The strengthening of foreign policy contradictions in Europe at the beginning of the 17th century. The Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) was caused, on the one hand, by the aggravation of intra-German contradictions, and on the other, by the confrontation between the European powers. Starting as an intra-imperial conflict, it turned into the first European war in history.

The most acute foreign policy contradiction in the West at that time was the confrontation between France and the Habsburg monarchies. France, which by the beginning of the 17th century had become to the strongest Western Europe absolutist state, sought to establish its hegemony in the system of states surrounding it. The Habsburg monarchies, Austrian and Spanish, stood in its way, usually acting in concert against France, although there were known contradictions between them, in particular due to Northern Italy.

France sought by all means to maintain the balance established in Germany after the Peace of Augsburg in order to prevent the strengthening of the position of the Habsburgs. She provided patronage to the Protestant princes and tried to break up the coalition of Catholic forces, to win over to her side one of the strongest Catholic princes - the Duke of Bavaria. In addition, France had territorial claims to the empire, she intended to annex Alsace and the Lorraine regions. With Spain, France had a conflict over the Southern Netherlands and Northern Italy. Joint Spanish-Austrian actions on the Rhine at the beginning of the war significantly exacerbated the contradictions between France and Spain.

England joined the anti-Habsburg coalition. But her position was controversial. On the one hand, she fought against the penetration of the Habsburgs into the Lower Rhine and the northern sea routes, and on the other hand, she did not want to allow the strengthening of the positions in this area and the opponents of the Habsburgs - Holland, Denmark and Sweden. England also sought to prevent the complete victory of the supporters of the anti-Habsburg coalition on the continent. She feuded with France over influence in the Middle East. Thus, England maneuvered between the two coalitions, equally afraid of the victory of both sides - Catholics and Protestants.

At first, Denmark, which owned the German regions - Schleswig and Holstein (Holstein), acted on the side of the Protestant forces; the Danish king was the prince of the "Holy Roman Empire". Denmark considered itself the successor to the Hansa in the North and Baltic Seas and sought to prevent the Habsburgs from strengthening their positions in this area. But her interests clashed here with Swedish aggression.

Sweden, which by that time had become the strongest militarily state in Northern Europe, fought to turn the Baltic Sea into its "inland lake". She subjugated Finland, captured Livonia from Poland, and, taking advantage of the weakening of Russia at the beginning of the 17th century, achieved the annexation of the Ladoga region and the mouths of the Narva and Neva rivers by the Peace of Stolbov in 1617. The implementation of Sweden's plans was hampered by the protracted war with Poland, an ally of the Habsburgs. The Habsburgs tried in every possible way to prevent the conclusion of peace between Sweden and Poland in order to prevent Sweden from entering the Thirty Years' War that had begun.

Holland, recently freed from the rule of the Spanish Habsburgs, in 1621 again entered the war with Spain. She was an active ally of German Protestants and Denmark in the Thirty Years' War. The aim of Holland was to push Spain into the Spanish Netherlands, weaken the Habsburgs and ensure the dominance of their merchant fleet on the old Hanseatic routes.

Türkiye directly or indirectly participated in the military conflict between European states. Although the Turkish danger threatened many European countries, it was most directed against Austria. Naturally, the opponents of the Habsburgs sought an alliance with Ottoman Empire. Türkiye sought to use the outbreak of the war to strengthen its positions in the Balkans. She was ready to contribute in every possible way to the defeat of the Habsburgs.

Russia did not directly participate in the outbreak of a military conflict, but both warring camps had to reckon with its position. For Russia, the main task of foreign policy was the fight against Polish aggression. Therefore, quite naturally, she was interested in the defeat of Poland's ally - the Habsburg monarchy. Contradictions with Sweden in this situation receded into the background.

Thus, the vast majority of European states directly or indirectly opposed the Austrian Habsburgs. Only the Spanish Habsburgs remained their reliable allies. This ultimately sealed the inevitable defeat of the Habsburg Empire.

The uprising in the Czech Republic and the beginning of the Thirty Years' War. After the creation of two military-political groups - the Protestant Union and the Catholic League (1608-1609) - the preparation of the warentered a decisive phase in Germany. However, deep contradictions were revealed in both camps, which did not give them the opportunity to immediately enter into a military conflict. In the Catholic camp, enmity was manifested between the head of the league - Maximilian of Bavaria and Emperor Ferdinand of Habsburg. The Bavarian duke himself claimed the imperial crown no. He did not want to help strengthen his rival. No less sharp contradictions were found in the Protestant camp, where the interests of the Lutheran and Calvinist princes clashed and conflicts arose over separate possessions. The intra-German contradictions were skillfully used by the European powers, recruiting supporters in both camps.

The beginning of the war was an uprising in the Czech Republic against the power of the Habsburgs. Since 1526, the Czech Republic was part of the Habsburg state. The Czech nobles were promised to preserve the old liberties: the national Sejm, which enjoyed the formal right to elect a king, regional estate meetings, the inviolability of the Hussite religion, self-government of cities, etc. But these promises were already violated in the second half of the 16th century. Under Rudolf II, who patronized the Catholic reaction, an attack began on the rights of Czech Protestants. This activated the noble opposition in the Czech Republic, which began to merge with the Protestant camp in the empire. In order to prevent this, Rudolf II made concessions and confirmed the “Letter of Majesty”, which granted freedom to the Hussite religion and allowed him to be elected to protect his defensors (defenders). Taking advantage of this, the Czech nobles began to create their own armed forces under the command of Count Thurn.

Matthew, who succeeded Rudolf II on the throne, relied on the Germans and pursued a policy hostile to the Czech nobility. He declared Ferdinand of Styria, a friend of the Jesuits and ardent enemy Protestants, who openly declared that he would never recognize the Letter of Majesty. This caused widespread unrest. An armed crowd of Praguers occupied the town hall and demanded reprisals against the Habsburg henchmen. According to the old Czech custom, a defenestration was arranged: two of the Habsburg "deputies" were thrown out of the windows of the town hall (May 1618). This was the beginning of open warfare.

The Czech Sejm elected a government of 30 directors who took over power in Bohemia and Moravia. The government strengthened the national troops and expelled the Jesuits from the country. It was announced that Ferdinand was deprived of power over the Czech Republic. Military operations began. Czech troops under the command of Count Turnn inflicted several defeats on the Habsburg army and reached the outskirts of Vienna. But it was a temporary success. The Habsburgs had military allies in the form of the Catholic League, while the Czechs were essentially alone. RukovoThe promoters of the Czech uprising did not call the masses to arms, hoping for military assistance from the German Protestants. The Czech Sejm, hoping to get the support of the Protestant Union, elected Frederick of the Palatinate as king. But this did nothing to improve the situation. Frederick of the Palatinate did not have sufficient military forces, and he entered into negotiations with the leaders of the Catholic League, in fact agreeing with the impending massacre of the Czech Republic.

