text:
Deluge (history)

The Deluge (potop szwedzki; švedų tvanas) was a series of mid-17th-century military campaigns in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. In a wider sense, it applies to the period between the Khmelnytsky Uprising of 1648 and the Truce of Andrusovo in 1667, comprising the Polish theatres of the Russo-Polish and Second Northern Wars. In a stricter sense, the term refers to the Swedish invasion and occupation of the Commonwealth as a theatre of the Second Northern War (1655–1660) only; in Poland and Lithuania this period is called the Swedish Deluge (potop szwedzki, Lithuanian: švedų tvanas, Svenska syndafloden), or less commonly the Russo–Swedish Deluge (Potop szwedzko-rosyjski) due to the simultaneous Russo-Polish War. The term "deluge" (potop in Polish) was popularized by Henryk Sienkiewicz in his novel The Deluge (1886).

During the wars the Commonwealth lost approximately one third of its population as well as its status as a great power due to invasions by Sweden and Russia. According to Professor Andrzej Rottermund, manager of the Royal Castle in Warsaw, the destruction of Poland in the Deluge was more extensive than the destruction of the country in World War II. Rottermund claims that Swedish invaders robbed the Commonwealth of its most important riches, and most of the stolen items never returned to Poland. Warsaw, the capital of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, was destroyed by the Swedes, and out of a pre-war population of 20,000, only 2,000 remained in the city after the war. According to the 2012 Polish estimates, the material damage caused by the Swedish army amounted to 4 billion złotys. 188 cities and towns, 186 villages, 136 churches, 89 palaces, and 81 castles were completely destroyed in Poland.

Historical background
In 1648, Bohdan Khmelnytsky led a popular uprising of Zaporozhian Cossacks and Ukrainian peasants discontented with the rule of Polish and Lithuanian magnates. Although the initial phase of the rebellion ended (after much destruction) at the Battle of Berestechko (1651), it brought into focus the rivalry between Russia and the Commonwealth for hegemony over Ukraine and over the eastern Slavic lands in general. Thus, in October 1653, the Russian Zemsky Sobor declared war on the Commonwealth, and in June 1654 the forces of Tsar Alexis of Russia invaded the eastern half of Poland-Lithuania, starting the Russo-Polish War of 1654–1667. In the summer of 1654, the Russians managed to capture most important cities and strongholds of today's Belarus. Smolensk was captured after a siege on October 3, 1654. The Swedish Empire, which technically already was at war with the Commonwealth (a ceasefire agreement existed from 1629 and was prolonged from 1635 to 1661), invaded in July 1655 and occupied the remaining half of the country.

Background
Following the Thirty Years' War, the Swedish Empire emerged as one of the strongest kingdoms on the continent. It had a large army but little money to pay its soldiers. The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, weakened by wars with the Cossacks and Tsardom of Russia, seemed like easy prey, also because its best soldiers had been either killed in the 1652 Battle of Batih or massacred after it. Furthermore, Swedes remembered claims to their throne by Polish kings Sigismund III Vasa and his sons Władysław IV Vasa and John II Casimir, who themselves belonged to the House of Vasa. An earlier conflict, the Polish–Swedish War (1626–1629) had ended with the Treaty of Stuhmsdorf.

The Polish–Lithuanian King John II Casimir (reigned 1648–68) lacked support among the Commonwealth nobility (szlachta) due to his sympathies with absolutist Austria and his open contempt for the "Sarmatist" culture of the nobility. Earlier, in 1643, John Casimir had become a member of the Jesuits and had received the title of Cardinal. Nevertheless, in December 1646, he returned to Poland and, in October 1647, resigned his position as Cardinal to stand for election to the Polish throne, after the death of his brother Władysław IV Vasa. He became King in 1648. However, some of the nobility supported Charles Gustav (King of Sweden from 1654 to 1660 and John Casimir's cousin) for the Polish–Lithuanian throne. Many members of the Polish nobility regarded John Casimir as a weak king or a "Jesuit-King"; Grand Treasurer Bogusław Leszczyński, a Protestant, and Deputy Chancellor of the Crown Hieronim Radziejowski, an old enemy of the Polish King who had been exiled to Sweden, encouraged Charles Gustav to claim the Polish crown. Two Lithuanian noble princes, Janusz Radziwiłł and Bogusław Radziwiłł, introduced dissension into the Commonwealth and began negotiations with the Swedish king Charles X Gustav of Sweden aimed at breaking up the Commonwealth and the Polish–Lithuanian union. They signed the Treaty of Kėdainiai (1655), which envisaged the Radziwiłł princes ruling over two duchies carved out from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania under Swedish protection.

1655
In July 1655 two Swedish armies, operating from Swedish Pomerania and the Province of Pomerania, entered Greater Poland, one of the richest and most developed provinces of the Commonwealth, which had for centuries been unaffected by any military conflicts, and whose levée en masse had not been used to fighting. Greater Poland's noble camp, located in the valley of the Noteć river, near the town of Ujście, looked more like a large party, as the szlachta, gathered there to face the Swedish Army, was more interested in drinking. To make matters worse, two powerful magnates, the Voivode of Poznań Krzysztof Opaliński, and the Voivode of Kalisz, Andrzej Karol Grudziński, argued with each other whether to fight or to give up. Polish troops lacked gunpowder, cannons, and even food, which was stolen at local villages by hungry soldiers.

