Swedish Intervention: Gustavus Adolphus Challenges The Emperor | Thirty Years War 7
Play Enlisted for FREE on PC, Xbox Series X|S and PS®5: playen.link/sandrhomanhistory...
Follow the link to download the game and get your exclusive bonus now. See you in battle!
In 1630, Gustavus Adoplhus, known as "the Lion of the North" or the "Lion of Midnight" invaded Germany. His invasion culminated in the most dramatic and controversial phase of the Thirty Years’ War, a phase usually referred to as the Swedish intervention. It not only pitched the most famous commanders of the war such as Tilly, Pappenheim and Gustavus Adolphus against each other in several decisive battles but also marks the moment in time when the war spilled out of Germany for good.
Patreon (thank you): / sandrhomanhistory
Paypal (thank you: www.paypal.com/paypalme/SandR...
Twitter: / sandrhoman
Bibliography:
Guthrie, William, Battles of the Thirty Years War: From White Mountain to Nordlingen, 1618-1635, 2001.
Clifford, J. R., The military revolution debate. Readings on the military transformation of early modern Europe, 1995.
Clifford, J. R., Tactics and the Face of Battle, in: Tallet, F., (editor), European Warfare 1350-1750.
Frost, R., Northern Wars, State and Society in Northeastern Europe 1558-1721, 2000.
Höbelt, Lothar, Von Nördlingen bis Jankau. Kaiserliche Strategie und Kriegführung 1634-1645, 2016.
Münkler, Herfried, Der Dreißigjährige Krieg, Europäische Katastrophe, deutsches Trauma 1618 - 1648, 2019.
Parker, C., The Cambridge History of Warfare, 2005.
Roberts, M., Gustav Adolf and the Art of War (first printed 1955), in: Essays on Swedish History, 1967.
Rady, M., The Habsburgs, 2020.
Ribas, Alberto Raul Esteban, The Battle of Nördlingen 1634. The Bloody Fight Between Tercios and Brigades, 2021.
Spring, Laurence, The Battle of The White Mountain 1620 and the Bohemian Revolt 1618-1622, 2018.
Van Nimwegen, Olaf, The Dutch Army and the Military Revolutions, 1588-1688, 2010.
Von essen, M. F., The Lion from the North: Volume 1+2 The Swedish Army of Gustavus Adolphus, 2020.
Wilson, Peter, The Thirty Years War: Europe’s Tragedy, 2009.
Play Enlisted for FREE on PC, Xbox Series X|S and PS5: playen.link/sandrhomanhistory2023 Follow the link to download the game and get your exclusive bonus now. See you in battle!
I have had this game for about a year but i did not know that you could customize like that.
When you said 'as usual reality looked very different from views fuelled by propaganda' I was completely expectant of a ground news plug! 😂
Tagline for your channel "where armies die like crunching cornflakes"
Can we get Venetian soldier merch
You introduced me into Venetian pike and shot history. Thank you, I never knew I needed it but I do know
Today I learned that 17th century war propaganda was wild.
It's been pretty standard since Ur or akkad. Mass torture scenes have a propagandistic message....Don't be next fool.
Wait until you learn about today's propaganda 😅
@@gunnarsjolander617140 beheaded babies!
I'm very surprised that we've yet to see a proper video covering the epic three-day Battle of Warsaw in 1656: It included Poles, Swedes, Germans, Tatars, etc; it was fought between two kings and an elector; it was Brandenburg-Prussia's first major battle; it saw a huge tactical flanking maneuver; the famous Winged hussars were defeated. It's year 2023, and it has still not been covered.. SandRhoman, this one is yours to take!
The level of research and quality of presentation of this channel is simply unsurpassed.
22:08 SEVEN TIMES THEY ATTACKED THAT DAY, SEVEN TIMES THEY RETREATED!!!!!
Love how you went to the trouble of making the Swedish brigade unit symbols rectangles, and the Tercio-based Imperials sturdy boxes. It was a careful touch that immediately helped visualizing the battle line configurations.
makes you wonder how the saxons were arrayed though.
It does help.
Best channel of the era by some margin. Excellent narrative and informative qualities that are easy to follow
Appreciate that
Germans: WAR! Spanish: WAR! Dutch: WAR! Swedes: WAR! Danes sleepily rubbing their eyes: "Um, hi guys, are you doing something?" Actually, Denmark-Norway also took part in the war, with Christian IV seeking to become the leader of the northern German states. But they were crushed at Lutter in 1626, and again at Wolgast. A treaty forbade them from further intervention.
Potentially messy battle, won by discipline, patience and daring. Fascinating.
One of the best history documentary channel online. Great video, I always learn!
Glad you enjoy it!
1:06 Reindeer cavalry, confirmed. Riding white reindeer that pierced the enemy with their antlers, competing with their riders for kills. These were specially trained reindeer who regenerated from eating their slain enemies.
DONT THINK FOR SECOND I DIDNT SEE THE LITTLE FROG AT 1:25
At Stuhm/Trzciana, the Swedes met an enemy much larger than themselves and was indeed at first routed, but thats not how this minor battle ended. Herman Wrangel arrived with his cavalry and the Swedes steadied the lines and retreated in an orderly fashion to first Pułkowice, and then Nowa Wieś. The next day they could completly undisturbed, retreat to Malbork. After this there were two smaller engagements at first Koniecpolski and then Żuławy Elbląskie, where the Swedes won the day. After that the peace was signed in the villige of Altmark.
