Hello! Vavva again, now with the second part of the Finnish Winter War.
The Russian forces marched into the Finnish woods. In the winter. In -40 degrees Celsius (about -100 Fahrenheit). In olive-green summer uniforms. Good idea in Central-European warfare. Not a good idea in Finland.
The Fins had skilled marksmen and snipers on skis in white, stealthy suits made to be invisible in the snow that covered everything, and had no problem in the beginning taking down the Russians. "The White Death", as the Russians called it when their soldiers just vanished to gunshots from an apparently desolate forest, claimed countless lives. As the Russians had terrible uniforms which neither gave camouflage nor protection from the bone-chilling snow, they perished in large numbers during the war. Though the Soviets have large numbers of tanks, immensely superior to their Finnish counterpart, they are quite useless in the think snow with a minimum of roads. The tanks drove in large columns through the forest, vulnerable to Finnish ski troops. They drive by, throw some explosives at the tank in the front and zoom away again, disabling the advance for hours.
The Russian divisions all over the front camped in large camps with colossal field kitchens, and the Fins go for them. They just zoom in on skis, drop some molotov cocktails or grenades on the tanks and field kitchens, shoot some Russians and then vanish out again. All in a flash. One of the Russian divisions are completely surrounded by various Finnish forces, during the battle of Suomussalmi, who divide the army into "motti" - a Finnish logger's expression of a stable of chopped wood ready to be carried away. Almost the entire division is annihilated in ambushes.
Nontheless, the Finnish knew well that they could never win the war. Their only hope was to hold the line so long that the Western countries would feel sympathy for the struggling Fins and support them. Russia could pump out a million or two in short notice. The Russians were immensely annoyed by the apparent confidence of such a small nation, and strive for finding creative excuses for the "saviour of the world", the army, banging its head in a tiny wall on the border for such a long time. They expected 12 days. It took over 4 months.
TBC
Please etc.
Vavva
tirsdag 1. november 2011
søndag 24. april 2011
Nordic Wars : Battle of Poltava
Hello. I've been busy for some weeks, which delayed my posting here, but now it comes a new post about the decisive battle of Poltava in 1709, which will be the last post in the series "Nordic Wars".
It all started in a muddy field in Poltava in today's Ukraine, then in Russia. The Swedish army was exhausted after a seemlingly endless march towards the Russians, looking for a final blow to the Russian army and eventually the fall of Moscow. A long campaign had been going on, with heavy casualties on both sides, and the Swedish government wanted to end the bloodshed with a victory. Besides, the Swedish king Charles XII (murdered in a previous post) was obsessed with warfare and couldn't rest with what he had: He loved the battlefield. And battlefield he created, as the Swedish army, with a minimum of supplies and a wounded king, marched into the fields of Poltava, deciding the Swedish Empire's fate.
As always in these campaigns, the Swedes were outnumbered, which usually weren't a problem. At the battle of Narva 9 years earlier the Swedes won, though outnumbered 1:5. And when the army of about 10.000 men marched further, the Russian army was counting 45.000 men. Unfortunately for the Swedish, the Russians learned from their mistakes, including the one in Narva, and now got largely better equipment and cannons. Additionally, the Swedish artillery was too heavy to carry, and had small amounts of ammunition and gunpowder, and could barely be used on the battlefield. With weak gunpowder, as gunpowder had a "best before date" at the time, the Swedish army's victory was both difficult to accomplish and crucial.
Without the proper commander (the king, who was wounded and could only watch the encounter), the Swedish army was lead by the generals Carl Gustav Rehnskiold and Adam Ludwig Lewenhaupt, which complicated the conditions utterly, as they had widely different strategies and solutions. After a series of unfortunate events, as mutiny, drinking, disease epidemics and late supplies, the battle was almost doomed from the beginning. However, the Swedes marched on through the muds, like zombies. The Russians fired, but the Swedes kept marching, as their gunpowder could only be used at close range. Finally, the Swedes fired, but with a weak effect. As a commander of the Swedish army commented, the sound of the firing in many of the guns sounded "like a pair of gloves smacked together". Still, they marched on, outnumbered 1:3. And thundered into the Russian line, fighting, fighting. Rehnskiold saw the glororious event and had a serious opportunity to win, if the cavalry would charge the Russian flanks now. Unfortunately, the cavalry wasn't ready yet, and needed to regroup in order to charge in, which sealed the battle and the nation's fate. The Swedish line infantry lost the encounter, broke and fled, and now the Swedish core, including the wounded king, was surrounded by fleeing comrades and Russian bullets. Charles was the main priority of both the Swedish and Russian army, and more and more Swedes protected the king with their lives, directing bullets originally meant for the king. About 30 men lost their lives taking king-aimed bullets, but the king got away, with some of the army. About 9000 lost their lives, mostly Swedes, and about 3000 Swedish soldiers, including the artillery, was captured.
Epilogue
The army marched further, in even worse conditions, through the muddy fields of Poltava, and tried to reach Dniepr, a river running out in the Black Sea, from where they could sail home. However, the rafts to get the fleet southwards to the Black Sea, were too small to fit the entire army, and after quarreling and fighting over the open slots on the raft, a minority of the army, including the king, got away. They went to Moldavia (controlled by the Ottoman empire, Sweden's allies) and got home from there. The Swedish army and might was a mere shadow of its past glories, as a couple of thousands survived a disastrous campaign with about 44.000 participants.
Please correct me if some numbers, dates or facts are incorrect.
Vavva
It all started in a muddy field in Poltava in today's Ukraine, then in Russia. The Swedish army was exhausted after a seemlingly endless march towards the Russians, looking for a final blow to the Russian army and eventually the fall of Moscow. A long campaign had been going on, with heavy casualties on both sides, and the Swedish government wanted to end the bloodshed with a victory. Besides, the Swedish king Charles XII (murdered in a previous post) was obsessed with warfare and couldn't rest with what he had: He loved the battlefield. And battlefield he created, as the Swedish army, with a minimum of supplies and a wounded king, marched into the fields of Poltava, deciding the Swedish Empire's fate.
As always in these campaigns, the Swedes were outnumbered, which usually weren't a problem. At the battle of Narva 9 years earlier the Swedes won, though outnumbered 1:5. And when the army of about 10.000 men marched further, the Russian army was counting 45.000 men. Unfortunately for the Swedish, the Russians learned from their mistakes, including the one in Narva, and now got largely better equipment and cannons. Additionally, the Swedish artillery was too heavy to carry, and had small amounts of ammunition and gunpowder, and could barely be used on the battlefield. With weak gunpowder, as gunpowder had a "best before date" at the time, the Swedish army's victory was both difficult to accomplish and crucial.
Without the proper commander (the king, who was wounded and could only watch the encounter), the Swedish army was lead by the generals Carl Gustav Rehnskiold and Adam Ludwig Lewenhaupt, which complicated the conditions utterly, as they had widely different strategies and solutions. After a series of unfortunate events, as mutiny, drinking, disease epidemics and late supplies, the battle was almost doomed from the beginning. However, the Swedes marched on through the muds, like zombies. The Russians fired, but the Swedes kept marching, as their gunpowder could only be used at close range. Finally, the Swedes fired, but with a weak effect. As a commander of the Swedish army commented, the sound of the firing in many of the guns sounded "like a pair of gloves smacked together". Still, they marched on, outnumbered 1:3. And thundered into the Russian line, fighting, fighting. Rehnskiold saw the glororious event and had a serious opportunity to win, if the cavalry would charge the Russian flanks now. Unfortunately, the cavalry wasn't ready yet, and needed to regroup in order to charge in, which sealed the battle and the nation's fate. The Swedish line infantry lost the encounter, broke and fled, and now the Swedish core, including the wounded king, was surrounded by fleeing comrades and Russian bullets. Charles was the main priority of both the Swedish and Russian army, and more and more Swedes protected the king with their lives, directing bullets originally meant for the king. About 30 men lost their lives taking king-aimed bullets, but the king got away, with some of the army. About 9000 lost their lives, mostly Swedes, and about 3000 Swedish soldiers, including the artillery, was captured.
Epilogue
The army marched further, in even worse conditions, through the muddy fields of Poltava, and tried to reach Dniepr, a river running out in the Black Sea, from where they could sail home. However, the rafts to get the fleet southwards to the Black Sea, were too small to fit the entire army, and after quarreling and fighting over the open slots on the raft, a minority of the army, including the king, got away. They went to Moldavia (controlled by the Ottoman empire, Sweden's allies) and got home from there. The Swedish army and might was a mere shadow of its past glories, as a couple of thousands survived a disastrous campaign with about 44.000 participants.
Please correct me if some numbers, dates or facts are incorrect.
Vavva
onsdag 23. mars 2011
The Nordic Wars - Kronan
Hello, and welcome to yet another post in the topic of the great nordic wars. This time: Kronan.
Kronan ("The Crown") was a enormous Swedish battleship with over 100 guns, built in the 1672. It was the great pride of the Swedish navy - the biggest ship in Scandinavia, number four in the world! As Sweden and Denmark was the rivals at the time, Sweden wanted to break the Danish naval supremacy. Usually, the Danes had a great navy, while the Swedes had a great army. As an army can't cross water, which a Swede had to in order to reach Copenhagen, all the Swedes had to do was break the Danish navy, and victory was theirs! And Kronan was set to do so. But...
The ship was gigantic, but the crew unskilled and officers primarily taken from land warfare. The Danish crew was the pride of their nation. Just like today, material supremacy only can't let you win. But the Swedes had to try, and try they did. In the Scandinavian war of 1675-79, at the battle of Öland in the Baltic sea, 1676.
The Danish navy gets the upper hand by getting the wind in their backs and scares away the Swedish navy, following them. The unskilled Swedish main admiral Lorentz Creutz keeps fleeing until better conditions for a fight can be found, as the Danes surely couldn't be beaten if they had the wind too! The Swedes set sails, too many sails, to get away, as the winds are powerful and tears in the sails and masts. The admiral is baffled when some of his ships turns around to engage the Danes, despite the admiral's orders. Creutz swears, as he have to choose between:
-Keep sailing, knowing the ships that turned probably will be lost
-Turn the entire fleet around, and starting the battle in complete disorder
Creutz swears again and orders the fleet to turn around. The cannons are locked and loaded, as Kronan turns around. The reckless sailing causes the ship to heel drastically, and is taking water through the open cannon ports. As gunpowder and lit fuses rumble around in the heeling ship, it takes fire and explodes. Nearly 10% of the Swedish navy crew, its admiral and greatest ship is all gone. The Swedes additionally loses several ships, and the Danes win decisively with only minor casualties. After another Danish victory in the battle of Køge Bugt later in this war, the Danish naval supremacy is secured, and it lasts all the way to 1807, when the once-great Danish navy is robbed by Great Britain. (See the 1814 - pt.1 post)
Please correct me if some dates, numbers or facts are incorrect.