After an easy Swedish victory at the Battle of Ujście, Krzysztof Opaliński surrendered Greater Poland to Charles Gustav. On July 31, 1655, the army commanded by Arvid Wittenberg captured Poznań, and on August 20 near Konin, the armies of Wittenberg and Charles Gustav joined forces, and headed for Warsaw. On September 2, the Poles lost the Battle of Sobota, and on September 4, the Swedes captured Łowicz. Four days later, the Swedish army entered the Polish capital, becoming the first foreign army in history to capture Warsaw. King Charles Gustav left a garrison in Warsaw, under Bengt Gabrielsson Oxenstierna, and headed southwards, in pursuit of John Casimir. On September 16, the Swedes defeated Polish troops in the Battle of Żarnów, and the Polish forces gave up resistance and surrendered to the invaders. The Polish king headed towards Kraków on September 25, and then fled to the Głogówek castle near Prudnik in Upper Silesia. Kraków was left in the hands of Stefan Czarniecki; on October 3 Swedish forces once again defeated the Poles in the Battle of Wojnicz, which opened the road to Kraków. The ancient capital of Poland was captured after a siege, on October 13, 1655. With the three most populated and best developed Polish provinces in his hands (Greater Poland, Lesser Poland and Mazovia), Charles Gustav decided to head back northwards to Royal Prussia, which was defended by the Voivode of Malbork, Jakub Wejher. The Swedes, who were generally superior in training, discipline, and equipment, advanced rapidly. Meanwhile, in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, whose eastern part had been occupied by another Swedish army under Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie since August 1655, Janusz Radziwiłł and his cousin Bogusław Radziwiłł signed the Union of Kėdainiai (October 20, 1655), which ended Lithuania's union with Poland. The decision of the Radziwiłłs was the result of the 1654 Russian invasion, as Janusz Radziwiłł accused the Poles of not helping the Lithuanians with the defence of the Grand Duchy. The Russian capture of Vilnius (August 9, 1655) and the subsequent slaughter of its residents convinced the Lithuanian nobility that Swedish protection was the best solution. The situation of the Commonwealth was desperate, but hope appeared with the Truce of Vilna (November 3), in which Poland and the Tsardom of Russia formed an anti-Swedish alliance. With Russian forces attacking Sweden in Livonia (see Russo-Swedish War (1656–1658)), Poland finally had time to recoup and gather fresh forces. On October 12, 1655, with permission from King John Casimir, Frederick William, Elector of Brandenburg signed the Treaty of Rinsk, in which the Royal Prussian nobility agreed to allow Brandenburgian garrisons in their province to defend it against the Swedish invasion (the treaty did not include the cities of Gdańsk, Elbląg and Toruń). In November and December 1655 the Swedish army under Gustaf Otto Stenbock captured all the towns of Royal Prussia except for Gdańsk, Puck and Malbork.

To prevent John Casimir's return to Poland, Swedish units protected the border with Silesia. On November 18, 1655, the Swedes besieged the monastery at Jasna Góra, located in Lesser Poland, near the border. Led by the Grand Prior Augustyn Kordecki, the garrison of this symbolic sanctuary-fortress of Poland held off its enemies in the Siege of Jasna Góra. The defense of Jasna Góra galvanized Polish resistance against the Swedes. The news of the siege spread across the nation, and in several areas guerrilla units were created, outraged at the Swedes' attempt to seize the monastery. On December 7, 1655, the unit of Colonel Gabriel Wojniłłowicz defeated the Swedes and their Polish collaborators near Krosno. On December 13, Polish troops under Wojniłłowicz recaptured Nowy Sącz, and soon afterwards Sweden lost Biała, Dukla, Biecz, Wieliczka, and Oświęcim. By late 1655, the situation in southern Lesser Poland had deteriorated to such an extent for the invaders that on December 27 they decided to lift the siege of Jasna Góra. On December 16, 1655, in Sokal, Polish Crown hetmans urged the nation to fight the Swedish armies. Two days later, King John Casimir left the Głogówek in Silesia, and via Racibórz and Cieszyn, returned to Poland, arriving at Lubowla on December 27. Two days later, the Tyszowce Confederation was formed in support of the Polish king. John Casimir himself met with hetmans Stanisław Rewera Potocki, Jerzy Sebastian Lubomirski, Stanisław Lanckoroński and Stefan Czarniecki in Krosno, on December 31, 1655. The meeting was also attended by Primate Andrzej Leszczyński, and eight voivodes.

1656
While in Krosno, the Polish king found out about the end of the siege of Jasna Góra, and about the death of Janusz Radziwiłł. On January 12, 1656, John Casimir left Krosno, and after three days, arrived at Łańcut Castle, which belonged to the Lubomirski family. On February 10, the king came to Lwów, which, together with Gdańsk, was one of only two major cities of the Commonwealth not seized by any of Poland's enemies. Soon Polish Army units began to concentrate in the area of Lwów, including militias from Red Ruthenia, Volhynia and Lublin, as well as forces under Potocki and Prince Lubomirski, together with the garrison of Kamieniec Podolski fortress. Charles Gustav, after finding out about the return of the Polish king, ordered his armies to concentrate in Łowicz. On February 8, 1656, the Swedes defeated Czarniecki in the Battle of Gołąb, and continued their march towards Lwów, reaching the Zamość Fortress on February 25. On March 1, realizing that without heavy guns it was impossible to capture the mighty stronghold, the Swedish army gave up the siege, and headed towards Bełżec. On March 3, Charles Gustav, whose units were harassed by Polish guerilla forces, decided to retreat. At the same time, guerilla warfare also broke out in Mazovia and Greater Poland, and Lithuanian units under the Grand Hetman of Lithuania Paweł Jan Sapieha began moving towards Red Ruthenia.

On March 11, the Swedish army arrived at Jarosław, fighting its way across the San river. Charles Gustav sent some of his forces to capture Przemyśl, but on March 16 they returned to Jarosław without success. On March 22, the Swedish army set off northwards, along the San and Vistula rivers, back to Warsaw. They were followed by units of Stefan Czarniecki and Aleksander Koniecpolski, and during the retreat, Polish troops supporting the invaders changed sides, joining the forces of John Casimir. On March 30, the starving, cold and tired Swedish army of 5,000 stopped near Sandomierz, which was already in Polish hands. The Swedes camped among the forests of Sandomierz Forest near Gorzyce, where they were quickly surrounded by approximately 23,000 Poles and Lithuanians. To help the besieged army, on March 27 Frederick VI left Warsaw with 2,500 reiters and dragoons, so John Casimir ordered the mounted units of Czarnecki and Lubomirski to face the margrave. Frederick's army was defeated on April 7 in the Battle of Warka. At Gorzyce, however, second-quality Polish forces remained, and the Swedish king managed to break out (April 5), and on April 13, Charles Gustav reached Warsaw. Meanwhile, the Polish king made the Lwów Oath (April 1), in which he entrusted the Commonwealth to the Blessed Virgin Mary's protection, and declared her 'The Queen of the Polish Crown'.

