"The death of Gustavus Adolphus" Topic

I wanted to know if anyone was ever identified as being the person who killed Adolphus during the Battle of Lützen.

According to Peter Wilson, Lützen,(Oxford University Press) 2018:

p. 70
"The initial wound was caused by a musket ball, most likely fired by a corporal of the Breuner battalion, which hit his left arm below the elbow, driving part of the bone through the sleeve of his leather coat. The ball continued through into the neck of Streiff, his horse. Unable to hold the reins with his left hand, Gustavus risked losing control of his horse. He dropped his sword in order to use his right hand instead. He then turned to Duke Franz Albrecht von Sachsen-Lauenburg, who headed his entourage, and asked to be helped to safety…"

p. 71
"…Contemporary accounts present the duke as supporting the king, by riding alongside, leading the group in an attempt to return to the main Swedish line. Bloodstains on Franz Albrecht's coat supported this version of events. However, they now blundered into a party of imperial cuirassiers from the Götz Regiment, allegedly led by Lieutenant Colonel Moritz von Falkenberg… Falkenberg is supposed to have recognized the king and fired his pistol, hitting Gustavus in the back. This shot went through his right shoulder blade to enter his lung. Falkenburg was shot in turn, perhaps by the duke, but the other cuirassiers pressed close… Franz Albrecht was obliged to defend himself as a pistol shot burned his face, and he let go of Gustavus who fell from his horse… Later hostile accounts claimed the duke panicked and spurred his horse away, shouting the king was dead… The rest of the entourage had by now left, though exactly who was there is unclear, because several individuals subsequently claimed to be present, though of course in ways that excused them of any blame…"

p.72
…The injured king was now found lying abandoned by another party of three troopers from Piccolomini's regiment led by Major Pier Martinelli who shot him again in the head and stomach. One of the party then allegedly asked the dying Gustavus who he was and on hearing the answer rushed off to find Octavio Piccolomini, the regiment's commander… The soldiers plundered the corpse, with Martinelli taking the king's gold chain, while the troopers took his watch, silver spurs, jacket, hat, and boots, leaving him only in his blood-stained shirt and stockings."

Thanks, that was very interesting.

when asked who he was , Gustavus answered "I was the King of Sweden."

Another good example why you do not trust Peter Wilson when it comes to anything Swedish during the 30YW without checking other sources first.

While the broad outline of his description of Gustavus last moments is reasonably correct the devil is in the details which includes a number of errors which could easily have been avoided if Wilson had read the primary sources and the detailed forensic examination of the so called "Lützen artifacts" which include the buffcoat as well as the 3 shirts worn by Gustavus when he was wounded. (Note 3 shirts, not a single one as described by Wilson.)

Wilson describes details not found in the primary sources, his description of the wounds are at odds with the forensic evidence. For example he claims that the shot in the back went through the shoulder blade when a simple google search for images of the buff coat will reveal that the shot did not hit the shoulder unless Gustavus had shoulder blades stretching down to his waist…
Likewise the supposed shot to the stomach somehow left no trace on any of the 3 shirts Gustavus wore that cold November day.

Last but not least on the occassion when a footnote (number 45) in this section actually is directly to a Swedish source (Sveriges Krig, vol VI, p440-441) the pages referenced does not exactly support Wilsons description in the sentence that is footnoted nor the general content of the larger section of text that sentence is part of…

Missed including the link to a photo of the buffcoat link

Thank you Daniel. Looking at the footnotes, as you state, Wilson did not consult the primary sources. Instead his account seems to be his interpretation of a number of both German and Swedish secondary sources. Unfortunately, for us English-only readers, we are limited to what we can read in English.

I will qualify that somewhat. I can haltingly read German (but not Swedish). However, with my phone and its Google Translate app I can at least deal with short paragraphs or image captions so there is at least a way to get at some of these non-English sources.

I am also surprised at times at the reluctance of some historians to look beyond the written sources and also take into account physical artifacts. But then it is also encouraging to see what insights can be brought to the fore when archeological surveys are used to compliment the written sources, such as has been done with Lützen.

So Major Pier Martinelli really did not shoot the King? And differently not in the Stomach.

Sergeanto-Magiore Pier Martinelli did shot the King, but he only delivered a coup de grace shot to the head which was not only observed by Piccolomini but also documented Kaspar Kennig who was present at the embalming of Gustavus body after the battle. Unfortunately the detailed report of the embalming has been lost but a letter including a list of the wounds was sent by Kennig to Pfalzgraf Johann Casimir who was married to Gustavus half-sister, Katarina Vasa, and resided in Sweden since 1622 having been forced to flee from Catholic troops. Johann Casimirs son Karl would become Karl X, king of Sweden.

While Martinelli's shot did end Gustavus life the King would have been dead within minutes if not faster. The shot to the back had pierced the lower part of the lung and caused a massive bleeding which was fatal, it was just a question of time. Dr Olof Sjöqvist who did the medical assesment of Gustavus wounds published in 1944 had served as a military surgeon in Finland 1940-41 and he estimated that Gustavus life was measured in minutes after he was shot in the back. So the 'honor' of being the man who killed Gustavus Adolphus would go to Moritz von Falkenberg

However Falkenberg firing the shot only appears in second hand sources who claim to have the information from Truchsess who was part of the King's small retinue. However other period secondary sources dispute that Falkenberg did the deed, notably the 'official' Swedish history of the 30YW. We will never know for certain if it was indeed Falkenberg who fired the fatal shot in the confused but deadly melee that november day.

An interesting fact is that both men indentified as shooting Gustavus were killed in action during the battle while no living man steped forward to claim that he did the deed. Yet we know that multiple assilants struck Gustavus with bladed weapons both before and after he was stripped of the famous buffcoat. Fear of Swedish & Protestant retaliation? Or was killing a King still a sensitive issue among the notoriously superstitious soldiers?

Very interesting analysis – thank you Daniel S. It is fascinating to speculate on the motives of the different parties. I have always been surprised at the ‘coup de grace' rather than trying to capture the King. At such an intense moment it is difficult to know how anyone will act I suppose.

Another good example why you do not trust Peter Wilson when it comes to anything Swedish during the 30YW without checking other sources first.

Oh no! Over 200 pages into it, now you tell me

Thank you Dan
I always learn a lot from your posts

Every time I read the details I am depressed again. What a loss.