[MichaelNewton]

I feel that historians place too much importance on these single battles (Lepanto and Salamis, for example). I have never been convinced that losses at these single battles would have meant the complete defeat of the West nor that these battles caused the complete defeat of the East. (Same with the Battle of Yorktown.)

[iowamark]

It is hard to say. We Americans regard Yorktown, the Battle of New Orleans, Appomattox, as decisive in retrospect because both the victor and the defeated agreed to some degree.

Lepanto was seen at the time as a great victory by Catholics and other Christians. It was not the end of expansionist Islam but it was certainly the end of their great string of victories.

[justa-hairyape]

What about the battle of Manzikert ? That was one battle that the west lost. The Byzantines lost their main army and their Emperor was captured. The Emperor agreed to ridiculous terms to guarantee his freedom and those terms led to civil war within the Byzantine Empire. Thus the Byzantines were easy pickings for the Turks who expanded westward and eventually took Constantinople.

[Tallguy]

I feel that historians place too much importance on these single battles (Lepanto and Salamis, for example). I have never been convinced that losses at these single battles would have meant the complete defeat of the West nor that these battles caused the complete defeat of the East. (Same with the Battle of Yorktown.)

I think that you are using a modern lense when thinking about ancient wars. Frequently the issue was decided in a single afternoon and it would be generations before it could be reversed. It wasn't really until Napoleon's time that generals started to think in terms of campaigns (ie. maneuvering toward battle and combining battles into ultimate victory).