Download Scottish Mercenaries Ebook - General Robert Monro website

The Usage of Scottish Mercenaries
by the Anti-Imperial Forces
in the Thirty Years’ War
•
By William S. Brockington, Jr.
General Robert Monro
17th Century Scottish Military Professional & Soldier of Faith
WSB: William S. Brockington, Jr. Master’s Thesis: The Usage of Scottish Mercenaries by the Anti-Imperial Forces in
the Thirty Years’ War {USM}. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in
the Department of History, University of South Carolina: 1968.
Sub scribitur:
John Patrick Dolan, PhD (Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, 1955), Thesis Director.
Peter W. Becker MA (PhD, Stanford University, 1971), Second Reader.
H.W. Davis, PhD, Dean of the Graduate School.
Updated, Revised and Edited: 1969–2011.
© All rights reserved, William S. Brockington. Posted at www.generalrobertmonro.com: August 2012
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Overview of Period (1500–1700).............................................................................................................................. 3
Chapter I .........Seventeenth-Century Warfare........................................................................................................14
Chapter II ........Outbreak of the Thirty Years’ War and Danish Intervention.........................................................22
Chapter III ......Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden Intervenes.....................................................................................35
Chapter IV ......The End of the Thirty Years’ War...................................................................................................47
Chapter V ........Epilogue and Conclusion...............................................................................................................57
Appendix 1.......Scottish Officers Abroad and at Home..........................................................................................67
Appendix 2.......Authorized Levies, 1618–1648.......................................................................................................73
Bibliography..............................................................................................................................................................76
––
WSB. The Usage of Scottish Mercenaries by the Anti-Imperial Forces in the Thirty Years’ War (2012)
––
2
Overview of the Early Modern Era (1500–1700)
Context is critical for understanding history. Since context in a historical work is often either presumed
(hopefully not assumed), overlooked (not known to an author), omitted (at times, deliberately) or glossed
over, an overview can help keep ideas, persons and events in order. The Early Modern Era { EME} contained
myriad simultaneous ‘Revolutions’ – each of which affected different people (all classes) and different states
(hundreds of which existed in the EME) in different ways – all of which are almost impossible to
include/incorporate when attempting to provide context. This overview considers some of the most important
factors/themes of the EME: political/constitutional conflicts, confrontations and alterations; social flux and
pressures (class structure & social mobility); the emergence of a global economy; religious and intellectual
challenges; and military change/revolution. USM is an effort to explain how and why these themes interface
with each other and how a specific group of people – the military entrepreneur (more specifically, the
Scottish ‘mercenaries’) – were affected by or, in some way, affected the enormous paradigm shifts occurring
in Europe throughout the EME. The overview is taken from various Study Guides {SG} which I developed
over the decades for my students. At some point these learning aids are To Be Posted {TBP}.
Throughout the early modern period the dual themes of the centralization of state power and the development
of capitalism were vital components in the creation of the modern world. The limitations of feudalism in an
epoch of revolutionary change produced a desire by different groups [certain corporations, cities, provinces,
social classes, and the universal church], each with diverse motivations [protection of ancient rights and
liberties or the acquisition of new rights and liberties] for greater stability and less disorder within the
embryonic state-systems then in existence. The dynastic-territorial state {DTS}, the form of state-system
then in existence, was precisely that: a ruling family claimed sovereignty over geographic areas which rarely
contained many centrifugal forces. Frequently non-contiguous, divisions/elements of a kingdom were further
separated by different languages, 1 laws, customs, weights and measures, et al. Poor or non-existent
transportation [Roman roads were still the best] and communication networks hampered development of
royal bureaucracies. Other centripetal forces [thus impediments to claims of absolute authority] included
ancient rights and liberties enjoyed by certain corporations, cities, provinces, social classes, and the universal
church within each state. Renaissance ideas and ideals provided theoretical foundations for a more powerful
– as well as a constitutionally limited – monarchy. 2
Struggles for power regarding the parameters of royal authority – how much power to the monarch and what
kind of checks and balances were necessary – occurred throughout Europe. The most frequent struggles for
power resulted from attempts to centralize the power of the state. Obviously, rulers preferred absolute power
within a centralized state. 3 A monarch desirous of such power faced numerous difficulties, not the least of
which were aristocratic privileges and the universal church (often a state within the state). Leaving either
1
2
3
Standardization of national languages was only in the formative stage throughout Europe. See WSB, ‘Celtic Britain’ which is
TBP.
Theoretical v real power is a throughout the EME. It was an issue often settled by war.
Divine right monarchy was a form of royal absolutism. The seventeenth-century doctrine of the divine right of kings asserted
that the monarch’s power was paternal and absolute, was not subject to approval by any constitutional organism, was derived
from Biblical authority and was an extension of God’s power on earth.
3
uncontested or unregulated was simply unthinkable. Controlling such powerful opponents meant that
European kings and princes had to be cautious, even Machiavellian, in their political activities if they were to
overcome such limitations. One tactic included utilizing members of the middle class in government, which
gave the appearance of offering opportunity for upward mobility through service to the state. By the late
fifteenth-century, despite inadequate bureaucracies and limited revenue from traditional sources, some rulers
were establishing increasingly effective and authoritative central governments. 4 But it was a personalized
(not institutionalized as in a dictatorship) despotism over their subjects. And each DTS was different, that is,
there were hundreds of constitutional paradigms during the EME.
Concomitantly, the emergence of merchant capitalism was a vital factor within each constitutional paradigm.
In mercantile (Atlantic) states, support for a stronger central authority was initially supported by an emerging
middle class because of the promise of a diminution of domestic turbulence (greater internal stability) and
the emergence of an environment more conducive to economic growth. On the other hand, a DTS with little
external trade was far less affected by this factor; central and eastern Europe remained land-locked and landoriented well into the twentieth-century. This does not mean, however, that they were unaffected by the
forces changing Europe. The dramatic increase of specie over the sixteenth-century triggered a price
revolution, which, in turn, led to a more relevant middle class and a relatively less powerful (and cashstrapped) upper class.5 Inflation hammered all classes, but most hurt were those dependent upon traditional
revenue sources which remained relatively flat/fixed/stationary. 6
A promising source of new revenue for rulers was an increase in economic regulations implemented by the
state. As a source of power, control of the economy of the DTS was considered essential for every
seventeenth- and eighteenth-century government. To enhance economic control, as well as to tap this
potentially lucrative income source, policies (later collectively termed mercantilism) designed to control a
state’s economic efforts were introduced. Holding forth the promise of income on a scale hitherto impossible,
these policies included: government subsidies, grants of monopolies, building government-run industries,
establishing protective tariffs and possessing (and completely dominating the economic life of) colonies, Not
coincidentally, such policies were also intended to make a state self-sufficient and to amplify monarchical
power. Implementation of such a system depended upon a number of factors, not least of which was the
extent of absolutism then possessed by the would-be money-czar. Royal fiat was preferable to negotiating
with interested parties, hence the nature of mercantilism varied widely from state to state. Although the
middle class was the primary financial beneficiary of the world’s first truly global economy, their costs [and
profits] escalated as monarchs [who viewed income produced via mercantilism as their personal cash cow]
hit their pocketbooks with numerous taxes. Having little or no political power themselves, it was they to
whom the radical ideas of constitutionalism most appealed.
The Weltanschauung of EME was dramatically altered by the Age of Exploration and Colonization, for it
was an expansion of societies, not just of groups. Records were kept, maps were made, and colonies were
established and controlled. More territory was covered and far more rapidly than ever before, as, for the first
4
Which encouraged other rulers in their efforts – work in progress – always.
5
For the debate regarding the Price Revolution, see Braudel & Spooner, ‘Prices in Europe’ in CEcHE 4: 374–486.
6
Between 1540 and 1600 general food prices increase 800% [Rosalind Mitchison, A History of Scotland (London, 1970), p. 138].
Between 1560 and 1600 general prices increased 500–600% while wages increased only 400–500%. [Somewhere in Smout,
Scottish People, Scotland and Europe or Scottish Trade, ??].
4
time, people of the West crossed the great oceans of the world. It carried Westerners outside the orbit of the
Mediterranean world, hitherto controlled by Italians, Byzantines and Moslems. It placed them in new and
unfamiliar contact with a bewildering variety of races, creeds and cultures. Because of superior organization,
technological strength and drive, Westerners extended their power and influence throughout the world. There
was no single Western center, rather a number of competing centers, each perfectly willing to cut the throats
of the others. Yet this deadly rivalry neither weakened nor delayed the processes of conquest and expansion;
indeed, it enhanced and accelerated it. By 1700 the expansion of Europe affected almost every part of the
world. It is important to note that these were not ‘New Worlds’ which were conquered for there existed
thriving cultures and civilizations throughout the areas of European contact. Technology, especially
weaponry, allowed Westerners to defeat, control and/or destroy many of the peoples contacted. Within
Europe itself, feudalism withered under the multiple impacts of the Price Revolution, the strengthening DTS
monarchs, and the rising middle classes who possessed the money made during the Commercial Revolution.
In sum, the influx of imported goods and bullion stimulated entrepreneurial ambitions and economic growth
throughout Western Europe, especially of the Atlantic nations. Simultaneously, it stimulated dreams of
political power within their native DTS.
‘Renaissance’ means Rebirth. Renaissance scholars projected a view of history that was cyclical, and they
considered their own era as one of renewal. 7 Causes of the Renaissance include the influence of the Greek
and Roman civilizations, the growth of a critical and skeptical attitude, and increased commerce. The
Renaissance began in Italy because city life was well advanced in Italy, people had the wealth to cultivate the
arts, Roman roads and monuments intensified the Italians’ links to their Roman past, and Italy contained
many ancient manuscripts. The cities of northern Italy were particularly significant due to their banking and
commercial centers; they had the money to pay for the things they wanted. As the Middle Ages drew to a
close, the northern Italian city-states developed governments dominated by individual strong men. These
cities competed with each other militarily and culturally. The most significant political realist in the ‘School
of Europe’ was Niccolò Machiavelli, whose political ideals called for the ruler to combine intelligence with
ruthlessness for the good of the state. Machiavelli advocated and/or recommended in The Prince and The Art
of War that success was based on force, therefore politics should be divorced from morality altogether, that a
powerful monarch (of the kind already found in states like France) should be selected to revive Italy’s glory,
and that a state’s existence must depend, in the last resort, on strength in war. Although the classical revival
began in the northern Italian towns, it soon radiated to other areas. Scholars from throughout Europe came to
Italian universities to study and took the ideas home with them. The effects of the classical revival were
revolutionary wherever seeds were planted. Humanistic attitudes impacted political thought, social
structures, religious beliefs, and economic development. Change begat change as the Medieval West was
transformed into the Early Modern West.
The monumental religious upheaval that officially began in 1517 is still, even 500 years later, a highly
controversial matter. Even the name is in dispute for, to a Protestant, it was the Reformation and, to a
Catholic, it was the Protestant Revolt. When the universal church reformed itself, it was their Reformation; to
Protestants, it was merely the Counter-Reformation. No matter the terminology, it was a major intellectual,
social, political, and economic upheaval in western Europe which, in some areas, still continues. Early
religious reformers did not intend revolution – they were religious crusaders who wished to return to the
7
WSB. Senior Thesis: ‘Renaissance Questions’ (1966).
5
ideals/ideas of the true Church of earliest Christianity. However, the beliefs they symbolized and the forces
they set in motion did constitute a revolution of great magnitude. Although the Reformation is stated to have
begun in 1517, the forces that caused it go back many centuries. The universal Church was corrupt, but
wealthy; the DTS wanted to control the church, and its wealth; the middle class used the Reformation to
justify various practices; the Renaissance set in motion a number of humanistic challenges to the doctrinal
bases of the Latin church; and, perhaps most importantly, there were religious reformers who truly sought
salvation, within the church if possible, but outside it if necessary.
Martin Luther (1485–1546) was a devout Augustinian monk who possessed one of the greatest minds of that,
or any era. His quarrel with his ecclesiastical superiors was over one of the oldest tensions in Christian
thought, that between faith and good works. When Luther posted his 95 Theses, he had no clear intention of
setting up a separate religious body, but the challenged papal forces stiffened their resistance which, in turn,
forced the Lutherans into further resistance. Under papal pressure, Luther took an ever more extreme (not to
Paul, his mentor; to the papacy) position: man is saved by faith alone. From this followed the denial of other
catholic essentials: priests, papacy, et al. Luther was successful for many reasons: his theology was well
presented; his supporters were significant, especially Frederick the Wise (a Protestant appellation) of
Luther’s native Saxony; Germans resented the Italian papacy; German princes saw an opportunity to usurp
further power from the Emperor as well as take from the Church; the invention of movable type spread his
ideas so rapidly that the Church could not resist effectively; there was no champion for the papacy at the
critical moment; and the Holy Roman {HR: Römisch-Deutscher } Emperor {Kaiser}], Charles V [Spanish:
Carlos I; Dutch: Karel V; German: Karl V; Italian: Carlo V] (1500–1558), was a young boy who could not,
or would not assert himself, at least initially, when it would have been possible to have dealt with the
Lutherans.
It was John Calvin (1509–1564) who shaped Protestantism into a faith instead of a struggle over dogma.
Born in France, the young lawyer fled to Geneva when his theological views, which were much along the
lines of Luther, were considered heretical as well as threatening to the state. In Geneva Calvin created a
theocracy which he ruled with an iron hand until his death. Ministers and elders (presbyters) were entrusted
with the government of his church. Calvin’s great work, The Institutes of the Christian Religion (1536),
spelled out his beliefs. He agreed that faith was exalted above works, but the core of his doctrine was the
principle of predestination. God was omnipotent and omniscient; so being, God knew the past, the present,
and the future. Hence, certain souls are ‘elect’ and are saved; nothing can be done to change one’s destiny.
Calvin insisted that the elect act wisely simply because they are saved, and not because of some ulterior, and
human, motive. He believed that hard work, frugality, austerity, thrift, and other virtues were innate in the
elect; he also believed that poverty was a sign of God’s displeasure. Calvinism appealed to the growing
middle class for it validated many of their practices. Within a generation Calvinism had spread throughout
Western Europe (and were known by various names in different states: Huguenots, Presbyterians, Puritans,
Dutch Reformed, and Calvinists), becoming in the process the dynamic Protestant force of the century after
1550. Calvinists went about doing God’s work, and their own. They most clearly symbolize that which has
been called the ‘Protestant Work Ethic’ or the ‘spirit of capitalism.’ By so doing they helped make the
Commercial and Industrial Revolutions possible, and thus too the modern world.
6
A single state religion was considered essential to a ruler’s political authority. In vogue was a new statecraft
principle, that of church and state being one and not separate as in medieval times. Symbolizing this tenet
was the phrase: cujus regio, eius religio8 (of whom the region, of his the religion), that is, the ruler
determined the religion of his people. This meant having effective control over the state church. In a state
church, clerics became functionaries of the state and minions of the rule; it often meant enhancement of
absolute authority with their connivance. Religious reform movements exacerbated conflict by forcing (or
encouraging) secular rulers to defend a chosen – or mandated – religious status within their realms as well as
to deal with religious issues and choices in adjacent areas. The Reformations of the sixteenth-century were
constitutional, economic, social and intellectual confrontations which polarized European states into three
major camps9 – Evangelisch/Lutheran, Calvinist, and Catholic. Religious wars (beginning in mid-sixteenth
century) were commonplace. Several variations of state religion emerged: (1) ruler as supreme head of the
church, e.g., France (Gallican was Catholic with a twist) , Sweden (Lutheran) 10 and England (Anglican was
Catholic without papal authority); (2) ruler as ally of church, e.g. Habsburgs (Spanish and Austrian) and the
pope plus the Jesuits], whereby the state church functioned as a department of the state [religion used to
control]; and (3) ruler working through the church – Calvinist. Notice that nowhere, save in Rome, is there
mention of temporal role for the papacy. Religious conflict during the EME conjoined theological and
constitutional debates – a state church or separation of church and state, with confrontations throughout
Europe being remarkably similar.
The Catholic Reformation/Counter-Reformation was the reaction of the Catholic Church against the
Reformation. The official Roman church response to the initial phase of the Reformation was delayed
because of a lack of vigorous leadership in the papacy, a failure to realize the seriousness of the revolt, and
attempts at conciliation. The Council of Trent (1546–1563) clarified doctrine and made Church organizations
more efficient. The Council of Trent: inaugurated reforms in church administration and discipline;
condemned such practices as simony, nepotism, luxurious living, and the sale of religious offices; and
eliminated the unrestricted sale of indulgences. Doctrinally, the Council of Trent affirmed: the reality of
purgatory, the validity of good works, of the need for thought control by the Church. To accomplish this last,
it reorganized the Index of Prohibited Literature and proposed the Professio fidei Tridentina. It most
assuredly did not compromise with the Protestants on matters of doctrine. One of the main accomplishments
of the Catholic Reformation was increased control of the Church by dedicated clergymen; the shock troops
of the Catholic Reformation came from the Society of Jesus, or the Jesuits, founded by Ignatius of Loyola
[Ignacio de Loyola] (1491–1556) in 1539. Their attitude toward the Catholic Church, as stated by Loyola,
was as follows: ‘If she [the Church] shall have defined anything to be black which to our eyes appears to be
white, we ought in like manner to pronounce it black.’ 11 Jesuits were significant missionaries and educators
because of their dedication and devotion to Catholicism. As the Jesuit order grew in power and importance, it
8
9
10
11
The phrase is believed to have been coined in 1582 by Joachim Stephani (1544–1623) of the University of
Greifswald. It may not have been stated so succinctly at the Peace of Augsburg (1555), but it was the intent of the
settlement.
While this is far too simplistic, it will suffice for now.
Gustav I of Sweden [Gustav Vasa] (1496 –1560) created a Swedish national church at the same time Henry VIII
created the Anglican Church. For similar reasons each expelled papal influence but retained Catholic forms.
Ignatius Loyola, ‘Spiritual Exercises, Rule 13’ in Bettenson, Documents, p. 26.
7
became controversial as it continually meddled in the internal political affairs of Catholic countries and was
eventually banished from most of the Catholic nations of Europe.
The Catholic Reformation was most successful in areas where Roman Catholicism continued (Habsburg
lands) and where Catholic monarchs supported Jesuit activities. Some areas of success were Poland,
Bohemia, Hungary, Ireland, Southern Netherlands, and Bavaria. The heritage of the Counter-Reformation
included: a new vigorous spiritual force propagated by Catholic theologians who returned to scholasticism
yet acknowledged the dignity of human reason; the spread of literacy due to the educational activities of
various monastic orders and religious societies, especially the Jesuits; and the growth of charitable activities
with emphasis on good works. The Catholic Reformation succeeded in preserving and reinvigorating
fundamental Catholic beliefs. But, while the Roman Catholic Reformation halted the further spread of
Protestantism in Europe, it was able to regain relatively little territory that had been lost to the Protestants. To
summarize, the Reformations did all of the following: strengthened the authority of the state over its people;
revived an interest in religion, but one based on authority; contributed to the rise of the middle class;
stimulated capitalism by making interest and the investment of capital respectable; led to terrible religious
wars; and was even reflected in the struggles of European nations in the contest for areas of the ‘New World’.
Regarding the influence of the Renaissance and Reformation on Western Christendom, Christianity was at
first threatened by the Renaissance of secularism but was later revitalized by the Protestant and Roman
Catholic Reformations, which the Renaissance helped to provoke. The Renaissance and the Reformation can
be compared to each other in that both were related to the growth of capitalism and the rise of the middle
class.
The standing army was arguably the most persuasive facilitator of paradigm shifts in early modern Europe. 12
Having one allowed/provided an opportunity for a ruler to control dissident elements within a state; lack of
one meant a ruler could neither control, defend nor expand his/her realm. Since a successful war, be it
domestic or foreign, usually resulted in enhanced authority for monarchs, it was thus quite tempting for
rulers to attempt to expand their spheres of control by using their new toys (the standing armies)
aggressively. Raising and maintaining one was the problem, for a standing army raised questions such as:
affordability [back to mercantilism; taxation; bureaucracy]; how large; where to station it/them (if several);
from whence the rank and file; and who staffs it? As it evolved, the standing army became a vital component
in monarchical control of nobility; let the nobles command the army and serve the state. With inflation
hammering them, a military career was perfect for younger sons of nobles, hence the military entrepreneur.
As with the state church, nobles became sycophants/parasites/dependent upon the largesse of the state – and
ardent supporters of the new status quo. In this way, in most of Europe, the feudal nobility maintained itself
in a position of strength into modern times. The nature of warfare changed radically during the EME. Wars
were no longer a single battle or campaign; wars became year-round activities and world-wide in scope. This
necessitated innovations in logistics, tactics, weapon technology, and troop discipline. Required was a
support system to move equipment and to supply troops. Logistics provided living necessars13, or
entertainment, and made it less necessary for soldiers to forage – or to straggle. Throughout the EME, and
12
A true national army does not appear until the French Revolution. What emerges during this period is the standing army. More on
this TBP.
13
Although necessar is merely a Scottish variant of necessary, its military connotation defines that which is needed to
keep a military force functioning.
8
especially between 1550 and 1650, virtually every state of Western Europe was involved in war, either civil
or international, often both.
On the continent, a prime instigator of war throughout the sixteenth- and seventeenth-centuries was the
Habsburg family/dynasty, which claimed suzerainty over the largest European DTS since Charlemagne
(800).
The sixteenth-century is often called the Spanish century, but a more accurate name would be the Habsburg
century for that dynasty controlled the far-flung empire under their direct or indirect control. In Spain royal
power increased as a result of the Spanish Inquisition, militant Catholicism, control of the Iberian Peninsula,
and wealth from the Americas. Charles V ruled the largest European empire since the time of Charlemagne;
and Spanish strength in the second half of the sixteenth-century was based on wealth from the ‘New World’,
an efficient bureaucracy, a strong, efficient army, and the support of the papacy. Opposing the growth of
Habsburg power in Europe were the Valois/Bourbon dynasty of France, the Ottoman Turks, Protestant
princes in the HRE, the Tudors of England, and the Calvinists of the Dutch Republic. 14 Charles V abdicated
in 1556, dividing the Habsburg possessions among his son, Philip II of Spain (1527–1598), and his brother,
Ferdinand I (1503– r1558–1564) of the HRE. Philip had three goals: further consolidation of royal
absolutism in Spain, further extension of Spain’s influence and domination, and championing Catholicism
against Protestantism. Throughout his reign Philip was plagued by recurring revolts by the Calvinist
Protestants of the Dutch Republic – officially the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands [Republiek der
Zeven Verenigde Nederlanden]. As these rebels were often helped by the English, he sent the ‘Invincible’
Armada against England in 1588. Sadly for Spain, it was not unsinkable. Thereafter Spain declined as a great
power because of its costly foreign wars, the expulsion of the Jews and Moors, and a decline in bullion
coming from the New World.
The HRE15 was theoretically ruled by the emperor but it was in reality a conglomeration of German states,
few of which paid more than lip-service to their nominal overlord. 16 The Protestant Reformation began there,
and Evangelisch supporters, in addition to adhering to a reformed church, used their church as a cudgel
against the emperor as well as a means of acquiring cash (confiscation of church properties). Stirring the pot
was the introduction of Calvinism, which neither Catholics nor Evangelisch recognized. Superimposed upon
this religious maelstrom were Austrian Habsburg efforts truly to become HR emperors, to eliminate
14
15
16
A diplomatic principle which will emerge from this opposition to Habsburg hegemony will be that of ‘Balance of
Power’, which refers to the unwritten, albeit often followed, tenet which holds that no single power or group of
powers in Europe can be permitted to develop enough strength to dominate all others.
Where RM pursued his profession for over twelve years
There were hundreds of states in what was called the Holy Roman Empire, from bishoprics like Köln and free cities such as
Hamburg to large states like Bavaria. The HR Emperor was little more than a titular ruler, for, by the Golden Bull of 1356 the
position of Emperor of the HRE was elective. Seven Electors (Kurfürsten) chose the ‘King of the Romans’, who would then
(usually) be crowned HR Emperor by the pope. Initially, the seven electors were: ‘Three prelates [the arch-chancellor of Germany
(Mainz), of Gaul and Burgundy (Trier), and of Italy (Köln/Cologne)]; the Bohemia cupbearer, the Palsgrave seneschal, the
Saxony marshal, and the Brandenburg chamberlain.’ Bryce, Holy Roman Empire, 243. By 1618 the seven electors included: three
ecclesiastical [the Archbishop of Mainz, the Archbishop of Trier, and the Archbishop of Köln] and four secular [the King of
Bohemia (král český, König von Böhmen) {also the HR Emperor heir apparent}; the Kurfürst/Margrave of Brandenburg
(Markgraf von Brandenburg); the Kurfürst /Count Palatine of the Rhine (Pfalzgraf bei Rhein); and the Kurfürst/Duke of Saxony
(Herzog von Sachsen). Making the situation even more complex, there were three Catholic votes (the archbishops), three
Protestant votes (Calvinist Palatine and Brandenburg plus Lutheran Saxony), and one swing vote (if a Habsburg, Catholic; if
chosen by Bohemians, Calvinist)
9
Protestantism and to restore Catholicism throughout the HRE. 17 This, understandably, was opposed by the
concomitant/parallel determination of the potpourri of sovereign German entities to limit imperial power
where- and whenever possible. 18 Overt resistance to Imperial efforts erupted in the 1540s, with a quasiconstitutional-religious truce effected by the Peace of Augsburg (1555). With no accepted or acceptable
authority capable of enforcing – or willing to enforce – the terms of the truce, clashes between religious
factions over agreement violations were frequent. By 1600 the Habsburgs had to a large extent eliminated
Protestantism from Austria. The Kingdom of Bohemia was the next target for their reforming zeal, for it was
largely Protestant and most of the influential nobility were anti-Catholic – and anti-Imperial. Almost
inevitably, in such a hotbed of zealotry, only a relatively minor event might precipitate war.
The Reformation in England differed from those on the continent in that the head of government began the
English version. It was an attack on the temporal power of the papacy, and it was started over an issue more
political than religious. Henry [Tudor] VIII (1491–r1509–1546) initially opposed Luther’s ideas, but his own
struggle with the papacy left England with a very catholic although clearly Protestant church. A fundamental
reason for the decision of Henry VIII of England to break with the pope was his determination to safeguard
the future of his dynasty. His dead brother’s wife, now his wife, Catherine of Aragon, had not provided the
realm with a male heir. Henry requested an annulment; but the pope, under the thumb of Charles V, the
nephew of Catherine, demurred. In their relations with Parliament, Tudor kings tended to use Parliament to
promote their own programs. Tudor monarchs of England were generally successful as absolute rulers
because their ideas about England’s welfare coincided with those of their subjects. The Reformation
Parliament was no exception. England was the home of Wycliffe, and there was a considerable body of
opinion that was anti–papal and anti–Catholic in nature. Henry tapped into this sentiment.
The 1530s Reformation in England was, in many ways, a revolution. Henry’s method adumbrated the
tensions of the next 150 years in British Isles. The Act of Supremacy of 1534 set Henry as the supreme head
of the Church of England. By including Parliament in the legal process, the representative body became an
integral part of the English constitutional process – if it could deal with religion, it could deal with anything.
Royal wealth and authority increased in the 1530’s as Henry VIII collected church fees and sold the lands of
monasteries he had dissolved. The monarchy profited greatly from the sale, and the threat of bankruptcy was
pushed away. Those who bought monastic property from the Crown became part of a new class, the Gentry.
Henry found his greatest support for his break with Rome among the gentry, which would become, in
England, the establishment. Few were of the noble class; indeed, during the period when royal power was
being strengthened in England, the king’s ministers were usually recruited from the middle class, and many
took advantage of their status to acquire land and position. The gentry was thus bound to the interests of the
Crown for fear that their lands would be repossessed were Roman Catholicism to be reintroduced. All this
notwithstanding, Catholicism did not vanish. The Pilgrimage of Grace, a revolt in Yorkshire favoring the
monasteries as an absolute necessity in the sparsely populated north of England, typified Catholic support in
England – disunited and dispirited. Still, as carried through by Henry VIII, the Protestant Reformation gave
England a catholic Church without monasteries or pope.
17
The Habsburg monarchs of the HRE of the sixteenth- and seventeenth centuries regarded themselves as apostles of
the Counter Reformation.
18
Obviously this is far more complex – some RC princes favored limiting the Emperor while others didn’t, some Calvinists hated
Lutherans more than Catholics, etc.
10
Real religious reform came during the reign of Henry’s son, Edward [Tudor] VI (1537–r1547–1553).
Archbishop Thomas Cranmer introduced a new prayer book, churches were white-washed with altars and
images being discarded, and a new reform creed was introduced. Upon Edward’ death in 1553, his elder
sister, Mary I [Tudor] (1516–r1553–1558), became Queen and attempted to return England to the Catholic
Church. Under ‘Bloody Mary’ Protestants were persecuted, with over 300 burned. Marian exiles were those
English religious reformers who fled to Geneva during her reign. At her death her younger sister Elizabeth I
[Tudor] (1533–r1558–1603) became ruler. The Elizabethan Settlement – designed to conciliate as many
English citizens as possible – refers to the religious settlement in England of 1559. The Anglican Church lay
somewhere between the Catholicism of her father and the Protestantism of her brother. As had been done by
her father, all laws were enacted by Parliament. By the end of the Tudor Century, Parliament had become the
junior partner of the monarchy, with many privileges and prerogatives – but a junior partner nonetheless.
Compromise, however, is rarely acceptable to all. The Marian exiles, now deeply committed to the ideas of
Calvinism would, upon their return, seek to purify the Church of England as established by the Elizabethan
Settlement. These Puritans would be a major force in the history of Britain during the seventeenth-century.
For a monarch who wished to be absolute, Catholics and Calvinists alike were viewed as threats to the
crown.
England between 1600 and 1689 seemed to be the land of violence and change. During these years English
opponents of royal absolutism beheaded one king and drove another into exile. Englishmen who rose against
the Crown in the British Civil Wars (1638–1660) and again in the Glorious Revolution (1688–1689) were not
downtrodden people revolting from a sense of despair; they were self-assertive people out to get the things
they wanted – power, wealth, their own form of religious worship, and what they conceived to be their rights.
The primary cause of friction between the first two Stuarts and their Parliaments, which led to revolution and
the dictatorship of Oliver Cromwell (1599–1658), was that both sides sought drastic changes in the existing
structure of government. Both tried to bend the line of English constitutional growth away from the Tudor
compromise of a strong Crown working with and through a medieval type of Parliament built and based
upon an alliance of nobility, gentry, and the commercial classes. James VI [Stuart/Stewart] [1566–r1567–I
of England, r1603–1625) and Charles I [Stuart] (1600–r1625–1649), a short monarch who became shorter]
tried to bend the line toward divine-right monarchy of the continental type; men in Parliament sought a
legislative body possessing the final authority in the making and carrying out of policy and law. Religion
played an important part in welding both sides into cohesive fighting groups. The royalist cause was
identified with High Church Anglicanism; the parliamentary cause, at first supported by many moderate Low
Church Anglicans, came to attract and to be dominated by a strong Puritan or Calvinist element. 19
James, accustomed to monarchical rule in Scotland, was unable to cooperate for long with the English
Parliament and dissolved it at will. Parliament was able to exert some influence over the Stuart monarchs
because Parliament had control over the purse strings of the English monarchs. Puritans opposed James I
because he made peace with Catholic Spain, because they expected a king who had ruled a Presbyterian
country to be more friendly toward them, and because he did not whole-heartedly support the Protestant
cause (and the cause of his daughter and son-in-law) during the 30 Years’ War. Charles I became monarch of
England in 1625. Utterly tactless and unable (or unwilling) to compromise, he was forced into The Petition
19
For background of the British Civil Wars, see Gardiner, England, 1603–1642, 10 vols. Many more TBP.
11
of Right (1628) which was a major statement of parliamentary rights and is considered a part of the English
constitution. However he tried to rule without parliament in 1629 by collecting taxes without Parliament’s
consent (ship money). When he tried to enforce a ‘High Church’ form of Anglicanism in Scotland, his
eleven-year effort to rule as an absolute monarch without a meeting of Parliament was defeated by a Scottish
revolt against his religious policies. The Bishops’ Wars (1639 and 1640) ultimately led to his downfall
because he was forced to call Parliament in order to raise the money needed for his army. He then found that
the Stuart House of Commons had become in fact a Committee of the Ruling Class and one that would not
work with him without considerable compromise on his part.
Importantly, while both Tudors and Stewarts strove for secular and temporal authority (an important element
in acquiring divine-right status), Calvinists in each kingdom – Presbyterians in Scotland and Puritans in
England – viewed such assertions as anathema. These differences of opinion – which underlay the eruption
of the British Civil Wars two generations later – may be observed by noting the English translations of the
Bible used by the opposing groups: Calvinists used the Geneva Bible (1599) while royalists used the King
James Version of the Bible {KJVB} (1610). The former was not only an outstanding translation but it was
also revolutionary in tone. Its explanatory notes were considered antithetical by divine right theorists but
wonderful by groups opposing any religious form or format which smacked of Catholicism – as well as by
individuals and groups holding more republican views. Indeed, the KJVB was authorized, in part, because
James VI/I despised the annotations of the Geneva Bible. Both James and his son, Charles I, forbade the use
of the Geneva Bible within their kingdoms. Anyone wishing to understand the religious issues of the era must
first become knowledgeable of the different versions of Christianity in the British Isles and of their status:
banned was Roman Catholicism; the Churches of England, Scotland and Ireland were official, state-churches
within each kingdom; and Calvinist churches which had no bishops hence no easy way by which a subject
population could be monitored or controlled. Calvinists were viewed by the Stewarts as holding religious –
and political – views considered by them to be dangerous at best and treasonous at worst. Furthering the
complexity was the inchoate nationalism of the various groups: Calvinist Scottish Presbyterians were
despised by Calvinist English Puritans and vice-versa.
The British Civil Wars were wars between opposing political and religious principles and sentiments. Basic
issues in the Civil Wars were: political (was Parliament or the king sovereign), religious (was there to be a
state church or toleration of practice by several Protestant sects), and social (to what extent should the middle
class participate in government). The wars in Ireland began with the Catholic Uprising of October 1641. In
June of 1642, following numerous confrontations with Parliament, Charles left London and raised the royal
banner at Oxford. There is no clear line dividing the opponent and supporters of the King or Parliament. In
general, nobles and rural areas (especially Catholic areas) supported the King, while middle-class
townspeople supported Parliament. The most influential group supporting Parliament in the British Civil
Wars was the London merchants. This latter group made sure that parliamentary armies were better supplied
and better paid than royalist armies were. The parliamentary leader who emerged during the British Civil
Wars was Oliver Cromwell. Parliament was victorious because of the Scottish alliance and Cromwell’s
military reforms. The victory by Oliver Cromwell ultimately led to the execution of the King. Following the
execution of Charles I England was officially a republic but was actually a military dictatorship under Oliver
Cromwell. As Lord Protector of England Oliver Cromwell refused to accept the title of king. The
Commonwealth became a dictatorship that had come to power as result of the strength of the New Model
12
Army and the dominating personality of Cromwell. Although faced with a divided England, a hostile
Scotland and a rebellious Ireland, Cromwell not only mastered all his foes – with great brutality in the case
of Ireland – but also succeeded in conducting victorious foreign wars extending the limits of the empire. The
parliamentary problem, however, he could not master, and the ephemeral nature of his regime was clearly
demonstrated by its collapse two years after his death. Though the Stuarts were restored [Charles Stuart II
(1630–r1661–1685)], no English king could ever again hope to rule without Parliament or take ultimate
command of the public purse from it. The revolution that overthrew James [Stuart] II [the Twit (1633–r1685–
1688–1703)], last of the Stuart kings, in 1688, was actually a coup d’état engineered by his parliamentary
opponents, the Whigs, and supported by some of his nominal friends, the Tories, and the vast majority of the
English people. Not only did Parliament throw out the Stuarts in 1688, but the Act of Settlement of 1701,
clearly established the fact that it would decide, in the future, who would be King/Queen of England.
13
CHAPTER I – Seventeenth-Century Warfare
Any consideration of Scottish mercenaries 20 in the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) must be prefaced by a note
on the changes in warfare that took place in the centuries preceding the war. Innovations in tactics, weapons,
and control of troops had vastly changed the nature of warfare to the extent that it had become continental in
scope. Mercenary armies became the dominant tour de force, and a survey of the development of the hired
army is necessary for an understanding of the role played by mercenaries, particular the Scottish
mercenaries, in the Thirty Years’ War. Tactics and strategy were almost non-existent during the age of
feudalism. The well-trained and disciplined armies of Greek and Roman times had, by that time, degenerated
into unruly mobs that were only purported to be armies. 21 The dominant figure on the battlefield was the
heavily armored, mounted knight. The usual battle formation consisted of a mass of cavalry positioned in the
center and bodies of ill-trained and ill-equipped infantry on each flank and in front of the knights. There were
few general engagements, however, because of the enormous expense of fully equipping a knight.
The Hundred Years’ War (1337–1453) witnessed the beginning of change as the infantry again began to play
an important part in the art of warfare. The common foot-soldier in the English army served as a paid soldier.
His pay was equivalent to the pay of a laborer, thereby guaranteeing a continuous supply of recruits. These
soldiers were equipped with the longbow, a weapon which could, in skilled hands, send arrows with accuracy
at ranges up to 250 yards/228.6 meters, thus giving the infantry a commanding position over slow-moving
knights, especially when dismounted. At Crécy (1346), Poitiers (1356), and Agincourt (1415), French nobles
learned that small numbers of English bowmen (well-protected by English men-at-arms) were more than a
match for a massed onslaught of armored men. 22 The end of the Hundred Years’ War flooded western Europe
with unemployed men having no trade except that of war. These men often banded together into armed
companies, called Free Companies, in order to sell their services to the highest bidder. The petty quarrels
between the city-states of Italy gave impetus to the development of the military entrepreneur, the condottiero,
for the cities needed armies for protection but could seldom raise enough troops in their own states. The
process was relatively simple: a condottiero approached the ruler of a city or state and offered his services
and that of his soldiers in return for a specified remuneration, usually amount of money per soldier per
month. The contract also specified the number of soldiers, amount of equipage, and types of soldiers to be
20
Modern mercenaries and their ilk create a totally false image of the seventeenth-century professional soldiers.
Military entrepreneur or enterpriser is more accurate.
21
Background information regarding war and warfare throughout human history – in particular, the seventeenth-century – was
distilled from: Aston, Crisis; Blair, European Armour; Brandi, Religionskriege; Carman, History of Firearms; Clark,
Seventeenth-Century; Clark, War and Society; CMH, vol 4; Delbrück, Geschichte der Kriegskunst, vol 4; Durant, Civilization,
vols 5–7; Earle, Makers of Modern Strategy; Fortescue, British Army, vol 1; Fuller, Decisive Battles of the Western World, vol 1;
Gardiner, Thirty Years’ War; Gindely, Thirty Years’ War; Holborn, Modern Germany, vol 1; Lloyd, History of Infantry; Montross,
War Through the Ages; NCMH, vols 2–5; Ogg, Europe; Oman, Art of War in Middle Ages, 2 vols; Opel, Dreissigjährige Krieg;
Preston, Men in Arms; Reade, Sidelights; Roberts, Military Revolution; Spaulding, Warfare; von Ranke, Deutsche Geschichte;
and Wedgewood, Thirty Years’ War. Far more TBP.
22
Oman, War in Middle Ages, II:385–392 and passim.
14
provided.23 War was then waged, although the battles were often sham conflicts in which few men were
injured or killed. This was done in order to protect the investment of the condottiero.24
The most famous mercenaries of the fifteenth-century were the Swiss pike-men. While English archers aided
in the decline of mounted knights, the Swiss pike-men brought about a temporary dominance of infantry over
cavalry. The Swiss formation, similar to the Macedonian phalanx, proved almost invincible in combat.
Mercenaries became the principal export of Switzerland, and most Swiss youths were trained in the usage of
the pike and the profession of war. German Landsknechte copied in every particular the pike and halberd
tactics of the Swiss and competed with the Swiss in the mercenary market. 25 However, the development of
the handgun and artillery made it unwise for an unsupported phalanx to be used without there being heavy
losses. The Swiss formation declined in importance as innovations in ordnance became available to the
various rulers. The development of weapons using gunpowder was exceedingly slow. As early as the
fourteenth-century artillery was used, but the early models were extremely crude and were dangerous to
operate. Field artillery was also hampered by its immobility. One attempt to add mobility to the artillery was
conceived by Jan Žižka, the Hussite general. He mounted artillery in armored wagons and used them with
great success against the armies of the HR Kaiser which were sent against him (Hussite Wars, 1420–1430).
During the later Middle Ages improvements in the casting of barrels and the development of improved
gunpowder made the artillery wing an important feature of the new style armies. Artillery was also
responsible for the decline in importance of the armored knight as artillery rendered obsolete the stone
castles of the knight, the last bastion of his feudal superiority.
The first half of the sixteenth-century was a period of great change in the art of warfare. Ancient works on
military tactics and strategy were rediscovered and republished, while new works were written. Generals
learned tactics from their opponents, from their own mercenaries, and from books. Works such as Epitoma
rei militaris by Vegetius and Strategematica by Frontinus were considered important military textbooks.
Works by Xenophon, Aelian, Caesar, Polybius, Modestus and Vitruvius were also studied. Contemporary
military writers used these classical works as guides 26; however:
Their ideas were not swallowed whole, but the most practical writer on a technical subject was glad to add to
his own opinions an echo of ancient authority. Even Machiavelli … (in his Arte Della Guerra, 1521) … after
comparing the respective merits of ancient and modern infantry ... decided that the ideal unit should be made
up half of men armed in the Roman manner, with short sword and shield, half in the modern Swiss fashion
with pikes and harquebus.27
The most pressing military problem of the age was the lack of good, steady troops; and the Roman model
offered a solution – discipline. The best general, the best tactics, and the best equipment were all wasted if
23
24
Roberts, GA I:211–213.
Montross, War Through Ages, 199–201. For the changing of the military paradigm and the rise of the military entrepreneur, see
Bottomore, Elites; Cockle, Bibliography; Delbrück, Geschichte der Kriegskunst, vol 4; Jähns, Kriegswissenschaften, vol 21.2;
Kiernan, ‘Foreign Mercenaries’ in P&P 11; Redlich, De Praeda, VSW 47; Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47 & 48; and
Roberts, Military Revolution. Far more TBP.
25
Delbrück, Kriegskunst, IV:8–16, 71–79.
26
Machiavelli, Art of War, xvi–xviii.
27
Hale, ‘Art of War’ in NCMH II:483.
15
truculent mercenaries refused to fight. ‘On questions of discipline and morale the advice of the ancients
could be taken without qualification.’28
The advice of the ancients was best applied in the Spanish army, where discipline and esprit de corps became
important factors in the rise of the Spanish tactical unit, the tercio. The tercio was a square of 3000 men
divided into twelve companies of approximately 250 men and was composed of equal numbers of pikemen
and harquebusiers. This modified version of the Swiss pike-phalanx came to dominate the battlefields of
Europe during the sixteenth-century. 29 During the revolt by the Dutch Republic, later called the Eighty Years’
War (1568–1648), small numbers of Spanish infantry were able to defeat larger numbers of Dutch because of
their better discipline and tactics. In spite of its superiority over feudal tactics, there were limitations. Since
only a small number of men could discharge their weapons at any one time, the formation was uneconomical
in its usage of men. Furthermore, the very bulk of the tercio prevented any rapid movement in battle.
In order to combat the superior Spanish formation, Maurits van Nassau [Maurice of Nassau] (1561–1625)
developed a more mobile unit of only 250 men. In battle his units were drawn up into a linear formation, thus
giving more men an opportunity to discharge their pieces at the enemy. By 1600 the reforms of Maurits van
Nassau effected a change in the method of dealing with mercenary armies. In addition to his tactical reforms
and payment of troops reforms, he also pioneered in the standardization of equipment, a stricter discipline
and more intensive training, the usage of mathematics for advances in fortification, and inventions such as
the telescope and a time fuse for grenades. When the Dutch leader insisted that his mercenaries be promptly
paid, he ended the period of lax discipline, for he demanded actions and deeds for his money. The men had to
drill, build fortifications, and undergo severe punishments for breaches of discipline, because there was no
longer any excuse for laxity. This is not to say that the armies became models of virtue, for they did not; but
prompt payment of wages did lead to better and more effective armies. 30
The rank and file of the mercenaries of the period following 1400 traditionally came from the poorer
countries that had surplus of manpower. Troops were levied in these countries by many methods, the most
common of which was to ‘… invite by trumpet and drum all to take employment, whom either the desire of
honor, riches, booty, pay or wages may encourage to undergo their service ….’ 31 Companies and regiments
from the Italian, the German states, Swiss cantons, the Dutch Republic, England, Ireland and Scotland were
found in all west European armies. Scotland had a long history of providing troops for continental armies,
and Scottish soldiers were often found in the armies of France, Spain, various German states (including the
imperial armies of the HRE, Poland, the Dutch Republic, Denmark, Sweden and Russia. Research has shown
that, between 1300 and 1600, Scotland provided approximately 30,000 soldiers to France; 5000 troops to
Danzig and Poland; 5000 men to the Dutch Republic; 3000 soldiers to Denmark; and 6000 troops to
Sweden.32 During the Thirty Years’ War, approximately 40,000 Scots left their homeland to join various
28
Ibid., II:484–485.
29
Delbrück, Kriegskunst, IV:174–176.
30
Ibid., IV:181–190.
31
Turner, Pallas Armata, 165.
32
The following is a more complete source compilation than that which appeared in USM. Rather than separating Scottish
emigration into several notes, this citation covers (1) Sources pertaining to Scottish emigration, (2) Sources pertaining to Scottish
military emigrants prior to 1618 and (3) Sources pertaining to Scottish military emigrants during the Thirty Years’ War (1618–
1648). Many sources cover all three categories, but each source is cited but once – unless specific data is provided. (1) Sources
pertaining to Scottish emigration:(a) General» Bulloch, The Scot Abroad; Burton, The Scot Abroad; Lithgow, Ninetene Yeares
16
armies on the Continent.33 The underlying cause for the exodus was the abject poverty of the country. This
condition can be attributed to a number of factors ranging from geography and climate to poor farming
techniques, to the unstable political atmosphere of the country at that time – all of which resulted in periodic
mortality crises.34
Scotland is a small mountainous country of only 30,114 square miles/78,387 km2.35 Approximately twothirds of the country is comprised of barren mountains and is not capable of supporting a large population.
Warm summers and cool winters characterize the climate. There is more than adequate rainfall, especially in
the western coastal region. Heavy rains, coupled with extensive deforestation, 36 caused serious erosion timber
and is responsible for the barrenness of much of the Highland area. The skies are covered with clouds for a
great portion of the year and are often accompanied by heavy ground fog. This combination of heavy rain
and little sun makes farming difficult in much of Scotland. In seventeenth-century Scotland, the basic
economic unit was the farm. With the weather and terrain against him, the Scot compounded his own misery
by using poor agricultural methods. The major fault in the Scottish farming method was the neglect of the
bottom lands. Because farmers seldom attempted to drain bottom lands, the soil was usually alkaline, and
Travayles from Scotland; Notestein, The Scot in History; (b) Baltic [Denmark, Poland, Russia & Sweden]» Andersson, History of
Sweden; Berg & Lagercrantz, Scots in Sweden; Donner, Scottish Families in Sweden and Finland; Fischer, Scots in Eastern and
Western Prussia; Fischer, Scots in Germany; Fischer, Scots in Sweden; Hallendorff & Schück, History of Sweden; Pufendorf,
Compleat History of Sweden; Samuel, ‘Sweden and Scotland’; Stefansson, Denmark and Sweden; Steuart, Scots in Poland;
Steuart, Scottish Influences in Russian History; ⁞(c) France» Black, ‘Relations of Scotland and France’; Michel, Les Écossais en
France, vol 1, and a ‘Review’ thereof in Edinburgh Review; Teulet, Papiers d’Etat relatifs de l‘Histoire de l‘Écosse; ⁞(d) Dutch
Republic » Davidson & Gray, Scottish Staple at Veere; MacLean, ‘Scottish Families in Holland’; ⁞and (e) for principalities or
states within the HRE]» Bulloch, Gordons in Germany; Fischer, Scots in Germany; Hantsch, Geschichte Österreichs, vol 1;
Wechmar & Biederstedt, ‘Die schottische Einwanderung in Vorpommern’; ⁞⁞(2) Sources pertaining to Scottish military emigrants
prior to 1618:(a) General» Beauge, Martial Atchievements of the Scots Nation; Grant, Scottish Soldiers of Fortune; SSNE; (b)
Baltic» Berg & Lagercrantz, Scots in Sweden, 13–17; Dow, Ruthven’s Army, passim; Fischer, Scots in Germany, 36 & 69; Fischer,
Scots in Sweden, 91; Smout, ‘Scottish Commercial Factors in the Baltic’; Stefansson, Denmark and Sweden, 56; Steuart, Scots in
Poland, ix–xxxiv; Steuart, Scottish Influences in Russian History, passim ⁞(c) France» Forbes-Leith, Scots Men-at-Arms, 1:97;
MacDonald, Royal Guard of Scottish Archers, 33–37; ⁞(d) Dutch Republic » Ferguson, Scots Brigade, vol 1; ⁞and (e) HRE»
Fischer, Scots in Germany; ⁞⁞(3) Sources pertaining to Scottish military emigrants during the Thirty Years’ War:(a) General»
Beauge, Martial Atchievements; Bulloch & Skelton, Gordons Under Arms; Defoe, Scots Nation; Grant, Scottish Soldiers of
Fortune; Laffin, Scotland the Brave; Scotland Forever; ⁞(b) Baltic» Berg & Lagercrantz, Scots in Sweden, passim; RM,
Expedition; Fallon, Scottish Mercenaries, passim; Fischer, Scots in Eastern and Western Prussia, passim; Fischer, Scots in
Germany, passim; Fischer, Scots in Sweden, passim; Grant, Memoirs and Adventures of Sir John Hepburn, passim; Grimble,
‘Payment of Mackay’s Regiment’; Mackay, ‘Mackay’s Regiment’; OSB; SSNE; Stefansson, Denmark and Sweden, passim;
Steuart, Scots in Poland, passim; Steuart, Scottish Influences in Russian History, passim; SweInt; Terry, Alexander Leslie; ⁞(c)
France» Michel, Les Écossais en France, 2:277–320; Grant, Hepburn, passim; ⁞(d) Dutch Republic » Ferguson, Scots Brigade,
vol 1; MacLean, Huwelijksintekeningen ⁞and (e) HRE» Fischer, Scots in Germany, passim; Hantsch, Österreichs; and Ward,
Austria. Far more TBP.
33
See Appendix II for these figures.
34
Mortality crises are historical events which endanger large segments of a specific population. War, famine, and
plague are the most severe types of mortality crisis. WSB, ‘Auld Sod’: TBP.
35
Sources providing information pertaining to Scotland in the early modern era include: Braudel, ‘Prices’ in CEcHE;
Dickenson, Scotland: Franklin, Farming; Grant, Economic History; Grant, Social and Economic; Keltie, Highlands;
Lang, Scotland, vols 2-3; Mackie, Scotland; NCMH; Smout, Scottish People; Smout, Scottish Trade; Symon,
Scottish Farming ; Van Bath, Agrarian History; and Warrack, Domestic Life. Far more TBP.
36
Brown, Contemporary Documents, 283, has an interesting notation on the lack of timber. Earl of Melros, received a decree from
James VI in 1608 stating that the export of timber from Scotland was forbidden. Melros, in a letter to the King, thanked him, but
noted that in no tyme bigane within the memorie of man, thair hes bene ony tymmer transported furth of this kingdome, the haill
cuntry being almost naiked’ and that if James left the restraint on, it is verye probable and liklie that other princes, vpoun notice
thairof, sall mak the lyke restrent in thair boundis, and sua altogidder spoyle your malesteis subiectis of that so necessair a
benefeir which goodlie thay can not want.’ He then implores James to be careful of making restraints on subjects of which he has
little knowledge.
17
these areas were often left untilled. Thus, the farmer was forced to use the hillsides for his crops. In addition
to this, arable land was poorly utilized: one section, the infield, was worked intensively for three or four
years until the yield was too small to warrant another replanting. Another section, the outfield, was then
brought into use and the old field was left to lie fallow for several years. 37 As a result, famines occurred with
alarming regularity and were alleviated only by heavy grain imports from the Baltic region. 38 The
concomitant outflow of hard currency in payment for grain caused serious inflation. Only near the end of the
reign of James, after his policies had brought about internal stability and external security, did the prospect of
famine become more remote. Beginning in the late sixteenth-century, however, there was a tendency by the
large landholders to uproot the small farmers who could not afford to pay higher rents, thereby contributing
to the large increase in the number of destitute persons and vagabonds in the country. 39
The pattern of trade in Scotland during the early seventeenth-century also illustrates the type of economy that
Scotland had. For the most part, internal trade was limited to coastal traffic. Due to a lack of hard currency,
trade was often based upon the barter system. Trade with the continent consisted mostly of exports of cheap,
raw materials, such as coal, hides and skins, wool, and fish. In return, Scots imported the more expensive
manufactured items and luxury foods. There was little trade with England. 40 The paucity of trade with
England was a result of enmity caused by centuries of warfare between the two countries. From the twelfthcentury until the sixteenth-century, Scotland was repeatedly invaded by English kings seeking not only to
increase their domains but also for self-protection due to a centuries-long, Franco-Scottish [the Auld]
Alliance. Further, constant border warfare kept the most productive areas of Scotland in perpetual chaos.
Only with the accession of Elizabeth as queen of England was there a cessation of open hostilities between
the two countries.
The change of policy was brought about, in part, by the Scottish Reformation. 41 The Auld Alliance had been
extended when Mary [Stuart] (queen regnant 1542–abdicated/fled1567–1587) was married to Francis,
Dauphin of France. At his accession as Francis II, she became queen consort of France (1559–1560), but his
death resulted in her return to Scotland in 1561 as Mary I, Queen of Scots. By 1560 Scottish internal affairs
were dominated by France, with Frenchmen controlling the highest positions of state and French soldiers
garrisoning Scottish fortresses. These actions were opposed by Scottish nobles who did not relish the idea of
a strong central government under French control. Those who desired a reformation of the Church were also
opposed to the strong Catholic bond which was being forged between France and Scotland. The nobles and
the reformers joined forces in 1557, forming a ‘Congregation of Christ’, or, more simply, the Covenant. By
this action the Scottish Reformation/anti-French revolution was begun. The political repercussions of the
Reformation were first felt in Scotland in 1559, when John Knox (1505?–1572), the spiritual leader of the
Reformation in Scotland, returned from exile. Knox had been ordained in the Catholic Church; but in 1540
he came into contact with some ‘heretical’ writings and began advocating reform of the official Church of
37
38
See Smout & Fenton, ‘Scottish Agriculture’ in AgHR 13:2 (1965), 73–93.
Although dealing specifically with England, extrapolations regarding Scotland may be made: Hoskins, ‘Harvest Fluctuations
1480–1619’ in AgHR 12 (1964), 36–46; Hoskins, ‘Harvest Fluctuations 1620–1759’ in AgHR 16 (1968), 15–31.
39
Brown, Queen Mary, 562.
40
Pryde, Scotland from 1603, 25.
41
The following is a more complete citing than that which appeared in USM. Background information pertaining to religious
issues in Scotland (and in the British Isles) include: Brown, Mary; Buchan & Smith, Kirk in Scotland; Bulloch, Kirk in Scotland;
Donaldson, The Scottish Reformation; Mackenzie, Queen Mary; Willson, James VI and I. Far more TBP.
18
Scotland. In 1554 Knox went to Geneva and served as pastor of the English church there. He conferred often
with John Calvin (1509–1564) and became infused with militant Calvinism.
Knox was invited to return to Scotland by the Covenanters to aid the spiritual reformation of Scotland. When
he preached a sermon in Perth that resulted in the destruction of several religious houses, open confrontation
between the French-controlled crown and the Covenanters erupted. Elizabeth interceded on behalf of the
Protestants; and, in June 1560, the Treaty of Edinburgh, which ended French domination (as well as the Auld
Alliance), was forced upon Mary. The Scottish Reformation Parliament, which met in August, abolished
papal authority and established Presbyterianism as an accepted form of worship in Scotland. Most of the
inhabitants of the Lowlands and southern Uplands accepted the new religion; but many Highland areas
remained Catholic, now banned. The Reformation is extremely important in the history of Scotland, for only
through it was a merging of the Crowns of Protestant Scotland and of Protestant England made possible. It
also aids in explaining why many Scots joined the Protestant forces during the Thirty Years’ War. 42
The latter half of the sixteenth-century was saw a trend toward internal stability in Scotland. Mary’s reign
was marked by a series of marriages, affairs and murders in which she became involved and which shocked
the strict Calvinists of Scotland. Following yet another religious outburst initiated by John Knox, Mary fled
to England in 1567, and James, her infant son, was proclaimed King of Scotland. His early years were filled
with many traumatic experiences as various nobles used him as a pawn in their bids for power. When he
began his personal reign in 1583, he demonstrated an ability to rule his country well. By adroitly using
Realpolitik, he succeeded in establishing his rule over Scottish barons and in asserting his control over most
aspects of Scottish life. He even established his supremacy over the Church [Kirk] of Scotland. With his
accession to the English throne in 1603, he brought together in one person the crowns of the two countries.
However, it did not create a united kingdom, per se, and there was little other contact between the countries.
James did act to eradicate the constant border warfare between the two countries. Although not successful as
an English king (probably due to his early senility), James, by virtue of his long reign and his understanding
of the Scottish people, established in Scotland by the end of his reign in 1625 ‘a healthy respect for royal
authority ... [and to achieve] ... the two basic conditions of economic progress, external security and internal
political stability.’43
Despite these signs of improvement, the basic problems of poverty and reactionism were still present. Any
economic impact that was felt was limited to certain groups, and most people lived in the same manner as
their ancestors. The economic progress of the last quarter of the sixteenth-century and the first quarter of the
seventeenth-century was based upon greater physical security, but there was little unanimity of action among
the Scots. There were few matters upon which all could agree, and inter-clan rivalry prevented any true
national solidarity. Thus, there were still major economic problems facing most Scots and few opportunities
42
43
The era of religious wars was also a time when the literacy rate rose. This is reflected not only in an increase of
personal correspondence and accounts – sent for private and public consumption – but also in the explosion of
popular culture offerings designed to mold and/or manipulate public opinion. See Primary Materials and
Contemporary Accounts for an introduction to this literature. See also the numerous nineteenth- and twentiethcentury journals and compendia of primary material. Guides to this material include: Beller, ‘Sources’ in AmHR
32:276-282; Beller, Propaganda; Cockle, Bibliography; Coupe, German Illustrated Broadsheet, 2 vols; Davies,
Bibliography; Mathieson, Catalogue; Stockum, Newspapers; Terry, Publications; and Thomson, Public Records. Far
more TBP.
Lythe, Economy of Scotland, 249.
19
that offered solutions. A possibility for a few Scots was that of becoming an officer in the army of another
country and acting as a military entrepreneur. Realizing the possibilities of money, rank and fame as a
soldier-for-hire, many Scots entered into contracts with various rulers and sought to raise regiments of their
countrymen. With the outbreak of the Thirty Years’ War, the profession of military enterpriser became more
lucrative as the demand for soldiers increased. In the early years of the war, recruiting in Scotland was
relatively easy and levies were often exceeded. As more and more levies were authorized by the Privy
Council of Scotland {PCS}, volunteers became less plentiful, especially in the years following 1629. Other
expediencies were then resorted to, i.e. pressing and PCS decrees. There was also ‘a large admixture of Irish
and English in late years; and Scottish officers often had to raise troops in Germany or elsewhere.’ 44
The economic motive was the primary, but not the only reason for taking service abroad, for there were many
Scottish officers who joined the armies for religious reasons. Religious motives compelled many Calvinist
Scots to serve in Bohemian, Danish and Swedish armies; 45 and when the religious controversy between
Charles and Scotland erupted in the 1630s, many of those officers returned home. 46 Few Scots from the
Catholic strongholds of Angus, Banff and Argyll served in the Scandinavian armies, but instead served in the
Catholic armies of the Spanish or Austrian Habsburgs or of France. It should be noted that there were highranking Protestants serving the Holy Roman Kaiser, such as Walter Butler and John Gordon, who rose to
positions of influence under the Kaiser. Conversely, there were Catholics serving the Protestant cause, such
as Sir John Hepburn and Sir Andrew Gray.
Yet another reason for service abroad was a desire to aid Elizabeth Stuart, 47 the daughter of James and wife
of Kurfürst [Elector] Friedrich V von der Pfalz [Frederick of the Palatinate48] (1596–1632). This may, in
part, explain why recruiting was easier in the early years, for a Scotsman’s loyalty to a clansman and the clan
leaders was well-known.49 For some, this loyalty was extended to Elizabeth and resulted in a desire to serve
her cause. There was also a desire by some to serve under a great leader and to attain military glory. The
Marquis of Hamilton is the best example of this type of mercenary. After bringing an army of 6000 men to
Germany in 1631 to serve Gustav II Adolf {GA}of Sweden (Sveriges Konung, r 1611–1632), he returned
home when the Swedish king refused to give him another command after his army had wasted away. And
finally, to compensate for the law of primogeniture which excluded many younger sons from clan leadership
or land-holding, many young Scots sought to increase their stature at home by gaining high ranks and titles
of nobility abroad. With the rank and file, however, there were few such reasons. Many of the levies were
men who had little hope of earning a decent living in Scotland. They were, for the most part, vagabonds and
men of few skills. Many of the regiments were comprised of Catholic Highlanders serving under Calvinist
officers, thus religion could not have been of great significance to them. Their main consideration was
survival, and the army offered them the best chance for this. Although many were pressed into service, most
44
Mathew, Charles, 93.
45
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:166–168.
46
Fischer, Scots in Germany, 97.
47
See Oman, Elizabeth of Bohemia, passim.
48
49
The Palatinate of this period was, as were so very many German states, non-contiguous. Rheinpfalz/Rhenish
Palatinate was focused on Heidelberg and Oberpfalz/Upper Palatinate was north of Bavaria.
Fischer, Scots in Germany, 97.
20
stayed and served well once they were in a regiment. Pay and the hope of booty were the most powerful
incentives for them.
Thus, there were many reasons for the large movement of Scots to the Continent during the Thirty Years’
War. All played a part in causing the exodus, and it is not possible to state that one particular factor caused
the movement because it was usually a combination of several. However, the basic cause was the poverty of
Scotland, which necessitated the outflow of men from Scotland to the continent in search of employment. 50
50
WSB: ‘Expanding Professions’; ‘Auld Sod’; ‘Propaganda’; Scottish Mercenaries’; and ‘Demographic Movement’ are TBP at
GRM.com in the near future. Still more TBP later.
21
Chapter II – Outbreak of the Thirty Years’ War
and Danish Intervention
The war to which Scots went was a general European conflict, the German portion of which was known as
Thirty Years’ War.51 Although there were many causes of the war, the most important issue with regard to
Scottish participation, at least initially, was the religious one. In the HRE Imperial authority was synonymous
with the Catholic [Counter-]Reformation in Germany The Bohemian rebellion against the Habsburg HR
Kaiser in 1618 was ostensibly caused by the fears of Bohemian Protestant nobles of a Jesuit-led religious
purge in Bohemia. This much-publicized fear aided in gaining much popular sympathy for their cause in
Protestant countries, particularly in England and Scotland. When warrants were issued in those countries for
the raising of troops for service in Bohemia, the religious issue was certainly a major factor in the speedy
raising of regiments which went. Underlying the religious struggle in Bohemia was a crisis little noted
outside the Empire, this being the constitutional crisis precipitated by a stunning act of defiance: the
Defenestration of Prague (23 May 1618). The Bohemian phase of the Thirty Years’ War was
the last, abortive attempt of the feudal nobility of the Habsburg crown lands to preserve and, if
possible, extend their constitutional, economic and social prerogatives against the advancing
bureaucratic centralism, political absolutism and religious conformity, which were the aims of the
Viennese Government.52
When Bohemian nobles then renounced Ferdinand [II] (1578–r HR Kaiser,1619–1637) as King of Bohemia,
their overt action brought to the fore the many constitutional issues within the HRE, which, as noted earlier,
began much earlier.
As noted in the Overview, the Protestant Reformation/Revolt and the Catholic Reformation/CounterReformation of the sixteenth-century had virtually polarized Germany into three separate camps –
Evangelisch, Calvinist, and Catholic. The Religious Peace of Augsburg (1555) effected a stalemate between
the camps, with a policy of cuius regio, eius religio established. This had not been strictly adhered to, and
clashes between Protestant and Catholic forces had been frequent. The War of the Jülich-Cleves Succession
(1609–1614)53 brought about a confrontation between those Protestant princes who did not want to see an
51
Austrian Habsburgs sought control of the HRE and Spanish Habsburgs waged war in Flanders, the Valtelline, and FrancheComté. Ultimately, their efforts resulted in a pivotal confrontation between them and French Bourbons. Included were:(1) the 80Years’ War between the United Provinces and Spanish Habsburgs, 1568–1648; (2) the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648); (3) the
struggle for the Grisons, 1618–1622; (4) the Swedish-Polish War, 1621–1629; (5) the War of Mantuan Succession, 1628–1631;
(5) the Swedish-Danish War, 1643–1645; and (6) the Franco-Spanish Wars, 1634–1650 and 1652–1659. Not included but related
to the foregoing are various civil wars such as renewed religious wars in France (1626–1628) and the British Civil Wars (1637–
1661).
52
Steinberg, European Hegemony, 24. For Bohemian v Habsburg issues, see Gindely, Gegenreformation; Ritter,
Gegenreformation; Müller, Böhmischen Kriege; NNN, Bohemian Persecution; and Ward, House of Austria.
53
The Jülich-Cleves crisis was brought on by the death without heir of the Herzog von Jülich-Cleves-Mark-Berg-Ravensberg.
There then developed a power struggle for possession of this strategically and economically important duchy. The Kaiser
attempted to grant the inheritance to his nephew, but Kurfürst Johann Sigismund von Brandenburg and Pfalzgraf Wolfgang
Wilhelm von Neuburg a.d. Donau reacted by agreeing to joint occupancy. Spanish and Dutch troops entered the area and
occupied several cities. The Treaty of Xanten (12 November 1614) ended the conflict by partitioning the area between Johann
22
increase of Imperial-Catholic authority, and Matthias [Habsburg of Austria] (1557–King Bohemia, 1611–HR
Kaiser, 1612–1619) who wished to assert his Imperial rights. Prior to the Jülich-Cleves crisis, a number of
Protestant rulers had joined together to form the Protestant Union [Protestantische Union] as protection
against Imperial usurpation of their rights. 54 A ten-year defensive pact was signed by the members on 14 May
1608; and Friedrich was designated director. Outsiders, especially the Dutch Republic and France closely
monitored the situation and tacitly supported the Union. Unfortunately for the Union, religious differences
between the Lutheran and Calvinist members prevented any coordinated action from being taken, a problem
for anti-Imperial action throughout the Thirty Years’ War.
In opposition to the Union was the Catholic League [Katholische Liga], formed under the co-directorship of
Herzog Maximilian I of Bavaria (1573–1651) and the Kaiser. The Liga had been initially created in 1603, but
it was not formally established until 10 July 1609. Comprised of fifteen archbishoprics, five abbacies and
Aachen, it received subsidies from Spain and the papacy. With such interest by the great powers, 55 it is easy
to see that any confrontation between German princes might easily escalate into a general European conflict;
the Jülich-Cleves crisis appeared to be just the spark needed for war. Full-scale war was averted, however, by
the assassination of Henri IV [Bourbon (1553–King Navarre, 1572–King France/le Roi de France, 1589–
1610] on 10 May 1610, which plunged France into internal chaos and eliminating her from the struggle at
that time.56 Strife continued in the HRE as the Union strengthened itself with alliances with Maurits van
Nassau (1610), England (1612) and the United Provinces (1617). The Liga slowly disintegrated and was
dissolved in 1617, although Maximilian formed a new Liga in that year. Maximilian took full advantage of
the Bohemian situation by promising military support against Friedrich and the Union in exchange for
concessions from the Kaiser, one of which was sole directorship of the Liga. Agreed upon on 8 October
1619, Maximilian directed the Liga for over twenty-six years.
With the open break between Bohemia and the crown, Friedrich, as head of the Union, attempted to bring his
Protestant allies into the Bohemian crisis by accepting the Bohemian crown (26 August 1619). The majority
of the Union, however, refused to follow his leadership, leaving him with no major German ally. He did have
an army (under the command of Graf Ernst von Mansfeld [1580–1626] and sent by Charles Emanuel I, the
Duke of Savoy to the Bohemian Estates in August 1618 57), but the only allies upon whom he could depend
were Silesia, Lusatia and Moravia, tiny neighboring states which confederated with Bohemia in July 1618.
Finding himself bereft of significant support, Friedrich appealed to Protestant rulers for aid, but received
little of substantive value. James, his father-in-law, offered only a series of paternal lectures dealing with the
great mistake that the young Kurfürst had made, this despite popular opinion in Britain favoring action.
Sigismund and Wolfgang Wilhelm. Spanish (and Dutch) troops did not evacuate cities they occupied, thereby exacerbating fears
by Protestants of Habsburg intentions.
54
Formed in 1608, the Protestant Union was a defensive alliance between Lutheran and Calvinist princes within the HRE and was
directed by Kurfürst Friedrich V von der Pfalz (1596–1632). Members of the Union included: Duke Friedrich von Württemberg;
the Margraven von Baden and von Ansbach; Johann Sigismund; Wolfgang Wilhelm; Pfalzgraf Johann II von Zweibrücken; et al.
Imperial cities such as Straßburg and Ulm joined in 1609. The final tally of Union signees includes nine principalities and
seventeen Imperial cities. The Union was tacitly supported by Henri IV [a Huguenot prince turned Catholic: Paris was indeed
well worth a mass!].
55
A power vacuum exists when an area or state which has an extremely weak government and/or army has powerful
neighbors that are desirous of expansion. The HRE during this period is a classic example of a power vacuum.
56
See Baustaedt, Richelieu und Deutschland for a study of Richelieu and his foreign policy at this time.
57
Charles Emanuel sent the army in hopes that the Bohemian estates would elect him to the throne of Bohemia.
23
James finally relented to domestic pressures in 1620 and authorized Sir Andrew Gray to levy a regiment of
2000 Scottish volunteers for Bohemia. 58 James also authorized the levy of an English regiment of 2200 men
and gave command of the regiment to Sir Horatio Vere. The frugal [stingy] monarch agreed to finance only
the latter.59 The Scottish regiment under Gray was raised in three months and sailed for Hamburg at the end
of May 1620.60 The rapid raising of the regiment was effected with the aid of the PCS, for the Council
ordered all idle and unemployed men to report to the mustering ground in Edinburgh. Where volunteers were
few, unit strength was complemented with ‘strong and sturdie beggaris, idill vagaboundis … and maisterles
men’ who were to register and be escorted to levy places; ‘thame that … neglect and contempne the present
occasioun offerit … [are] to be apprehendit thay salbe execute to deade withoute favour or mercye.’ 61
After landing in Hamburg, Gray’s Regiment marched through Germany to Prague. Forced by political
considerations to take a circuitous route. Lutheran Kurfürst Johann Georg I des Kurfürstentum
[Electorate] Sachsen [Saxony] (1585–r 1611–1656) refused to support Friedrich and would not allow the
regiment to march through his neutral Kurfürstentum. The regiment first marched eastward to Brandenburg
and then turned southward. While marching through Brandenburg, the Scots were met with great hostility by
the Lutheran inhabitants who feared the mercenaries had been imported by their Calvinist Kurfürst, Georg
Wilhelm (1595–1640), to force Calvinism on them. 62 The fears of the populace were groundless, as the
regiment did not stop. It arrived in Prague on 1 July 1620. 63 Upon its arrival, the regiment was quartered near
Prague and was assigned to act as the personal bodyguard of the King. This was done at the request of
Mansfeld who realized that the strange food and the long march had seriously weakened the regiment. 64 John
Taylor, an English visitor in Prague at the time, noted in his diary that many of Gray’s troops were sick. 65
Because of this, the regiment did not take part in the Battle of White Mountain (8 November 1620) 66 in
which the Bohemian forces were routed by the Liga army under Count [Johann Tserclaes] Tilly and [Charles
Bonaventure de Longueval, Comte de] Bucquoy.
Following the defeat of his army, Friedrich fled his kingdom, deserting his subjects and the remnants of his
army. Mansfeld, who had not taken part in the battle because his army had been besieged at Plzeň [Pilsen] by
Imperial forces, called the remnants of the Bohemian army together and marched toward the Palatinate. The
Scots under Gray were ordered to surrender the fortress at Karlstein and to join Mansfeld. 67 In January 1621,
58
John Chamberlain to [Sir Dudley Carleton] (23 February1620). PROL SP 14/112/104 [?? pages]. CSPD 14/112/104/125: ‘Sir
Andrew Gray has made suit to be allowed to raise 2000 volunteers for Bohemia. Money is very short.’
59
Sir Richard Yonge to Lord Zouch (14/24 June 1620). PROL SP 14/115/73 [2 pages]. CSPD 14/115/73/152:‘Sir Horatio Vere
appointed to Generall of the 4000 sent to defend the Palatinate.’ The names of the officers are listed. See also Markham, Fighting
Veres.
60
The majority of these recruits were Highlanders, many of whom carried bows, long knives and Scottish spears, in
addition to their muskets. This description of Scottish troops was valid throughout their service in the German Wars,
as they were then called.
61
Proclamation by RPCS (8 May 1620), 1 RPCS 12:260. Data from 1 RPCS 12:259–262, 272.
62
Jany, Geschichte der königlich preußischen Armee, I:49.
63
‘A True Relation of the Late Proceedings in Bohemia….’ (1620), 10.
64
Mansfeld, Appollogie (1622), 38
65
Taylor, Taylor, his Travels (1620), D 1–2.
66
See Krebs, Schlacht am weißen Berge, for an account of the battle.
67
Seton-Watson, Czechs & Slovaks, 112.
24
Gray’s troops effected the junction with Mansfeld and the army marched toward Heidelberg. 68 The English
regiment authorized by James had sailed for the Netherlands on 2 August 1620. This force of 2000 soldiers
evaded the Spanish army under the Marqués [Ambrogio di Filippo, marqués de los Balbases] Spinola 69 and
marched up the valley of the Rhine River to the Palatinate, reaching Worms in October. There, Vere divided
his army into three sections and occupied the fortified cities of Mannheim, Heidelberg (on the Neckar River)
and Frankenthal. These three cities were the last outposts of Friedrich because Spinola had, by this time,
conquered the rest of the Palatinate. Spinola immediately besieged the cities. 70 The English forces held out
under extreme hardship until the winter of 1622/23 when, one by one, the cities fell to the forces besieging
them.
In 1622 Mansfeld at first sought to improve the position of the Protestants in the Palatinate. Unfortunately for
him, the twin defeats of Wimpfen (6–7 May 1622) and Höchst (20 June 1622) made his position in that area
untenable. In June, he retreated into Alsace and from there advanced into the Low Countries, where he
entered Dutch service. Soon after contracting with the Dutch Republic, Mansfeld defeated Spinola near
Hainault (30 August 1622). In this battle, Scottish troops under Captains [James] Hepburn, [Thomas?] Hume
and Sir James Ramsay distinguished themselves. 71 Mansfeld’s troops were also able to accomplish the relief
of Bergen-op-Zoom (4 October 1622), but little else. The Dutch soon wearied of the plundering of his men,
refused to finance him further and his army disintegrated in 1623. 72 The only other disciplined Protestant
army in Germany was under the command of Christian of Brunswick [der Jüngere, Herzog des Herzogtum
Braunschweig-Lüneburg: der tolle Halberstädter]73, which was defeated at Stadtlohn (6 August 1623).
Surviving Union troops entered the service of Mansfeld, who was seeking a new master.
In order to recoup his fortunes and regain an army, Mansfeld journeyed to England in April 1624. He was
accorded a royal welcome by the English, for they felt Mansfeld to be the champion of Elizabeth of
Bohemia. James himself finally decided to support the cause of his son-in-law by providing Mansfeld with
£20,000 and authorizing a levy of 6000 men. 74 This sudden desire to help Mansfeld was surely motivated, at
least in part, by James’s realization that Spain had rejected his son, Charles, as a match for the Spanish
Infanta and by the consequential deterioration of relations between Spain and England. With the aid of the
king, Mansfeld was able to raise a larger army than originally intended – an army of 12,000 men. 75 It was,
however, ill-armed and ill-equipped. The troops, lacking tents and warm clothing, were shipped to Holland in
68
Mansfeld, Appollogie, 55.
69
July-August 1620: Spanish Intervention. The Spanish Habsburg army under Spinola was in the Rhenish Palatinate because, as
part of the overall Habsburg strategy to crush the Bohemian insurrection, Spanish forces left Flanders and occupied most of
Friedrich’s towns.
70
Spinola was unable to besiege the cities for any length of time as the twelve-year truce between the Dutch Republic and Spain
was due to expire in 1621, and the conflict was certain to be renewed. Spinola therefore left the sieges to Tilly and returned to
Flanders.
71
72
73
Grant, Hepburn, p. 20.
Of the twenty-four regiments under Mansfeld at this time, two were British: Gray with a declared size of 2000 and
Vere with a declared size of 3000. Wertheim, Herzog Christian, II:545–546.
Wertheim, Herzog Christian, 2 vols.
74
[Thomas] Locke to [Sir Dudley Carleton] (17 May 1624). Money is needed for recovery of Palatinate and have also promised
£100,000 to the King of Denmark. From whence is the money to come? Listing of officers: four colonels [all English] with 1500
men each are for Low Countries. PROL SP 14/164/92 [3 pages].
75
List of officers and levies [30 November 1624]. PROL SP 14/175/89 [2 pages]. The names are mostly English, though some
surnames familiar in Expedition (Murray, Forbes, Beaton: about 20 of 60 were Scottish). Total 12,900.
25
the middle of the winter of 1624/25. There, it rapidly dwindled away due to disease and wholesale desertion
to the Spanish.76 At this time, many of the Scots who had served under Gray or had come with Mansfeld were
convoyed to Sweden under the command of Sir John Hepburn. 77 By November 1625, only 3000 of the
original 12,000 men could be mustered in the Dutch Republic; and these, along with 2000 new recruits, were
sent to Denmark under the command of Sir Charles Morgan, an Englishman. 78 Part of this body of soldiers
then marched into Silesia, where it was incorporated into the new army that Mansfeld was building. 79 The
rest joined Christian IV (Kong Danmark [Denmark]–Norge, r 1588–1648) after the battle of Lutter am
Barenberge (27 August 1626).80
Commanders during the Thirty Years’ War often had major troubles keeping an army at full strength because
of the problem of paying the men. A typical example of the irregularity of payment and the various sources
used can be provided by the army of Mansfeld. Mansfeld did keep his army together by paying his soldiers in
full, but most of the payments were late. After White Mountain (when Mansfeld moved his camp to the
Upper Palatinate) his army was subsidized by England, and he was able to pay his men. Yet another time,
when his army relieved Frankenthal, the grateful citizens paid the wage arrears. The capture of the Spanish
war chest at the Battle of Hainault further provided Mansfeld with money for his troops. 81 Upon his arrival in
the Low Countries, the Dutch Republic paid his army – until the atrocities perpetrated on the local
inhabitants determined the Dutch to terminate their contract with him. Mansfeld then went to East Friesland
until 1622, when the people there paid him 300,000 florins to leave. He financed the English army which he
raised in 1624 at first with English aid and then with French aid in 1625. ‘Of course, any soldier who had
died before his back wages could be paid lost out.’ 82 It is obvious, then, that the financing of an army often
depended upon good fortune, and there was never any guarantee to the soldiers that they would be paid.
While Mansfeld maneuvered in the Low Countries, Protestant fortunes in the HRE declined at a rapid rate.
Friedrich, derisorily called the ‘Winter King’, was stripped of his possessions and titles. Ferdinand, newly
elected HR Kaiser, rewarded Maximilian for his support by granting him the Upper Palatinate and by
investing him as Kurfürst von Bayern [Bavaria]. Ferdinand also granted Maximilian the attendant office of
imperial steward, which had been enjoyed since 1356 by the Counts Palatine of the Rhine. Following White
Mountain a number of Bohemian nobles were executed; an estimated five-sixths of the Bohemian nobility
went into exile and their properties were confiscated. In fact, approximately one-half the land in Bohemia
was confiscated and sold to Catholics. Albrecht [Wenzel Eusebius von/ Albrecht Václav Eusebius z
Valdštejna] Wallenstein (1583–1634]83 made himself wealthy as the result of the confiscation and sale of the
estates of his Protestant countrymen. 84 A Catholic Reformation, under the aegis of Jesuits, was carried out
76
‘Report of Sir John Coke of a message from his majesty to the house of commons’ (8 July 1625). CSPD 16/4/56–
57. Mass defections and the need for money for supplies are detailed.
77
Grant, Hepburn, 27.
78
Beller, ‘Morgan’ in EHR 43:528-539.
79
[Poyntz], Poyntz, 46–47.
80
Hurter, Wallensteins, 126.
81
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:498.
82
Ibid., VSW 47:499.
83
84
Redlich, ‘Contributions’ in EcHR 12:2 (1959/60): 247–260; Ritter, ‘Kontributionssystem’ in HZ 90 (1903): 193–249; and ‘WSB,
‘Wallenstein and the Kontributionssystem’ (1966): TBP.
Friedrich, Baroque, 168.
26
whereby Bohemian Protestants (especially middle-class burghers) either converted or were either driven out
or executed.
In late 1624 two Scandinavian kings – GA and Christian – considered entering the war, supposedly to
champion Protestantism. GA proposed an alliance between Sweden, the Dutch Republic, Denmark and
England. Sweden, of course, would lead the coalition, with subsidies supplied by the United Provinces and
England.85 However, his agenda also included subjecting the Poland-Lithuania Commonwealth as well as
Pomerania to Swedish rule, which alienated prospective allies. Christian had more modest desires. Fearing
that Liga military successes might well result in the restoration, as well as the expansion, of Catholicism in
northern Germany, he publicly declared his country’s military interests were intended halt further Catholic
encroachments in Protestant areas. He also acted to forestall re-institution of Catholicism in areas lost to
Protestantism since 1555. Underlying these public claims was Christian’s realization that further Catholic
successes might easily result in the loss of several ecclesiastical principalities in his own possession. 86 The
course proposed by the latter was viewed more favorably by those states considering intervention; and, at the
Hague (29 November/9 December 1625), an accord between the Dutch Republic, England (and by extension,
Scotland and Ireland) and Denmark was signed. 87 Christian thus embarked upon a military campaign against
Catholic forces then on his border (later identified in Danish history as ‘the Emperors’ War’ (Kejserkrigen).
Unfortunately, the likelihood of military success by the coalition was almost immediately lessened as the
result of significant alterations in the European political-military milieu extant at the time of the agreement.
First, it was known that Spain, a vitally important Imperial ally, was tied-down by its commitment to
crushing the rebellion/revolt by the Dutch Republic. Unbeknownst to Christian, this was offset by
Wallenstein’s pledge of his personal army (numbering somewhere between 30,000 and 100,000 soldiers) to
Ferdinand in return for the right to plunder the captured territories. Second, potential allies – particularly
principalities located in areas certain to be in the anticipated war zone – were understandably hesitant to
make unnecessary enemies. Principalities and towns, especially as the wars dragged on, were well-aware of
the dire consequences resulting from choosing the losing side to failure to meet logistical demands. Not
surprisingly, Sweden rejected the idea of a coalition under Danish leadership; GA instead engaged in war
with Poland-Lithuania. While France had earlier, tacitly for the most part, 88 supported virtually every
challenge to the Habsburgs, domestic issues – especially a brewing civil war between French royal forces
(operating at the behest of Cardinal-Duc de Richelieu [Armand Jean du Plessis de Richelieu (1585–1642)],
able first minister of Louis XIII, le Roi de France [1601–r 1610 –1643) and Huguenots protected by the Edict
of Nantes (1589) – lessened the likelihood of significant assistance from the French. Third, coalition
operations were hindered by the lack of funding. The Dutch Republic voted only a fraction of what Christian
believed essential for raising enough troops and for acquiring the necessars critical for waging war against
the forces opposing the coalition. The English Parliament refused to vote any money at all but did not oppose
85
86
Roe, ‘Mission to GA’, Camden Miscellany 4:82–92.
Christian was in possession of the ecclesiastical States of Bremen (his second son was bishop of Bremen), Verden & Halberstadt
and wanted the bishopric of Osnabrück as reward for his participation [Ward, TCMH, 14:40]. According to the Peace of
Augsburg (1555), these were violations of the accord. The Defenestration of Prague was but one of many challenges to the
religious agreements, but it was the most significant as it initiated the Thirty Years’ War.
87
Loose, Hamburg und Christian, 4:23.
88
Openly, if the plans of Henri IV had not been derailed by his assassination.
27
the issuance of contracts for levying troops in Scotland and England. Essentially, the Danish king was going
to war with little more than his own treasury available to support his plans.
Still, following the signing of the accord, a grand strategy between coalition members was agreed upon.
Christian of Denmark was to overpower Lower Saxony; Christian of Brunswick was to attack the
Wittelsbach bishoprics in Westphalia and the lower Rhineland; Mansfeld, appointed generalissimo of
the coalition, was to advance against Bohemia, Silesia and Moravia; Bethlen [Gabor of Transylvania]
was to operate against Austria and Moravia and effect a conjunction with Mansfeld. 89
In theory, it appeared a good plan, but the 1625 campaign season witnessed little fighting. When Christian
suffered an 80-foot fall,90 he was for all intents and purposes incapacitated for the rest of that year. Christian’s
generalissimo did little to further the cause for Mansfeld failed to advance into Bohemia against the military
novice, Wallenstein. The coalition’s military situation grew rapidly and progressively worse with the
resumption of active warfare in the spring of 1626. Christian and Mansfeld were not only widely separated
but also were divided by the Elbe River. In a perceptive (or fortuitous) strategic move, Tilly and Wallenstein
advanced their armies into the gap and occupied many of the passes [crossings] over the Elbe.91 The central
position held by the Liga-Imperial armies thus drove a wedge between their opponents and forced coalition
forces to attack an entrenched enemy. The resulting battles – Dessau Bridge (25 April 1626) 92 and Lutter93 –
were overwhelming victories for Liga-Imperial forces. Mansfeld, following his defeat at Dessau Bridge,
retreated into Silesia with the remnants of his army. He then set out for Venice in hopes of finding a
benefactor willing to fund another army but died en route (November 1626). The remnants of Mansfeld’s
army, supplemented by newly raised but poorly trained troops, were placed under the command of General
Balthazar Jacob von Schlammersdorf, a commander with appropriate credentials but with little military
talent. Further west in Holstein, Christian established a defensive line along the Weser River, anticipating an
offensive in early 1627 by the Liga army under Tilly.
Desperately needing reinforcements to replace his manpower losses, 94 the Danish king contracted with a
number of mercenary officers, including various Scottish military enterprisers. The MacKay Regiment,
arguably the most famous of Scottish regiments to serve in the German Wars, 95 was initially commissioned
by Mansfeld on 6 March 1626. This, in turn, was honored by Charles, who authorized a warrant for the levy
89
Steinberg, European Hegemony, 45.
90
Thrown from his horse, Christian then plunged down a steep embankment. Although not quite the drop as experienced during the
Defenestration of Prague (and there was no convenient pile of mist upon which to land), it clearly affected Christian’s actions.
From descriptions of his behavior following the fall, it is likely he suffered a severe concussion as a result of his tumble.
91
Whether this was a coordinated move (and if so, who suggested or ordered it) or whether this was simply one of those lucky
things which occurs in warfare, there is no way of knowing at this late date. Given the nature of command and of
communications in the seventeenth-century, it is more likely the latter. In any event the net result was Imperial-Liga armies
occupied the central position.
92
Poyntz, Poyntz, 46–47. Poyntz claims to offer an ‘eye-witness’ account but his version is littered with inaccuracies. All primary
material from that period has to be cross-checked for accuracy and for POV.
93
94
95
Described and analyzed in Voges, Lutter.
Wastage is a British term used to describe the severity of man-power losses from all causes. It is an element in the degradation
of military force.
Obviously Expedition has much to do with this.
28
of 2000 men which was to be issued by the PCS to Sir Donald MacKay, later Lord Reay. 96 In the summer of
1626, two additional licenses to levy were issued by the PCS: one to Captain Alexander Seton for 500 men
for Denmark97 and the other to Sir James Leslie for 400 men for Mansfeld. 98 Of the latter two, it is unknown
how many men were actually raised and transported, although an estimate of 1000 men has been made. 99 In
early 1627 three further commissions for levies for Danish service were authorized by Charles and by the
PCS: Robert Maxwell, the Earl of Nithsdale received a patent on 27 February to raise 3000 men; 100
Alexander Lindsey, Lord Spynie, and James Sinclair of Murkill were each issued warrants on 8 March by the
PCS, with each authorized to levy 3000 men. 101 In addition to these levies, Sir James Spens was authorized to
raise 1200 men for service in Sweden. 102 Although it is impossible to determine exactly the number of troops
raised, it has been ‘guesstimated’ that approximately 10,000 of the authorized 14,000 (including the levies of
late 1626) were raised and transported. 103 MacKay’s Regiment of approximately 2400 soldiers, many of them
Highlanders, embarked from northern Scotland in the Fall of 1626. RM’s unit sailed from Cromarty on 10
October 1626, landing at Glückstadt six days later. Since the soldiers had been commissioned by Mansfeld,
his death meant that Mackay had only to request that Christian employ them, which occurred almost
immediately.
96
For a regimental history précis, see Mackay, ‘Mackay’s Regiment’ in TGSI 8. For a lengthier account, along with supporting
documentation, see OSB. Both rely heavily on Expedition. A partial listing of recruiting documents includes: Mackay, Sir
Donald, Lord Reay. NAS: Reay Papers GD 84/2/146–192a. The wording of contracts and of levy authorizations can be followed
in the extant records of Sir Donald MacKay of Farr [(a) Ernest, Prince and Count of Mansfeld to Captain David Lermont at
Lauenburg [French] (24 January 1626). Commission to treat with those levying and bringing Scottish regiments and companies to
the service of the King and Queen of Bohemia. NAS Reay GD 84/2/148; (b) Charles to the RPCS (3 March 1626). Grant Sir
Donald Mackay a warrant for raising 2000 men. 2 RPCS 2:1 & 2:245; OSB 237; (c) Letter of Agreement between Captain David
Lermont and James, Lord Occultrie, on behalf of Sir Donald Mackay [English] (4 March 1626). NAS Reay GD 84/2/149; (d)
RPCS License to Mackay (16 March 1626). Authorizes levy of 2000 for Denmark. NAS Reay GD 84/2/150; (e) Mr Wolfen and
another [to Lord Treasurer Marlborough] (April 1626). ‘Agreement made with Sir Donald Mackay in name of Count Mansfeld
for levy of regiment of 3,000 for His Majesty’s service in Germany … we stand in need of present money for the transportation
of the regiment.’ CSPD 16 23:523/105/122; (f) Official commission from Ernest, Prince and Count of Mansfeld (in Zerbst), to
Sieur Donalt Macquay Chevalier [French] (9 April 1626)). Mackay named colonel of 3000 Scots in 15 companies. NAS Reay
GD 84/2/151. Two further recruiting notes:(a) RM received in 1626 a commission as a lieutenant in the regiment: ‘Robert Monro,
at first lieutenant in the said regiment to the noble and worthy captain, Thomas Mackenzie of Kildon, brother of the noble lord,
the Lord Earl of Seaforth.’ [Expedition Intro:1] and (b) ‘Na h-uile fear a theid a dhollaidh Gheibh a dolar bho MhacAoidh’ –
Gaelic proverb in the northern Highlands: ‘He that is down in his luck shall get a dollar from Mackay’. According to OSB 254, it
is likely from the Thirty Years’ War era and stems from Reay’s recruiting efforts. I would posit that it is more than just ‘likely’.
These (and more) documents are TBP on GRM.com. See also Fallon, Scottish Mercenaries, 34–187, for data on fulfilling military
contracts. My USM was researched and written in 1966–1968; Fallon’s remarkable dissertation was accepted in 1974. IMHO,
while I broke new ground on the topic, Fallon’s manuscript should long ago have been published. Perhaps he will permit me to
post his work (of which I have a purchased copy) on GRM.com. If he will contact me, or a reader can provide contact
information (contact us), and permission is granted, his dissertation will be posted. Further, SSNP is an invaluable resource for
locating material on the topic.
97
Levy License to Alexander Seton (25 June 1626). 2 RPCS 1:315.
98
Levy License to Sir James Leslie for 400 men (20 July 1626). 2 RPCS 1:357.
99
100
101
Grant, Soldiers, 126. Grant estimates the force raised by MacKay at 3400 which is about 30% higher than probably raised, that is
2400. His estimate of the number of troops raised by Leslie and Seton was 1500; and if this is also reduced by 30%, the figure is
approximately 1000.
License to Robert Maxwell, Earl of Nithsdale (27 February 1627). 2 RPCS 1:531–532.
License to Alexander Lindsey, Lord Spynie (8 March 1627). 2 RPCS 1:539–540; License to James Sinclair (8 March 1627). 2
RPCS 1:540.
102
License to Sir James Spens (13 February 1627). 2 RPCS 1:523–524.
103
2 RPCS 1:lxxxiii, 565–568, 578–587 & 611. TBP: WSB. ‘Expanding Professions’.
29
In 1627 Wallenstein and Tilly acted to expand the area controlled by their forces for several reasons.
Foremost in their strategy (either independently or mutually) was the defeat of the forces arrayed against
them. Secondly, an unstated, albeit one widely feared by northern German Protestants, goal was the
restoration (and perhaps the extension) of Catholicism to areas lost to Protestantism since the Treaty of
Augsburg (1555). Finally, there was the desire by both Tilly and Wallenstein to sustain their forces by
bringing more territory under the Kontributionssystem.104 As developed by Wallenstein, the
Kontributionssystem was a method by which the inhabitants of a region paid for matériel
requirements/necessars of troops quartered in their vicinity without having to billet them [maybe]. This
quasi-legal extortion was of two major types: money contributions and payment in kind. When an army
approached a town of any size, its commander assessed the value of the town; and its citizens were informed
of what they were expected to pay. If payment were not forthcoming, the city was either captured or, this
being unfeasible, the countryside was devastated. Payment in kind was dealt with in a similar manner. Again,
commanders decided how much food was necessary to sustain one man and townspeople had to supply that
amount for every man in the army. The value of these rations was calculated by commanders, and food was
doled out to soldiers in lieu of money payments. With such goals in mind, in early June (the opening of
‘fighting’ season), Imperial-Liga forces moved against the Protestant coalition forces.
In the campaigns of 1627, Christian’s armies were expelled from Lower Saxony, then chased into Jutland.
Wallenstein soon circumscribed Tilly’s role and relegated the Liga army to a secondary role in Lower
Saxony; his Imperial army then invaded Mecklenburg and Pomerania. Danish armies could only delay
enemy advances as the Liga/Imperial armies were far too powerful to be halted. According to Robert Monro
{RM}, Scottish troops played a prominent role in the delaying tactics fought by Christian’s army. At
Boizenburg four companies of Highlanders (800 men) under Major James Dunbar held off 10,000 soldiers
under Tilly in June 1627.105 Unfortunately, as often happens when isolated posts cannot be relieved and when
a commander of the garrison refuses to parley, Dunbar and his four companies, reduced by disease and
combat to 400 men, were later wiped out at the Castle of Breddenburg (August 1627). 106 Holstein was now
virtually undefended, and the last Danish field army in the west was practically annihilated at Grossenbrode
(4 September 1627). Colonel Sir Charles Morgan and the remainder of English-Scottish troops which had
joined Christian in 1625 were bottled up in cities and ultimately surrendered (25 April 1628). 107 Morgan
himself was at Stade, near Bremen, where the Scots under his command put up the only resistance when
Tilly attacked.108 In October 1627 the Marquis of Baden was defeated by Tilly, and only he and five
companies of Scots escaped.109
104
Redlich, ‘Contributions’ in 2 EcHR 12:247–254; Ritter, ‘Kontributionssystem’ in HZ 90:193–249. RM euphemistically calls the
acquisition of necessars via the use of force and/or threat a ‘contribution’ but this is clearly an Anglicization of the German
Kontribution. The practice was not new, as Roman legions operated under the motto: bellum se ipsum alit (or alet). ‘War feeds
itself’ (German: Der Krieg ernährt den Krieg; French: La guerre doit se nourrir elle-même) was implemented on a lesser scale by
Tilly in 1623 on occupied enemy territory. Wallenstein raised the practice to its most productive level, leading some to conclude
that he actually created the system utilized during this period. The brutal results of the Thirty Years’ War on the HRE led to a
different the style of war: an era of limited war waged by professional armies following ‘Rules of War’ and ‘Codes of Conduct’
which were outlined in part by Hugo Grotius.
105
Expedition I:10–12. Also Opel, niedersächsisch-dänische Krieg, 2:??.
106
Expedition I:38–41. Also Opel, niedersächsisch-dänische Krieg, 2:28 ; Grant, Scottish Soldiers, 231–232.
107
Gardiner, History of England 6:185–6. Also Beller, ‘Morgan’ in EHR 43:528–539.
108
Hurter, Wallensteins, 123.
109
Sir Thomas Conway to Viscount Wilmot (16 October 1627). PROL SP 16/81/51 [three pages]. Conway’s description is likely
referring to Mackay’s troops, including RM. Charles Morgan and his troops are also mentioned. Note: CSPD 16 2/81/51/389 is a
30
Typical of Scottish bravery and steadfastness was the Battle of Oldenburg in September 1627. 110 Prior to this
battle, Wallenstein defeated a Danish army in Silesia under General Balthazar Jacob von Schlammersdorf,
who retreated northward to the island of Poel, near Wismar. 111 Meanwhile, the remaining seven companies of
the MacKay Regiment had been ordered eastward as reinforcements for the Danish army in Silesia.
However, upon learning of that army’s defeat, the regiment swiftly shifted direction and marched also to
Poel. After rendezvousing with von Schlammersdorf’s battered army, the combined forces were evacuated,
then transported by sea to Heiligenhafen. Following disembarkation, the army marched to Oldenburg to face
Tilly. As the pass at Oldenburg was unfortified, part of the Danish army was ordered to construct field
fortifications for defense of the vital choke-point. Unfortunately for the defenders, Tilly’s swift advance
towards Oldenburg brought the Liga army to the pass before effective breast-works were built. Tilly
immediately ordered assaults to be made on Danish trenches and the Danish army began to fall back in
confusion. Mackay’s men were ordered forward in order to stabilize the Danish line. Moving forward in
silence, as was their custom, 112 the Highlanders stopped the advance of the Liga army and held the line for
the rest of the day.
It was obvious that the Danish army was in a precarious position. Orders were issued to the army secretly to
retreat that night and to embark for Denmark. The Highlanders, having fought well, were the first to be
pulled back and sent to Heiligenhafen for embarkation. When it became known that the Scots were gone, the
rest of the Danish army began to retreat in hopes of getting away before Tilly advanced. The retreat rapidly
became a mad rush, and it was with difficulty that the Highlanders were able to board ship. Scouts from
Tilly’s army, who noticed that the pass had been evacuated, immediately notified the Liga general. His army
was immediately set in motion and their pursuit caught the bulk of the Danish army on the docks. These
soldiers surrendered and joined Tilly’s army, doing so in full view of the Scots who had already sailed. The
Highlanders, reduced as a result of battle and disease to 800 soldiers capable of active duty plus 150 other
sick and wounded men, were thoroughly disgusted by the proceedings. 113 Although Christian saved his army
from complete annihilation, the territory he effectively controlled was reduced to the Danish home islands. 114
To extend Imperial authority to the Baltic coast, Ferdinand appointed Wallenstein as General des Baltischen
und Ozeanischen Meeres115 and authorized the levying of more troops for the Imperial army, increasing its
very short rendition of a three-page document. As I began accessing original documents, it became clear that personal bias by the
calendarian (my word: a person who compiles a calendar) occasionally resulted in a skewed (POV) synopsis of the document.
This was most obvious in documents pertaining to the British Civil Wars where anti-Scots POV often manifests itself, this not
just from the tone of the document itself. As posting progresses, a calendar citation will be matched with a transcription of the
original(s). So please keep checking back. If you have already transcribed this, or other cited documents, please contact us. You
will receive full credit, if posted!
110
Expedition I:16–28.
111
Opel, niedersächsisch-dänische Krieg, 2:275–278.
112
Firth, Cromwell’s Army, 101. This assuredly puts a dent in the thesis of McWhiney & Jamieson, Attack and Die (1982) which
asserts that massive battle casualties suffered by the Confederacy on the battlefields of the American Civil War are attributable to
Southern battle tactics derived from their wild, screaming Celtic ancestors. Indeed, the thesis comes very near to deeming this
propensity a social atavism, similar to behavior described in Schumpeter, Soziologie der Imperialismen.
113
Expedition I:11–28.
114
Kellenbenz, ‘Hamburg’ in VHB 49/50:83.
115
Valentin, Geschichte, 244.
31
mass to 70,000 men. Wallenstein was given authority to recruit, to disband troops and to regulate his
command structure. In effect, the Imperial army was Wallenstein’s army because he, and only he, determined
promotion or demotion.116 To carry out his task, Wallenstein solidified his control of north-central Germany
by subjecting cities which had sworn allegiance to Christian and allowed the Liga army under Tilly to control
north-western areas. Importantly, not all cities in northern Germany were occupied by either Wallenstein or
Tilly, as the numbers required to garrison so many cities was far beyond the capacity or capability or the
Catholic forces. Indeed, some cities, such as Hamburg, were never occupied by external forces during the
Thirty Years’ War. On the other hand, the two Catholic armies did control – either directly or indirectly – the
Baltic coastline of the HRE for the Kaiser: except for Stralsund, 117 a city located on a peninsula of the
Pomeranian coast near the island of Rügen. Stralsund was virtually impregnable to land attack, and supply by
sea was easy. That assessment, to Wallenstein, was unacceptable. In a strategic move, Wallenstein dispatched
1000 soldiers as aid to the King of Poland, providing the illusion that the Empire would further assist him if
help were requested. His objective was to encourage the Poles to fight harder against GA. This would,
hopefully, pin down the Swedish army in Poland thereby keeping Sweden out of the conflict. 118
Stralsund was then attacked. Upon the arrival of the first contingents of the Imperial army – under General
Johann Georg von Arnim [-Boitzenburg] (1583–1641), Wallenstein’s general – on 13 May 1628, two
assaults were immediately made. Although Stralsunders repulsed these attacks, they swiftly concluded that
they could not hold out for long. Turning to Christian for support, Danish army reinforcements to the
beleaguered city soon arrived. The first groups, under the command of Colonel Heinrich Holk, landed on the
4th and 7th of June. These units were comprised of the MacKay Regiment’s 900 Scots plus a contingent of 400
Danes and Germans.119 The Scots were immediately sent to the Frankentor, the weakest sector of the city’s
defenses.120 Although GA was at the time engaged in a war with Poland, he observed the presence of the
Habsburg army on the shore of the Baltic with alarm. This threat to his plan of making the Baltic a ‘Swedish
Lake’ forced him to act. When Stralsund requested his assistance, on 30 June, Swedish aid of eight ships and
600 men arrived. However, no troops disembarked until a twenty-year alliance between Sweden and
Stralsund was signed.121 A treaty was signed on 3 July, the same day Wallenstein arrived to take personal
command of the siege. With his arrival the complexion of the fighting changed. Instead of forays and
harrying attacks, heavy frontal assaults were launched. These assaults were made, quite naturally and
expectedly, on the weakest point of the Stralsund defenses – the Frankentor. On the 4 th, 7th, 8th and 9th of July,
Imperial forces made night assaults, suffering horrendous casualties while accomplishing little save
bloodshed.122 The cost to the regiment?
116
Wedgwood, Thirty Years War, 214.
117
Sir Thomas Roe to Charles I (20/30 June 1629), in Roe, ‘Mission to GA’, Camden Miscellany 4:11–12. The only
other city of significance to remain under Christian’s control was Glückstadt on the Elbe.
118
Friedrich, Baroque, 173.
119
Berg & Lagercrantz, Scots in Sweden, 37.
120
Expedition I:64.
121
Fuller, Battles, 2:47.
122
RM devotes twenty-two of eighty-five pages [26%] of his account of the MacKay Regiment’s two-and-a-half years
in Danish service to the battle to defend Stralsund. Expedition I:59–80.
32
In defence of this town of Trailesound, our regiment did lose near five hundred men, and of the
remnant escaped, both of officers and souldiours, I do not think one hundred were free of wounds
received honourably, in defence of the good cause. Who will then say but that blood was better lost
than kept, when it returns with advantage, having brought credit to themselves and country? Let none
then mourn for the loss gotten so honourably. 123
This paean to his profession is clearly the same to his fellow Scots, for (according to him) the salvation of
Stralsund achieved by the bravery and blood of the Scots stationed there. 124
Still, even with such sacrifice, Stralsund was under great pressure and was prepared to surrender. The arrival
of Lord Spynie’s regiment of 1100 Scots in Danish pay served to bolster the sagging spirits of the citizens. A
surrender ultimatum from Wallenstein was then rejected. On 16 July General Alexander Leslie of the
Swedish army, along with 800 Scots and Swedes, arrived to take command of the city. He immediately
organized sallies and strengthened the defensive fortifications. This active defense, coupled with heavy rains
(21–24 July) which turned the area outside the city walls into a swampy marshland, led Wallenstein to
abandon the siege. RM was obviously pleased to get a Scottish governor of the town because the troops had
been ill-treated by the townspeople.
[A]nd what a blessing it was to a town, perplexed as this was, to get a good, wise, virtuous and valiant
governor in time of their greatest trouble, which shows that we are governed by a power above us ... it
faring then with Trailesound, as with Sara: she became fruitful when she could not believe it, and they
become flourishing having gotten a Scots governor to protect them, whom they looked not for, which
was a good omen unto them, to get a governor of the nation, that was never conquered, which made
them the only town in Germany free, as yet, from the Imperial yoke, by the valour of our nation, that
defended their city in their greatest danger. 125
When the siege was lifted, Leslie was well-rewarded by the grateful citizens of Stralsund. 126 More
importantly for the future, GA’s treaty with Stralsund was his first direct action against the Habsburgs and his
first encounter with Wallenstein. Although the Swedish king publicly declared his interest to be the welfare
of German Protestants, it was the threat to Sweden posed by Wallenstein’s army that caused him to send
Leslie and over 5000 Scots and Swedes to Stralsund. 127
With the Swedes in firm control of Stralsund, Christian attempted to regain control of at least some of
Pomerania, as well as to restore some of his tattered prestige. His forces, strengthened by the recalled
regiments of Lord Spynie and MacKay, landed near Wolgast and prepared to invade Mecklenburg.
Wallenstein was well-prepared to meet any threat of that nature and, on 12 August, the army of Christian was
virtually annihilated. Christian retired to Wolgast with the remnants of his force, leaving rear-guard action to
his Scots.128 Christian embarked for Copenhagen with his depleted forces, arriving 19 August. There the
Scottish regiments were reinforced by 1000 new troops recruited in Scotland by MacKay, now Lord Reay.
123
Expedition I:80.
124
Expedition I:68.
125
Expedition I:77.
126
Redlich, Military Enterpriser in VSW 47:331.
127
Droysen, ‘baltischen Frage’ in HZ 15:251–276.
128
Expedition I:80
33
The new and old troops were combined and formed into what was virtually a new regiment, the old regiment
having suffered so many casualties. 129 In April 1629, Christian planned an invasion of Holstein, but the
offering of lenient terms by Wallenstein to Christian for the ending of the war settled the issue. 130 It was
reported that Wallenstein, with regard to the terms offered to Christian, said: ‘If he has not lost his wits he
will grasp at it with both hands.’131
Representatives of the two negotiated a treaty which was signed at Lübeck on 22 May, terminating hostilities
between the Catholic Habsburg Kaiser and the King of Denmark. Christian agreed to surrender sovereignty
over the German ecclesiastical territories that he held 132 as well as over Lower Saxony. He was allowed to
reoccupy Jutland, Schleswig and part of Holstein. Essentially, this meant that Catholic forces now controlled
much of the HRE, which gave the Kaiser an enormous constitutional advantage over the German nobles.
Since Scottish troops were no longer needed, they were paid off and allowed to depart. Most of them were
taken into the service of Sweden. 133 As for the HRE, an uneasy peace settled over the land, uneasy because
Ferdinand then unilaterally issued the ‘Edict of Restitution’, in which he declared:
all alienation of church lands since 1552 (Convention of Passau) null and void, called for their
restitution to their rightful proprietors, authorized the latter after such restitution to expel all who
would not confess according to the preference of the ruler of the territory, and outlawed all Protestant
confessions except the Lutheran of Augsburg Confession.... 134
This, in effect, meant that two archbishoprics, twelve bishoprics and approximately 500 religious houses and
institutions would change hands and that thousands of citizens would be expelled from their homes. The
Edict proved a gross political error, serving to unite Protestants within the HRE against further
encroachments of Catholicism and by the Kaiser. The Edict of Restitution negated the effects of the Peace of
Lübeck and set the stage for the third phase of the Thirty Years’ War – the period of Swedish intervention.
The profession of military enterpriser was about to become more lucrative as the demand for mercenaries
would soon increase.
129
Expedition I:82–84.
130
Wedgwood, Thirty Years War, 251.
131
Wedgwood, Thirty Years War, 244.
132
Valentin, Geschichte, 244.
133
See Expedition II:1–2, for his account of the transfer of Mackay’s Regiment to Swedish service.
134
Friedrich, Baroque, 174. The text of the Edict may be found in Lundorp, Acta Publica 2:1048.
34
Chapter III – Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden Intervenes
On 6 July 1630, GA, 135 the thirty-six year old King of Sweden, landed his small army near Peenemünde on
the northern end of the island of Usedom in Pomerania. His invasion had a two-fold purpose: Swedish
security and control of the Pomeranian coast. The presence of Imperial and Liga forces on the southern shore
of the Baltic was perceived as a serious threat to Swedish security, for no power could be allowed to control
potential invasion staging areas in Pomerania and Mecklenburg. Well aware that north German states could
no longer defend themselves from Imperial domination, GA was determined to establish a strong Swedish
presence along the middle Baltic coast. Incidental to his strategic plan, but important in his effort to gain
alliances with north German states, was his desire to assist the Protestants of the HRE. 136 Seeking allies, GA
conferred with Christian in February 1629 and tried to persuade him to join Sweden as a junior partner to
force a retreat of Imperial forces. Because of his excursion into the HRE, Christian was not particularly
interested in further warfare at that time. North German states and cities were wooed by the GA; and his
personal representative, John Adler Salvius, prepared the way for the invasion by mounting an intense
propaganda campaign in north Germany against the Habsburgs. GA also obtained tacit consent for
intervention from France, the Dutch Republic and England.
Prior to the invasion, Sweden had long been engaged in a struggle for control of the Baltic Sea and its
coastline. In particular, there was little love lost between Denmark and Sweden, for each had the same
strategic goal. Under GA, the foreign policy of Sweden was aimed at a dominuim maris Baltici. In order to
supplement the national income of Sweden, control of the mouths of rivers emptying into the Baltic was
sought in order to collect tolls on trade coming down the rivers. The Peace of Stolbova (1617) ended
Sweden’s war with Russia and put the ports of the eastern Baltic region under Swedish control. Thus little
Russian trade could reach the West without passing through Swedish customs posts. GA then attacked
Livonia (1621), capturing the port of Riga, on the Dvina. The Polish War (1624–1629). in addition to being a
war against the King of Poland, a Catholic Wasa expelled from the Swedish throne and who was meditating
revenge, was an extension of the Swedish Baltic policy. ‘By 1629 the Prussian ports of Memel, Pillau and
Elbing were in Swedish hands; Danzig bought its neutrality by entering the Swedish system.’ 137 The Peace of
Lübeck determined the king to end the Polish War because the German situation demanded his attention.
With French diplomatic assistance, GA thus agreed to the truce of Altmark (25 September 1629) by which
Poland ceded Livonia and the administration of the Prussian customs to Sweden. 138 This allowed Sweden to
enter the conflict in Germany without fear of a multi-front war.
The core of the Swedish army of 1630 constituted Europe’s first national army. Swedish infantry was raised
by a type of draft known as the utskrivning; and, since regimental units were usually composed of men from
the same province, a high level of unit cohesion was achieved. The utskrivning was quite effective for, in the
135
See Droysen, Gustaf Adolf; Fletcher, Gustavus Adolphus; Harte, Gustavus Adolphus; and Roberts, Gustavus
Adolphus, 2 vols.
136
Roberts, Essays, 82–86.
137
Steinberg, European Hegemony, 49.
138
For a contemporary account of the negotiations, Roe, ‘Mission to GA’, CS: Camden Miscellany 4:82–92
35
period between 1626 and 1630, 49,500 men were raised by this method. Swedish cavalry was composed of
volunteers of the best quality, and there were few desertions. 139 Pay for these troops came from the land
revenues in Sweden. His military successes raised his ambitions, he was well aware that an invasion of the
HRE would require far more soldiers than he had. More troops meant mercenaries which meant more hard
money – which, given the nature of Sweden’s resources, GA had precious little of. As noted in Chapter I,
foreign troops were raised by a contract made between GA and a military entrepreneur; but the Swedish ruler
hoped that mercenaries, after being mustered,
would fight on credit. All governments during the Thirty Years’ War enlisted far more mercenaries than they
could afford to pay regularly, and trusted to the chapter of accidents – a victory, a lucrative sack, extortion
from the civilian population – to extricate them from their financial difficulties. 140
Muster-money of eight riksdalers per soldier was the initial amount required in order to assemble the
soldiers. In 1630, the amount dropped to six riksdalers and later to four. A company of infantry (190 men)
was guaranteed a payment of 1958 riksdalers per month as wages and the officers of a regiment (20 men)
were promised 1285 riksdalers per month. Actual pay received by mercenaries was rarely that which was
guaranteed. Since full pay was a rarity, good quarters and the Kontributionssystem were important to keeping
his armies intact. In lieu of cash, GA strove to provide this army with food, shelter, fuel, salt and other
necessities.
Of mercenaries serving in the Swedish army in 1630, approximately 12,000 men, or one-sixth of the total
manpower of the Swedish army, were Scottish. Many had served under GA in Poland, but several regiments
joined Swedish service after their service under Christian was terminated. 141 With the Swedish King when he
landed at Peenemünde were the Scottish regiments of Mackay (now Lord Reay), Sir James Spence, and [ ─]
MacDougal.142 Sir Alexander Leslie, Sir John Hepburn, Lord Spynie, [─] Stargate and Sir James Lumsden
commanded other Scottish regiments serving in the Swedish army. There were also many other Scottish
officers in command of German or Swedish troops, men such as William Baillie, Sir David Leslie [cousin of
Alexander], Robert Monro, the Black Baron [cousin of RM], John Monro [elder brother of RM] and Sir
Hector Monro [yet another RM cousin]. Scottish regiments served an important role in the campaigns of the
next two years for they were almost always in the van on a march. They were used as the shock troops in
storming cities or fortresses, and they were placed in critical positions in battle formations. The reason for the
heavy use of Scots was their steadfastness in battle and their willingness to prove their merit under the most
disheartening of conditions. Their devotion to GA earned them the affection of the Swedish king. 143 The
Scots, along with the Swedish and Finnish troops, were the best soldiers in the Swedish army. 144
The Swedish army was well-disciplined, for, although the ‘Articles of War’ were similar to others in use on
the continent, Swedish ‘Articles’ were more strictly enforced than those used by other armies. Heavy
139
Roberts, GA I:209.
140
Roberts, GA I:213
141
See Expedition II:1–2, for transfer of Mackay’s Regiment.
142
SweInt 1:49.
143
144
Although RM noted that this steadfastness and fortitude came at a price. If one is good, one is overused. Still, the
Scottish soldier has been lauded as a great fighter for centuries. See Laffin, Scotland the Brave.
RM makes this claim often in Expedition, which is repeated in Grant, Soldiers, Fischer’s works and OSB
36
penalties were prescribed for offenses such as blasphemy, dueling or allowing ‘loose’ women in camp.
Unfortunately, the practice of the times demanded that mercenary regiments deal with their own disciplinary
problems, and GA was unable to control his mercenaries as well as he did his draftees. As his army became
composed of more mercenaries, the discipline problem became more and more acute and excesses
multiplied. Also, his inability to pay his forces regularly caused much looting, as plundering was a more
promising alternative to the troops than severe privation. 145 The discipline that GA initiated was necessary in
order to allow his military reforms to be successful. ‘New, unfamiliar ... weapons, new tactical units, a new
style of fighting, demanded as a precondition for success intensive drilling of the individual soldier and
careful exercises by smaller and larger bodies of troops.’ 146 Soldiers were drilled constantly and large-scale
maneuvers were often held. On the day before the battles of Breitenfeld and at Alte Feste, GA’s soldiers
practiced the type of combat that would be faced on the battlefield the following day. 147
The brigade was the new tactical unit and the successor to the successful experiments by Maurits van
Nassau. It was usually made up of two weak regiments or one full regiment. The combat unit was
‘a brigade of 1512 foot drawn up in three lines. Three groups of pikemen totaling 648, form a
protective triangle. Behind them, in the intervals, and on the flanks, are 864 musketeers in five groups
occupying positions from which they can sally forth, deploy, fire and retire once more within the
formation to reload.’148
This formation resulted in added maneuverability and increased firepower to Swedish army, and it was far
superior to the tercio.149 One of the most famous brigades in Swedish service was the Green, or Scots
Brigade, formed in March 1631. Commanded by Sir John Hepburn, it was made up of regiments of Lord
Reay, Sir James Lumsden, Hepburn plus Stargate’s Corps. 150 Initially an oversized brigade of 4500 men, it
was composed almost completely of Scots, or about one-third of the total number of Scots serving in GA’s
primary army at that time.151 It almost goes without saying that unit cohesion – a key element in the quality
of a fighting unit – of the Green Brigade played a significant role in forming the Scottish soldiers’ reputation.
While Gustavus Adolphus mounted his invasion of Germany, Wallenstein prepared to meet the threat. His
ability to meet the impending invasion was severely hindered when, in May 1630, the Kaiser ordered the
general to send 30,000 Imperial troops to Italy to aid Spanish forces engaged in the War of the Mantuan
Succession.152 Then, the Regensburg Kurfürstentag (June–August 1630) convened amidst smoldering
145
The ‘Articles of War’ in effect in the Swedish army between 1621 and 1630 were relatively simple, and punishments were light
(see The Swedish Discipline in SweInt 5:??). In 1631, newer and harsher ‘Articles’ were instituted because of excesses committed
by GA’s troops. See Frauenholz, Das Heerwesen, 3:384–485, for the revised Articles. For an example of Swedish military judicial
procedure, see Gebauer, ‘Ein schwedischer Militärprozess’ in HZ 98:544–560.
146
Roberts, GA I:239.
147
Roberts, GA I:240.
148
Montross, War, 271.
149
Delbrück, Kriegskunst, IV:209.
150
151
152
Stargate’s Corps was detached shortly thereafter, leaving a brigade of 3000 men. Disease and battle [wastage] soon reduced the
Scots Brigade to the size of a regular ‘Swedish brigade’.
Grant, Hepburn, 54–66.
The War of the Mantuan Succession (1627–1631) was fought over the strategically important Duchy of Mantua.
Located in northern Italy, Mantua was sought after by France and the Habsburgs because of its proximity to Turin
and Milan. France became actively involved in the conflict, but the Spanish veterans defeated the inexperienced
37
hostility by the Kurfürsten for Wallenstein 153 as well as trepidation regarding Ferdinand’s motives. Ferdinand
sought the election of Ferdinand, his eldest son [Crown Prince Ferdinand (1608–r 1637 as Ferdinand III–
1657)] as King of the Romans as well as increased support from the HRE for Spanish Habsburg efforts in the
Low Countries. Realizing that some Kurfürsten were willing to turn to France, Ferdinand acceded to their
demand for the dismissal of his general. In August Wallenstein resigned at the request of the Kaiser, and Tilly
was given command of a greatly reduced Imperial army. The Edict of Restitution was, in effect, cancelled
although the Kaiser did not rescind the decree. For this, Ferdinand received nothing; both of his requests
were denied. Thus, the Empire lost 30,000 veteran troops and the only general capable of raising and
supporting another large army. Ironically, the resignation occurred just as the Swedish king was landing in
Germany.
The initial Swedish invasion force was small, only 13,000 strong. Following debarkation, the Swedish king
ordered his troops to dig in. He then expanded his beachhead by occupying Rügen and the surrounding area.
Leslie was ordered to send an army southward from Stralsund; and a force under Johan Banèr (1596–1641),
including half of Reay’s Regiment, was then sent northward. Reay’s Regiment re-joined the main Swedish
army which lay before Stettin, a harbor-city of major importance situated at the mouth of the Oder River.
Bogislaw XIV, Herzog von Pommern 154 (1580–1637), attempted to avoid becoming embroiled, but GA made
it clear that he wanted the city. Following a parley between Bogislaw and GA, the Herzog rode back to the
city. While the drawbridge was down, a company of Scots from Reay’s Regiment seized the gate. Because of
the complete surprise gained by the Scots, there was no organized resistance. 155 In addition to his tiny army,
GA had 6000 troops under Leslie in Stralsund and 50,000 troops in garrisons in Sweden, Finland and
Prussia; Finnish and Swedish troops made up approximately one-half of his army and the remainder was
composed primarily of Scottish and German mercenaries. 156 By the end of July 1630, the Pomeranian coast
between Stralsund and Stettin was in Swedish hands.
As the result of a fortunate accident, a large segment of Hinter-Pommern came under Swedish control. Six
companies of Reay’s Regiment, under RM, had been stationed in Braunsberg in Prussia for nearly a year
following their joining Swedish service. In August 1630 the unit was ordered to re-join the main body of the
regiment at Stettin. En route, one of the boats foundered off the Pomeranian coast near Kolberg, and nearly
200 men landed with only themselves, their ‘swords, pikes and some wet muskets.’ 157 The Scots surprised the
town of Rügenwald and obtained fresh powder and ammunition. They held the town for nine weeks until GA
sent Hepburn’s Scottish regiment to relieve them. This force then joined with a Swedish regiment under
Colonel William Mackay plus the rest of Reay’s Regiment 158 and marched to join Swedish forces besieging
French. Richelieu turned to diplomatic means and secured the election of the pro-French Duke of Nevers to the
Duchy. By the peace of Cherasco (19 June 1631), Nevers received Mantua and Montferrat as his fief and the
Imperial forces were forced to evacuate the Val Telline.
153
Wallenstein was made Herzog zu Mecklenburg in May 1629. The general had, by his elevation to princely status, aroused the
animosity of the Kurfürsten.
154
Vor- and Hinter-Pommern: Pomerania, west of and to the east of the Oder River, with Stettin as the capital.
155
SweInt 1:55–56.
156
Droysen, Gustav Adolf, 2:85.
157
Expedition II:15.
158
Mackay, ‘Mackay’s Regiment’, 103.
38
Kolberg. On 13 November an Imperial relief force under [Count Raimondo] Montecucculi (1609–1680)159
was defeated, resulting in the capitulation of Kolberg. 160 By the end of 1630, GA commanded of most of the
Pomeranian coast. Bogislaw had been forced to contribute 200,000 thalers to the Swedish war-effort, thereby
alleviating some of the Swedish monarch’s monetary woes. The Dukes of Mecklenburg, having lost their
land to Wallenstein, rallied to the Swedish cause, as did Christian Wilhelm von Brandenburg (1587–1665), 161
and Landgraf Wilhelm V of Hesse-Kassel (Landgrafschaft Hessen-Kassel).
Still, the major problem of financial support for GA’s army was not solved. Fortunately for him France and
Sweden shared certain strategic goals. France, which was virtually encircled by Habsburg territories, could
expand only at the expense of the Habsburgs. Heretofore, internal religious wars had kept France from
actively combating Habsburg encirclement. Only in 1630, following the subjugation of the Huguenots, did
France moved overtly against the Habsburgs. Under Richelieu’s guidance France engaged in political
subversion of Habsburg authority, either by subsidy of those rulers or states which opposed to the Habsburgs,
or by secretly supporting those countries actively engaged in warfare with the family. It was this latter type of
aid which brought about the Truce of Altmark between Poland and Sweden and which allowed Sweden to
invade the HRE. Then, on 23 January 1631, at Bärwalde, Sweden and France concluded a treaty by which
the GA agreed to raise and maintain an army of 30,000 infantry and 6000 cavalry in the HRE in return for a
French subsidy of 400,000 thalers per year. 162 The liberation of northern Germany and the Baltic coastline
from the Imperioal yoke was the proclaimed goal of the treaty. Catholic worship was to be tolerated in all
areas conquered by the Swedes. The greatest advantage gained by Sweden in the treaty was the open
acknowledgment of French support for Sweden. 163
With this support, GA was ready to expand his bridgehead. The Swedish army left their quarters at Stettin in
late January 1631, with most of the army marching to Landsberg, while 8000 troops under GA attacked Neu
Brandenburg. The first assault was led by a body of Highlanders and was successful in capturing some of the
outworks. The defenders then agreed to surrender and marched out. 164 A small garrison of 1000 men,
including approximately 500 Scots, was left in the town, and the King marched into Mecklenburg. Upon the
departure of the Swedish king and his army, Neu Brandenburg was surrounded by Tilly’s army of 22,000
men. The defenders, however, refused to surrender although the town was ill-prepared for defense. On 19
March, after nine days of artillery bombardment, Tilly’s army began the attack and soon conquered the town.
Quarter was at first refused and most of the Scottish defenders were slaughtered. Two officers and some men
survived and escaped to bring the news to Sir John Hepburn, the commander of the newly formed Green
Brigade. The news infuriated the Scots, and they determined to seek revenge at the first opportunity. That
159
160
161
Montecucculi was an Italian Field-Marshal in Imperial service. After distinguishing himself in the Thirty Years’ War, he was sent
to Hungary to take the field against the Turks. His victory at Szentgotthard (1664) was the first major setback for the Turks in
Hungary. In the German Wars (1672–1678) he commanded Imperial forces with success. As reward for his services, he was made
a prince of the HRE.
SweInt 1:65–67.
Christian Wilhelm von Brandenburg was ‘the Protestant administrator of the archbishopric of Magdeburg, [and] hoped to regain
with Swedish help the office [of] which he had been deprived by the Edict of Restitution. The city of Magdeburg was the key
fortress which dominated the line of the river Elbe and laid open the roads into Lower Saxony and Thuringia; it was at once
placed under a Swedish governor.’ Steinberg, European Hegemony, 54.
162
Friedrich, Baroque, 180.
163
Kellenbenz, ‘Hamburg und die französisch-schwedische Zusammenarbeit’ in ZVHG 49/50:84–85.
164
Fischer, Scots in Sweden, 91–93.
39
opportunity came at Frankfurt a.d. Oder on Palm Sunday (13 April ) 1631. 165 The town was defended by
nearly 6000 men under the Counts [Friedrich Hermann, 1st Duke of (1615–1690) Schomberg and
Montecucculi, whereas the Swedish army numbered 14,000 men. GA ordered his artillery to fire a salvo and,
under the smoke and confusion thereby provided, a general assault was launched. The Scots, who formed the
vanguard, were under heavy fire from the outset. Although suffering many casualties, they were able to carry
the main gate and to enter the fortress. Twice, the defenders called for a parley, but the Scots paid no heed
and took their revenge, killing 1700 of the defenders and taking over 1000 prisoners with a tremendous
amount of booty.166
After the capture of Frankfurt a.d. Oder, the Swedish army moved westward through Brandenburg to Berlin.
GA halted his army there and negotiated with his brother-in-law, Kurfürst Georg Wilhelm for the fortress of
Spandau. While the King negotiated, the Liga army under Tilly and [Gottfried Heinrich] Graf [Count] zu
Pappenheim (1594–1632) stormed, sacked, and destroyed the Protestant city of Magdeburg. 167 The Swedish
army had been too small to prevent the loss of the city, and GA could only move his disease-weakened army
further westward to Werben. There he set up a fortified camp and began to rebuild his army. Tilly attacked
the fortifications in June but was forced to fall back, leaving 6000 dead and wounded out of an attacking
force of 22,000.168 Tilly’s failure to dislodge the Swedes from Werben then forced him to invade Saxony, for
Mecklenburg was too ravaged to support both the Swedish and Liga armies. This in turn led Kurfürst Johann
Georg to seek an alliance with Sweden in order to protect his country from the looting soldiers of Tilly. The
alliance between Saxony and Sweden added 20,000 soldiers to the size of the Swedish army. GA realized that
he then had an army large enough to give battle to Tilly.
Meanwhile, an English-Scottish army of 6000 men under the Marquis of Hamilton was in the final stages of
preparation for embarkation for Germany. This army had been commissioned by GA in May 1630, 169 but no
action had been taken until March of 1631. Leslie had been sent by the Swedish king to Scotland to aid in the
levying of the troops, but he recruited only 400 men. 170 Charles then interceded and ordered the sheriffs of all
shires to round up all vagrants and send them to the mustering places. By July 1631, Hamilton raised his
army of 6000, although only 1000 were Scots and few of the total were volunteers. These soldiers were
landed at Wolgast on 21 August 1631 and were ordered to campaign in Mecklenburg. 171 Hamilton, an
‘incapable officer [who was] very conscious of standing,’ 172 lost over 2000 soldiers to disease and desertion
within six weeks.173 He had, at least, forced Tilly to send some forces northward, forces that the Liga general
could ill-afford to lose because the main Swedish army was growing steadily stronger.
At Breitenfeld on 7/17 September 1631, the Swedish King, the student of Maurits van Nassau, met Tilly, the
pupil of [Alexander Farnese; Alessandro Farnese (It); Alejandro Farnesio (Sp), Duke of] Parma [and
165
Expedition II:24.
166
Expedition II:25.
167
See Usinger, ‘Die Zerstörung Magdeburgs’ in HZ 13:378–405.
168
Montross, War, 274.
169
Naylor, Military History of Germany, 1:530.
170
Fischer, Scots in Germany, 91.
171
Droysen, Gustaf Adolf, II:263
172
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:439.
173
Berg & Lagercrantz, Scots in Sweden, 33.
40
Piacenza (1545–1592)]. The two armies were fairly even in numbers at the outset of the battle, with each side
having approximately 35,000 men. There were several factors that could have won the battle for either side.
Tilly had the advantage of the wind and the sun, for both were in the faces of the Swedes. Why this was a
disadvantage can be explained thusly. First, if the sun were in the eyes of one group, it would be harder for
them to detect movements by their opponents, or to aim the weapons. The most important factor was the
wind because ‘it drove the dense smoke on them … [and frustrated efforts] in priming their pieces. This had
to be done with the finest of meal powder, and was almost impossible when facing the wind.’ 174 Then too, the
Swedish allies, the Saxons, untested on the battlefield, were subject to panic if pressed too fiercely. The
major advantage held by the Swedes was their battle formation – which gave mobility to the troops that was
unheard of in that day and time. The Swedish artillery superiority was also a factor in favor of the Swedes.
GA drew up his army of 22,000 men in two lines with a reserve behind the center. The infantry was formed
into the battle formations, the brigades, in ranks of six deep. They were positioned far enough apart so that a
squadron of cavalry could operate between each brigade. Twelve regiments of cavalry were stationed on the
right flank and six others on the left. The Green Brigade was in the second line and was located on the
extreme left of the infantry line. The Saxon army, 16,000 strong, was positioned to the left of the Swedish
army and was drawn up in tercios. The Swedes had almost 100 cannon, these being placed in front of the
troops. Tilly drew up his 35,000 troops in the traditional Spanish manner. His tercios averaged 1500 men
apiece, and, like the Swedes, these squares were arranged in two lines. The cavalry was posted on both
wings, the artillery in front of the troops. The Liga army was further favored by having a downward sloping
hill in front of them.
At noon the Swedish cannon opened fire and were soon firing at a rate of almost three shots to one shot for
Tilly’s cannon. The Liga army soon became restless because of the heavy pounding that they were taking and
both wings of cavalry charged. The Croats on the right wing were immediately successful and drove the
Saxons from the field. The cuirassiers of Pappenheim, however, were not as fortunate, for the mobile
Swedish forces stopped every attack. Pappenheim’s seventh attempt served only to break his forces, and the
survivors took to flight.175 Meanwhile, the tercios of Tilly moved to take advantage of the uncovered Swedish
left flank. There, as on the Swedish right, the maneuverability of the Swedish brigade demonstrated its value,
for the Green Brigade wheeled left and to take position perpendicular to the original front, thus presenting an
unbroken front to Tilly. The musketeers then closed together to form only three ranks and fired volleys into
the advancing tercios.176 The Scots, charging into the Liga forces, disorganizing them thoroughly. GA ordered
his cavalry on the right flank to charge since, by then, Pappenheim’s cavalry had left the field. The path of
the charge lay parallel to the original Swedish battle line and in a direct line with the left flank of the Liga
army. The attack shattered Tilly’s army, and his veterans fled the field. Tilly’s army suffered 12,000
casualties and 7000 others surrendered, whereas the Swedes lost only 2100 men.
174
Spaulding, Warfare, 470.
175
Delbrück, Kriegskunst, IV:236–238
176
Such concentrated firepower was new to the battlefield for, prior to this battle, only a small proportion of the men in the ranks
had been able to fire at one time. Turner, Pallas Armata, 237. See also Expedition II:66–70.
41
Following the battle, the Scots regrouped by beating the ‘Scots march’ on the drum. 177 The number of
casualties was noted, and Monro asked GA to let him recruit all English soldiers from the ranks of the
captured. He found only three Britons, all Irish, and these he declined to take. 178 GA later praised the valor of
the Scots in the presence of his entire army and promised them ‘noble rewards’. 179 Colonel James Ramsay
who commanded three regiments at Breitenfeld and had been severely wounded was rewarded with a grant
of land in Mecklenburg and the governorship of Hanau for his bravery. 180 After the battle Leipzig was retaken
and restored to Kurfürst Johann Georg. After resting his army for a few days, GA marched southward
towards Würzburg. After passing through the Thüringen Forest, the Swedish army drew up before the city of
Würzburg and demanded its surrender. The city capitulated on 6 October 1631, after Father Ogilvie a priest
in a Scottish cloister in the city, negotiated a treaty with the Swedish king. 181 The Catholic lords and bishops
of Franconia had stored most of their valuables in the supposedly impregnable Festung Marienberg, thus
making it a tempting target for GA. The only direct way to the castle was via a bridge with one arch
destroyed, so the king decided to circumvent this by sending a force across the river in boats. Colonels James
Ramsay182 and John Hamilton and their Scottish troops were to cross the river and attack while covering fire
was to be provided by another Scottish force that was to cross the bridge – using a plank to bridge the gap –
and then attack the outworks of the castle. After fighting until nightfall, the Scots had almost succeeded in
capturing the castle. However, GA called the Scots back and ordered his Swedish troops to finish the storm
on the following morning, thereby denying the Scots the privilege of looting the stormed fortress. Disgusted
by the king’s treatment of the Scots, Hamilton resigned and returned to Scotland. 183
Following the capture of Marienberg, the Swedish army marched westward toward the Rhine and the socalled ‘priests’ alley’ or Pfaffengasse. On 27 November, Frankfurt a. Main was taken, and Mainz was
surrendered to the king shortly thereafter. When GA went into winter quarters, he was in command of an
army of 108,000 men. He had 18,000 on the Rhine with him, 20,000 on the Main, 8000 in Hesse, 13,000 on
the Elbe, 17,000 in Mecklenburg, 20,000 in Bohemia, and 12,000 in various garrisons throughout territory
under his control.184 In order to support his army, he demanded and received a Kontribution from each city in
the area that he controlled. While the main Swedish army moved through south Germany, the Saxon army,
now commanded by Arnim (formerly a general in Wallenstein’s army), and the army of the Marquis of
Hamilton marched toward Bohemia. The Saxons, after their precipitous flight at Breitenfeld, were anxious to
regain their honor. Their first target was Lusatia, which was swiftly reduced. In the months of November and
December, the Saxon army captured the Bohemian cities of Prague, Eger and Budweis, after which they
returned to Dresden. In conjunction with the Saxon army, Hamilton and Leslie moved into Lusatia, then
177
This ‘Scots March’ is described by Grant, Hepburn, 106, thusly: ‘This old national air, which was the terror of the Spaniards in
Holland, and of the Austrians in Germany –– so much so that it was frequently beaten by the drums of the Germans at night when
they wished to keep their quarters unmolested, was first composed for the ancient guard of James V, when marching to attack the
castle of Tantallon in 1527.’
178
Expedition II:73.
179
Expedition II:66.
180
Dalrymple, Life of Sir James Ramsay, 2–4.
181
Grant, Hepburn, 116.
182
Same as the above mentioned Ramsay, so I guess he was not as severely wounded at Breitenfeld as indicated. After
Würzburg, however, he did no more campaigning.
183
SweInt 2:13–14.
184
Montross, War, 280.
42
turned northward and entered Silesia with an English-Scottish German army of 3000 men. After many
marches, the army returned to Magdeburg in December, much reduced in size due to disease and desertion.
By February 1632, there were only 700 soldiers left in the army, and these were merged into other units. 185
Hamilton was not given another command, and he joined the King’s personal guard. In September 1632,
following the battles at Nürnberg, he returned to Scotland.
GA planned to increase his army by an extra 120,000 men, but a new competitor for troops arose in
December 1631 – Wallenstein. After his forced retirement in 1630, Wallenstein had returned to his estates
and had taken no part in the war, even refusing to supply Tilly with the products of his estates. 186 After
Breitenfeld, the Kaiser Ferdinand realized that his dismissed general was vital to the war effort and
endeavored to get him to return. Wallenstein finally agreed to raise an army but would not lead it. The call
went out and men from everywhere came, ‘from sunny Italy, from hardy Scotland, from every German land
between the Baltic and the Alps. Protestants and Catholics alike were welcomed there.’ 187 In April 1632, he
finally agreed to lead the army after Ferdinand had acquiesced to all of his demands. The actual terms that
the Kaiser was forced to accept will probably never be known; but, in light of subsequent events, it may be
presumed that Wallenstein had absolute control over his army – even to the point of appointing all officers
and making treaties without conferring with the Kaiser.
The presence of the powerful Swedish army in the Pfaffengasse alarmed Richelieu. All of Thuringia,
Franconia, much of the Rhineland and the lower Palatinate, and many bishoprics had fallen to the triumphant
Swedish army. Trier and Cologne requested French garrisons in order to prevent the Protestants from
overrunning the lower Rhine and the Mosel regions. France had acquiesced to the treaty of Bärwalde, never
expecting that Sweden would advance into Catholic southern Germany as rapidly as she had. Kurfürst
Maximilian (as of 1623) had been a secret ally of France; but, seeing that Richelieu was not going to aid him,
he turned to the Kaiser. Thus, GA was provided with a reason for invading Bavaria. 188 In March 1632 the
Swedish army left their winter quarters in the Rhine Valley and marched to Frankfort a. Main with the Scots
Brigade as the vanguard. 189 From there they moved to Aschaffenburg and then to Windsheim where the army
was reviewed by Friedrich and GA. Friedrich was especially interested ‘in the Scottish troops, they being the
countrymen of Elizabeth, his beautiful and high-spirited Queen.’ 190 On 5 April 1632, the Swedish army drew
up before Donauwörth. A German regiment was ordered to lead the storm and it advanced beating the Scots
March, hoping to frighten the defenders. The defenders were not deterred and charged, causing the Germans
to fall back in disorder. ‘Had it not been for the valor of the Scots Brigade, they would have all been lost and
defeated.’191 The city was shortly thereafter taken and the army rested for four days. The Swedish army then
marched on München/Munich. The Lech River was crossed, despite a desperate defense organized by Tilly,
in which the Liga Army suffered 3000 casualties in addition to the loss of the seventy-three year old Tilly. On
185
Berg & Lagercrantz, Scots in Sweden, 33–36.
186
Ernstberger, ‘Wallensteins Herressabotage’ in HZ:142, 41–72.
187
Gardiner, Thirty Years War, 152.
188
Wedgwood, Thirty Years War, 300–301.
189
Expedition II:115.
190
Mackay, ‘Mackay’s’ in TGSI, 173.
191
Expedition II:115.
43
17 May, GA entered München, with the Green Brigade being given the honor of entering the city first. It was
also assigned the duty of being the king’s personal bodyguard while he stayed there. 192
While GA marched through Bavaria, Wallenstein began his movements. On 25 May his army retook Prague
while the Saxon army under Arnim retreated into Silesia. This action greatly perturbed GA because he was
counting on Arnim holding Bohemia and keeping Wallenstein occupied and away from Swedish lines of
communication. Arnim did not follow his instructions and the Swedish king was forced to retreat, Following
the recapture of Prague, Wallenstein advanced toward [Nuremberg] Nürnberg thereby threatening GA’s
supply line. This strategy forced GA’s withdrawal from Bavaria, but the Swedish king marched only as far
north as Nürnberg where he prepared to offer battle to the Imperial forces. After his arrival on 20 June 1632,
he outlined his plan for peace in Germany: ‘the Protestant princes should unite in a general union with
Sweden after dissolving their bonds with the Empire.’ 193 This plan was unfavorably met by all parties except
the Riksrådet, [the Swedish Council of the Realm]. At the same time, GA called together his scattered forces.
When Wallenstein arrived near Nürnberg on June 30, the two great generals were finally face to face.
When Wallenstein arrived, he had approximately 45,000 soldiers as apposed to 18,000 for GA. Despite his
numerical superiority, it was not the intention of the Imperial general to fight, for he did not want to risk his
untried troops in battle. Instead, he had his men dig in around the two hills of the Altenberg and the Alte
Feste. His cavalry was sent out to scour the countryside and to sweep it bare. Meanwhile, reinforcements for
the king continued to arrive – two Scottish regiments and five Saxon regiments under the Swedish RiksChancellor Axel [Gustafsson] Oxenstierna [af Södermöre, Count of Södermöre] Oxenstierna (1583–1654)
arrived on 10 August, and the 8000 troops of Bernhard von Sachsen-Weimar (1604–1639) [Bernhard von
Weimar] came soon afterwards.194 By the end of July, GA had 35,000 soldiers in his camp, but Wallenstein
still would not leave his fortifications. Both armies began to lose heavily to disease an desertion, but each
was waiting for the other to move. In August, the first engagement of any size was fought. A strong force of
Germans, Scots and Irish sallied forth from the Imperial lines in order to attack a supply train of the Swedes.
The Swedes reacted quickly and counter-attacked, routing the Germans. Only 1000 Scots and Irish held
formation, and these fought their way back to the Imperial lines, although many of the initial force were
captured. Major Walter Leslie and Lieutenant-Colonel John Gordon, 195 who were among those captured,
spent the next eleven weeks with their fellow Scots before being allowed to return to the Imperial army after
having been released on orders of GA who praised the two Scots for their bravery. 196
On 28 July 1632, Hepburn declared that he would no longer fight for the King of Sweden. GA had made
sarcastic remarks about the fine armor and dress of Hepburn, thereby irritating the Scotsman. When the King
insulted Hepburn’s religion (Catholicism), the Scot promptly resigned. Other reasons for the resignation
could have been the ill-treatment of the Marquis of Hamilton (most Scots felt that Hamilton should have
been given another army after the first had disintegrated), the affair at Marienberg when the Scots had been
denied the final storm, and the mistreatment of a Lieutenant-Colonel [––] Douglas, who had been imprisoned
after appearing unannounced and uninvited at a tennis match between GA and the King of Bohemia.
192
Expedition II:125–126.
193
Friedrich, Baroque, 182.
194
SweInt ?:30–33.
195
Bulloch, ‘John Gordon’ in Banffshire (1916/1917), 20–28.
196
Bulloch, Gay Gordons, 34.
44
Command of the Green Brigade went to Lieutenant-Colonel RM, while Hepburn and Hamilton returned to
Scotland – Hamilton to return to politics and Hepburn to raise a regiment of Scots for French service. 197
Although his position was the weaker, GA still resolved to attack and set the date of the assault for 3
September 1632. The battle began on the morning of that day and lasted for almost two days. The Scots
Brigade, under Colonel RM,198 had the dubious distinction of leading the attack on the Alte Feste, the
strongest point in Wallenstein’s fortifications. For ten hours, the Scots struggled up the hill but made little
progress. The Swedes and Finns were sent into action; but, as before, Wallenstein’s line remained unbroken.
Night ended the action, but the troops remained where they were until the next morning when one final
attack was launched. GA then called off the attack, leaving 2000 dead on the field and bringing off 600
wounded. Most of these men had been his best assault troops. Wallenstein had suffered only 2500
casualties.199 After the abortive attempt on the Alte Feste, GA pulled his weary troops back into his camp.
The setback caused a deep drop in morale, and desertions immediately skyrocketed. Within fourteen days,
one-third of his strength was gone, and, on 18 September, he retreated to Neustadt and then southward.
Wallenstein, having out-waited his opponent by three days, moved northward into Saxony toward Leipzig. At
Dinkelsbühl, between Donauwörth and Rothenburg ob der Tauber, the Scots Brigade was ordered to remain
behind and to recuperate while the main body of the Swedish army pursued Wallenstein. The Brigade had
suffered grievously in the campaign of 1632, and its strength was down to seven companies (800 men). 200
Before the rest of the army, the Scots were thanked by the king. Then, GA began his march northward.
Wallenstein, encamped at Lützen near Leipzig, sent Pappenheim to Halle with part of the troops in order to
find better winter quarters. The news of the arrival of the Swedish army caught him completely by surprise,
but he reacted swiftly by sending word to Pappenheim to return as rapidly as possible. His army of 12,000
was then deployed in a strong defensive position, with the right flank resting on the town of Lützen and
protected by the artillery placed there. The infantry in the center was arranged into four tercios, and the
cavalry was divided into two wings, one on each flank. On the morning of 6/16 November 1632, the Swedish
army of 12,000 came onto the battlefield. The battle line was basically the same as that used at Breitenfeld,
sans the Saxons. The right wing was under the command of the king and the left was under Bernhard von
Weimar. There were few Scottish units present in the Swedish ranks since most, decimated by disease and
battle, had been combined with other units. Leslie’s Scottish brigade on the extreme left and Henderson’s
Brigade as a reserve brigade in the center were the only two Scottish units that were able to take part in the
battle,201 although there were many Scots in other brigades.
As the Swedish army advanced to attack, a heavy fog enveloped the field, reducing the visibility to only a
few feet. The left flank captured most of the Imperial cannon, but an Imperial counterattack forced them
back. The Green Brigade (newly constituted and consisting mostly of Germans, with some Scots) – a part of
the Swedish left flank – was forced back along with the other units, but it refused to break contact and
197
Charles authorized a levy of 1200 by Sir John Hepburn for French service on 3/28/1633, which was approved by the PCS on
4/24/1633. 2 RPCS 5:65.
198
Expedition II:148: on ‘eighteenth of August 1632, [GA] placed me Colonell over the Regiment.
199
Malleson, Battlefields of Germany, 76.
200
Expedition II:159.
201
Deutike, Schlacht, 72
45
retreat.202 The rest of the Imperial line, wavering, was about to collapse when the arrival of Pappenheim and
his 4000 cuirassiers stabilized the situation. However, Pappenheim was mortally wounded in the initial
attack, and his demoralized cavalrymen left the battlefield. It was shortly after Pappenheim’s attack had
restored the Imperial line that GA himself was killed. 203 While trying to regroup Swedish forces on his right,
the king, inadvertently charging into a group of Montecucculi’s cavalrymen, was shot and killed. The King’s
death at first demoralized the Swedish army, but then seemed to instill in them a desire to revenge the deed.
Bernhard von Weimar, although wounded, led a charge on the left flank, recaptured the Imperial cannon
again and turned them on Wallenstein’s forces. Imperial forces could not retake the guns and retreated to
Leipzig, and from there, to Bohemia. The Swedish army withdrew southward to Swabia. The Swedish army
suffered about 10,000 casualties while inflicting about 12,000 on the Imperial army.
202
203
Seidler, Schlacht bei Lützen, 63.
Seidler, Schlacht bei Lützen, 64. There are many conflicting accounts of the time and place of the death of the Swedish King.
Seidler presented the best account based on the latest data and this writer has used him as the authority. Seidler states that GA was
killed by some of Montecucculi’s cavalrymen. The time was given as shortly after noon and the place was on the right flank of
the Swedish army. Seidler was the main source for the account of the battle.
46
CHAPTER IV: The End of the Thirty Years’ War {74}
With the death of GA, the crown of Sweden passed to his six-year-old daughter, Kristina Augusta (1626–r
1632–1689); but real power of the government remained in the hands of Oxenstierna, the capable chancellor
of the slain monarch and director of GA’s foreign policy. Oxenstierna wanted to continue the policies of his
late master by continuing the war against the Habsburgs. His task was made far more difficult by a
threatened collapse of the Swedish alliance and subsidy system. As the news of the death of GA spread,
Kurfürst Georg Wilhelm, Kurfürst Johann Georg and many other rulers in Germany hesitated to continue. In
addition to this, Kong Christian ‘offered to mediate a general peace in the Empire’, although few took him
very seriously.204 In an effort to forestall a peace movement, Oxenstierna negotiated separately with each
ruler. The son of the Kurfürst Georg Wilhelm was promised the hand of the young Queen Kristina, thereby
pacifying him with an illusion of a future Swedish-Brandenburg superpower. 205 The petty diplomatic attempts
by the ruler of Saxony to assume the role of Protestant leader and to become the head of a ‘peace party’ were
circumvented by a meeting of significant Protestant leaders at Heilbronn in March 1633. The conference,
which Kurfürst Johann Georg boycotted, subsequently resulted in the formation of a coalition for the
protection of its members – Franconia, Swabia, the upper Rhenish and electoral Reichkreise [Imperial
Circles],206 and Brandenburg – from Imperial aggression. The League of Heilbronn, as it was called, was led
by Sweden, with France recognized as a joint protector. By these actions Sweden assured herself of a
dominant role in actions taken in the HRE regarding Habsburg policy in the post-GA era. 207
The deterioration of the Swedish army following the death of GA posed an equally serious problem. The
inability of the Swedish government to pay its mercenaries regularly had caused trouble even in the lifetime
of the Swedish monarch. With his death, and without his persona, conditions for Swedish troops worsened as
the collapse of the Swedish subsidy system, based to a large extent upon ‘contributions’ from Protestant
allies, made satisfying either the military entrepreneurs or their men almost impossible. Resentment over the
non-payment of wages and arrears manifested itself in a mutiny by a group of German officers in the spring
of 1633. The officers declared that they would ‘refuse to obey further orders, unless satisfied within a stated
period of time. If not satisfied then, they would act on their own account, occupy conquered territory, and
hold it as a pawn until the army was paid in full.’ 208 Because most lesser-ranking Swedish and Scottish
officers refused to participate in the mutiny – supporting instead Generals [Count] Gustav Horn [af
Björneborg] (1592–1657)209 and Bernhard von Weimar – the revolt collapsed. Wage settlements were made
204
205
206
Wedgwood, Thirty Years’ War, 338.
She never married, but her situation was normal for the time: she was viewed as but a pawn in Realpolitik.
A Reichskreis was a regional grouping of states in the HRE, created for organizational control and for raising
money. There were ten established by 1512.
207
Baustaedt, Richelieu und Deutschland in HS 295:90–110.
208
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:506.
209
See Hackradt, Horn.
47
with the mutineers by granting them land in territory under Swedish control and letting them use the
revenues to deal with their own men. 210
The Swedish position in south Germany was further complicated by the jealousy and animosity between the
two Swedish army commanders – Bernhard von Weimar and Horn – and their refusal to work together.
Bernard von Weimar, a prince of the blood, demanded overall command of the Swedish army as his right;
whereas Horn, a Swedish general of long tenure, felt that the highest rank should be reserved for him due to
his length of service. Because of this rivalry, the two obviously could not serve in the same army;
Oxenstierna’s solution was to give each an independent command, the former in Bavaria and the latter in
Swabia. The Scottish regiment that GA had left in Swabia [RM’s] was placed, first under the command of
Bernhard von Weimar then later under Horn. It was ordered to patrol the Danube Valley and surrounding
areas and to occupy as many posts as possible. Monro’s Regiment, as Reay’s Regiment was now called, was
combined with the remnants of the regiment of Monro of Obsdale and other Scottish units, to form a unit of
fighting strength. In mid-1633 RM returned home to raise more cannon-fodder. His recruits, and those of
other Scottish military entrepreneurs, were sent from time to time throughout 1633 until, by 1634, the
regiment was brought up to full strength – about 2000 men. 211
At the same time that the Swedish army was undergoing changes in composition and morale, the Imperial
army was also in transition. Following Lützen, Wallenstein retreated into Bohemia to rebuild his army.
Believing that many of his officers had shown spinelessness at Lützen, thereby costing him the battle, the
Imperial general convened the ‘Bloody Judgment of Prague’ at which a number of his officers and men were
condemned and executed for their alleged cowardice. This act cost him the allegiance of many of his
officers.212 Wallenstein also refrained from involving his army in any active prosecution of the war, thereby
planting a seed of doubt in the mind of the Kaiser as to the real intentions of his general. By the end of 1633
Wallenstein had only accomplished the liberation of Silesia from the Swedes; but, on the other hand, he had
allowed Regensburg to fall to Bernhard von Weimar. Ferdinand then ordered Wallenstein to send 6000 troops
to Italy to aid [Don Fernando de Austria/Ferdinand von Österreich], the Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand
[Cardenal-Infante Fernando de España] (1609/1610–1641), who was in the process of raising an army for
service against the Dutch Republic. The general was also ordered to recapture Regensburg. Wallenstein
refused to do either. Instead he summoned his officers to Plzeň (11–13 January 1634) and declared that he
would resign his command before doing as the Kaiser ordered. His officers requested that he remain and
swore allegiance to him alone.
The Kaiser then acted to negate the machinations of his general, relieving Wallenstein of his command on 24
January 1634. In early February Ferdinand declared his former commander guilty of high treason. The
general, aware that most of the officers who had sworn allegiance to him had deserted him, attempted to
escape. On 23 February, he left Plzeň and journeyed to Cheb [Eger] on the River Ohře in order to effect a
meeting with representatives of Saxony [probably from Arnim, his former subordinate]. En route Wallenstein
encountered an Imperial dragoon regiment under Irishman Colonel Walter Butler and ordered the regiment to
follow him. The town of Eger was opened to him by the Scottish officers, Lieutenant-Colonel John Gordon
210
Ritter, Deutsche Geschichte, 3:554–556.
211
OSB 179.
212
Srbik, Wallensteins Ende, 200. Accounts of Wallenstein’s last days may be found in: von Ranke, Geschichte Wallensteins; Srbik;
and von Hurter, Wallensteins vier letzte Lebensjahre.
48
and Major Walter Leslie, who were in charge of the city. The three Britons knew that Wallenstein was a
fugitive and conspired to assassinate him, thinking that they would be well rewarded. On the night of 24/25
February, the three officers and six Irish Dragoons cut down Wallenstein’s friends; Captain Deveroux, an
Irishman, broke into Wallenstein’s bedroom and killed the general. As the conspirators had hoped, their
efforts were well rewarded. Gordon, for example, used this exploit as a stepping stone to higher positions,
eventually gaining the rank of Colonel-General of the Imperial army, attaining the rank of Marquis, and
becoming the bearer of the golden key as High Chamberlain to the Kaiser. 213 With Wallenstein’s removal
command of the Imperial Army was given to Austrian Habsburg Crown Prince Ferdinand and to General
Matthias Gallas [Matthias di Gallasso] (1588–1647) [Graf von Gallas zum Schloß Campo und
Freyenthurn].214
During the summer of 1634, Swedish forces continued to ravage Catholic areas of southern Germany
although renewed Imperial activity threatened to undermine their position. Bernhard von Weimar’s army was
hindered by an outbreak of the plague; but Horn was active in the area near Lake Constance, besieging
Überlingen in an effort to close the route that the Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand and his newly-raised forces
would have to take in order to reach the Low Countries. When the Imperial army under the Crown Prince
Ferdinand besieged Regensburg, Horn raised his siege of Überlingen and marched northward. He and
Bernard von Weimar joined forces and marched to relieve Regensburg; but the city fell on 29 July, two days
before their arrival. The Swedish commanders again separated their armies. The crown prince then moved
against Nördlingen, the most heavily fortified Protestant city in Swabia. This move by the Imperial Amy
forced Bernhard von Weimar and Horn to unite their armies once again, this time to relieve Nördlingen. The
combined Swedish force of 20,000 men arrived in the vicinity on 22 August 1634. 215 The Scottish regiment,
under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel William Stewart marched with the wing of Bernhard von
Weimar.216
In the Battle of Nördlingen (27 August/6 September 1634) the Swedish combined force was completely
overwhelmed by superior Imperial forces. The Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand, on his way from Milan to the
Spanish Netherlands with an army of 17,000 men, united his army with that of his cousin, Crown Prince
Ferdinand, forming an army of 36,000 men. Initially, by taking advantage of a strong natural position south
of the city, the Imperial-Spanish army stood on the defensive. Even though outnumbered, the Swedish
tactical plan called for Horn to attack the Imperial right while Bernard von Weimar pinned the Imperial left
and prevented any shifting of forces. Despite the bravery of Swedish troops, the Imperial-Spanish army
repulsed the poorly conceived attack. Because of the exhaustion of his men, Horn attempted to withdraw
from his untenable position, but Habsburg forces maintained contact at the Swedish rear. Simultaneously,
Habsburg attacks on Bernard’s position routed the Swedish-German right. Those troops then wheeled into
213
214
215
216
Bulloch, ‘John Gordon’ in Banffshire (1916/1917), 20–28. See also Dudik, Schweden in Böhmen und Mähren, 88 & 100.
Gallas managed to lose every army entrusted to him although he was rarely engaged in battle, thus earning for
himself the title Heerverderber (army destroyer). According to Cust, Warriors of the Thirty Years’ War, I:381, a
medal was struck in Hamburg in 1645 to commemorate the ineptitude of Gallas. The medal had the inscription ‘A
succinct narrative of the distinguished achievements of von Gallas in Holstein’. The obverse bore his effigy and the
reverse was left perfectly smooth and without any legend.
Struck, Schlacht bei Nördlingen, 41–45.
Expedition II:180. Stewart, brother of the Earl of Traquair, commanded the regiment from August 1633 to August 1634. In
March and April of 1634, Colonel Patrick Ruthven also returned to Britain in order to raise troops but was unsuccessful in raising
many. – Frankland to R. Harvey (20 March 1634). CSPD 16/278/20.
49
Horn’s flank and virtually annihilated his entire wing, killing over 6000 Swedish infantry and capturing Horn
in the process. Fully half of the officers were killed, and the rest of the army was captured or scattered. The
catastrophe was reported to London in the dourest of terms: ‘scarce 200 of the whole Scottish brigade left’ …
‘Colonel Ramsay’s regiment is quite cut off – a captain and two under officers are only left of it’ … of
24,000 men there are only 9000 left. 217 When Bernard von Weimar mustered Swedish forces on 27
September at Frankfurt a. Main, only 11,000 men out of the whole army were present. RM’s regiment of
2000 men was so crippled that it never acted again as a separate unit as scarcely 400 Scots rejoined their unit.
RM himself wrote that the regiment was ‘reduced after the Battaile of Nerling, to one Company in
September 1634 at Wormes in the Paltz.’ 218 Habsburg losses were light, with but 1200 casualties of 36,000
engaged.219 The Swedish army – at that moment completely demoralized and unfit for combat – could only
regroup.220 The remnants of two Swedish armies retreated to central Germany to raise new recruits and to
await reinforcements from Sweden and Scotland.
With the defeat at Nördlingen, most of southwestern Germany was left in a political and military vacuum, a
situation for which Richelieu had been preparing. Even before the battle, he had authorized the hiring of
more foreign mercenaries in order to increase the size of the French army at a more rapid rate. The Scottish
regiment of Colonel George, Lord Gordon (k 1645), was moved its position on the Italian frontier to Lorraine
in order to serve under the Marshal [Jacques-Nompar de Caumont, duc] de la Force (1558–1652).221 Sir John
Hepburn raised a regiment of almost 2000 men in Scotland. The Regiment d’Hebron, as it was called, arrived
in France in August 1633 and was later sent to Lorraine. 222 Then, in 1633, Richelieu ordered French armies to
invade the Duchy of Lorraine. Following Nördlingen, Richelieu seized the opportunity to increase the French
sphere of influence farther into the HRE and ordered the French armies in Lorraine to advance into Alsace as
far as the Rhine River. One French army occupied forts and cities from Zabern/Saverne to Mannheim, while
a second army occupied the left bank of the Rhine from Basel to Zabern. 223 Another French army crossed the
Rhine at Mannheim, joined with the army of Bernard von Weimar, and relieved the city of Heidelberg on 22
December 1634. On 27 October 1635 Bernhard von Weimar joined the French service, and all of his troops
were taken into the pay of France. In late December the soldiers of the Marshal de la Force, Hepburn and
Bernard von Weimar were brought together. At that time, all Scottish units in French service were united
under Hepburn and formed into an over-large unit composed of some 8000 men, although it was still called
the Regiment d’Hebron.224 This composite was formed by the remnants of many of the old regiments, ‘... the
Bohemian bands of Sir Andrew Gray, all the Scottish regiments of Gustavus, and even the Scottish Archer
Guard of the French kings....’225 Hepburn, however, did not command the regiment for long, as he was killed
217
John Durie to Sir Thomas Roe (8/18 September 1634) [English]. PROL SP 16/274/11.
218
Expedition title page.
219
Struck, Schlacht bei Nördlingen, 72–89, and Fuchs, Schlacht bei Nördlingen, 120 –136.
220
Droysen, Bernhard von Weimar II:29.
221
Bulloch & Skelton, Gordons Under Arms, AUS 59:430.
222
223
Forbes-Leith, Scots Men-at-Arms, 1:430.
A humorous incident between Father Joseph and Sir John Hepburn occurred in December 1634. Father Joseph believed himself
to be well-versed in the art of war. He was talking with Hepburn about how easy it would be to take this city or that city –
pointing our each city on a map with his finger. After listening for a while, Hepburn interjected, ‘Go not so fast, good Father
Joseph, for, believe me, towns are not taken with a finger end.’ Grant, Hepburn, 228.
224
Mackay, 181.
225
Forbes-Leith, Scots Men-at-Arms, 212–213.
50
at Zabern on 28 June 1636. Under a new commander, Lord James Douglas, the regiment was renamed le
Regiment de Douglas.226 Thus, while the Swedish role in Germany had been significantly reduced, the French
role was correspondingly increased. 227
Following Nördlingen, most of Sweden’s former allies deserted her and entered into negotiations with the
Kaiser. The political disintegration of the Heilbronn League had been taking place throughout 1634, despite
Oxenstierna’s efforts to hold the alliance together. With Nördlingen, the Heilbronn League ceased to exist,
and Sweden was left to fend for herself. Kurfürst Johann Georg resurrected his peace proposals and won over
some of Sweden’s former allies. Kurfürst Georg Wilhelm deserted the Swedish cause when Swedish designs
on Pomerania became known. On 30 May 1635, most of the Protestant German principalities and states came
to terms with the Kaiser and signed the Peace of Prague, which favored the Habsburgs almost totally. The
authority of the Kaiser was assured by the prohibition of alliances between the various states of the HRE and
by providing for an Imperial army funded by the Reichskreise. The religious question was resolved by
reaffirming the doctrine of cuius regio, eius religio by implication, and, by similar implication, setting the
Edict of Restitution aside. ‘Ecclesiastical domains ... were to be divided on the actual possession at the time
of the Peace of Passau ... and, for those acquired after Passau, the date of 12 November 1627, should
serve....’228 There were certain exceptions: Bohemia and the Palatinate were not to be affected by the
religious clauses. Also, Calvinism was again refused recognition as a religion. Most of the larger states in
Germany accepted the Peace of Prague, these being:
Bavaria, Saxony, Brandenburg, Mainz, Cologne, Trier (after Spanish soldiers had kidnapped the
Francophile archbishop), the landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt, the dukes of Mecklenburg and some
imperial cities, including Lübeck, Frankfurt, and Ulm. However, it failed to achieve a general
pacification as its true intent only stiffened the determination of the anti-Habsburg powers: France,
Sweden, and the Netherlands.229
It appeared that there was to be, at long last, a genuine peace; but, nine days before the peace was signed,
France declared war on the Habsburgs, and the wars would go on for another thirteen years. What had begun
as a seemingly insignificant event in Prague in 1618 was about to become a continent-wide conflagration.
France had long been participating in the war, although not overtly. As has been noted, financial aid had been
given to Sweden for many years prior to the Peace of Prague. In addition to subverting Habsburg policies by
subsidy, Richelieu undermined the Habsburg policies by diplomacy. The French Cardinal strove to prevent
the Habsburgs from forming outside alliances and to prevent the Spanish Habsburgs from assisting the
Austrian Habsburgs and vice-versa. Furthermore, GA’s success in the HRE led him to re-evaluate his
position regarding outright intervention, for he no more wished success to the Swedes than he did to the
Habsburgs. Still, it was not until 25 February 1635 that Richelieu allied France with the Dutch Republic in an
offensive and defensive alliance – a clear attack on the Spanish Habsburgs. Sweden had, quite naturally, been
resentful of the minor role relegated to her by France, and negotiations for keeping a Swedish army in
Germany broke off in early 1635. Oxenstierna travelled to Paris in order to re-establish relations; and, on 28
226
Forbes-Leith, Scots Men-at-Arms, 214.
227
Baustaedt, Richelieu und Deutschland, 144–151.
228
Friedrich, Baroque, 188–189.
229
Steinberg, European Hegemony, 68–69.
51
February 1635, he agreed to the Treaty of Compiègne. France also concluded agreements with Savoy,
Mantua and Parma in July, thus presenting the Habsburgs with yet another front. Finally, Poland was
disengaged from the Imperial cause with the Truce of Stumsdorf on 12 September 1635. There still remained
problems with his alliance system, the most severe being the termination of alliances with many German
states which had been, at least tacitly, allied with France through the League of Heilbronn. In the end only
those cities along the Rhine remained faithful to their alliances.
Despite Richelieu’s preparations for an all-out war against the Habsburgs, the French military position in
1635–1636 was actually quite tenuous. Their position along the Rhine was weakened when Spanish troops
attacked Trier and rapidly subdued it and the surrounding area. The invasion of French-held territory in 1635
undertaken by Imperial and Spanish forces in the Spanish Netherlands was at first successful. Gallas stormed
Kaiserslautern and then marched to join the Duke of Lorraine. Meanwhile, the French army under Hepburn
and Cardinal [Louis de Nogaret de] la Valette (1593–1639) maneuvered in the area between Mainz and
Bingen in order to draw Imperial forces northward, but was forced to withdraw to Metz when Gallas ignored
their movements and moved to sever their line of communication with France. Near Boulay Gallas surprised
the French army, and only the discipline of the Scottish troops prevented complete disaster. 230 In conjunction
with the movements of Gallas, the Duke of Lorraine invaded Lorraine and launched attacks into Alsace as far
eastward as St. Mihiel before winter ended the campaign. Richelieu realized the necessity for a much larger
army and called for the formation of twenty-one new regiments in addition to the 90,000 troops stationed on
the various French borders.231
In 1636 Habsburg forces in the HRE and the Spanish Netherlands launched a two-pronged invasion of
France. The Cardinal-Infante Ferdinand commanded a combined Bavarian-Spanish army invading from the
Spanish Netherlands, and General Gallas commanded a united Imperial-Lorraine army invading from the
east. The Spanish army invaded Picardy, crossed the Somme and advanced to Amiens. Bavarian cavalry
under [Count Johann von] Werth (1591–1652), outdistanced the rest of the army, coming as close to Paris as
Compiègne. Gallas advanced almost as rapidly, occupying all of Franche-Comté before finally being held up
near Langres by Bernhard von Weimar. Finding himself unable to advance further, Gallas halted his army. In
November, as winter rains began, the Imperial general retreated, his army wasting away due to disease and
desertion. In the following year the French were able to regain the offensive. The army that Richelieu had
ordered raised was ready, and his extremely competent commanders, Bernhard von Weimar and [Henri de la
Tour d'Auvergne, Vicomte de] Turenne (1611–1675), pushed the invaders completely out of France. By
1638, the French armies were again on the Rhine; and in December of that year, Bernard von Weimar
captured the fortress-city of Breisach, 232 thereby cutting the Spanish supply line that ran from northern Italy
to the Netherlands via the Rhine. In July 1639, Bernhard von Weimar died, and with the exception of limited
French actions in the Black Forest and the French invasions of Bavaria in 1646 and 1647, significant military
activity in the HRE by France was ended as their major efforts were directed at Spanish forces in the Low
Countries and in Italy.233
230
Grant, Scottish Soldiers of Fortune, 282–284.
231
Baustaedt, Richelieu und Deutschland, 154–160. Others TBP.
232
See Lufft, Freiburg.
233
Baustaedt, Richelieu und Deutschland, 177.
52
Scottish mercenaries continued to enter the French army, although they mostly arrived in mere driblets.
Between 1639 and 1643, warrants for the levying of 9500 soldiers were issued. 234 One famous unit, known as
La Garde Ecossaise du Corps du Roi, was raised by the Earl of Irvine in 1642 and landed at Dieppe in
September, October and November 1643. The unit served with distinction under [Louis de Bourbon, the Duc
d'Enghien and] Prince of Condé [le Grand Condé] (1621–1686) at Thionville (1643) and at Lens (1648),
fighting at the side of the French Regiment of Guards in the latter battle. 235 The Regiment de Douglas served
in northern France and the Low Countries from 1637 until the end of the French war with Spain in 1660. In
1653 Hepburn’s old regiment was placed under Colonel George Douglas, who succeeded his half-brothers
Lord James Douglas and Archibald Douglas as colonel of the Régiment de Douglas. The most important
battle in this particular theater was fought on 29 May 1643, at which French forces under Condé defeated
and slaughtered the Spanish infantry at Rocroi, with the credit for the victory belonging to the veteran
foreign mercenaries, many of whom were Scots. 236
Just as the Peace of Prague endangered French positions along the Rhine, the peace also jeopardized Swedish
forces in central Germany. Sweden was without a major ally in that area; and, with Bernhard von Weimar
joining French service, a whole army was removed from Swedish control. The other major Swedish army,
commanded by Banèr, was steadily forced northward and away from the hard-won fruits of the victorious
campaigns of 1631–1634. In October 1635, Saxony completely deserted her former ally and attacked the
Swedish forces under Colonel Robert Douglas at Eglen, causing Banèr to retreat further north. 237 The Saxons
then besieged Dömitz, planning to use the city as a base in their efforts to force the Swedes out of Pomerania.
A Swedish force under Patrick Ruthven marched to Dömitz to relieve the city. Upon his arrival (22 October
1635), he attacked and ‘As, however, [the Saxons] were neither provided with artillery nor cavalry, Ruthven
led his men boldly against the besiegers, and almost annihilated their army under [Wolf Heinrich von]
Baudissin [Bauditz] (1579–1646), killing some thousand men, and taking prisoners as many more.’ 238 This
victory helped to restore the morale of the Swedish armies.
Throughout the entire time Swedish forces were being forced northward, Hanau, a city near Frankfurt a.
Main, refused to surrender to Imperial forces besieging it. Sir James Ramsay, described as ‘... one of a
number of excellent Scottish officers who had set out for the Continent to take part in the great struggle...’, 239
had been seriously wounded at Breitenfeld in 1631. Soon thereafter, unable to campaign further, he was
made governor of that small, but strategically important city. From the fall of 1635 until June 1636, when the
city was relieved by General Leslie, 240 His conduct during the siege was outstanding, for he showed great
ingenuity in his defense – making sallies; taking precautions; and preventing waste. even to the extent of
ripping up the paving of the streets, sowing grain, and reaping a harvest. 241 His best troops in these effects
234
2 RPCS 7:247–248, 281 & 302–303. A contemporary viewer noted the number of men to be raised and how many were actually
raised in Scotland and wrote that it was extremely difficult to find men in Scotland willing to serve abroad. Memoirs Illustrative
of the Life and Writings of John Evelyn, 2:263, cited in Forbes-Leith, Scots Men–at–Arms, 211.
235
Forbes-Leith, Scots Men-at-Arms, 211–212.
236
Forbes-Leith, Scots Men-at-Arms, 117.
237
Irmer, Arnim, 326–327.
238
Cust, Warriors of the Thirty Years’ War, I:355.
239
Droysen, Bernhard, II:218.
240
Droysen, Bernhard, II:221.
241
Dalrymple, Life of Sir James Ramsay, 5–7.
53
were his personal bodyguard, a group composed entirely of Scots. 242 When the city was relieved on 24 June
1636, it was restocked with supplies and the garrison was replaced by 1200 Hessians. The second siege of
Hanau began in July 1637, but there was little hope of relief, for the closest French armies were in Alsace,
and the Swedish armies were too far north to be of aid. Ramsay bargained with the besiegers in hopes of
gaining time but had little success. The new garrison was made up of sullen, unwilling soldiers, and he was
unable to conduct an active defense. In late January 1638, the city was betrayed from within, but Ramsay,
four officers and 70 soldiers barricaded themselves in a house and held out until 12 February. When Ramsay
finally surrendered, his captors refused to ransom him; and, poorly treated by his jailers, he died on 11 March
1638.243
In the following year, the Swedish army regained much of its lost prestige and reputation at the Battle of
Wittstock (4 October 1636). Throughout the preceding summer, a combined Imperial and Saxon force of
23,000 men had besieged Magdeburg while Swedish Field Marshal Banèr was forced to watch because his
army was too weak, having a strength of only 17,000 men. Finally, he divided his army into two sections and
faced the enemy with a completely divided battle line. Swedish General [Lennart] Torstensson [Count of
Ortala, Baron of Virestad] (1603–1651) was given the command of the right section, and Banèr took
command of the left. The entire Imperial-Saxon army deployed against the right wing of the Swedish army,
which withstood the combined assaults of the enemy for three hours. At dusk, after having marched around
the enemy, Banèr’s half emerged at the rear of the Imperial-Saxon army. Banèr promptly attacked, throwing
the enemy army into confusion. Because this attack was delivered late in the afternoon, the Imperial-Saxon
army escaped under cover of darkness. But the war chest was captured by the Swedes, and the mercenaries
of the Imperial-Saxon army refused to return to the battlefield without money. 244 It was Banèr’s victory, but
Field-Marshal Alexander Leslie’s brilliant command of the center of Torstensson’s wing must be given
partial credit for the victory. There the Imperial-Saxon army was not able to break the Swedish lines although
they outnumbered the Swedes three to one. Another Scot, Major-General James King, was present at the
battle and commanded the left wing of Torstensson’s army. 245
Although the Swedish military situation was improved by battles such as Wittstock, other problems arose. As
the war continued, the strict discipline that had been a trademark of the Swedish army in the time of GA
gradually deteriorated. The mutiny of 1633 adumbrated the discipline problems that were to be faced by the
Swedish high command after 1634. As more and more German troops were hired, discipline became
practically impossible to enforce, for the Germans were true mercenaries with little loyalty for the master
they served and less regard for the civilian population of Germany. The Scottish stand at Neu Brandenburg
had demonstrated a willingness of the Scots to fight to the death for Sweden, but the German mercenary
much preferred his Sold to any cause. Living by this principle, the mercenary often turned to the civilian
population in order to increase his earnings, and literature from the period 246 is filled with tales of how the
mercenaries extorted money from the civilians. With the appointment of Torstensson as the Swedish
242
Fischer, Scots in Sweden, 85.
243
Dalrymple, Ramsay, 7–10.
244
Delbrück, Kriegskunst, 4:248–251.
245
Berg & Lagercrantz, Scots in Sweden, 39–43, passim.
246
See Grimmelshausen, Simplicissimus (1669). For an alternate interpretation, see Ergang, Myth.
54
generalissimo in 1641,247 discipline deteriorated even further. Torstensson solved his wage payment problem
by simply stating that he would no longer pay his soldiers. Instead, he allowed them to plunder the peasantry
for their food and wages.
Much of the military action in the HRE in the last few years of the war was composed of sieges, small
skirmishes, and long marches. Each Swedish general acted more or less independently, and most campaigns
were little more than raids undertaken in hopes of acquiring booty and comfortable quarters. The army
commanded by Torstensson lodged itself in Bohemia, Silesia and Moravia, defeating every Imperial army
that was sent against it. During this last phase of the Thirty Years’ War, there was only one Scot of any
significance serving in the Swedish army – Field Marshal Robert Douglas. At Jankau (24 January 1645), he
was in command of the Swedish left wing in the battle that destroyed the Bavarian cavalry, the backbone of
the Imperial army. This battle had the effect of giving control of all Imperial land north of the Danube to the
Swedes. Douglas was also active in the campaigns undertaken by the Swedes in Bohemia and Moravia
between 1640 and 1648. 248 In May 1643, Torstensson was ordered to leave Moravia and attack Denmark
[Swedish-Danish War (1643–1645)]. 249 Within a few weeks he invaded Danish continental provinces and
forced the Danes to retreat to their islands. The Peace of Brömsebro was a humiliating defeat for Denmark,
for she was forced to cede much of her possessions on the Swedish peninsula to Sweden as well as to exempt
Swedish vessels from Danish tolls. 250 Torstensson then returned to Bohemia, and, when the war ended in
1648, his forces were at the gates of Prague – where it had all begun thirty years earlier.
Concurrent with the military operations in Germany, negotiations were carried on by the various powers in
hopes of ending the war. The first steps for peace were made on 24 February 1638, when the French and
Swedes made public their demands for peace settlement. The accord, signed in Hamburg, called for the ‘...
restitution of the political, constitutional, and religious status of 1618, a general amnesty, and the ‘satisfaction
of the two crowns’ of France and Sweden.’ 251 The accord also provided for the further French subsidies for
the Swedish army. 252 Ferdinand III realized that many of the German states would be willing to accede to the
Franco-Swedish demands and summoned the Imperial diet in order to deal with the problem. However,
military reverses weakened his position so that it was impossible for him to gain support from the German
states. Finally, in 1643, representatives from various principalities and states began arriving at the
Westphalian towns of Münster and Osnabrück in order to begin negotiations. The negotiations dragged on for
five years, with the wars continuing all the while. The negotiations were held in two places because Sweden
refused to yield precedence to the French, hence the duplication of representatives at the two sites – the
Imperial-French negotiations at Münster and the Imperial-Swedish negotiations at Osnabrück. Ostensibly the
mediators of the negotiations were the Papacy, represented by Cardinal Fabio Chigi, and the Republic of
Venice, represented by Alvise Contarini. 253 The demands of the various combatants for territorial
compensation, the disputes over the rights of the Protestants, the desires of Sweden to have a ninth Kurfürst
247
Banèr died on 10 May 1641.
248
Dudik, Schweden in Böhmen und Mähren, 120–121 & 129–208, passim
249
See Stefansson, Denmark and Sweden.
250
Loose, Hamburg und Christian IV, 110–120.
251
Steinberg, European Hegemony, 77.
252
Kellenbenz, ‘Hamburg und die französisch-schwedische Zusammenarbeit’ in ZVHG 49/50:94.
253
The definitive source for the negotiations may be found in Braubach & Repgen, Acta pacis Westphalicae.
55
created in addition to the eighth Kurfürst reserved for the Kurfürstentum Palatine – all aided in the
prolongation of the negotiations. Finally, on 7 January 1648, the stalemate was broken when Spain and the
United Provinces agreed to a peace treaty at Münster. France, with the help of Bavaria, then pressured the
Kaiser into agreeing to a peace. On 24 October 1648, the separate treaties of Münster and Osnabrück,
together known as the Peace of Westphalia, were signed, thus bringing to an end the Thirty Years’ War. The
terms of the treaties were many and varied, but most were resolved according to the wishes of France and
Sweden. France gained sovereignty over Metz, Toul, Verdun, Breisach, and Phillipsburg. She was also ceded
Alsace, although the terms of the cession were couched in extremely ambiguous terms. Sweden gained West
Pomerania (including Stettin and the island of Rügen), Bremen, Verden and Wismar. Her armies were also to
be paid five million thalers by the Empire. The Upper Palatinate and the old Kurfürstentum vote remained
with Bavaria; the Rhenish Palatinate – and a Kurfürstentum vote – was given to Karl Ludwig [Pfalzgraf bei
Rhein u. Kurfürst von der Pfalz] (1617–r 1648–1680), the son of Friedrich, the Winter King. The
independence of the Swiss Confederation and the United Provinces was recognized; and the sovereignty of
the various states in the HRE was established. At long last Calvinism was recognized as an official religion,
and religious matters were no longer decided by the strict application of cuius regio, eius religio.
The signing of the Peace of Westphalia evidenced the rise of a new power structure in Europe. The Empire,
devastated by thirty years of war and divided into nearly 350 separate (and essentially sovereign) entities by
the treaty, ceased to be a power in Europe. 254 The Austrian Habsburgs, realizing the impossibility of
controlling the states of the HRE, turned to consolidation of their hereditary lands and to expansion to the
southeast. Sweden became the dominant power in the Baltic region, dominating the economic life of central
and northern Germany through its control of the mouths of the Oder, the Weser and the Elbe Rivers, this in
addition to maintaining sovereignty over a major portion of the southern Baltic coast. Spain, ignored by the
French negotiations at Westphalia, was a declining power long before 1648, and the treaty merely
demonstrated her impotence. France, on the other hand, demonstrated her pre-eminent position at
Westphalia, for it was her diplomats who led the bargaining, her money that supported her allies, and her
armies which were the best in Europe. Just as France gained supremacy at Westphalia, the papacy lost
virtually all of its diplomatic credence at the Congress. The Peace of Westphalia signaled the end of the
Counter-Reformation and religious wars and initiated the era of struggles between secular states. The state
system was standardized by the treaty, and the congress-system provided the template for taking action when
events threatened to upset the equilibrium supposedly established at Westphalia.
254
In diplomatic terms the HRE became a power vacuum, that is, an extremely weak (politically, militarily or both)
area with powerful neighbors desirous of expansion. Think hungry dogs and a juicy bone.
56
CHAPTER V: Epilogue and Conclusions {101}
Of the approximately 40,000 Scots who left their native land between 1618 and 1648 in order to serve in the
armies on the continent, only a small number ever returned to Scotland. Most of those who returned were
officers, as the common soldier had little hope of leaving the army after enlisting. This was especially true
with regard to those men who had been forced to enlist; if they men deserted their regiment and returned to
Scotland, they were subject to a death penalty. 255 Disease and a high, battle casualty rate [wastage] combined
to deplete Scottish regiments of their all-Scottish nature; and most regiments were Scottish in name only
after serving in several campaigns – unless frequent infusions of recruits were sent by military entrepreneurs
such as Lord Reay or RM. Since the common soldier was not allowed to resign, the Scottish soldier who
served on the Continent generally remained with his unit until he was killed or rendered incapable of actively
engaging in combat. Some few common soldiers did return home, although most of them were maimed. In
September 1634, the PCS granted the right to erect a hospital for maimed soldiers returning from the
Swedish wars to Colonel RM. 256 Therefore, it may be assumed that the rewards of the common soldier were
small and transitory in nature, having little effect on Scotland.
The officer class was more fortunate in gaining significant rewards for their services, even though death was
also the common reward for most of these men. A survey of the officers with the rank of lieutenant-colonel
or above (of those whose fate is known) shows that sixty per-cent of these officers were killed in Germany or
died as a result of wounds or disease. 257 Lesser officers led a more dangerous life and lived under more
squalid conditions, and it may be assumed that their mortality rate was much higher. Scottish officers who
survived battle and disease, and were deemed capable and trustworthy, were rewarded through advancement
in rank, albeit at a very slow rate: Leslie and Ruthven both reached the rank of Field-Marshal in the Swedish
service, but only after each had served Sweden for almost thirty years. 258 The reason for the slowness of
promotion for Scots was that before and during the time of the Thirty Years’ War, the highest ranks were
invariably reserved for men of noble birth [think Bernhard von Weimar and Horn]; few Scots who sought
service abroad fit into that category. Interestingly, only in Swedish service might a low-born soldier hope to
attain high rank on merit alone.
Of officers fortunate enough to survive the rigors of combat and camp life, few profited from their long years
of service abroad. As has been noted, full and regular payment of the soldiers was a rare occurrence,
especially in a losing campaign. Typical of this is the case of the Englishman, Sir Charles Morgan, who was
forced to support his troops in 1626–1627 by using his own resources because the English government sent
only worthless bills with which to pay overdue wages and because the Danish government could not afford
255
1 RPCS 12:257, 259 & 272.
256
2 RPCS 5:334, 349 & 353–356.
257
See Appendix I for a data base {USM 128}.
258
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:180, notes that there were several Scots who attained high rank at a very early age. Of the
three men who became colonel before their twenty-first birthday, two were princes and the other came from the Douglas family.
Of the seven men who became general before the age of twenty-six, four were princes and three were noblemen. Hamilton, as
first peer of Scotland, fell into the latter category.
57
to pay him.259 Under GA the Swedish government paid the troops more regularly; but even Lord Reay, an
important supplier of troops, was forced to sell parts of his estates in order to repay debts incurred while
acting as a military entrepreneur for GA. 260 With regular money payment to the military enterprisers an
impossibility for most employers, grants of land became a common form of remuneration. This was
especially true with regard to men who served Sweden. The areas conquered by Sweden formed a seemingly
endless supply of wealth to be distributed as back wages to her officers. Many of the early endowments were
made in southern Germany, e.g. Ruthven received the Fugger Grafschaft von Kirchberg in 1633. However,
following the Swedish debacle at Nördlingen in 1634, most of this land was lost to Sweden and also to all the
officers who had been given land in that region. In the 1640s Pomerania became the area in which
confiscated estates were given to deserving officers. Robert Douglas obtained several estates in Pomerania
and in Verden.261 William Lewis, too, received an estate in Livonia for his service; and his descendants,
known as the family of Lowis von Menau, were still in that region in 1900. 262
There were other hazards that prevented Scots from attaining tangible gains from serving abroad.
Indebtedness was the largest problem. Daniel Hepburn, a cavalry colonel in Imperial service, was forced to
borrow money from Wallenstein and died owing the general 8000 thalers (which the general later collected
from Hepburn’s widow).263 Another risk was that of being taken prisoner, as the ransom money demanded by
the captor was often high. Walter Butler, an Irishman in the Imperial service, is a typical example of this. In
1631, he was forced to pay RM 1000 thalers for his freedom following his capture at Frankfurt a.d. Oder. 264
Others were more fortunate: John Gordon and Walter Leslie, who, when captured at Nürnberg by the Swedes
in 1632, were released without ransom by GA because he admired their bravery. 265 Still others were refused
ransom because their fighting qualities were such that release might come back to haunt the captor, e.g.
James Ramsay, the governor of Hanau. Although worth 900,000 thalers in money and gems, he was refused
ransom and died in captivity. 266 Another hazard for officers and men alike was the civilian population for, as
reported by RM, stragglers or unwary soldiers caught by the civilians were tortured and killed. 267 Thus, the
hazards of serving in a mercenary army at that time were great and the rewards small.
Occasionally, there was a Scot who, fortunate enough to survive the pitfalls encountered by the lesser
officers and common soldiers, amassed a large fortune and high position. John Gordon parleyed his role in
the assassination of Wallenstein into a title, a high official position, and a fortune in land and money. 268
Commanders who were able to control their soldiers and prevent looting were often rewarded by cities or
regions. Alexander Leslie received a large sum of money from Stralsund upon his departure from that city in
1631 as a token of thanks for his aid to the city when it had been besieged by Wallenstein. Robert Douglas
259
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:254.
260
Fischer, Scots in Germany, 91–92.
261
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:354–356.
262
Fischer, Scots in Prussia, 132.
263
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:186–243 ( passim).
264
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:394. RM describes Butler’s valor, but mentions neither the ransom amount nor that he
received this amount in Expedition.
265
Bulloch, Gay Gordons, 33.
266
Redlich, Praeda Militari, VSW 39:56.
267
Expedition I:46 & II:122
268
Bulloch, Gay Gordons, 40–42.
58
received 500 florins from the people of Swabia after he had maintained discipline in the Swedish army which
had been stationed in the region after the Treaty of Westphalia. 269 Ranks of nobility were often conferred
upon successful soldiers in the Swedish service, and the rolls of the Riddarhas, the Swedish House of Lords,
display names such as Hamilton, Ramsay, Spens and Douglas. 270 Positions of high command could and did
lead to the abuse of power, and Scots were certainly not immune to the desire for booty. Patrick Ruthven
amassed six carriage-loads of loot in Ulm while he served as the governor of that city in 1631–1632. Colonel
John Hepburn also was guilty of looting Würzburg upon its capture by the Swedes in 1631. 271
One benefit available to those fortunate enough to survive the long campaigns in good health was the
pension plan. If an officer were fortunate enough to be employed by a power or a prince that remained in the
field, and if that officer reached the age of retirement, he could do so and would be given a pension. This was
usually a sum agreed upon before the man entered that service. Even the common soldier was not totally
ignored; old soldiers were given pensions of six riksdalers per year. 272 An enlisted man was also allowed to
retire after serving a given number of years and had the option of a pension or land. However, the records of
Sweden, Scotland, England, and other countries are filled with petitions from pensioners who were not
receiving their allotments or were receiving them infrequently. 273 If a soldier were unfortunate enough to be
maimed while serving a power, he was to be given a pension and then allowed to return home; but, again,
most of these unfortunates were forced to fend for themselves. Few powers had money to spare for those
who were incapable of rendering further service. The best pension system was that of Sweden. Field Marshal
Alexander Leslie received a pension of 800 riksdalers per year when he resigned from his command in the
Swedish army. 274 Field Marshal Patrick Ruthven, too, received a pension, but of 1200 riksdalers. LieutenantColonel Robert Lumsden received 1000 riksdalers, while Colonel William Gunn was awarded 1000
riksdalers until the end of Queen Kristina’s minority. On the other hand, James King never received his back
wages and, until his death in 1652, regularly petitioned the Riksrådet for his pension and back wages.275
Occasionally, in addition to a pension, a gift was presented officers with good records – ‘... a gold chain with
the picture of Her Majesty.’276
Most of the officers who took advantage of the pension plan and left the Swedish service in the 1630’s had
an important reason for leaving. 277 A religious controversy in Scotland between King and Kirk had led to an
open break between the two. Scotland had requested the professional soldiers to return home to staff the
269
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:361. The Swedish army was stationed in Swabia to collect the money promised by the
Kreise for payment of the Swedish armies as guaranteed by the Peace of Westphalia.
270
Lorentzen, schwedische Armee, 184.
271
Andersson, A History of Sweden, 181.
272
Fischer, Scots in Sweden, 119. The pensions were liberal when one considers the poverty of Sweden at the time but Queen
Kristina was determined to reward her faithful servants well.
273
CSPD 14 and CSPD 16 calendars many examples of soldiers petitioning for back wages and pensions. Also, many authors cite
Swedish state papers when referring to the non-payment of pensions. Judging from these two sources, it may be presumed that
neglect of pensioners was a regular occurrence throughout the period.
274
Redlich, Military Enterpriser, VSW 47:329.
275
Fischer, Scots in Sweden, 118 & 113–114.
276
Riks-Radets Protokoll VII:587. Cited in Fischer, Scots in Sweden, 113.
277
Most of the officers who returned home to join the Covenant were Presbyterian officers serving in the Scandinavian armies.
Catholic Scots serving in the French, Spanish and Austrian armies remained. Therefore, the officers mentioned in this chapter are
those who served in the Protestant Scandinavian armies and were more willing to heed the call of the Presbyterians in Scotland
when the trouble with Charles arose.
59
army that was being raised to resist the religious policy of Charles who had just authorized a Book of Canons
which was to be used in the Scottish Kirk. This book was regarded by most Scots as ‘popish’ and quite
repugnant to their religious convictions. The reading of the Book at St. Giles Kirk in Edinburgh in July 1637,
produced a riot and the beginning of an open break between Scotland and the King. In February of the
following year, a ‘Covenant,’ signed by the nobles, was then issued to the general public. As the positions of
Covenanters and King hardened, it became clear that only a war could settle the issue. A ‘Circular Letter
from the Committee’ at Edinburgh was sent to each shire in Scotland stating that, for protection of liberty,
Scotland had to be defended. For defense, regiments were to be raised and were to be led by a colonel, a
lieutenant-colonel, and a sergeant-major
...who, being prime officers, ought to be men of skill, and must be sent for out of Germany and
Holland, and paid for out of the first end of the contribution of the shires. Every company must have a
captain, lieutenant, ensign and two sergeants. The captain and ensign may be noblemen or gentlemen,
the lieutenants and sergeants must be sent for out of Germany and Holland, and paid for as is
aforesaid.278
It was because of this crisis and the plea for help that Scottish officers hurried home. High-ranking
commanders, such as Field-Marshals Leslie and Ruthven, General King, as well as many other officers,
resigned. James Lumsden, David Monro, and R. Clerck are only three of the many colonels who left in order
to take positions in the Scottish army. ‘No wonder that Leslie on his arrival in Newcastle met no fewer than
twenty-six of his former companions-in-arms in the Swedish wars.’ 279 It should be noted, however, that few
Scottish officers serving in France returned home, because these officers, predominantly Catholic, were less
interested in the religious controversy in Scotland.
Most officers who left the Swedish service at this time wanted only to obtain a leave of absence, but were
forced to resign because of possible international complications that might arise. These officers were leaving
Swedish service to take part in a rebellion against their rightful ruler. Sweden, although a Protestant country
and a secret supporter of the Covenant, could not openly sanction a revolt against a king. Also, some of the
officers wished to obtain artillery and muskets in lieu of their back pay, and this again might have led to
international complications. It was decided that, if these officers wished to return to Scotland, they would
have to resign and leave the Swedish service completely, thereby absolving the Swedish government of
blame that would be normally attached to actions such as the Scottish officers were taking. Also, weapons
were to be given to the men as rewards for their services, but not as part of their wages. In this way any
suspicion of active support to rebels could be circumvented. The largest recipient of these weapons was
Alexander Leslie who received 2000 muskets and two artillery pieces. 280 Also, ‘Robert Lumsden received
200 muskets and 200 cuirasses in 1640.’281
When these men returned home, they were immediately given positions of responsibility in the new Scottish
army. Leslie was appointed overall commander, Alexander Hamilton (the inventor of the mobile ‘leather gun’
278
Circular Letter (January 1639). CSPD 16:410/167.
279
Fischer, Scots in Sweden, 114.
280
Fraser, Leven, 1:392.
281
Fischer, Scots in Sweden, 113.
60
that GA made famous) was appointed General of Artillery, David Leslie was placed in charge of the cavalry,
and RM was given command of the infantry. With these men in high command and their many brother
officers aiding in the drilling and training of the recruits, the Covenanter forces ‘... were an army and not an
armed mob.’282 Charles raised 21,000 men but, realizing that his army was grossly inadequate, he agreed to
the Treaty of Berwick (18 June 1639). In the following year, however, Charles again raised an army and
attempted to subdue Scotland, but the superior Scottish army soon forced the retreat of Charles’ motley force.
The Scots then occupied Northumberland and Durham. At Ripon, on 16 October 1640, a treaty was signed
by which the Scots were to advance no further and were to receive £850 a day from Charles for sustenance.
As a result of this treaty, Charles was forced to call Parliament (the Long Parliament, 1640–1660) in order to
raise the money to pay the Scots.
Following the Bishops’ Wars, Charles, because of trouble with Parliament, visited Scotland and sought to
gain the aid of these fine Scottish soldiers. He created many nobles, e.g. Leslie was created the Earl of
Leven. He also distributed large pensions, e.g. Major-General James King received £1000 and a diamond
ring (ostensibly for services rendered the Prince Palatine). With the actual outbreak of civil war in 1642,
some of the former Covenanter officers did join the King, although the most important officers remained
with Scotland. In 1643, Scotland joined with Parliament in a ‘Solemn League and Covenant’, and an army of
21,000 men under Alexander Leslie was raised to assist the Parliamentary forces. At the Battle of Marston
Moor (2 July 1644) the Parliamentary-Scottish force under Cromwell (1599–1658) and Alexander Leslie met
the Royalist force of Prince Rupert [third son of Friedrich: Prinz Ruprecht von der Pfalz (1619–1682)]. In
this battle, over half of the Scottish foot broke and ran, but the regiments of the John, Earl of Lindsay and Sir
John Maitland stood firm and beat off the charges of Rupert. These regiments which had been trained in the
style of GA, acted with well-disciplined, precision movement. The men in these regiments were also
positioned in the Swedish battle formation with musketeers and pikemen intermingled. This steadfastness
prevented Rupert from breaking the Parliamentary right even though most of the original line had fled. On
the Parliamentary left flank, the Royalist horse was at first successful, but the discipline of Cromwell’s troops
prevented a breakthrough. A timely countercharge by David Leslie’s cavalry broke the Royalist right, which
fled the field. The combined cavalry of Cromwell and Leslie then routed Rupert’s cavalry force. With both
wings of the Royalist cavalry in flight, the Royalist infantry had little hope of standing against the entire
Parliamentary army. They refused to surrender, however, and most of the force, including the Newcastle
Whitecoats, was annihilated.
Following Marston Moor, Scottish participation in England was less significant because of the activities of
[James Graham, 5th Earl/1st Marquis of] Montrose (1612–1650), in the Highlands and the support necessary
for the Scots Army in Ireland. At the same time, Cromwell was forming his ‘New Model Army,’ a national
army which was regularly paid and well-trained. 283 With the ending of the first phase of the war in 1646, and
the subsequent capture of the King, many Covenanters reversed loyalties and supported the King. Scotland
had, in fact, become a very junior partner toward the end of the Civil War and had become perturbed over the
religious policies of Cromwell and the Parliamentary army. The ultra-conservative Puritan religion adopted
caused conservative Covenanters to reevaluate their position and to realign themselves with the Royalists. In
December 1647, Charles, although a prisoner on the Isle of Wight, agreed to a secret ‘Engagement’ with
282
Firth, Cromwell’s, 14.
283
Firth, Cromwell’s, 70–93, passim.
61
three Scottish commissioners and agreed to establish Presbyterianism for three years in England in return for
the help of the Scottish armies. In 1648 the ‘Engagers’, under the leadership of the Marquis of Hamilton,
crossed into England with the stated intention of freeing the King and instituting the Covenant. Before
Hamilton could cross the border, rebellions in Wales and England erupted. These uprisings were to have
occurred simultaneously with the invasion, but were premature and were crushed. Thus, Hamilton was left
without hope of aid from the English and ‘... his army was no longer the well-organized force of the ‘Bishops
Wars,’ for it had been raised in the face of a ‘protest’ from the stalwarts of the Kirk. Hamilton had little save
his courage to recommend him.’ 284 His disorganized and separated army was attacked and destroyed in
piecemeal fashion by Cromwell at Preston, Wigan, and Warrington on 17–19 August 1648. Hamilton
demonstrated in the engagements that he had learned little of tactics while in command of a separate army in
Germany in 1631. The defeat at Preston cost him his head; he was tried on a charge of treason, condemned
and executed.
Following Preston, Cromwell consolidated the position of Parliament throughout Britain. Recognizing with
regret that Charles would never subordinate himself to parliamentary rule, Cromwell allowed the King to be
tried on a charge of high treason. He was condemned and executed in January 1649. Thus, the rule of
Parliament was established with ruthless finality. With England under Parliamentary control, Cromwell
turned to Scotland, invading that country in 1650 with 16,000 troops of his New Model Army to suppress the
Covenanters. David Leslie, a capable general who had learned the art of war while serving in the Swedish
army, was the actual commander of the Scottish forces which opposed Cromwell, although the seventy-one
year old Alexander Leslie was the supreme commander of the Scottish army that numbered almost 25,000
men. Sadly for Scottish hopes, in a purge conducted by the Kirk, David Leslie was deprived of 3000 of his
soldiers and eighty of his officers because of their lack of theological perception and devotion. With the most
decisive campaign under way, Leslie was severely weakened by the well-meaning ministers of the Kirk. 285
Still, the younger Leslie held a commanding position and, by using a policy of attrition similar to that used
by Wallenstein at Nürnberg, refused battle, forcing the choice of retreat or starvation upon Cromwell’s
forces. Cromwell chose the former course and began his retreat. Leslie immediately made plans to attack the
enemy but had to postpone the attack because it was the Sabbath. Leslie then followed Cromwell closely, and
by 2 September 1650, the Scottish army had the Parliamentary forces trapped at Dunbar, with the latter in a
valley underneath the guns of the Covenanters. However, at the instigation of the committee of ministers,
Leslie was forced to abandon his favorable position and to descend and place his infantry on the level ground
in front of the hill.286 There, Major-General Sir James Holborne of Menstrie either stupidly or traitorously
ordered the infantry to extinguish their matches and to seek cover for the night. Instructions were also given
to the cavalry to set some of the horses out to forage. Cromwell’s scouts were quick to note the strange
behavior of the Scottish army and quickly alerted Cromwell, who immediately set his army in motion. At
daybreak on 3 September 1650, the Scottish army was confronted by the Parliamentary army in full battle
array while the Scots were totally unprepared. In the debacle that followed, over 3000 Scots were killed and
284
Mackie, Scotland, 220.
285
Lane, King Covenant, 225.
286
Lane, King Covenant, 226–227. The reason for the abandoning of the good position was that the ministers decided to use their
own tactics. These tactics had been, as they said, ‘…revealed to them by the Lord of Hosts.’
62
10,000 were captured. Cromwell then occupied Edinburgh and established control over the Lowlands.
Prisoners taken at Dunbar were sent as slaves to the sugar plantations in the West Indies. 287
David Leslie and his few remaining officers devoted the following winter to training a new army. Dunbar
had cost the Scots the last semblance of the army that had taken the field in 1639–1640, and an entirely new
army had to be raised and trained. On 1 January 1651, Prince Charles was crowned as king at Scone, and the
Scots again attempted to overthrow parliamentary forces. In the spring of 1651, Cromwell outmaneuvered
the Scots by moving northward toward Perth, cutting Leslie’s line of communication with his base of supply.
Leslie and Charles were faced with either attacking Cromwell and risking almost sure disaster or invading
England in hope of gaining English allies. Choosing the latter course, the Scottish army moved slowly down
the westward coast of England but found little support. Cromwell pursued the Royalist army, covering 320
miles in three weeks. The Scottish army of 16,000 ill-trained soldiers stood little chance against the 31,000
veterans of the New Model Army, but Charles retreated to Worcester and prepared to make a stand.
Cromwell divided his army; converged on the Scottish army in a well-executed double-flank attack; and,
exactly one year to the day after Dunbar, annihilated the Covenanter army. Only a few hundred men,
including the new king, escaped. 288 David Leslie was captured and imprisoned from 1651 until the
Restoration in 1660 when he was released and ennobled by Charles II. 289 Following the Scottish defeats of
Preston, Dunbar, and Worcester, there occurred a great exodus of Scots Royalists to the Continent. The
majority of these men followed their King to France where they joined the armies of that country in her war
with Spain, joining such regiments as Les Gardes Ecossaise,290 the Dumbarton Regiment (the old Hepburn
Regiment), and the Campbell Regiment. 291 When Charles II returned to England in 1661, he was
accompanied by some of these troops. The Dumbarton Regiment exists in Great Britain today as the Royal or
Orkney regiment and is the oldest continuous-service regiment in the British army. 292 Although the majority
of those Scots who fled their homeland went to France, some few went to Scandinavia. Lord Reay served
Charles I but had been captured. Montrose freed him, but when Montrose was defeated at Philiphaugh in
September 1645, Reay returned to Denmark where he died four years later. 293 James King, who aided Charles
I in the early years of the war but often displayed sympathy for his fellow Scots, returned to Sweden where
he died in 1652.294
Another theatre of action for the returning officers was Ireland, where a revolt of the Irish Catholics against
their English masters, directed at the Protestant English and Scottish settlers in Ireland, had broken out in
1641. In November 1641, the Scottish Parliament had offered 10,000 troops to Prince of the Palatine; but
after a Catholic massacre of Protestants in Ireland – especially in Ulster – cancelled this project, the men ‘...
were offered [to Charles I] and accepted for the quelling of the Irish, and placed under the command of the
287
Lane, King Covenant, 226–227.
288
Montross, War, 307–308.
289
DNB 6:968.
290
This regiment should not be confused with the Scots Guards or La Garde Ecossaise du Corps du Roi. This regiment was the one
raised in 1642 by the Earl of Irving.
291
Of all Scots, the Campbells were the most noted of the supporters of the King and many of the clansmen followed Charles II to
France following the defeat of the King at Worcester.
292
Forbes-Leith, Scots Men-at-Arms, 214.
293
DNB 12:566–567.
294
DNB 11:135–136.
63
Earl of Leven, as general.’ 295 Immediate command of the Scots Army in Ireland was given to RM, author of
Expedition. From 1642 until 1647, Monro commanded the army in Ireland with no great success, although
with no great failure either. In 1646, Colonel Jones and 8000 men of the New Model Army were sent by
Cromwell to Ireland and, by the end of 1647, Ireland was again quiet. 296 The Second British Civil War
resulted in the disbanding of the Scottish Army in Ireland; RM was sent to the Tower of London for five
years, after which he was then released and pardoned, living out his remaining days in Ireland. 297 In 1652,
Cromwell himself commanded the New Model in Ireland and crushed the Irish rebellion with great cruelty.
Militarily then, the Scottish professional soldiers who returned to Scotland affected the military policies and
strategy for over a decade after returning home, using training methods that they had learned in the
Continental armies: trained soldiers would naturally lead the martial activities of a nation engaged in war.
However, the Scottish officers and non-commissioned officers who returned to help Scotland often found
their efforts hindered by political intrigue, clan politics and by the religious policies of the Kirk. Therefore, it
may be stated that there was little noticeable influence by these soldiers on the military customs and tactics
as practiced by the Scots for hundreds of years prior to 1618. Indeed, it was not until after the Union of 1707,
and the formation of new Scottish regiments for service in British armies, that the old style of a quick, shockattack with claymores completely died out. 298 Since the profession learned by the returnees had little
noticeable effect of Scotland, the question arises as to whether the soldiers had any appreciable effect on
Scotland at all. Of interest would be possible effects in areas such as religion, social and political
advancement, the exchange of ideas, or economic development. 299
The influence on religious ideas would be the second most important possibility for the returning
mercenaries, who had been in contact with other creeds and doctrines for many years. It was also a time of
religious change in England. If these returnees had encountered any new ideas, it appears that they would
have been able to convey them to friends and to establish a new church. However, there was no change
brought about by the professional soldiers for the internal structure of the Kirk made change difficult. ‘The
Church was not only supreme in spiritual matters, but it was the duty of a Christian State to support it and to
lend the secular arm, when required, to carry out its decrees, to punish heresy, and to enforce discipline, and
to suppress any church which threatened rivalry.’ 300 The armies that the returning officers staffed were well
provided for religiously as ‘... morning and evening prayers, and sermons on Sunday, and Fast-days, both in
the morning and afternoon ...’ were given. There was also a ‘complete system of ecclesiastical
jurisdiction...established in the army.’ 301 Therefore, religion was not affected by the returning mercenaries.
Social advancement due to wealth attained or glory won and a concomitant rise in politics would be another
possibility for influencing Scottish life. Many high-ranking officers returned home and received titles of
295
Fraser, Leven, 1:409.
296
Farmer, Stuarts, 157.
297
DNB 13:637–638.
298
As late as 1689 the Highland method of attack was successful for, at Killiekrankie, Viscount Dundee and his barefoot
Highlanders annihilated an English army under General Mackay. It was never again as successful, for a better equipped English
army destroyed a Scottish army at Dunkeld in 1690, and completely humbled the Highlanders. For a misunderstanding of
Scottish fighting methods, see McWhiney & Jamieson, Attack and Die.
299
As much as I hate to state it, the rest of USM is in dire need of revision – and it will be. Check back for TBP.
300
Buchan, Kirk, 28.
301
Firth, Cromwell’s, 315, for both quotes.
64
nobility which would seem to ensure the men a place of distinction. However, the historical evidence
demonstrates that these men, returning to Scotland at a time of trouble, never had a chance to assert their new
power. Indeed, most of those men either landed in prison or fled to the Continent within ten years of
returning home. Also, the nobles who had been the leaders before the return of the military entrepreneurs
remained the leaders after their return, delegating authority to the returnees only when necessary – as when
an army commander was needed. There was a long-term effect, for many of the peerage lines established at
that time were able to influence Scottish political actions at a later date. The marriage alliance that was
arranged between Gustavus Leslie, the eldest surviving son of Alexander Leslie, Earl of Leven, and the
daughter of the Earl of Rothes, a member of an old but impoverished family, 302 was surely a common
occurrence as the new nobility attempted to ‘get respectable.’ However, there was no immediate effect on the
social and political structure in Scotland following the return of the officers.
With the influx of men who had been on the Continent for many years, it would seem logical that there
would be a corresponding influx of new ideas into Scotland, but again that expectation is proved false.
Unfortunately for Scotland, many, if not most of the men who went abroad were illiterate and were not
interested in new ideas or techniques. Thus, there was very little of a radical or an innovative nature brought
back by the mercenaries. One major exception was RM, author of Expedition, who was a well-read and
intelligent person. In his book, he commented on every conceivable topic, but his influence was small
considering that few Scots could read. This is not to say that new ideas were not reaching Scotland at that
time, for it was during this period that Scottish students by the thousands were attending Continental
universities. The old medieval law system was being replaced by the Roman law that the students were
learning at the French and Germans universities. 303 The art of government as practiced in France particularly
impressed young Scots who were studying in Paris. There was also a large interchange of ideas between the
Presbyterians and their co-religionists in France, the Huguenots. ‘Travel to Paris formed an almost essential
element in the training of a man of politeness and of affairs.’ 304 However, this was not what was required of a
mercenary, and the soldier simply did not come into contact with new ideas and so was unable to bring any
home with him.
One final area in which the Scottish mercenaries could have affected Scotland was in the economic field. The
outflow of such a large number of young men could, at first, seem to have caused harm to the internal
economic system of Scotland. However, because of the relatively small potential of absorption of labor in the
Scottish economic system, the majority of men that went abroad did little harm to the system, for they were
actually a glut on the labor market. Indeed, simultaneously with the flow of the mercenaries abroad, there
was an outflow of merchants and peddlers who did help the Scottish economy for ‘At the bases where these
regiments were equipped, solid merchant houses [were] established.’ 305 With the establishment of these
clearing houses abroad, the merchants of Scotland had a ‘factor’ – a trader, preferably a Scot, who sold the
goods in the market for a commission. ‘... Scottish trade was concentrated mainly in those areas and at those
towns where Scottish merchants settled down...’306 – Scandinavia, Holland, and France. During the first half
302
Mathew, Charles, 279.
303
Smith, ‘Scotland’ in British Commonwealth, II:21–23.
304
Mathew, Charles, 206.
305
Mathew, Charles, 278.
306
Smout, Eve of Union, 96–97.
65
of the seventeenth-century, the export-import trade between Scotland and the Baltic region greatly increased,
and much of the credit for the increase must be given to the trading houses that were established there. The
increase in the export-import trade is also indicative of a healthy increase in the economic situation that
occurred in Scotland at the time. This is not to say that mercenaries were directly responsible for the increase
in trade or in the economic situation in Scotland. They were not. However, Scots tended to go where their
countrymen had gone, and the large congregation of Scots in the Baltic region drew trade to the area. There
was, then, an increase in the production in Scotland of goods for sale abroad. This alone was a tremendous
aid to Scotland.
In summation, then, it must be stated that the Scottish mercenary had very little effect on his native land or
on the Continent. If there was any actual impact, it was felt by the military leaders of the day who recognized
the fighting qualities of the Scots and their value as shock troops. There were few Scots who were able to rise
to positions of high command, but there were many Scots who served as junior-grade officers and noncommissioned officers. The inability of the average Scot to lead large numbers of troops may be noted in the
actions in the British Civil Wars where no great success was attained by Scottish arms except possibly at
Marston Moor. However, the ability of the Scot as an individual fighter was never doubted, and, as a part of a
whole, the Scot was a useful soldier to have in battle. But, because of his inability to accept discipline and to
do menial tasks, such as digging trenches, his value as a well-rounded soldier was diminished. Therefore,
Scottish mercenaries served a small but necessary part in the Continental armies in that they could be relied
upon in battle. Their pride in their military capability prevented their fleeing at the least provocation. Also,
the Scots were loyal to their master and fought well for him. There are few instances in the Thirty Years’ War
where the Scot betrayed the trust placed in him. However, their reward was small, for most of these soldiers
now lie in unmarked graves at the sites of the battles and camps.
The Scottish mercenary who returned home brought little of value with him, and his social, political,
intellectual and economic impact on Scotland was small. Indeed, a Scot who returned home almost always
returned home as a stranger. Peter Ross accurately described the plight of the returnee when he wrote: ‘The
wanderer at length goes home to find it home no longer. Friends and relatives have died or wandered away to
other parts of the earth, old landmarks have disappeared or changed and the place that knew the wanderer
now knows him no more.’307 Thus the Scot who returned home was little more than an alien in a changed
world. Only those few who had been able to maintain contacts with home actually had anything to which
they could return.
307
Ross, Scots, 56.
66
Appendix I: Scottish Officers Abroad and at Home {USM 128–137}
Huge numbers of Scottish officers served various leaders and myriad rulers/masters throughout the Thirty
Years’ War. Appendix I is a listing of Scottish officers holding the rank of lieutenant-colonel or above –
primarily those in Protestant service; and more specifically, those serving in the German Wars – between
1618 and 1648. It also notes rank attained during British Civil Wars. The information comes from many
sources, including: Bulloch & Skelton, Under Arms; Defoe, Scots Nation; DNB; Expedition, List: 1–5;
Fraser, Leven; Grant, Memoirs of Hepburn; Irving, Book of Scotsmen; OSB; RPCS; and SweInt. Officers of
the rank above colonel are listed by highest rank achieved and seniority; Colonels (Col) and LieutenantColonels (Lt-Col) are listed alphabetically. This is by no means a comprehensive list; at some point, such a
list is TBP. Bear in mind that it was compiled in 1968, long before there were databases such as SSNE.
A. Field-Marshals.
· Sir Alexander Leslie, 1st Earl of Leven (@1580–1661). Served Sweden for approximately thirty years.
Governor over many cities along the Baltic Coast and later Field-Marshal over Swedish forces in Westphalia.
Commanded Scottish Covenanter forces during British Civil Wars.
· Sir Patrick Ruthven, Earl of Forth and Brentford (1583–1651). Served Sweden for approximately twenty-eight
years. Governor of Ulm, 1631–1632, and later commanded Swedish army which defeated Saxons at Dömitz
(22 October 1635). Was royalist general in the British Civil Wars.
· Sir Robert Douglas [Count of Skenninge and Baron of Skalby] (1611–1661). Important general and
administrator for Sweden. Commanded left flank of Swedish army which defeated Saxons at Jankau (6 March
1645). Field Marshal (1657–1662).
· Walter Leslie, Count Leslie (1606–1667). Entered Imperial service and advanced slowly in rank. Role in
assassination of Wallenstein (1634) assured his advancement. Received regiment of foot following Nördlingen
(1634). Advanced to rank of field-marshal by 1648. Sworn to Imperial Privy Council in 1655. Received Order
of the Golden Fleece in 1665.
B. Maréchal de France.
· Sir John Hepburn (1598–1636). Began service in Germany with Gray’s regiment in Bohemia. Transferred to
Swedish service in 1625. Appointed 1st colonel of the Scottish/Green Brigade under GA. Left Swedish service
in 1632 and joined French service. Commanded Régiment de Hebron Killed at Saverne in 1636.
C. Generals.
· James, the 3rd Marquis [later 1st Duke] of Hamilton (1606–1649). Raised force of 6000 British infantry to serve
GA (1631–1632). Royalist during British Civil Wars. Beheaded on orders from Cromwell.
· Andrew Rutherford, Earl of Teviot (??–1664). Mentioned as early as 1610 in Swedish war with Russia. Served
with distinction in French army. Killed at Tangier in 1664.
· Sir James Spence [Spens] of Wormieston, Count of Orcholm & Lord of Moreholme. Raised regiment for GA
in 1626. Later Chancellor of Sweden and Generalissimo of Swedish forces.
· Alexander Hamilton (called Dear Sandie). Colonel to a regiment of Scots. General of artillery in Swedish
army. General of artillery in Scottish Covenanter Army.
· Alexander Erskine. Minister of War to GA. Represented Sweden during negotiations leading to Peace of
Westphalia (1648).
D. Lieutenant-Generals.
· Alexander Forbes, 10th Lord Forbes (??–1672). Fought for Sweden.
67
·
Sir James King, Baron Eythin (1589–1652). Major-General in charge of Swedish operations in Westphalia but
obtained leave in 1639 due to conflict with Swedish general Johan Banèr. Returned to Scotland in 1640,
joining Charles I. In battle often displayed sympathy for fellow Scots, even if on opposing side. RM note:
‘since Lieutenant-General’, this post-1637.
· James Douglas (??–1645). Colonel in service of France. Upon death of Hepburn, took command of Régiment
de Hebron and renamed Régiment de Douglas. Killed near Douay in 1645.
· William Baillie. Colonel to a regiment of foot of Germans. Lieutenant-General in Scottish Covenanter Army in
British Civil Wars.
· Robert Monro [RM] (1590–1680). [‘Colonel to a regiment of Scots, which was my Lord of Rhees’]. AntiImperial service (1627–1633 & 1635–1637), rising to rank of Colonel. Author of Expedition. Returned to
Scotland to serve in Scottish Covenanter Army. Appointed Major-General in acting-command of the Scots
Army in Ireland (1642–1648). Named Lieutenant-General in 1648, but captured by parliamentary forces in
Carrickfergus Castle (1648). Imprisoned in Tower of London (to 1654). Retired to Ulster.
· David Leslie, 1st Lord Newark (c. 1600–1682). Lieutenant-Colonel to Horse. Colonel of cavalry in the
Swedish service. Major-General of cavalry in Scottish Covenanter Army in British Civil Wars. Royalist after
1650.
E. Major-Generals.
· Lord Hugh Hamilton. Served Sweden.
· Sir David Drummond. General-Major and Governor of Stettin in Pomerania.
· Sir James Ramsey [Baron Jacob von] (1589–1639). Commanded a Scottish regiment in Swedish service at
Breitenfeld. Severely wounded in battle, GA named him General-Major and Governor of Hanau. Defended city
against Imperial forces (1635–1638). Captured and died in captivity.
· John Leslie of Maines.
· Thomas Kerr [Carr] (??–1631). Killed at Breitenfeld.
· Sir John Ruthven. Colonel to a brigade of Germans, and since General-Major.
· William Forbes
· ─ Bonner
· ─ Burdon.
· William Legge.
· ─ MacDougal. Served in the Imperial army.
· William Gunn. Began as a captain in MacKay’s Regiment and was promoted to the colonelcy of a German
regiment. Later entered Imperial service, rising to major-general and created baron.
· James Carr. Colonel to a regiment of Scots, and since General-Major.
· Lord George (Douglas), 1st Earl of Dumbarton (1635–1692). Major-General and commander of Régiment de
Douglas/Dumbarton (1655).
F. Colonels & Lieutenant-Colonels [Lt-Col].
· ─ Armstrong. A commander in Sweden.
· Sir William Ballantine [Bellenden?]. Colonel to a foot-regiment of Scottish and English troops in Silesia.
· ─ Beaton. Lt-Col in Sweden.
· William Borthwick. Lt-Col to foot.
· Sir Henry Bruce. Captured at Nördlingen by Imperial forces.
· ─ Burden. Commander in Sweden.
· ─ Bullion. Captain in Mackay’s Regiment. Rose to colonel. Served as quartermaster-general of Swedish forces.
· R. Clerck. Colonel in Swedish service until 1639.
· John Cockburn. Commander in Sweden.
68
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
George Colin. Commander in Sweden.
George Lindsay, 14th Earl of Crawford (??–1633). Colonel of German foot-regiment in service of GA. Killed
by a lieutenant of his regiment.
John Crichton.
─ Cuming [Cummings] of Relugas. Commander in Sweden.
Alexander Cunningham. Lt-Col, since a Colonel to foot-regiment of Germans.
Sir James Cunningham. Lt-Col to foot.
Robert Cunningham.
William Cunningham. Colonel to foot-regiment of Scots in Prussia.
William Dick. Captain in Mackay’s Regiment. Rose to Lt-Col in Swedish service.
James Dickson. Lt-Col, since slain in the Palatinate.
─ Douglas. Lt-Col since a Colonel of Horse in Germany under the Swede.
Sir George Douglas. Lt-Col, since Ambassador for his Majesty of Great Britain, in Prussia, died in Germany,
and was transported and buried in Scotland.
Lord George Douglas. Colonel of infantry in French service. Took command of regiment of his brother, Lt-Gen
James Douglas, upon death of latter.
Archibald Douglas, Earl of Angus (c.1609–1655). Titular colonel of the Regiment de Douglas.
James Drummond. Lt-Col to horse.
Ludovick Drummond. Killed at Copenhagen.
David Edingtoune. Commander in Sweden.
─ Edmond [Edmunds]. Captured the Count de Bucquoi.
John Ennis. Lt-Col to foot.
─ Finlayson. Commander in Sweden.
─ Forbes. Colonel of Scottish cavalry in French service (1635–1641).
Sir Arthur Forbes. Lt-Col to foot in Mackay’s Regiment. Slain in combat near Hamburg [Holstein] in 1628.
Lord Alexander Forbes. Commander of two regiments of Scottish infantry in Swedish service.
Alexander Forbes, called the Bald. Lt-Col, since a Colonel.
Alexander Forbes, called Finnesse Forbes. Colonel to a regiment of Finns. [Lt-Col Finnesse Forbes, since a
Col]
Arvid Forbes. Finnish-born Scot. Rose through ranks and commanded infantry of Bernhard von Weimar.
George Forbes. Lt-Col to foot.
John Forbes. Colonel to a foot-regiment of German & Swiss troops in Swedish service. Joined French service
and killed in France.
John Forbes of Tullough. Lt-Col. was slain at Nördlingen.
The Master of Forbes. Colonel to a regiment of Scots.
Matthew Forbes. Commander of Swedish forces.
N. Forbes. Colonel of Scottish infantry. French service (1635–1638).
Poytaghee Forbes. Lt-Col to foot.
W. Forbes. Colonel of infantry in Swedish service.
─ Fullerton. Colonel of regiment of Scottish infantry in French service.
Herbert Gledstains [Gladstone]. Commander of Swedish forces.
─ Gordon. Lt-Col, since a Colonel to foot of Germans under the Crown of Sweden.
John Gordon. Colonel in Imperial service. Instrumental in plot to kill Wallenstein. Created Marquis and
became advisor to Kaiser.
69
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
John Gordon. Colonel of Germans in Swedish service.
Sir Andrew Gray. Colonel of Scottish and English infantry. Served under Mansfeld in Bohemia and in the
Palatinate.
Robert Hanna[n]. Lt-Col to foot. Killed in Alsace.
Sir Frederick Hamilton. Colonel to a regiment of Scots & Irish in Swedish service.
Hugh Hamilton. Colonel to a foot-regiment of Germans. Created Baron of Sweden in 1654.
Sir James Hamilton. Colonel to a foot-regiment of Scots.
Sir John Hamilton. Colonel of a Scottish regiment in Swedish service. Resigned at Würzburg in September
1631.
William Hamilton. Killed in Germany.
Alexander Hay. Lt-Col of Dragoons in Swedish army under GA.
─ Henderson. Commander of the reserve of Scottish infantry at Lützen in 1632.
James Henderson. Lt-Col to Foot.
John Henderson. Lt-Col, since a Colonel under the Kaiser.
Daniel Hepburn. Colonel of two regiments under Wallenstein. Died 1628.
Sir James Hepburn of Waughton. Lt-Col. Killed in Lorraine in 1637.
William Herring [Heron]. Lt-Col to foot in Swedish service.
Thomas Hume of Carolside. Lt-Col of Horse; since a Colonel in France.
Robert Innes. Lt-Col in Swedish service.
James Campbell, Earl of Irvine [d. 1645]. Colonel of Garde Écossais [actually Régiment d’infanterie
Écossais]. Served in French service from 1643 onward.
Alexander Irving of Tulloch. Lt-Col in Swedish service.
Edward Johnstone.
James Johnstone.
─ Kinnemond the elder. Lt-Col to foot.
─ Kinnemond the younger. Lt-Col to foot.
─ Kinnemond. Colonel to foot of Swedes, since dead.
James Kinninmond [Kinnemond].
John Kinninmond [Kinnemond]. ‘with one leg, Governor of ─ .’
Sir John Kinninmond [Kinnemond].
Thomas Kinninmond [Kinnemond].
William Kinninmond [Kinnemond].
Sir William Lawson.
Walter Lecky [Leekie]. Colonel to foot of Swedes.
Alexander Leslie. Lt-Col, since a Colonel to foot. [Son of Field-Marshal Leslie & colonel in Swedish army].
Alexander Leslie. in Russian army.
George Leslie. Lt-Col, since Colonel. Governor of Fecht.
Gustavus Leslie. Elder son of Field-Marshal Leslie and colonel in Swedish service (appointed in 1637).
John Leslie, the omnipotent. Lt-Col in Ruthven’s regiment of Germans.
John Leslie. Lt-Col, since a Colonel to foot of Scots.
Ludovick Leslie. Colonel to a regiment of Scots, which was Sir John Hamilton’s.
William Philip. Commander in Sweden.
70
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
─ Potley. Lt-Col to foot, under Sir George Fleetwood.
Alexander Ramsay. Colonel in Swedish army. Killed at Nördlingen in 1634.
Alexander Ramsay. Colonel, and Governor of Bad Kreuznach. Quartermaster-General to Bernhard von
Weimar.
Andrew Ramsay. Lt-Col in Swedish service. Killed in 1636.
Sir James Ramsay. Colonel to a foot-regiment of English. Governor of Breisach. Died at London.
Sir Francis Ruthven. Colonel to foot of Germans and Scots in Prussia (1636–1638).
Sir John Ruthven. Commanded a German Brigade.
─ Ruthworm [Ruthven]. Colonel of Scottish cavalry in French service after 1641.
─ Sandilands. Lt-Col, since slain in the Pfalz.
James Scott. Colonel to foot of Finns, since dead.
James Seaton. Colonel to foot of Swedes.
John Seaton. Brother of James Seaton.
Alexander Seton [Seaton]. Lt-Col in MacKay’s Regiment. Wounded at Oldenburg in 1627.
David Sinclair. Colonel of Cavalry.
Francis Sinclair. Lt-Col to foot in Swedish service.
James Sinclair. Officer in MacKay’s Regiment. Lt-Col in Swedish service.
John Sinclair. Brother of Robert Leslie. Colonel to Old Scots Regiment in Swedish service.
Walter Leslie. Officer in Imperial service, rising to major in 1634. For role in assassination of Wallenstein, later
elevated to Count.
John Lichton. Colonel in Swedish service. Killed at Wittstock in 1636.
─ Liddel. Commander in Sweden.
Alexander Lindsay. Lt-Col, since slain in Bavaria. Brother of John Lindsay.
Alexander Lindsay, Lord Spynie. Colonel of a Scottish regiment raised for service in Denmark in 1627.
George Lindsay, 14th Earl of Crawford (??–1633). Colonel of German regiment in service of GA. Killed by a
lieutenant of his regiment.
Henry Lindsay. Began service in Mackay’s Regiment. Lt-Col to Leslie the younger. Wounded at Lützen. Died
at Hamburg in 1639.
John Lindsay of Bainshaw. Lt-Col in MacKay’s Regiment. Killed at Neu Brandenburg in 1631.
William Lindsay. Lt-Col to Horse.
Sir James Lumsden. Colonel to a regiment of Scots in Green Brigade of GA.
Robert Lumsden [Lumsdell]. Began service in Mackay’s Regiment. Rose to Lt-Col to foot in Swedish service.
John Lyall [Lyell]. Lt-Col to foot in Swedish service.
─ MacDougal[l]. Lt-Col in Swedish service, since slain in Swabia.
─ MacDougal. Colonel of a Scottish regiment. Landed with GA in Germany in 1630.
Angus Mackay. Son of Sir Donald MacKay. Served as colonel in Danish army.
Sir Donald Mackay, Lord Reay. Colonel to a regiment of Scots in Danish service. Held commission for three
regiments from GA and commanded brigade in Swedish service.
William MacKay. Lt-Col of Swedes. Killed at Lützen in 1632.
─ MacKean. Lt-Col in Swedish service. Killed at Alte Feste in 1632.
─ MacKenzie
Sir John Meldrum. Colonel in Prussia to foot.
Arthur Mon-gorge. Lt-Col to foot.
James Monipenny. Lt-Col of cavalry. Promoted at Breitenfeld for bravery.
71
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
─ Monro. Many field officers of the name. Grant states there were twenty-seven.
Sir Hector Monro. Lt-Col, since a Colonel of Germans in Swedish service. Made Knight Baronet. Died at
Hamburg in 1635, and buried at Buckstehood in the Oldland on the Elbe.
John Monro of Obsdale (1588/9–1633). Elder brother of Robert Monro. Anti-Imperial service (1627–32),
rising to rank of colonel of a regiment of Scots. Killed during altercation with German troops in Swedish
service. Buried at Ulm.
Robert Monro, Baron [Black Laird] of Foulis (d. 1633). Anti-Imperial service (1627–32): colonel of horse &
foot over Germans; died of battle wounds suffered at Ulm.
James Montgomery. Lt-Col, slain in combat.
─ Monypenny. Lt-Col to horse.
Peter More. Commander in Sweden.
John Mŭnro of Assynt. Lt-Col to foot in Swedish service.
Henry Muschamp. Lt-Col, since was a Colonel and was slain at Nördlingen.
─ Muster. Colonel in Swedish service.
John Nairn. Commander in Sweden.
William Ogilvie. Commander in Sweden.David Sinclair.
John Sinclair. Lt-Col in MacKay’s Regiment. Killed at Neumarkt in 1633.
Hugh Somerville. Aide-de-camp to GA at Lützen.
William Spence. Lt-Col to foot.
─ Stargate
George Stewart. Lt-Col in Conway’s Regiment. Drowned off Danish coast in .
James Stewart. Last Lord St. Colme.
Robert Stewart. Lt-Col of Lumsden’s pikemen under Otto Todt. Since a Colonel. Ulster Protestant.
Sir William Stewart. Lt-Col in MacKay’s Regiment. Wounded at Oldenburg in 1627. Succeeded to Colonel of
RM’s Regiment upon death of John Sinclair. [Laggan Army in Ulster??]
─ Taylor. Commander in Sweden.
Thomas Thomson. Colonel to foot of Swedes, since dead.
William Troop[e]. Lt-Col slain in the Palatinate.
John Urquhart of Cromarty.
─ Vavazer. Lt-Col since a Colonel to foot.
Robert Weir. Lt-Col, since slain in Saxony.
72
Appendix II: Authorized Levies, 1618–1648 {USM 138–140}308
It is impossible to ascertain exactly how many soldiers emigrated from Scotland to the Continent. Merely
adding up the numbers authorized is a waste of time: levies in the early years (1618– 1627) were often overfilled; levies in the middle years (1637–1634) were about three-fourths filled (guestimate); and levies in the
final years (1635–1648) were rarely half met. Then, military entrepreneurs often levied illegally, that is,
recruits were raised and transported without authority. This was especially true when a military entrepreneur
was recruiting his own kinsmen. In the listing below, some appear to be duplicates, but that is because there
were several steps: acquisition of a contract, king authorizes; PCS disposes [albeit not always the number
authorized by king, i.e., not rubber-stamped]. More information TBP.
DATE
1618–1624
4/28/1620
1/30/1621
*/*/1623
[*/*/1623
[*/*/1624
3/30/1624
# MEN
2000
100
6000 by James
8000 by Poland
xxx by Spain
1200 by James
1200
7/1/1624
1625–1629
*/*/1625
300 by Charles
1/24/1626
800 by Charles
7/20/1626
400 by PCS
3/3/1626
RPCS 2:1 & 245/London
3/16/1626
─
5/16/1626
2000 by PCS
6/25/1626
500
10/22/1626
3000 by Charles
2/13/1627
1200 by PCS
2/8/1627
3000 by Charles
2/8/1627
3000 by Charles
2/8/1627
3000 by Charles
2/27/1627
3000 by PCS
3/8/1627
3000 by PCS
3/8/1627
3000 by PCS
8/17/1627
2000 by Charles
8/29/1627
2000by PCS
8/12/1627
200
2/19/1627
1000 by Charles
308
─
DESTINATION/ENTREPRENEUR
SOURCE/WHERE ISSUED
Bohemia/Sir Andrew Gray
Palatinate/John Lindsay
Palatinate/Gray & Count Mansfeld
Poland/Robert Stewart
LC/Earl of Argyle
Sweden/James Spens
Sweden/James Spens
2000 LC/James Spens
1 RPCS 12:257, 273
2 RPCS 2:412
─
1 RPCS 3:lvii – GA opposed]
1 RPCS 3:viii]
2 RPCS 1:524note/London
1 RPCS 3:478/Edinburgh
1 RPCS 3:364
Palatine/James Leslie
Palatine/James Leslie
Palatine/James Leslie
2000 by Charles
2 RPCS 1:lxiv/London
2 RPCS 1:354/London
2 RPCS 1:355/Edinburgh
Palatine/Donald MacKay
Denmark/A. Lindsey, Lord Spynie
Denmark/Donald MacKay
Denmark/Alex. Seton
Sweden/James Spens
Sweden James Spens
Denmark/E/Nithsdale-Maxwell
Denmark/A. Lindsey, Lord Spynie
Denmark/James Sinclair
Denmark/E/Nithsdale-Maxwell
Denmark/James Sinclair
Denmark/A. Lindsey, Lord Spynie
England v France/Earl Of Morton
England v France Earl Of Morton
England v France /A. M'nauchtan
Denmark/Sir Donald Mckay
2 RPCS 1:294
2 RPCS 1:295/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 1:315
2 RPCS 1:524/London
2 RPCS 1:523/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 1:532/London
2 RPCS 1:539/London
2 RPCS 1:539/London
2 RPCS 1:531/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 1:540/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 1:539/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 2:51/London
2 RPCS 2:52/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 2:56
2 RPCS 2:297/London
This appendix is a somewhat expanded version of that which appeared in USM. Added is more information pertaining to
authorized levies. Also added is some data pertaining to unauthorized levies and to recruiting practices. Sources include various
document collections, CSPD 14 & 16; Expedition; Fallon, USM and RPCS. It is not intended to be a comprehensive list. Check
back for more data TBP.
73
2
*/*/1627
7/11/1628
9/25/1628
7/1628
7/1628
[*/*/1629
10/18/1629
3/9/1629
3/9/1629
4/9/1629
4/9/1629
4/1/1629
7/7/1629
[9/*/1629
[9/*/1629
1630–1635
1630
4/*/1630
10/24/1630
10/24/1630
10/24/1630
5/5/1631
6/2/1631
6/30/1631
8/*/1631
7/22/1631
8/*/1631
11/*/1631
9/*/1631
10/5/1631
4/*/1632
4/26/1632
4/18/1632
5/25/1632
7/29/1632
*/*/1632
3/28/1633
4/24/1633
1633
1636–1643
6/9/1635
7/1/1635
7/17/1635
10/26/1635
11/16/1635
11/2/1635
1000 by PCS
500 by Charles
500 by PCS
300 by Charles
300 by PCS
2 Regt by GA
Raised 300
Regt by Charles
Regt [2000]
1200 by Charles
1200 by PCS
1200 by Charles
1200 by PCS
1200 by Charles
1200 by PCS
300 by Sweden
300 by Sweden
1200
2000 by Charles
6000 by Charles
Assist
6000 by PCS
2000 by Charles
2000 by PCS
1200 by Charles
1200 by PCS
2000 by Charles
2000 by PCS
Sent 1800
200 by Charles
200by PCS
1200 by Charles
1200 by PCS
200 by Charles
2000
200
1500
1200 by Charles
1200 by PCS
200
Denmark/Sir Donald Mckay
Denmark/Sir George Keith
Denmark/Sir George Keith
Sweden/LtCol Cunningham
Sweden/LtCol Cunningham
Sweden/Earl/Crawford (George Lindsay)
Sweden/Earl/Crawford (George Lindsay)
LC/Sir George Hay
LC/Sir George Hay
Sweden/Alexander Hamilton
Sweden/Alexander Hamilton
Sweden/Sir John Meldrum
Sweden/Sir John Meldrum
Sweden/Sir George Cunningham
Sweden/Sir George Cunningham
Capt Henry Muschamp
Capt ** Douglas
Sweden/Col John Gordon
France/Lord Gordon
Sweden/Marquis Of Hamilton
Sweden/ Marquis Of Hamilton
Sweden/Marquis Of Hamilton
Sweden/Sir Donald MacKay
Sweden/Sir Donald MacKay
Sweden/Sir Fred. Hamilton
Sweden/Sir Fred. Hamilton
Sweden/Alexander Forbes
Sweden/Alexander Forbes
Sweden Appeals For Shipping
Sweden/Ludovick Leslie
Sweden/Ludovick Leslie
Sweden/Col James Lumsden
Sweden/James Lumsden
France/Lord Gordon
Russia/Col Alexander Leslie &
LtCol Thomas Sanderson
Sweden/James Macdougall
LC
France/Sir John Hepburn
France/Sir John Hepburn
Russia/Sir Alex Leslie
No levies/levying permitted by Charles
200 can go
France/James Lindsay
60
Sweden/Thomas Moffat
─
France/Col N. Forbes
─
France/Col N. Forbes
60
France/Alexander Gordon
74
2 RPCS 2:295/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 2:456/London
2 RPCS 2:457/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 2:396/London
2 RPCS 2:397/Edinburgh
Berg & Lagercrantz, 29]
2 RPCS 3:313
2 RPCS 3:99/London
2 RPCS 3:99, 120
2 RPCS 3:136/London
2 RPCS 3:136/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 3:138/London
2 RPCS 3:137/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 3:208/London
2 RPCS 3:208/Edinburgh
Fallon, 57]
Fallon, 57]
Fischer, 91
─, 88/London
2 RPCS 4:58, 193/London
2 RPCS 4:194
2 RPCS 4:194/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 4:219/London
2 RPCS 4:219/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 4:319/London
2 RPCS 4:319, 627/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 4:319/London
2 RPCS 4:318, 627/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 4:360-361
2 RPCS 4:342/London
2 RPCS 4:342/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 4:483/London
2 RPCS 4:483/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 4:482/London
─, 407
2 RPCS 4:525
2 RPCS 4:xxxvii
2 RPCS 5:65/London
2 RPCS 5:65/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 5:79
2 RPCS 6:28/London
2 RPCS 6:??
2 RPCS 6:65
─
─
2 RPCS 6:140–141
12/17/1635
3/9/1636
4/16/1636
9/11/1636
2/27/1637
3/9/1637
5/13/1637
5/13/1637
10/19/1637
5/13/1637
5/13/1637
7/25/1637
12/4/1638
12/4/1638
1/14/1639
1/14/1639
1/*/1639
12/3/1641
3/2/1642
3/2/1642
4/7/1642
4/7/1642
6/25/1642
7/21/1642
3/5/1642
*/*/164*
2/16/1643
1/1644
1643–1660
8/29/1654
8/29/1654
1654
[3/1656
60
300 by Charles
300 by PCS
xx by Kristina
cavalry squadron
1000 by Charles
1000 by PCS
400 by Charles
400 by PCS
92 drowned
800 by Charles
400 by PCS
400 by Charles
400 by PCS
1000 by Charles
1000 by PCS
1000 by Charles
1000by PCS
─
10,000 by PCS
4500 by Charles
4500 by PCS
1000 by Charles
1000 by PCS
1000 by Charles
500 by PCS
2000
1500
80
France/Robert Towers
LC/James Lord Almond
LC/James Lord Almond
Sweden/Col Robert Monro
Sweden/Francis Ruthven
France/Robert Hume
France/Robert Hume
Sweden/Alex. Cunningham
Sweden/Alex. Cunningham
Aberdeen/Alex. Gordon
Sweden/Robert Monro
Sweden/Robert Monro
Sweden/Robert Stuart
Sweden/Robert Stuart
France/Andrew Gray
France/Andrew Gray
France/Alex. Erskine
France/Alex. Erskine
Scots! Come Home!
Ireland/Scottish Army
France/Earl Irvine-J. Campbell
France/Earl Irvine
France/Col Fullerton
France/Col Fullerton
France/James Douglas
France/James Douglas
France/James Douglas
France/Wm Gordon
France/James Gordon
2 companies
2 RPCS 6:157
2 RPCS 6:225/London
2 RPCS 6:225/Edinburgh
─
─
2 RPCS 6:401&3/London
2 RPCS 6:401&3/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 6:458/London
2 RPCS 6:458; Fallon, 302/Edinburgh
Bulloch, ─,411
2 RPCS 6:459/London
2 RPCS 6:459; Fallon, 302/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 6:485/London
2 RPCS 6:484; Fallon, 302/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 7:104/London
2 RPCS 7:103/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 7:107/London
2 RPCS 7:106,136/Edinburgh
Bishops’ Wars
2 RPCS 7: ─/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 7:248/London
2 RPCS 7:247/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 7:281/London
2 RPCS 7:281/Edinburgh
2 RPCS 7:302/London
2 RPCS 7:302/Edinburgh
Bulloch, ─, 405/68
Spaulding, SC:23, 95
Bulloch, ─, 438
France/William Gordon Bulloch, ─, 514
1000
1000
Regt
Regt by Kristina
Continent/Earl Of Glencairn
Continent/Laird Of Lugton
Sweden/Col James Sinclair
Col Cranstoun
─, 29
─, 29
Fischer, Sweden, 123
Fischer, Sweden, 123]
75
Bibliography {USM 141–154}
It may be untrue, but it surely seems that anything written for publication must follow a style format which is
ALWAYS somewhat different from all other – including various standard – style formats. In particular,
spacing, spelling, abbreviations and punctuation usage requirements differ greatly. Creating a bibliography
thus required developing/following a consistent format/methodology. Since New Hart’s Rules: The
Handbook of Style for Writers and Editors (Oxford UP) offers the greatest flexibility, its basic guidelines are
applied. The best advice offered? ‘A decision [regarding what to include/exclude] … should be applied
consistently to all citations.’[New Hart’s Rules, 331] Thus, there is only one guarantee: posted entries will
make sense and will contain whatever bibliographical information provided throughout GRM.com. This
should make it possible for you to follow whatever style sheet required of you. If you hate the abbreviations
and acronyms, you’ll just have to live with them – even I had to learn how to txt. I am, of course, WSB.
Abbreviations Used in Footnotes & Bibliography:
─ Archives
BL
British Library, London
NAS
National Archives of Scotland (formerly Scottish Record Office), Edinburgh
NLS
National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh
PROL
Public Records Office, London
─ Archival Collections
BL TT
Thomason Tracts
BL Broadsheets German Broadsheets
EEBM
Early English Books, 1475–1640 (microfilm, which I used)
EEBO
Early English Books Online (various websites)
NAS
GD 84 Reay – Baron of MacKay Papers
PROL
SP 14 – State Papers, Domestic, James I, 1603–25
PROL
SP 16 – State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, 1625–49
─ Antiquarian & Historical Publishing Societies:
AUS
Aberdeen University Studies
BC
Bannatyne Club
CS
Camden Society
GC
Grampian Club
HMSO
His/Her Majesty’s Stationery Office
MC
Maitland Club
RC
Roxburghe Club
RHS
Royal Historical Society
SAS
Society of Antiquaries of Scotland
SAUP
St. Andrews University Publications
SBRS
Scottish Burgh Records Society
SC
Spalding Club
SGS
Scottish Gaelic Society
SHS
Scottish History Society
SRS
Scottish Record Society
STS
Scottish Text Society
SS
Spottiswoode Society
TRHS
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society
76
─ Journals, Monographs & Databases:
AgHR
Agricultural History Review
AmHR
American Historical Review
CEcHE
The Cambridge Economic History of Europe
CMH
The Cambridge Modern History
EcHR
Economic History Review
EHR
The English Historical Review
GRM.com
GeneralRobertMonro.com
HJ
The Historical Journal
HL
The Harleian miscellany
HT
History Today
HR
Historical Research
HZ
Historische Zeitschrift
IHS
Irish Historical Studies
JCBG
Jaarboek Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie
JBS
Journal of British Studies
JMH
Journal of Military History
MHQ
MHQ: The Quarterly Journal of Military History
NCMH
The New Cambridge Modern History
OSB
Mackay, An Old Scots Brigade
P&P
Past and Present
SG
Scottish Genealogist
SGM
Scottish Geographical Magazine
SGS
Scottish Gaelic Society
SHR
The Scottish Historical Review
Scotia
Scotia, the Journal of the St. Andrew Society
SSNE
Scotland, Scandinavia and Northern Europe
TGSI
Transactions of the Gaelic Society of Inverness
VSW
Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte
ZVHG
Zeitschrift des Vereins für Hamburgische Geschichte
─ Historical Organizations
CSBS
NACBS
North American Conference on British Studies
PCAS
SCBS
SCHA
─ Calendars, Bibliographic Guides and Dictionaries
Beller, E.A. ‘Contemporary English Printed Sources for the Thirty Years War’ in AmHR 32 (1926/27), 276–282.
Cockle, Maurice J.D. A Bibliography of English Military Books to 1642 and of Contemporary Foreign Works. London
GB: Simpkin Marshall, 1900.
CSPD 14: Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, of the reigns of Edward VI, Mary, Elizabeth, James I (1547–1625)
preserved in the State Paper Department of Her Majesty’s Public Record Office [SP 14]. 12 vols; various eds. London GB:
HMSO, 1856–1872.
CSPD 16: Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, of the Reign of Charles I (1625–1649) preserved in the State Paper
Department of Her Majesty’s Public Record Office [SP 16]. 23 vols; various eds [John Bruce, W.D. Hamilton & S.C. Lomas].
London GB: HMSO, 1858–1897.
Dahlmann-Waitz: Quellenkunde der Deutschen Geschichte. 9. Auflage; various eds [Friedrich Christoph Dahlmann,
Georg Waitz u. Erich Brandenburg]. Leipzig DE: Koehler, 1931.
77
DNB: The Dictionary of National Biography. 22 vols; Leslie Stephen & Sidney Lee (eds). London GB: Oxford UP,
1921–1922.
Davies, Godfrey (ed). Bibliography of British History: Stuart Period, 1603–1714. Oxford GB: Clarendon, 1928.
Matheson, Cyril. A Catalogue of the Publications of Scottish Historical and Kindred Clubs and Societies, 1908–1927.
Aberdeen GB: Milne & Hutchison, 1928.
Roach, John. A Bibliography of Modern History. Cambridge GB: CUP, 1968.
RPCS: Register of the Privy Council of Scotland (1569–1707). 3 series; 36 vols [1 RPCS 1–14 (1880–1898); 2 RPCS 1–8 (1899–
1908); 3 RPCS 1–14 (1908–1933)]; various eds. Edinburgh GB: HM General Register House, 1880–1933.
Terry, C. Stanford. A Catalogue of the Publications of Scottish Historical and Kindred Clubs and Societies, 1780–1908.
Glasgow GB: James MacLehose, 1909.
Thomson, John M. The Public Records of Scotland. Glasgow GB: James MacLehose & Sons, 1922.
─ Primary Material and Contemporary Accounts
‘A Most True Relation of the Late Proceedings in Bohemia, Germany, and Hungaria dated the 1, the 10 and 13 of July
this present yeere, 1620.’ Dort, 1620.
Bettenson, Henry (ed). Documents of the Christian Church, 2nd ed. London GB: Oxford UP, 1963.
Bible: Geneva (1566); English (1599). The 1599 Geneva Bible Patriot’s Edition. White Hall WV: Tolle Lege, 2010.
BL German Broadsheets (1630–1632). BL 1750 b 29/95: Scots flogging Papists; BL 1750 b 29/104: 800 Scots arrive in
Stettin; BL 1750 b 29/105: King of Sweden uses foreign nationals.
Brown, P. Hume. Scotland before 1700 from Contemporary Documents. Edinburgh GB: David Douglas, 1893.
Burnet, Gilbert. The Memoirs of...James and William, Dukes of Hamilton and Castle-Herald. London GB: Grover,
1677.
Cowan, Samuel. The Ruthven Family Papers. London GB: Simpkin-Marshall-Hamilton-Kent, 1912.
Crowne, William. A True Relation of...the travels of...Thomas...Earl of Arundell, Ambassador
Extraordinary...to...Fernando the Second. London GB: Henry Seile, 1637.
[Crowne, William]. Connoisseur and Diplomat: The Earl of Arundel’s Embassy to Germany in 1636 as recounted in
William Crowne’s Diary…. Francis C. Springell (ed). London GB: Shenval Press, 1963.
Dalyell, Sir John Graham. Fragments of Scottish History. Edinburgh GB: [David Willison] for Archibald Constable,
1798.
Ferguson, James (ed). Papers Illustrating the History of the Scots Brigade in the Service of the United Netherlands,
1572–1782. SHS: 3 vols» 32, 35 & 38 [vol 1»32: the War of Independence, 1572–1609; the Time of the Twelve
Years’ Truce, 1609–1621; the Thirty Years’ War, 1621–1648; the Age of William of Orange and the British
Revolution, 1649–1697 (1899)]. Edinburgh GB: Constable, 1899–1901].
Forbes-Leith, William. The Scots Men-at-Arms and Life-Guards in France. 2 vols. Edinburgh GB: Paterson, 1882.
Fraser, Sir William (ed). The Manuscripts of the Dukes of Hamilton. London GB: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1887.
Fraser, Sir William (ed). The Melvilles, Earls of Melville, and the Leslies, Earls of Leven. 3 vols. Edinburgh: n.p., 1890.
Fraser, Sir William (ed). The Sutherland Book. 3 vols [vol 1: Memoirs; vol 2: Correspondence; vol 3: Charters].
Edinburgh: n.p., 1892.
Fyfe, J.G. (ed). Scottish Diaries and Memoirs. 2 vols [vol 1: 1550–1746]. Stirling GB: Eneas Mackay, 1927.
Gardiner, Samuel Rawson (ed). The Fortescue Papers. New ser CS 1. London GB: J.B. Nichols & Sons, 1871.
Gardiner, Samuel Rawson (ed). The Hamilton Papers. New ser CS 27. London GB: J.B. Nichols & Sons, 1880.
Gardiner, Samuel Rawson (ed). Letters and Documents Illustrating the Relations between England and Germany at the
Commencement of the Thirty Years War. CS 90 & 98. London GB: J.B. Nichols & Sons or Offices of the Royal
Society, 1865 & 1868.
Grimmelshausen, Hans Jakob Christoph von. Der Abenteuerliche Simplicius Simplicissimus (1669). Reprint. München:
W. Goldman, 1961.
Heldmann, Karl. Fürsten- und Feldherrenbriefe aus der Zeit des Dreißigjährigen Krieges. Göttingen DE: Vandenhoeck
u. Rupprecht, 1913.
KJVB: Holy Bible 1611 King James Version. 400th Anniversary Edition. Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan, 2011.
78
‘Letter from George Fleetwood to his Father, Giving an Account of the Battle of Lützen and the Death of Gustavus
Adolphus (1633)’ in The Camden Miscellany, CS 1; Sir Philip de Malpas Grey-Egerton (ed). London GB: Offices of
the Royal Society, 1847: 3–12.
Lithgow, William. The Totall Discourse … of long Ninetene Yeares Travayles from Scotland …. London GB: Nicholas
Okes, 1632.
MacDonald, Alexander (ed). Letters to King James the Sixth from the Queen, … the Princess Elizabeth and her
husband Friedrich King of Bohemia …. MC 35. Edinburgh GB: MC, 1835.
MacDonald, Alexander (ed). Papers Relative to the Royal Guard of Scottish Archers in France. MC 36. Edinburgh GB:
MC, 1835.
MacDonald, Alexander (ed). Reports on the State of Certain Parishes in Scotland. MC 34. Edinburgh GB: MC, 1835.
Machiavelli, Niccolò. The Art of War (1521; 1st English ed, 1560). Rev ed of Ellis Farneworth; Neal Wood (trans).
Indianapolis IN: Bobbs–Merrill, 1965.
Mackay, Sir Donald, Lord Reay. NAS: Reay Papers GD 84/2/146–192a. Letters, commissions, petitions, &c., primarily
regarding Mackay/Reay as military entrepreneur (1626–33).
MacLean, I.J. De Huwelijksintekeningen Van Schotse Militairen in Nederland 1574–1665. Zutphen NL: De Walburg,
1976).
[Mansfeld, Ernst]. The Appollogie of Ernestus, Earle of Mansfielde. S.W. (trs). Heidelberg DE: n.p., 1622.
Michel, Francisque. Les Ecossais en France, les Français en Ecosse. 2 vols; Libraire de la Société de l’École Impériale
des Chartes et de la Société Impériale des Antiquaires de France (Paris: A. Franck, 1862).
Monro, Robert. Monro his Expedition with the Worthy Scots Regiment called Mac-Keyes Regiment …. London GB: W.
Jones, 1637.
Monro his Expedition with the Worthy Scots Regiment Called Mac-Keyes by Colonel Robert Monro (London England:
1637). WSB, ed. Praeger Series in War Studies (Westport CT: Greenwood, 1999).
N.N.N., an exile. History of the Bohemian Persecution, from...894 to...1632. London GB: B.A. for John Walker, 1650.
[Poyntz, Sydnam]. The Relation of Sydnam Poyntz, 1624–1636. 3 CS 14; A.T.S. Goodrick (ed). London GB: Offices of
the Royal Society, 1908.
PROL SP 14. State Papers, Domestic Series, of the reigns of Edward VI, Mary, Elizabeth, James I (1547–1625)
preserved in the State Paper Department of Her Majesty’s Public Record Office, London GB.
PROL SP 16. State Papers, Domestic Series, of the Reign of Charles I (1625–1649) preserved in the State Paper
Department of Her Majesty’s Public Record Office, London GB.
Pufendorf, Samuel von. The Compleat History of Sweden. C. Brockwell (trs). London GB: Joseph Wild at the Elephant
at Charing Cross, 1702.
Pufendorf, Samuel von. An Introduction to the History of the Principal Kingdoms and States of Europe. J. Crull (trs).
London: Three Crowns in St. Paul’s Churchyard, 1719.
Reay Papers. NAS GD 84/2/146–192a.
[Roe, Thomas:] ‘Letters Relating to the Mission of Sir Thomas Roe to Gustavus Adolphus, 1629–1630’ in The Camden
Miscellany, CS 7: Samuel Rawson Gardiner (ed). Westminster GB: J.B. Nichols & Sons, 1875: ppp .
Scott, David. History of Scotland containing all the Historical Transactions of that Nation, from the year of the World
3619 to the year of Christ 1726. Westminster GB: Cluer & Campbell, 1728.
Scott, Sir Walter. A Legend of Montrose (1819). New York: Routledge and Sons, 1831.
Spalding, John. Memorialls of the Trubles in Scotland and in England, A.D. 1624–A.D. 1645. SC: 2 vols [21 & 23];
John Stuart (ed). Aberdeen GB: SC, 1850–51.
Steuart, A. Francis (ed). Papers Relating to the Scots in Poland, 1576–1793. SHS 59. Edinburgh GB: SHS, 1915.
SweInt: The Swedish Intelligencer, Religious, Civile, and Military. 8 parts: (a) Lion of the North [Part I – 2 vols, to
Breitenfeld; Part II – 4 vols, to Munich; Part III – 5 vols to Lützen; Part IV – 3 vols, 1630–1632, history of other
armies not with GA]; (b) Continuation of German History [Part V – 3 vols, 1633; Part VI – 3 vols, 1634]; (c) Modern
History [Parts VII & VIII 3 sections – 5 vols, 1634–1635]. London GB: Nathaniel Butter & Nicholas Bourne, 1633–
1634.
79
Taylor, John. Taylor, his travels, from the City of London in England to the City of Prague in Bohemia...with many
relations worthy of note. London GB: N. Okes for H. Gosson, 1620.
Teulet, Jean Baptiste Alexandre Theodore. Papiers d’Etat relatifs de l‘Histoire de l‘Écosse au 16me Siecle; tires des
Bibliotheques et des Archives de France, et publies pour la Bannatyne Club d’Edinbourg. BC 107, ?? & ??; 3 vols
(Paris: Plon frères, 1851–1852).
‘The Great and Famous Battel of Lutzen, fought between the Renowned King of Sweden and Walstein ... faithfully
translated out of the French copy (1633)’ in HL:4. Jacob Baum (ed). London GB: Harding & Wright, 1809: 197–210.
Turner, James. Memoirs of his own Life and Times, 1632–1670. BC 28: Thomas Thomson (ed). London GB: BC, 1829.
Turner, James. Pallas Armata: Military Essayes of the…Modern Art of War. London GB: M.W. at the Rose & Crown,
1683.
Vincent, Philip. The Lamentations of Germany…. London GB: E.G. for J. Rothwell, 1638.
─ General Works
Anderson, Roger C. Naval Wars in the Baltic during the Sailing Ship Epoch, 1522–1850. London GB: Gilbertwood,
1910.
Andersson, Ingvar. A History of Sweden. Carolyn Hannay (trs). New York NY: Friedrich A. Praeger, 1957.
Aston, Trevor (ed). Crisis in Europe, 1560–1660. London GB: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965.
Baustaedt, B. Richelieu and Deutschland: von der Schlacht bei Breitenfeld bis zum Tode Bernhards von Weimar.
Historiche Studien 295. Berlin DE: Emil Ebering, 1936.
Beauge, Jean de. The Martial Atchievements of the Scots Nation. 2 vols; Patrick Abercromby (trs). Edinburgh GB:
Robert Freebarin, 1711 & 1715.
Beller, E.A. Propaganda in Germany during the Thirty Years War. Princeton NJ: PUP, 1940.
Blair, Claude. European Armour circa 1066 to circa 1700. London GB: B.T. Batsford, 1958.
Berg, Janas & Bo Lagercrantz. Scots in Sweden. P.A. Hart (trs). Stockholm SE: Stellan Stål, 1962.
Bottomore, T.B. Elites and Society. London GB: C.A. Watts, 1964.
Brandi, Karl. Gegenreformation und Religonskriege. Leipzig DE: Koehler u. Umelang, 1941.
Braubach, Max, and Konrad Repgen. Acta Pacis Westphalicae. Munster DE: Aschendorff, 1962.
Bryce, James. The Holy Roman Empire. New ed. London GB: Macmillan, 1978.
Brown, P. Hume. Scotland in the Time of Queen Mary. Edinburgh GB: David Douglas, 1904.
Buchan, John and George A. Smith. The Kirk in Scotland. London GB: Hodder & Stoughton, 1930.
Bulloch, James. The Kirk in Scotland. Edinburgh GB: St. Andrews, 1960.
Bulloch, J.H. The Scot Abroad. 2 vols. Edinburgh GB: M. Blackwood & Sons, 1864.
Bulloch, John Malcolm. The Gay Gordons. London GB: Chapman & Hall, 1908.
Bulloch, John Malcolm. Gordons in Germany: the Brandenburg Line. Aberdeen GB: John Avery, 1932.
Bulloch, John Malcolm. The House of Gordon. 2 vols; AUS 8 & 30. Aberdeen GB: AUP, 1903 & 1907.
Bulloch, John Malcolm & C.O. Skelton. Gordons Under Arms. AUS 59. Aberdeen GB: AUP, 1912.
Burton, John Hill. The Scot Abroad. New ed. Edinburgh GB: William Blackwood & Sons, 1898.
Carman, W.Y. A History of Firearms from the Earliest Times to 1914. London GB: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1955.
Clark, G.N. The Seventeenth-Century. 2nd ed. Oxford GB: Clarendon, 1963.
Clark, G.N. War and Society in the Seventeenth-Century. Cambridge GB: CUP, 1958.
Coupe, W.A. The German Illustrated Broadsheet in the Seventeenth-Century. 2 vols. Baden-Baden DE: Librairie Heitz,
1966.
Crawfurd, George. The Peerage of Scotland: Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that
Kingdom. Edinburgh GB: printed for the author, 1716.
Cust, Sir Edward. Lives of the Warriors of the Thirty Years War. 2 vols. London GB: John Murray, 1865.
Dalrymple, Sir David. Sketch of the Life of Sir James Ramsay. Edinburgh: n.p., [1784].
Dalton, Charles. The Scots Army, 1661–1688, with Memoirs of the Commanders-in-Chief. London GB: Eyre, 1909.
Davidson, John & Alexander Gray. The Scottish Staple at Veere: a Study in the Economic History of Scotland. London
GB: Longmans Green, 1909.
80
Defoe, Daniel. The Scots Nation and Union Vindicated from the Reflections Cast on Them, in an Infamous Libel,
Entitl’d the Publick Spirit of the Whigs [by Jonathan Swift]. London GB: printed for A. Bell, 1714.
Delbrück, Hans. Geschichte der Kriegskunst im Rahmen der politischen Geschichte. 4 vols [Band 3: Das Mittelalter;
Band 4: Neuzeit ] . Berlin DE: Georg Stilke, 1920.
Delbrück, Hans. History of the Art of War. Walter J. Renfroe, Jr. (trs). 4 vols [vol 4: The Dawn of Modern Warfare
(1920/1990). Lincoln NE: UNEP, 1975–1980.
Deutike, Karl. Die Schlacht bei Lützen. Dissertation: Universität Gießen DE, 1917.
Dickenson, W. Croft. Scotland from the Earliest Times to 1603. 2nd ed. Oxford GB: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1965.
Dolan, John Patrick. History of the Reformation: A Conciliatory Assessment of Opposite Views. New York NY: New
American Library, 1967.
Donaldson, Gordon. The Scottish Reformation. New York NY: Cambridge UP, 1960.
Donner, Otto. Brief Sketch of the Scottish Families in Sweden and Finland. Helsinki [Helsingfors: Swedish] SE/FI:
Finnish Literary Society, 1884.
Douglas, R.M. The Scots Book. Glasgow GB: James MacLehose & Sons, 1935.
Dow, James. Ruthven’s Army in Sweden and Estonia. Historiskt Arkiv 13. Stockholm SE: Kungl. Vitterhets Historie Och
Antikvitets Akedemien, 1965.
Droysen, Gustav. Bernhard von Weimar. 2 vols. Leipzig DE: Duncker u. Humblot, 1885.
Droysen, Gustav. Gustaf Adolf. 2 vols. Leipzig DE: Beit, 1870.
Dudik, B. Die Schweden in Böhmen und Mähren, 1640–1650. Vienna AT: Carl Gerold’s Sohn, 1879.
Durant, Will [& Ariel]. The Story of Civilization. 11 vols [vol 5: The Renaissance: A History of Civilization in Italy from
1304–1576 AD (1953); vol 6: The Reformation: A History of European Civilization from Wyclif to Calvin from 1300
to 1564 (1957); and vol 7: The Age of Reason Begins: from the reign of Elizabeth I through the Thirty Years’ War
(1961)]. New York NY: Simon & Schuster, 1935–1975.
Earle, E.M.(ed). Makers of Modern Strategy: Military Thought from Machiavelli to Hitler. Princeton NJ: PUP, 1944.
Ergang, R. The Myth of the All-Destructive Fury of the Thirty Years’ War. Pocono Pines PA: Craftsman, 1956.
Fallon, James A. Scottish Mercenaries in the Service of Denmark and Sweden, 1626–1632. Dissertation: University of
Glasgow GB, 1972.
Farmer, D.L. Britain and the Stuarts, 1603–1714. New York NY: Humanities Press, 1966.
Fischer, Thomas A. (pseud Ernst Ludwig). The Scots in Eastern and Western Prussia. Edinburgh GB: Otto Schulze,
1903.
Fischer, Thomas A. [pseud Ernst Ludwig]. The Scots in Germany, being a Contribution towards the History of the Scots Abroad.
Edinburgh GB: Otto Schulze, 1902.
Fischer, Thomas A. (pseud Ernst Ludwig). The Scots in Sweden. Edinburgh GB: Otto Schulze, 1907.
Fletcher, C.R.L. Gustavus Adolphus and the Struggle of Protestantism for Existence. New York NY: G.A. Putnam &
Sons, 1895.
Fortescue, Sir John. History of the British Army. 20 vols [vol 1: from the Battle of Hastings to the end of the Seven
Year’s War (1713)]. London GB: MacMillan, 1889.
Franklin, Thomas Bedford. A History of Scottish Farming. London GB: Thomas Nelson, 1952.
Frauenholz, Eugen von. Das Heerwesen in der Zeit des Dreißigjährigen Krieges. Vol 3.1 of Entwicklungsgeschichte des
deutschen Heerwesens. Munich DE: C.H. Beck, 1939.
Friedrich, Carl J. The Age of the Baroque, 1610–1660. New York NY: Harper & Row, 1965.
Fuchs, John. Die Schlacht bei Nördlingen am 6. September 1634. Weimer DE: Karl Voigt, 1868.
Fuller, J.F.C. The Decisive Battles of the Western World and their Influence upon History, 3 vols [vol 1: from the
earliest times to the battle of Lepanto (1954); vol 2: from the defeat of the Spanish Armada to the battle of Waterloo
(1956)]. London GB: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1954–1956.
Gardiner, Samuel Rawson. History of England from the Accession of James I to the Outbreak of the Civil War, 1603–
1642. New ed, 10 vols [vols 3–10: 1616–1642). London GB: Longmans Green, 1883–1884.
Gardiner, Samuel Rawson. The Thirty Years War, 1618–1648. London GB: Longmans Green, 1874.
Gindely, Anton. Geschichte der Gegenreformation in Böhmen. Leipzig DE: Duncker u. Humbolt, 1894.
81
Gindely, Anton. History of the Thirty Years War. 2 vols; A. Ten Broek (trs). New York NY: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1884.
Gordon, C.A. A Concise History of the Ancient and Illustrious House of Gordon. Aberdeen GB: p.a., 1754.
Gordon, William. The History of the Ancient, Noble and Illustrious Family of Gordon, from their first arrival in
Scotland in Malcolm III's time to the year 1690. 2 vols (Edinburgh: Thomas Ruddiman, 1726).
Grant, I.F. The Economic History of Scotland. London GB: Longmans Green, 1934.
Grant, I.F. The Social and Economic Development of Scotland before 1603. Edinburgh GB: Oliver & Boyd, 1930.
Grant, James. Cavaliers of Fortune. London GB: Routledge, Warnes & Routledge, 1859.
Grant, James. Memoirs and Adventures of Sir John Hepburn, Commander of the Scots Brigade under Gustavus
Adolphus. Edinburgh GB: William Blackwood & Sons, 1851.
Grant, James. The Scottish Soldiers of Fortune. London GB: George Routledge & Sons, 1889.
Hackradt, August. Gustav Horn: schwedischer Feldherr im Dreißigjährigen Kriege. Dissertation: Universität HalleWittenberg DE, 1883.
Hallendorff, C. & A. Schück. History of Sweden. Lajla Yap (trs). London GB: Cassell, 1929.
Hantsch, Hugo. Die Geschichte Österreichs, 1648–1918. 2 vols [Band 1: bis 1648]. Graz AT: Universitäts
Buchdruckerei Styria, 1937 & 1950.
Harte, Walter. The History of the Life of Gustavus Adolphus, King of Sweden…. 2 vols. London GB: G. Hawkins, 1759.
Heckscher, Eli F. An Economic History of Sweden. Goran Ohlin (trs). Cambridge MA: Harvard UP, 1954.
Holborn, Hajo. A History of Modern Germany. 3 vols [vol 1: The Reformation; vol 2: 1648–1840]. New York NY:
Knopf, 1961–1964.
[Howe, J.]. Biographia Scoticana. 3rd ed. Edinburgh GB: Schaw & Bielans, 1796.
Hurter, Friedrich von. Wallensteins vier letzte Lebensjahre. Vienna AT: Wilhelm Braumüller, 1862.
Hurter, Friedrich von. Zur Geschichte Wallensteins. Zürich CH: Zürcher u. Furrer, 1855.
Irmer, Georg. Hans Georg von Arnim. Leipzig DE: G. Hirzel, 1894.
Irving, Joseph (ed). The Book of Scotsmen. Paisley GB: Alexander Gardner, 1882.
Jacob, Karl. Von Lützen nach Nördlingen: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des 30jähr. Krieges in Süddeutschland, 1633–
1634. Strassburg DE: van Hauten, 1904.
Jähns, M. Geschichte der Kriegswissenschaften, vornehmlich in Deutschland. 3 vols [Band 2: XVII and XVIII
Jahrhundert bis zum Auftreten Friedrichs des Grossen (1890)]. Geschichte der Wissenschaften, vol 21.2. Berlin DE:
Oldenbourg, 1889–1891.
Jany, Curt. Geschichte der königlich preussischen Armee bis zum Jahre 1807. 4 vols [Band 1: von den Anfangen bis
1740 (1928)]. Berlin DE: Karl Siegismund, 1928–1933.
Keltie, John S. (ed). A History of the Scottish Highlands. 2 vols. Edinburgh GB: A. Fullerton, 1875.
Krebs, Julius. Die Schlacht am weissen Berge bei Prag. Breslau A-H: Wilhelm Koebner, 1879.
Laffin, John. Scotland the Brave: the Story of the Scottish Soldier. London GB: White Lion, 1963.
Lane, Jane. The Reign of King Covenant. London GB: Robert Hale, 1956.
Lang, Andrew. A History of Scotland from the Roman Occupation. 4 vols [vols 2: 1546–1625 (1902); vol 3: 1625–1689
(1904)]. Edinburgh GB: William Blackwood & Sons, 1900–1907.
Lee, R.W. Hugo Grotius. Proceedings of the British Academy, vol 16. London GB: Oxford UP, 1930.
Lloyd, E.M. A Review of the History of Infantry. London GB: Longmans Green, 1908.
Loose, Hans-Dieter. Hamburg und Christian IV. von Dänemark während des dreissigjährigen krieges; ein Beitrag zur
Geschichte der hamburgischen Reichsunmittelbarkeit. Hamburg DE: H. Christians, 1963.
Lorentzen, Theodor. Die Enschädigung der schwedischen Armee nach dem Dreissigjährigen Kriege. Dissertation:
Universität Heidelberg DE, 1888.
Lorentzen, Theodor. Die Schwedische Armee im Dreißigjährigen Kriege und ihre Abdankung. Leipzig DE: Von Veit,
1894.
Lorimer, James. The Green Brigade [novel]. Edinburgh GB: William Blackwood, 1935.
Lufft, August. Die Schlachten bei Freiburg im Breisgau im August 1644: Enghien und Turenne gegen Mercy. Freiburg
i.B. DE: n.p., 1882.
Lythe, S.G.E. The Economy of Scotland in its European Setting, 1550–1625. Edinburgh GB: Oliver & Boyd, 1960.
82
Mackay, John. An Old Scots Brigade [OSB] being the History of Mackay’s Regiment, 1626–1634. Edinburgh GB:
William Blackwood, 1885.
Mackie, John D. A History of Scotland. Baltimore MD: Penguin, 1964.
Mackenzie, Agnes M. The Scotland of Queen Mary and the Religious Wars, 1513–1638. London GB: Alexander
MacLehose, 1936.
MacLehose, Alexander. Historic Haunts of Scotland. London GB: Alexander MacLehose, 1936.
Malleson, G.B. The Battlefields of Germany. London GB: W.H. Allen, 1884.
Markham, C.R. The Fighting Veres. London GB: Sampson Low,1888.
Mathew, David. Scotland under Charles I. London GB: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1955.
Maxwell, Herbert. A History of the House of Douglas. 2 vols. London GB: Freemantle, 1902.
McWhiney, Grady & Perry Jamieson. Attack and Die: Civil War Military Tactics and the Southern Heritage. Tuscaloosa
AL: UAP, 1982.
Mitchison, Rosalind. A History of Scotland. London GB: Routledge,1970).
Moll, Herman. Atlas Geographus: or, A compleat system of geography, ancient and modern .... 5 vols [vols 1 & 2:
Europe (1711–1712)]. London GB: John Nutt, 1711–1717.
Montross, Lynn. War Through the Ages. 3rd ed. New York NY: Harper & Row, 1960.
Müller, K.A. Fünf Bücher vom Böhmischen Kriege, 1618–1621 in Forschungen auf dem Gebiet der neueren Geschichte
3. Leipzig, Saxony: Gerhard Fleischer, 1841.
Murdoch, Dr. Steve & Dr. Alexia Grosjean. Scotland, Scandinavia & Northern Europe, 1580–1707 [SSNE] University
of St. Andrews GB: http: //www.st–andrews.ac.uk/history/ssne/ .
Naylor, F.H. The Civil and Military History of Germany from the landing of Gustavus to the conclusion of the Treaty of
Westphalia. 2 vols. London GB: n.p., 1816.
Notestein, Wallace. The Scot in History. New Haven CT: Yale UP, 1947.
Ogg, David. Europe in the Seventeenth-Century. London GB: Oxford UP, 1955.
Oman, Carola. Elizabeth of Bohemia. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1938.
Oman, Charles. A History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages. 2 vols; new ed. London GB: Methuen, 1924.
Oman, Charles. A History of the Art of War in the Sixteenth-Century. London GB: Methuen, 1937.
Opel, Julius Otto. Der Dreissigjährige Krieg: Eine Sammlung von historischen Gedichten. Halle DE: Buchhandlung des
Waisenhauses, 1862.
Opel, Julius Otto. Der niedersächsisch-dänische Krieg. 3 vols [vol 1: Der Dänische Krieg, 1621–1623 (1872); Der
Dänische Krieg, 1624–1626 (1878); vol 3: Der dänische Krieg von 1627 bis zum Frieden von Lübeck, 1629 (1894)].
Halle DE: Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses, 1872–1894).
Paret, Peter, Gordon A. Craig & Felix Gilbert (eds). Makers of Modern Strategy from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age.
Princeton NJ: PUP, 1986.
Pastor, Ludwig, Freiherr von. The History of the Popes. 40 vols [vols 25–26: 1605–1621; vols 27–29: 1621–1644; vol
30: 1644– ]; Dom Ernest Graf (trs). London GB: Kegan Paul, Trench & Trübner, 1891–1953.
Preston, R.A., Sidney F. Wise & H.O. Werner. Men in Arms. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965.
Pryde, George S. Scotland from 1603 to the Present Day. London GB: Thomas Nelson, 1962.
Ranke, Leopold von. Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation. 6 vols. Leipzig DE: Duncker u. Humblot,
1845–1847.
Ranke, Leopold von. Geschichte Wallensteins. Leipzig DE: Duncker u. Humblot, 1870.
Reade, Hubert H.G. Sidelights on the Thirty Years War. 3 vols. London GB: Kegan Paul, 1924.
Redlich, Fritz. De Praeda Militari: Looting and Booty, 1500–1815. VSW 39. Wiesbaden DE: Franz Steiner, 1956.
Redlich, Fritz. The German Military Enterpriser and his Work Force: a Study in European Economic and Social
History. VSW 47 [vol 1.1: ‘From the Embryonic to the Full-fledged Military Enterpriser, 1350–1600’; vol 1.2: ‘The
Heyday of Military Entrepreneurship, 1600–1650’]. Wiesbaden DE: Franz Steiner, 1964.
Redlich, Fritz. The German Military Enterpriser and his Work Force: a Study in European Economic and Social
History. VSW 48 [vol 2.3: ‘The Decay and Demise of Military Entrepreneurship, 1650–1800’. Wiesbaden DE: Franz
Steiner, 1965.
83
Ritter, Gerhard. Die Weltwirkung der Reformation. 2nd ed. Munich DE: Oldenbourg, 1959.
Ritter, Moritz. Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Gegenreformation und des Dreißigjährigen Krieges (1555–1648).
3 vols. [vol 3: Geschichte des Dreißigjährigen Krieges] Stuttgart DE: Union Deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1908.
Roberts, Michael. Essays in Swedish History. London GB: Camelot, 1967.
Roberts, Michael. Gustavus Adolphus, A History of Sweden: 1611–1632. 2 vols. London GB: Longmans Green, 1953–
1958.
Roberts, Michael. The Military Revolution, 1560–1660. Belfast GB: Marjory Boyd, 1956.
Ross, Peter. Scotland and the Scots. New York NY: ‘Scottish American’ Office, 1889.
Scotland Forever: A Gift Book of the Scottish Regiments. New York NY: Hodder & Stoughton, 1915.
Scott, David. History of Scotland containing all the Historical Transactions of that Nation, from the year of the World
3619 to the year of Christ 1726. Westminster GB: Cluer & Campbell, 1728.
Seidler, J. Untersuchungen über die Schlacht bei Lützen, 1632. Memmingen DE: Memminger Zeitung, 1954.
Seaton-Watson, R.W. A History of the Czechs and Slovaks. Hamden CT: Archon, 1965.
Joseph A. Schumpeter. Zur Soziologie der Imperialismen. [Sonderabdruch aus dem Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und
Sozialpolitik, Band 46 Heft 1 und 2]. Tübingen, J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1919.
Smith, T.B. Scotland: the Development of its Laws and Constitution. Vol 11 of The British Commonwealth: the
Development of its Laws and Constitutions. G.W. Keeton (ed). London GB: Stevens & Sons, 1962.
Smout, T. Christopher. A History of the Scottish People, 1560–1830. London GB: Collins, 1969.
Smout, T. Christopher. Scottish Trade on the Eve of Union, 1660–1707. Edinburgh GB: Oliver & Boyd, 1963.
Smout, T. Christopher. Scotland and Europe, 1200–1850 (Edinburgh GB: John Donald, 1986).
Spaulding, O.L., Hoffman Nickerson & J.M. Wright. Warfare: A Study of Military Methods from the Earliest Times.
Washington DC: Judd & Detweiler, 1937.
Srbik, H.R. von. Wallesteins Ende. Vienna AT: Seidel u. Sohn, 1920.
Stefansson, Jon. Denmark and Sweden. London GB: Fischer Unwin, 1916.
Steinberg, S.H. The Thirty Years’ War and the Conflict for European Hegemony, 1600–1660. New York NY: Norton,
1966.
Steuart, A.F. Scottish Influences in Russian History from the End of the Sixteenth-Century to the Beginning of the
Nineteenth-Century. Glasgow GB: James MacLehose, 1913.
Stockum, W.P. van. The First Newspapers of England Printed in Holland, 1620–1621. The Hague NL: van Stockum,
1914.
Struck, Walter. Die Schlacht bei Nördlingen im Jahr 1634. Stralsund DE: Königliche Regierungs, 1893.
Symon, J. A. Scottish Farming, Past and Present. Edinburgh GB: Oliver & Boyd, 1959.
Terry, C.S. The Life and Campaigns of Alexander Leslie. London GB: Longmans Green, 1899.
The Cambridge Economic History of Europe [CEcHE]. 6 vols [vol 4: The Economy of Expanding Europe in the 16th and
17th Centuries (1967)]; various eds [E.E. Rich; R.H. Tawney; E.H. Wilson]. London GB: Cambridge UP, 1965–1989.
The Cambridge Modern History [CMH]. 14 vols [vol 4: The Thirty Years War (1906); Ward (ed)]; various eds [John
Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton; Stanley Leathes; Sir Adolphus William Ward; G.W. Prothero]
Cambridge GB: CUP, 1902–1912.
The New Cambridge Modern History [NCMH]. 14 vols [vol 2: The Reformation, 1520–1559 (1965/1990); vol 3: The
Counter-Reformation and Price-Revolution, 1559–1610 (1968); vol 4: The Decline of Spain and the Thirty Years War,
1609–48/59 (1970); vol 5: The Ascendancy of France, 1648–1688 (1964)]; various eds [F.L. Carsten; J.R. Cooper;
G.R. Elton]. Cambridge GB: CUP, 1957–1979.
Valentin, Veit. Knaurs Deutsche Geschichte. Stuttgart DE: Deutscher Bucherbund, 1960.
Van Bath, B.H. Slicher. The Agrarian History of Western Europe a.d. 500–1850. Olive Ordish (trs). London GB:
Edward Arnold, 1963.
Voges, Hermann. Die Schlacht bei Lutter am Barenberge am 27. August, 1626. Leipzig DE: Hirzel, 1922.
Ward, A.W. The House of Austria in the Thirty Years War. London GB: Macmillan, 1869.
Warrack, John. Domestic Life in Scotland, 1488–1689. London GB: Methuen, 1920.
Wedgewood, C.V. The Thirty Years War. London GB: Lowe & Brydone, 1938.
84
Wertheim, Hans. Der tolle Halberstädter: Herzog Christian von Braunschweig im pfälzischen Krieg. 2 vols. Berlin DE:
Internationale Bibliothek, 1920 & 1929.
Willson, David Harris. James VI and I. London GB: Jonathan Cape, 1956.
Zeeden, Ernst Walter. Das Zeitalter der Reformation. Freiburg i.B. DE: Herder, 1955.
─ Articles
Beller, Elmer A. ‘The Thirty Years War’ in NCMH 4: 306–358.
Beller, Elmer A. ‘The Military Expedition of Sir Charles Morgan to Germany, 1627–9’ in EHR 43 (1928): 528–539.
Black, Charles Stewart. ‘The Relations of Scotland and France during the Hundred Years’ War’ in Scotia 3 (1909): 102–
115, 167–176 & 231–237.
Boynton, L.O.J. ‘Billeting: the Example of the Isle of Wight’ in EHR 74: 290 (1959): 139–148.
Braudel, Fernand & Frank C. Spooner. ‘Prices in Europe from 1450 to 1750’ in CEcHE 4: 374–486.
Bulloch, J.M. ‘A Scoto-Austrian. John Gordon, the Assassinator of Wallenstein’ in Transactions of the Banffshire Field
Club (1916/1917): 20–28.
Dickinson, Gladys. ‘Some Notes on the Scottish Army in the First Half of the Sixteenth-Century’ in SHR 28 (1949):
133–145.
Droysen, Gustav. ‘Studien zur baltische Frage’ in HZ 15 (1866): 251–276.
Ernstberger, Anton. ‘Wallensteins Heeressabotage und die Breitenfelder Schlacht (1631)’ in HZ 142 (1930): 41–72.
‘Francisque Michel, ‘Écossais en France, les Francais en Écosse: a Review’ in Edinburgh Review 118: 241 (July 1863):
116–128.
Gebauer, Johann H. ‘Ein schwedischer Militärprozess von 1631’ in HZ 198 (1907): 544–560.
Grimble, Ian. ‘The Royal Payment of Mackay’s Regiment’ in SGS 9 (1961): 22–37.
Hale, J.R. ‘Armies, Navies and the Art of War’ in NCMH 2: 481–509.
Hoskins, W.G. ‘Harvest Fluctuations and English Economic History, 1480–1619’ in AgHR 12 (1964): 36–46.
Hoskins, W.G. ‘Harvest Fluctuations and English Economic History, 1620–1759’ in AgHR 16 (1968): 15–31.
Kellenbenz, H. ‘Hamburg und die französisch-schwedische Zusammenarbeit im Dreißigjährigen Krieg’ in ZVHG 49/50
(1964): 83–107.
Kiernan, V.G. ‘Foreign Mercenaries and Absolute Monarchy’ in P&P 11 (1957): 66–86.
Mackay, John. ‘Mackay’s Regiment, 1626–1634’ in TGSI 8 (1876/1879): 128–189.
MacLean, J. ‘Scottish Families in Holland’ in SG 12 (1965): 53–55.
Redlich, Fritz. ‘Contributions in the Thirty Years’ War’ in EcHR 12:2 (1959/60): 247–260.
Ritter, Moritz. ‘Das Kontributionssystem Wallensteins’ in HZ 90 (1903): 193–249.
Samuel, John S. ‘Sweden and Scotland’ in Scotia, the Journal of the St. Andrews Society 3 (1909): 86–92.
Smout, T.C. ‘Scottish Commercial Factors in the Baltic at the End of the Seventeenth-Century’ in SHR 39:128 (October
1960): 122–128.
Smout, T.C. & Alexander Fenton. ‘Scottish Agriculture before the Improvers – an Exploration’ in AgHR 13:2 (1965),
73–93:
Usinger, R. ‘Die Zerstörung Magdeburgs’ in HZ 13 (1865): 378–405.
Wechmar, I. von & R. Biederstedt. ‘De schottische Einwanderung in Vorpommern im 16. und frühen 17. Jahrhundert’
ins Greifswald-Stralsunder Jarhbuch 5 (1965): 7–28.
WSB. ‘Ferdinand II of Austria’ in Great Lives in History, Renaissance to 1900. Pasadena CA: Salem, 1989: 727–731.
Revised, illustrated and updated: posted GRM.com (2010): .
WSB. ‘Danish-Swedish Wars, 1497–1679’ in Great Events from History: The Renaissance & Early Modern Era.
Pasadena CA: Salem, 2005: 234–236. TBP – Revised, illustrated and updated: posted GRM.com (2012): .
WSB. ‘Expanding Professions in the Seventeenth-Century: Scottish Military Entrepreneurs in the Early Modern Era’
(Birmingham AL: CSBS, 1991). TBP – Revised, illustrated and updated: posted GRM.com (2012): .
WSB. ‘John Calvin’ in Great Lives in History, Renaissance to 1900. Pasadena CA: Salem, 1989: 340–344. TBP –
Revised, illustrated and updated: posted GRM.com (2012): .
WSB. ‘Leaving the Auld Sod: Population Pressures and Scottish Emigration Patterns in the Early Modern Era’ (New
Orleans LA: SCBS, 1995). TBP – Revised, illustrated and updated: posted GRM.com (2012): .
85
WSB. ‘Propaganda in Early Modern Europe, 1500–1648’ (Jacksonville FL: PCAS, 1989). TBP – Revised, illustrated
and updated: posted GRM.com (2012): .
WSB. ‘Robert Monro: Professional Soldier, Military Historian and Scotsman’ in Scotland and the Thirty Years’ War,
Steven Murdoch (ed). Leiden NL: Brill, 2001: 215–241.
WSB. ‘Saying What You Mean, and Meaning What You Say: or Does the Term “Celtic Britain”' Really Tell You
Anything’ (Boulder CO: NACBS, 1995).
WSB. ‘Scottish Mercenaries in the Thirty Years’ War’ (Francis Marion University, Florence SC: SCHA, 1986).
Published in The Proceedings of the SCHA 1986 (Aiken SC: Howell, 1987), 41–47. TBP – Revised, illustrated and
updated: posted GRM.com (2012): .
WSB. ‘Scottish Military Emigrants in the Early Modern Era: An Analysis of Demographic Movement in an Emergent
Society, 1570–1660’ (Fort Worth TX: SCBS, 1991). TBP – Revised, illustrated and updated: posted GRM.com
(2012): .
WSB. Seminar Essay: ‘Wallenstein and the Kontributionssystem: Military Logistics in the Thirty Years’ War’ in Topics
in Early Modern Europe with John Patrick Dolan (USC, Columbia SC: Department of History, 1966).
WSB. Senior Thesis: ‘Renaissance Questions: Guicciardini, Machiavelli & Jean Bodin and Their Understanding of
History’ with John Patrick Dolan, (USC, Columbia SC: Department of History, 1966).
WSB. ‘Tilly, Count Johan Tserclaes (1559–1632)’ in Magill’s Guide to Military History (Pasadena CA: Salem, 2001),
IV:1538–1539.
WSB. ‘The Defenestration of Prague, 1618’ in Great Events from History: European Series. Pasadena CA: Salem,
1998), 250–253. Revised, illustrated and updated: posted at GRM.com (2010): .
86