Join our Discord community! Hang out, discuss history, make video recommendations and vote in polls on what I should react to next! Join here: discord.gg/NZVfmWCjUT
Karl XII was an effective strategist because of the Carolean Doctrine. This doctrine was pretty much the Swedish Blitzkrieg; aggressive and fast warfare with special iteration of shock tactics. Swedish soldiers was drilled to quickly advance on enemy lines weathering their musket fire and only stop and fire one volley at the enemy at point blank range. This shocking display of showing no fear would disconcern the enemy troops and many began to run away before the Swedes unloaded their muskets. After their volley they immediately charged in with swords and pikes and the enemy line quickly melted away. Psychological warfare where the enemy often ran away in terror before the battle started, which enabled the Swedes to defeat numerically superior forces. Swedish soldiers was also some of the finest in Europe with modern soldiering hammered into them and deep religious indoctrination, which made them a nightmare to face on the field. What also made the Swedish soldiers so effective is their king was always there in the midst of it risking his own life to personally command the army. Morale was an important factor that kept the Swedish soldiers pushing, and Karl XII was always there to rally them. Even after his death in battle the Swedish soldiers kept pulling these ridiculous victories against Russian attempts at invading the Swedish mainland. An interesting point is even though all of Northern Europe eventually turned against Sweden the Swedish mainland remained intact and no successful invasions was made to conquer Sweden. Not even the Danes managed to get their claims in Scania back.
Thanks for that explanation Faderneslandet (sorry for not having the 'a' with the two dots above it😅) But dont you think the enemy would soon realize this swedish tactic and then learn to attack after the Swedes fired their first shots? If part of the tactic was to intimidate the enemy soldiers (which i have no doubt certainly did) i would think the commanders would tell their soldiers that the Swedes are most vulnerable after the first attack
@@McJibbin As Extra Credits mentioned when the Swedes invaded Russia the soldiers they faced was made of stirner stuff than before. Their commanders had been taking notes like the coalition against Napoleon also later did and eventually learned to exploit the weakness of the enemy. In the case of Napoleon they defeated him by avoiding to meet him in battle, something the Russians did to Karl XII until the army was weakened enough to easily defeat. The Swedish military was way ahead of its time, but even the superpowers got an achilles heel, which we have seen repeated in history where the mightiest always have fallen.
@@McJibbin An important factor to the Swedish shock tactics which doesn't always get mentioned is the specific level of quality of weaponry at the time. The tactic of "charge up close to the enemy then fire at point-blank range" was immensely effective not just because it terrified the enemy into routing, but also because muskets were a LOT less accurate at long range than you'd think. The swedes would advance fearlessly at the enemy, who'd fire at them from a distance immediately and only land essentially some potshots. Then the enemy would have to reload (which takes a lot of time with muskets) at which point the Swedes would get close enough that their ONE volley at point blank range basically can't miss and utterly devastates them. The Swedes, since they only fired one volley, completely eliminated the need for a break to reload their guns and turned it into momentum against their enemy by strategically hitting the enemy when they're trying to reload theirs after having fired one ineffective volley. Right in the middle of that shock, when the enemy has JUST received a crippling volley and panic is starting, the swedes charge in and fight with with bayonets and sabers face-to-face. (Which the enemy soldiers wouldn't expect because no one else did that) The chaos of close-combat after all that is generally where the enemy soldiers break and rout if they weren't disciplined enough. It's all a very carefully designed tactic that, in combination with Sweden's elite veteran soldiers, allowed Sweden to punch MANY times above their weight class and win, until eventually the rest of the world caught up to them.
My forefather was there fighting. The story goes that him together with a few other men saved the king’s life as he got stuck with his boot in the mud. By dragging him up from the mud.
It might be worth looking at the Carolean Swedish Army separately, it had quite a nifty approach to act as a force multiplier for a small army, but it was not without its flaws
I think you could say that the entire "late Baroque" period (1690-1721) is utterly remarkable in every field - politics, war, advances in science, music, architecture and literature. There are so many, many different angles and perspectives that deserve study, it's mind-boggling.
Karl XII was like no other king during the time in history. He was often side by side with his kavalery soldiers fighting in the in the front lines.. Of course it was a tremendous boost for the moral and fighting spirit among his men to have the king fighting by their side.. I believe he was the last king in history killed I battle.
He followed the tradition of the even greater Gustav II. If you want your men to follow, you need to lead. If you want them to fight you need to bleed. If you want their loyalty and respect you must live among them as one of them. Only then can you know if they are ready and able.
Why do you think the Crimea is so important to Russia? Its their only Mediterranean military base and port, and even with the limited access to the Black Sea it is a priceless asset which they carefully protected when the Ukraine was granted its independence.
