WI: Gustavus Adolphus survives Lutzen?

Like the title says, what would happen if Gustavus Adolphus wasn't killed at Lutzen? How would the Thirty Years War continue? Would we see more or less French involvement? Would the war end earlier and Sweden remain an important power for longer?
 
Gustavus surviving doesn't change the fact Sweden is too weak and too poor to be a Great Power much longer than OTL - it got ridiculously fortunate OTL, anything more would be absurd.

It might change the Thirty Years War, but I suppose that depends on what Gustavus does next - specifically, how does that differ from OTL Swedish policy?
 
Like the title says, what would happen if Gustavus Adolphus wasn't killed at Lutzen? How would the Thirty Years War continue? Would we see more or less French involvement? Would the war end earlier and Sweden remain an important power for longer?

The thing is - Sweden is not capable of fighting off the empire on its own. It was mainly due to the organisational changes instituted by Gustavus and French gold that they got as far as they did IOTL. Gustavus may have a few years of victories ahead of him, but sooner or later, his enemies will copy his organisation and the law of diminishing returns will take hold. So - Gustavus will have to end the war soon, and then work on consolidating his gains for the inevitable next phase of the war (You really don't expect the empire to concede primacy to a northern Protestant power so easily, do you?)

As for the French, they will remain in the game, playing off the empire and Sweden against each other, and trying to reap the harvest from others' campaigns.
 
Interesting, I planned to start a (slightly different) discussion on the TYW as well ...


A few points:

  • Military strategy and success did not change a lot after Adolphus' death, surprisingly. His generals and especially his chancellor Oxenstierna did extremly well in strategic questions.
  • Nevertheless, Adolphus' death does change a lot. Adolphus had established very good relationships with the German Protestant princes willing to support him (Pommerania, Hesse-Kassel, Thuringian states). He had (credibly) promised them to retain their authority and most of their respective territory in case of a victory; he basically acted as their feudal lord and thus as a kind of counter-Emperor towards them. Under Oxenstierna, these relationships deteriorated quickly. Oxenstierna wanted everything for Sweden without Adolphus', well, imperial grace or generosity.
    As a result, the war gradually turned from a (at least seemingly) religious conflict into a France-and-Sweden-messing-in-Germany story.
  • Another consequence, more in the psychological sector: Of course, a major Swedish defeat would have to happen at some point. Dying after a unbelievably successful walkover campaign and a few draw battles, Adolphus avoided being associated with any major defeat. Thus his image as a martial hero, even more, as the powerful savior of all Protestants could remain integral IOTL.
 
The major defeat for the anti-imperial forces in the wake of Gustavus Adolphus's death was at Nordlingen in 1634.

The Swedes were outnumbered, but they had overcome worse odds in previous engagements. Failure of their two generals (Gustav Horn and Bernard of Saxe-Weimar) to coordinate contributed to the disaster.

Maybe things would have gone better if Gustavus Adolphus had still been alive (even if he all he did was avoid the battle). The imperials it should be said, fought bravely and well at Nordlingen. A Swedish win is not certain even with their best general in command.
 
@Bee:
I agree very much. Miscommunication between the commanders has a lot to do with the worsening relationship I mentioned above.

However, we should note that individual battles are not very important in this war, at least not if we consider alternate scenarios: Given the tactic options, battles only took place if both armies sought it, or one army was caught by surprise. If there was enough time, one of the armies could easily fortify in the field. So the attacker would have to switch from assault to siege, which usually required more perseverance than the armies had.
This explains why there were so relatively few battles for such a long war.

Most of the decisive events in the war were the occupations of cities, and the marauding in the countryside.
 
Top