Carl 12 of Sweden vs. Peter the Great of Russia
-
- Member
- Posts: 174
- Joined: 13 May 2004 16:02
- Location: North
Carl 12 of Sweden vs. Peter the Great of Russia
Carl had the best army how did he loose to untrained Russian soldiers who were poorly organized?
-
- Member
- Posts: 2014
- Joined: 07 Apr 2002 14:44
- Location: United Kingdom: The Land of Hope and Glory
By ignoring the vagaries of the Russian winter and believing that Lewenhaupt could bring the supplies to him over such bad roads, in such short time with so few troops.
By ignoring the ever increasing capability of Russian troops, and taking the example of the Streltsy and not the western trained regiments, to be the hall mark of the Russian army at the defeat at Narva.
And finally for looking down his nose at Peter and refusing a compromomise peace, ignoring the fact that while Mistress of the North Sweden did only posess 2 million citizens, and far more enemies in the form of Ausgustus of Saxony, Dennmark, and the opportunist Prussia.
regards,
By ignoring the ever increasing capability of Russian troops, and taking the example of the Streltsy and not the western trained regiments, to be the hall mark of the Russian army at the defeat at Narva.
And finally for looking down his nose at Peter and refusing a compromomise peace, ignoring the fact that while Mistress of the North Sweden did only posess 2 million citizens, and far more enemies in the form of Ausgustus of Saxony, Dennmark, and the opportunist Prussia.
regards,
-
- Member
- Posts: 174
- Joined: 13 May 2004 16:02
- Location: North
-
- Member
- Posts: 1380
- Joined: 07 Jul 2004 13:55
- Location: Festung Europa
-
- Member
- Posts: 1173
- Joined: 03 Oct 2002 19:50
- Location: Shanghai
Kind of more complicate than that, I recommand a very good book:"The Northern Wars : War, State and Society in Northeastern Europe, 1558-1721" by Robert I. Frost
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... ce&s=books
This book will explain everything about this subject
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... ce&s=books
This book will explain everything about this subject
-
- Member
- Posts: 2014
- Joined: 07 Apr 2002 14:44
- Location: United Kingdom: The Land of Hope and Glory
-
- Member
- Posts: 1380
- Joined: 07 Jul 2004 13:55
- Location: Festung Europa
-
- Member
- Posts: 1846
- Joined: 23 Mar 2002 08:30
- Location: Ukraine
I don't think Russian winter had anything to do with it - the earlier victories of Charles actually occured during snowing conditions. Also Sweden has winter too
The major loss occured at Poltava, and reasons behind it are:
1. Charles did not want to wait for the rest of Cossack army to join his side (when Mazepa signed Ukrainian-Swedish treaty, he brought only few regiments, while the others units were still forming)
2. Swedish army was actually exhausted from constant partizan raids and traveling.
3. During the battle, the Swedes had only 4 cannons vs. 30 Russian.
4. Charles got wounded and had to be carried around - this was bad for morale.

1. Charles did not want to wait for the rest of Cossack army to join his side (when Mazepa signed Ukrainian-Swedish treaty, he brought only few regiments, while the others units were still forming)
2. Swedish army was actually exhausted from constant partizan raids and traveling.
3. During the battle, the Swedes had only 4 cannons vs. 30 Russian.
4. Charles got wounded and had to be carried around - this was bad for morale.
-
- Member
- Posts: 952
- Joined: 30 Mar 2002 00:31
- Location: Las Vegas
"4. Charles got wounded and had to be carried around - this was bad for morale."
It was worse than that. Charles' style of leadership required him to be active and capable of making rapid decisions to affect the flow of the combat. Being stuck on a litter on one part of the field didn't help matters. Being unable to ensure his subordinates followed their orders was another. Charles' plan of battle at Poltava was based on passing through the line of Russian redoubts, ignoring them, and then making a concentrated attack on Peter's infantry behind them. If the plan had been followed, the likely result would have been the same as previous fights, such as Narva.
It didn't happen, though, in considerable part because Charles was unable to exercise command as he was accustomed to.....because of it, subordinates ignored their orders and wasted both time and men attacking the redoubts.
Charles had intended a hammerblow on the Russian infantry.....he wound up trying it with a tackhammer rather than a sledgehammer.
It was worse than that. Charles' style of leadership required him to be active and capable of making rapid decisions to affect the flow of the combat. Being stuck on a litter on one part of the field didn't help matters. Being unable to ensure his subordinates followed their orders was another. Charles' plan of battle at Poltava was based on passing through the line of Russian redoubts, ignoring them, and then making a concentrated attack on Peter's infantry behind them. If the plan had been followed, the likely result would have been the same as previous fights, such as Narva.
It didn't happen, though, in considerable part because Charles was unable to exercise command as he was accustomed to.....because of it, subordinates ignored their orders and wasted both time and men attacking the redoubts.
Charles had intended a hammerblow on the Russian infantry.....he wound up trying it with a tackhammer rather than a sledgehammer.
-
- Member
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 28 Sep 2004 03:38
- Location: Europe
Charles problems were not on battelfield. Poltava is usually overated, 2 after this Peter offered generous peace offering back all Sweden´eastern provinces exept lands surrounding StPetersborough. Actually Charles had many time chances to end or pull out of war with good results, but political and diplomatic impotence are main reasons to be blamed.
Sweden was ofcourse very small country compared with oppoents and waging war on many fronts is always very costly. Though you cannot blame only Charles for loosing a war. He was very young when became king and inherited many problems from past and then almost immidetly big war breake up.
