The Ottomans defeated the Poles, who were supporting the Habsburgs in the Thirty Years' War, at the Battle of Cecora in September–October 1620, but were not able to further intervene efficiently before the Bohemian defeat at the Battle of the White Mountain in November 1620. File:Defending the Polish banner at Chocim, by Juliusz Kossak, 1892
The attack on Transylvania followed long Habsburg efforts to
enlist Polish support. Poland was potentially a more important ally
than Spain, and Sigismund III was as devout a Catholic as Philip III.
Poland’s military power was to be demonstrated in 1621 when it was
to raise an army of 45,000 backed by 40,000 Cossacks. More
significantly, Poland bordered on Silesia and Hungary, placing it in
a direct position to help, and it had signed a mutual assistance pact
in 1613 promising aid against rebellions. As Emperor Ferdinand’s
sister, the Polish queen naturally championed intervention, but the
king remained undecided. His own ambitions remained firmly fixed on
the Baltic and he was disappointed at his in-law’s lack of
assistance when Sweden invaded Livonia in 1617–18. (Ferdinand would
again fail to help against a second invasion in 1621.) Sigismund also
had to consider his nobles who preferred raiding against their
traditional targets, the Turks and Muscovites. However, the Russians
had made peace in December 1618, widening Sigismund’s options.
Many Polish clergy were receptive to Habsburg arguments that the
Protestant Bohemians posed a common threat. Sigismund had instructed
his son Wladyslaw to decline a Bohemian invitation to stand in their
royal election. As the situation worsened during 1619, Ferdinand held
out inducements, including an offer to relinquish the bishopric of
Breslau to Poland. Many Polish historians regard the Thirty Years War
as a lost opportunity, arguing that Sigismund should have accepted
this offer, or grabbed Silesia by playing the role later adopted by
Sweden and joining the German Protestants. Sigismund had no such
plans. Instead, he sought a way of satisfying the Polish pro-Habsburg
lobby without committing himself to a long war that would distract
from his primary objective of recovering Sweden. The leaders of the
Sejm agreed, because limited intervention provided a way of removing
the 30,000 unpaid Cossacks. These troops had been discharged after
the recent war with Russia and their raiding across the southern
frontier risked provoking a new conflict with the sultan. The
Cossacks have entered history as the Lisowczycy, after their original
commander, Aleksander Lisowczycy, a Lithuanian veteran who commanded
a regiment in the Russian war. The Lisowczycy were the kind of
cavalry that ‘God would not want and the Devil was afraid of’.
Unlike the traditional Polish cavalry, they wore no body armour,
relying on speed and fake retreats to lure opponents into traps. They
were happy to be paid, but also fought for booty, deliberately
terrorizing civilians into submission.
The Habsburg ambassador intended to recruit the Cossacks to
reinforce the imperial army, but they were reluctant to serve too far
from home in a land they considered full of impregnable fortresses
where plunder would be hard to take. Plans were changed so that 4,000
Lisowczycy joined 3,000 other Cossacks recruited by György Homonnai,
an Upper Hungarian magnate who was also a member of the Transylvanian
Estates and a personal enemy of Bethlen, who he believed had cheated
him in that country’s election of 1613. Having been driven into
exile, Homonnai had already fostered two failed rebellions. He now
struck across from his estates in Podolia at the end of October 1619.
Bethlen had left Rákóczi with only 4,000 men in Transylvania,
refusing to believe Homonnai posed a threat. The two armies met near
Ztropka (Stropkow in modern Slovakia) on 22 November, where Rákóczi’s
men were routed after they mistook the classic feigned retreat for
the real thing.
Homonnai’s attack fuelled an already volatile situation in east
Central Europe. Despite the grand vizier’s promise, the Ottomans
had hesitated to break their truce with the Habsburgs. Nonetheless,
they regarded Bethlen as their client and did not want him driven
from Transylvania, especially by the Poles who were already
interfering in neighbouring Moldavia. Peace had just been concluded
with Persia, allowing the sultan to send the Tartars, backed by
Ottoman regulars, into Moldavia where they routed a Polish relief
force at Cecora in October 1620. Sigismund sent a huge army the
following year that entrenched at Chocim (Hotim) on the Dneister and
managed to repel almost twice its number of Tartars and Turks. Fresh
problems with Sweden forced Sigismund to agree peace later in 1621,
restoring the pre-1619 situation, though Poland had to accept the
sultan’s candidate as prince of Moldavia. This conflict was
separate from the Thirty Years War, but nonetheless proved
significant for the Empire in preventing Poland and the Ottomans from
intervening.
The threat to Bethlen was already receding before he left his camp
outside Vienna. He had arrested most of Homonnai’s supporters after
the earlier rebellions. Finding few willing to support him, Homonnai
was already in retreat by 2 December. With the wider situation
remaining unclear, Bethlen was nonetheless forced to accept the
mediation of the Hungarian diet, agreeing an eight-month truce with
Ferdinand on 16 January 1620. Bethlen remained a threat to Ferdinand,
but the immediate danger had passed.