Why didn't Gustavus ally with that Transilvanian Prince Gabor Bethlen? He seems to be a reliable ally that will absolutely show up when the Protestants really need him
But just when the world needed him most he disappeared.
If you were already impressed by Prince Gabor Bethlen' "reliability", you have to see his successor George I Rákóczi who helped the Swedes besieging Brno in 1645 by bringing the plague into their camp. It did surely relieve their logistics and such. Seriously, the Transilvanian Princes might have been useful as a thorn in the Habsburgs' side but you couldn't expect them to actually achieve anything.
Legends have taught, battles fought This Lion has no fear at heart Lion come forth, come from the North, come from the North! Gustavus Adolphus, Libera et Impera Acerbus et Ingens Augusta per Angusta A storm over Europe unleashed, dawn of war, a trail of destruction The power of Rome won't prevail, see the Catholics shiver in fear The future of warfare unveiled, showed the way that we still walk today Der Löwe aus Mitternacht comes, once more he is here for war! --Sabaton, The Lion From The North
The Swedish Intervention in the Thirty Years' War serves as an intriguing reminder of the complex interaction between principle and pragmatism in history. This conflict, occurring between 1630-31, reflects the conundrum born from territorial ambition, religious schism, and geopolitical strategy. It forces us to consider the deep reverberations our actions may have when combining faith, fear and power. The war's paradoxical legacy lives on to remind us that while warfare can alter a nation's boundaries, it also has an immense effect on the human soul.
I think the war was mostly a defensive war. Sweden and Poland was fighting a family game about who had the most rightous claim to the Swedish throne. The King of Poland was the former King of Sweden and he was angry and wanted his throne back.Poland was one of the mightiest countries in Europe, and to make bad things worse was it also allied with Spain and the German emperor in Austria. Rumours had spread that Poland was planning to build a navy, which would get the help from Spain to land troops in Sweden and remove the Swedish King and put the country under polish control. This was a great fear. And the success Austria had in this war made many countries worried that Germany was becoming unified and too powerful for any country have a chance to beat it. Even powerful France got worried. And Denmark and Sweden did not like to have a powerful Germany at their doorstep, and when it began building a navy did they feel the need to act before it was too late. Germany was to be attacked before it had become completly unified and built a strong navy. Denmark joined the war but were quickly beaten back. And later on would Sweden join the war after a peace with Poland was made. It should also be said that Swedens top priority was never to get land from Germany. At least not in the last 10 years of the war. The most important war goal was instead to get money so it could pay off its enormous economic debts it had built up by paying for all mercenaries. Austria refused and it took 10 years for them to finally agree to this demand, and then had Swedens debts only grown larger. So a bad move from their part. The next important thing for Sweden was to guarantee religious freedom in Germany and the autonomy of each little German state. And after that did France and Sweden get a seat in the German parliament and was declared as guarantors of the independence of the small German states. And only then after those demands had been met was Sweden interested in any territorial compensation. And what it got was quite meager considering the large sacrifices. Both Sweden and Brandenburg laid claims to Pomerania after its former ruler died. Brandenburg got the bigger and more prosperous part of it, while Sweden got the poorer western part of it. And the areas of north western Germany that Sweden held not much economical significance either. It was however useful to have bridgehead for Swedish troops to walk into Denmark through the backdoor, and as a supply hub in the case of another war in Germany.
Hakkaa Päälle! Pronunciation was close enough for a Finn to understand what you tried to say.
4:26 That is also a saying in Finland as well! "Mene sinne missä pippuri kasvaa." Go where the pepper grows.
As an ethnic Finn who doesn't speak Finnish the hakkapaleta are something I would love to know more about
I've been enjoying how in depth this series has been, and I can't wait for the French phase of the War, which doesn't usually receive the same attention.
Don't know where you got your translation from, but the most common translation of "Hakkaa Päälle" is 'keep hitting' or 'hack on' as in hacking with the sword.
I also think the translation at 9:30 is a little incorrect. In Swedish it is ”Det är bättre att vi binder våra hästar i fiendens gärdesgårdar än han i våra”... which mean that "it is better that we come with our horses to the enemies farms, than he come with his to ours". So yes Sweden would try to let Germany pay for Swedens war. However it also true that Sweden viewed this as a defensive war and did not want German troops to come to Swedish soil and bring the horrors of war to the homeland and plunder Sweden and use Swedens resources against itself. Gustav Adolf was reluctantly dragged into a war with Germany. Swedens enemy the King of Poland was allied to the German emperor and that was the reason why Gustav Adolf feared Catholics expansion up into northern Germany so much. A strong Polish-German-Spanish anti-Swedish alliance was too strong for Sweden to ever be able to defeat it. So going to war with Germany before it became too strong made sense to Sweden.
A grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-grand-(I don't know how many more)-father was a soldier in Gustaf Adolfs army. He survived, obviously and as got some land in Finland as his pay. That's the reason I'm here typing this comment as a Finnish man, not swedish. And anyway, it's just a story told by my father, it could be a fiction as well.
Have you tried some ancestry searching things? Or that DNA test that could verify your ancestry.
@@Torag55 No I haven't, and I probably never will. It would be too much work, and I'm not really interested in the reality of that story. To me, it's just a story.
Bro....quit your fibbing, we can all see your an alien. You don't live in Finland, you live on planet Zurn.
"go where the pepper grows" brilliant
"As we say in Germany, go where the pepper grows" - But it's a Swedish saying too
@@Grasslander write in swedish please. i'd like to see.
