The Thirty Years War

[zelda12]

Well I recently read a book set in the time frame and have inadvertently found myself sucked in. The various intricasies and infighting the shifting alliances and grand battles.

What I really want is to learn more. A lot more. So I thought I know I'll start a thread where people can discuss the thirty years war. Hence the existance of this thread.

I start the ball rolling:

Was Gustav Adolphus the greatest General of the period. The king of Sweden was a born soldier. He led the assault on a fortress on the border between Denmark and Sweden Capturing it. He fought wars all across Northen Germany he defeated the polish in various engagements and his defining moment came at Breitenfeld. Where he crushed a Habsburg army. He came close to establishing a seperate, Protestant Germany free from the Habsburg control. He was however excessively brave and died soon after Breitenfeld leading a cavalry charge.

This is a sketchy history and I'll try to flesh it out but what do you think. Do you think Tilly was the best after only experiencing defeat for the first time in his old age at Breitenfeld?

Is it one of the Prince's of Orange who held the Spanish at bay for the better part of a century?

Any questions are welcome any information gladly accepted.

[Adrian II]

Was Gustav Adolphus the greatest General of the period.

It could be argued that it was Wallenstein who succesfully guarded the Habsburg front against Christian IV and became so prestigious that the territorial rulers forced the Emperor to depose him and reduce the size of the Imperial army. Wallensteins protracted campaign against Mansfeldt wasn't spectacular in the sense that it abounded in brilliant battles, but in the sense that it was a brilliant display of maneuvering skills, logistics, psychology and diplomatic skills typical of warfare in that period. German historian Golo Mann has written an exhaustive and utterly boring 1125-page biography of Wallenstein, a Bohemian eccentric who fought his own fears and preoccupations as well as his eternal - and eternally worsening - health problems as much as he fought the enemy.

[Ironside]

It's hard to know exactly on what you would put into the word greatest general. Is it the tactical skills, strategical skills, diplomatic skills or a combination of the above?

Because if you take all these together, then I would say that Gustav Adolphus was the greatest general, but if you remove the diplomatic skills part, then it isn't so certain anymore.

I'm probably biased though

Other highly skilled generals for the Swedish side was Johan Banér and Lennart Torstensson.

[zelda12]

He was certainly fearless. He recieved a neck wound by being shot. The doctors couldn't get the bullet out, so as a result he couldn't wear armour. Yet he still led many cavalry charges like the illfated charge at Lutzen.

[Watchman]

High officers, royalty included, tended to do that at the time. And, naturally, every now and then they ended up getting killed as a result despite their bodyguards' best efforts.

Though by what I've read old (well, in his late thirties...) Adolphus II didn't exactly die "leading a charge", rather more along the lines of "stumbled into a troop of enemy cuirassieurs in the smoke with a small party and duly got shot trying to det away"...

[zelda12]

Yeah, kina heard that too. Tried to ignore it though.

The Swedish did win the Battle though. Anyway he did manage, with his other generals granted, to make the Baltic an almostly entirely swedish controled area. He conquered the Russian Baltic Coast. Along with the Polish and he effectively controlled the German side after he defeated Tilly's mercenaries at Breitenfeild. The only other peopl on the Baltic were the Danes.