After the Battle of Warka, Czarniecki and Lubomirski decided to head towards Greater Poland and Kujawy, to support guerrilla forces active there. By April 9, Polish troops reached Royal Prussia, capturing Bydgoszcz and Nakło (April 19). The Polish attempt to capture Toruń, on April 17, was a failure. After a short rest, Stefan Czarniecki considered a raid of Swedish Pomerania, but other Polish leaders opposed this idea. Charles Gustav decided to prevent the Poles from taking control of the northern districts of the country, and departed Warsaw with an army of 10,000 (April 17). On April 21, the Lithuanians under Sapieha freed Lublin, and on April 23, the Lithuanian army reached Praga, which today is a right-bank district of Warsaw. The forces of Czarniecki and Lubomirski joined other troops near Piła, but on May 7 they were defeated in the Battle of Kłecko, despite their numerical superiority. After the battle, the surviving Polish units regrouped near Gniezno, and in late May, they headed for Warsaw, to help the Lithuanians in the siege of the Polish capital (April 24 – July 1). Warsaw was being defended by Arvid Wittenberg with 2,000 soldiers, as the main Swedish army was busy besieging Gdańsk. Wittenberg capitulated on July 1, 1656.

Already in late 1655, Charles Gustav realized that it would be impossible for him to control the Commonwealth. The Swedish king decided to find allies, who would help him to divide Poland-Lithuania. On June 29, 1656, he signed the Treaty of Marienburg, in which he offered Frederick William, Elector of Brandenburg a reward for fighting on his side. Brandenburg-Prussia was promised sovereignty in four voivodeships – Poznań, Kalisz, Łęczyca, and Sieradz. On July 28, a reinforced Swedish–Brandenburgian army, under Charles Gustav, set out for Warsaw. Even though the allied army was smaller, it still managed to defeat the Poles and Lithuanians in the Battle of Warsaw (July 28–30), and to recapture Warsaw. This victory, however, achieved little, as the Poles retreated behind the Wieprz, where they regrouped, and were soon ready to continue fighting. Finally, Charles Gustav decided to abandon Warsaw, and retreat to Royal Prussia. To punish Brandenburg-Prussia, Commonwealth forces decided to invade the Duchy of Prussia. In early October 1656, an army of 11,000 under Wincenty Korwin Gosiewski entered Prussia, supported by 2,000 Crimean Tatars. On October 8, Gosiewski's army won the Battle of Prostken (October 8), but after the Tatars decided to return to the Crimea, the Polish–Lithuanian army was defeated in the Battle of Filipów (October 22). In November 1656, Greater Poland's troops invaded the Brandenburger province of Neumark, which resulted in withdrawal of Brandenburger forces from most of Greater Poland. Charles Gustav, knowing that he needed the support of the Elector, agreed to sign the Treaty of Labiau (November 20), which granted full sovereignty to the Prussian ruler, in exchange for his complete military support of Sweden in the ongoing war. The Commonwealth, on the other hand, had already been negotiating with the House of Habsburg. On December 1, 1656, the first Treaty of Vienna was signed, which was followed by a second Treaty of Vienna, in which Emperor Leopold I promised to aid John Casimir with 12,000 troops against the Swedish-Brandenburgian alliance. By late 1656, Swedish troops had been pushed out of most of the Commonwealth. They only held the right-bank half of Royal Prussia, northern Mazovia, Łowicz, Kraków, and Tykocin.

1657
In 1653, the Transylvanian Hungarian ruler George II Rákóczi signed an alliance with Poland, and the relations between the Commonwealth and Transylvania were friendly. George had even been offered the Polish crown, on condition that he convert to Catholicism. Stunning Swedish successes, however, made Rákóczi change his mind. On May 18, 1656, Charles X Gustav, in a letter sent from Malbork, offered the Hungarian prince Red Ruthenia, in exchange for military support against the Commonwealth. Meanwhile, Rákóczi had already been negotiating with Bohdan Khmelnytsky, and on September 7, 1656, Transylvania and the Zaporizhian Sich signed a peace treaty, which obliged both sides to help each other in war. On December 8, 1656, the Treaty of Radnot was signed, which divided Poland-Lithuania among Charles X Gustav, Bogusław Radziwiłł, Elector Frederick William, Bohdan Khmelnytsky, and George II Rákóczi. In late January 1657, the Transylvanian army of 25,000 crossed the Carpathians, heading towards Medyka, where 10,000 Cossack allies awaited them. To face the new invader, the army of hetman Stanisław Rewera Potocki rushed southwards. At the same time (January 2), in the Battle of Chojnice, the Swedes defeated the Poles. On February 26, Stefan Czarniecki and King John Casimir met in Kalisz, where they decided to prevent the Swedish and Transylvanian armies from meeting.

