What's new

Battle of Breitenfeld (Battle of North Leipzig) - 1631 AD

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
19,295
Reaction score
387
Country
China
Location
Australia
After seeing some pure Chest Thumping action, let show those people how to study Military History, shall we?

Today Battle is an important one, Which was fought between the Swedish/German against the Imperial Roman Catholics Force, which is mostly Spanish or Spanish influenced soldier. Today battle will decided the live and death of Christianity on the hand between the Catholics and of the Protestant.

Background of the battle : This battle belong to a part of 30 years war between the Catholics Church and the protestant front in Europe. With Swedish Intervention on behalf of the Protestant Society in 1630. This is the 3rd battle the Swede Engaged in this war, coming form a 2-0Victory.

On the other hand, the Swede is now meeting a recouped imperial force. Fielding 34000 strong army in disperse of Infantry, Cavalry and certain Artillery pieces. The Holy Roman Force have initial success of their campaign, especially just coming out defeating the then Big Gun of Europe, the Danish-Norwegian Forces. Which also see the reason of why Swedish is involving themselves in the conflict.

On that day, September 17, 1631. Both side agree to meet on the battle field on Breitenfeld, for a meet-up engagement.

Deposition of Forces

772px-Battle_of_Breitenfeld_-_Initial_dispositions%2C_17_September_1631.gif


While the Swedish/German Camp fielded better trained musketmen, their Cavalry is considered lightly armoured and lightly armed (Almost all of light cavalry do not have firearms, while the rest have assorted spear and pistol). 42,000 Swedish/German soldier opt for a linear formation with Cavalry cover both flank and a 2 line musketmen form the battle line. And Germanic force Reinforce the Swedish Position and extend their battleline slightly longer than the Imperial Force

On the other hand, Imperial Force field a 34,000 camp, while most of them (25,000) are infantry. and with a smaller number but crack cavalry troop. The imperial soldier is well trained on a formation called Tercio, in which a combine force of Pikeman and Musketman form a square with 4 corner guard by Musketman flank with a compacted pikeman center.

Both side utilise mixed unit. While the Swedish line mixed Musket with Pike on a continuous line, Imperial Side uses Tercio Formation as explained above.

Start of Battle : Battle started with 2 hours artillery exchange, followed by an Imperial cavalry charge on both flank of the Swede/German Line. Thus routing the Germany allied troop and only the Swede troop remain in the battle.

771px-Battle_of_Breitenfeld_-_Opening_moves%2C_17_September_1631.gif


Upon seeing the left flank of the Swedish line wide open. Imperial Force decide to capitalise on the collapse of Left Flank, moving all available infantry across the battlefield and trying to swamp the Swede Left Flank.

However, the Swede is able to notice their flank opened and the German retreat, General Gustavus order their second line to push left in an angle, thus refusing the flank of the Imperial attack. While each imperial charge the infantry on Swedish left flank, the swede repel the Imperial Cavalry by dispersing the musketmen into small group and pick out the charging cavalry one by one, thus disrupting the Imperial Cavalry charge, when the Imperial Cavalry retreat, the Swede will send their lighter and less armoured cavalry to give chase, lighter mean the Swedish cavalry is a lot faster than the Imperial Cavalry and thus able to put in pressure to the retreating cavalry.

772px-Battle_of_Breitenfeld_-_Stopping_the_attack%2C_17_September_1631.gif


At this precise moment. Swedish see a chance to regroup their own cavalry and counter attack the Imperial left. The Swede first charge and capture the imperial gun, then using the same gun, they pound on still moving Imperial Infantry formation. With the Tercio Formation move across the field, taking fire from both Swedish and Captured Imperial Artillery as well as the incoming Musket fire from Swedish line. Pressure buckled the whole imperial army. Swedish infantry line can easily mop up the imperial Force with bulk of them fleeing from battlefield. Thus concluded the engagement.

Importance of the battle : The battle have 1 immediate importance on the war, it basically save the German from entering the catholic camps. However, the long term importance is the emergence of Sweden in Northern Europe. Traditionally Dane-Norwegian is the force to be reckon with in Europe, but after this day, Swede show they can do stuff that the Dane can't. Entrenched the Swede success and emergence in the 1800s.

What went wrong with the Imperial Force?? : The imperial forces follow one golden rules of battle, which is to initiate engagement first if you are consider smaller than your enemy. Imperial Force fire first, force the Swedish into their hand, and from then on, the Swede need to play the imperial game. As this is a meeting engagement, both side do not have a urge to move first, in this case, the smaller guy need to lead the bigger guys to dance.

However, what the Imperial cannot see is, their force is actually stronger and more defence orientated. When the initial success opened up the Swedish flank. Instead of marching the whole formation diagonal they should move their main force head on to meet the Swede. Also, another mistake is made when they allow their better armed and better armoured cavalry got bogged down by fighting the infantry. This is a lethal mistake to them because by doing so, you free up the enemy cavalry to do whatever they want to you, even though the Swedish Cavalry are consider poorly armed, they will still give your infantry a run for your money.

What they should do is, they should eliminated the enemy cavalry before capitalise on the open flank. By drawing bulk of troop into an open flank, they devoted resource on a weak side and to blindsided by the opening. The swede have 2 lines they can simply reinforce the flank or like what they did in the actual battle. Which is carry out a refusing flank move.

When you have a more capable infantry, it's important for you to screen your threat and eat up the enemy main line. In this case, if the bulk of 25,000 imperial infantry can force a set fight with Swedish Lightly armoured infantry. It does not matter what the Swedish Cavalry anymore, the war would most likely ended in Imperial Favor.
 
Very interesting an compact article! Please keep up the great work. :tup:

Finally a thread about military history.
 
I joined pdf primarily to discuss terrorism, rape, america, juice etc, but this article is a bonus. Thanks @jhungary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good work my man, keep more coming.

I joined pdf primarily to discuss terrorism, rape, america, juice etc, but this article is a bonus. Thanks @jhungary.

Very interesting an compact article! Please keep up the great work. :tup:

Finally a thread about military history.


thanks,

some Chinese member think I am a tactical idiots :lol: and they like to do whatever chest thumping style.
Hence I open up my own topic
 
Last edited by a moderator:
After a long time real great article.But what went wrong i disagree.
First the cumbersome imperial tercios didn't have enough firepower to deal with gustavas's new t sized musketeer based brigades and lighter and mobile artillery.Overwhelming swedish firepower cost the imperials the day.Till'ys decision to attack the swedish left that had collapsed was not wrong,but because the swedish infantry were more mobile they were able to redeploy faster and plug the hole.
As for cavalry engagements,gustavas made an innovation of intermixing musketeers with his cavalry to provide firepower.As the imperial cavalry charged,before they could engage the swedish cavalry they were decimated by the salvoes of musketeers ,and then 6the disorganized ranks charged by swedish cavalry with sabres.
In reality this was the end of the old age[the tercios] and the beginning of the modern infantry combat age.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...22908-13-best-infantry-all-time-no-order.html
In this thread,how the tercios were replaced by the new model musketeer infantry starting with the swedish and culminating in the french under napoleon,prussians under frederick and british redcoats that won europe military supremacy.This phenomenon is historically called the'military revolution' in europe.
 
After a long time real great article.But what went wrong i disagree.
First the cumbersome imperial tercios didn't have enough firepower to deal with gustavas's new t sized musketeer based brigades and lighter and mobile artillery.Overwhelming swedish firepower cost the imperials the day.Till'ys decision to attack the swedish left that had collapsed was not wrong,but because the swedish infantry were more mobile they were able to redeploy faster and plug the hole.
As for cavalry engagements,gustavas made an innovation of intermixing musketeers with his cavalry to provide firepower.As the imperial cavalry charged,before they could engage the swedish cavalry they were decimated by the salvoes of musketeers ,and then 6the disorganized ranks charged by swedish cavalry with sabres.
In reality this was the end of the old age[the tercios] and the beginning of the modern infantry combat age.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...22908-13-best-infantry-all-time-no-order.html
In this thread,how the tercios were replaced by the new model musketeer infantry starting with the swedish and culminating in the french under napoleon,prussians under frederick and british redcoats that won europe military supremacy.This phenomenon is historically called the'military revolution' in europe.

Some good point here.

I agree the Imperial would be out "musket" by the Swede as the Tercio formation only allow the first 2 rank (File 1 and 2) open fire on Musket Where the last 2 rank (file 3 and 4) would be blocked and cannot fire. Even if they have 1 on 1 number of musket, which the imperial did not. They will still be 50% down.

However, I still maintain the Imperial Charge on the Swedish left flank BEFORE taking care of the Swedish Cavalry is a mistake.

Assume the Imperial have done Recon before the battle started, they would have notice there is a reserve rank line just right behind the ready line. There are 3 reserve regiment in the rear. Assume they did scout and they know about that fact, they would know the Swedish reserve will plug the hole and refuse the flank before their infantry can move into the position.

There are no way a commander can assume an attacking force can move across the battlefield faster than their enemy reserve fill the rank. And the imperial should know this too.

If they did not do the recon, then this in itself is one fatal flaw on their operation.

Hence I still maintain that charging the Swedish Flank before the Swedish cavalry is being dealt with or at least being tied down is a mistake. They should either eliminate the Swedish Cavalry in the flank, or try to tie them down and move the whole infantry line to engage the Swedish line.
 
Some good point here.

I agree the Imperial would be out "musket" by the Swede as the Tercio formation only allow the first 2 rank (File 1 and 2) open fire on Musket Where the last 2 rank (file 3 and 4) would be blocked and cannot fire. Even if they have 1 on 1 number of musket, which the imperial did not. They will still be 50% down.

However, I still maintain the Imperial Charge on the Swedish left flank BEFORE taking care of the Swedish Cavalry is a mistake.

Assume the Imperial have done Recon before the battle started, they would have notice there is a reserve rank line just right behind the ready line. There are 3 reserve regiment in the rear. Assume they did scout and they know about that fact, they would know the Swedish reserve will plug the hole and refuse the flank before their infantry can move into the position.

There are no way a commander can assume an attacking force can move across the battlefield faster than their enemy reserve fill the rank. And the imperial should know this too.

If they did not do the recon, then this in itself is one fatal flaw on their operation.

Hence I still maintain that charging the Swedish Flank before the Swedish cavalry is being dealt with or at least being tied down is a mistake. They should either eliminate the Swedish Cavalry in the flank, or try to tie them down and move the whole infantry line to engage the Swedish line.

The thing is they couldn't 'take care' of the swedish cavalry.Pappenheim and his imperial cavalry tried again and again and were decimated by swedish musketeer cavalry combined arms tactics.In that age cavalry was supposed to face cavalry,that was the convention.And the lumbering tercios could never engage mobile cavalry,so tilly chose to attack where his heavy infantry could do the damage against the opposing infantry line at its weakest point.He thought by winning the infantry fight he could make the result of the cavalry duel inconsequential and win the battle before it mattered.But that didn't happen as the swedish left didn't collapse and rallied,and the now freed swedish cavalry fell on his flank and the swedish guns hammered his line.
 
The thing is they couldn't 'take care' of the swedish cavalry.Pappenheim and his imperial cavalry tried again and again and were decimated by swedish musketeer cavalry combined arms tactics.In that age cavalry was supposed to face cavalry,that was the convention.And the lumbering tercios could never engage mobile cavalry,so tilly chose to attack where his heavy infantry could do the damage against the opposing infantry line at its weakest point.He thought by winning the infantry fight he could make the result of the cavalry duel inconsequential and win the battle before it mattered.But that didn't happen as the swedish left didn't collapse and rallied,and the now freed swedish cavalry fell on his flank and the swedish guns hammered his line.

Indeed, winning the infantry fight in the middle will win Tilly his battle. But can he win the battle by flanking the enemy? No. Gustavas have reserve guarding both his flanks. Tilly have to know what Tercios can do and what they cannot do, by the look of basic requirement, if tilly think his infantry can Take that flank before the reserve move in, then he is probably crazy.

You don't need to "finish" the Swedish Cavalry on either flank, you need to close in contact WHEN you are charging your cavalry against them.

Fact is, Pappenheim charge his cavalry 7 times with no infantry movement from Tilly. Tilly was not even moving until he see their flank wide open.....This IMO is a major mistake. You charge your cavalry, then you immediately followed by your infantry.

You always charge your cavalry with Infantry support, without the "Mutual support" between the cavalry and the infantry, then why bother charging, you just feed your force into the enemy piecemeal. This is a very fundamental error, resulting no infantry support when cavalry charging and no cavalry support when the enemy charge your own infantry.

He got blindsided by the flanking move, which if he have recon, could realise the open flank is nothing more than a rat trap in military term.

Honestly if I am Pappenheim, I will dismount and go ask Tilly what the heck is going on, is he enjoying the show or fighting a war??.........
 
Indeed, winning the infantry fight in the middle will win Tilly his battle. But can he win the battle by flanking the enemy? No. Gustavas have reserve guarding both his flanks. Tilly have to know what Tercios can do and what they cannot do, by the look of basic requirement, if tilly think his infantry can Take that flank before the reserve move in, then he is probably crazy.

You don't need to "finish" the Swedish Cavalry on either flank, you need to close in contact WHEN you are charging your cavalry against them.

Fact is, Pappenheim charge his cavalry 7 times with no infantry movement from Tilly. Tilly was not even moving until he see their flank wide open.....This IMO is a major mistake. You charge your cavalry, then you immediately followed by your infantry.

You always charge your cavalry with Infantry support, without the "Mutual support" between the cavalry and the infantry, then why bother charging, you just feed your force into the enemy piecemeal. This is a very fundamental error, resulting no infantry support when cavalry charging and no cavalry support when the enemy charge your own infantry.

He got blindsided by the flanking move, which if he have recon, could realise the open flank is nothing more than a rat trap in military term.

Honestly if I am Pappenheim, I will dismount and go ask Tilly what the heck is going on, is he enjoying the show or fighting a war??.........

Oh you didn't know?It wasn't tilly's fault.Both sides had a artillery duel before the battle.The lighter and better swedish guns win it definitevely.Pappenheim's tired of the steady pounding from the swedish guns,charged without orders from tilly at the swedish cavalry.It wasn't tilly's decision.
 
Oh you didn't know?It wasn't tilly's fault.Both sides had a artillery duel before the battle.The lighter and better swedish guns win it definitevely.Pappenheim's tired of the steady pounding from the swedish guns,charged without orders from tilly at the swedish cavalry.It wasn't tilly's decision.

Actually no body know who's fault and why Pappenheim and Tilly isn't, it's a disputed fact. it can either be 1 of the 2 case. But general believe is Tilly is the one to blame.

Case 1.) it's Tilly's Plan all along, he may try to develop a double envelopment on Swedish Force, Pappenheim only following Tilly order and charge their cavalry toward the Swede.

Case 2.) It's Pappenheim fault as he charge the Cavalry prematurely before Tilly can get ready for whatever reason. (The reason you mention is plausible)

However, we only know some facts on, during and after the battle but nobody really ever know who's order the charge. But we know for a fact that Tilly was in overall command (Pappenheim answer to him) and Pappenheim was not disciplined if it's Pappenheim fault of the lost (ie case 2) as he is still a field marshal of imperial cavalry force and lead his troop to kill Gustavas just a years later but with his own life in battle of Lützen. Because if that is Pappenheim own fault by leading the charge prematurely, he would be punished for both insubordination and dereliction of duty, both crime include a punish of death and in lessen extend, ei at least a removal of Command

Historian mostly agree whether or not it's Pappenheim fault, Tilly took the blame anyhow so that nothing ever really happened to Pappenheim. Mostly because even if it's Pappenheim fault, Tilly is the overall command and he should have charge with Pappenheim when he see his own flank is open. Hence, no matter who's actually order the initial cavalry charge, Tilly was either part to blame or all to blame of the outcome.
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom