Good place to start learning about this clusterfuck?
wikipedia
Wedgwood, C. V. (2005). Thirty Years War
>>1527852
Pretty much this.
>>1527843
European Tragedy: History of the Thirty Years War.
Peter Wilson I think was the name of the author.
Gustav II Adolf is the goat desu
>>1527843
>Gustavus is reported to have entered battle without wearing any armor, proclaiming, "The Lord God is my armor!" It is more likely that he simply wore a leather cuirass rather than going into battle wearing no battle protection whatsoever. In 1627, near Dirschau in Prussia, a Polish soldier shot him in the muscles above his shoulders. He survived, but the doctors could not remove the bullet, so from that point on, he could not wear iron armor; two fingers of his right hand were paralyzed.[16]
So why is he pictured wearing full plate on torso and arms at Breitenfeld (1631)? Also
>"The Lord God is my armor!"
>gets shot at Lützen
>>1527914
That one should come with a detailed map. I'm from Europe, and even for me, it was a pain in the ass to figure out where some of the events took place.
>>1528527
>"The Lord God is my armor!"
>gets shot at Lützen
tfw Gott icke min uns
>>1527843
Tom Richey is probably a good place to start since you stole his thumbnail
>>1528527
HOW CAN THIS BE HAPPENING, GOD'S IN CHARGE HERE
>>1528624
Well you see, magic doesn't actually exist and cannot protect you from gunfire.
>>1528527
>So why is he pictured wearing full plate on torso and arms at Breitenfeld (1631)?
The word you're looking for is "depicted", and it's quite likely because the painter either didn't know about his injury, or because they were taking artistic license to make him look cooler.
'The Thirty Years War' by SH Steinberg for a shorter read
>>1528671
>The word you're looking for is "depicted"
I think both are correct but depicted is used more frequently in the context?
The definition of 'pictured':
>represent (someone or something) in a photograph or picture.
>"he is pictured with party guests"
>>1528465
Wedgewood's is from the 1930's and probably an easier read. European Tragedy is the pretty much the definitive english language history of the war and Wilson's writing is extremely dense.
I think the graph wikipedia has of all the pro- or anti- emperor States throughout the war is all you need to know to get that it was a massive clusterfuck.
Saxony switched side twice. kek
>>1529123
Key didn't save with it:
Red = against the Emperor (light red being indirect, dark red being direct)
Black = in support of the Emperor (grey being indirect, black being direct)
>>1528555
Yeah, sometime it was hard, but thanks to EU4 I already knew about a lot of places lel.
It was just a prank gone wrong
>>1528637
t. perceiver-still-hidden-behind-the-veil
>read up the defenestration of prague to learn about the war
>turns out there are three defenestrations of prague
Is that a fucking tradition or something ? Also the guys fell safely into shit and went on unharmed. History is so unreal sometimes
>>1529123
feels like you'd need to know the history of every little piece of shit province in europe at the time to get a good overall picture
Imagine the 2nd Congo War but with white people
>>1530212
kek
>>1530233
i found that mildly hilarious
>>1527843
Geo Epoche Ep. 5 or 9. Not complete but awesome summary
Polish riders stopped siege of viena... again...
>>1527914
I started reading this but to be honest Christian history just makes me tune right out. I have to skip from mid-Roman Empire to Enlightenment.