Naval History Forums

You only have to read what Shakespeare did to Richard the third to see political correctness at work, even all those years ago!!

Ian

iankw wrote:You only have to read what Shakespeare did to Richard the third to see political correctness at work, even all those years ago!!

Ian

I agree absolutely.

Did you know that Richard III was the last legitimate English king, due to the illegitimacy of Edward IV?

G'day everyone I voted Jutland.but i must admit it was a strange battle result from my point of view the germans won a tactical victory,(less ships at the start of the battle and less losses of both ships and men) but the brits won a stratigic victory.(the high seas fleet never tried to engage the british fleet again)giving control of the atlantic to the British.

The British had absolute surface control of the Atlantic right from the start of WW1.

Hi RF.What i was trying to say was that after Jutland.the germans were unwilling to try the British navys control of the atlantic,they(germans) never again tried fleet or large squadron,operations against the Royal navy.

I also voted for Salamis. Not only for the impact on history but the Greeks were heavily outnumbered and won. That is an important criteria in my defintion of great.

Hi longreach,

At Jutland the Germans were trying to take out a portion of the British Grand Fleet to give them control of the North Sea.

The Atlantic would be a different proposition because the large battlewagons of the HSF were very heavy coal consumers and didn't carry enough coal to break out into the Atlantic let alone cruise there, without a very large fleet of coalers to support them.

Jutland was of crucial concern to the British as a substantial German victory would have laid the east coast of England open to a German landing or even full scale invasion....

I voted Midway. A major upset - it turned the biggest naval war in history around. It also confirmed Coral Sea - future major naval engagements, with but a few exceptions, no longer involved battleships and heavy gunfire.

Derf

I find it interesting that so many chose Jutland, considering that battle was indecisive, with no clear winner or loser, and neither side had enough to soundly thump the other. The battle's outcome didn't stop Germany from making war (as proven with the Third Reich), and Beatty's folly simply hedged a questionable career.

Perhaps my interpretation of the term "great" differs from that of others, but to my way of thinking, a battle or war's "greatness" is measured by its impact on the world. Surely Salamis or Nelson's defeat of the Spanish Armada ripple through history much more strongly than Jutland.

Maybe Jutland's appeal is based on its "wow factor", spectacular on the surface but behind that facade, little of substance.

Surely Salamis or Nelson's defeat of the Spanish Armada

I have to agree. These battles changed the world as it was known then substantially.

Jutland was a great battle, but what finally took out the German navy was mutiny and total loss of command control. A few summary excutions did not change the demise. Neither Great Britain nor Germany gained anything from that encounter except another war, WWII.

I like Jutland because it was so interesting to study.

I don't think Nelson defeated the Spanish Armada.

Bgile wrote:I don't think Nelson defeated the Spanish Armada.

Why, SURE he did!! It was just a different Nelson...

Shows what I know, eh...?

Ulrich Rudofsky wrote:.

Jutland was a great battle, but what finally took out the German navy was mutiny and total loss of command control. A few summary excutions did not change the demise. Neither Great Britain nor Germany gained anything from that encounter except another war, WWII.

I don't think that Jutland itself led to WW2, not even Hitler regarded the encounter of any significance and the Fuhrer was entirely land minded.
You could argue it was the father of the Z Plan, but the Z Plan didn't really learn anything from Jutland.

Here's two cents from a noob.

It's Salamis guys. Had the Greeks not won there, we can't even imagine what the world would be like today. The only close runner up to Salamis is Lepanto.

All those other battles were important but how much would the world have changed if those battles had ended differently?

If the Germans had won at Jutland (debateable to this day whether they did or not) that would not necessarily mean that the Germans win World War 1. I mean, so the Germans get into the Atlantic, the High Seas Fleet wasn't a blue water fleet, how long could they have stayed there with no logistical bases? And unless the entire Grand Fleet had been sunk at Jutland the RN would be out at sea looking for payback. Maybe the United States enters the war earlier if German ships keep sinking US merchantmen? Now the High Seas Fleet has to take on the Royal Navy AND the US Navy?

If Jutland had never happened I don't think much would have changed. In point of fact, after Jutland nothing was changed.

Farragut wrote: If Jutland had never happened I don't think much would have changed. In point of fact, after Jutland nothing was changed.

Maybe so, but "greatest" doesn't necessarily mean the greatest impact on history. How many of us are intrigued enough by Salamis to study it in great detail? Weapons were relatively simple then and just not as interesting.

Maybe to most of us "greatest" means which one intrigues us the most.