Sigismund refused to allow the Lisowczycy back into Poland, and
redirected them along the mountains into Silesia to join the imperial
army. Five detachments totalling 19,000 fighters set out between
January and July 1620, though some were intercepted by the Silesian
militia. The steady reinforcement enabled Bucquoy to resume the
offensive, launching three attacks from Krems in March, April and
early June against Thurn’s Bohemians and Austrians entrenched
around Langenlois to the north. The Silesians and Moravians returned,
bringing the Confederate army up to 25,000 by May when Anhalt arrived
to take command. They were joined by 8,000 Hungarian and
Transylvanian cavalry sent by Bethlen who, despite Ferdinand’s
generous terms, still distrusted the emperor and decided to re-enter
the war. Bethlen and Frederick had already sent a joint delegation to
Constantinople in March 1620 to seek Ottoman assistance for the
revolt. Mehmed Aga reached Prague in July to deliver the sultan’s
belated congratulations on Frederick’s coronation. He asked to see
where the Defenestration had taken place and enthusiastically
promised 60,000 Ottoman auxiliaries for Bohemia. Many in Prague were
deeply uncomfortable with courting the Ottomans, yet the leadership
was seduced by the fantastical scheme of a grand alliance smashing
both Poland and the Habsburgs. Scultetus did a theological somersault
to stress common ground between Calvinism and Islam, while Baron
Tschernembl argued any means were justified provided they saved the
true cause from the papists. Despite misgivings, Frederick wrote to
the sultan on 12 July, making Bohemia a tributary state of the
Ottoman empire in return for assistance. A delegation of a hundred
Bohemians, Hungarians and Transylvanians set out for Constantinople
with 70,000 fl. in bribes to seal the deal. Meanwhile, Frederick
promised 300,000 fl. to Bethlen, even pawning his jewels to raise the
first instalment.
With support growing, and having easily repulsed another attack by
Homonnai in August 1620, Bethlen seized control of the diet at
Neusohl in Upper Hungary. This had convened in May at Ferdinand’s
request to broker peace among all Hungarians. Bethlen’s supporters
declared the abolition of the clerical Estate and the confiscation of
the property of all who opposed them. Ferdinand ordered the diet to
disband on 13 August. Twelve days later, Bethlen’s supporters
elected him king of Hungary. Throughout, the solidly Catholic
Croatian diet (Sabor) rejected the Hungarians’ overtures and
aligned itself with its Inner Austrian neighbours, still loyal to the
Habsburgs.
The advancement of warfare from mid Sixteenth Century to the end of the Napoleonic Period.
Thursday, September 29, 2016
Siege of La Rochelle
The Protestant Reformation, especially the radical version
preached by Frenchman John Calvin (ne Jean Cauvin), who set himself
up in Geneva, spread to France soon after it began. Calvinism was
particularly appealing to the French middle class and nobles. As the
nobles were often the chief source of opposition to the Crown, French
kings naturally took alarm. In the 1550s the government of Henri II
persecuted adherents of the new faith, who came to be called
Huguenots, and burned a number of them at the stake. Despite this
persecution, Calvinism continued to make inroads, especially in
southwestern France.During 1562-1598 France experienced a series of costly religious wars during which the Huguenots established a number of fortified cities, including La Rochelle on the southwestern Atlantic coast. The wars were settled when the Huguenot champion, Henri de Navarre, became king of France as Henri IV. Because the great majority of Frenchmen were still Catholic and because Henri IV wished to secure the Catholic stronghold of Paris, he converted to Catholicism (“Paris is well worth a mass,” he is supposed to have said). To mollify his former coreligionists, he issued the Edict of Nantes in 1598 that granted religious toleration and full civil rights to the Huguenots. The edict also allowed them to fortify some 100 towns where the Huguenot faith was in the majority.
Unfortunately for France, Henri IV’s reign was brief; he was stabbed to death in Paris by a religious fanatic in 1610. His son, Louis XIII (r. 1610-1643), was then only nine years old. Louis grew up to be weak and indecisive, but he had a capable chief minister in Armand Jean du Plessis, Cardinal de Richelieu, who was the virtual ruler of France during 1624-1642. This born administrator made raison d’etat (reason of state) the dominant consideration in all his policies. Although he was a sincere Catholic, Richelieu never let religion get in the way of strengthening the state.
To Richelieu, the Huguenot-fortified towns formed a state within a state and were thus unacceptable. Alarmed by Richelieu’s stance, the Huguenots rebelled under the leadership of the dukes de Rohan and Soubise. Richelieu responded by declaring the suppression of the rebellion his first priority in 1625. Protestant, rich, and looking toward England, La Rochelle relished its independence. The city itself lay at the end of a channel. Off it were two islands: the closest, Ile de Re, and the more distant Ile d’Oleron. La Rochelle was the strongest of the Huguenot fortresses and the center of resistance to royal rule.
In 1626 La Rochelle had been forced to accept a royal commissioner, to agree not to arm its ships, and to accord full rights to Catholics. In March 1627 France formed an alliance with Spain that solidified its position. Six months later Richelieu’s forces initiated a siege of the city and exchanged artillery fire with its Huguenot defenders. Because La Rochelle was a port it could receive aid by sea, and in June 1627 King Charles I of England sent 120 ships and 6,000 soldiers there under his favorite, George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham.
The English fleet arrived at Ile de Re on July 10. If the people of La Rochelle welcomed the troops, Buckingham was to place them under command of the Duc de Soubise, who arrived with him. If not, the men would return to England. Soubise went to La Rochelle to negotiate with its leaders, but they feared the consequences of welcoming English troops. Buckingham therefore ordered his men ashore to secure Fort St. Martin on Ile de Re, which was controlled by the royalists, as a base for future operations. His men, most of whom had been pressed, were poorly trained, and many refused to go ashore. Others bolted on the first gunfire with the royal garrison on the island. Buckingham was thus unable to take the fort; instead, he resorted to a blockade.
Richelieu was certain that if Buckingham took Fort St. Martin, his siege operation would fail. Richelieu therefore sent French ships to supply the fort, called up feudal levies, and sent about 20,000 men toward La Rochelle. The brother of the king, Gaston d’Orleans, had nominal command, but field command was held by the Duc d’Angouleme. As it worked out, Richelieu actually retained direction of affairs.
In August, Angouleme closed off the city from the land side, and the city fathers voted to call on Buckingham for arms and assistance. The royal garrison on the Ile de Re continued to hold out, although on October 1 its commander, Jean de St. Bonnet de Toiras, sent word that his men were almost out of food and that without relief he would have to surrender on the evening of October 8. Therefore, on the night of October 7 Richelieu sent a relief force of 47 vessels under an adventurer named Beaulieu-Persac. That night a battle took place off Ile de Re between the French and English warships. Although he was eventually forced to surrender, Beaulieu-Persac succeeded in distracting the English long enough for his 29 supply ships to beach themselves on the island.
A few days later King Louis XIII arrived in the vicinity of La Rochelle. Richelieu then personally led 9,000 reinforcements to the Ile de Re and Ile d’Oleron from northern French mainland ports. Running short of supplies himself, in desperation Buckingham and 2,000 men launched a last attempt to storm Fort St. Martin on November 5. The English took the outer works but were then driven back and shortly thereafter came under heavy attack from the French relief force. On November 8 Buckingham sailed away with the half of his force that remained.
With Ile de Re secure, Richelieu could concentrate on La Rochelle. In November the French constructed a powerful siege line more than seven miles long with 11 forts and 18 redoubts. The French lacked the means to blockade the city completely from the sea, but after reading how Alexander the Great had built a great causeway to end the siege of Tyre, Richelieu ordered construction of a great stone dike at the end of the bay to close La Rochelle off from the sea. Jean de Thirot, architect to the king, and Clement Metezeau, the king’s master builder, had charge of construction.
Work began in October and for all practical purposes was complete by January 1628, with the jetty and 56 ships chained together and armed to form a floating wall. In addition, Richelieu assembled 36 galleys and pinnaces in the roadstead to attack any expedition launched from La Rochelle to destroy the dike.
In March an English ship made it to La Rochelle with supplies and promised assistance from Charles I. The people of La Rochelle took heart and elected Jean Guiton as mayor. He infused new life in the defense. Moreover, in early May an English fleet under Lord Denbigh arrived. The English ships briefly bombarded the dike but without effect. Then, learning that a Spanish fleet was at sea, Denbigh sailed away on May 18. On September 28 a larger English fleet under Count Lindsey appeared off the dike, transporting 11 regiments and food for many months, but the troops were disaffected, and it departed without landing either men or supplies.
With this final disappointment and virtually no hope of resupply, on October 29 the La Rochelle garrison finally surrendered. During the siege, largely as the consequence of famine and disease, the population of the city went from 27,000 to only 5,000 people. Richelieu entered the city in triumph, and French troops immediately began the destruction of La Rochelle’s walls and fortifications. Richelieu then amended the Edict of Nantes in the Peace of Alais, which formally ended the siege. The Huguenots lost the right to maintain fortified towns and military formations independent of the Crown. They did, however, retain full religious and civil rights until 1685, when King Louis XIV, much to the detriment of his kingdom, annulled the Edict of Nantes altogether.
One reason the siege had taken so long was that France did not have much of a navy. Richelieu may be regarded as the father of the French Navy, for he ordered construction of a force of 38 warships for the Atlantic and 10 for the Mediterranean.
References
Holt, Mack P. The French Wars of Religion, 1562-1629. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
O’Connell, D. P. Richelieu. New York: World Publishing, 1968.
Sutherland, N. M. The Huguenot Struggle for Recognition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1980.
Wood, James B. The Army of the King: Warfare, Soldiers, and Society during the Wars of Religion in France, 1562-1676. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)