After joining the Cossacks, Rákóczi decided not to attack Lwów, but set off towards Kraków, where the situation of the Swedish garrison under Wirtz was desperate. On March 21, Rákóczi captured Tarnów, and on March 28, he reached Kraków. Along the way to the ancient Polish capital, the Transylvanian-Cossack army burned and looted towns and villages, murdering thousands. Since his army was too busy looting Lesser Poland, only 5,000 soldiers reached Kraków, which by the Treaty of Radnot, was to be ruled by Transylvania. After leaving 2,500 soldiers to help the Swedish garrison of Kraków, Rákóczi's army headed northwards, along the Vistula. On April 12, 1657, the Transylvanian-Cossack army met with Swedish forces under Charles X Gustav, at Ćmielów. The joined forces began to follow the Polish Crown army under Stanisław Potocki, and the Lithuanian army under Paweł Sapieha, to force a decisive battle. On April 29, the Polish and Lithuanian armies joined forces at Łosice, and in early May 1657, the Poles decided to organize a revenge raid on Transylvania, under hetman Jerzy Sebastian Lubomirski. On May 13, Rákóczi and Charles X Gustav seized the fortress of Brześć Litewski, and on May 17, after a three-day siege, the Swedes, Cossacks, and Transylvanians captured Warsaw. Soon afterwards, however, the Dano-Swedish War began, and Charles X Gustav left Poland with most of his troops. The remaining Swedish army was commanded by Gustaf Otto Stenbock. The Swedish withdrawal made Rákóczi uneasy, as he was well aware of the poor quality of his soldiers. On July 7–8, 1656, at Łańcut Castle, King John Casimir and his hetmans agreed that Stefan Czarniecki would follow Rákóczi and the Cossacks, while Lubomirski's and Potocki's divisions together with Crimean Tatars.

The Ottomans were offended that George II Rakoczi, who was officially their vassal, did not ask their approval to attack Poland and did not want to open another war (in that time they tried to attack Venice through Dalmatia) but when he ignored them they ordered the Crimean Tatars to help the Polish troops and punish Rakoczi. They already replaced Rakoczi's vassal voivodes from Moldavia and Wallachia.

On June 20, 1657, Stenbock was ordered by Charles X Gustav to abandon Rákóczi and head with his army to Stettin. To save his skin, the ruler of Transylvania began a quick retreat southwards, towards the Carpathians. On July 11, Stefan Czarniecki's division defeated Rákóczi at Magierów near Lwów, and on July 20, the Transylvanian-Cossack army was destroyed in the Battle of Czarny Ostrów in Podolia. Three days later, Rákóczi signed a peace treaty with the Commonwealth, in which he promised to break the alliance with Sweden, withdraw his troops from Kraków and Brześć Litewski, and pay for the damage inflicted by his army. On July 26, remnants of the Transylvanian army were surrounded by the Tatars near Skałat. Rákóczi himself managed to flee, and the army was temporarily commanded by John Kemény, who himself was captured by the Tatars. After six months of fighting in Poland, Rákóczi's army of 25,000 ceased to exist, with all survivors taken prisoner by the Tatars.

On August 30, the Swedish garrison left Kraków, and throughout August and September 1657, all Swedish troops in Poland moved northwards, to Royal Prussia. Altogether, by autumn of that year, only some 8,000 Swedish soldiers remained in Poland–Lithuania. The Swedes still kept some Prussian cities, as Malbork, Elbląg, Sztum, Brodnica, Grudziądz, and Toruń. On September 11, an Austrian army of 11,000, allied with Poland, concentrated near Kraków and set off to Płock, where it spent the winter. Polish army commanders and King John Casimir, gathered in Poznań on November 26, decided to delay the attack on Swedish forces in Royal Prussia until spring 1658. On November 6, 1657, Poland and Brandenburg–Prussia signed the Treaty of Bromberg. Ducal Prussia, which had previously allied itself with Sweden and attacked Poland, changed sides and guaranteed military support of the Commonwealth, in return for sovereignty (it had been a fief of Poland since 1466). This treaty is regarded by historian Józef Włodarski as one of the worst mistakes in Polish history.

1658–1660
In the spring of 1658, the Polish army, together with its Austrian allies under Raimondo Montecuccoli, began a campaign in Royal Prussia, where several key towns and cities were still in Swedish hands. On July 1, the siege of Toruń began. The heavily fortified city was defended by 2400 soldiers under Barthod Hartwig von Bülow. The Polish troops included the divisions of Krzysztof Grodzicki, Jan Sapieha and Stefan Czarniecki. Furthermore, they were provided support by the Brandenburgian-Prussian army of Bogusław Radziwiłł, which after the Treaty of Bromberg changed sides. Altogether, almost 25,000 soldiers besieged Toruń. After a prolonged artillery bombardment, the main attack took place in the night of November 16–17, and on December 30 Toruń capitulated. Meanwhile, Stefan Czarniecki's division headed to Denmark–Norway, to help the Danes in the Dano-Swedish War. In October 1658, the Polish army of 4500 reached Hamburg, and in December 1658, with the help of Polish troops, the fortress of Kolding was captured (see Battle of Kolding).

On July 1, 1658, the Sejm ordered the expulsion of the Polish Brethren, who were accused of collaborating with the Swedish invaders.

In 1659, the Swedish army still remaining in Poland under Lorens von der Linde was withdrawn to major Royal Prussian fortresses – Malbork, Głowa Gdańska, Grudziądz, Elbląg, and Brodnica. In August 1659, the Polish army captured Głowa and Grudziądz, and soon afterwards, the starving Swedish garrison at Brodnica surrendered. The siege of Malbork was continued, and Polish – Brandenburgian troops blocked Elbląg. In December 1659, the siege of Elbląg began. Meanwhile, in late 1658, the Polish–Russian truce ended when Russian forces under Ivan Andreyevich Khovansky (Tararui) and Jurij Aleksiejewicz Dołgorukow again attacked the Polish – Lithuanian units (see Russo-Polish War (1654–1667)). The Russians managed to capture large parts of the Commonwealth, but were later defeated in the Battle of Konotop and the Battle of Polonka.

On May 3, 1660, the Treaty of Oliva was signed, which ended the Polish–Swedish War. After the conclusion of the conflict, Poland–Lithuania initiated a large offensive against the Russians, who were beaten in the Battle of Chudnov. In 1661, Vilnius was recaptured (December 2), and in 1663–64, Polish forces invaded Left-bank Ukraine. The war with Russia ended with the Truce of Andrusovo (January 30, 1667).

