Analysis of Wedgewood´s The Thirty Years War

Wedgwood, C.V. The Thirty Years War. London: Lowe & Brydone Ltd, 1938. Print.

It is difficult to determine when the Thirty Years War really began. Ultimately, a culmination of events led to the tension between the countries of the Ottoman Empire. Prior to the war’s beginning on May 23, 1618, Europe was in a state of religious, political, and imperial turmoil. The Lutherans, Catholics, and Calvinists were all competing for religious dominance. Political leaders tried to advocate for their religions in the elections. There was much controversy regarding the new kings of Bohemia and political stress between the Bourbons and the Hapsburgs. War was inevitable. Although the Thirty Years War is highly regarded as a religious war, it will ultimately become a conflict of dynastic power.

According to The Thirty Years War, the war began when Ferdinand called for a meeting among the princes. Frederick of Bohemia had argued that his crown was not taken from the Emperor Ferdinand, but from the Archduke of Austria Ferdinand. This argument was based upon the premise of Bohemia being separate from the Ottoman Empire, assuring that Ferdinand could not overrule Frederick, even as emperor. This way, he wouldn’t be breaking imperial peace, but just instigating a war between two separate entities (not a civil war). Four months later, Ferdinand called a meeting at Mühlhausen including all the Catholic representatives of the Empire. In this meeting, Ferdinand declared tolerance of all religions in the Upper Saxon Circle. The decision was then made to make Bohemia part of the Ottoman Empire. In effect, Frederick was considered a traitor because his country was...

... middle of paper ...

...igious war that will drain your resources.

I think that Wedgwood’s purpose in writing this book is to analyze the actions of rulers in the Ottoman Empire during the Thirty Years War. The central theme of this book is based on politics. She discusses the qualifications of the rulers. She talks about how suited they were for their position. I also think that she meant to write it to point out the mistakes these rulers make that we aren’t able to see. For example, she talks about how Ferdinand should have pinned two opposing sides against one another as a distraction so that he could declare Maximilian the new Elector in place of Frederick. We all know that history repeats itself, sometimes for the good and sometimes the bad. Without being educated and informed about the mistakes made in the past, we can instigate a catastrophic event just like this German tragedy.