Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!

  1. #1

    Default Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!


  2. #2

    Default Re: Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!

    Battle of Kalisz - 1706 (3rd Northern War).

    Russian-Polish-Saxon forces (followers of August II Mocny) versus Swedish-Polish-Lithuanian forces (followers of Stanisław Leszczyński)

    http://www.northernwars.com/Kalisz.pdf

  3. #3
    Nissedruva's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Gävle, Sweden
    Posts
    1,092

    Default Re: Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!

    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post
    Battle of Kalisz - 1706 (3rd Northern War).

    Russian-Polish-Saxon forces (followers of August II Mocny) versus Swedish-Polish-Lithuanian forces (followers of Stanisław Leszczyński)

    http://www.northernwars.com/Kalisz.pdf
    Not much of an even battle....5 regiments of Swedes (actually only 1 regiment was national Swedish) faces 40 000+ enemies

    Sweden's Polish allies fled as soon as the fighting begun. The Swedish forces almost managed to break the Polish lines but were forced back by the overwhelming firepower.

    Losses:

    Sweden- 700 dead, around 2000 captured
    Unknown casualties for the polish allies.

    Poland and Russia- Atleast 2000 dead or wounded

    Estimations made by historians and archaeologist has talked about around 5000 dead in the battle in total for both sides however we only know for certain the Swedish losses.

    This battle isn't well known and there is no real need for that to change (other than for pure interest) as it was fairly unimportant. Archaeological investigations in the area has been conducted and thousands (some say tens of thousands) of human remains has been found however its uncertain that every find can be related to the battle. During the years many battles were fought in the area by different armies in different wars.

    Nice link btw...i did read the text about 6 month ago, its very interesting.
    Last edited by Nissedruva; May 26, 2008 at 10:20 AM.
    - Gentlemen, we just seized an airfield.
    - That was pretty ninja....

  4. #4
    Atterdag's Avatar Tro og Håb
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In the Valley of the Wind
    Posts
    6,691

    Default Re: Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!

    As I read though the wikipedia links something struck me as very odd:

    1184, 21 May A Danish fleet of 125 ships under Absalon defeats a Venician fleet.
    I didn't know Venice had navies so far north
    Granted Lettre de Marque by King Henry V - Spurs given by imb39
    Сканија је Данска

    عیسی پسر مریم گفت :' جهان است پل ، عبور بیش از آن است ، اما هیچ ساخت خانه بر آن او امیدوار است که برای یک روز ، ممکن است برای ابدیت امیدواریم ، اما ماندگار جهان اما ساعت آن را صرف در دعا و نماز برای استراحت است نهان

    All of the Balkans is not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier.
    Otto von Bismarck


  5. #5

    Default Re: Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!

    Not much of an even battle....


    Interesting thesis…

    Why you think that it wasn't a battle? Maybe it was a picnic or a swimming competition?

    4 regiments of Swedes (actually only 1 regiment was national Swedish) faces 40 000+ enemies


    Read the fragment of the book first (which is in link giveb above), before putting here numbers from Wikipedia (wikipedia is SO damn reliable source of "knowledge" and "true" facts!! ) - Jan Wimmer is one of the best historians of this age.

    There were no 40,000+ Polish-Russian forces – there were not even 35,000 of them (including Saxons) – 35,000 is the maximum possible number, but there were probably even much fewer of them.

    Interesting. - Where did you get info about this "only one regiment" which was national-Swedish? Wimmer writes only about 1 French grenadiers battalion and 1 Swiss infantry battalion in Swedish army - and the 4 other battalions were national-Swedish (as well as the vast majority of the 26 companies of cavalry and dragoons).

    Btw - what is the difference between a national-Swedish unit of Swedish army and non-national-Swedish unit of Swedish army? Is there any difference in weapons they used or something? French grenadiers battalion was armed with scythes or with machine guns? What is your point in mentioning this???

    Btw – in Russian army only less than 50% were Russians, in Polish army there were many Germans, probably some Dutch, in Saxon army many Poles, some Germans from other regions - etc. And what is the result from this?

