Talk:Torstenson War

WP:MILHIST Assessment
Very short. Nice sectioning, but definitely needs expansion in every section. Needs an infobox. The intro also needs a little work - perhaps something like "The Hannibal War, also known as..." Slight changes in wording can make things seem a lot neater and more professional. Nice list of references, though. Always nice when an article lists its references. LordAmeth 00:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

The Dutch Republic as belligerent
GlobalReference221, the source you've added to support the claim that the Dutch Republic was a belligerent, seemingly involves factual errors; it says "Dutch and Swedes declared war on Denmark in 1643", even though it's widely accepted that the Swedes invaded without any formal declaration of war – Sundberg (2002), Svenska freder och stillestånd 1249–1814, p. 245. Furthermore, according to The Rise and Fall of the Danish Empire (p. 135), also opposing any claim of declarations of war, the Dutch Republic "had not directly participated in the war with Denmark", since the Dutch ships involved at the Battle of Fehmarn (1644) were hired by Swedish-Dutch Louis De Geer on behalf of Sweden, thus not representing the Dutch Republic as a state. The same source mentions how "concessions in customs of the Sound" were granted to the Netherlands, but the same is also true for Britain, France and Hansa – The Baltic Straits (p. 71). Everything I've seen thus far, except for the dubious source you added, points to the fact that the Dutch Republic neither declared war or participated; it merely supported the Swedes by allowing them to hire ships with crew there, thus hardly being a belligerent. Imonoz (talk) 23:00, 8 October 2023 (UTC)


 * There are plenty of sources that say otherwise, u can also look for them yourself yk. From what i read the Dutch also sent ships themselves due to Denmark raising the toll, the Dutch wanted to secure their trading position see https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Dutch_Wars_of_Independence/2K3pAgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=&pg=PT36&printsec=frontcover it was an official war between the dutch and danish who also made a treaty https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Merchant_s_magazine_c/7HwEAAAAQAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=&pg=PA283&printsec=frontcover. GlobalReference221 (talk) 12:08, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The Sources you've provided above don't appear to support your argument. I'm not sure what page number we're supposed to be looking at in "The Dutch Wars of Independence", while the Merchant simply says in 1645 (ie after the war) Denmark agreed a series of trade agreements with nations who used the Sound, setting out tariffs for access to the Baltic trade.
 * "Securing their trading position" is not the same as the Dutch declaring war, which is what needs to happen for it to be considered a Belligerent in this conflict. Maybe I'm missing something. Robinvp11 (talk) 14:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Regarding your first source, the Dutch Republic did send a fleet under Witte de With to the Baltic, but not as a belligerent ; to quote your source, it was a "war (1643-5) between Denmark and Sweden". The Dutch Republic seized the opportunity of a weakened Denmark and, in a show of force, sent a naval fleet with merchants in 1645 in an attempt to reduce the Sound Dues, all while acting neutral (unless attacked) – Försvarsstaben (1944), Slaget vid Femern, 1644, 13/10, 1944, p. 165. However, contrary to your claims, the Dutch Republic and Denmark were not at war (this is only mentioned in your dubious source Asia in the Making of Europe which incorrectly assumes Sweden and the Dutch Republic declared war in 1643) nor had they fought each other. In fact, Försvarsstaben (pp. 87-88) mentions how the Swedish government sent their trustee Louis De Geer to Amsterdam in 1644 to convince the Dutch Republic to enter the war on Sweden's side, and to privately equip, hire and buy ships on Sweden's behalf; the Republic not only refused to enter the war, seeing as Sweden had started it without consulting them, but denied any subsidies for Geer's fleet. The treaty at Kristianopel mentioned in your second source concerned the dues only (I referred to it earlier), it was not a peace treaty between Denmark and the Dutch Republic since they had not been at war. Imonoz (talk) 15:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you are indeed right but, the Dutch where not neutral, but just did not officially join the war. The Dutch where an ally of Sweden they even signed a defensive alliance in 1640, and Denmark, and Spain made an 'anti Dutch treaty'. The Dutch even encouraged Louis de Geer to help the Swedes, and Amsterdam, and some other towns tried to send a Dutch fleet to help Sweden but eventually did not. however they failed to do anything more then this, but provide more political support( from Dutch Primacy in World Trade, 1585-1740 page 146-148 ). However from another thing i red was, In 1645, the Dutch threatened to join Sweden in the war against Denmark if the Sound dues were not lowered, and the Danes were eventually obliged to give way.  from Northern Europe in the Early Modern Period
 * The Baltic World 1492-1772. So i do think u are indeed right and that they do not classify as belligerent, thank you for correcting me. GlobalReference221 (talk) 13:32, 11 October 2023 (UTC)