Armies Battles and Sieges Colours and Standards

  ANTI-SWEDISH
  COALITION (Part 1)

  ANTI-SWEDISH
  COALITION (Part 2)

 

 
  ARMIES
 
  Denmark-Norway
  Holstein-Gottorp
  Prussia
  Russia
  Saxony
  Sweden
 
 
  BATTLES
 
  Narva 1700
  Kliszow 1702
  Fraustadt 1706
  Lesnaya 1708
  Poltava 1709
  Helsingborg 1710
  Gadebusch 1712
  Stresow 1715

 
 
  COLOURS
 
  Model Drawings
  Preserved Colours

  Colour Sheets
 

Örjan Martinsson

 
Frederick IV of Denmark-Norway, Augustus the Strong of Saxony and Peter the Great of Russia

The Great Northern War started when a Saxon army launched a surprise attack against the Swedish city of Riga in February 1700. Immediately after the news of this attack reached Copenhagen, the Danish army invaded the Swedish ally Holstein-Gottorp. In August the same year a third country, Russia, declared war to Sweden. The roll-out of a war against Sweden on three fronts was the product of years of secret negotiations between these states.  And while Sweden had anticipated a war against Denmark and viewed Russia as a likely Danish ally, the Saxon participation came as a big surprise to them. For Sweden this meant that an almost perfect storm had been created which would eventually bring Sweden’s status as a great power to an end.

It is common in history writing to point to the fact that Sweden had too limited resources to be able to maintain its status as a great power in the long run. And since Sweden’s expansion in the 17th century had been at the expense of its neighbours Denmark, Russia and Poland (the latter in a personal union with Saxony since 1697), it was just logical that these countries would exact its revenge sooner or later. But this is also an example of writing history by looking through the rear view window because it pays too little attention to the special circumstances that made the anti-Swedish coalition come together. The Great Northern War and the dismemberment of the Swedish dominions was not an earthquake that was just waiting to happen.  It is thus important to take a closer look at each participant’s reason to go to war.

Denmark

The one state that was really eager to settle the score with Sweden was Denmark. The only thing that held Denmark back was the fact that the Swedish military was stronger and that the Danes would need allies if they were to start a war.

Denmark and Sweden were so called “hereditary enemies” and they had fought wars against each other since recorded history. Sweden had always been the underdog in these conflicts from the late 14th century to the Kalmar War of 1613-15. An integral part of the wars had been Danish claims to the Swedish throne.  The rapid growth of Swedish power in the 17th century led however to a dramatic reversal of these roles.  In 1643 Denmark experienced that their neighbour would no longer tolerate Danish provocations, not even when the Swedish army was deeply involved in the Thirty Years War. To the Danes’ great surprise the Swedish army turned heel and invaded Jutland from the south and forced Denmark to cede vast territories. In 1657 Denmark saw an opportunity to take back the lost territories when the Swedish army was bogged down in Poland. But yet again the Swedish army immediately turned heel, invaded first Jutland and then the rest of Denmark, forcing the Danes to cede even more territories. In the next war (1658-1660) it was Denmark who had to fight for their very survival as an independent state against Swedish aggression.

Denmark survived however and in the Scanian War 1675-79 they managed together with Brandenburg to destroy much of the great reputation of the Swedish army. But due to French intervention, Denmark was denied any territorial gains. Sweden thus still controlled several provinces that had been ancient Danish core territories. Although, while Denmark would very much like to retrieve these territories, it was nevertheless a different issue that was to be the key to future conflict, and that was the duchy of Holstein-Gottorp.

The Holstein-Gottorp Question

Holstein-Gottorp was strictly speaking not a duchy but it is called that for the sake of convenience. It was actually a collateral branch of the Danish royal house that ruled the two Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein as co-ruler to the Danish king. The latter duchy was a part of the Holy Roman Empire and both the duke of Holstein-Gottorp and the king of Denmark was a vassal to the Holy Roman Emperor in their capacity as dukes of Holstein. Schleswig on the other hand was a part of the kingdom of Denmark and there the duke of Holstein-Gottorp was not just a co-ruler to the Danish king but originally also his vassal. The two duchies were partitioned into ducal, royal and jointly administrated portions.

The lands of the duchy of Holstein-Gottorp were strategically important and during both Swedish invasions of Jutland in the middle of the 17th century its duke betrayed the Danish king by siding with the Swedes in exchange for sovereignty in ducal Schleswig which was achieved in 1658. The Holstein-Swedish alliance had furthermore been strengthened by the marriage between the Swedish king Charles X Gustav and the Holstein princess Hedvig Eleonora in 1654. Their son Charles XI would as king of Sweden (1660-1697) be very loyal to his Holstein relatives. The Danes had thus seen Holstein-Gottorp turning from a Danish fief into a Swedish satellite state which infiltrated Denmark’s vulnerable southern border. Reversing this was the major goal of Denmark’s foreign policy during the late 17th century.

At the very beginning of the Scanian War the Danish king Christian V deposed the duke of Holstein-Gottorp and returned his part of Schleswig to the Danish crown, although the French intervention in 1679 reversed that too. However, Charles XI felt he had been humiliated by the unilateral way in which France had made peace on Sweden’s behalf, so he switched to a Dutch alliance in 1681. The timing of this switch was not good though since Louis XIV stood at the height of his power at that time. Sweden’s former enemies, Denmark and Brandenburg quickly replaced Sweden as France’s northern allies and began to make threatening moves against Sweden. It was only because of the fact that France kept its eye towards annexing German territory, and did not want its allies tied up in a northern war, that Sweden escaped a new war. But in 1684 Denmark invaded Holstein-Gottorp and reclaimed the Schleswig portions in clear violation of the 1679 peace treaty. Sweden was powerless to do anything about it and the Dutch alliance was not worth much when also England was in the French camp and the Emperor was busy fighting Turks. In this situation Denmark was even bold enough to lay siege on the free city of Hamburg in 1686.

After years of unsuccessful negotiations concerning the Holstein-Gottorp question, a political earthquake occurred in England 1688 which changed everything. The Dutch stadtholder William of Orange seized power in England and managed to build a new great alliance against France (including former French ally Brandenburg). Charles XI promised to support the Netherlands with auxiliary troops if they helped him with Holstein-Gottorp. Suddenly, Denmark was politically isolated and was faced with an ultimatum to accept the Swedish demands by 20 June 1689 or be attacked by a coalition of Sweden, Hanover and the Maritime powers (i.e. England and the Netherlands). On the very last day Denmark accepted the terms of the Altona treaty and restored the duchy of Holstein-Gottorp. For Charles XI the humiliation of the 1679 treaty and the following events had now been wiped clean by the triumph of forcing his enemy into submission without firing a single shot. For the Danes, this meant that they were now back on square one. The situation was still unacceptable, but they had to wait for a more favourable diplomatic situation before they could try to clip the duke’s wings again.

Even though the duke of Holstein-Gottorp had been granted sovereignty in his parts of Schleswig in 1658, and had this confirmed in 1679 and 1689, the actual duchies of Schleswig and Holstein were still intact and with it the old treaties that regulated how they were to be governed by the two co-rulers. There was thus an in-built contradiction in this arrangement which enabled different interpretations of how extensive the duke’s sovereignty actually was. The Danish opinion was that it was very limited and Christian V had justified his occupations in 1675-79 and 1684-89 by claiming that the duke had broken the terms of the old treaties from the 16th century.

When Frederick IV became duke of Holstein-Gottorp at the end of 1694, the old conflict began to heat up again. He wanted to put an end to the ambiguous status of his domains by demanding a final partition of Schleswig-Holstein and an end to the co-rulership.  But what really got the Danes alarmed were his actions to raise troops and to build new fortifications in his domains, the latter being done with the help of Swedish soldiers. The Danes noted that the fortifications were too large for the tiny Holstein-Gottorp army and that these were obviously intended to be used by the Swedish army in case of a war. Again the Danish king claimed that the duke had exceeded his authority while the Duke (and Sweden) claimed it was within his sovereign rights to build fortifications in his own territory.

The dissenting views escalated into a full crisis after the death of Charles XI in April 1697. His son Charles XII was still a minor and did not assume power until seven months later. In the hope that the new regime would be less committed to propping up Holstein-Gottorp, Danish troops entered the duchy in May and destroyed the newly built fortifications. Sweden did not accept this however and lengthy multilateral negotiations were initiated to try and find a solution to the crisis. These were unsuccessful though and Sweden eventually responded with a military build-up in Germany, which culminated with sending two regiments into Holstein itself in the autumn of 1699 to rebuild the fortresses.

Furthermore, the alliance between Sweden and Holstein had been strengthened by the marriage in 1698 between the duke of Holstein and Charles XII’s older sister, who the same year had brought with her a Swedish battalion to Holstein as her personal guard. The Danes had tried to woo Sweden by offering marriage alliances between their royal houses and even putting a Danish-Swedish-French alliance on the table in exchange for concessions in the Holstein-Gottorp questions. But Charles XII felt that both he and his younger sister were too young to marry and his older sister had already been promised to the duke of Holstein-Gottorp. As time passed the Swedish position became instead more firmly pro-Holstein and Charles XII made clear his determination to defend the duke’s rights with military force if necessary. But the Danes did not waver either and by the end of 1699 a war looked increasingly likely with the bulk of the Danish army already deployed in Schleswig-Holstein.

The Great Powers

Denmark’s biggest problem though was that the Altona treaty of 1689 was still in effect, so not only Sweden but also the Maritime powers and Hanover were obliged to defend Holstein-Gottorp’s sovereignty in case Denmark started a war. Denmark had tried to gain favours with the great powers by offering auxiliary troops and alliances throughout the 1690s and these attempts had been successful enough that Denmark now enjoyed good relations with both the Maritime Powers and France. And since a new great European war over the Spanish succession was likely to come soon, the great powers were looking for allies so they did not act forcefully against Denmark in the Holstein-Gottorp crisis. Denmark hoped that the Maritime powers would not honour the Altona treaty since the Swedish contribution to them in the recent war of the Augsburg league had been somewhat disappointing. Sweden had furthermore disappointed them by maintaining a foreign policy in the 1690s that sought to keep it unaligned and free of commitments to the great powers.

But as the crisis progressed after May 1697 it was clear that neither the Maritime powers nor France had any desire for a northern war between Denmark and Sweden.  It was also clear that both camps preferred Sweden as an ally over Denmark. The Danes tried in vain to convince the great powers that it was in their best interest to restore the balance of power in Scandinavia by putting an end to the Swedish dominance.  Sweden’s reluctance to make strong commitments to the Maritime powers would however keep the Danes hoping that these would remain neutral or even join Denmark in return for favourable trade agreements when the war started.

Hanover

But even if Sweden and Holstein did not get Anglo-Dutch aid, Denmark would still need allies if they were to have any real hope of success. At first glance one might think that the obvious candidates would be the previous allies in the Scanian War, which were Brandenburg and the state that was now called Hanover.  The latter state was however a part of the Altona treaty of 1689 and if it was pro-Holstein then it was even more so now.  Danish-Hanoverian relations had deteriorated severely during the 1690s as the elector and king feuded over titles and lands. Danish troops had even clashed with Hanoverian troops in 1693. With Hanover being a likely enemy, Denmark instead made alliances with five of Hanover’s smaller neighbours who promised to attack Hanover if that state broke the peace with Denmark. These alliances would however not materialise as it was Denmark who started the hostilities in 1700.

Brandenburg

The elector of Brandenburg on the other hand was at this time engaged in ambitious goals elsewhere. He was both trying to get support from the great powers (especially the Emperor) for his desire to declare himself king in Prussia, as well as succeeding William of Orange as stadtholder of the Netherlands (he was his closest male heir). Because of this he did not want to antagonise the great powers by being viewed as a troublemaker.  Instead he antagonised Denmark by appearing sympathetic to the duke of Holstein-Gottorp’s demands during the crisis. Later he even denied a Saxon auxiliary corps to pass through Brandenburg on its way to Holstein in late 1699 on the grounds that he did not wish to endanger the peace in Europe. The elector was at the time under pressure from the Emperor who had got wind of the emerging anti-Swedish coalition which he saw as a threat because he feared it might align itself with France. So Imperial troops had been concentrated in Silesia which prompted Brandenburg to keep a low profile and not mobilise any of their own troops.  The elector did however at the same time express his willingness to support Denmark in case they were attacked. And on 6 April 1700, when the war had already been started by Denmark, he even went further and promised to not support Denmark’s enemies, and this time allowed for Saxon auxiliary troops to pass through Brandenburg territory. In exchange he demanded that the Swedish city of Wismar was to be sold to Brandenburg if the Danes captured it. So even though Brandenburg was not willing to take part in the anti-Swedish coalition from the beginning, it was likely that they would have joined not long after the outbreak of war if the anti-Swedish coalition had been more successful.

Russia

Perhaps the most obvious Danish ally in a war against Sweden was Russia since gaining access to the Baltic Sea by retaking former Russian provinces from Sweden made perfect strategic sense for them.  The Russians had however in the 1670s rejected Danish offers to participate in the Scanian War, but at that time they had been more concerned over Ukraine where they struggled for control against Poland and the Ottoman Empire.

Just five days after the death of Charles XI in 1697 a Danish envoy was sent to Russia to negotiate an offensive alliance against Sweden. Unfortunately for the Danes, the Russian tsar Peter I had weeks earlier begun his Grand Embassy to Western Europe and there was no one in Moscow who could negotiate with the Danish envoy.  Since the tsar travelled incognito and claimed to still be in Moscow, the Danes had great difficulties in coming in contact with him for well over a year.

Peter I was at this time at war against the Ottoman Empire and had in 1696 concluded a successful campaign against the Turkish fortress of Azov and built a naval base there. The Great Turkish War was however winding down and the Emperor and the Sultan made peace at Karlowitz in early 1699. The main purpose with Peter I’s Grand Embassy had been to prevent this peace treaty and even try to expand the Holy League fighting the Ottoman Empire. The failure to achieve this, and his ambitions not satisfied with the conquest of Azov, led Peter I to turn his eyes to Sweden.

A rebellion in Moscow forced him to return home earlier than planned, but on his journey back to Russia he met the Saxon elector and Polish king Augustus the Strong at Rawa in Poland in the late summer of 1698. Augustus was also a member of the Holy League and equally disappointed that the war was going to end since he had hoped to conquer Moldavia. The personal chemistry between them was very good and they spent four days together. During these days it was most certainly Peter I who approached Augustus with the suggestion of attacking Sweden instead and the latter who agreed to this. No formal alliance was however made at this time.

Back in Moscow the tsar began to talk with the Danish envoy and suggested an alliance between Russia, Denmark and Saxony. The negotiations would however take some time. In part because of the great distances between the various capitols, but also because Peter I was a slow decider who could wait months before he signed the various documents. He was very anxious that Denmark would confirm alliances and support from other states such as Saxony and Brandenburg before he committed to a war. The death of Christian V in August 1699 also resulted in a delay as the new king Fredrick IV had to confirm the Danish envoy’s authority to negotiate an alliance. It was thus not until November 1699 that the final agreement was ratified by the tsar in Moscow.  Another complication was that Russia was still at war with the Ottoman Empire and Peter I did not want to start a new war until he had resolved the Turkish War, which ended with a truce in July 1700. So Denmark and Saxony had to start the war without knowing exactly when Russia would join.

Saxony

Saxony was an unlikely enemy to Sweden since they did not share a border and did not have any rivalling claims. Furthermore, both had Brandenburg as a neighbour and rival, so in that sense a Swedish-Saxon alliance was more likely. This changed however when the Saxon elector Augustus became king of Poland in September 1697 (and shocked protestant Europe by converting to Catholicism to do so).  Poland and Sweden had fought several wars between 1563 and 1660 and Sweden had conquered Livonia from Poland as well as annexing Estonia which the Poles had regarded as rightfully theirs. But Poland had also lost large territories to Russia after that, and from a Swedish point of view Poland would be a natural ally against Russia. So the election of Augustus as Polish king was not a source of immediate concern for Sweden (other than the religious aspect of Martin Luther’s homeland being ruled by a catholic convert). The weak royal power in Poland also meant that it was highly unlikely that the King would be able to deploy Polish troops in a war that was not deemed to be absolutely necessary by the Polish parliament.

Augustus’ legitimacy as Polish king was also very questionable since his opponent François Louis, the Prince of Conti, had actually received more votes in the election. But before the Prince of Conti left France for his new kingdom, Augustus invaded Poland with a Saxon army and was crowned by his Polish supporters. This move was strongly supported by Austria and Russia who did not want Poland to defect from the Holy League. But the messy succession meant that Augustus had to spend the following years to pacify his new kingdom with the help of his Saxon army, as well as continuing the war against the Turks.

In this situation Augustus was very interested in making alliances that could help to secure his grip on Poland. So when the Danes approached him he agreed to a treaty in March 1698 in which they promised to support each other with auxiliary troops in case any of them were attacked. The immediate effect of the treaty was that Augustus received two Danish auxiliary corps to be stationed in Saxony and Poland with a combined strength of 4000 men. Furthermore, the Danes promised to stop any French fleet from sailing to the Baltic Sea to support to the Prince of Conti’s claim to the Polish throne.  In return for this valuable aid, Augustus promised in a secret article of the treaty to support Denmark in case the duke of Holstein-Gottorp did not honour the rights of the Danish king and, in the event of a war, was supported by a third party.

Augustus was however not a reliable ally, and neither the Danish treaty in March 1698 nor the oral agreement with the tsar at the Rawa meeting had really committed him to a war against Sweden. During his long reign, the impulsive Augustus would become infamous for his machiavellian habit of not honouring treaties or promises he made.  After the March treaty in 1698 there was very little diplomatic activity for over a year, which made the Danes doubt that they could expect any help from Augustus. The event that would be decisive for his participation in an anti-Swedish coalition was not the previous agreements but instead the employment of the Livonian nobleman Johann Reinhold Patkul in his service.

When Charles XI wanted to extend his absolute rule to Livonia, he met strong resistance from the Livonian nobility of which Patkul was a very vocal representative of. The nobility was however unsuccessful in retaining its privileges and Patkul was charged with treason and sentenced to death in 1694. But before that happened he had already fled the country and he would spend the following years conspiring against Sweden. He came to Saxony after the Rawa meeting and would then convince Augustus that there was a deep resentment of the Swedish rule in Livonia. If a Saxon army invaded that province, Patkul promised that the entire Livonian nobility would rise into rebellion. He devised an invasion plan which involved a surprise attack on Riga without a preceding declaration of war, and he promised that the poor state of the fortifications and the high number of Livonian officers in the garrison would guarantee success.

Patkul claimed to speak for the Livonian nobility when he negotiated the terms of a Livonian capitulation to Augustus in August 1699. Livonia was to be a Polish fief with complete autonomy and freedom of religion. The nobility’s privileges would not only be restored but also greatly expanded. In exchange Livonia would be ruled by Augustus and his descendants even if they did not occupy the Polish throne. The nobility would also commit to maintaining a 24 000 men strong army. Augustus found this prospect irresistible and also hoped to increase his power in Poland in exchange for returning Livonia to the Polish Commonwealth.

Deceiving Sweden

Sweden was not completely unaware of what was happening around them. Throughout this period they had hoped to gain Augustus as an ally. His very good relationship with Hanover, with which he in 1697 had made a similar alliance as the one with Denmark in March 1698, had given the Swedes expectations that he was a likely ally and it then became a Swedish mission to recruit him. These negotiations did however not lead anywhere and in June 1698 the Swedes learned that the Saxon-Danish treaty was much more significant than what had officially been stated.  Sweden was now very concerned and sent Mauritz Vellingk as their envoy to the court of Augustus to learn about his true intentions. Augustus used all his charm though and convinced Vellingk that he was a great friend to Sweden and even denied the existence of the Danish treaty. Vellingk then began to work on an alliance between Saxony and Sweden, but again the negotiations just dragged on without resulting in a treaty, even though Augustus continued to reassure Vellingk about his friendly intentions.  While this went on, the Swedish government got disturbing information from other sources and was in 1699 convinced that Augustus was not a trustworthy character. Augustus eventually stopped denying the existence of the Danish treaty and thus proved he had lied, but he still insisted that Sweden had no reason to fear him. By the end of 1699 though, the Swedish government was thinking that Augustus was probably friendly after all and an alliance still possible. Vellingk’s continuous stream of positive reports and the help Saxon diplomats gave their Swedish colleagues in Moscow made them draw that conclusion.

Sweden had also observed the Danish diplomats’ presence in Moscow and was worried about the prospect of a Danish-Russian alliance. It thus became a goal for the Swedish diplomats to sign a treaty with Russia where Peter I confirmed all the previous peace treaties with Sweden. Peter I acted very friendly to the Swedish diplomats and proceeded to confirm the treaties in the autumn of 1699. But when he did so he did not kiss the cross as was the custom in Russia when treaties were signed. Peter I insisted that this was not necessary since he had kissed the cross when he had confirmed the same treaties during Charles XI’s reign. The Swedish delegation had to accept that explanation and left Moscow in November with a treaty that Peter I later would claim to be invalid since he had not kissed the cross. When the Swedes left, their Danish and Saxon colleagues remained in Moscow to negotiate more lasting treaties.

The Anti-Swedish Coalition Becomes Reality

After much discussion all the pieces in the new coalition finally came together in late 1699. Denmark and Saxony had signed a new and expanded treaty in September 1699 while Russia in its turn signed the alliances with Denmark and Saxony in November.

The September treaty stated that a lasting peace in the North could only be achieved when Sweden had returned all territories it had taken from Denmark, Poland and Russia, although their immediate aim was only to take back a few of these lost territories. The same treaty outlined that the war should start not later than February 1700 with a Saxon invasion of Livonia. Russia would follow by attacking Ingria and Carelia. Denmark would act forcefully to tie up Swedish forces in Holstein and along the Norwegian border while the Danish navy would prevent Swedish troops to be transported to the Baltic provinces and also attack Livonian ports. Furthermore, Denmark should work to include Brandenburg and the Maritime powers in the alliance or at least make them promise neutrality. Saxony was in the treaty given the task to ensure that Russia joined the coalition and also to attack Hanover and Brandenburg in the back if they chose to attack Denmark.

As proven by the following events, that plan turned out to be very optimistic. Patkul’s grandiose vision of a great Livonian rebellion was just a fantasy. The Livonian nobility’s loyalty to Sweden showed very few cracks when the Saxon army invaded Livonia in February. The attack itself was not even a surprise since the Swedish governor general in Livonia, Erik Dahlberg, was suspicious from the very beginning when Saxon troops arrived near the border in the autumn of 1699. And being Sweden’s top expert in siege warfare, he took all the necessary precautions. Even a lesser man than him would not have been surprised since Saxon deserters revealed in mid-January what their army planned to do.

One man who truly was surprised by the Saxon invasion was Vellingk. When he heard of this he confronted Augustus who denied it straight to his face and insisted that it was just a false rumour. Vellingk believed him this time too and, while in detail declaring how silly that rumour was, he again put forward a proposition of a Swedish-Saxon alliance. Augustus did not respond to that and instead changed the subject. The next day Augustus sent an intermediate to inform Vellingk that war had indeed started between their countries and that he was no longer welcome at his court.

On the other front Denmark did not succeed in recruiting any more members to the coalition. The Brandenburg elector was very unimpressed of how the Saxons conducted their invasion. And much more disastrous was the fact that rather than helping the coalition or remain neutral, the Maritime powers chose to honour the Altona treaty. They had negotiated a treaty with Sweden in January 1700 promising their support to Holstein-Gottorp in return for Swedish support against France if that country attacked the Spanish Netherlands or aided the House of Stuart. Charles XII did not like these terms and it was not until after Denmark attacked Holstein-Gottorp that he ratified the treaty. But with that signature the Maritime Powers sent a joint fleet to support a Swedish invasion of Sealand with the result of Denmark being knocked out of the war before Russia could join them.

What if?

The events of 1700 were a great fiasco for the anti-Swedish coalition. But it did start a war that would eventually lead to Sweden losing its status as a great power since it did not have the necessary resources to defeat a large coalition on its own. However, this did not mean that the Great Northern War or a similar conflict was unavoidable. Denmark benefitted from the fact that both Peter I and Augustus were very ambitious and unscrupulous men who were not bothered by starting a war of aggression without anything that resembled a just cause. And had Sweden made the treaty with the Maritime powers earlier, then Denmark would likely not have dared to start a war and thus no anti-Swedish coalition. Augustus on the other hand would probably not have embarked on this great adventure if he had not met Patkul and been fooled by his dreams, and Peter I would probably not have agreed to a war with just Denmark as an ally. Had the Turkish war not ended in 1699, then both Russia and Saxony would not have been available for a Northern War. Had Sweden been willing to hold back its Holstein ally and be more conciliatory towards Denmark, then the Danes might not have proceeded to form an anti-Swedish coalition.

Read also about the Restoration of the Anti-Swedish coalition

References

Hjärne, Harald. Omstörtningen i Östeuropa 1697-1703. Stockholm (1902)
Jensen, Bernt. Dansk-russiske relationer 1697-1709. (1970)
Jonasson, Gustaf. Karl XII och hans rådgivare - Den utrikespolitiska maktkampen i Sverige 1697-1702. Uppsala (1960)
Laidre, Margus. Segern vid Narva - Början till en stormakts fall. Stockholm (1996)
Olmer, Emil. Alliansförhandlingen mellan Sverige och konung August 1697-1700. Göteborg (1900)