Vavva
Kronan ("The Crown") was a enormous Swedish battleship with over 100 guns, built in the 1672. It was the great pride of the Swedish navy - the biggest ship in Scandinavia, number four in the world! As Sweden and Denmark was the rivals at the time, Sweden wanted to break the Danish naval supremacy. Usually, the Danes had a great navy, while the Swedes had a great army. As an army can't cross water, which a Swede had to in order to reach Copenhagen, all the Swedes had to do was break the Danish navy, and victory was theirs! And Kronan was set to do so. But...
The ship was gigantic, but the crew unskilled and officers primarily taken from land warfare. The Danish crew was the pride of their nation. Just like today, material supremacy only can't let you win. But the Swedes had to try, and try they did. In the Scandinavian war of 1675-79, at the battle of Öland in the Baltic sea, 1676.
The Danish navy gets the upper hand by getting the wind in their backs and scares away the Swedish navy, following them. The unskilled Swedish main admiral Lorentz Creutz keeps fleeing until better conditions for a fight can be found, as the Danes surely couldn't be beaten if they had the wind too! The Swedes set sails, too many sails, to get away, as the winds are powerful and tears in the sails and masts. The admiral is baffled when some of his ships turns around to engage the Danes, despite the admiral's orders. Creutz swears, as he have to choose between:
-Keep sailing, knowing the ships that turned probably will be lost
-Turn the entire fleet around, and starting the battle in complete disorder
Creutz swears again and orders the fleet to turn around. The cannons are locked and loaded, as Kronan turns around. The reckless sailing causes the ship to heel drastically, and is taking water through the open cannon ports. As gunpowder and lit fuses rumble around in the heeling ship, it takes fire and explodes. Nearly 10% of the Swedish navy crew, its admiral and greatest ship is all gone. The Swedes additionally loses several ships, and the Danes win decisively with only minor casualties. After another Danish victory in the battle of Køge Bugt later in this war, the Danish naval supremacy is secured, and it lasts all the way to 1807, when the once-great Danish navy is robbed by Great Britain. (See the 1814 - pt.1 post)
Please correct me if some dates, numbers or facts are incorrect.
Vavva
onsdag 16. mars 2011
The Nordic Wars - Carl XII - what happened? pt 2
Hello, Vavva here again, with part 2 of the mystery of Carl XII.
As probably understood from pt. 1, Carl wasn't an appreciated man in Sweden after his (or, the enemies') wars. This caused suspicious voices to say: Was this a lucky shot, or a murder?
As the Swedish king had no children or wife, his throne went to his sister Ulrika Eleonora and her husband, Friedrich of Hessen. If Carl was assassinated, he must have been the man behind. This is quite pointed out as Carl's nephew and good friend mourns Carl for a long time and is in deep sorrow, while Friedrich covers from the tragedy unusually quickly. Instead he charges the former in-reality ruler of Sweden, baron Görtz. He was a good friend and cousin of Carl, and during Carl's many and long campaigns, Görtz reigned Sweden. He was charged for some vague accusations, found guilty and executed quickly after Friedrich's reign started. So Friedrich could have been the one killing Carl, indirectly. But who did it?
In the trench of Fredriksten fortress where Carl fell, a Frenchman stood some metres away from the king, André Paré, Friedrich's aide. He ran away from Carl some seconds before the shot, and then ran back again. If Friedrich was behind this conspiracy, Paré was obviously the assassin. Many years later, as the old Paré was interviewed by Voltaire about Carl XII, Paré, as many believe today, cryptically confessed the murder. He later, with a high fever, opened the window of his apartment and cried out loud that he shot the king. People just said his fever made him mad. Or did Paré shoot him?
The Swedish main field surgeon had been in a lot of battles, including Fredriksten, and hurried onto Carl to look at the wound. The surgeon had worked with hundreds of shot wounds and could determine the distance the shot was fired at based on the wound. He immediately concluded that this shot was fired at close range. He later wrote in his diary that he had his suspicions that this was an assassination, but didn't want to say these out loud in the fear of actions against him. Which may lead to Friedrich and Paré too...
Though there are other proofs, for and against, that this was a murder, I'll stop here and let you think. Murder...
Or not?
Please correct me if some dates, numbers or facts are incorrect.
Vavva
As probably understood from pt. 1, Carl wasn't an appreciated man in Sweden after his (or, the enemies') wars. This caused suspicious voices to say: Was this a lucky shot, or a murder?
As the Swedish king had no children or wife, his throne went to his sister Ulrika Eleonora and her husband, Friedrich of Hessen. If Carl was assassinated, he must have been the man behind. This is quite pointed out as Carl's nephew and good friend mourns Carl for a long time and is in deep sorrow, while Friedrich covers from the tragedy unusually quickly. Instead he charges the former in-reality ruler of Sweden, baron Görtz. He was a good friend and cousin of Carl, and during Carl's many and long campaigns, Görtz reigned Sweden. He was charged for some vague accusations, found guilty and executed quickly after Friedrich's reign started. So Friedrich could have been the one killing Carl, indirectly. But who did it?
In the trench of Fredriksten fortress where Carl fell, a Frenchman stood some metres away from the king, André Paré, Friedrich's aide. He ran away from Carl some seconds before the shot, and then ran back again. If Friedrich was behind this conspiracy, Paré was obviously the assassin. Many years later, as the old Paré was interviewed by Voltaire about Carl XII, Paré, as many believe today, cryptically confessed the murder. He later, with a high fever, opened the window of his apartment and cried out loud that he shot the king. People just said his fever made him mad. Or did Paré shoot him?
