Swedish Gå På Tactics During The Great Northern War

Swedish Reenactors 

Dear Reader,

Today we have another excellent guest post focusing on the Karoliner, by historian Mike Glaeser.[1]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Never have I seen such a combination of uncontrollable dash and perfectly controlled discipline, such soldiers and such subjects are not to be found the wide world over except in Sweden"[2]
- General Magnus Stenbock after the Battle of Gadebusch, 1712

If students of early modern warfare know one thing about the Swedish Karoliner, it is that they preferred aggressive tactics often executed in the face of overwhelming odds. Their successes in the first half of the Great Northern War bewildered their enemies and endeared the Karoliner to many a historian and wargamer since. Known as Gå På, translated as “go on”, the Swedish tactics emphasized speed over firepower and closing with cold steel.[3] At a time when much of Western European warfare devolved into long and grueling sieges, Gå På allowed the Swedes to play an attacking role and quickly move against a numerically superior foe before excessive firepower could be brought to bear. In this way the Swedes were victorious at Narva (outnumbered 3:1), Klissow (2:1), and Fraustadt (2:1), to name a few. What follows is a brief look at the mindset of the Swedish army, their weapons, and how this combination allowed them to execute Gå På with élan.

Swedish Infantry Formation, Alf Aberg, Karoliner, 156.

Voltaire described the Swedes as “well made, robust, agile and capable of enduring the greatest hardships, hunger and poverty. They are born warriors, full of pride and more brave than industrious” .[4] It is from this stock that the army drew its manpower. Military reforms undertaken by King Charles XI in the 1680s and 90s helped create a strong, unified force that could be sustained in times of peace and quickly mustered for war.[5] The men in each provincial regiment came from the same geographic area which fostered an esprit de corps. Continuous training was a high priority and companies would gather once a month while the full regiment assembled annually for drills under the supervision of the king. They were expected to follow orders without question: “Commands will be carried out soberly and silently without any observation on the part of those whose business it is to obey”.[6] While the men honored their king, they also feared God. Each regiment had an attachment of chaplains who preached the Lutheran creed. Ultimately, God alone decided when and where each soldier would die so it was a moot point to fear death. This religious fatalism allowed the Swedes to march and ride undaunted into enemy fire. Rigorous training, strict discipline, and a shared faith provided the foundations for effective Gå På.

Gå På tactics affected the selection and use of certain weapons. The most notable armament difference between Swedish armies and those of Western Europe was the deployment of the pike. Starting with the Spanish Tercios and Swiss mercenaries of the 1500s, the pike became the queen of the battlefield for much of the following century. It was primarily used as a defensive weapon to help protect matchlock musketeers from cavalry attacks. True to form, the Swedish pike held off a charge of the Polish Crown army at Klissow and then shattered them with two volleys of musket fire. However, the “push of pike” was also a devastating offensive maneuver but one that relied on momentum to see the attack through. With the advent of effective bayonets towards the end of the 17th century, as well as the improvements in gun technology, the pike began to fall out of favor.[7] Nevertheless, the Swedes and Russians tended to make use of the pike throughout the Great Northern War.[8] For the Swedes, the pike suited Gå På tactics perfectly as an offensive shock weapon. Up to one third of each battalion was equipped with the 12-18 foot long weapon with the pikemen taking up the center of the formation. With a typical musket and bayonet amounting to ~6.5 feet, the pike enjoyed a distinct reach advantage. Following the one or two volleys from the musketeers, the entire battalion would charge with pikes leveled.

The Swedes put their faith in the effectiveness of cold steel. While Charles respected firepower, the prevailing belief was that the sword could be more accurate and devastating. At Holowczyn in 1708, “…the king himself went from one battalion to another ordering them above all things, instead of firing, to use their pikes, bayonets and their swords”.[9] All infantry, musketeers and pikemen alike, were equipped with a sword that the king himself had a hand in designing. Once the initial volley was delivered, bayonets would be fixed and swords drawn. The musket with fixed bayonet would be tucked under one arm and the sword leveled in the other. The horse and dragoons had a similar blade and it was used to the same effect. It is worth noting that the blade was straight rather than curved, reinforcing the emphasis on stabbing rather than slashing.

Tent of Augustus the Strong, captured in 1702 by Swedish Karoliner

There is a common perception that Charles had no use for the artillery as it was rarely fielded en masse in his armies. Even the head of the artillery, General Carl Cronstedt, had a similar observation: “At the beginning of the war His Majesty had a sort of contempt for the artillery; but later bitter experience taught him how valuable a weapon it could be”.[10] For Charles and the spirit of Gå På, it was a matter of deployment and speed. Many of Sweden’s victories saw them start the battle as the outnumbered attacker which meant a traditional artillery duel was unsustainable. Deploying cannons could be a time-consuming process and in most cases the Swedes had a tactical disadvantage in terms of terrain. To maintain the initiative, the larger pieces simply had to be kept out.