Other conflicts
The Deluge was the climax of a series of wars that took place in Poland–Lithuania in the mid-17th century. The Commonwealth was first affected by the Khmelnytsky Uprising, which began in 1648, and affected southeastern provinces of the country. In the final stages of the uprising, the Russians invaded Poland–Lithuania in 1654, reaching as far west as the Vistula river near Puławy. The Commonwealth also fought forces from Transylvania and Brandenburg-Prussia, but the Duchy of Prussia gained formal Polish recognition of its independence outside of the Polish state (Treaty of Wehlau, 1657). The Tatars of the Crimean Khanate and the Nogai Horde conducted almost annual slave raids in the territories controlled by the Commonwealth. In all these other invasions, only the Russian invaders caused the most similar damages to the Swedes, due to Russian raids, destructions and rapid incursion which crippled Polish industries.

With the Treaty of Hadiach on September 16, 1658, the Polish Crown sought to elevate the Cossacks and Ruthenians to a position equal to that of Poland and Lithuania in the Polish–Lithuanian Union, and in fact transform the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth into a Polish–Lithuanian–Ruthenian Commonwealth (Polish: Rzeczpospolita Trojga Narodów, "Commonwealth of Three Nations"). Supported by Cossack Hetman Ivan Vyhovsky and the starshyna, the treaty aimed to change the face of Eastern Europe. However, its terms never came into full operation: in addition to the unpopularity of continued integration with the Commonwealth with the majority of the Cossacks, Russia refused to recognize Hadiach, and maintained its claims to Ukraine. The Russo-Polish War (1654–1667) ended with the Treaty of Andrusovo of January 13, 1667. (Poland-Lithuania profited from Turkish participation in the Russo-Turkish War (1676–1681) due to Ottoman links with the Crimea.) The peace settlement gave Russia control over the so-called Left-bank Ukraine (left of the river Dnieper), with the Commonwealth retaining Right-bank Ukraine (right of the Dnieper). While initially the agreement stipulated that Russia would return Left-bank Ukraine to the Commonwealth in twenty years, the division became permanent with the Eternal Peace Treaty of 1686.

The Deluge brought to an end the era of Polish religious tolerance: mostly non-Catholic invaders antagonized the mostly Catholic Poles. The expulsion of the Protestant Polish Brethren from Poland in 1658 exemplified the increasing intolerance. During the Deluge, many thousands of Polish Jews also fell victim to violence carried out by the Zaporozhian Cossacks.

Outcome
The exact outcome of the Deluge is disputed, historians like Michael Fredholm von Essen state that the Deluge "did not end in a Swedish defeat" and that the Deluge "did not end in a Polish victory, while Kevin Wang and James Lee Ray classify the war as a Swedish success diplomatically. Polish politician and writer Jędrzej Giertych mentions it as a defensive victory against Sweden. While Feliks Koneczny calls the result Status quo ante bellum and says that the whole war was an unnecessary bloodshed. The Treaty of Oliva signed in 1660 meant that: Poland gave up most of Livonia with Riga, retaining only part of it (Latgale – the south-eastern part of Livonia) which was in Russian hands at the time, until the Armistice of Andrusov in 1667. King John II Casimir Vasa renounced his right to claim the Swedish Throne for himself and those who succeeded him. He did, however, retain the title of King of Sweden for the rest of his life. Sweden had pledged to uphold freedom of trade in the Baltic. Additional sources also claim that Sweden won the war. However, this view is not shared by the historians Leszek Podhorecki and Adam Kersten who wrote about the Polish victory over the Swedes.

Destruction of the Commonwealth
The Swedish invasion affected the richest provinces of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (Greater Poland, Lesser Poland, Mazovia, Pomerelia, Kujawy, Podlasie), which for the most part had not been affected by major wars for 200 years. According to Professor Andrzej Rottermund, manager of the Royal Castle in Warsaw, the Swedish army robbed Poland of her most precious goods – thousands of works of art, books and valuables. Most of these items have never been returned to Poland, and are kept both in private Swedish hands and in Stockholm museums, such as the Swedish Army Museum, and Livrustkammaren. Almost all cities, towns, castles and churches in locations where Swedish troops were stationed were destroyed, and in guides to many Polish towns and cities one can find notes that read "object destroyed during Swedish invasion". From the Royal Castle in Warsaw the Swedes plundered approximately 200 paintings, a number of carpets and Turkish tents, musical instruments, furniture, Chinese porcelain, weapons, books, manuscripts, marbles, even dresses of maids and door frames pulled from walls. Meanwhile, the Russian invaders in the east had also destroyed and damaged much of the eastern part's infrastructure, partly due to heavy agricultural fertile developments there.

Hubert Kowalski of the University of Warsaw Institute of Archeology says that Swedes stole anything they could lay their hands on—windows, stairs, chimneys, sculptures, floors, doors and gates. Most goods were loaded on boats and transported along the Vistula to the Baltic Sea and then to Sweden. In November 2011, archaeologists of the University of Warsaw found approximately 70 items (total weight five tons), which probably come from the Warsaw Royal Castle. They sank in the Vistula while being transported to Sweden. Even though Article 9 of the Treaty of Oliva stated that Sweden should return all stolen goods, all items are still kept in Stockholm and other Swedish locations. Several Polish kings (John II Casimir, John III Sobieski and Stanisław II Augustus) sent official missions to Sweden, but without success. In most situations, Swedish authorities claimed that they did not know where stolen goods were. In 1911, Kraków's Academy of Science sent its own mission, which was made up of renowned professors Eugeniusz Barwiński, Ludwik Birkenmajer and Jan Łoś. In Stockholm and Uppsala they found 205 manuscripts and 168 rare Polish books, describing their foundings in a report. In 2002, the Warsaw Royal Castle organized an exhibition, "Eagle and Three Crowns", which presented many items stolen from Poland, and kept in Swedish museums. After the Deluge, the Commonwealth became a "cultural desert". Poland and Lithuania lost 67 libraries and 17 archives. Of all major cities of the country, only Lwów and Gdańsk were not destroyed, and when Swedish soldiers were unable to steal an item, they would destroy or burn it. In ruins were castles, palaces, churches, abbeys, towns and villages. As a result of the Swedish invasion, few pre-Baroque buildings remained in Poland. An estimated 3 million died.