    And even if some of Swedish units didn't consist of soldiers who were Swedes, there is nothing unusual in it. During the Thirty Years War there was a moment, that the "Swedish Army" had some 200,000 men in the territory of German states - of which only 13,000 were Swedish soldiers and the rest were protestant Germans ^^

    Coming back to strenght of both armies:

    Swedish-Polish-Lithuanian army (Mardefeld):

    - around 4,500 Swedish forces of Mardefeld (including 3,000 infantry) – 6 infantry battalions and 26 dragoons companies (including 17 companies of Dragoons)
    - Around 9,500 Polish forces of Józef Potocki and Lithuanian forces of Sapieha (54 units of Pancerni cavalry and Hussars, 26 units of Dragoons and Cuirassiers)
    - 10 cannons

    Russian-Polish-Saxon army (August II):

    - around 18,200 Russian forces of Alexander Menschikov – including 8,700 regulars – Dragoons (16 regiments and 1 squadron) and up to 4,000 Cossacs + around 5,500 Kalmuks (which both were types of irregular light cavalry)
    - around 10,000 Polish forces of Rzewuski and Sieniawski (including 12 units of noble levy) – around 28% of Polish forces were Dragoons, rest were different kinds of cavalry (including light cavalry, Pancerni medium cavalry, noble levy, Cuirassiers, Hussars)
    - maximum of 6,000 Saxon forces of Michael Brandt (former soldier of Polish army – during the times of Sobieski’s rule) – including 5 regiments of Dragoons and 9 regiments of heavy cavalry
    - 17 cannons

    As you see, all of Swedish-Polish-Lithuanian forces were regulars, and the great part of Russian-Polish-Saxon forces were irregular cavalry.

    And Russian-Polish-Saxon forces were not even 35,000.

    Sweden's Polish allies fled as soon as the fighting begun.


    Definietly not as soon as the fighting begun - it was much later – read the article.

    I would say they "betrayed" Swedes and withdrawed (Potocki’s Polish forces for shure), not “fled”.

    First forces which left the battlefield were Lithuanian forces of Sapieha. When Potocki saw, that Lithuanian forces are leaving the battlefield, he also ordered withdraw.

    But that is true, that Swedish forces lost almost immediately after Polish-Lithuanian allies left them alone – even though Swedes were fighting desperatly against overhelming enemies (and were almost encircled because Polish-Lithuanian allies were fighting on wings, and Swedes in the center – so when Lithuanians and Poles left the battlefield, wings were not protected at all and remaining Swedes were easy target to encircle, especcialy while being outnumberred).

    Losses:

    Sweden- 700 dead, around 2000 captured
    Unknown casualties for the polish allies.

    Poland and Russia- Atleast 2000 dead or wounded

    Estimations made by historians and archaeologist has talked about around 5000 dead in the battle in total for both sides however we only know for certain the Swedish losses.
    Sources please, please!!!

    What "archeologists" and what "historians" (or maybe - "hysterians" ?)

    And what were the casualties of Polish-Lithuanian allies of Sweden.

    You also forgot about the Saxons.

    I must check what Wimmer says about casualties...

    This battle isn't well known and there is no real need for that to change (other than for pure interest) as it was fairly unimportant.
    Good that you added this in bracket...

    So you don't like that i put here this article?

    Archaeological investigations in the area has been conducted and thousands (some say tens of thousands) of human remains has been found however its uncertain that every find can be related to the battle.
    It was not "very important" because only Narwa and Poltawa were "very important"... It was no less important than other big battles of this war (except Narwa and Poltawa).

    But it was an unusual battle for this period (almost only cavalry & dragoons - only Swedes had infantry), it was very multi-national and also it was (and is) interesting. And it was one of the biggest.

    So imo it should be available in ETW as one of the historical battles.

    During the years many battles were fought in the area by different armies in different wars.
    Mhmmm... Near Kalisz?!

    Sorry but i don't remember now any more battles of Kalisz - and i live in Poland so i would probably hear if there were other big battles there.

    Can you list some of these "many big battles of Kalisz" ??

    Nice link btw...i did read the text about 6 month ago, its very interesting.
    But now you have listed some numbers and informations which are different than those from the text.

    I didn't know Venice had navies so far north
    Or rather Danish fleet was so far south.
    Last edited by Domen123; May 26, 2008 at 11:28 AM.

  6. #6
    Nissedruva's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Gävle, Sweden
    Posts
    1,092

    Default Re: Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!

    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post

    Interesting thesis…

    Why you think that it wasn't a battle? Maybe it was a picnic or a swimming competition?
    It was a battle but not an even one just like i wrote.




    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post
    Read the fragment of the book first (which is in link giveb above), before putting here numbers from Wikipedia - Jan Wimmer is one of the best historians of this age.
    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post

    There were no 40,000+ Polish-Russian forces – there were not even 35,000 of them (including Saxons) – 35,000 is the maximum possible number, but there were probably even much fewer of them.
    Well the Swedish numbers are right, regarding the Polish numbers then your probably right however it hardly makes a different.

