4:15 -This is a good point and a really interesting discussion for several reasons, I think. As a Swede growing up and learning all of this from just the Swedish perspective, the concept of an empire never really reached me. In Swedish terminology, it is always referred to as "Stormaktstiden" (basically translated to "the Era of Great Power"), which, in my mind, implies something different than an empire. So, I was a bit surprised when I grew older and started reading about Swedish history from an outside perspective to find that Sweden was considered to have had an empire. In theory, I think that is a true statement under the definition of an empire as several states ruled over by one monarch. But in practice, it was small, short-lived, and did not really project itself onto the arena around it-or at least not in the way I imagine an empire should. There is also the dimension of viewing it through a modern lens, with today's understanding of the political entities around the Baltic. In that sense, the Swedish way of framing it is almost a bit disrespectful in not explicitly recognizing it as an empire ruling over others. All that said, we are talking about an era when nation-states were still a concept under formation, and power resided more in individuals and families than in the states themselves.
Perhaps you can do a video on Sigismund III Vasa. A man who despite expanding the borders of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to their greatest extent failed to hold onto Sweden & Russia.
59:10 to my knowledge, the wife of the soldier-peasant didnt work his field alone, but the other farmers put together in the "ruotu" worked it while the soldier was away. also the ruotu could be a larger allotment than two farms, depending on the productivity of the land. the soldier-plots were usually small and the occupants poor.
Great stream. I used to live and later work near Narvavägen (Narva road) in Stockholm. One of our most beautiful promenades. It runs from Karlaplan which has its name from Charles X, XI and XII down towards the sea
Great video, not sure if this would be a good topic for you but with the Hungarian tv show Rise of the Raven you could do a video on Janos Hyundai and his son Matthias Corvius.
Great stream. I’d love to hear AM’s thoughts on Robert I. Frost’s the Northern Wars. Covers this era of Swedish Greatness in detail and really helps explains how Sweden was able to punch above its weight.
The Tales of Ensign Stål, Soldier boy "He who wavers here in his old age! No, to die young for the land, for honor and the king, that would be my delight! -Johan Ludvig Runeberg
Sweden from Gustavus Adolphus to Charles XII in the global/pan-European context is very fascinating chapter of the European military, diplomatic and political history which is sadly very poorly discussed in English in terms of academic studies
Also note that the Swedes and Norwegians are very tall people. I dont know if this was true back then, best to double check, but if it is, then it makes sense to use the physical superiority of the swedish body to win close combat agaisnt short weaker Russian soldiers. Height and physical strength was a very important focus in the older days, would not surprise me if this was considered in the military tactics.
In relative terms perhaps. But I believe it was around 170 cm perhaps a bit less at the time. Depends a lot on which years we are talking about. Some generations were really short due to famine.
Height wasn't an issue it was discipline. The Swedish army of Charles XII was the best trained in the world. Only when they had been drained in 10 years of war did Charles start to lose but when he had his disciplined troops no army at the time could beat him.
Amongst other things a fascinating insight into the somewhat irrecoverable mentalite of these terrifyingly effective warriors and their motivation. The background of a later character such as Axel von Fersen.
Was there a route where Sweden retained relative great power status and domination of the Baltic states into the medium term? This hypothetical sets aside Charles’ strategic & diplomatic limitations. Easy to see Sweden’s decline as inevitable vs an increasingly outward looking and mobilised Russia, given the resource disparity. Best I can come up with is a scenario where Russia focuses on the southern theatre. A Peteropolis is built on the Black Sea and Russia’s centre of gravity moves south. Even then Russia would still have a keen interest in Poland and the Baltic.
Asa Swede I think our population was just to small. The biggest town in Sweden was Riga. Compare with Portugal (who had global reach), they just coudl not match Spain, England, France etc as the home country was to small with limited population. Portugal got a steady Alliance with England at last. Sweden is easy to defend militarily but back then we had way to small population to match Russia. Especially as Denmark strong at sea was always there and other potential Russian allies (Poland, Prussia, Saxony...). When we did do very well (30 years wars etc) we had French, Dutch or English backing, German and Scotish allies or mercenaries etc.
I think the only way would be establishing an allied Poland which could help to make up their numbers disparity. However, in the long term this would probably result in either Poland becoming the dominant power and Sweden effectively becoming their vassal, or Poland turning on Sweden and becoming their enemy again
One of the most underrated and ignorant emperors of all time like bod damn if half of humanity had half of his balls we would have either conquered the galaxy or gone extinct already
Karl XII became king at 16, his father dies at 41 and his mother passad away less than five years earlier. Being a monarch with absolute powers both parents dead and being stubborn at 16 is ...dangerous to the country for sure. Especially when you have a military "all in" streak. As a Swede it is obvious we needed allies and fighting both Russia & Denmark is unwinnbale without allies or a big fleet to at least force Denmark to surrender. Denamrk was a naval power and wea land power so that seems unlikley for sure. The "plan" to take Moscow and force Russia to surrender was a pipe dream. Countries like Sweden and Denmark fighting among ourselves over and over is terrible. It does open up for bigger nearby nationd to just push us and/or pressure us way easier or snatch of parts :(
Re the strategy vs tactics debate - the GNW was always a losing battle given Sweden faced an alliance with a population that was 10x+ larger than her own. In light of this fact I think the hyperagressive strategy was warranted as nothing but a complete and brutal defeat of Russia would just mean a grinding war of attrition which ultimately Russia would win because they had more resources. Plus, I think no lasting peace could be achieved without the complete and utter defeat of Russia (i.e. basically putting a puppet tsar on the throne) because a port in baltics was the tsars core war aim and they would have just returned and fought Sweden at a later date (and at that time the balance of power would have been even worse), if CXII would have accepted the tsars peace overtures
Charles lost because he lacked the resources for a long war of attrition but also because he aimed for too much. He should have stuck into baiting Peter coming to him not go and invade Russia and get his army destroyed.
@@PMMagro i recently saw the film, magrethe I queen of the north, about the kalmar union,... danmark , sverige & norge really where united under one woman...
Perhaps a presentation on Tsarina Elizabeth of Russia? Elizabeth sent 85,000 troops to attack Frederick the Great who considered surrendering to her. However Elizabeth died and Frederick was saved from a disaster.
@ Peter III was Prussian. His son who later on was named Tsar Paul also idolized Prussia. I wonder how Peter ended up being Tsarina Elizabeth’s heir in Russia?
I agree that Charles XII father was the better king. But it's a bit unfair to compare the two. Charles XI horrific victory at Lund was more luck than anything else. He was slightly older while Charles was just 18. The situation in Europe was also different. It's hard to say who won the Scanian wars. The Swedish navy lost 3 major battles and were in a bad shape. One king had 20 years of peace and great reforms, the other king had almost 20 years of war against 2 large European powers and one medium. Comparing them by result is a little bit unfair. Beating up the bully in school vs fighting Mike Tyson.
Those maps of holding the parts of middle norway is something the swedes need to get over. That hardly happend. They hold those for like 3 months, until the norwegian army kicked them out. Lol
The "gaa paa" tactic is better pronounced, as if the words were written in English like "Goh pah". Anyway good riddance to "Karl", - Sincerely, Norwegian
As a Swede I have been hoping for this, but never expected it to materialize. Thank you and God bless AM.
All the best things will come to pass eventually. ❤
That's how I felt when he did about Poland
@@Ciech_mate That's how I felt when he did Prussia
4:15 -This is a good point and a really interesting discussion for several reasons, I think. As a Swede growing up and learning all of this from just the Swedish perspective, the concept of an empire never really reached me. In Swedish terminology, it is always referred to as "Stormaktstiden" (basically translated to "the Era of Great Power"), which, in my mind, implies something different than an empire.
So, I was a bit surprised when I grew older and started reading about Swedish history from an outside perspective to find that Sweden was considered to have had an empire.
In theory, I think that is a true statement under the definition of an empire as several states ruled over by one monarch. But in practice, it was small, short-lived, and did not really project itself onto the arena around it-or at least not in the way I imagine an empire should.
There is also the dimension of viewing it through a modern lens, with today's understanding of the political entities around the Baltic. In that sense, the Swedish way of framing it is almost a bit disrespectful in not explicitly recognizing it as an empire ruling over others.
All that said, we are talking about an era when nation-states were still a concept under formation, and power resided more in individuals and families than in the states themselves.
Perhaps you can do a video on Sigismund III Vasa. A man who despite expanding the borders of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to their greatest extent failed to hold onto Sweden & Russia.
Making breakfast to this delightful discussion.
Please do one on Maximilian I of Mexico!
This will be interesting! Tack så mycket, AM!
Good to see you back.
59:10
to my knowledge, the wife of the soldier-peasant didnt work his field alone, but the other farmers put together in the "ruotu" worked it while the soldier was away. also the ruotu could be a larger allotment than two farms, depending on the productivity of the land. the soldier-plots were usually small and the occupants poor.
It was more like ten farms, with the tenth being supported by the nine.
Great stream. I used to live and later work near Narvavägen (Narva road) in Stockholm. One of our most beautiful promenades. It runs from Karlaplan which has its name from Charles X, XI and XII down towards the sea
Great video, not sure if this would be a good topic for you but with the Hungarian tv show Rise of the Raven you could do a video on Janos Hyundai and his son Matthias Corvius.
1:32:55
swedish, and polish Vasas were split up, and working at cross purposes in Russia, during the time of troubles.
I would love to hear you talk about the grand strategy of the Polish Vasa dynasty, possibly Polands greatest dynasty in terms of aspirations.
It was still a Swedish dynasty, just on the Polish-Lithuanian throne but never forgetting about Stockholm.
@DACHgag why do you think you are worthy of talking to me, vile troll and defo virgin civilian
Great stream. I’d love to hear AM’s thoughts on Robert I. Frost’s the Northern Wars. Covers this era of Swedish Greatness in detail and really helps explains how Sweden was able to punch above its weight.
Great stream as usual gentlemen
The Tales of Ensign Stål,
Soldier boy
"He who wavers here in his old age!
No, to die young for the land,
for honor and the king,
that would be my delight!
-Johan Ludvig Runeberg
Charles XII: Dies in Norway
Nobody:
Britain: Switches sides to support Sweden
Sweden from Gustavus Adolphus to Charles XII in the global/pan-European context is very fascinating chapter of the European military, diplomatic and political history which is sadly very poorly discussed in English in terms of academic studies
Great stream!
Good stream.
How many Swedish kings have their own power metal album?
Swedish bias.
Fake music.
@@ryansilva1274 gatekeep much?
Also note that the Swedes and Norwegians are very tall people. I dont know if this was true back then, best to double check, but if it is, then it makes sense to use the physical superiority of the swedish body to win close combat agaisnt short weaker Russian soldiers. Height and physical strength was a very important focus in the older days, would not surprise me if this was considered in the military tactics.
In relative terms perhaps. But I believe it was around 170 cm perhaps a bit less at the time. Depends a lot on which years we are talking about. Some generations were really short due to famine.
Height wasn't an issue it was discipline. The Swedish army of Charles XII was the best trained in the world. Only when they had been drained in 10 years of war did Charles start to lose but when he had his disciplined troops no army at the time could beat him.
Amongst other things a fascinating insight into the somewhat irrecoverable mentalite of these terrifyingly effective warriors and their motivation. The background of a later character such as Axel von Fersen.
Was there a route where Sweden retained relative great power status and domination of the Baltic states into the medium term? This hypothetical sets aside Charles’ strategic & diplomatic limitations.
Easy to see Sweden’s decline as inevitable vs an increasingly outward looking and mobilised Russia, given the resource disparity.
Best I can come up with is a scenario where Russia focuses on the southern theatre. A Peteropolis is built on the Black Sea and Russia’s centre of gravity moves south. Even then Russia would still have a keen interest in Poland and the Baltic.
Asa Swede I think our population was just to small. The biggest town in Sweden was Riga. Compare with Portugal (who had global reach), they just coudl not match Spain, England, France etc as the home country was to small with limited population. Portugal got a steady Alliance with England at last. Sweden is easy to defend militarily but back then we had way to small population to match Russia. Especially as Denmark strong at sea was always there and other potential Russian allies (Poland, Prussia, Saxony...). When we did do very well (30 years wars etc) we had French, Dutch or English backing, German and Scotish allies or mercenaries etc.
I think the only way would be establishing an allied Poland which could help to make up their numbers disparity. However, in the long term this would probably result in either Poland becoming the dominant power and Sweden effectively becoming their vassal, or Poland turning on Sweden and becoming their enemy again
One of the most underrated and ignorant emperors of all time like bod damn if half of humanity had half of his balls we would have either conquered the galaxy or gone extinct already
Karl XII became king at 16, his father dies at 41 and his mother passad away less than five years earlier. Being a monarch with absolute powers both parents dead and being stubborn at 16 is ...dangerous to the country for sure. Especially when you have a military "all in" streak. As a Swede it is obvious we needed allies and fighting both Russia & Denmark is unwinnbale without allies or a big fleet to at least force Denmark to surrender. Denamrk was a naval power and wea land power so that seems unlikley for sure. The "plan" to take Moscow and force Russia to surrender was a pipe dream. Countries like Sweden and Denmark fighting among ourselves over and over is terrible. It does open up for bigger nearby nationd to just push us and/or pressure us way easier or snatch of parts :(
His statue in Stockholm was vandalised today on his death day.
S V E R I G E
Charles tactical mentality reminds of Alexander the Great
Re the strategy vs tactics debate - the GNW was always a losing battle given Sweden faced an alliance with a population that was 10x+ larger than her own. In light of this fact I think the hyperagressive strategy was warranted as nothing but a complete and brutal defeat of Russia would just mean a grinding war of attrition which ultimately Russia would win because they had more resources.
Plus, I think no lasting peace could be achieved without the complete and utter defeat of Russia (i.e. basically putting a puppet tsar on the throne) because a port in baltics was the tsars core war aim and they would have just returned and fought Sweden at a later date (and at that time the balance of power would have been even worse), if CXII would have accepted the tsars peace overtures
Charles lost because he lacked the resources for a long war of attrition but also because he aimed for too much. He should have stuck into baiting Peter coming to him not go and invade Russia and get his army destroyed.
this video is very popular in danmark: denmark :P
Do not worry. Sweden is small today but not THAT small.
@@PMMagro i recently saw the film, magrethe I queen of the north, about the kalmar union,...
danmark , sverige & norge really where united under one woman...
Perhaps a presentation on Tsarina Elizabeth of Russia? Elizabeth sent 85,000 troops to attack Frederick the Great who considered surrendering to her. However Elizabeth died and Frederick was saved from a disaster.
By Peter III who idolized Frederick the Great.
@ Peter III was Prussian. His son who later on was named Tsar Paul also idolized Prussia. I wonder how Peter ended up being Tsarina Elizabeth’s heir in Russia?
“AM never fails to show how much I suck.” - DAN CARLIN
Come on, it is not Straslund, but Stralsund.
I agree that Charles XII father was the better king. But it's a bit unfair to compare the two. Charles XI horrific victory at Lund was more luck than anything else. He was slightly older while Charles was just 18. The situation in Europe was also different. It's hard to say who won the Scanian wars. The Swedish navy lost 3 major battles and were in a bad shape.
One king had 20 years of peace and great reforms, the other king had almost 20 years of war against 2 large European powers and one medium. Comparing them by result is a little bit unfair. Beating up the bully in school vs fighting Mike Tyson.
sort of
Those maps of holding the parts of middle norway is something the swedes need to get over. That hardly happend. They hold those for like 3 months, until the norwegian army kicked them out. Lol
The "gaa paa" tactic is better pronounced, as if the words were written in English like "Goh pah". Anyway good riddance to "Karl", - Sincerely, Norwegian