Translated by dr.hist. Eva Eihmane

 

Comment by PhD Tatjana Bogdanoviča

 

About the source

This document is part of the archival complex the History of the Riga College of the Society of Jesus in Livonia (Historia collegii Rigensis Societatis Jesu in Livonia), which is held at the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus (Archivum Romanum Societatis Jesu), Lithuanian Fonds, 54th book. The archival complex was created in 1619 and was co-authored by a Jesuit from the Riga College who, as indicated by the content of the documents, was an eyewitness of many events. The History of the Riga College has at its foundation annual reports Historia collegii Rigensis S.J. sent to the Jesuit General Curia in Rome. Historia aimed at revealing the development trends of the respective structural unit of the Society and its contacts with the world around it, thus, the reports were expected to contain information about the growth of the particular Jesuit house and the main events in its service area. In the 1605 report, the Jesuits described the siege of Riga by the troops of Swedish King Charles IX (1604–1611) and the Battle of Salaspils (Kircholm) as the most important events of the year. These events take 90% of the document testifying to the importance of the battle for the College, town, Livonia and the whole of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Rzeczpospolita). 

 

Commanders of the battle: Charles IX, Joachim Friedrich von Mansfeld, Jan Karol Chodkiewicz

The author of the document clearly demonstrates his attitude towards the commanders of the battle. He starts the narrative by mentioning Charles IX, the King of Sweden, referring to him by his title of the Duke of Södermanland. In historical sources Charles was often called the Duke of Södermanland, i.e., by the title that he held before ascending to the throne, which was also associated with his land holdings. In 1560, when Sweden was divided among Gustav I’s (King of Sweden 1523–1560) sons, he inherited the duchy and since then, was often mentioned in various chronicles and diplomatic correspondence by this title. After the death of Johannes III (King of Sweden 1569–1592), Charles was appointed the regent of Sigismund (Sigismund Vasa, 1566–1632), heir to the throne. In 1587 Sigismund was elected King of Rzeczpospolita and in 1592 was declared King of Sweden but ruled this country only formally as he continued residing in Poland. In Sweden, there emerged opposition to Sigismund led by Charles, and struggle for the throne began. It resulted in 1604 Charles officially accepting the title of the King of Sweden as Charles IX. Before the official coronation in 1607, his title was Charles IX of Sweden, King of the Swedish state elected by the grace of God and hereditary prince, Duke of Södermanland, Närke, and Värmland, thus, his mentioning only by his ducal title indicates Rzeczpospolita’s official position on the issue of his legitimacy. The supporters of Sigismund III did not accept Charles as a legitimate king and regarded him only as the Duke of Södermanland wo had rebelled against the legitimate king. In official Polish and Lithuanian documents, it was an usual practice to refer to the enemies of the state whose rights to a new title were contested by their former titles and no exception was made for the king of Sweden. 

The present document, however, does not contain any negative evaluative lexical constructions regarding Charles IX, which indicates a certain respect for the King of Sweden. However, from the context of the described events, a certain image emerges: the greatest emphasis is placed on the fact that Charles IX is an adversary of the Roman Catholic Church, which, considering the document's authorship, is not surprising; traits such as self-confidence and shortsightedness, as well as underestimation of the enemy, are also highlighted. Yet, it cannot be said that Charles' character is portrayed as overtly negative: the author also emphasizes the king's generosity — he did not hurry immediately to attack Chodkiewicz's small army, instead giving it room to retreat. 

The commander of mercenary troops Count Joachim Friedrich von Mansfeld (1581—1623) is presented in a similar light. On one hand, his army, according to the Jesuits, destroyed everything around them with fire and sword, and burned down St. Gertrude's Church; but on the other hand, he distinguished himself with noble deeds, the distribution of alms. Thus, for the document’s author, the enemy is not inherently evil.

When writing about Jan Karol Chodkiewicz (1561–1621), the Grand Hetman of Lithuania, the author of the document emphasizes that he is Lithuanian, which indicates both his background and his army’s affiliation with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This is because Rzeczpospolita’s army was divided according to an "ethnic" principle: the Lithuanian troops from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and the Polish troops from the Kingdom of Poland (the Crown). It can be assumed that the document’s author himself was from Lithuania, and therefore, when mentioning Chodkiewicz's background, he highlighted that the Swedes were defeated specifically by the Lithuanian army, thereby emphasizing the achievements of a particular commander and his troops.

This document clearly juxtaposes Chodkiewicz with Charles IX; it is not only a military confrontation but also a religious one. While Charles is presented as an adversary of the Catholic faith and the Church, Chodkiewicz is depicted as a devout man guided by God himself and acting in the name of God and the state. In this context, it should be noted that during the Polish-Swedish wars, the Catholic faith for the szlachta became a kind of a unifying factor in the fight against Lutheran Sweden.

 

Description of the battle site

 

Jesuits provide very modest information about Salaspils: they mention it only as a place located two miles, i.e., 15 km from Riga. It indicates that it was not a large or significant town. However, for the author, it is highly symbolic because it was from there that Bishop Meinard began the Christianization of Livonia. The mentioning of this fact is also important in the context of the battle itself, considering that from the Jesuits’ perspective this was not only a conflict between two political powers, Rzeczpospolita and Sweden, but also between two denominations, Catholicism and Lutheranism. It is important for the author to emphasize that it was precisely there, on the site of great significance for of the Livonian (Catholic) Church, that the Swedes, i.e., Lutherans were defeated. A metaphorical analogy can be discerned here: the victorious march of Christianity in Livonia during the Middle Ages began in Salaspils, and it was there that the archenemy of Catholicism, the Lutheran faith, was vanquished during the Counter-Reformation, as it impeded the spread of the Catholic faith in the Duchy of Livonia.

 

The description of the battle

 

Jesuits were clergymen, not militaries, thus, the description of the battle is quite abstract, but still interesting. The document’s author distinguishes two phases in the battle. The first one is related to the Swedes’ attempt to capture Riga. For the Jesuits as well as for the city, this was a dangerous moment because their residence was located in Riga, and it was clear that if the city were taken, the college would have to be closed. A relatively detailed account of the events surrounding the siege of Riga is also connected to an important political aspect: in this way the author emphasizes the city’s loyalty to Rzeczpospolita. Based on many documents, including the above-mentioned Jesuits’ reports, Riga remained faithful to the Lutheran faith. It opposed Jesuit activities and often conflicted with Rzeczpospolita’s authorities. Nevertheless, it did not surrender to the Lutheran King of Sweden. The second phase is the battle itself. The description of it contains two levels of information: factual material and the perception of the described events.

The description of the battle is not particularly rich in facts. However, the details are quite accurate and confirmed by numerous historical studies, such as the battle taking place on 27 September and Mansfeld's forces participating in the siege of Riga. The Jesuits also mention a specific number, 14,000 soldiers disembarking at Daugavgrīva on 15 August, although according to Polish researcher Mariusz Balcerek, the actual number was only 11,000. The author probably made a mistake or perhaps intentionally exaggerated the enemy's numerical strength to further emphasize the heroic victory of the Lithuanian army.

The number of soldiers in Chodkiewicz’s army is also specified very precisely: 3,300. It should be noted that among researchers, there has long been debate about the numerical size of the Lithuanian army; the most recent studies mention a figure of 3,000. The number of soldiers in the Duke of Courland's army, which came to assist Chodkiewicz, is also given very precisely: 300 soldiers. Balcerek confirms this in his studies, stating that they were 300 cuirassiers.

The number of casualties in the Lithuanian army indicated by the Jesuits (50 killed, 40 wounded) does not match the researchers' data (70–100 killed and 200 wounded). The Jesuits probably only considered those who were transported to the city hospital. However, despite the discrepancy, these figures confirm that the Lithuanian army's losses were minimal.

This document also reveals a little-known fact: a feast held by the Swedish army at Blumenthal (mod. Mazjumprava) manor, which belonged to the Riga Jesuit college.

In the description of the Battle of Salaspils, the Jesuits emphasize a particular tactical move: a feigned retreat, which brought Chodkiewicz victory over Charles IX despite his army being three times smaller. Initially, both armies took cautious positions, and the Swedes did not even respond to Chodkiewicz’s provocations. Then, the front lines of the Lithuanian troops drew back, which the Swedes interpreted as a flight and began an attack, extending their forces. When the Swedes descended into the valley, Chodkiewicz signalled a cavalry flank attack. This tactic is considered one of the most brilliant displays of military leadership in the 17th century, demonstrating that a competent manoeuvre and understanding of the enemy's psychology can change the course of a battle even with a significant numerical disadvantage.

Another aspect that makes the description of the battle interesting is that it presents the Jesuits' perspective. First, they tried to find out what motivated Charles IX to attack the Livonian fortresses and cities. According to the Jesuits, the Swedish king believed that he was fighting a just war: he was reclaiming what the Poles had once taken away from him. In his view, a part of Livonia was under Polish illegal control, as it had previously (in the 1660s and 1670s) been under Swedish protectorate. Furthermore, it was a fight for religious dominance; it is not without reason that in his address to the city, the king emphasized the need to eradicate everything associated with the Catholic faith.

The Battle of Salaspils carries a highly symbolical meaning for the Jesuits. They emphasize the date that it took place – 27 September, St. Stanislaus Day – as an important religious, political, and propaganda manoeuvre. Saint Stanislaus (who died in 1079) was considered one of Poland’s main patron saints, a symbol of faith in the Catholic religion and of protection against external enemies. Thus, victory achieved on his feast day was seen as a divine affirmation that Chodkiewicz’s army had been fighting for the right cause. The document’s author aimed to show that the Catholic saint was defending the Catholic troops against the Lutherans, thereby reinforcing the religious subtext of Chodkiewicz’s victory. It is also supported by the mention that the victory was achieved in the name of Jesus and Mary. It is worth noting that Lutherans did not recognize the authority of Mary, whereas Rzeczpospolita regarded her as their main patron saint. Additionally, attention should be drawn to the fact that the author openly states that this victory, which many doubted to be possible but was eventually achieved, is attributed to none other than God. In this context, Chodkiewicz’s army, is merely an instrument in the hands of God.

 

Literature:

• Balcerek, M. (2022). Battle of Kircholm (Salaspils) in 1605. The current state of research. Open Military Studies 1 (1): 171 – 189.

• Balcerek, M. (2009). Liczebność, skład i szyk wojska hetmana litewskiego Jana Karola Chodkiewicza w bitwie pod Kircholmem na ordre de bataille Erika Dahlberga. Zapiski historyczne, 2009, t. 74, z.3, p. 77-92.  

• Bohun T. Kircholm 1605. Gambit hetmański, Mówią Wieki, no. 10, 2005: 10-15 (in Polish).

• Wisner H., Kircholm 1605, 3rd ed., Bellona, Warszawa, 2011.