Among others, Swedish troops stole such items as:
 * both Polish and Lithuanian state records (Metrica Regni Poloniae),
 * the royal library from Warsaw,
 * libraries from Ujazdów Castle, Toruń, Bydgoszcz, Malbork, Poznań, Grudziądz, Gniezno, Lublin, Jarosław, Vilnius, Sandomierz, Radom, and Kraków, also archives and libraries from most towns of Royal Prussia. Most of the stolen books are kept in the University Library at Uppsala, the Royal Library at Stockholm, and private libraries of the Bielke, Oxenstierna, Rosenhahne, Wrangel and Brahe families,
 * all Warsaw palaces – completely robbed were the Kazanowski Palace, the Ossoliński Palace, the Daniłłowicz Palace, the Primate Palace, the Bishophoric Palace, the Royal Palace and the Royal Castle,
 * castles and churches, which were robbed and destroyed, as were almost all Polish towns; the most notable examples are Golub-Dobrzyń, Krzyżtopór, Wieluń, Krasnystaw, Wawel, Tęczyn, Lanckorona, Pieskowa Skała, Kielce, Sandomierz, Chęciny Niepołomice, Ojców, Wiśnicz, Łobzów, Kruszwica, Rabsztyn.

According to the estimates of Polish scholars I. Ihnatowicz, Z. Landau, A. Mączak and B. Zientara, the invasion by the Swedish army and its allies (Brandenburg-Prussia and Transilvania), resulted in the loss of 25% of the population in four core Polish provinces. Lesser Poland lost 23% of population, Mazovia 40% in villages and 70% in towns, Greater Poland 50% in villages and 60% in towns. Royal Prussia lost some 60% of its population. The Commonwealth's population losses are estimated at between 30% and 50% in 1648–1660.

In January 2013 Marek Poznański, a Palikot Movement member of the Polish parliament, announced his plan to send thousands of postcards to European politicians and journalists, in which he wanted to convince the recipients that Poland should get financial compensation from Sweden for the destruction of the country in the deluge. Poznański claims that in the 1660 Treaty of Oliwa, Sweden pledged to return all stolen goods, which never happened. The MP had previously intervened at the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Culture; he also visited the Embassy of Sweden in Warsaw. A businessman from Warsaw, Sławian Krzywiński, joined Poznański, creating the Foundation of Reconstruction of Destruction Caused by the Swedish Invasion (Fundacja Odbudowy Zniszczeń Dokonanych w Czasie Potopu Szwedzkiego). According to Krzywiński, looted goods are still kept in Swedish museums and private collections. Among others, Poland lost the Braniewo Library, works of Nicolaus Copernicus, including the 1543 Nuremberg edition of De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, and the oldest printed text of Bogurodzica. Krzywiński states that as an act of goodwill, the Swedish side should cover the cost of reconstruction of the Rawa Mazowiecka castle, which was destroyed by them in the 1650s.

Effect on the fate of the Commonwealth
One of the most notable effects of the devastating Deluge was the subsequent weakening of Poland's international standing. While Sweden destroyed more, Russia also took part and was second only to Sweden in the level of destruction. With the entire Polish nation crippled by the Swedes and Russians, Russia was able to rise, found the Russian Empire in the early 18th century and play a major role in the Partitions of Poland in the latter half of the 18th century.

In popular culture
The Deluge had a major effect on Poland, and there are several books describing the war. In 1886 Henryk Sienkiewicz described the Swedish invasion in his novel Роtор. Based on the novel, Jerzy Hoffman directed the film The Deluge (Роtор) in 1974, a classic historical work. It starred Daniel Olbrychski as the character Andrzej Kmicic, a patriot who valiantly fought against the Swedish invasion. The film received a nomination for an Oscar in 1974, but lost to the Italian film Amarcord.

In 2000, Renata Ocieczek wrote the book Czasy potopu szwedzkiego w literaturze polskiej (The time of the Swedish deluge in Polish literature), and in 2006 Jacek Płosiński wrote Potop szwedzki na Podlasiu (Swedish deluge in Podlasie). Other books about this topic include: Warszawa 1656 by Mirosław Nagielski, Krwawy sztorm ("Bloody storm") by Augustyn Necel (describing the Deluge in the region of Kaszuby), Znak Jastrzębca (The sign of the Jastrzębiec) by Stanisław Maria Jankowski, and Pamiętnik oblężenia Częstochowy (The memoir of the siege of Częstochowa), by Father Augustyn Kordecki. Furthermore, James Michener describes the Deluge in his novel Poland (1983). The Deluge has also found its way into video games. The video game Mount & Blade: With Fire & Sword (named after the first book of Sienkiewicz's trilogy) contains a quest called "The Deluge" that is based on the events of the actual Deluge.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Deluge (history)


text:
Widemouth blindcat

The widemouth blindcat (Satan eurystomus) is a species of North American freshwater catfish endemic to Texas in the United States. It is the only species in the genus Satan.

Description
It was first discovered inhabiting a well, and is adapted for a lightless underground environment. Like other cavefish, the widemouth blindcat lacks pigmentation and has no externally visible eyes. The eye remnants are extremely reduced in size with very little or no trace of a retina or lens; the optic tract is present, but always regresses before reaching the brain. The swim bladder in these fish is reduced, and the skull is mostly cartilaginous and not well-ossified, unlike the adults of most larger ictalurids. The lateral line is fragmentary and never reaches past the anterior part of the anal fin. This species also has a few paedomorphic traits (indicated by small size, kidney morphology, and weak ossification of the skeleton). This species grows to about 13.7 cm TL.

Taxonomy
The widemouth blindcat's closest relative is the much larger flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris).

Distribution and habitat
Along with the related toothless blindcat (Trogloglanis pattersoni), this species is distributed in five artesian wells penetrating the San Antonio Pool of the Edwards Aquifer in and near San Antonio, Texas. These fish have been found with crustacean exoskeletons in their stomachs, and may be the top carnivore in their habitat.

