Gustavus Adolphus the Great

[Adrian II]

http://www.reformationsa.org/article...usAdolphus.htm

Very interesting article on King Gustavus Adolphus the Great.

In an attempt not to sound overly-nationalist, and I apologize if I do (), I believe Adolphus was probably one of greatest military minds of his time, and in history. Though of course not the sole innovater in the idea of combined arms, he managed to effectively apply the idea to a campaign, that being the Thirty Years War. His use of mobile artillery, shallower ranks of pike and musket, and the use of combined cavalry and infantry in warfare helped heavily in his victories.

Any opinions?

Not much to add, except that you are probably right. I just travelled Wallenstein´s homeland (Frydlant in the former Austrian Bohemia, now Czechia) and was reminded of his military genius.

Could you shed some new light on the Battle of Lützen (1632) where Gustavus was killed? The paradox of that battle seems to be that if the Swedes' resistance had not hardened because of Gustavus' death, Wallenstein might well have carried the day despite being in the minority and with less motivated troops. Or is this poppycock?

[KarlXII]

Not much to add, except that you are probably right. I just travelled Wallenstein´s homeland (Frydlant in the former Austrian Bohemia, now Czechia) and was reminded of his military genius.

Could you shed some new light on the Battle of Lützen (1632) where Gustavus was killed? The paradox of that battle seems to be that if the Swedes' resistance had not hardened because of Gustavus' death, Wallenstein might well have carried the day despite being in the minority and with less motivated troops. Or is this poppycock?

Rumors of the King's death were spreading before it was used to win the day, the whole Swedish centre broke after a disastorous charge. Royal preacher Jakob Fabricius gathered officers and sang psalms in the rout, and hundreds of soldiers stopped. I believe that the Swedish Army was effectively saved by this act. When the army learned of the King's death, they were not leaderless, as Bernhard had already taken control, but they were vengeful. "They have killed the King! Avenge the King!," was the charging cry as they headed straight at the Imperial line, taking the day.

To your question: Had Gustavus Adolphus not died, the battle probably would've ended earlier in a Swedish victory. Had the Army never learned of his death, the battle would more than likely ended in a stalemate, or close Swedish victory. Simply because the death of the King gave the Swedes inspiration to win. Wallenstein would more than likely not be able to win, in any case.

[King Jan III Sobieski]

I recently saw a book on Gustavus Adolphus at a local discount bookstore; now I wish I would have picked it up.

[Adrian II]

Wallenstein would more than likely not be able to win, in any case.

I see. His troops weren't exactly #A1 either. I remember reading the huge (and hugely tedious) Wallenstein-biography by Golo Mann as a student, and one thing which stuck in my mind is the sheer doggedness with which Wallenstein pursued his campaigns in the second and final phase of his career. No money, no soldiers, no support whatsoever from Ferdinand. And in his advanced age he constantly suffered from gout, tooth aches and stomch trouble, which made the endless marching, maneuvering and (re)positioning particularly hard on him. Still, he managed to force the Swedes to attack a fortified position at Lützen. Quite a feat of the old fox.

[Martok]

I have to confess that despite the fact there's a Lutheran college right here in Minnesota that's named after the man, I'd never really paid any attention to who he was until after I joined the Org.

Nice article, although it does portray him as little more than a Swedish version of Alfred the Great. Perhaps that was intentional?

[KarlXII]

I have to confess that despite the fact there's a Lutheran college right here in Minnesota that's named after the man, I'd never really paid any attention to who he was until after I joined the Org.

Nice article, although it does portray him as little more than a Swedish version of Alfred the Great. Perhaps that was intentional?

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, I was hard pressed to find a proper biography on the King. Most information you can get is on the 30 years war in general, with little mention of Adolphus' true exploits.

And yes, Gustavus is often seen as Sweden's Alfred the Great

[KrooK]

He was really good commander. However not undefeated....

[Martok]

He was really good commander. However not undefeated....

Yeah, but who isn't? To the best of my knowledge, Alexander is the only "Great General" who can make the claim of never having lost a battle in which he personally commanded. That Gustavus cannot doesn't nullify his genius -- that would be like saying Hannibal was a sucky commander because he eventually lost to Rome in the end.