Under such conditions, on November 8, 1620, the decisive battle took place at Bela Hora (near Prague), in which the Czech army was defeated. Bohemia, Moravia and other areas of the former Czech kingdom were occupied by the troops of Ferdinand II (1619-1637). Mass repressions began against all participants in the uprising. The property of those executed and those who fled from the Czech Republic passed to the Catholics, in large part to the Germans. The Hussite religion was forbidden.

The defeat of the Czech Republic was followed by rampant Catholic reaction throughout Germany. Frederick of the Palatinate, nicknamed the "winter king" of Bohemia (he held the royal title for only a few winter months), was subjected to imperial disgrace. The Palatinate was occupied by Spanish troops, the title of elector, taken from Frederick, was transferred to Maximilian of Bavaria. Military operations in Germany continued. Catholic troops advanced to the northwest. In the Czech Republic and Austria, mass demonstrations of peasants began, directed against military robberies and rampant feudal reaction.

Danish war period (1625-1629). The offensive of the Catholic troops to the north caused alarm in Denmark, Holland and England. At the end of 1625, with the assistance of France, Denmark, Holland and England entered into a military alliance against the Habsburgs. The Danish king Christian IV received subsidies from England and Holland and undertook to start a war against the Catholic camp in Germany. The Danish intervention, carried out under the guise of military assistance to fellow believers - the Protestants, pursued predatory goals - the rejection of the northern regions from Germany.

The Danish offensive, supported by Protestant forces in Germany, was at first successful, aided by discord in the Catholic camp. The emperor was afraid of the excessive strengthening of the league and did not provide material assistance to its troops. The discord among the Catholic forces was facilitated by French diplomacy, which pursued the goal of splitting Bavaria from Austria. In this environment, Ferdinand II decided to create his own army, independent of the Catholic League. He accepted the plan proposed by Albrecht Wallenstein.

A. Wallenstein (1583-1634) was a Czech nobleman who became extremely rich by buying confiscated lands of Czech rebels. An outstanding commander-condottiere, hesmog in the most short time create a large army of mercenaries. His principle was: "War feeds war." The troops were kept at the expense of the robbery of the population and military indemnities. The officers received high salaries, and therefore there was always plenty of various adventurers from the nobles and declassed elements to replenish this bandit army. Having received from the emperor several districts in Bohemia and Swabia for standing troops, Wallenstein quickly completed and prepared an army of sixty thousand and, together with Tilly, began military operations against German Protestants and Danes. During 1627-1628. Wallenstein and Tilly defeated their opponents everywhere. Wallenstein laid siege to Stralsund, but could not take it, running into the staunch resistance of the Danish and Swedish troops who came to their aid.

Wallenstein's army occupied all of Northern Germany and was ready to invade the Jutland Peninsula. But this was prevented by the position of the European states, and especially France, which declared a strong protest against the emperor. In the Catholic League itself, contradictions also escalated: the Catholic princes expressed obvious dissatisfaction with the actions of the power-hungry imperial commander.

Defeated Denmark was forced to make peace on the terms of restoring the status quo and refusing to interfere in the affairs of Germany (Peace of Lübeck 1629). But this peace did not bring peace to Germany. Wallenstein and Tilly's mercenaries continued to rob the population of Protestant principalities and cities. Wallenstein benefited the most from the war. He received from the Emperor the Duchy of Mecklenburg and the title of "Admiral of the Baltic and Oceanic Seas." all harbors in Pomerania and prepared the fleet for the beginning of military operations on the seas.All these activities were directed against Sweden and her plans in the Baltic Sea.

The victory over Denmark seemed to open up an opportunity for the Habsburgs to assert their influence in the north and restore the dominance of the Catholic faith everywhere. But these plans were doomed to inevitable failure. In Germany, dissatisfaction with the policy of the emperor and his commander, who spoke openly about the dangers of princely pluralism and called for an end to it, was ripening.

Most of all, the interests of the Protestant princes were hurt. According to the Restorative (restorative) edict issued in 1629, the secularized possessions were taken away from the Protestants. To enforce this edict, Wallenstein used mercenary troops, occupying with their help the possessions of former monasteries abolished by the Reformation. in oppositionto Wallenstein were also Catholic princes. Ferdinand II was forced to agree to the resignation of Wallenstein (1630).

Swedish period of the war (1630-1635). Peace with Denmark was in fact only a pause in the European war that had begun in Germany. Neighboring states were waiting for an opportunity to enter the war and realize their aggressive plans for the empire. The policy of the Habsburgs fueled contradictions and gave rise to the unleashing of a European war.

Sweden, having achieved a truce with Poland, began to vigorously prepare for the invasion of Germany. An agreement was concluded between Sweden and France: the Swedish king undertook to send his army to Germany. France was to provide financial assistance. To deprive the Habsburgs of support from the papal curia, Richelieu promised to help the pope in the capture of the Duchy of Urbino in Italy.

The Swedish king, acting as a savior of the Protestant princes who suffered from restitution, in the summer of 1630 landed his army in Pomerania, relatively few in number, but possessing high fighting qualities. It consisted of free Swedish peasants, was well trained and armed with the most advanced weapons for that time, in particular artillery. King Gustavus Adolphus was an outstanding commander, skillfully applied the tactics of maneuvering combat and won battles against a numerically superior enemy.

The offensive actions of the Swedish troops were delayed for a whole year due to the position of the Electors of Brandenburg and Saxony hostile to the Swedes. Only after the commander of the Catholic troops, Tilly, captured and destroyed the Protestant city of Magdeburg, and the Swedish army began to prepare for the shelling of Berlin, an agreement was reached with the Elector of Brandenburg to allow the Swedish troops to pass. The Swedish army began active offensive operations. In September 1631, the Swedes defeated Tilly's troops at the Battle of Breitenfeld (near Leipzig) and, continuing to move deeper into Germany, reached Frankfurt am Main at the end of the year. The success of the Swedish troops was facilitated by peasant and urban uprisings in a number of regions of Germany. Gustav Adolf, who declared himself the defender of the peasants, tried to speculate on this. But later the peasants turned their weapons against the atrocities of the Swedish troops.

The offensive of the Swedes did not develop at all as Richelieu expected. Gustav Adolf strove for a decisive victory and did not stop at the violation of the neutrality of the Catholic principalities allied with France, in particular Bavaria. On the territory of the latter, on the outskirts of Austria, battles unfolded. In the battles on Lech, the commander of the Catholic army, Tilly, was killed. The position of the Habsburgs became critical. Ferdinandyes II had no choice but to turn again to Wallenstein, who now demanded complete independence in command of the army and the conduct of the war. The emperor was forced to sign a humiliating treaty and in fact transfer the highest military power into the hands of the power-hungry "generalissimo". Wallenstein insisted on the submission of the head of the Catholic League, Maximilian of Bavaria, otherwise refusing to liberate Bavaria from the Swedish troops. In April 1632, Wallenstein, taking over the supreme command, quickly created an army of mercenaries, which included his former adventurer soldiers. France had no intention of hindering Wallenstein's progress; now she was most afraid of the implementation of the military-political plans of Gustavus Adolphus.