With morale and discipline established and the appropriate weaponry in place, the Gå På tactic was ready to be unleashed. A provincial infantry regiment consisted of about 1200 Swedes. This was broken down into two battalions and these served as the primary tactical unit. During battle, a battalion would line up four ranks deep with pikes in the center, musketeers on either side, and grenadiers on the flanks. The order to advance would be given by the sound of drums and there are examples of Swedes marching in total silence. At about 40 paces from the enemy, the two front ranks would kneel and the two rear ranks would give fire. The advance would then continue through the cover of the blackpowder smoke to about 20 paces where the two front ranks would fire.[11] General Stenbock’s Instructions stressed holding fire until the foe was within bayonet range.The order was then given to charge and if the enemy unit was not already wavering from being shot at point-blank range, they were now assaulted with sword, bayonet, and pike. At Fraustadt in 1706, some battalions attacked the Saxon lines without firing a single volley. More often than not, the first volley or charge was enough to break a unit and the momentum then carried the Swedes through enemy lines. At the first battle of Narva, the rapidity of the assault allowed the Swedes to close on their opponents with minor casualties and despite being outnumbered three to one, the majority of fighting was over within three hours. The Gå På tactic was devastating against low discipline/ ill-trained units but occasionally proved more problematic against a disciplined foe, especially one that was entrenched like the Russians at Poltava.

Reconstructed Karoliner (Svenska Armeemuseum)

The Swedish cavalry tended to make up around fifty percent of the fighting force. The cavalry was divided between the horse and dragoons although they acted and fought the same way.[12] The tactical unit was the squadron of about 250 men. Deployed on the flanks, the Swedish cavalry tended to move quicker than their enemy counterparts and would charge home at the gallop rather than the trot. The squadron would advance “knee behind knee” with the cornet at the front and each man slightly behind the next to form an arrow. This wedge shape helped punch holes through infantry and cavalry alike. While the horse had pistols and the dragoons their carbines, doctrine decreed that guns should not be fired (unless the attack wasn’t slowed as a result) and the unit should charge home with cold steel.[13] At Klissow in 1702, the Saxon horse surprised the Swedes with a quick deployment through swampy terrain. However, any impetus was lost when the Saxons slowed down and began to caracole .[14] The Swedish cavalry recovered, formed up, and charged with swords. They managed to break the Saxons before turning in on the flank. Here then is a clear example of cold steel having a greater effect than black powder.

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook,  or following us on twitter. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading,


Mike Glaeser

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Michael Glaeser is an early modern historian specializing in the Great Northern War and the reign of Charles XII of Sweden. He is published in The Great Northern War Compendium and taught history at the University of New Hampshire. He is also an avid reenactor and wargamer. He completed his graduate work at the University of Sheffield, England.
[2]Robert Nisbet Bain, Charles XII and the Collapse of the Swedish Empire, 243.
[3]The “a” has a ring diacritic which gives it a similar pronunciation as “o”. Gå På is therefore pronounced as “go-po”
[4]Voltaire, The History of Charles XII of Sweden, 31.
[5]This was known as the indelningsverk, or allotment system
[6]Charles XI quoted by Alf Aberg, Sweden’s Age of Greatness 1632-1718, 272.
[7]Despite being outdated, Maurice de Saxe still supported use of the pike later in the century.
[8]The Danes, having seen the effectiveness of the pike earlier in the conflict, fielded them when they re-entered the war in 1710.
[9]Robert Frost, The Northern Wars 1558-1721, 274.
[10]Aberg, 284.
[11]David Chandler suggests 40-20 paces whereas Einar Lynth and Lars-Eric Hoglund suggest 70-30.
[12]Dragoons were cheaper to raise and equip but they behaved like cavalry on the battlefield. Their carbines tended to be employed more during foraging missions.
[13]Stenbock, Instructions, Waxjo 1710.
[14]The caracole (Spanish for snail) was a tactic that saw cavalry advance on the enemy at a trot, fire their pistols, and then retreat to the rear to reload while the next rank repeated the same steps.

Russia Admonished: The Battle of Narva in the Great Northern War

Swedish Reenactors portray Karoliner on the march in summer months
Photo by Anders Bertrandsson

Dear Reader,

Today, we have our second guest post- this time from Michael Glaeser.[1] As a historian who has published on the Great Northern War, Michael brings a great depth of experience to the subject in this post: the Battle of Narva.

If you would like to write for Kabinettskriege, or have an idea for a post, please contact us via the link on the upper right. Without further introduction- here is Michael's post:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the year 1700, the Kingdom of Sweden was the dominant power in the Baltic. The sea was very much a Swedish one with the nation’s territory circling around the waters to include Finland, Ingria, Estonia, Livonia, and parts of northern Germany. For many socio-political reasons, Denmark-Norway, Saxony-Poland-Lithuania, and Russia formed an alliance to seize control and beat back Swedish hegemony. The three-pronged attack was meant to be quick and decisive. After all, the King of Sweden, Charles XII, was only an eighteen-year-old adolescent…

Immediately after declaring war on Sweden on August 20th, the Russians began their push into Ingria to besiege the fortified town of Narva. With Russia having no access to the Baltic, Ingria was a vital strip of land that Tsar Peter I desperately wanted to have back. As Narva was also the lynchpin fortress on the border of Ingria and Estonia, Peter wanted to take the town first and use it as a base of operations from which Russian troops could pour into neighboring regions. More importantly, it was only fourteen kilometers away from the Gulf of Finland and that vital seat on the Baltic Sea.

Looking for sources: a British Newspaper from 1700 describes the battle

Due to its strategic location, the town of Narva was well fortified. The Swedes added a ring of bastions in the 1680s to supplement the existing 15th-century castle. This was done under the watch of the aged field marshal and engineer Erik Dahlberg, the "Swedish Vauban". The western side of the town had the most open approach but this too had defensive features including a dry moat. The town itself held a garrison of 1,460 infantry, substantially lower than the planned 3,100, but it did include additional cavalry as well. These were under the command of Henning Rudolf Horn at the time of the siege.

While Russian troops immediately advanced into Ingria, it wasn't until the end of October that the artillery and siege guns arrived at the outskirts of Narva. With over 37,000 men facing the town, the general expectation was that Narva could only hold out until the end of the month. Peter had arrived to personally supervise the siege and take part in the forthcoming surrender. Horn and his men clung to the safety of the town walls and were no doubt encouraged by the letters sent from Charles indicating that "we will soon be with you and dislodge the enemy".[2]

Russian Army flags used at Narva (later captured by the Swedish Army)

Following the sweeping success against Denmark, Charles and the Swedish army mustered for shipment to the Baltic provinces in early October. They had arrived and disembarked by the 8th and a plan was formulated to send a relief force to Narva while the king and another body of troops headed south to break the siege of Riga launched by Augustus, the Elector of Saxony.[3] Swedish commander Otto Vellingk brought news of an improved situation- Augustus did not get the necessary support from his ally Peter and rather than face the wrath of the Swedes alone, decided to break his siege and send his army into winter quarters. Given the suspension of Saxon operations and the seasonably bad weather that mired the roads, Charles felt safe enough to divert all efforts towards Narva and come to grips with his cousin at a later point.

On November 13, the Swedish army began its march through soggy and scorched lands. Given the scarcity of food, the weather, and the state of the roads, the army was in need of a morale boost. This came on the 17th when the king led a small detachment against a much larger Russian force led by General Boris Sheremetev at a chokepoint called Pyhajoggi pass. Sheremetev was under orders to withdraw without forcing a battle but the retreat of 5,000 of the enemy had an uplifting effect for the tired Swedes. More importantly, this was the first independent action for Charles who held his own and managed his men well enough to earn praise.

Despite hearing news from Sheremetev that the Swedes were approaching, the Russian command was unconcerned. Western European warfare had become known for lengthy sieges rather than fast assaults and pitched battles. The belief in the Russian camp was that the Swedes would halt, gather strength, and then force the issue. Tsar Peter even left the siege a day and a half before the Swedes arrived on the 19th in order to direct more reinforcements. The tsar's leave of absence on the eve of battle has garnered much attention from contemporary observers and historians. Naturally, the Swedes painted Peter as a coward, someone who saw the writing on the wall and wanted no part in an eventual defeat. But given the prevalence and preference for siege warfare, Peter probably thought he had more time. In any case, it was a fortuitous move on his part.

Battle of Narva, Robert K. Massie, Peter the Great, 331.

In the tsar's place as acting commander was Field Marshal Charles Eugene Du Croy, a western trained general who fought against the Swedes at Lund and the Ottomans at Vienna. He had the vastly larger Russian force organized behind a nine-foot-high wall in front of which was a six foot wide dry trench. He was also backed up by over 140 cannon and mortars. Due to the size of Narva, the most glaring error was that his forces were stretched out over a six-kilometer line. The Swedish attack would focus on two columns smashing into the enemy and then rolling up both flanks. With poetic timing, or perhaps divine intervention, a snowstorm picked up in intensity and blew directly into the faces of the waiting Russians. The Swedes used the opportunity to launch their attack with Charles and his Drabants concentrated on the left column. It was this group that was the first to shatter their opposition. A Swedish volley within 30 paces caused many of the defenders to “fall like grass”. Hastily made fascines filled the dry trench, and ladders allowed the Swedes to scale the walls and enter the Russian camp. Success quickly followed on the right as well: “We charged directly sword in hand and so entered. We slew all who came at us and it was a terrible massacre”.[4] That the fighting was intense is evidenced by the commentary surrounding Charles. He had a horse shot out from under him and lost a shoe in the soggy mud. After the battle, a bullet was found lodged in his neckcloth, the first of five to hit him in his life.

With the Swedes storming into the camp, a panic set in. Many of the Russian commanders were foreign and some could not even communicate in the language of their subordinates. Distrust and an unwillingness to fight for their officers led many Russians to flee. Most famous was the rout across Kamperholm bridge which became so inundated with fleeing men that it collapsed under their weight. Many drowned as a result. Du Croy and the Russian guard regiments provided a valiant resistance but were forced to surrender. A small holdout of Russians continued to fight until nightfall at which point friendly fire was inflicting unnecessary casualties on the exhausted Swedes. By the morning, the battle was over.

More Russian Banners Captured at Narva 

The Swedes counted over 600 dead. The Russians had anywhere between 8,000 to 12,000. The number that surrendered was even higher forcing the Swedes to set the majority free and allow them to return to Russia with and without arms. Leading commanders were taken prisoner for ransom or future exchanges. All of Peter's artillery was claimed as war booty forcing the tsar to famously confiscate church bells in an effort to cast new cannon. A near spiritual success was the capture of a large number of Russian flags and standards.[5] Among the victors, General Magnus Stenbock was quick to praise his colleague and king: “It is God’s work alone, but if there is anything human in it, it is the firm, immovable resolution of His Majesty and the ripe dispositions of General Rehnskjold.”[6] For all his losses, Tsar Peter remained optimistic and redoubled his efforts to modernize his forces: “When we had that misfortune, or putting it better great fortune, compulsion then drove away sloth, and forced us to labor day and night."[7] It was a process that paid dividends on a summer day in the Ukraine some nine years later.


Thanks for Reading,



Mike Glaeser,


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Michael Glaeser is an early modern historian specializing in the Great Northern War and the reign of Charles XII of Sweden. He is published in The Great Northern War Compendium and taught history at the University of New Hampshire. He is also an avid reenactor and wargamer. He completed his graduate work at the University of Sheffield, England.
[2] Hatton, Charles XII of Sweden, 150.
[3] Augustus "the Strong" was both the Elector of Saxony, King of Poland, and Duke of Lithuania.
[4] Massie, Peter the Great, 333.
[5] A vast majority of these captured flags still reside in the Army Museum in Stockholm, and are on display.
[6] Massie, Peter the Great, 337.
[7] Rothstein, Peter the Great and Marlborough, 35.

Russian Account of Poltava

Peter the Great at Poltava, Artist Unknown

The following is an account the Battle of Poltava, which an English nobleman received from Russian colleagues present at the battle. I have standardized the spelling to be internally consistent, but not otherwise modified the text.

Mons 13/24 July 1709

Right Honble:

                On this day & night I had the honour to give you an account of the great victory obtained by his Tsarish Majesty on the 27th past near Pultawa. Counts Golopkin  and Scharproff have sent the following relation, which differs in some particulars from what I then mentioned.

                On the 20th June all the Muscovite Army past the River Worskla, and encamped a small German mile from the Swedes: On the 24th they advanced further within a quarter of a mile and intrenched themselves to prevent all surprises, posting their horse on the Right under cover of some thick Bushes and two or three redoubts which were well furnish'd with men and Cannon, designing in this posture to prepare all things for a Battle.  But they were prevented by the King of Sweden who on the 27th in the morning very early posted the defiles with his whole army and attacked the horse with such fury that he obliged them to retire from their redoubts towards the trenches, after brave resistance, where drawing up again they returned to the charge and routed the Swedes right wing, taking Major General Schlippenbach prisoner.

In the meantime, Prince Menschikoff and General Renkel had been sent with a Detachment of horse and foot towards Pultawa , to intercept any new succor, and to attack such of the enemy as might be lelft in the Trenches:  On the way they met with reserve of about three thousand men, most whereof, after a short fight were either killed or taken Prisoners;  on which the Prince returned to the Main Army, but General Renkel continuing his march obliged Maj. General Roos who was left in the Trenches with three Regiments to surrender on discretion after a small resistance. While this past, the Enemy's horse had retreated to their foot, and ranged themselves in order of Battle about a quarter of a mile from the Muscovite Camp, on which his Tsarish Majesty drew out two lines of his foot, leaving the third to guard the trenches, and posted his horse on both wings. General Rönke having been wounded in the first action, General Bauer commanded the Right, Prince Menschikoff the left (where the chief action was expected) and his Tsarish Majesty the Main Body. About nine the fight began on both sides and in half an hour the Swedes both horse and foot were entirely routed; nor could the foot ever come to rally again, the muscovites driving them with sword in hand to a wood, where first Major general Shulenberg and soon after General Hamilton, Field Marshall Rheinschild, the Prince of Wirtemberg, several colonels and their other officers, and some thousand common soldiers were taken prisoners. Three miles round Pultawa was all covered with dead Bodys, so that they reckon to have killed eight or ten thousand Swedes with very little loss on their side. His Tsarish Majesty gave all possible proofs of a brave general and wise prince, his hat was shot through with a musket ball and prince Menshikoff had three horses wounded under him.

                The first line of muscovite host (or foot), about ten thousand strong won the Victory the second never coming to charges; the King of Sweden 's litter was found shot to pieces, and general Gallirin and Bauer were sent after the Enemy with the Guards and two other Regiments of foot and ten of dragoons; On the 28th they were followed by Prince Menshickoff with more foot and they had news that their troops were almost got up with the enemy who continued his flight with all possible diligence  and had already abandoned about three thousand of his Baggage wagons.  Count Piper, Mons. Cederholm, and Secretary Daben finding as means of escaping went into Pultawa of their own accord. 

Thanks for Reading,

Alex Burns 

Battle of Helsingborg, 28th February, 1710

Magnus Stenbock vid Helsingborg by Gustaf Cederstroem

Dear Reader,

Today, we are going to take a moment to remember a significant event in the Great Northern War. As I stated in the post on this Kabinettskriege era war, the Great Northern War is divided into 3 large phases: 1700 to 1709, 1709-1718, and 1718-1722. Today, we are going to look at the Battle of Helsingborg, which occurred on February 28th 1710, according to the Swedish calendar.

This battle was the first major field battle in this war since the Battle of Poltava in 1709. In the Battle of Poltava, the Swedish army was totally defeated by a restructured Russian army under Peter I of Russia. I would recommend everyone read Swedish historian Peter Englund's book, The Battle Which Shook Europe, as he is both a great historian, and a great writer.

This battle occurred not between Sweden and Russia, but between Sweden and Denmark. The Danes had been invaded and knocked out of the war very early on, but with the defeat of Karl XII of Sweden at Poltava, they broke their treaty and resumed the attack. In October of 1709, they reoccupied Helsingborg and other cities in the region. They desperately wanted to reclaim Skåne, the southern portion of Sweden, which they had lost to the Swedes in the 17th century. You may know this area of Sweden, as it is the setting of the famous, "Wallander" series by Swedish author Henning Mankell. (Ystad is just off the map to the right.)  Magnus Stenbock, the leader of the Swedish forces in the king Karll XII's absence, realized that he could not defeat the Danes with the small number of soldiers he had (around 1,500 to the Danes 14,000) and withdrew to raise more forces.

The Attack at Helsingborg

By February, Stenbock had raised enough troops to stand a chance against the Danes. This is one of the battles of the Kabinettskriege period where the number of soldiers on each side was almost exactly equal, around 14,000 men each. The one difference here, is that the Swedish had slightly more cavalry, while the Danes had more infantry. While some military historians might immediately assume that this was to the advantage of the Swedes, (after all, Hannibal used his mounted arm to great effect,) it is equally fair to say that infantry is useful as well- see the Battle of Mollwitz, 1740.

Initial Deployment

Stenbock prepared to attack the Danish forces around Helsingborg, which was one of the larger cities in Skåne. The Danish commander, Jorgen Rantzau, expected the Swedes to attack from the northwest, along the Angelsholms road, but Stenbock, using a heavy fog as cover, shifted north and attacked along the Kulla road. Rantzau, seeing that his left flank was exposed, quickly shifted his army and reinforced this trouble spot.

Battle is joined

The Swedes advanced to the attack, and the cavalry on the Swedish left immediately engaged the Danes. The Karoliner possessed some of the finest cavalry in the world, and as a result, quickly got the better of their Danish opponents.

Danish Collapse

The Swedes also attacked with their infantry in the center, and finally their right wing cavalry. The Danish put up a good fight, better than the Saxons at Fraustadt, but their cavalry was unable to best the Swedes, leading to a collapse on the Danish right, which eventually panicked and routed the Danish army. The Danish lost 1,500 killed,  3,500 wounded, and 2,677 captured, or just over 50% losses. The Swedes on the other hand, lost 897 killed, and 2,098 wounded, or around 20% losses. The unusually large Danish loss (by Kabinettskriege standards) can be attributed to the high ration of Swedish cavalry, which effectively pursued the Danes.

Magnus Stenbock i Mälmo, by Gustaf Cederstroem

This battle revitalized Swedish belief in their cause, and Stenbock would go on to win another victory at Gadebusch in Germany. This would prolong the war, dragging it out to the bitter end in 1722, when having been horribly defeated by Russia, Sweden surrendered. However, when looked at in another sense, Helsingborg gave us the Sweden we have today. As recently as 1658, Skåne had been under the control of Denmark, and if Stenbock had lost at Helsingborg, Denmark would have likely received Skåne in the peace settlement of the Great Northern War. However, because of this victory, Skåne remained part of Sweden, up to the present day.

Thanks for Reading,


Alex Burns

Militia in the Kabinettskriege period

Afghan Militia in modern Afghanistan 

Dear Reader,


Today, we will look at the use of militia, and other populist forces throughout the Kabinettskriege period. My American readers may be familiar with the role of militia, "minute-men," and other irregular forces in the American War of Independence. These men, and sometimes women, fought the British throughout the American colonies, in smaller engagements, all the way to the large battles, such as Guildford Courthouse and Saratoga.

Militia at the Battle of Guildford Courthouse

Militia in the American War of Independence
A cursory look at the militia forces give a clear picture, which is difficult to argue with. In essence: the militia were bad, often horrible soldiers. At Guildford Courthouse, the British overran two line of militia before even reaching the Continental army in the third line. These troops were panicky, prone to flee at the first sign of a British bayonet charge. As a result, the American commanders ordered their militia to fire two shots and then flee, a prudent use of soldiers who were likely to flee anyway. Towards the end of the war, American commanders learned to deploy their militia in front of their regular battle line, as a sort of speed bump to slow  and weaken the oncoming British. In this role, the militia proved quiet effective. While unable to compete with regular soldiers, the militia effectively drained the strength of the regular forces opposing them.

Off the battlefield, militia assisted the Continental Army in the so-called Kleine Krieg: the endless series of little skirmishes which made up the vast majority of this war. The militia proved effective in these type of skirmishes, as they could use the ambush tactics which they knew very well. They sometimes possessed hunting rifles, which they often used to target British officers. At the Battle of Bemis Height's Colonel Daniel Morgan ordered his riflemen to deliberately target General Simon Fraser from hidden positions. In the Kabinettskriege context, this seemed more like murder than war. In fact, Frederick II of Prussia reprimanded two of his Jägers for targeting enemy officers with their rifles. While the Americans eventually obtained their independence as a result of French help, the militias assisted in keeping the contest running until the French, Dutch, and Spanish could help the colonists.

Swedish Uppbåd (quasi-militiamen) 

Swedish Auxiliary Forces in the Kabinettskriege period
In addition to the usually discussed American militia, Swedish armies often called on the support of militia-type forces in this period. If the lower part of Sweden (Skåne, or Scania in English) was invaded, the peasants often turned up in numbers to fight, as they had a tradition of freedom not unlike the American militia.  At the siege of Malmö or the battle of Landskrona during the Scanian War, or the battle of Helsingborg in the Great Northern War, Swedish peasants joined the ranks of the army, and often went into battle with little or no training. Although in the Great Northern War, these soldiers were hastily armed with muskets, their original weapon was spiked club. While the Swedish soldiers fought well, much better than American militia in similar circumstances, they still lacked the trained skill of the Swedish Karoliner. 

Whether in Sweden, North America, or elsewhere, the appearance of large militia groups meant that one side had popular support. Even if it did not mean popular support across the board, the presence of militia meant that one army had the support of a vocal minority. Countries with militia proved difficult to invade, as the militia troops would harry the invading army, and sometimes, as at the battle of Bennington in the American War of Independence, destroy detachments of invaders through tricks and disguising themselves as friendly soldiers.

Modern Lessons: 

After Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, the American army is starting to appreciate the predicament of the British in the American War of Independence. It is next to impossible to achieve victory if neither the invading army's home population, or the population being invaded supports the war. The presence of militia and other paramilitary forces make victory hard to achieve. In the modern War in Afghanistan, American soldiers defeated local militia groups time and again in open conflict. However, these continuing conflicts sap the strength of the American military, and quickly eroded the American population's willingness to see the war continue.

While Britain lost the American colonies, and America lost in Vietnam, the American's in Iraq and Afganistan have had more success. The answer may lie with the American's dedication to training and handing over the fight to Iraqi and Afghani security forces, comparable to British-leaning loyalists in the American Revolution. The key to success against militia is to obtain militias of your own; in order to end the "foreign" occupation in the minds of the occupied populace and the populace supporting the invading military.

Thanks for reading,

Alex Burns

Spotlight on: Great Northern War (Stora Nordiska Kriget/Северная война)

Battle of Poltava (Slaget vid Poltava/Полтавская битва)

Dear Reader,

Most of my English readers will not have heard of the Great Northern War, or will have some kind of hazy idea of what occurred. This Kabinettskriege dominated the first 20 years of the eighteenth century, and opened a Russian window into Europe. In Russian history, the Great Northern War opens a period of history which will not be concluded until 1945 or 1989. In Swedish history, the Great Northern War marks the end of the stormaktstiden period, the years 1630 to 1722, when Sweden was one of the most powerful nations in Europe.  This post should serve as a brief introduction to the war. I will cover the various armies, cultures, and battles in more specific posts later on. For specific information on the battle of Fraustadt, a major battle during the Great Northern War, click here. For a timeline of the entire Kabinettskriege period, click here. 

First Phase: 1700-1709

The war opened in 1700, as Peter I of Russia (Пётр I), Augustus II of Saxony, and Frederick IV of Denmark planned to break the Swedish control of the Baltic. It seemed like the right time to strike, as Charles XI of Sweden had died, leaving his eighteen year old son, Charles XII, to rule the kingdom. 

Unfortunately for the anti-Swedish coalition, Charles XI had left his son a large, modern military, referred to today as the Karoliner. These soldiers, with blue coats and yellow turnbacks, would fight on, despite incredible odds, for the next 22 years. The Karoliner had incredibly high morale, which came from a strongly rooted religious identity and a sense of national unity. 

As a result of this high morale mixed with highly aggressive tactics (Swedish: Gå-På English: "Go-On"; I 

believe a better colloquial translation might be "Head-On") the Swedish army won many victories in the 

1700-1709 period. The battles of Fraustadt, Narva, Saladen, and Holowczyn, give an impression of what 

the Karoliner's capabilities. The Swedes won all of these victories while outnumbered, and often without artillery support. In the summer of 1709, Sweden was winning the war, having forced Denmark and Saxony to sign peace treaties. 

However, Charles XII was unwilling to accept a negotiated settlement with Tsar Peter I, and pushed the war on into the Ukraine, after long campaigns in Poland and Saxony. At Poltava, in the Ukraine, on June 27 1709,  the Karoliner were crushed by a modernized Russian army, using heavy artillery and field fortifications. The best book currently available on the Great Northern War, Peter Englund's, The Battle That Shook Europe, covers this pivotal turning point in the war. 

The Second Phase: 1709-1718

With the defeat of Sweden's main field army, the Swedish cause disintegrated  and Saxony and Denmark re-entered the war. Charles XII fled into exile in the Ottoman Empire, where he would attempt to bring the Ottomans into the war on Sweden's side. Despite the massive losses inflicted by the defeat at Poltava, Sweden was able to scrape together enough men to win impressive victories such as Helsingborg  in 1710 and Gadebusch in 1712. In 1714, Charles returned home, after outstaying his welcome in the Ottoman empire. His return brought disaster for Sweden. Still unable to agree to a negotiated peace, Charles invaded Norway twice, dying in the second invasion, on the 30th of November, 1718. His death meant the end of the Karoliner, and the majority of the soldiers in his army never returned to Sweden. 

The Third Phase: 1718-1722

The final phase of the Great Northern War dealt with a succession crisis for Sweden, followed by a series of Russian amphibious raids on the Swedish coast. The Swedes were spent by this time, and mostly unable to resist.  The war ended by confirming Russia as the new Baltic power, and encouraging the rise of several smaller states, such as Brandenburg-Prussia. The Swedes fell into a decline which would last most of the 18th century, but they would briefly take revenge on the Russians in the war of 1788 to 1790. 

