Adolf was a military genius
Yes that's right, the 17th century Swedish commander Gustav Adolf played a key part in the military revolution and successfully led a well disciplined Swedish army to a number of sensational victories over the German states at the height of the Thirty Years War.
His Latinised name, and the one to be used when referring to him in English, is Gustavus (II) Adolphus.
If you're going to use the Swedish name, it's "Gustav II Adolf" or "Gustav Adolf den store." Referring to a Swedish historical king by only part of his name is a slight, actually, for those who care.
His Latinised name, and the one to be used when referring to him in English, is Gustavus (II) Adolphus.
If you're going to use the Swedish name, it's "Gustav II Adolf" or "Gustav Adolf den store." Referring to a Swedish historical king by only part of his name is a slight, actually, for those who care.
I'm going to side with the historian Michael Roberts on this one I'm afraid.
Neu Leonstein
05-06-2006, 06:28
I'm going to side with the historian Michael Roberts on this one I'm afraid.
And the historian Michael Roberts is not Swedish, and thus used an anglicised version of the name, rather than the actual one.
But really, what's the point of this thread? Many of the people here know their history quite well, and this man was a big figure in that war. Chances are that people have at least heard of him.
Obviously some might think you're talking about Hitler (how witty), but then I still wonder: What is the issue that you want debated in this thread?
LaLaland0
05-06-2006, 06:32
His Latinised name, and the one to be used when referring to him in English, is Gustavus (II) Adolphus.
If you're going to use the Swedish name, it's "Gustav II Adolf" or "Gustav Adolf den store." Referring to a Swedish historical king by only part of his name is a slight, actually, for those who care.
Bam!
Smackdown with the knowledge
I'm going to side with the historian Michael Roberts on this one I'm afraid.
Then he is a pretty bad historian if he refers to him as if he were the first Gustav, seeing as the first Gustav is Gustav Vasa. Not to mention that there are also two others kings called "Gustav Adolf," those being number IV and VI.
Nevertheless, the name one is supposed to use in English for "Gustav II Adolf" is "Gustavus (II) Adolphus." Just as the kings called "Karl" are to be referred to as "Charles" in English.
I'll repeat that one is never to use only one part of the double names, as that is seen as disrespectful.
And the historian Michael Roberts is not Swedish, and thus used an anglicised version of the name, rather than the actual one.
But really, what's the point of this thread? Many of the people here know their history quite well, and this man was a big figure in that war. Chances are that people have at least heard of him.
Obviously some might think you're talking about Hitler (how witty), but then I still wonder: What is the issue that you want debated in this thread?
No issue to be debated, just a very tired, very bored post borne out of the fact that I have been revising the military revolution for 2 days with very little sleep.
Fass: Virtually every book I have read on Gustav refers to him as I have done.
Peisandros
05-06-2006, 09:58
*yawn*
Waste of thread space.
LaLaland0
05-06-2006, 10:00
*yawn*
Waste of thread space.
but a boon to our post counts
Psychotic Military
05-06-2006, 11:36
Just a hint ppl that at West Point and many other academic schools of war Alexander The Greats tactics and logistics are being taught and implemented in modern warfare so i guess one needs to do more than read books inorder to have a full understanding of this topic
Soviet Haaregrad
05-06-2006, 11:54
Gustav II Adolf was good, but he was no Napoleon.
Just a hint ppl that at West Point and many other academic schools of war Alexander The Greats tactics and logistics are being taught and implemented in modern warfare so i guess one needs to do more than read books inorder to have a full understanding of this topic
What a waist. The US won't be in any full-scale war anytime soon. Certainly not in our life time. I fail to see how pusing a few buttons then sending in some soldiers requires any knowledge of Alexander the Great.