Sweden was ofcourse very small country compared with oppoents and waging war on many fronts is always very costly. Though you cannot blame only Charles for loosing a war. He was very young when became king and inherited many problems from past and then almost immidetly big war breake up.
-
- Member
- Posts: 7836
- Joined: 11 Mar 2002 16:59
- Location: Europe
As for books, Peter Englund's "Poltava" is one of the best battle accounts I have ever read, from any conflict.
Poltava was something of a nightmare situation for the Swedes. The Swedish Army was more or less cut off between the fortified town of Poltava, which it was besieging, and Peters Army, who was separated from Charles' by forest and a line of strong redoubts in the interval between the woodlands. His supply situation was becoming critical. The plan was to overrun the redoubt line by a surprise attack at first light, and then move on to attack the Russian Army. However, the Swedish approach march in the darkness was confused, the deployment was delayed, and orders were unclear. As a result, the attack was made in daylight, the redoubt line was not taken by surprise and losses were heavy. Parts of it were overrun, elsewhere the attempt failed. When the Swedish Army subesequently deployed against the much larger Russian force, they had not only suffered heavy casualties but were still missing important elements who had continued to assault the redoubt line. Despite its weakness, the assault drove in the Russian center, but the left flank (if I remember correctly) broke and fled under intense fire, with predictable results.
cheers
Poltava was something of a nightmare situation for the Swedes. The Swedish Army was more or less cut off between the fortified town of Poltava, which it was besieging, and Peters Army, who was separated from Charles' by forest and a line of strong redoubts in the interval between the woodlands. His supply situation was becoming critical. The plan was to overrun the redoubt line by a surprise attack at first light, and then move on to attack the Russian Army. However, the Swedish approach march in the darkness was confused, the deployment was delayed, and orders were unclear. As a result, the attack was made in daylight, the redoubt line was not taken by surprise and losses were heavy. Parts of it were overrun, elsewhere the attempt failed. When the Swedish Army subesequently deployed against the much larger Russian force, they had not only suffered heavy casualties but were still missing important elements who had continued to assault the redoubt line. Despite its weakness, the assault drove in the Russian center, but the left flank (if I remember correctly) broke and fled under intense fire, with predictable results.
cheers
-
- Member
- Posts: 1171
- Joined: 14 Jun 2003 03:38
- Location: Riom Auvergne & Bourbonnais France
Re: Peter Putin the Great of Russia
While Isolated Russia celebrates tsar who opened 'window to Europe' and Sweden-Finland should join NATO/OTAN...the Russian president offers his particular vision of an other period of the History after WWII, the long, 21 years, Great Northern War
Putin compares his actions to Peter the Great's conquests
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday compared his current actions to Peter the Great's conquest of the Baltic coast during his 18th-century war against Sweden.
After visiting an exhibition in Moscow dedicated to the 350th birthday of tsar Peter the Great, Putin told a group of young entrepreneurs that "you get the impression that by fighting Sweden he was grabbing something. He wasn't taking anything, he was taking it back".
When Peter the Great founded Saint Petersburg and declared it the Russian capital "none of the countries in Europe recognised this territory as belonging to Russia," Putin said.
"Everyone considered it to be part of Sweden. But from time immemorial, Slavs had lived there alongside Finno-Ugric peoples," the Russian leader added.
"It is our responsibility also to take back and strengthen," Putin said, in an apparent reference to Russia's offensive in Ukraine.
"Yes, there have been times in our country's history when we have been forced to retreat, but only to regain our strength and move forward," he said.
The defeat of Sweden in the Great Northern War (1700-1721) made Russia the leading power in the Baltic Sea and an important player in European affairs.
But with ties Russia's ties with the West currently shattered by the Ukraine invasion, Moscow authorities are downplaying Peter's affinity for Europe and focusing on his role in expanding Russian territories.
More than three centuries after he sought to bring Russia closer to Europe, Russians on Thursday marked the 350th birthday of tsar Peter the Great with the country deeply isolated over the Ukraine conflict.
Peter I reigned first as tsar and then as emperor from 1682 until his death in 1725.
Text from France24
Putin compares his actions to Peter the Great's conquests
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday compared his current actions to Peter the Great's conquest of the Baltic coast during his 18th-century war against Sweden.
After visiting an exhibition in Moscow dedicated to the 350th birthday of tsar Peter the Great, Putin told a group of young entrepreneurs that "you get the impression that by fighting Sweden he was grabbing something. He wasn't taking anything, he was taking it back".
When Peter the Great founded Saint Petersburg and declared it the Russian capital "none of the countries in Europe recognised this territory as belonging to Russia," Putin said.
"Everyone considered it to be part of Sweden. But from time immemorial, Slavs had lived there alongside Finno-Ugric peoples," the Russian leader added.
"It is our responsibility also to take back and strengthen," Putin said, in an apparent reference to Russia's offensive in Ukraine.
"Yes, there have been times in our country's history when we have been forced to retreat, but only to regain our strength and move forward," he said.
The defeat of Sweden in the Great Northern War (1700-1721) made Russia the leading power in the Baltic Sea and an important player in European affairs.
But with ties Russia's ties with the West currently shattered by the Ukraine invasion, Moscow authorities are downplaying Peter's affinity for Europe and focusing on his role in expanding Russian territories.
More than three centuries after he sought to bring Russia closer to Europe, Russians on Thursday marked the 350th birthday of tsar Peter the Great with the country deeply isolated over the Ukraine conflict.
Peter I reigned first as tsar and then as emperor from 1682 until his death in 1725.
Text from France24

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.