The Swedish main field surgeon had been in a lot of battles, including Fredriksten, and hurried onto Carl to look at the wound. The surgeon had worked with hundreds of shot wounds and could determine the distance the shot was fired at based on the wound. He immediately concluded that this shot was fired at close range. He later wrote in his diary that he had his suspicions that this was an assassination, but didn't want to say these out loud in the fear of actions against him. Which may lead to Friedrich and Paré too...
Though there are other proofs, for and against, that this was a murder, I'll stop here and let you think. Murder...
Or not?
Please correct me if some dates, numbers or facts are incorrect.
Vavva
tirsdag 15. mars 2011
The Nordic Wars - Carl XII - what happened? Pt. 1
Hello, Vavva here. As I've written some posts now, maybe I should reveal my true name and age, as Vavva is, obviously, a pseudonym. My true name is John Halvor Rykkelid, a history-interested 15-year old boy, being obsessed with history for some time. I thought spreading my knowledge through the Internet could be nice, as I don't like popular histoy writing today. You usually have to dig some deeper into professional literature, but normal people won't do so, so most people is left with the sad leftover of the history books and stories, learning almost nothing.
And then, back to the topic:
The bullets fly everywhere. Some are hit, some stand and fire. The date is 22nd of November 1718, the place is Fredriksten, a Norwegian (Danish) fortress bordering Sweden. The Swedish king Carl (Charles) XII besieges the fortress in order to take Norway. As he raises up in the Swedish trench to watch the hostile barricades himself, one of his officers warns him; he may be shot. "Don't be afraid", the Swedish king says, just when a bullet fulfills the officer's worst thoughts as Carl dies instantly, 36 years old. A luck shot, maybe - or something deeper?
Firstly, we must look on the political situation at the time. Sweden, being the greatest power of the northern Europe, is war-tired after 18 years of war, the Great Nordic War. A anti-Swedish coalition consisting of Denmark, Russia, Poland-Lithuania (covering most of today's Belarus, Poland and Lithauania) tries to end the Swedish dominance in the Baltic. The Swedish young king, Carl XII, is very interested, bordering to obsessed, in soldiering, and wins his first victory over the coalition in Narva, 1700, against Russia. Outnumbered 1:5 (8000 vs 40 000) the Swedish wins the battle, and the Russians realise they may have to deal with their military inferiority. The decision is proven to be crucial later. Victory follows victory for the Swedish army, and the coalition is partly disbanded. But Russia stays, though they still lose many battles. Carl moves to the south to seek a total destruction of the Russian army, but as troops are moved to the front, the Swedish regions at the east side of the Baltic sea (except Finland) are lost to the Russians. Though common sense may say he should've stayed and managed his great empire, he wanted battles...
In 1709, the Swedish are stuck. They are out in the front, far away from home, in Poltava, Ukraine. And the Russians follow them. What Carl doesn't know, is that the Russians have formed a "new model army" being far more dangerous to the Swedes. To make a long story short, though I'll tell the long one another time, the Swedes loses decisevely at Poltava, shattering the army and ruining Carl's plans. The old coalition smells blood and declares war at Sweden, weakening the bankrupt empire, leeched out of troops and money. After some less-fortunate campaigns, Carl tries his last one: To invade Norway. Which ended so tragically.
But, what happened?
TBC
Please correct me if some numbers, dates or facts are incorrect.
Vavva, or
John Halvor Rykkelid
And then, back to the topic:
The bullets fly everywhere. Some are hit, some stand and fire. The date is 22nd of November 1718, the place is Fredriksten, a Norwegian (Danish) fortress bordering Sweden. The Swedish king Carl (Charles) XII besieges the fortress in order to take Norway. As he raises up in the Swedish trench to watch the hostile barricades himself, one of his officers warns him; he may be shot. "Don't be afraid", the Swedish king says, just when a bullet fulfills the officer's worst thoughts as Carl dies instantly, 36 years old. A luck shot, maybe - or something deeper?
Firstly, we must look on the political situation at the time. Sweden, being the greatest power of the northern Europe, is war-tired after 18 years of war, the Great Nordic War. A anti-Swedish coalition consisting of Denmark, Russia, Poland-Lithuania (covering most of today's Belarus, Poland and Lithauania) tries to end the Swedish dominance in the Baltic. The Swedish young king, Carl XII, is very interested, bordering to obsessed, in soldiering, and wins his first victory over the coalition in Narva, 1700, against Russia. Outnumbered 1:5 (8000 vs 40 000) the Swedish wins the battle, and the Russians realise they may have to deal with their military inferiority. The decision is proven to be crucial later. Victory follows victory for the Swedish army, and the coalition is partly disbanded. But Russia stays, though they still lose many battles. Carl moves to the south to seek a total destruction of the Russian army, but as troops are moved to the front, the Swedish regions at the east side of the Baltic sea (except Finland) are lost to the Russians. Though common sense may say he should've stayed and managed his great empire, he wanted battles...
In 1709, the Swedish are stuck. They are out in the front, far away from home, in Poltava, Ukraine. And the Russians follow them. What Carl doesn't know, is that the Russians have formed a "new model army" being far more dangerous to the Swedes. To make a long story short, though I'll tell the long one another time, the Swedes loses decisevely at Poltava, shattering the army and ruining Carl's plans. The old coalition smells blood and declares war at Sweden, weakening the bankrupt empire, leeched out of troops and money. After some less-fortunate campaigns, Carl tries his last one: To invade Norway. Which ended so tragically.
But, what happened?
TBC
Please correct me if some numbers, dates or facts are incorrect.
Vavva, or
John Halvor Rykkelid
tirsdag 8. mars 2011
The Nordic Wars: Siege of Copenhagen
Hello. I am Vavva, and this will be an interruption in the normal plan, as Winter War pt. II will be delayed. Instead, I thought of starting up on a new collection where I'll find some of my favourite stories: The trouble of the Nordic through the 17th, 18t and 19th century.
The first part will be about the siege and charge of Copenhagen during the winter of 1658.
Denmark and Sweden of course were the main parts of the conflict, as another meaningless war in Scandinavia broke out by Sweden declaring war (Denmark and Sweden has the doubtful record of being the nations fighting the most wars through history, about 50(!)) in 1658. This maybe was one of the most meaningful, though, as the Swedish king Gustav saw an opportunity to conquer his rival through 150 years: Denmark and its king Frederik III, then controlling Scania (Skåne in Danish and Swedish, the southernmost tip of the Swedish peninsula), Norway and parts of Germany.
A strategic blow to the most vulnerable part would immediately end this kingdom once and for all, and the Swedish king knew where to start: Jutland ( Jylland in Danish, the main part of Denmark). As Scania bordered to Sweden itself, the Danish main army was lined up there. The Swedish army, however, was in Poland on a less fortunate campaign the Swedish king wanted to bail from. This was a golden opportunity, to strike the Danish where the Swedes were the least expected. The Swedish king and army met almost no resistance in Denmark, as they also were lucky on weather.
The Danish sounds (known as "bælts") froze very rarely, and the greatest hadn't in over a hundred years when they all suddenly did in the winter of 1658. The Swedish army could almost walk the Danish straits and sounds straight down, both due to lack of manned forts and ice over the moats and trenches of the manned Danish forts. As the Danish capital Copenhagen is situated on an island, Zealand (Sjælland in Danish), the Swedish army had to walk down the Great Belt (Storebælt in Danish) in order to reach it, which he did. In the meantime, the Danish king Frederik stood in Scania, unable to cross the icy sound of Øresund to reach his capital, as the ice wasn't safe here. Instead, he went for diplomacy and sent representatives to Roskilde outside Copenhagen to negotiate and offered almost half the Danish kingdom in order of peace. The Swedes wanted it all, however, and refused the offer. They planned the siege and charge of Copenhagen. And it all went down to this, would the Danish monarchy, stable for 800 years, die here? Or would Denmark prevail?
The Swedish army lined up in a giant camp at the size of Copenhagen itself, and promised three straight days of looting and raping to the soldiers if Copenhagen fell. This obviously inspired the Copenhageners to defend their homes and wives, and almost all able citizens entrenched themselves. It was a harsh battle, but turned out to be a crushing Danish victory!
The Swedish attack massively failed due to bad luck, a lot of unfortunate circumstances such as too short moat bridges, a burning ship providing sight to the Danes, and many other happenings which led to over 1000 fallen Swedes and a broken army. Less than 20 Copenhageners fell. The Danish government accepted a slightly milder variety of the treaty of Roskilde, which still counts it all as a loss, but a survival for the Danish nation.
Vavva
The first part will be about the siege and charge of Copenhagen during the winter of 1658.
Denmark and Sweden of course were the main parts of the conflict, as another meaningless war in Scandinavia broke out by Sweden declaring war (Denmark and Sweden has the doubtful record of being the nations fighting the most wars through history, about 50(!)) in 1658. This maybe was one of the most meaningful, though, as the Swedish king Gustav saw an opportunity to conquer his rival through 150 years: Denmark and its king Frederik III, then controlling Scania (Skåne in Danish and Swedish, the southernmost tip of the Swedish peninsula), Norway and parts of Germany.
A strategic blow to the most vulnerable part would immediately end this kingdom once and for all, and the Swedish king knew where to start: Jutland ( Jylland in Danish, the main part of Denmark). As Scania bordered to Sweden itself, the Danish main army was lined up there. The Swedish army, however, was in Poland on a less fortunate campaign the Swedish king wanted to bail from. This was a golden opportunity, to strike the Danish where the Swedes were the least expected. The Swedish king and army met almost no resistance in Denmark, as they also were lucky on weather.
The Danish sounds (known as "bælts") froze very rarely, and the greatest hadn't in over a hundred years when they all suddenly did in the winter of 1658. The Swedish army could almost walk the Danish straits and sounds straight down, both due to lack of manned forts and ice over the moats and trenches of the manned Danish forts. As the Danish capital Copenhagen is situated on an island, Zealand (Sjælland in Danish), the Swedish army had to walk down the Great Belt (Storebælt in Danish) in order to reach it, which he did. In the meantime, the Danish king Frederik stood in Scania, unable to cross the icy sound of Øresund to reach his capital, as the ice wasn't safe here. Instead, he went for diplomacy and sent representatives to Roskilde outside Copenhagen to negotiate and offered almost half the Danish kingdom in order of peace. The Swedes wanted it all, however, and refused the offer. They planned the siege and charge of Copenhagen. And it all went down to this, would the Danish monarchy, stable for 800 years, die here? Or would Denmark prevail?
The Swedish army lined up in a giant camp at the size of Copenhagen itself, and promised three straight days of looting and raping to the soldiers if Copenhagen fell. This obviously inspired the Copenhageners to defend their homes and wives, and almost all able citizens entrenched themselves. It was a harsh battle, but turned out to be a crushing Danish victory!
The Swedish attack massively failed due to bad luck, a lot of unfortunate circumstances such as too short moat bridges, a burning ship providing sight to the Danes, and many other happenings which led to over 1000 fallen Swedes and a broken army. Less than 20 Copenhageners fell. The Danish government accepted a slightly milder variety of the treaty of Roskilde, which still counts it all as a loss, but a survival for the Danish nation.
Vavva
tirsdag 15. februar 2011
The Winter War Pt. 1
Hello. Me, Vavva, will now in my fourth post tell a story I find really fascinating: The Winter War in 1939.
The Soviet Union had won many a battle in 1939, and did its usual routine when invading smaller countries: Massive numeral advantage... They had won many a battle doing this strategy, and everything looked normal when USSR declared war on the neighbour Finland in 1939. The Soviets wanted some more "buffer land" for one of their greatest cities, Leningrad (St. Petersburg today), and firstly asked, or demanded, some land and a demilitarised zone. The Finnish said no, though it was kind of foolhardy. The Finnish had a quite strong defence, but couldn't measure their forces against this human wave the Soviets were sending.
Finland was a poor nation. After a devastating civil war between communists and anti-communists (popularly called red and white) and oppression from Russian rule for a hundred years, the Finnish economy and army was small. They could force out about 300 000 men, and less than 150 airplanes and tanks. The Russian army outnumbered the Finnish one technologically 1:50 and in numbers 1:5. This was an easy match for the Russians, and all their generals thought so too. But the Finnish wouldn't give up so easily...
The Swedish-Finnish general and field marshal Carl-Gustaf Mannerheim went to work for the last time in 1939. He was old, and wanted a hard-earned retirement when the message shocked him: Finland was at war! Of course, Mannerheim had to command his troops once again and win, or endure, a hopeless war. Much to Mannerheim's dismay, the northern parts of Finland surrenders rapidly. The port bordering the Barents sea, Petsamo, falls the first day, and many surrounding settlements give up soon. Most of the Finnish army was stationed at the Mannerheim line on the land strip between Leningrad and southern Finland, as this was the straightest way to Helsingfors, the capital at the southern coast. But the Russian high general didn't want to go on there. He went for the Finnish endless forests, strangely enough, and declared proudly that "the biggest problem the Russian army will have here is not to go too far and cross the Swedish border". He didn't know he'd get bigger problems than that...
TBC
Please correct me if some dates or numbers are incorrect.
Vavva
The Soviet Union had won many a battle in 1939, and did its usual routine when invading smaller countries: Massive numeral advantage... They had won many a battle doing this strategy, and everything looked normal when USSR declared war on the neighbour Finland in 1939. The Soviets wanted some more "buffer land" for one of their greatest cities, Leningrad (St. Petersburg today), and firstly asked, or demanded, some land and a demilitarised zone. The Finnish said no, though it was kind of foolhardy. The Finnish had a quite strong defence, but couldn't measure their forces against this human wave the Soviets were sending.
Finland was a poor nation. After a devastating civil war between communists and anti-communists (popularly called red and white) and oppression from Russian rule for a hundred years, the Finnish economy and army was small. They could force out about 300 000 men, and less than 150 airplanes and tanks. The Russian army outnumbered the Finnish one technologically 1:50 and in numbers 1:5. This was an easy match for the Russians, and all their generals thought so too. But the Finnish wouldn't give up so easily...
The Swedish-Finnish general and field marshal Carl-Gustaf Mannerheim went to work for the last time in 1939. He was old, and wanted a hard-earned retirement when the message shocked him: Finland was at war! Of course, Mannerheim had to command his troops once again and win, or endure, a hopeless war. Much to Mannerheim's dismay, the northern parts of Finland surrenders rapidly. The port bordering the Barents sea, Petsamo, falls the first day, and many surrounding settlements give up soon. Most of the Finnish army was stationed at the Mannerheim line on the land strip between Leningrad and southern Finland, as this was the straightest way to Helsingfors, the capital at the southern coast. But the Russian high general didn't want to go on there. He went for the Finnish endless forests, strangely enough, and declared proudly that "the biggest problem the Russian army will have here is not to go too far and cross the Swedish border". He didn't know he'd get bigger problems than that...
TBC
Please correct me if some dates or numbers are incorrect.
Vavva
onsdag 9. februar 2011
1814 - pt. 2
Hello. Vavva here, and here is part 2 of the Norwegian independence story.
Norway hadn't been independent since 1397, and in 1814, Norway had been in an union with Denmark for 434 years. As probably understood, the Norwegians were quite fed up with this, though it wasn't that bad a reign, and wanted independence. As partially mentioned in part 1, the Kiel treaty of January 1814 took away Norway from Danish rule and gave it to Sweden as "punishment" for the Danish support to Napoleon in exchange for lesser territories as a symbolic compensation in Germany.
Norway had been waiting quite a long time for this moment. This was the time to claim Norwegian independence before it was too late and the Swedish union was nailed! Representatives from all over the country came to Eidsvoll, north of Oslo, Norway, and discussed a Norwegian constitution. At the 17th of May, the Norwegian national day, they agreed and declared Norway an independent state.
Of course, the Swedes didn't like this, and declared war on this newly formed state. Now, Norway and its temporary king Christian Frederik was in big trouble. Sweden had experienced troops from the Napoleonic wars, one of France's best marshalls as commander (Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, now known as prince Carl Johan). Norway had newly conscripted peasant-soldiers, green and unexperienced, and few good commanders. They were fewer than the Swedes too, and the Norwegians only had bare luck to trust during this war.
Norwegian troops boarded up all along the Swedish front, or primarily the souther one, along Østfold's Swedish border. Here fights broke out, but not rather decisive ones like in Europe. Those kinds of battle would come in Rakkestad, Østfold, where the Norwegian main army lined up. And a possible Norwegian independence's chance of survival was fought here during the summer of 1814...
...or not. The Norwegians let their senses overcome the courage and glory of a possible victory, and signed a peace treaty with Sweden. Norway became Swedish, though with a looser connection than expected by the Swedes. The Norwegians could have their own constitution (a quite liberal one, by the way), their own Prime Minister, and internal politics were separated in Norwegian and Swedish politics. However, the Swedish kept, as planned by them, foreign policy, trade and diplomacy to themselves. This union lasted for 91 years, and after quarrels over the Norwegian trade fleet sailing under Swedish flags (the Norwegian fleet was amongst the largest in the world at the time) and other issues, the Swedish opened for a referendum over abolishing the union. A great majority voted yes, and the modern Norwegian state was founded in 1905. Maybe, just maybe, 91 years too late, if Rakkestad would've been won...
Please feel free to correct me if some numbers, dates or facts are incorrect.
Vavva
Norway hadn't been independent since 1397, and in 1814, Norway had been in an union with Denmark for 434 years. As probably understood, the Norwegians were quite fed up with this, though it wasn't that bad a reign, and wanted independence. As partially mentioned in part 1, the Kiel treaty of January 1814 took away Norway from Danish rule and gave it to Sweden as "punishment" for the Danish support to Napoleon in exchange for lesser territories as a symbolic compensation in Germany.
Norway had been waiting quite a long time for this moment. This was the time to claim Norwegian independence before it was too late and the Swedish union was nailed! Representatives from all over the country came to Eidsvoll, north of Oslo, Norway, and discussed a Norwegian constitution. At the 17th of May, the Norwegian national day, they agreed and declared Norway an independent state.
Of course, the Swedes didn't like this, and declared war on this newly formed state. Now, Norway and its temporary king Christian Frederik was in big trouble. Sweden had experienced troops from the Napoleonic wars, one of France's best marshalls as commander (Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, now known as prince Carl Johan). Norway had newly conscripted peasant-soldiers, green and unexperienced, and few good commanders. They were fewer than the Swedes too, and the Norwegians only had bare luck to trust during this war.
Norwegian troops boarded up all along the Swedish front, or primarily the souther one, along Østfold's Swedish border. Here fights broke out, but not rather decisive ones like in Europe. Those kinds of battle would come in Rakkestad, Østfold, where the Norwegian main army lined up. And a possible Norwegian independence's chance of survival was fought here during the summer of 1814...
...or not. The Norwegians let their senses overcome the courage and glory of a possible victory, and signed a peace treaty with Sweden. Norway became Swedish, though with a looser connection than expected by the Swedes. The Norwegians could have their own constitution (a quite liberal one, by the way), their own Prime Minister, and internal politics were separated in Norwegian and Swedish politics. However, the Swedish kept, as planned by them, foreign policy, trade and diplomacy to themselves. This union lasted for 91 years, and after quarrels over the Norwegian trade fleet sailing under Swedish flags (the Norwegian fleet was amongst the largest in the world at the time) and other issues, the Swedish opened for a referendum over abolishing the union. A great majority voted yes, and the modern Norwegian state was founded in 1905. Maybe, just maybe, 91 years too late, if Rakkestad would've been won...
Please feel free to correct me if some numbers, dates or facts are incorrect.
Vavva
lørdag 5. februar 2011
1814 - pt. 1
Hello, and welcome to my second post here at VHB. The first dedicated history post will be about 1814 and the temporary Norwegian independence story. A classic story for Norwegians (I am one), and quite fascinating for other people.
The story, or the prologue, begins in Copenhagen 1807. The Napoleonic wars rages, and Denmark (including Norway)'s side in the war is quite undecided, though they favour the French, primarily because the UK (France's nemesis as always) attacked Copenhagen in 1801, but they were still fence riding for some more. The British knew that the Danish trade fleet was one of the largest ones at the time, and the British feared that the French could get their hands on this, or, maybe, the British just wanted it for themselves. As a quite strange act, the British went into the waters outside Copenhagen and simply demanded the Danish fleet. The Danes obviously said no. The British then bombed Copenhagen with fire bombs as the history's first terror bombing until the Danes gave away their fleet. (!)
This clear act of war forced the Danes onto Napoleon's side in the war, not surprising, as the nemesis Sweden was a part of the Coalition (the anti-Napoleonic side).
The other prologue starts two years later, in 1809. Sweden, including Finland at the time, got attacked by the Russians, who conquered Finland in this year. The Swedes just lost an 800-year-old part of the once-great Swedish empire. After the failure in Finland, the Swedish officers did a regular coup d'etat and kicked the Swedish king Gustav VI Adolf. The military dictatorship didn't want to abandon the monarchy, they just wanted another ruler, and the old king was replaced with Carl XIII, the old king's uncle. He was not married, had no brothers or sisters, and was over 60 years old, and everyone knew that he wouldn't have a long time left. The Swedish monarchy was running out of time. They ask around for possible princes. Firstly, a Danish prince is requested, but he dies shortly after the selection. Then, after a long feud I'll probably explain another time, the French marshall Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, one of the best, actually, is chosen as new Swedish throne heir.
Bernadotte realises that Russia is too big an enemy for Sweden to handle to get back Finland, and he gives up taking Finland back. He instead realises the weak nemesis in west, Denmark, and thinks of a plan to get Norway ripped away from them. And yes, this happens, in the treaty of Kiel of 1814, where Denmark gives Norway to Sweden. But the Norwegians have other plans...