Preferring not to engage in a general battle with the Swedes, which Gustav Adolf was so eager for, Wallenstein exhausted the enemy in skirmishes, capturing communications and creating difficulties for supplying his troops. He moved his army into Saxony, which forced the Swedes to withdraw from southern Germany in order to protect their northern communications. On November 16, 1632, the Swedes imposed a decisive battle at Lutsen, in which they gained an advantage, but lost their commander-in-chief. The death of Gustavus Adolf did not allow the Swedish army to realize the victory. Wallenstein withdrew his troops to the Czech Republic.

The Swedish Chancellor Axel Oxenstierna, who led the policy of Sweden after the death of the king, created an alliance of Protestant princes (1633), thereby abandoning the previous projects of establishing a Swedish protectorate over Germany .. This led to an improvement in relations between Sweden and France and in the future to even more their close union.

Meanwhile, Wallenstein, who had a hundred thousandth army, began to show more and more independence. He negotiated with the Lutheran princes, the Swedes and the French, not always accurately informing the emperor about their content. Ferdinand II suspected him of treason. In February 1634, Wallenstein was removed from his post as commander and killed by bribed officers. His mercenary army was placed under the command of the Austrian Archduke.

Subsequently, hostilities unfolded in the territory between the Main and the Danube. In September 1634, Imperial-Spanish troops inflicted a heavy defeat on the Swedish army at the Battle of Nördlingen and devastated the Protestant areas in Central Germany. Protestant princes went to reconciliation with the emperor. The elector of Saxony concluded a peace treaty with Ferdinand in Prague, achieving the annexation of a number of territories to his possessions (1635). His example was followed by the Duke of Mecklenburg, the Elector of Brandenburg and a number of other Lutheran princes. The war finally turned from intra-imperial to European.

Franco-Swedish war period (1635-1648). In an effort to prevent the strengthening of the position of the Habsburgs and the loss of its influence in Germany, France renewed its alliance with Sweden and began open hostilities. French troops simultaneously launched an offensive in Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and the Pyrenees. Soon Holland, Mantua, Savoy and Venice also intervened in the war. During this period, France played a leading role in the anti-Habsburg coalition.

Despite the fact that the largest Protestant princes of Germany went over to the side of the emperor, the opponents of the Habsburgs had a preponderance of forces. Under the control of France, the 180,000-strong army of Berenhard of Weimar, hired with French money, fought in Germany. The enemy troops did not enter into decisive battles, but tried to wear each other out, making deep raids into the enemy's rear. The war took on a protracted, exhausting character, the civilian population suffered the most from it, subjected to constant violence by the riotous soldiery. One of the participants in the war describes the atrocities of the landsknechts as follows: “We ... flew into the village, took and stole everything we could, tortured and robbed the peasants. If the poor fellows did not like it and they dared to protest ... they were killed or their houses were set on fire. The peasants went into the forests, created detachments and entered into battle with the robbers - foreign and German mercenaries.

The Habsburg troops suffered one defeat after another. In the autumn of 1642, in the battle near Leipzig, the Swedes defeated the imperial troops. In the spring of 1643, the French defeated the Spaniards at Rocroix. The largest victory was won by the Swedes in the spring of 1645 at Janko-vice (Czech Republic), where imperial army lost only 7 thousand people killed. But the Habsburgs resisted until the victories of the French and Swedish troops created an immediate threat to Vienna.

Peace of Westphalia 1648 Consequences of the war. A peace treaty was signed in two cities in the Westphalia region: in Osnabrück - between the emperor, Sweden and the Protestant princes - in Munster - between the emperor and France. The Peace of Westphalia led to significant territorial changes both in the German Empire itself as a whole and in individual principalities.

Sweden received Western Pomerania and part of Eastern Pomerania with the city of Stettin, as well as the island of Rügen and, as an "imperial fief", the city of Wismar, the Archbishopric of Bremen and the Bishopric of Verden. Thus, under the control of Sweden were the mouths of three large rivers - the Oder, Elbe, Weser, as well as the Baltic coast. The Swedish king acquired the rank of imperial prince and could send his representative to the Reichstag, which gave him the opportunity to interfere in the internal affairs of the empire. 522

France secured the rights to bishoprics and cities

Metz, Toul and Verdun, acquired from around the world. in Cateau-Cambrais, and annexed Alsace without Strasbourg and several other points that remained formally part of the empire. In addition, under guardianship french king passed 10 imperial cities. Holland and Switzerland were finally recognized as independent states. Significantly increased their territories some large German principalities. The Bavarian Duke received the title of Elector and the Upper Palatinate. The eighth Electorship was established in favor of the Count Palatine of the Rhine.

The Peace of Westphalia finally consolidated the fragmentation of Germany. The German princes achieved the recognition of their sovereign rights: to conclude alliances and enter into contractual relations with foreign states. They could conduct an independent foreign policy, but the treaty contained a clause that their actions were not to harm the empire. The formula of the Augsburg religious world "whose country, that is the faith" was now extended to the Calvinist princes. Divided into many large and small principalities, Germany remained a hotbed of internal and international complications.

The Peace of Westphalia brought significant changes to international relations. The leading role has passed to the large national states - France, England, Sweden, and in Eastern Europe - Russia. The multinational Austrian monarchy was in decline.

The Thirty Years' War brought Germany and the countries that were part of the Habsburg monarchy unprecedented ruin. The decline in population in many areas of Northeast and Southwest Germany has reached 50 percent or more. The Czech Republic was subjected to the greatest devastation, where out of 2.5 million people, no more than 700 thousand people survived. An irreparable blow was dealt to the productive forces of the country. The Swedes burned and destroyed almost all ironworks, foundries and ore mines in Germany.

“When peace came, Germany was defeated - helpless, trampled, torn to pieces, bleeding;

and the peasant was again in the most distressed situation.'” Serfdom intensified throughout Germany. It existed in the most severe forms in the eastern regions beyond the Elbe.

Reference table for thirty years war contains the main periods, events, dates, battles, participating countries and the results of this war. The table will be useful to schoolchildren and students in preparing for tests, exams and the exam in history.

Bohemian period of the Thirty Years' War (1618-1625)

	Events of the Thirty Years' War	Results of the Thirty Years' War
	The oppositional nobles, led by Count Thurn, were thrown out of the windows of the Czech Chancellery into the ditch of the royal governors (“Prague Defenestration”).	Beginning of the Thirty Years' War.
	The Czech directory formed an army led by Count Thurn, the Evangelical Union sent 2 thousand soldiers under the command of Mansfeld.
	The siege and capture of the city of Pilsen by the Protestant army of Count Mansfeld.
	The Protestant army of Count Thurn approached Vienna, but met with stubborn resistance.	The 15,000-strong imperial army, led by Count Buqua and Dampier, entered the Czech Republic.
	Battle of Sablat.	Near České Budějovice, the imperials of Count Buqua defeated the Protestants of Mansfeld, and Count Thurn lifted the siege of Vienna.
	Battle of Vesternica.	Czech victory over Dampier's imperials.
	The Transylvanian prince Gabor Bethlen moved against Vienna, but was stopped by the Hungarian magnate Druget Gomonai.	On the territory of the Czech Republic, protracted battles were fought with varying success.
October 1619	Emperor Ferdinand II concluded an agreement with the head of the Catholic League, Maximilian of Bavaria.	For this, the Elector of Saxony was promised Silesia and Lusatia, and the Duke of Bavaria was promised the possessions of the Elector of the Palatinate and his electoral rank. In 1620, Spain sent a 25,000-strong army under the command of Ambrosio Spinola to help the emperor.
	Emperor Ferdinand II concluded an agreement with the Elector of Saxony Johann-Georg.
	Battle on White Mountain.	The Protestant army of Frederick V suffers a crushing defeat from the imperial troops and the army of the Catholic League under the command of Field Marshal Count Tilly near Prague.
	The collapse of the Evangelical Union and the loss of all possessions and title by Frederick V.	Bavaria received the Upper Palatinate, Spain - the Lower. Margrave George-Friedrich of Baden-Durlach remained an ally of Frederick V.
	The Transylvanian prince Gabor Bethlen signed peace at Nikolsburg with the emperor, gaining territories in eastern Hungary.
	Mansfeld defeated the imperial army of Count Tilly at the battle of Wiesloch (Wishloch) and joined with the Margrave of Baden.	Tilly was forced to retreat, having lost 3,000 men killed and wounded, as well as all his guns, and headed to join Cordoba.
	The troops of the German Protestants, led by Margrave George-Friedrich, are defeated in the battles of Wimpfen by the Tilly imperials and the Spanish troops that came from the Netherlands, led by Gonzales de Cordoba.
	The victory of the 33,000th imperial army of Tilly in the battle of Hoechst over the 20,000th army of Christian of Brunswick.
	At the Battle of Fleurus, Tilly defeated Mansfeld and Christian of Brunswick and drove them into Holland.
	Battle of Stadtlon.	Imperial forces under Count Tilly thwarted Christian of Brunswick's invasion of northern Germany by defeating his 15,000-strong Protestant army.
	Frederick V concluded a peace treaty with Emperor Ferdinand II.	The first period of the war ended with a convincing victory for the Habsburgs, but this led to a closer unity of the anti-Habsburg coalition.
	France and Holland signed the Treaty of Compiègne, later joined by England, Sweden and Denmark, Savoy and Venice.

Danish period of the Thirty Years' War (1625-1629)

	Events of the Thirty Years' War	Results of the Thirty Years' War
	France declared war on Spain.	France involved in the conflict its allies in Italy - the Duchy of Savoy, the Duchy of Mantua and the Venetian Republic.
	The Spanish-Bavarian army under the command of the Spanish prince Ferdinand entered Compiègne, the imperial troops of Matthias Galas invaded Burgundy.
	Battle of Wittstock.	The German troops were defeated by the Swedes under the command of Baner.
	The Protestant army of Duke Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar won the Battle of Rheinfelden.
	Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar took the Breisach fortress.
	The Imperial Army is victorious at Wolfenbüttel.
	The Swedish troops of L. Torstenson defeated the imperial troops of Archduke Leopold and O. Piccolomini at Breitenfeld.	The Swedes occupy Saxony.
	Battle of Rocroix.	The victory of the French army under the command of Louis II de Bourbon, Duke of Anghien (from 1646 Prince of Condé). The French finally stopped the Spanish invasion.
	Battle of Tuttlingen.	The Bavarian army of Baron Franz von Mercy defeats the French under the command of Marshal Rantzau, who was captured.
	Swedish troops under the command of Field Marshal Lennart Torstensson invaded Holstein, Jutland.
August 1644	Louis II of Bourbon at the Battle of Freiburg defeats the Bavarians under the command of Baron Mercy.
	Battle of Jankov.	The imperial army was defeated by the Swedes under the command of Marshal Lennart Torstensson near Prague.
	Battle of Nördlingen.	Louis II of Bourbon and Marshal Turenne defeat the Bavarians, the Catholic commander, Baron Franz von Mercy, died in battle.
	The Swedish army invades Bavaria
	Bavaria, Cologne, France and Sweden sign a peace treaty in Ulm.	Maximilian I, Duke of Bavaria, in the fall of 1647 broke the treaty.
	The Swedes under the command of Koenigsmark capture part of Prague.
	At the Battle of Zusmarhausen near Augsburg, the Swedes under Marshal Carl Gustav Wrangel and the French under Turenne and Conde defeat the Imperial and Bavarian forces.	Only the imperial territories and Austria proper remained in the hands of the Habsburgs.
	At the Battle of Lans (near Arras), the French troops of the Prince of Condé defeat the Spaniards under the command of Leopold Wilhelm.
	Westphalian peace.	Under the terms of the peace, France received Southern Alsace and the Lorraine bishoprics of Metz, Toul and Verdun, Sweden - the island of Rügen, Western Pomerania and the Duchy of Bremen, plus an indemnity of 5 million thalers. Saxony - Lusatia, Brandenburg - Eastern Pomerania, the Archbishopric of Magdeburg and the Bishopric of Minden. Bavaria - Upper Palatinate, Bavarian Duke became Elector. All princes are legally recognized the right to enter into foreign policy alliances. Consolidation of the fragmentation of Germany. End of the Thirty Years' War.

The results of the war: Thirty Years' War was the first war that affected all segments of the population. In Western history, it has remained one of the most difficult European conflicts among the predecessors of the World Wars of the 20th century. The greatest damage was inflicted on Germany, where, according to some estimates, 5 million people died. Many regions of the country were devastated and remained deserted for a long time. A crushing blow was dealt to the productive forces of Germany. In the armies of both opposing sides, epidemics broke out, constant companions of wars. The influx of soldiers from abroad, the constant deployment of troops from one front to another, as well as the flight of the civilian population, spread the plague farther and farther from the centers of disease. The plague became a significant factor in the war. The immediate result of the war was that over 300 small German states received full sovereignty with nominal membership in the Holy Roman Empire. This situation continued until the end of the first empire in 1806. The war did not lead to the automatic collapse of the Habsburgs, but changed the balance of power in Europe. Hegemony passed to France. The decline of Spain became evident. In addition, Sweden became a great power, significantly strengthening its position in the Baltic. Adherents of all religions (Catholicism, Lutheranism, Calvinism) gained equal rights in the empire. The main result of the Thirty Years' War was a sharp weakening of the influence of religious factors on the life of European states. Their foreign policy began to be based on economic, dynastic and geopolitical interests. It is customary to count the modern era in international relations from the Peace of Westphalia.

At the beginning of the 17th century, Europe was undergoing a painful “reformatting”. The transition from the Middle Ages to the New Age could not be carried out easily and smoothly - any break in the traditional foundations is accompanied by a social storm. In Europe, this was accompanied by religious unrest: the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation. The religious Thirty Years' War began, in which almost all countries of the region were drawn into.

Europe entered the 17th century, carrying with it the burden of unresolved religious disputes from the previous century, which also exacerbated political contradictions. Mutual claims and grievances resulted in a war that lasted from 1618 to 1648 and was called " Thirty Years' War". It is considered to be the last European religious war after which international relations took on a secular character.

Causes of the Thirty Years' War

• Counter-Reformation: an attempt by the Catholic Church to win back from Protestantism the positions lost during the Reformation
• The desire of the Habsburgs, who ruled the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation and Spain, for hegemony in Europe
• The fears of France, which saw in the policy of the Habsburgs an infringement of their national interests
• The desire of Denmark and Sweden to monopoly control the maritime trade routes of the Baltic
• Selfish aspirations of numerous petty European monarchs, who hoped to snatch something for themselves in a general dump

The protracted conflict between Catholics and Protestants, the collapse of the feudal system and the birth of the concept nation state coincided in time with the unprecedented strengthening of the Habsburg imperial dynasty.

The Austrian ruling house in the 16th century extended its influence to Spain, Portugal, the Italian states, Bohemia, Croatia, Hungary; if we add to this the vast Spanish and Portuguese colonies, the Habsburgs could claim the role of absolute leaders of the then "civilized world". This could not but cause discontent of the "neighbors in Europe".

Religious issues were added to everything. The fact is that the Peace of Augsburg in 1555 resolved the issue of religion with a simple postulate: "Whose power, that is faith." The Habsburgs were zealous Catholics, and meanwhile their possessions extended to the "Protestant" territories. The conflict was inevitable. His name is Thirty Years' War 1618-1648.

Stages of the Thirty Years' War

Results of the Thirty Years' War

• The Peace of Westphalia established the borders of European states, becoming the source document for all treaties until the end of the 18th century.
• German princes received the right to pursue a policy independent of Vienna
• Sweden has achieved dominance in the Baltic and the North Sea
• France received Alsace and the bishoprics of Metz, Toul, Verdun
• Holland is recognized as an independent state
• Switzerland gained independence from the Empire
• It is customary to count the modern era in international relations from the Peace of Westphalia

There is no way to retell its course here; suffice it to recall that all the leading European powers—Austria, Spain, Poland, Sweden, France, England, and a number of petty monarchies that now form Germany and Italy—were drawn into it in one way or another. The meat grinder, which claimed more than eight million lives, ended with the Peace of Westphalia - a truly epoch-making event.

The main thing is that the old hierarchy, which was formed under the dictation of the Holy Roman Empire, was destroyed. From now on, the heads of independent states of Europe have become equal in rights with the emperor, which means that international relations have reached a qualitatively new level.

The Westphalian system recognized as the main principle the principle of state sovereignty; the basis of foreign policy was the idea of ​​a balance of power, which does not allow any one state to strengthen at the expense of (or against) others. Finally, having formally confirmed the Peace of Augsburg, the parties gave guarantees of religious freedom to those whose religion differed from the official one.

We all know that world wars that affected the interests of several states at once occurred in the 20th century. And we will be right. However, if we dig a little deeper into European history, we will find the fact that 300 years before the world wars, Europe had already experienced something similar - maybe not on such a scale, but nonetheless suitable for a world war. This is a 30-year war that took place in the 17th century.

Prerequisites

As early as the end of the 16th century, Europe experienced a painful clash between religious groups - Catholics and Protestants. The Roman Catholic Church lost more and more parishioners every year - European countries one after another abandoned the old religion and adopted a new one. In addition, countries gradually began to move away from the enormous power of the Pope and accepted the power of a local ruler. Absolutism was born. During this period, a real dynastic boom began - the princes of the blood entered into marriages with representatives of other states to strengthen both countries.

The Catholic Church sought by all means to regain its former influence. The role of the Inquisition increased - waves of bonfires, torture and executions swept across Europe. Spies of the Vatican - the Jesuit order - thanks to its special proximity to Rome, strengthened its position. Germany most zealously defended its position on freedom of religion. Despite the fact that the Habsburg dynasty that ruled there was Catholic, the representatives had to stand above all strife. A wave of uprisings and rebellions swept across the country. Religious disputes eventually turned into a war, which became a long stage for many European states. Starting as a religious dispute, it eventually turned into a political and territorial conflict between the countries of Europe.

Causes

Among the many causes of war, some of the most significant can be distinguished:

1. the beginning of the counter-reformation - attempts by the Catholic Church to regain their former positions -
2. The Habsburg dynasty, which ruled in Germany and Spain, aspired to complete dominance in Europe under its rule.
3. the desire of Denmark and Sweden to control the Baltic and trade routes
4. the interests of France, which also saw itself as the sovereign of Europe
5. Throwing England in one direction or the other
6. inciting Russia, Turkey to participate in the conflict (Russia supported the Protestants, and Turkey supported France)
7. the desire of some petty princelings to snatch some piece for themselves as a result of the division of European states

Start

The uprising in Prague in 1618 served as a direct cause for war. Local Protestants rebelled against the policy of King Ferdinand of the Holy German Nation because he allowed foreign officials to come to Prague in huge numbers. It is worth noting here that Bohemia (the territory of the present Czech Republic) was ruled directly by the Habsburgs. Ferdinand's predecessor, King Rudolph, granted the locals freedom of religion and tolerance. Having ascended the throne, Ferdinand abolished all liberties. The king himself was a devout Catholic, brought up by the Jesuits, which, of course, did not suit the local Protestants. But they haven't been able to do anything serious yet.

Before his death, Emperor Matthias suggested that the German rulers choose their successor, thus joining those dissatisfied with the policies of the Habsburgs. Three Catholic bishops had the right to vote, three Protestants - the princes of Saxony, Brandenburg and the Palatinate. As a result of the vote, almost all votes were cast for the representative of the Habsburgs. Prince Frederick of the Palatinate offered to cancel the results and become King of Bohemia himself.

Prague began to rebel. Ferdinand did not tolerate this. Imperial troops entered Bohemia in order to root out the uprising. Of course, the result was predictable - the Protestants lost. Since Spain helped the Habsburgs in this, she also snatched a piece of German land for herself in honor of the victory - she got the land of Electoral Hall. This circumstance gave Spain the opportunity to continue another conflict with the Netherlands, which had begun years earlier.

In 1624, France, England and Holland make an alliance against the Empire. This agreement was soon joined by Denmark and Sweden, rightly fearing that the Catholics would extend their influence to them. Over the next two years, local skirmishes between the troops of the Habsburgs and the Protestant rulers took place on the territory of Germany, and the victory was for the Catholics. In 1628, the army of General Wallenstein, the leader of the Catholic League, captured the Danish island of Jutland, forcing Denmark to withdraw from the war and sign a peace treaty in 1629 in the city of Lübeck. Jutland was returned with the condition that Denmark would no longer interfere in hostilities.

Continuation of the war

However, not all countries were afraid of the Danish defeat. Already in 1630, Sweden entered the war.

A year later, an agreement was concluded with France, according to which Sweden pledged to provide its troops on German lands, and France to pay the costs. This period of the war is characterized as the most fierce and bloody. Catholics and Protestants mixed up in the army, no one remembered why the war started. Now everyone had only one goal - to profit from the devastated cities. Whole families died, entire garrisons were destroyed.

In 1634, Wallenstein was killed by his own bodyguards. A year earlier, the Swedish king Gustavus Adolf had died in battle. Local rulers leaned one way or the other.

In 1635, France finally decided to enter the war in person. The Swedish troops, who had previously suffered mostly defeats, perked up again and defeated the imperial troops at the battle of Wittstock. Spain fought on the side of the Habsburgs as best they could, but the king had something to do, except for the military arena - in 1640, a coup took place in Portugal, as a result of which the country achieved independence from Spain.

Results

For the past few years, wars have been fought throughout Europe.

Already not only Germany and the Czech Republic were the main arena of battles - clashes took place in the Netherlands, the Baltic Sea, France (the province of Burgundy). The Europeans were tired of the incessant fighting and sat down at the negotiating table in 1644 in the cities of Münster and Osanbrück. As a result of 4 years of negotiations, agreements were reached that took the form of the Peace of Westphalia.

• German rulers received autonomy from the empire
• France received the lands of Alsace, Metz, Verdun, Toul
• Sweden - a monopoly in the Baltic
• The Netherlands and Switzerland gained independence.

Speaking of losses, this war can be compared to the world wars - about 300,000 people on the Protestant side, and about 400,000 on the imperial side in a few battles. This is only a small part - in just 30 years, almost 8 million people died on the battlefield. For Europe of that time, not very densely populated - a huge figure. And whether the war was worth such sacrifices - who knows.

400 years ago, in May 1618, outraged Czechs threw two imperial governors and their secretary out of the window of the fortress tower of the Prague Castle (they all survived). This seemingly insignificant incident, later called the Second Prague Defenestration, was the beginning of the Thirty Years' War - the bloodiest, most brutal and devastating military conflict in Europe until the world wars of the 20th century.

How was modern Europe and the current world order born in the darkness of the bloody events of the 17th century? Whose side was Russia on and whom did it feed then? Did the Thirty Years' War give rise to aggressive German militarism? Is there a typological similarity between it and the ongoing ongoing conflicts in Africa and the Middle East? The candidate answered all these questions of Lente.ru historical sciences, Associate Professor, Faculty of History, Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov Arina Lazareva.

The very first world

Lenta.ru: Some historians who study the 18th century consider the Seven Years' War to be the first real world conflict. Is it possible to say the same about the Thirty Years' War of the 17th century?

Arina Lazareva: The epithet "world" for the Seven Years' War is due to the fact that it took place on several continents - as you know, it was not only in the European, but also in the American theater of operations. But it seems to me that the Thirty Years' War can rather be considered the "first world war".

Why?

The myth of the Thirty Years' War as the "First World War" is associated with the involvement of almost all European states in it. But in the early modern times, the world was Eurocentric, and the concept of "peace" embraced, first of all, the states of Europe. In the Thirty Years' War, they were divided into two opposing blocs - the Spanish and Austrian Habsburgs and the coalition opposing them. Almost every European country had to take one side or another in this general conflict of the first half of the 17th century.

Why was the Thirty Years' War such a colossal shock for Europe that its consequences are still being felt?

As for the colossal shock and trauma inflicted by the Thirty Years' War on Germany or even on the whole of Europe, here we are partly dealing with the myth-making of German historians of the 19th century. Trying to explain the lack of a national German state, they began to appeal to the "catastrophe" of the Thirty Years' War, which, in their opinion, destroyed the natural development of the German lands and caused an irreparable "trauma", which the Germans began to overcome only in the 19th century. Then this myth was picked up by German historiography of the 20th century, and especially Nazi propaganda, which was very profitable to exploit it.

Painting by Charles Svoboda "Defenestration"

Image: Wikipedia

If we talk about the consequences of the war, which are still being felt, then the Thirty Years' War should rather be viewed in a positive way. Its most important legacy, preserved to this day, is structural changes international relations that have become systematic. After all, it was after the Thirty Years' War that the first system of international relations appeared in Europe - the Westphalian system, which became a kind of prototype for European cooperation and the foundation of the modern world order.

Germany became the main theater of operations of the Thirty Years' War?

Yes, contemporaries have already begun to call the Thirty Years' War "German", or "the war of the Germans", because the main fighting deployed in the German principalities. The northeastern lands, the central part of Germany, the west and south - all these areas have been in constant military chaos for 30 years.

The British passing through them spoke very interestingly about the state of the German principalities in the mid-30s of the 17th century. They wrote: “The earth is absolutely deserted. We saw abandoned and devastated villages that were allegedly attacked 18 times over the course of two years. There was not a single person here or in the whole district.” Statistical Research German historian Gunther Franz show that some areas (for example, Hesse and Bavaria) lost up to half of the population.

Apocalypse of the German Nation

Is that why in Germany the Thirty Years' War is often called "the apocalypse of German history"?

It was the most devastating war at that time in the history of Europe. The perception of the war as an apocalypse was completed by a plague epidemic that began in the 1630s, and a severe famine, during which, according to contemporaries, there were even cases of cannibalism. All this is very colorfully captured in journalism - there are absolutely terrible stories, how in Bavaria, during the famine, meat was cut from the corpses of people. For the ideas of the people of the XVII century, war, plague and famine were the embodiment of the horsemen of the Apocalypse. Many writers of the Thirty Years' War actively quoted the "Revelation of John the Theologian", since its language was quite suitable for describing the then state of Central Europe.

The Thirty Years' War was also considered German because it decided the internal affairs of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation. The conflict between the emperor and Frederick of the Palatinate was not only a religious conflict - it was a struggle for power, where the question of the place of the emperor, his prerogatives and relations with the ranks of the empire was decided. It was about the so-called "imperial constitution", that is, internal order empire.

Painting by Sebastian Vranks "Marauding Soldiers"

Painting from the workshop of Sebastian Vranks "Scene of the period of the Thirty Years' War near a small town"

It is not surprising that the Thirty Years' War was a real shock for contemporaries, both ideologically and politically.

Was it the first total war in the modern sense?

It seems to me that the Thirty Years' War can be called total, because it affected all the state and public institutions of that time. There were no indifferent people at all. This is precisely due to the causes of the war, which should also be considered quite broadly.

How exactly?

Traditionally domestic historiography interpreted the Thirty Years' War as a religious war. And at first glance, it seems that the main reason for the war was the question of establishing confessional parity in the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation between Catholics and Protestants. But if we are talking about a religious settlement in the empire, how then to explain the all-European character of the war? And this involvement of almost all European states in the military confrontation provides the key to a broader understanding of the causes of the war.

These reasons are related to central theme early modern times - the formation of the so-called "modern" states, that is, states of the modern type. Let's not forget that in the 17th century the states of Europe were still on the way to the idea of ​​sovereignty and its practical implementation. Therefore, the Thirty Years' War was not a conflict of equal states (as it became later), but rather a confrontation between various hierarchies, orders, organizations that were at the crossroads from the Middle Ages to the New Age.

And from the multitude of these confrontations, a new world order was born, the states of the New Age were born. Therefore, in today's historiography, the point of view has already been more or less clearly established that the Thirty Years' War is a state-forming war. That is, it was a war centered on the emergence of a new type of state.

Magdeburg lack of rights

That is, figuratively speaking, the entire modern system of international relations was born in the throes of the Thirty Years' War?

Yes. The most important prerequisite for the Thirty Years' War was the "general crisis" of the 17th century. In fact, this phenomenon was rooted in the previous century. This crisis manifested itself in all spheres - from economic to spiritual - and became the product of many processes that began in the 16th century. The Church Reformation undermined or significantly changed the spiritual foundations of society, and towards the end of the century, a cooling began - the so-called Little Ice Age. Then the European dynastic crisis was added to this, caused by the inability of the then political institutions and elites to withstand the challenges of the time.

The Russian “rebellious” 17th century, which began with the Time of Troubles, continued with the Great Schism and ended with the reforms of Peter I, was also part of this “general crisis” in Europe?

Undoubtedly. Russia has always been a part of the European world, albeit a very peculiar one.

What was the reason for the general bitterness, sometimes reaching savagery, and mass violence against the civilian population? How reliable are the numerous testimonies about the horrors and atrocities of that war?

If we talk about the horrors of war, then I do not think that there are exaggerations here. Wars have always been fought extremely fiercely, ideas of value human life as such were very blurry. We have a huge amount of terrible evidence describing torture, robbery and other abominations of the Thirty Years' War. Interestingly, contemporaries personified even the war itself.

Engraving by Jacques Callot “The Horrors of War. Hanged"

Engraving "Allegory of War" from the work of Georg Philipp Harsdörfer "Women's Dialogues"

They depicted her as a terrible monster with a wolf's mouth, a lion's body, horse legs, a rat's tail (there were different options). But, as contemporaries wrote, "this monster has the hands of a man." Even in the writings of those contemporaries who did not set out to directly report on the horrors of war, there are very colorful and truly monstrous pictures of military reality. Take, for example, the classic work of that era - the novel by Hans Jakob Grimmelshausen "Simplicissimus".

The story of the massacre in Magdeburg, committed after its capture in 1631, was widely known. The terror against the inhabitants of the city, arranged by the victors, was unprecedented by the standards of that time?

No, the atrocities during the capture of Magdeburg were not much different from the violence against the local population during the capture of Munich by the troops of the Swedish king Gustav II Adolf. Just the sad fate of the inhabitants of Magdeburg had more publicity, especially in Protestant countries.

"Fire, plague and death, and the heart freezes in the body"

What was the scale of the humanitarian catastrophe? They say that between four and ten million people died, about a third of the territory of Germany was abandoned.

The territories of Germany, located along the line from the southwest to the northeast, were most severely affected. However, there were also areas not affected by the war. For example, northern German cities - in particular, Hamburg - on the contrary, only got rich from military supplies.

It is difficult to reliably say how many people actually died during the Thirty Years' War. There is only one statistical work on this by Günther Franz, whom I mentioned, written in the 30s of the 20th century.

Under Hitler?

Yes, so some of his data is very biased. Franz wanted to show how much the Germans suffered from the aggression of their neighbors. And in this work, he really gives figures about 50 percent of the dead population of Germany.

Painting by Eduard Steinbrueck "Magdeburg Girls"

But here the following should be remembered: people died not so much during hostilities as from epidemics, famine and other hardships caused by the Thirty Years' War. All this fell upon the German lands after the armies, like the three biblical horsemen of the Apocalypse. The classic of German literature of the 17th century, a contemporary of the Thirty Years' War, the poet Andreas Gryphius wrote: “Fire, plague and death, and the heart freezes in the body. Oh, mournful land, where blood flows in streams ... "

The modern German political scientist Herfried Münkler considers the emergence of German militarism to be an important result of the Thirty Years' War. As far as one can understand it, the desire of the Germans to prevent a repetition of its horrors on their soil in the long run led to an increase in their aggressiveness. The result was the Seven Years' War, sparked by Prussian ambitions, and both world wars of the 20th century, unleashed by Germany. How do you like this approach?

From today's perspective, the Thirty Years' War can, of course, be blamed for anything. The vitality of the nineteenth-century myth is sometimes simply amazing. Rather, its offspring was not militarism, more associated with the rise of Prussia in the 18th century, but German nationalism. During the years of the Thirty Years' War, German national feeling became more acute than ever. In the view of the Germans of that time, the whole the world was filled with enemies. Moreover, this was manifested not on a confessional basis (Catholics or Protestants), but on the basis of national identity: the Spaniards, the Swedes and, of course, the French enemies.

During the Thirty Years' War, some formulaic statements and opinions appeared, which later turned into stereotypes. Here, for example, about the Spanish enemies: "real insidious killers who are cunning with the help of their bestial intrigues and intrigues." This penchant for intrigue, attributed to the Spaniards, you see, is still in our minds: if “secrets”, then definitely “of the Madrid court”. But the most hated enemies were the French. As German writers of that time wrote, with the arrival of the French, “vice, debauchery and depravity poured in from all the open gates.”

In the ring of enemies

Was the concept of the German "special path" (the notorious Deutscher Sonderweg), borrowed by Russian Slavophiles in the 19th century, also the result of a rethinking of the experience of the Thirty Years' War?

Yes, it all comes from there. At the same time, the myth of God's chosen people of the German people appeared and the idea that the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation is the last of the four biblical kingdoms, after the fall of which the Kingdom of God will come. Of course, all these images have their specific historical explanations, but this is not the point here. It is important that the national component has risen to a new level during the years of the Thirty Years' War. Political weakness after the end of the war began to be more and more actively obscured by claims for "past greatness", the possession of "special moral values" and similar attributes.

Is it true that it was precisely as a result of the Thirty Years' War that Brandenburg, the core of the future Prussia, strengthened in the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation?

I wouldn't say so. Brandenburg grew stronger thanks to the far-sighted policy of the great Elector Frederick William I, who pursued a very competent policy, including religious tolerance. The rise of the Prussian kingdom was more facilitated by Frederick the Great, who consolidated the successes of his ancestors, but this happened already in the second half of the 18th century.

Why did the Thirty Years' War last so long?

To understand the duration of the war, one must recognize its European character. One should not, for example, think that France's entry into the Thirty Years' War was based solely on the Franco-German confrontation. After all, Louis XIII officially started the war not with the Holy Roman Emperor, but with Spain. And this happened after the Spanish troops captured the Elector of Trier, who was officially under French protection since 1632. That is, for France, the war against the emperor was only a side theater of military operations in the war against Spain. France had no specific strategic goals in relation to the Habsburgs, she was looking for a long-term security program.

Did France try to resist the hegemony of the Habsburgs, whose possessions she was surrounded on almost all sides?

Yes, this was precisely the strategy of Cardinal Richelieu, who led the foreign policy of France.

Painting by Sebastian Vranks "Soldiers rob a farm during the Thirty Years' War"

But the duration of the war was largely due to the involvement of more and more European actors in it under various pretexts. Constant contradictions regularly arose and aggravated between European states, while the alignment of political forces in Europe was never unambiguous. For example, the same Richelieu, even at the time of the Swedish invasion of the German principalities, seeing the strengthening of Sweden, was thinking about concluding an alliance with the Habsburgs against Stockholm. But this is a completely unique fact!

Why?

Because the Franco-Habsburg antagonism has been the main conflict in Europe since the end of the 15th century. But such thoughts were prompted by Richelieu that the strengthening of Sweden was completely unprofitable for France. However, due to the death of Gustav II Adolf at the Battle of Lützen in 1632 further strengthening forces opposing the emperor was again seen as an urgent need. Therefore, France in 1633 entered into the Heilbron Union with the Protestant estates of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation.

Russian bread for Swedish victories

It's a difficult question...

France?

To some extent, its authority in the international arena has noticeably strengthened, especially in comparison with Spain. But the Fronde still continued there, greatly weakening the country from the inside, and France reached the peak of its power only in mature years Louis XIV.

Sweden?

If we regard the winner in terms of international prestige and claims to hegemony, then for Sweden the war turned out to be extremely successful. After that, the great-power period of Swedish history reached its climax, and the Baltic Sea, right up to the Northern War with Russia, in fact, really turned into a “Swedish Lake”.

But some historians - for example, Heinz Duchhard - believe that Europe won because thanks to the Thirty Years' War, the European center was strengthened. After all, none of the participants in the war wanted the destruction of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation - everyone needed it as a deterrent. In addition, after the war, new ideas about international relations appeared in Europe, voices advocating for common system European security.

And what happened to the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation? It turns out that it was she who became the losing side?

It cannot be unequivocally said that the Thirty Years' War put an end to its development and viability. On the contrary, the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation was necessary for Europe as an important political body. The fact that after the Thirty Years' War its potential was clearly preserved is proved by the policy of Emperor Leopold I at the end of the 17th century.

The war began in 1618, when the 15-year Troubles ended in Russia. Did the Muscovite state take any part in the events of the Thirty Years' War?

There are many scientific works dedicated to this issue. The book of the historian Boris Porshnev, who considers the foreign policy of Mikhail Romanov in the context of pan-European international relations of the era of the Thirty Years War, has become a classic. Porshnev believed that the Smolensk War of 1632-1634 was the Russian theater of operations of the Thirty Years' War. It seems to me that this statement has its own logic.

Indeed, divided into two warring blocs, the European states were simply forced to take one side or another. For Russia, the confrontation with Poland turned into an indirect struggle with the Habsburgs, since the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation was fully supported by the Polish kings - first Sigismund III, and then his son Vladislav IV.

Moreover, not long before that, both of them "checked in" with us during the Time of Troubles.

Yes, like many of their subjects. It was on this basis that Moscow actually helped Sweden. Deliveries of cheap Russian bread ensured the successful march of Gustav Adolf through the German lands. At the same time, Russia, despite the requests of Emperor Ferdinand II, categorically refused to sell the bread of the Holy Roman Empire.

However, I would not speak unambiguously about Russia's participation in the Thirty Years' War. Nevertheless, our country, devastated by the Time of Troubles, was then on the periphery of European politics. Although both Mikhail Fedorovich and Alexei Mikhailovich, judging by the reports of the ambassadors and the first Russian handwritten newspaper Vesti-Kuranty, followed European events very closely. After the end of the Thirty Years' War, the documents of the Peace of Westphalia were very quickly translated for Alexei Mikhailovich. By the way, the Russian Tsar was also mentioned in them.

Westphalian Foundation of the Modern World

Now some researchers, and not only the above-mentioned Herfried Münkler, compare the Thirty Years' War with the current protracted conflicts in Africa or the Middle East. They find much in common between them: a combination of religious intolerance and the struggle for power, ruthless terror against the civilian population, the permanent enmity of everyone with everyone. Do you think such analogies are appropriate?

Yes, now in the West, especially in Germany, these comparisons are very popular. Not so long ago, Angela Merkel spoke about "the lessons of the Thirty Years' War" in the context of the Middle East conflicts. Even now people often talk about the erosion of the Westphalian system. But I would not like to delve into modern international political science.

If you really want to find analogies in history, you can always do it. The world is still changing: the reasons may remain similar, but the methods for resolving issues today are much more complicated and, of course, tougher. If desired, the conflicts in the Middle East can also be compared with the long wars of European states (primarily the Holy Roman Empire) with Ottoman Turkey, which were of a civilizational nature.

Yet why is the Peace of Westphalia, which ended the Thirty Years' War, considered to be the basis of the European political system and the entire modern world order?

The Peace of Westphalia was the first peace treaty regulating the general balance of power in Europe. Even during the signing of the peace, the Italian diplomat Cantorini called the Peace of Westphalia "an epoch-making event for the world." And he turned out to be right: the uniqueness of the Peace of Westphalia lies in its universality and inclusiveness. The Treaty of Münster contains, in the penultimate paragraph, an invitation to all European sovereigns to join in the signing of peace, on the basis of proposals from one of the two peace parties.

In the minds of contemporaries and descendants, the world was considered Christian, universal and eternal - "pax sit christiana, universalis, perpetua". And it was not just a formula of speech, but an attempt to give it a moral justification. On the basis of this thesis, for example, a general amnesty was held, and forgiveness was announced, thanks to which it was possible to create a basis for Christian interaction between states in the future.

The guidelines contained in the Peace of Westphalia were a kind of security partnership for the entire European society, a kind of ersatz of the European security system. Its principles - mutual recognition by states of national state sovereignty, their equality and the principle of inviolability of borders - became the foundation of the current global world order.

Which lessons modern world can learn from the longest and bloodiest European conflict of the XVII century?

It is probably this partnership for the sake of security that we all need to learn today. Look for mutual compromises in order to avoid a war that risks becoming a global catastrophe for the whole world. Our ancestors in the 17th century were able to achieve this. Figuratively speaking, the general bitterness and horror, dirt and bloody chaos of the Thirty Years' War dragged Europe to the very bottom. But she still found the strength to push off from him, be born again and reach a new level of development.

Interviewed by Andrey Mozzhukhin