Conclusion: 

As we are still going through the 300th anniversary of the war, there is a great deal of interest in how it was fought, and what effects it had on Europe. If anyone has any opinions on the Great Northern War, or would like to have an article regard specific aspects of the Great Northern War, please let me know in the comments. 

Spotlight on: Battle of Fraustadt, 1706

Prayer after the battle of Fraustadt: Gustav Cederströrm

Dear Reader,

On February 13th 1706, in the middle of the Great Northern War, general Carl Gustaf Rehnskiöld of the Swedish army faced a difficult situation. The Saxon army under general Johann von Schulenburg outnumbered Rehnskiölds' force by slightly over two to one (9,500 to 20,000). The Saxons and Russians under Schulenburg had been following Rehnskiöld, with the hopes of destroying his much smaller army.  Rehnskiölds' situation was only worsened by the fact that King Augustus the Strong of Poland (another member of the anti-Swedish coalition) was approaching with an additional 8,000 horsemen. If Schulenburg and Augustus completed a junction, the force against Rehnskiold would increase to three to one.

North of the town of Fraustadt, (present day Wschowa) the Saxo-Russian force established a defensive position of roughly two miles in length, between the villages of Röhrsdorf  (present Osowa Sein) and Geyersdorf (present Debowa Leka). The defensive positions were littered with cannons and Chevaux de frise, spikes designed to impale horses.

Chevaux de frise

Schulenburg deployed his army in a traditional Kabinettskriege pattern: the infantry in the center, with the cavalry on the wings, and Rehnskiöld followed suit. Schulenburg placed his Russian allies on the left flank of his infantry line, and supposedly ordered them to turn their uniforms inside out to disguise the fact that they were Russian. (The inside of the Russian coat was red, like the outside of the Saxon coat.) Schulenburg was dubious about the value of his Russian allies, based on their poor performance at the debacle of Narva in 1700.

At the outset of the battle, the Saxons and Russians had most of the traditional military advantages. They had a larger army, much more artillery (the Swedes didn't have any cannons at this battle) , the flanks of their infantry line were protected by cavalry, villages, and a marsh, and they had strong fortifications in the front of their army.

Despite all of these disadvantages, Rehnskiöld ordered the Swedes to attack. The Swedes possessed one advantage that the other forces of the Great Northern War did not: superior morale. The Swedes would attack against incredible odds again and again during the Great Northern War. Rehnskiöld also knew that he had great superiority in cavalry, and as we has seen before, if cavalry could break into enemy lines, they would cause panic and massive casualties.

Before we continue, here is a map of the battle of Fraustadt, drawn by yours truly. Do not copy this map for anything except personal use.

Map by author 2/13/2013

My map is based on contemporary maps and shows the course of the battle.  Oskar Sjöstrom provides a more accurate map of the deployment, in his book, Fraustadt 1706 - ett fält färgat rött ("Fraustadt 1706- a field colored red".) Here is his map.

Map by Oskar Sjöstrom (2008)

Rehnskiöld knew that to frontally attack Chevaux de frise meant suicide for his horsemen, so he sent them around the enemies' flank. On the right flank, the cavalry under Krassow and Rehnskiöld would sweep around the left flank of the Saxon and Russian army. On the Swedish left flank, the cavalry under Hummerhielm would by pass by the Chevaux de frise by moving through a frozen swamp in front of the Saxon right flank. The result of this flanking movement can be seen on my map, above.

The Swedish cavalry moved to envelope the Saxon flanks, while the Swedish infantry moved against the centre of the of the Saxon and Russian forces, preventing them from assisting the cavalry. The Saxon cavalry did not attempt to countercharge the Swedes during the flanking movement, and the result was disasterous for the Saxons.

Both Saxon cavalry wings broke under the onslaught, and the Swedish cavalry, showing considerable restraint, moved to attack the rear of the Saxon and Russian infantry.  This can be seen on my map. Once the Swedish horsemen were in among the enemy infantry, the battle was over, and the Saxon and Russian army ceased to exist. The Swedes lost around 1,500 men killed and wounded, while the Saxons and Russian lost around 15,000 killed, wounded and captured.

This double envelopment has often been compared to Hannibal's miraculous victory at Cannae, and the Swedish army was grateful for its incredible victory.  The regimental chaplains led the men in prayer, to thank God for the victory.  This scene was immortalized by the great Swedish painter, Gustaf Cederström, in the painting at the beginning of this post. 

For further information, check out Oskar Sjöstrom's book Fraustadt 1706 - ett fält färgat rött. Even for non-Swedish readers, the book has many helpful maps and diagrams.

Thanks for reading,

Alex