And Polish too! It's interesting how sometimes different languages share such sayings.
@@uelibinde Dra dit pepparn växer
As a Sabaton fan this history video tickles me pink
As a Swede who is very interested in these years of the war I can say this is an excellent video! For anyone interested in this I can recommend the book "Gustavus Adolphus, Sweden and the Thirty Years War", which came out last year.
I love the editing in these videos, great work!
Great content as always. Excited to see the other parts. Thank you. Always informative and entertaining.
Great video
GARS!!! Great Video. Any Eric Flint 1632s series needs to see this video. Thank you very much.
Es schlägt ein fremder Fink im Land radibimmel, radibammel, radibumm Die Luft, die riecht wie angebrannt der Tilly der zieht um!
Spent the night in formation To the battle we marched in the dawn...
We were ready to die our king On the fields of Breitenfeld
Fire at will Aim for their cannons
Amazing I love the Thirty Years War content
Ah, the series I have been waiting for. Although SandRhoman has quite a few videos on the Thirty Years' War, it's a really complicated and long-spanning subject so, the more, the better! It's difficult for me to read on, so I really appreciate all of this. Also, can confirm, Enlisted is a cool game which has an appeal that I have been missing for some time now.
Hakkaa päälle, pohjan poika! Very cool and well done video!
great video man
Superb
I love your videos. Please more. Thank you
I love your channel 😊
thanks for the love and the comment!
Never been this early for a SandRhoman video
hmm, i think you were early with some other people in your life. probably premature even!
@@clintmoor422 jokes on you i never gotten laid
I was trying to create something related to Gustav II of Sweden in 1630, so happy to update this video
thank you for covering this war! appreciate the German sayings, too.
Looking forward to more content on Swedish great power times (stormakstiden)!
As a Swede i have it hard to read through the comments and seing "Gustavus Adolphus" every where insdead of the Swedish name im more familiar with (Gustav II Adolf)
@@arisnotheles va?
As a German I feel this too
Hoppas du hört krigshistoriepoddens avsnitt om 30 åriga kriget. Den bästa skildringen av kriget någonsin
@@oliverbrunninge Ja det har jag
Lion of Midnight is such an edgy name, you'd assume it belongs to an 8th grader in WoW 😅
My bro I love your videos they enlighten me
I love your videos! They’re the perfect mix of entertaining and educational! I also love the art used and was wondering if it’s your own or if you’ve gotten it from another source. I’ve been wanting to make a medieval based card game and that’s the perfect style of art I’d want for the cards
Gustavus Adolphus is one of my favorite warrior kings!
@@SwedishDrunkard5963 Nei, du tar feil, jeg snakker norsk ;) + jeg er kjent med Svenske bokstaver og forstår hva du mener med..
@@giod6266 Kul, Nu känner jag mig dum även om jag kanske förväntade mig det.
@@SwedishDrunkard5963 Nei da, alt i orden! Setter pris på at du ville forklare.. ❤
@@giod6266 tack
Super Video, wie immer.
This channel is awesome
Really nice movie. I watch it, and it was really interesting
Love the video and the sponsor❤
Sweet Jesus your content is good. 😃
Thanks :P Let's hope KZhead agrees with you and shows the video to our subscribers! Apparently that's not something that can be taken for granted these days.
go where the pepper grows haha. Love the Sprechblasen
I listened to that song on repeat in 2012
Nice video
Sweet, a nice new video to watch while i eat my breakfast soup
AWESOME
I can tell that I am going to like this video and the reason is because the thirty years war really interests me.
Fair assessment
I always love your story-telling. This time however... Somehow, the "Sack of Magdeburg" was reported differently in my history lessons at school. The story went that Katholic and Protestant troops alike (as those armies were not as segregated in this regard as we might think) fighting for Tilly went rogue when they recieved the news that Magdeburg (officials were present in Tilly's tent and negotiating) had surrendered and the city was not to be plundered. This city was one of the richest and most densly populated in the war and the prospect of having fought for so long without any plunder to be gained - especially for the mercenaries of Pappenheim - was too much to "suffer". In an explosive rage and fit the army entered the city and no quarter was given to men, women and children. They "exterminated" the entire population of the city in three ever more thorough sweeps, just to be sure no-one would survive. After they had searched the houses for the second time and could not distinguish muffled noises of crying babies from those of cats and other animals they decided to burn the entire place just to be sure everyone would die in the flames. Magdeburg was essentialy de-populated. This is the horror I remember from school. Think: An accidental fire would eventually have stopped and run out of steam like in London or other medieval cities or its beginnings would have been localised and not spread all over the city. The only other time there had been hunting scenes in Magdeburg of human beings as hunters AND prey were the racist attacks of Neo-Nazis some few years ago, the existance of which also was denied by the Federal Chief of Internal Security (Verfassungsschutz). - He was sacked for lying and his political affiliation to the very Neo-Nazi groups he was supposed to investigate and control. Now, in the case of our medieval Magdeburg, using these vicious and inhuman acts by either side in a religious context (Katholics vs. Protestants) rather than a political one (Imperial centralized power vs. Decentralised independent states), seems possible, given the scarcity of balanced, impartial information for a still largely illiterate populace, but on the other hand the lack of actual measures regarding this savage city-wide genocide in a purely religious context (no theological discourse, no dispensation asked or given), rather suggests a general (!) decline in morals or basic human decency which must have infected or even engulfed all armies in the field. It always seemed to me that Wallenstein's uttering "Ich kenne meine Pappenheimer" was also to be seen in this regard and his desire to end the war might have derived from the fact that he realised his troops, the enemies troops and the people as a whole were about to loose or had already lost their souls in this never ending war. When I recall the recent events in Magdeburg or review the "Wannsee Konferenz" protocols I ask myself if all these wars have had a lasting impact on the fundamentals, the fabric of European (up to Persia and North Africa) cultures and have taken a permanent toll on our souls.
Magdeburg was a city the same size as Berlin and Vienna at that time. Imagine that say a town of 3 million people getting murdered today and one can realize the brutality and destruction this event had.
@@nattygsbord Thank you, exactly what I tried to say. Magdeburg was the dominant city of that region and might have continued to be that. Was a free city (Reichsstadt) on top of that, if I recall correctly. Imagine just slaughtering thousands and thousands of human beings face-to-face. Innocent civilians, women, children and then their pets as well, just because. War is the most stupid and evil thing ever.
Who the fuck are Katholics????
@@michaelking9772 Seriously, you can’t deduct that?
MAKTEN OCH HÄRLIGHETEN!
Every catholic is gangster until Gustavus Adolphus join the war.
All my homies hate Gustavus Adolphus
@@CptCudlScoops Nah you crazy all my homies love Gustavus Adoluphus the real GOAT
Don't forget that Gustavus died and it was the French Catholics (not the Swedes) who won the war in the end...
based
Well, today I learned where Jerry Pournelle got the name of Col. Falkenberg. Great stuff.
I really like the historical realism of games, like only being able to play it once and then you die. Love that!
So. Which historical fashion accessory do you guys think was more ridiculous? 1)the powdered wig. 2) the foily neck things @ 4:19
goatee
Hmm the Foil Neck Things
@@HistoricalGuy417I wear a foil neck thing and a powdered wig and I get soooo many bitches my game is insane
The powdered wig, I think. People let that shit get nasty, but at least the neck ruffles you can keep clean.
The neck foil, because shaving your head made it easier to deal with lice in those days.
“A time of religion and war legends tell the tale of a lion”
This beast in the shape of a man with a dream to rule sea and land
And all of those who stand in his way Die by god and victorious arms
@@JN-rk5rl With the righteous that follows him south Once more, set ashore, to war
The Lion from the North 🦁🇸🇪🤴
Swedish history is amazing. At its peak, it nearly dominated the entire continent while having a population of around 2 million. the Swedish military regularly defeated armies 2 to 3 times it`s size.
Gustav II Adolfs Sweden had around 0.9- 1.2 million people. Germany had about 20 million people. So it is 10 times Swedens size. And Sweden managed to dominate all of modern day Germany back then and even to walk armies into far away locations like Munich, Nuremberg and Prague and establish a Swedish navy in southern Germany. And in the span of a few decades would Sweden also conquer Moscow, occupy all of the gigantic Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth with its 11 million people. And Denmark which was considered a great regional power had its capital threatened of destruction and half of its territory taken by the Swedes in a single war. And the Swedes felt so sure that they would conquer and destroy Denmark that they did not even bother to press hard in the peace negotiations to make Denmark sacrifice more land, as they assumed that Denmark would soon cease to exist anyways. So confident did the Swedish King feel about the Swedish military machine.
Germany is not "almost the whole continent" and in the end after the death of Gustavus Adolphus, the Swedes were almost expelled from the Holy Roman Empire, the ones who won the war were the French and in fact they were the ones who almost dominated the whole continent in various phases from the second half of the 17th century to the beginning of the 19th century. It is almost impossible that they could have dominated all of Europe with such a small population without the help of allies like France or England, and they did not even prevent the Russians from winning the Great Northern War a century later.
@@IsaacRaiCastillo *" the Swedes were almost expelled from the Holy Roman Empire"* And Frederick the Great was almost crushed in the seven years war, and the Romans were at the brink of disaster after the defeat at Cannae, so what is your point? *"the ones who won the war were the French"* Thats like saying Brazil won World war 2 for the allies. The majority of all troops fighting in Germany was under the Swedish flag. The Swedes fought this war longer than the French did. France begged for Swedish help when Spanish troops threatened Paris. And it was mainly Swedish troops that made the final push to end this war. *"they were the ones who almost dominated the whole continent in various phases from the second half of the 17th century to the beginning of the 19th century"* France was the strongest power in Europe up until 1815. Or at least until after the Seven years war. However it was no unrivaled super power. It had several mighty neighbours that kept it in check. And that was possible to do back then because England, Holland, Sweden and Brandenburg were countries well with well managed government administrations that allowed larger military than what badly mismanaged countries like France, Austria, Poland and the Ottoman empire had. They also tended to build up militaries that also was able to punch over their own weight - and so in particular in the case of Sweden and Brandenburg. The English army was not any remarkable, but the English navy was so enormous in size that by the 1700s that no country on its own could ever hope to defeat it. Even the second and third largest navies in Europe would togheter have less ships than England. *"It is almost impossible that they could have dominated all of Europe with such a small population without the help of allies like France or England"* It dominated the area called northern Europe and the Baltic sea. It did not have much power ouside of that area. Just like Spains, France and Englands power in the Baltic sea was very limited. Did England and Spain have much saying in what happened on the Balkans in the 16th and 17th and 18th century? - No. But that fact does not mean that they were powerful great powers. And Sweden was the dominant great power in northern Europe in the 17th century. If you asked Poland, Brandenburg, Denmark-Norway, Saxony, Russia, and Kurland which country around the Baltic sea they feared the most, then they would answer Sweden. In the end was it tiny Prussia that came to dominate Germany and not Austria. And little England would dominate the world and not France despite it had a 5 times larger population than England back in the 1500s. And it was Sweden who occupied and bullied the much larger Polish-Lithunian commonwealth at multiple times and not the other way around. In the past it was easier for small countries punch above their own weight. And it is stupid and historically ignorant to try to apply game rules from the 1900s and 2000s back on the past. Then you will not understand anything. And you will have no clue why England came to domitate the world. How Portugal and the Netherlands could build sizeable colonies worldwide, and how Sweden could beat the crap out of big countries like Germany, Russia and Poland and build the largest navy in Europe in the late 1500s and early 1600s. Had one travelled back in time it to the 1500s and proposed your worldview. Then people would have felt certain that the Ottoman empire would be the strongest country on the planet. And the incestious Habsburgs would continue to gobble up more land with royal marriages. And France would forever be the most powerful country in western Europe as it had the largest population and a good climate that allowed the place to be rich thanks all the bounty of food their lands produced. After all, did the muslims call crusaders for "franks" since most and nearly all of them came from France - the most powerful and most populated country in Europe at that time. England on the other hand was militarily weak and had a small population. It could not win any wars on its own but constantly had to ally itself with a strong land power like Prussia. *"they did not even prevent the Russians from winning the Great Northern War a century later."* I think it is astonishing that Sweden came close to winning the war at multiple occasions. Sweden stood alone against Denmark, Norway, Saxony, Poland, Russia, and later on also against Hannover and Brandenburg. The enemy had a 13 times larger population than Sweden, but for two decades were they force Sweden to the negotiating table. Compare that to Frederick the Greats Prussia which had to fight against enemies with a population of only 9 times stronger, and Frederick also had allies like Britain, Hanover and Hessen that provided troops that could help fight off French and German empire attacks before they reached Prussia. But despite all this, and despite many impressive military victories stood his Kingdom at the brink of total destruction after the defeat at Kunersdorf after just 3 years of war. However the Russians remained passive and that saved Prussia from destruction, as Frederick had no troops left after that defeat to stop a push into Brandenburg. Frederick kept on fighting the war, but by late 1761 had his luck runned out again as the Austrians had for the first time made a succesful winter campaign. After that could only a miracle have saved Prussia. And that is what Frederick got when the Russia empress died, and the mentally ill prussian fanboy King Peter III took power in russia and made peace with Frederick and decided to join the war on Fredericks side. So which side handled the war better? I would argue that Sweden did. And many of Prussias military defeats just oved to Fredericks own stupidity, hubris and arrogance - like Hochkirch and Kunersdorf. Sweden on the other hand continued to fight outnumbered for the entire war, but despite that deliever impressive victories time and time again: Narva 1700, Düna 1701, Rauge 1701, Kliszow 1702, Saločiai 1703, Pultusk 1703, Jakobstadt 1704, Poznan 1704, Poniec 1704, Gemauerthof 1705, Warsaw 1705, Fraustadt 1706, Grodno 1708, Holowczyn 1708, Malatitze 1708, Rajovka 1708, Oposhnya 1709, Krasnokutsk-Gorodnoye 1709, Helsingborg 1710, Gadebusch 1712, Stäket 1719. Indeed had Charles XII not died in 1718 had Norway likely fallen into Swedish hands as two of Norways biggest cities were only weeks from falling. Fredriksten fortress, was the gateway to Oslo and it was estimated by both sides to fall within half a week. And Trondheim only had food for two more weeks before it had to surrender. And after that would Denmark be kicked out from the war. Saxony was already eager to make peace and saw no reason to keep on fighting as it likely would not lead to any territorial gains, and the King have become more hostile towards Russia and Brandenburg. The tiny Hanoverian army could easily have been crushed by Swedish forces after Norway was taken, and no Danish navy could block Swedish troops from being sent to Germany. And with Denmark and Hanover out of the way would Brandenburg stand no chance alone against the Swedish troops and would likely soon have surrendered as well. So then would only Russia be left to defeat. And while the strong Swedish navy would protect Sweden from a russian invasion could Swedish troops march into the undefended Baltics and retake the breadbasket of Sweden. And without the Baltic harbors would the entire russian army in Finland starve to death - so russia would have then been forced to retreat. So basically all the land gains by Swedens enemies since 1721 would have been undone by that point. So even at the last years of the war did Sweden stand a good chance of winning the war.
@@nattygsbord True.
@@nattygsbord Sweden's success in the Thirty Years' War would not have been possible without rallying the German Protestants to its cause and gaining French subsidies to pay its army. Sweden alone did not have the manpower - for most of the time, more than two thirds of the soldiers in the "Swedish army in Germany" were German mercenaries like Prague's partly conqueror Königsmarck. Also, like the video said: Sweden couldn't pay its army, it had to rely on contributions (which rapidly dwindled by the devastation the soldiers caused) and foreign subsidies. But in the end, they fought the war in Germany for France and brought it to an end almost on their own - because France was enterily occupied with fighting Spain until Rocroi 1643 and did even afterwards not score many really impactful victories against the Austrian Habsburgs.
"Ohhhhh, you lion from the North."
Mighty eagle rule alone, liberator claim the throne
Lion from the Northern land, Take the scepter on his hand!