    I did not used the wikipedia article if you think that, what numbers is there i dont know.



    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post
    Interesting. - Where did you get info about this "only one regiment" which was national-Swedish? Wimmer writes only about 1 French grenadiers battalion and 1 Swiss infantry battalion in Swedish army - and the 4 other battalions were national-Swedish (as well as the vast majority of the 26 companies of cavalry and dragoons).
    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post

    BTW - what is the difference between a national-Swedish unit of Swedish army and non-national-Swedish unit of Swedish army? Is there any difference in weapons they used or something? French grenadiers battalion was armed with scythes or with machine guns? What is your point in mentioning this???
    The only national Swedish regiment at the battle was Norra Skånska cavalry regiment.

    Wimmer does not write what you claim he says: "The Norra skånske cavalry regiment, 3 German Dragoon regiments , Västerbotten Infantry Regiment, Pommerska infantry regiment, Bavarian infantry regiment and a battalion of Swiss and one of French soldiers.

    Västerbottens regiment was in garrison so it was not present. Large parts of Pommern was under Swedish rule however the regiment was a enlisted one not indelt and mostly had Germans from various locations.

    Hell Wimmer even writes: "As this catalouge illustrates, Mardefeld's command was composed principally of foreign regiments"

    Please stop claim stuff when you haven't read the text.

    My point is that the battle had an unusually large portion of foreigners in the Swedish side, it wasn't usual with such large percents during the times.

    Off course it can be questioned on how good these "foreigners" was compared to the national units however thats .

    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post
    Btw – in Russian army only less than 50% were Russians, in Polish army there were many Germans, probably some Dutch, in Saxon army many Poles, some Germans from other regions - etc. And what is the result from this?

    That nations had alot of foreigners in their armies, my point is that the Swedish army in the GNW usually had a much larger percentage of national troops compared to many other states. This battle is one of the few times there were more Foreign than national forces.


    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post
    Coming back to strenght of both armies:
    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post

    Swedish-Polish-Lithuanian army (Mardefeld):

    - around 4,500 Swedish forces of Mardefeld (including 3,000 infantry) – 6 infantry battalions and 26 dragoons companies (including 17 companies of Dragoons)
    - Around 9,500 Polish forces of Józef Potocki and Lithuanian forces of Sapieha (54 units of Pancerni cavalry and Hussars, 26 units of Dragoons and Cuirassiers)
    - 10 cannons

    Russian-Polish-Saxon army (August II):

    - around 18,200 Russian forces of Alexander Menschikov – including 8,700 regulars – Dragoons (16 regiments and 1 squadron) and up to 4,000 Cossacs + around 5,500 Kalmuks (which both were types of irregular light cavalry)
    - around 10,000 Polish forces of Rzewuski and Sieniawski (including 12 units of noble levy) – around 28% of Polish forces were Dragoons, rest were different kinds of cavalry (including light cavalry, Pancerni medium cavalry, noble levy, Cuirassiers, Hussars)
    - maximum of 6,000 Saxon forces of Michael Brandt (former soldier of Polish army – during the times of Sobieski’s rule) – including 5 regiments of Dragoons and 9 regiments of heavy cavalry
    - 17 cannons

    As you see, all of Swedish-Polish-Lithuanian forces were regulars, and the great part of Russian-Polish-Saxon forces were irregular cavalry.

    And Russian-Polish-Saxon forces were not even 35,000.
    Wimmer himself says that the exact Polish-Russian numbers are hard to get hold of, he makes guesses and they can very well be right. 30 00, 35 000 or 40 000 doesn't mean much it was still an overwhelming numerical superiority.

    Even if the polish and Russian armies had allot of irregular cavalry it doesn't matter as the Russian dragoons alone with their 10 000 men was more than twice the numbers of the Swedes in total.

    Even together with Sweden's Polish "friends" the number of regular cavalry was larger on the allied side.




    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post
    Definietly not as soon as the fighting begun - it was much later – read the article.
    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post

    I would say they "betrayed" Swedes and withdrawed (Potocki’s Polish forces for shure), not “fled”.

    First forces which left the battlefield were Lithuanian forces of Sapieha. When Potocki saw, that Lithuanian forces are leaving the battlefield, he also ordered withdraw.

    But that is true, that Swedish forces lost almost immediately after Polish-Lithuanian allies left them alone – even though Swedes were fighting desperatly against overhelming enemies (and were almost encircled because Polish-Lithuanian allies were fighting on wings, and Swedes in the center – so when Lithuanians and Poles left the battlefield, wings were not protected at all and remaining Swedes were easy target to encircle, especcialy while being outnumberred).
    I was practically as soon as the battle begun, after the first assault the Swedish friendly poles on the right flank fled the field, the others followed shortly, Wimmer states that.

    They clearly fled unorganized, that you think it mainly was betrayal is rather amusing.


    The Battle begun at 3.30 Sweden's polish allies fled after their first engagement but the Swedes held their ground until dusk fighting for 3 hours, they did not collapse as nearly quickly as you claim.


    Quote Originally Posted by Domen123 View Post
    Sources please, please!!!

    What "archeologists" and what "historians" (or maybe - "hysterians" ?)

    And what were the casualties of Polish-Lithuanian allies of Sweden.

    You also forgot about the Saxon.

    I must check what Wimmer says about casualties...

    It was not "very important" because only Narwa and Poltawa were "very important..." It was no less important than other big battles of this war (except Narwa and Poltawa).

    But it was an unusual battle for this period (almost only cavalry & dragoons), it was very multi-national and also it was (and is) interesting. And it was one of the biggest.

    So imo it should be available in ETW as one of the historical battles.



    Mhmmm... Near Kalisz?!

    Sorry but i don't remember now any more battles of Kalisz - and i live in Poland so i would heard if there were other big battles there.

    Can you list some of these "many big battles of Kalisz" ??
    We don't know as i said.

    Well for the archaeological claims its from Leszek Ziabka, the Swedish press made a quite comical article claiming that 17 000 Swedes was buried there however its clear that remnant of thousands of people has been found in the grave, most likely people of different nationalities serving different armies.

    http://www.historycy.org/index.php?showtopic=23778

    Well atleast according to people at Skalman forum (a site i have been using allot for this post) there was a battle between Prussia and Russia in the area 53 years later and in feb 1813 there were also fighting.

    According to a member, Copernicus Polonus living in Poland, the polish press have discussed figures around the battle based on the excavations, the say its likely around 5000 dead. How likely these figures are i don't know.

    http://forum.skalman.nu/viewtopic.ph...st=0&sk=t&sd=a

    I have to retake the atleast 2000 dead or wounded figure for the Polish-Russians, it could be virtually any numbers.

    The Battle was meaningless other than it was a propaganda tool for Peter the great. The victory didn't change a thing and Russia later withdrew its forces from Poland as Karl XII returned from sachsen with the main army.

    I can name atleast 10 more important battles (except Narva and Poltava) during the GNW (Fraustadt, Duna, Kliszów, Holowczyn, Lesna, Helsingborg, Riga, Storkyrko, Baggenstäket, Dynekilen etc) the fact that the battle had large numbers doesn't make it important.

    If its available on ETW then i would laugh, a more uneven battle is hard to find specially if its somewhat historically scripted.
    - Gentlemen, we just seized an airfield.
    - That was pretty ninja....

  7. #7

    Default Re: Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!

    I´d love to discuss the Scanian war since it is of great interest to me. I live like 3 km from the site of the Battle of Lund and pass the area every day on my way to work

    Anyone have any comments on the Scanian wars? Shoot!
    Taimse im' chodladh, agus ná dúisigh mé
    Mná na h-Éireann
    Quote Originally Posted by Nodey View Post
    Is not wierd dinosaur woman, but woman AND dinosaur. Not combined arms and legs into creature. Different unit. Player can learn teknologi for mount woman on dinosaur.

  8. #8
    Cavalier's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,622

    Default Re: Discussion of Northern Wars is Here!

    It'd be interesting to play Sweden vs Russians, multiplayer. We recreate the great northern war in Empire:Total War. I think it would be pretty cool, and interesting. And while we're at it, we could make videos.
    August Strindberg: "There's a view, current at the moment even among quite sensible people, that women, that secondary form of humanity (second to men, the lords and shapers of human civilisation) should in some way become equal with men, or could so be; this is leading to a struggle which is both bizarre and doomed. It's bizarre because a secondary form, by the laws of science, is always going to be a secondary form. Imagine two people, A (a man) and B (a woman). They start to run a race from the same point, C. A (the man) has a speed of, let's say, 100; B (the woman) has a speed of 60. Now, the question is 'Can B ever overtake A?" and the answer is 'Never!'. Whatever training, encouragement or self-denial is applied, the proposition is as impossible as that two parallel lines should ever meet."


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •