing. Gradually the only military spirit left in the empire came to reside in the army itself, where tradition and teachings were handed down from old soldiers to recruits, many of whom were sons of former legionaries.
Sound familiar, Americans? Are we on the same path? That is the backdrop to a discussion of "The Victory of Arminius over the Roman Legions under Varus, A.D. 9," from the Joseph Mitchell revision of Sir Edward Creasy's classic Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, published 1851. This volume is now Lt. Col. Mitchell and Creasy's combined Twenty Decisive Battles Of The World, published 1964.
The very first decisive battle in their estimation is the battle of Marathon, in which the Athenian Greeks and one small ally faced the giant Persian Empire forces, in 490 B.C.
Two thousand four hundred and fifty-four years ago, a council of Athenian officers was summoned on the slope of one of the mountains that overlook the plain of Marathon on the eastern coast of Attica. The immediate purpose of their meeting was to consider whether they should give battle to an enemy that lay encamped on the shore beneath them; but on the fate of their deliberations depended not merely the fate of two armies, but the whole future progress of human civilization.
... They saw before them the invading forces of a mighty empire that had shattered and enslaved all the kingdoms and principalities of the then known world.... With the exception of the Chinese Empire and India, all the great kingdoms which we know to have existed in ancient Asia were, in Darius' time, blended into the Persian. The Assyrians, the Syrians, the Babylonians, the Chaldeans, the Phoenicians, the nations of Palestine, the Armenians, the Bactrians, the Lydians, the Phrygians, the Parthians and the Medes all obeyed the Great King.... Egypt and Cyrene were Persian provinces. The Greeks in Asia Minor were Darius' subjects, [also] Thrace, so that from the Indus River to the mouth of the Danube, all was his.
Who won that battle at Marathon? Maybe we know; I will complete this review shortly.
It was now a professional army; Augustus recognized this fact. [He] also recognized the auxiliaries, recruited from the best men of the empire who were not Roman citizens. They were less well paid than the Romans, but upon discharge they received a bounty and were granted the Roman franchise for themselves, their wives and their children. The result was a highly trained, efficient army that successfully guarded Rome against invasion for hundreds of years, but behind it there was almost nothing. Gradually the only military spirit left in the empire came to reside in the army itself, where tradition and teachings were handed down from old soldiers to recruits, many of whom were sons of former legionaries.
Sound familiar, Americans? Are we on the same path? That is the backdrop to a discussion of "The Victory of Arminius over the Roman Legions under Varus, A.D. 9," from the Joseph Mitchell revision of Sir Edward Creasy's classic Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, published 1851. This volume is now Lt. Col. Mitchell and Creasy's combined Twenty Decisive Battles Of The World, published 1964.
The very first decisive battle in their estimation is the battle of Marathon, in which the Athenian Greeks and one small ally faced the giant Persian Empire forces, in 490 B.C.
Two thousand four hundred and fifty-four years ago, a council of Athenian officers was summoned on the slope of one of the mountains that overlook the plain of Marathon on the eastern coast of Attica. The immediate purpose of their meeting was to consider whether they should give battle to an enemy that lay encamped on the shore beneath them; but on the fate of their deliberations depended not merely the fate of two armies, but the whole future progress of human civilization.
... They saw before them the invading forces of a mighty empire that had shattered and enslaved all the kingdoms and principalities of the then known world.... With the exception of the Chinese Empire and India, all the great kingdoms which we know to have existed in ancient Asia were, in Darius' time, blended into the Persian. The Assyrians, the Syrians, the Babylonians, the Chaldeans, the Phoenicians, the nations of Palestine, the Armenians, the Bactrians, the Lydians, the Phrygians, the Parthians and the Medes all obeyed the Great King.... Egypt and Cyrene were Persian provinces. The Greeks in Asia Minor were Darius' subjects, [also] Thrace, so that from the Indus River to the mouth of the Danube, all was his.
Who won that battle at Marathon? Maybe we know; I will complete this review shortly.
May 12, 2025
The book that Turning Point Simulations based an entire series of wargames on.
Loosely based, that is. See, this book doesn't get terribly deep into the details of these battles, doesn't provide an analysis of the maneuvers. Fans of S&T or ATO will feel a bit let down, seeing a single map accompanied by one or two paragraphs describing the overall thrust, as it were, of an attack.
The focus of the book is, instead, on what makes these battles decisive: the particular political situation which caused the outcome of each battle to shape the world, change the course of history, whathaveyou. This is particularly well done, and the bullet points ending each chapter serve to tie these disparate battles into a flowing tide of history. It works quite well.
At battle #16, Vicksburg, Lt. Col. Mitchell takes over, and things get to be a bit, ah, nationalistic. One just doesn't appreciate ol' Ed Creasy until he's gone, and we're given the military history equivalent of a Jerry Bruckheimer film. I would almost say skip this one and stick with the 15 battles version, but Vicksburg is a particularly interesting battle, and the coverage of it here is pretty good.
Loosely based, that is. See, this book doesn't get terribly deep into the details of these battles, doesn't provide an analysis of the maneuvers. Fans of S&T or ATO will feel a bit let down, seeing a single map accompanied by one or two paragraphs describing the overall thrust, as it were, of an attack.
The focus of the book is, instead, on what makes these battles decisive: the particular political situation which caused the outcome of each battle to shape the world, change the course of history, whathaveyou. This is particularly well done, and the bullet points ending each chapter serve to tie these disparate battles into a flowing tide of history. It works quite well.
At battle #16, Vicksburg, Lt. Col. Mitchell takes over, and things get to be a bit, ah, nationalistic. One just doesn't appreciate ol' Ed Creasy until he's gone, and we're given the military history equivalent of a Jerry Bruckheimer film. I would almost say skip this one and stick with the 15 battles version, but Vicksburg is a particularly interesting battle, and the coverage of it here is pretty good.
September 8, 2024
The Cambridge Dictionary defines "decisive" as "strongly affecting how a situation will progress or end". Mitchell expands Sir Edward Shepherd Creasy's The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World to the modern era including five newer battles. The text describes the battles to be world-changing events and that another outcome of such an event would dramatically change society as we know it. However, the battles chosen seem biased and the descriptions are untrustworthy. This could be due to the adaptation's bias of heavily favoring battles in European countries. The stories describe the battles from a dramatic perspective with not much regard for the analysis of the battles which I was disappointed by. Mitchell does include different perspectives from historians and secondhand accounts of the battles but these sources are not prioritized in the book.
February 15, 2017
Some choices I think were added more for historical continuity than sticking to the criteria, but just an opinion. I'd like to read the original book, 15 battles...and an written book describing the critical battles for the USA.
June 7, 2020
Really very good. I'd rate it higher if it had footnotes!
July 22, 2012
Grievances:
1. Way too reliant on questionable sources.
2. Very pro-whoever the victor of a battle is.
3. Elitist.
4. Believes in "noble causes".
5. ...Boring...
1: If you read any book on history, listen to a good podcast, the author will stress repeatedly how sketchy a source is, how many different accounts there are of an account, or how plain unreliable an opinion is. Everyone takes everything with a grain of salt, because we know things are unreliable, we know that new things can come to light. Mitchell and Creasy...they take the romanticized accounts of the battles and adopt those tones. They are the people who parrot the "300 versus 2 million" account of Thermopylae. They reinforce the unreliability of sources to other people better than anybody else can.
2: The battles chosen for this book are "decisive" - they mark a turning point in some great country's history, in a shift of power and influence, etcetera. I do not dispute the choices of any of these battles. What I do dispute is how they are described and shown.
In many of the descriptions, especially the ones written by Creasy, the bias is so obvious even supporters of the authors's positions would yell at them. Greeks are better than Persians, Christians are better than Muslims, English are better than Spanish, etcetera. Gah!
3: See 2, but also what Creasy and Mitchell think of the colonizations of America and Africa. Cecil Rhodes is NOT an outstanding leader any more than Belgian Leopold II was a humanitarian!
4: Again, Creasy gets most of the blame here; Mitchell is more the in-the-mud, both sides suffered type. But for the worst ones, see: Marathon, the Metaurus, Châlons & Blenheim.
5: It took me almost 6 weeks to get around to reading this. Then, it took me three weeks to read. No, I am not a slow reader; I just didn't want to read this book.
This book doesn't even deserve one star; giving it 1/2 star would be generous.
1. Way too reliant on questionable sources.
2. Very pro-whoever the victor of a battle is.
3. Elitist.
4. Believes in "noble causes".
5. ...Boring...
1: If you read any book on history, listen to a good podcast, the author will stress repeatedly how sketchy a source is, how many different accounts there are of an account, or how plain unreliable an opinion is. Everyone takes everything with a grain of salt, because we know things are unreliable, we know that new things can come to light. Mitchell and Creasy...they take the romanticized accounts of the battles and adopt those tones. They are the people who parrot the "300 versus 2 million" account of Thermopylae. They reinforce the unreliability of sources to other people better than anybody else can.
2: The battles chosen for this book are "decisive" - they mark a turning point in some great country's history, in a shift of power and influence, etcetera. I do not dispute the choices of any of these battles. What I do dispute is how they are described and shown.
In many of the descriptions, especially the ones written by Creasy, the bias is so obvious even supporters of the authors's positions would yell at them. Greeks are better than Persians, Christians are better than Muslims, English are better than Spanish, etcetera. Gah!
3: See 2, but also what Creasy and Mitchell think of the colonizations of America and Africa. Cecil Rhodes is NOT an outstanding leader any more than Belgian Leopold II was a humanitarian!
4: Again, Creasy gets most of the blame here; Mitchell is more the in-the-mud, both sides suffered type. But for the worst ones, see: Marathon, the Metaurus, Châlons & Blenheim.
5: It took me almost 6 weeks to get around to reading this. Then, it took me three weeks to read. No, I am not a slow reader; I just didn't want to read this book.
This book doesn't even deserve one star; giving it 1/2 star would be generous.
March 6, 2012
Interesting collection
Sir Edward Creasy published a book called Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World: from Marathon to Waterloo in 1851. His original work was expanded in 1964 by Lt. Col. Mitchell in order to create Twenty Decisive Battles of the World. In some cases, Mitchell corrected factual errors in Creasy's original work that came to light since it was first written.
The main criteria for picking these twenty battles was that the battle had to have a lasting impact on the war it was a part of and also have a lasting impact on history. For example, the Confederate victory at the battle of Chancellorsville in the American Civil War was not chosen despite the fact that it was brilliantly fought by Robert E. Lee. The Confederacy went on to lose the war and the victory at Chancellorsville may have prolonged the war by a few months at most. On the other hand, Mitchell picked the Vicksburg campaign as a battle that was decisive in the history of the world because it spelled out the doom of the Confederacy in the West and led to the Grant's appointment as leader of all of the Union armies. A weakened United States (without the Confederate states) would not be as big a player in world politics as it is now so that victory had a lasting impact...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2011/...
Sir Edward Creasy published a book called Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World: from Marathon to Waterloo in 1851. His original work was expanded in 1964 by Lt. Col. Mitchell in order to create Twenty Decisive Battles of the World. In some cases, Mitchell corrected factual errors in Creasy's original work that came to light since it was first written.
The main criteria for picking these twenty battles was that the battle had to have a lasting impact on the war it was a part of and also have a lasting impact on history. For example, the Confederate victory at the battle of Chancellorsville in the American Civil War was not chosen despite the fact that it was brilliantly fought by Robert E. Lee. The Confederacy went on to lose the war and the victory at Chancellorsville may have prolonged the war by a few months at most. On the other hand, Mitchell picked the Vicksburg campaign as a battle that was decisive in the history of the world because it spelled out the doom of the Confederacy in the West and led to the Grant's appointment as leader of all of the Union armies. A weakened United States (without the Confederate states) would not be as big a player in world politics as it is now so that victory had a lasting impact...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2011/...
October 7, 2013
Pretty interesting... Enjoyed the setup and post analysis of the battles... Points in time that turned history one way or the other.. Mind wonderers what if a battle or so went the other way.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews