Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
« February 2014 »
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
Artillery personnel
Great Embassy
Prisoners of war
Source criticism
The Great Northern War
Sunday, 9 February 2014
The Malmberg papers
Topic: Archives

Captain Ernst Malmberg (1867-1960) was a prominent member of the cultural "elite" in the early 20th century. It would seem that there was no Swedish writer or painter of any significance who did not regularly visit the Malmberg home. Ernst Malmberg was also a collector of manuscripts. Somewhere around 1940 he apparently fell on hard times and a significant amount of his collection ended up with a scrap dealer in Uppsala, where it was acquired by the university library. It turned out to be material from Riga, documents from the Swedish administration of Livonia.

Where and how had Malmberg obtained these records? Well, subsequent events would suggest that he claimed to have bought them in Berlin. It's an odd collection - many small receipts or notes of no significant content besides a signature, which suggests that the person who had removed them from Riga was more interested in autographs than in the content. However, there are exceptions such as a letter by Field Marshal Johan Banér about the battle of Wittstock in 1636 or financial records from the period of the Polish-Swedish-Russian War of the late 1650's. Many of the letters are from the period of the Great Northern War and they appear to have been unknown to the Swedish military historian Hugo Uddgren, who first came to Riga in 1909 as well as to the Estonian historian Henrik Sepp, who in 1930 published a book about the siege of Narva in 1700. 

Another collector worth mentioning in this context was the historian Carl Schirren (1826-1910), who not only had built a large collection of copies from various European archives but also possessed a significant amount of original documents. Apparently he had in the 1860's and 1870's been allowed to remove items from the archive of the Swedish Governor General of Livonia, records which after his death eventually ended up in the Swedish National Archives. Given Schirren's standing as en expert on the Great Northern War his collection of originals is undoubtedly more well-known than Malmberg's, but the latter could very well be just as important. 

Posted by bengt_nilsson at 9:30 PM CET
Post Comment | Permalink
Sunday, 2 February 2014
Mysterious disappearances
Topic: Archives

On 7 August 1921 the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet published an article by the Finnish historian A. R. Cederberg (1885-1948) about the arrival in Tartu of the old "Swedish archive", which during World War I had been evacuated from Riga to Ryazan. In the article Cederberg, who was heavily involved in the organization of the Estonian archival system, focuses on some of the most important correspondents from the time of the Great Northern War (Henning Rudolf Horn in Narva, Carl Gustaf Skytte in Dorpat and Wolmar Anton Schlippenbach). Cederberg notes that there unfortunately are "almost no" letters from Horn during 1700, a statement which would appear to be correct even today if he by "almost no" meant "one letter". Unfortunately Cederberg gives not figure for the total amount of Horn letters in volume XX:7, which according to Bienemanns catalogue in 1908 contained 220.

Some weeks earlier (17 July 1921) Cederberg had written a similar article about documents from the first half of the 17th century. In this he noted that the volume (XVIII:9) which according to the Bienemann catalogue should contain 15 letters from Field Marshal Torstenson turned out to be notably thinner.

One of the first Swedish historians to use the old "Swedish archive" after Bienemann's catalogue was Hugo Uddgren, who came to Riga in 1909. In the first volume of his biography of Adam Ludvig Lewenhaupt Uddgren notes that "despite the brief interval between the cataloguing and my arrival some particularly valuable documents had disappeared". Unfortunately Uddgren gives only one example - the Swedish copy book for January-May 1705. He then goes on to suggest that the second volume for 1705 is kept in Krigsarkivet (Stockholm). This is clearly wrong, as the Krigsarkivet volume originates from Lewenhaupt's field chancellery, and nothing in Biemenann's catalogue suggests that the copy book for 1705 was divided in two parts. Be as it may, the missing volume is present today - but "hidden" in the series of German copy books (LVVA, fond 7349, op. 1, vol. 56). 

However, Uddgren's conclusion may not be entirely wrong. As Cederberg noted some documents does appear to have been lost between 1908 and 1921. How and when did this happen? Well, part of the explanation would seem to be that the Gesellschaft für Geschichte und Altertumskunde in Riga had wanted the Russian authorities to hand over the "Swedish archive" to them and was rebuffed, but still managed to acquire some volumes (some of those that are in fond 7349 today are not included in the Bienemann catalogue, but bears the bookplate of the Gesellschaft - which proves that they had managed to take over some even before 1900). But this is not the whole explanation...


Posted by bengt_nilsson at 7:48 PM CET
Post Comment | Permalink
Sunday, 26 January 2014
Old Believers
Topic: Religion

It's often stated that the first Old Believers (Starovery) started arriving in Estonia towards the end of the 17th century (see for example here). I am not sufficiently familiar with the subject to know if anabody has managed to pinpoint the exact time and place for the first wave of these immigrants, but I recently found a letter which suggests that it may have happened in late 1691 or early 1692. On 15 February 1692 Emanuel Eichler wrote from Dorpat to Governor Soop in Riga, reporting that Russians belonging to "a particular sect" had settled by the river Embach near Suspel and Tarwast as well as "on this side of Narva". Eichler writes that these Russians kept very much to themselves and baptized their own children. They would not touch food prepared by others and if they had to buy grain from local peasants they would wash and dry it once more. Some locals had already joined their congregations and Eichler feared that more would follow. How did Soop think that the matter should be handled?

I have not yet come across Soop's answer, but hopefully a copy is preserved in op. 1, vol. 46 (German letter book for 1692)


Source: LVVA, Fond 7349, op. 3, vol. 55, pp. 14-15 

Posted by bengt_nilsson at 9:01 PM CET
Post Comment | Permalink
Sunday, 19 January 2014
Otto Arnold von Paykul and Johann Reinhold Patkul
Topic: Livonia

In the standard Swedish biographical dictionary (Svenskt Biografiskt Lexikon) it is suggested that the Livonian nobleman Otto Arnold von Paykul (1662-1707), who was executed for serving in the enemy's forces during the GNW, may have been the son of Johann Friedrich von Paykull and Elisabeth Lode. This information is taken from Genealogisches Handbuch der baltischen Ritterschaften. Teil Estland, 1, pp 717-720. However, it appears to be incorrect, as letters from 1692 which concern him and the Koskullshof estate (LVVA, fond 7349, op. 2, vol. 217) indicate that he had inherited it from cavalry captain George Paykul (died 1688) and that his stepmother had lived there since his father's death. This corresponds well with records from the same year in Estonian Historical Archive: Otto Arend Paykell contra seine Stiefmutter geb. Anna von Wolfframsdorf in puncto Vermögens-Auseinandersetzung (EAA.915.1.249). 

The LVVA fond 7349 is also enormously rich in material about Johann Reinhold Patkul (1660-1707). This is particulary true of opis 2, volumes  191-204, where one finds a lot of material both about Patkul's military service and his political activities in the first half of the 1690's. One example is a letter from Governor General Hastfehr to Governor Soop, dated 14 March 1693. Hastfehr writes that captain Patkul has complained to him about being sent to Kokenhusen. Patkul has indicated that this would cause him so much trouble that he would feel forced to ask for a discharge. But as Charles XI now had decided to remove Patkul not only from Hastfehr's regiment but also from Livonia and place him in Finland (as captain in the Åbo infantry regiment). So, Hastfehr writes, this had taken the matter entirely out of his own hands. If Patkul still wanted to resign he should request his discharge through the proper channels (LVVA, fond 7349, op. 2, vol. 217, pp. 62-63)





Posted by bengt_nilsson at 9:26 PM CET
Post Comment | Permalink
Sunday, 5 January 2014
To know best
Topic: Interpretations

The number of Swedish historical magazines directed at the general public is quite remarkable. While most of them tend to focus heavily on World War II they occasionaly contain articles on the GNW. Populär historia, which started in 1991, probably does this more than the others. The latest example came in issue 2013:12, where Åsa Karlsson, Gunnar Åselius and Marie Lennersand got about 15 pages for articles about Charles XII and the GNW. Åselius article promptly provoked a reply from Sverker Oredsson, who belongs to the so called "Old school" in the tradition of Anders Fryxell, F. F. Carlson and Ernst Carlson. 

Oredsson's objections (published in issue 2014:1) are primarily the following:

1. Charles XII could have made peace after his victories against the Russians and the Saxons (presumably in late summer 1701), which was what the leading powers in Europe and his own advisors wanted.

2. By waging war against Poland Charles weakened the country and laid the foundation for future partitions of Poland. 

3. Charles should not have attempted a march towards Moscow. It would have been better to focus on recapturing "those Baltic provinces which had been lost during his time in Poland".

4. This resulted in the Czar eventually acquiring more land than he had wanted as the original intention was just to reach the Baltic sea.

5. Charles attacks on Norway in 1716 and 1718 were "unnecessary and unprovoked".  


Let's start with no 1. Well, assuming that it would indeed have been possible - on what terms? Both the Saxons and the Russians had launched surprise attacks, which eventually were beaten back in quite spectacular fashion. Should Charles have offered the Czar Narva and Augustus Riga or was it (in view of the victories at Narva and the Daugava) more reasonable to demand land or some sort of reparations? 

Number 2: Well, even if that was true Charles can hardly be blamed for putting what he believed was the in the Swedish interest first. In fact, the whole point with his policy towards Poland was to create an "eternal" Swedish-Polish alliance against Russia. There was no disagreement among his advisors on that point, but many of them seemingly believed that it could be achieved without dethroning Augustus.

3. The only Baltic province which had been lost was Ingria and Lybecker's campaign in 1708 showed how difficult it was to supply an army there. The King's main army was 3-4 times as large as Lybecker's, so such an undertaking would most likely have been totally impossible.  To bring 35-40,000 men into Livonia would have resulted in similar difficulties. Indeed, a march into Lithuania made every possible sense both politically and strategically and may indeed have been the only feasible alternative. 

4. Yes, Ingria was all the Czar originally wanted, but Augustus was to have Livonia.

5. A most peculiar criticism as the Danes (and Norwegians) had entered the war in 1709. As the Norwegians had launched an invasion of Bohuslän in 1711, surely Charles XII's invasions in 1716 and 1718 were not "unprovoked"? Whether they were "necessary" is an other matter, considering the situation it could hardly be worthless to capture some part of Norway for use as a bargaining chip. 

Posted by bengt_nilsson at 8:34 PM CET
Updated: Sunday, 5 January 2014 9:04 PM CET
Post Comment | Permalink
Monday, 4 November 2013
Krigskollegii brevböcker
Topic: Archives

The series Krigskollegii brevböcker is one the more interesting GNW collections available online (for a fee) through Riksarkivet. These very large volumes contain incoming letters to Krigskollegium (College of War). This administrative body did not have the authority it once had, particularly after the creation of the so called Defensionskommissionen, a committee consisting of several members of the Council of the Realm. Krigskollegium came to handle mostly issues of equipment, production of war materiel and fortifications. It also dealt with military trophies, which can be seen from such items as 1701:2345 ff., various lists of material taken from the Russian camp after the battle of Narva. Among the items one notes 3,569 muskets, 4 barrels of tar and two iron cauldrons. In 1701 there is also a letter from Medicinska Societeten (1701:429), which complains about the situation in regard to barber-surgeons. It's difficult to find qualified men as the pay is too low in view of the fact that the requirements in Sweden are higher than anywhere else in Europe. On 11 July Johan Sjöblad reports (1701:2179) about the succesful crossing of the Daugava etc.



Posted by bengt_nilsson at 9:54 PM CET
Post Comment | Permalink
Wednesday, 2 October 2013
The Courland trade
Topic: Diplomacy

Voltaire famously claimed that Charles XII only conquered to give his conquests to someone else, i.e. Stanisław Leszczyński. This is obviously a complete misunderstanding - the King's goals were much more ambitious than that. The gradual occupation of Courland which started in the summer of 1701 was intended to become permanent. This was also in line with the wishes of the merchants in Riga, who did not like the commercial ambitions of the Dukes of Courland. In the work Der baltische Getreidehandel im 17. Jahrhundert (1961) Arnold Soom briefly discusses some of the more "militant" attempts to limit the trade through Courland. One such attempt was made in 1690, when a Swedish man-of-war during the summer cruised off the coast of Courlandin an attempt to control the traffic. In 1691 the experiment was continued with the intent of stopping any trade to private ports. The Swedish captain Hans Ankarcrantz managed to capture two ships, which the Duke claimed belonged to him. A Swedish investigation found that this was not true, but the two vessels were nevertheless released for the sake of "good neighbourly relations". The Swedish Governor General of Livonia Hastfer was despite this incident determined to make an other effort in 1692. 

These events can be followed in LVVA, fond 7349. In op. 1, vol. 237 one finds for example an inventory of the two captured ships, a brief journal of the expeditions in 1690 and 1691 as well as letters and other documents dealing with similar naval expeditions later in the 1690's. In the Swedish copy book for 1697 (op. 1, vol. 69) there is the instruction issued to captain Michael Albrechtson in May 1697, when he was about to embark on one of these. Albrechtson is instructed to stop all trade from other ports than Libau and Windau, but make it quite clear to anyone he stops that he is just protecting ancient rights and privileges. 

Posted by bengt_nilsson at 9:57 PM MEST
Updated: Wednesday, 2 October 2013 9:58 PM MEST
Post Comment | Permalink
Tuesday, 24 September 2013
Passenger lists
Topic: Archives

In Bienemann's Katalog des Schwedischen Generalgouverneur-Archivs zu Riga (1908) there is a subseries called IX. Städtesachen. In this one finds for instance a number of volumes dealing with Riga (1-15). Some of these can be identified in LVVA, fond 7349, op. 1. They are volumes 177-189:

IX: 1 =?

IX:2 = 177

IX:3 = ?

IX:4 = 178

IX:5 = 180

IX:6 = ?

IX:7 = 181

IX:8 = 182

IX:9 = 183

IX:10 = 184

IX:11 = 185

IX:12 = 186

IX:13 = 187

IX:14 = 188

IX:15 = 189


According to Bienemann's catalogue volume IX:3  contained miscellaneous items concerning Riga dating from 1642-1708. The modern volume 179 still bears the old mark "IX:3, but nowadays only contains material from 1700 to 1708. Where has the rest gone? Even more unfortunate is the loss (?) of volume IX:6, which according to the old catalogue contained passenger lists and other documents concerning in- and outgoing ships between 1691 and 1706.  What has happened to that volume? 

As far as I know a lot of material from Baltic archives were during WWII transported to Troppau (Opava). In some older Soviet works on the matter it's stated that losses were suffered as a result of "enemy action", but I have yet to find an explanation of what that means. In this particularly case it seems a bit peculiar that volumes which belong to the same subseries and presumably were kept together could have suffered very different fates during this period. 

Passenger lists can however also be found in the letters from the garrison commander at Neumünde to the Governor General in Riga. Unfortunately this collection (Bienemann XX:25 - 6 volumes) has encountered other difficulties. In the Estonian Historical Archive in Tartu one finds XX:25b, 25c and 25f, while in the LVVA there are not only op. 1., vol. 298, 299 and 300 but also op. 2, vol. 235. To make things even more complicated some of Albedyhl's letters from 1706 and 1707 form the basis for Bienemann's volume IX:13 and a few others are preserved among the Lewenhaupt papers in Linköping and in the so called Riga-Tartu collection in Uppsala. The latter were most likely taken from Riga after 1908. 



Posted by bengt_nilsson at 8:19 PM MEST
Updated: Tuesday, 24 September 2013 8:21 PM MEST
Post Comment | Permalink
Tuesday, 17 September 2013
An angry exchange
Topic: Diplomacy

Among the records of the Livonian Governor General there is a large number of very fragmentary volumes concerning Swedish-Russian relations during the second part of the 17th century (Riga, LVVA, Fond 7349, op. 2, vol. 57-102 and op. 3, vol. 15-27). While the material belonging to op. 1 roughly constitutes the material catalogued around 1900 (with the exception of the volumes kept in Tartu), the content of op. 2 and 3 are said to have been found after the Bienemann catalogue was published in 1908. To me it seems like op. 2 and 3 predominately consist of records that at some point have been taken from their original volumes in op. 1 and arranged in a new way. Considering that the records were moved during both World War I and II this would seem logical and it's also clear that the occasional document from the archive of the Dukes of Courland (LVVA, Fond 554) have erroneously be moved to fond 7349.

One of these rather strange volumes is op. 3, volume 22. It mainly contains material dating from 1661 to 1685, but starts with something much older - a copy of one of the letters from de famous correspondence between Ivan the Terrible and the Swedish King Johan III. In these letters the two rulers hurled abuse at each other, with Ivan for example suggesting that Johan's father Gustaf I had been a simple peasant and not of noble birth. To this Johan reacted by describing the careers of some of his more distinguished ancestors, explaining their high rank by comparing them to distinguished officials in France, Poland and Lithuania.

I am not sure what role such material could play in Swedish-Russian negotiations almost 100 years later, but apparently someone on the Swedish side must have felt that it would be useful to have at least one of these letters copied. 

Posted by bengt_nilsson at 8:40 PM MEST
Post Comment | Permalink
Wednesday, 11 September 2013
Common misunderstandings
Topic: Factoids

It is always interesting to take a look at how the Great Northern War (GNW) is described in new history books. Recently I happened to come across a recently published work, which is intended for history students at university level. The GNW had only been given a few pages, but the authors still manage to make quite a few remarkable mistakes:

1.  Denmark, Saxony-Poland and Russia strengthened their relations, supported by the nobility of Livonia, jointly attacked Sweden in 1700. Saxony and Russia certainly attacked, with some unofficial military support from Lithuania and Poland, but there was no formal state of war between Sweden and Poland. Denmark only attacked the Duke of Holstein.

2. Sweden, supported by the Dutch and the English, rapidly defeated Denmark and forced the Danes to sign a separate peace treaty. Yes, but the treaty was with the Duke of Holstein as Sweden, the Netherlands and England only acted in accordance with their position as guarantors of the Treaty of Altona in 1689.

3. After Narva Charles XII decided to attack Poland.  He rather decided to march into Poland in order to put added pressure on the Poles to support the idea of dethroning Augustus II. There was at that time no state of war between the two countries.

4. After the dethronement of Augustus Poland became a vassal state to Sweden. It was certainly the intention, but Charles never got that far.

5. While Charles was busy in Poland the Czar managed to reach the Baltic, where he built ports and towns. Hardly "towns" in plural...

6. In the autumn of 1707, after the peace with Poland... Which undoubtedly refers to the Treaty of Altranstadt, which of course wasn't a peace treaty with Poland.

7. The Russians defended by burning their own land. It may possibly be true of certain areas west of Smolensk, but in 1707-08 the Russian army mostly defended itself on the territory of Poland-Lithuania.

8. An uprising in Poland tied down some units of the Swedish army.  Those opposing Charles had of course not recognized Stanislaw, so the armed struggle was ongoing. It also seems possible that the main reason for leaving Krassow's corps in Poland was distrust of Augustus, i.e. it should act as a deterrent against any attempt by him to make a comeback.

9. After his return to Sweden in December 1715 Charles XII refused to get involved in the diplomatic game, which the Council had advocated during nearly 10 years. The Council played no independent role in foreign policy until 1709 and the King certainly did not turn away from diplomacy - he only followed (through Goertz) a different agenda.

Of these mistakes no 1 and 2 are extremely common in Swedish literature. Almost nobody seem to understand why the Dutch and the English got involved and in what capacity they (and Sweden) acted. 


Posted by bengt_nilsson at 6:50 PM MEST
Updated: Wednesday, 11 September 2013 9:08 PM MEST
Post Comment | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older