Hype! :)
Not sure if you can do anything about it but the youtube preview only seemed to show the sponsored content
_Ich bin der Löw von Mitternacht_ _Mit dir will ich frisch fechten_ _Ich streite ja durch Gottes Kraft_ _Gott helfe dem Gerechten!_
That's a swell goat animation
hello, how do you do this simulation of battles with rectangles? Is it a program?
premiere pro, after effects, photo shop, a lot of patience
ei mitää hakka pelts vaan hakkaa päälle perkeles
9:32 Where is that animation from?
Thank you great work If it possible I want Arabic translation thanks
Lucky for Gustav, it‘s basically impossible for him not to get what he wants. The Emperor can‘t consolidate power and become an absolutist ruler of Germany (the way the French, English or Swedish kings already are), because in Germany it‘s the regional princes (Fürsten) that have become absolutist monarchs. They were always too powerful to subdue, and as result, while the universal process of centralization and nation-forming is in fact happening in Germany the same as everywhere else, they (the Fürsten) are the ones profiting from it, not the Emperor. They all have their own territory, their own tax base, their own standing armies, their own rich supporters, and because they do, the Emperor ultimately has none of those things. At least as emperor. As a result, he can‘t really enforce sovereignty outside a small part of Germany, and the other princes are free to pursue their own foreign policy with the help of their own armies and their own allies. Of course, in doing so they become the tail of larger, more powerful states but it does keep them in power and will continue to do so for centuries to come.
I think you have this backward, that was the _result_ of the war after the Treaty of Westphalia. Before that it wasn’t a clear nation-state system in the way you’re talking about and the Emperor was pretty damn powerful. The most powerful monarch in Europe, outside maybe the Spanish king if we’re thinking more globally. And he did exercise sovereignty over a large part of the Empire at this point having conquered so much in the first decade of the war. When he wasn’t able to maintain that with the relentless succession of interventions by major foreign powers against him, the Habsburgs of course had to agree to give up national sovereignty over the states of the Empire in 1648. But I find it a hard argument to make that the Emperor was so lacking in effective authority in the Empire going into the war considering it took an Empire-wide rebellion, Denmark, Sweden, France, the Netherlands and British support and 30 years of fighting to dislodge him from control over the Empire. No other European state in that era ever faced anywhere near that level of all-out war against its power for thirty years from within and without simultaneously, I’d hardly imagine the so well-centralized France would have easily subdued a comparable situation in its own country.
@@ethanpintar5454 no, the emperor never had the same level of control as other monarchs. That’s the entire reason this war was possible.
Commenting for the algorithm
an offer to the gods
Jaahas, torille.
Man I hope you don't get mad at me for this but your videos are superb to learn from just as they are to sleep to, damn.
I mean his videos are interesting but he also has a calming voice that might put you to sleep
GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS LIBERA ET IMPERA ACERBUS ET INGENS AUGUSTA PER ANGUSTA
Swedes sure were one powerhouse back then, still are but not as much as their glorious days.
after the war yes. in 1631, not yet.
Just a regional power trying to compete with France; England and Spain and losing to Russia; a other regional power.
Sweden was powerful back then. It had a chance of winning the Great Northern War at multiple occasions, but Karl died and then did the traitor nobles and Frederick of Hesse take over the country and drive it towards ruin. The time between 1721 and 1870 was just a dark age in Swedish history. The only positive from this age was scientific breakthroughs and art by Tobias Sergel. Since 1995 have Sweden been in another dark age since it joined the EU and became deindustrialized. Much of Swedens recipy for success in the early modern period was the strong state and strong monarchy and effiecent state apparatus. Our nobility was poor and constantly got murdered - In Stockholms bloodbath, and the murders of the Sture family, and then came King John III who also threatened the nobility with a similiar fate, and shortly after him came King Charles IX who murdered much of the Swedish nobility in Linköpings bloodbath. With the useless Queen Christina did the nobility gain power and wealth... and the Swedish state became weak, as the nobles who owned almost all the land in the country did not pay any taxes. So the Swedish state became underfunded, and militarily weak and had to seak security in military alliances instead. But the alliance with France dragged Sweden into the costly and pointless Franco-Dutch war... which was a costly disaster for Sweden, and the entire Swedish navy had to be rebuilt from scratch after it had been lost in a terrible storm. Many reforms to take back all land and power from the useless and incompetent nobles were made under the Kings Charles X and Charles XI. And soon did Sweden again have the best military in Europe again and a well funded war chest. But after Charles XII died was Swedens time as a great power permanently over because of the f**king nobles.
I see always a lot of insight in the Dutch, Imperial, Spanish and Swedish military systems, yet I always see only references to how the Danish organized their troops. Any idea on where to find sources on this, available in English?
Sweden and Spain had professional armies while Denmark did rely on mercenary forces that was hastenly put togheter as soon as the country declared war. Sweden more relied on mobilizing its own farmboys that it have trained togheter to become well drilled military units, and where the men in each platoon were friends and knew each other. And this created a strong bond between the men to want fight til the end for ones friends. The Spaniards terucio was similiar in this regard. But the Danish men of quickly mobilized mercenaries, volunteers, and forcefully conscriped mercenaries had not trained togheter and did not know each other. So their fighting morale and skills on the battlefields were therefore lacking. The Kalmar war was therefore the last time the Danish army was superior to the Swedish army. After then had the Swedish army improved tactics, training and organisation so much that the Danes could no longer compete.
Yes, but I wanted a source that isn't a KZhead comment. Denmark's military history is surprisingly opaque.
@@XScorpionXful I don't think it is surprising, I mean countries loves to read and talk about their military victories but not so much about depressing and humiliating defeats. To me as a Swede is it a bit funny when I listen to Norwegian military podcast, and the Norwegian wars in the 1600s and 1700s are just quickly passed over while the Napoleonic war is much more talked about. Probably because thats the only war with Sweden it did do well. The Norwegian military history is sparse.. it does not have much military glory, its more of a country of great explorers that found iceland, greenland, america... and travelled antartica. Likewise do the French love to talk about Napoleon, but the 1700s does not get much love from them. And here in Sweden is it not much written about Pomeranian war that went badly for Sweden. After 1613 have Denmarks military history only seen defeats. Torstenssons war was a disaster for Denmark, and the war of 1658 was the worst catastrophy Denmark's history - its like when Germany lost Prussia or when Hungary lost two-thirds of its territory in 1920. The Scanian war was unsuccesful in taking back all lost lands from Sweden. And likewise was the Great Northern war. The country easily got bullied into submission during the Napoleonic wars. And 1864 was it time for Denmark to get beaten up by the Prussians. And the country lost to nazi-germany in just a few hours of fighting. So from having been a great power during the viking age and medieval times and a pretty powerful Kingdom also under the Kalmar union... have Denmark faded into a tiny plot of land without much power. So I can understand if a Dane think the historical trend have been depressing. Another reason for the lack of Danish literature is probably the fact that Denmark have historically been more of a naval power, unlike its Swedish neighbour which was a land power. Like England did the strong Danish nobility probably feel more comfortable with a strong navy than an army that the King could use to supress rivals for power. And Denmarks borders in year 1520 was much different from today. Not only did Jylland and Själland need a sea connection. But so did also the connection between Denmark and Norway, Denmark and Iceland, Denmark and Gotland and Denmark and Scania, Denmark and Bornholm. And Denmarks imperialist ambitions in the Baltic sea and its attempts to take Saaremaa also required a navy. Denmark was also had a big merchant navy. And it was also the most succesful colonial power of all the countries in the Baltic sea, and its possessions in America, Africa and India needed a navy. Its navy had a much higher quality than the army, and could score many victories against the Swedes even later on. So its not much surprising that the navy gets more attention than the arm.
I love the fact that you didn't fall to protestant propaganda blindfully blaiming Tilly for the ransack of Magdeburg. While in most sources the debatability of this fact is indicated, I saw too many summarizations of Tilly's actions in war limited only to being "butcher of Magdeburg", which is terribly unfair. F.e. most of my local polish sources do that, which is kinda surprising taking to account which side of the war PLC was sympathising with, but I guess WWII sentiments towards Germans in the writings of the so-called historians are still so strong they need to demonize them at every step, which we kinda feel in other parts of history teachings too. Thankfully, generational change is slowly making progress, but it's still a long way. But enough about that, thanks for amaizing vid!
What a weird comment to make. We don’t blame the Jews for the holocaust nor do we discredit any of the history recounting or downplay the severity of the massacre that occurred. You owe the same respect to this piece of history.
@@creolekolbytv1252 Do you speak in the name of Protestants or Poles? Cuz I have no idea what's your point
0:05 Lion of the Noth
Gustavus.....Adolphus o.O
SandRhoman - will the English Civil War be a future series? Thx
we thought about doing it but we‘re hesitant. it has been covered by many channels, so the demand is probably quite low.
@@SandRhomanHistorymany people are interested and will watch any history content on youtube no matter what, if the quality is there. I, for example, watched kings and generals videos about the english civil war some months ago and if you were to upload a video about the same topic next week I would still watch it. Because different perspectives and POVs are always intriguing and stimulating
Weren’t the Swedish reserves deployed to the gap left by the Saxons also made of Finnish regiments?
the Finns were AFAIK light horse so not suited to that role
The Swedish reserve was mostly made up of Germans and Scots. Finnish units were mostly on the right wing and some in the center.
@@thodan467 there were Finnish infantry in the Swedish Army in Breitenfeld as well. You can check out original Swedish Army Regiments, those get divided to modern Swedish and Finnish regiments.
@@jokemon9547 ah ok! I totally remembered wrong, or got myself confused thinking that Horn had mostly commanded troops from the eastern part of the kingdom, but makes sense.
@@MrSpritzmeister Sorry, i thought the finnish cavalry was meant , who AFAIK where light cav and therefore not suited to that role and better suited units had been at hand
hi im just here to spek the algorithm
Honestly, we should all call him just as we people in the former Swedish Empire do, Gustav Adolf. Those 'us' endings don't really belong there.
It's Latinized and to be honest, it kind of sounds better and gives him and his name that gravitas that ancient Rome and its language tends to invoke.
@@Torag55 The latinised version sounds pompous, and foolish.
To You it might but to a Swede it's weird, you're just adding an ''-us'' suffix, that's really it.@@Torag55
English do this constantly to confuse people. If you think it is bad with this.. you should try to learning about spanish history.. where every name is always "angliced" so people dont even relate them to the spanish. Just see how they call "cristobal colon"..
@@TrikipumAre you saying Anglicizing names is worse somehow than Hispanicizing them or what
It seems like these lessons in effective tactics have to be learned over and over for militaries.
which less here are you referring to?
@@Eric-ng2ed lessons of using various units in close support, allowing men with training to form smaller squads that are authorized to make smaller tactical decisions for themselves, stressing training, etc. Basically the same lessons the Germans took away from their defeat by Napoleon, the lessons that the (EARLY WAR) Waffen-SS and Wehrmacht employed, that Ukraine is having trouble employing, hence their tactical failures - whereas their successes somehow manage to employ them, etc ad nauseam
Early psychological warfare 🤔
👍👍👍👍
.. those Swiss just didn't like the Habsburgs did they?!....:P
I love Germany's and Sweden's relationship throughout history from the 30 years war and the Hanseatic League to modern day with strong trade realations and common diplomatic interests (and soon both as members of NATO). As a swede with german friends i am honored to be a part of that long tradition of friendship. Thank you for spreading word of this relationship. May Germany and Sweden stay friends forever!
Didn't the Germans unite against the Swedes in the Great Northern War? I don't think they have always been friends, for a reason the Swedes no longer have territories in North Germany.
@@IsaacRaiCastillo I was not aware of this conflict. Kind of shattered my bubble somewhat. But even so, sometimes even friends fight
Gustavus Adolphus the father of modern war would have been a good title as well
Is he though? Historians still argue over he actually innovated as much as we say he did. Also have to remember that in this particular war he won one major victory at Breittenfeld, a second much less impressive one at Rain, a defeat at Alte Veste and then got himself killed at Lutzen which turned into a bloodbath for both sides. If you add to that his shakier record in previous wars, is he really that big or did his heroic death boost his reputation much higher than it should have? He was certainly a great military commander but I don't know if we can single him out as the father of modern warfare when he was living in an age filled with men who changed warfare.
@@francismorin8561 No it's his system of combining all elements and winning battles without fighting them. It's dumb people taht focus on that he only one won big battle in 30y war. When he infact caused a lot more death through starvation by using strategical movements. Also you completly ignore the whole period before he went into war in Germany. He as a 15 year old took over Sweden which was attacked by Denamrk, Poland and Russia. And the entire Swedish army had been wipped out by Polish troops. As he become king he first handeled Denmark, then Russia then Poland. As Nevitt Dupuy says Gustavus Adolphus is most likely the top 2 commanders in humans history, togheter with Genghis Khan. Because Napoleon, Ceasar, Alexander. Hannibal, Fredrick the Great all inheritade a perfectly good army from their fathers/goverments. Gustavus did not he had to rebuild his just like Genghis Khan. And Napoleon do say study Gustavous campaign to be a good strategist. A good strategist wins battles without fighting them.
@@francismorin8561 He won a few more battles than that and at Rain he was on his way to completly surround his enemy, but Tilly was was mortally wounded by a cannonball, so the Imperial retreated before he could finish the job. Alta Veste was an attack on a fortified encampment, difficult under all circumstances. But why he is called Father of mothern warfare, is not because his victories on the battlefield. Its because how he changed the way war is fought, with e.g more reliability on smaller more movable artillary integrated with the infantry. Look in Ukraine even now how important artillary is, thereby Father of "modern warfare".
The true father of Modern Warfare is the Spanish Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba (the Great Captain) who successfully combined the use of firearms with the infantry and those who evolved his concept were the Duke of Alba (who initiated the change from the arquebus to the musket) and Maurice of Nassau (who promoted firearms in the infantry and reduced pikes), Gustavus Adolphus was only the next step in that evolution (by better integrating artillery with infantry), but it should never be called the "Father" of something that didn't start. The only reason why the merit has been stolen is because Protestant countries do not like the idea of giving value to what a Spanish Catholic started.
@@IsaacRaiCastillo Only Gustaus Adolphus that is known as the father of modern warfare. And yes I do know he tried to get as much info as possible from all dutch diplomats reagrding Maurice of Nassau. Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba never managed to get the fire rate up and make it effective. Which is what Gustavus Adolphus did. Before you could acctually be better with just firing bows as it would have a lot higher fire rate. It's not like the spanish army ahd gone any futher in this and still sticked with large squares of pikes
Its the fuckin middle rising action bois! Fuck yeahhahahahhaj
let's go :)
Gustavus was the real hero of the war. Uniting all protestants, not giving any concessions to catholics, not working with catholics even! would he have lived longer, the war would have been over in 1633.
Si, pero no lo hizo. Y al final los católicos les mandaron a casa en 1934 en Nördlingen, Baviera cuando el Infante Cardenal Fernando de Austria se desvió de su camino junto a los tercios españoles que dirigia desde Italia para combatir en los Países Bajos y derrotó junto a Matthias Gallas y Fernando III Ernesto de Habsburgo y Wittelsbach a los ejércitos de Horn y Weimar que continuaban con su avance tras la muerte de Gustavo Adolfo. Parte importante de la batalla se decidió en la colina de Allbuch donde los españoles aguantaron de forma heroica todo intento de toma del bando sueco, siendo uno de los puntos donde se concentró la accion de la batalla. Gustavo Adolfo tuvo suerte de morirse antes de encontrarse con las tropas imperiales españoles. Después de esta batalla el Infante Cardenal Fernando dirigió sus tropas de nuevo a los países bajos donde como gobernador infligió diferentes derrotas de importancia a los rebeldes holandeses manteniendo el control de ciudades como Amberes y de los paises bajos españoles en general bajo el dominio se su legítimo rey, Su Catolica Majestad. Viva Cristo Rey! Muerte a los herejes.
Actually he worked with fake Catholics who have no moral scruples with working with anyone including the infidel Ottoman Empire against the Catholic Holy Roman Empire at the Treaty of Altmark.
he worked with france. catholic france.
@@uelibinde *In Name Only
And lose
😊