Conservation
The widemouth blindcat is a vulnerable species, and is threatened by groundwater pollution. In 2023, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to list the species as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 along with the sympatric toothless blindcat.

title: Widemouth blindcat


text:
Talk:Sesamoid bone

policy on spammy links?
Bartleby' Medical Terminology which is in the reference section is a site so overloaded with spammy ads it crashes my browser 1 in 10 pages I load on the site. What is the policy on linking to sites which are overloaded with spammy advertisement? Machn (talk) 09:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

source
I'm not saying this isn't true, I just would like to see a source for it:

In the hand - two sesamoid bones are located in distal portions of the first metacarpal bone. There is also commonly a sesamoid bone in distal portions of the second metacarpal bone.

Machn (talk) 10:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

See the reference to Gray's Anatomy at the bottom of the page.   Solo Owl   01:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eall Ân Ûle (talk • contribs) I'm not shure this is the right place to post this, but I would like to mention that the lenticular process of the incus is no longer considered a sesamoid bone, merely a process of the incus itself. Hereby I post the source of the proposed change. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21986927 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentful (talk • contribs) 19:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Detail Information for X ray and Other Imaging
Two points: often an image is shown to demonstrate the subject of an article but the image shows more than one possible area which could be the pertinent subject of the illustration (especially with medical imagery) and often neither the written "details" of the image nor the subject article itself will have a description defining the position of the subject in the image/illustration. Also there are often additional but unavoidable and (strictly speaking) superfluous (to the article but curiosity stoking) unexplained characteristics shown in some images. For example, in the second image of this article, the X ray image has written on it some "per-centage" ranges of some of the bones. Is this a measure of the size of the actual bone wrt the expected size for a person of that age? The article does mention that the bone size, if it is diminutive can be strong evidence of a delayed start of puberty so commentary of this detail would not be intrusive. Nevertheless of intrusivity, explanations of non pertinent to the article characteristics would also aid the reader in isolating the pertinent subject sought within the image. What is obvious to a radiologist's eye can be almost imperceptible to ignorant mere mortals.Ecstatist (talk) 04:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

After studying the 3rd and 4th images which denote by color, the "prevalence" range(not size) of the various bones, I realize the similar intention of the notes written in the 2nd image but this is by inference because its depiction is different (no color) and there is no explanation. Ecstatist (talk) 04:12, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sesamoid bone


text:
Talk:Communist International

Spelling/caps
Adam 10:50, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Why is Comintern spelled in capitals in the article title and in the text? This was not the usual English usage.
 * In any case, why is the article called Comintern and not Communist International, the organisation's correct name?
 * 1) The spelling seems to be about half and half either way (via Google.) 2) 45,000 vs. 33,000 on Google for the abbreviation vs. the long form. -Joseph (Talk) 10:54, 5 October 2004 (UTC)

I don't think Google should be the determinant. The organisation was called the Communist International. Comintern was a Russian abbreviation which later became established jargon within the Communist parties. The article should use the correct name, with a redirect from Comintern. Adam 11:09, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I dunno, they used COMINTERN in my PoliSci classes. How about yours? -Joseph (Talk) 11:18, 2004 Oct 5 (UTC)

In capitals? I doubt that. Anyway, an encyclopaedia is not just for the petit bourgeois intelligentsia. It is for the broad masses of the proletariat and peasantry. In any case this is a very inadequate article which I will have a go at rewriting when I have time. Adam 11:58, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * You think? Google apparently has been the deciding factor in a lot of cases. I had to live with it for reconnaissance satellite versus spy satellite, so guess what. It applies to everyone. And listen to you get all Marxist on us! I can only assume you're doing it for effect. -13:52, 2004 Oct 5 (UTC)

It doesn't apply to those who insist on accurate usages. Adam 01:35, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Heh. That's exactly what I was trying to do. COMINTERN is at least as accurate as Communist International. Wikipedia rules are for everyone. -Joseph (Talk) 01:55, 6 October 2004 (UTC)

The entry is total rubbish at present. No use to anybody and terribly unbalanced. This was an incredibly important body for much of its history. I've not the time to begin a proper rewrite at present but I will map out a rough structure that will allow the entry to be rerwritten in easy chuncks taking into consideration its history. I would also suggest renaming Communist International as this was its proper name despite the common use of the abreviation Comintern. I would also suggest moving liusts such as the Twenty-One Conditions and lits of affiliated parties and so forth to their own entries. This will allow their reproduction in full without unbalancing this entry. Heres hoping these suggestions work for youse guys.

Jock Haston

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Communist International. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060913130539/http://www.indiana.edu/~ceus/u469week7a.htm to http://www.indiana.edu/~ceus/u469week7a.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:10, 17 October 2015 (UTC) –   Paine Ellsworth   put'r there  09:12, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Communist International. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928095230/http://www.revolutionary-history.co.uk/backiss/Vol3/No3/Melogran.html to http://www.revolutionary-history.co.uk/backiss/Vol3/No3/Melogran.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20121205060032/http://www.comintern-online.com/ to http://www.comintern-online.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:42, 11 August 2017 (UTC) –  Paine Ellsworth   put'r there  09:14, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 24 November 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Not seeing agreement here to return to the article title, "Comintern", so we will keep the present title for now. As usual with a no consensus decision, there is no prejudice toward future attempts to garner consensus for the portmanteau title. Happy Holidays to all! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth   put'r there 08:44, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Communist International → Comintern – Per WP:COMMONNAME: Google Ngram. Also per WP:CONSISTENCY: We have articles titled Anti-Comintern Pact, 1st Congress of the Comintern, List of delegates of the 2nd Comintern congress etc. Timmyshin (talk) 21:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. James (talk/contribs) 10:49, 2 December 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. — usernamekiran (talk)   17:38, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