TBC
Vavva
The story, or the prologue, begins in Copenhagen 1807. The Napoleonic wars rages, and Denmark (including Norway)'s side in the war is quite undecided, though they favour the French, primarily because the UK (France's nemesis as always) attacked Copenhagen in 1801, but they were still fence riding for some more. The British knew that the Danish trade fleet was one of the largest ones at the time, and the British feared that the French could get their hands on this, or, maybe, the British just wanted it for themselves. As a quite strange act, the British went into the waters outside Copenhagen and simply demanded the Danish fleet. The Danes obviously said no. The British then bombed Copenhagen with fire bombs as the history's first terror bombing until the Danes gave away their fleet. (!)
This clear act of war forced the Danes onto Napoleon's side in the war, not surprising, as the nemesis Sweden was a part of the Coalition (the anti-Napoleonic side).
The other prologue starts two years later, in 1809. Sweden, including Finland at the time, got attacked by the Russians, who conquered Finland in this year. The Swedes just lost an 800-year-old part of the once-great Swedish empire. After the failure in Finland, the Swedish officers did a regular coup d'etat and kicked the Swedish king Gustav VI Adolf. The military dictatorship didn't want to abandon the monarchy, they just wanted another ruler, and the old king was replaced with Carl XIII, the old king's uncle. He was not married, had no brothers or sisters, and was over 60 years old, and everyone knew that he wouldn't have a long time left. The Swedish monarchy was running out of time. They ask around for possible princes. Firstly, a Danish prince is requested, but he dies shortly after the selection. Then, after a long feud I'll probably explain another time, the French marshall Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte, one of the best, actually, is chosen as new Swedish throne heir.
Bernadotte realises that Russia is too big an enemy for Sweden to handle to get back Finland, and he gives up taking Finland back. He instead realises the weak nemesis in west, Denmark, and thinks of a plan to get Norway ripped away from them. And yes, this happens, in the treaty of Kiel of 1814, where Denmark gives Norway to Sweden. But the Norwegians have other plans...
TBC
Vavva
tirsdag 1. februar 2011
Introduction
Hello, and welcome to my blog. I, Vavva, made this blog because I like history a lot and I'm tired of generally poor historic knowledge amongst normal people.
My favourite lapse of time through history is 1750-Napoleonic era. At this time in history, conquests and losses may actually be relevant today as many of these states still exist, as it was later too. What separates the time I like, is that war and battles are still somewhat glorious and not just tragic; of course, war and history is tragic, but 1750-NE is so... unsure. For instance, from WW2 we have countless reports of horror and suffering. These werent existing in 1750-NE. There, it was primarily glory and honour. This makes, in addition to the earlier mentioned fact, 1750-NE to the historic era I like the most.
As I see it, there are two problems with modern history writing:
1: It's for interested people only.
2: It's primarily written by Americans.
The first point could be something to work with, as good historians (though I'd probably classify as one today) may accomplish books and other medies that appeal to normal people.
The second "problem" may be harder to do something about. As you may notice by the setting, I'm not American (I'm Norwegian, so my English may not be perfect) , and I'm fed up at American history. 220 years, constantly repeated to the entire world, even though it may not be interested at all. American revolutionary wars, described as if it was an enormous loss in British eyes, Lousiana purchase, of course even more important (or as important as) the Napoleonic wars, war of 1812, the same, American Civil War, quite important, but not an "event of the milennium", 1st and 2nd World War, where the American effort is grossly overestimated. An extra push in WW1, true, and a Japanese frontier in WW2, true, but the European "campaign" USA launched was quite overestimated. As I saw in an American history film, the narrator went over the other nations' efforts at the D-day in one sentence, and then, the American forces met EXTREME resistance and HUGE armies, like the Germans saved everything for the Americans.
In later times, after WW2, USA have done a lot, and I of course appreciate USA, primarily political, but regarding history, I'm tired of the mentioned topic.
Welcome to this blog and my first post here.
Vavva
My favourite lapse of time through history is 1750-Napoleonic era. At this time in history, conquests and losses may actually be relevant today as many of these states still exist, as it was later too. What separates the time I like, is that war and battles are still somewhat glorious and not just tragic; of course, war and history is tragic, but 1750-NE is so... unsure. For instance, from WW2 we have countless reports of horror and suffering. These werent existing in 1750-NE. There, it was primarily glory and honour. This makes, in addition to the earlier mentioned fact, 1750-NE to the historic era I like the most.
As I see it, there are two problems with modern history writing:
1: It's for interested people only.
2: It's primarily written by Americans.
The first point could be something to work with, as good historians (though I'd probably classify as one today) may accomplish books and other medies that appeal to normal people.
The second "problem" may be harder to do something about. As you may notice by the setting, I'm not American (I'm Norwegian, so my English may not be perfect) , and I'm fed up at American history. 220 years, constantly repeated to the entire world, even though it may not be interested at all. American revolutionary wars, described as if it was an enormous loss in British eyes, Lousiana purchase, of course even more important (or as important as) the Napoleonic wars, war of 1812, the same, American Civil War, quite important, but not an "event of the milennium", 1st and 2nd World War, where the American effort is grossly overestimated. An extra push in WW1, true, and a Japanese frontier in WW2, true, but the European "campaign" USA launched was quite overestimated. As I saw in an American history film, the narrator went over the other nations' efforts at the D-day in one sentence, and then, the American forces met EXTREME resistance and HUGE armies, like the Germans saved everything for the Americans.
In later times, after WW2, USA have done a lot, and I of course appreciate USA, primarily political, but regarding history, I'm tired of the mentioned topic.
Welcome to this blog and my first post here.
Vavva
Abonner på:
Innlegg (Atom)