 * Support - Google Ngram evidence convincingly supports Comintern. Comintern was also the article title until this undiscussed move in 2014. -Zanhe (talk) 23:43, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support as the common name. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 09:43, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Shortened forms like Comintern skew ngram results due to their overuse in texts, due to the tendency of writers towards brevity and repetition. Much like how FBI is in far greater use overall than the full name of the agency, but our article exists at Federal Bureau of Investigation because using the full name of the organization is clear, complete, and professional for WP purposes. -- Netoholic @  10:30, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair point, but Comintern is not an acronym like FBI, and it's more widely used also because of the infamous Anti-Comintern Pact, which is almost never called the Anti-Communist International Pact. We also have Category:Comintern, under which most articles use "Comintern". For the sake of common name and consistency, it's better to use Comintern, which is in any case the longstanding former title. -Zanhe (talk) 19:23, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

 * Oppose, per Netoholic. 'Comintern' is basically an abbreviation of 'Communist International', so it is essentially two variantions of the same, common name. My preference would be 'Third (Communist) International', but ok with the current title for now. --Soman (talk) 10:41, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Full names are better in cases like this for the same reason they are better for people. Srnec (talk) 04:39, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose, I feel that Communist International feels more encyclopedic in this case and that having Comintern bolded in an adjacent parenthetical in the lead sentence should be sufficient to orient those arriving from the relevant redirect page. And, FWIW, the Libray of Congress goes with a combination and marxisthistory.com leads with just "The Communist International" in the title – though the parenthetical was included with their entry in search results. If I wasn't pretty sure it would be contrary to 'official' present WP title styling best practices (for overlapping with disambiguation styling, I think), I'd suggest we use Communist International (Comintern) here as well. But as stated, I don't think that's presently a viable option. ––A Fellow Editor– 13:49, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Move back per Zanhe. A  better ngram also indicates about a 2:1 preference.  Sources use both terms.  Either is acceptable, so the undiscussed bold move should be reverted.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:10, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Comment: § Requested move above (from 30 June 2014) has a brief sparsely attended WP:Requested move that eventually followed from the unilateral move User:Zanhe linked to previously. It led to having Communist International as the current title.
 * Personally, I find that Comintern feels more familiar (ie common) to me, but I think fair argument could be made for Communist International having a more encyclopedic sensibility to it ...
 * Suggestion: Perhaps keep Communist International as the main title and then restyle the lead sentence from, "The Communist International, abbreviated as Comintern and also known as the Third International (1919–1943), was ...", to, "The Communist International (Comintern), known also as the Third International (1919–1943), was ...", so as give the briefer, perhaps more colloquial, version a bit more prominence (parenthetical, right next to the initial bold term, as has been done with abbreviated instances elsewhere ). --A Fellow Editor (talk) 20:19, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

 * Sounds reasonable. -- Netoholic @ 21:51, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

title: Talk:Communist International


text:
Rotterdam Philharmonic Orchestra

The Rotterdam Philharmonic Orchestra (RPhO; Rotterdams Philharmonisch Orkest) is a Dutch symphony orchestra based in Rotterdam. Its primary venue is the concert hall De Doelen. The RPhO is considered one of the Netherlands' two principal orchestras of international standing, second to the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra of Amsterdam. In addition to symphony concerts, the RPhO performs as the opera orchestra in productions at De Nederlandse Opera, as do other Dutch ensembles.

History
Several musicians founded the RPhO in 1918 as a private "Society of Professional Musicians for Mutual Cultivation of the Arts". It had paying members and the aim was to make music for personal pleasure without pursuit of gain. The first musical director was Willem Feltzer, who was the manager of two Rotterdam music schools. Alexander Schmuller succeeded Felzer as music director, for two years. In May 1930, Eduard Flipse was appointed principal conductor, and held the post until 1962. Under his stewardship, the amateur ensemble evolved into a professional orchestra. When Flipse took over from Feltzer and Schmuller, the orchestra was in poor shape both financially and artistically. However, Filpse had both managerial skills and musical vision. He established an "Instrument Fund" to raise funds for new instruments and other necessities, and the orchestra became known for its special attention to contemporary music, featuring the work of Dutch composers such as Johan Wagenaar, Willem Pijper and Alphons Diepenbrock.

A 1300-seat concert hall, the Doelen, was built in 1935, and the orchestra was rewarded by rising attendance numbers. When the Rotterdam City Council began to subsidize the orchestra, its problems seemed to be in the past.

On May 7, 1940 the orchestra played a concert of Bruch and Stravinsky in a celebration of Flipse's first ten years as conductor. In June 1940 Rotterdam was planning to celebrate its six hundredth birthday and the Rotterdam Philharmonic planned a special program. However, on May 14 Nazi Germany bombed Rotterdam and nearly completely destroyed it, thereby launching its occupation of the Netherlands which lasted for the duration of World War II. The Doelen was destroyed, as was a rehearsal facility, with most of the music library and all of the orchestra's instruments.

Despite the problems, the orchestra season finished according to plan, thanks to several other Dutch orchestras who gave concerts to raise money and helped with equipment and sheet music. The Koninginnekerk, one of the few churches that survived the bombing, became the new concert hall. During the occupation, the rules of the new Cultuurkamer, an organization meant to regulate the arts in the Nazi-occupied Netherlands, were severely restrictive and discriminatory. Every musician had to become a member of the Cultuurkamer, Jewish musicians had to be fired, and music by Jewish composers was banned, as was music from countries at war with Nazi Germany.

After the war, the orchestra lacked a permanent home until a new concert hall, also called the Doelen, was built in 1966. After Flipse retired as principal conductor in 1962, his successors were Franz Paul Decker (1962-1967) and Jean Fournet (1968-1973). In 1973, Edo de Waart became principal conductor, and served in the post until 1979. Under De Waart and David Zinman, who succeeded him as principal conductor from 1979 to 1982, the Rotterdam grew into an orchestra of international stature, making many recordings and successful international tours.

From 1983 to 1991, James Conlon was the RPhO's principal conductor. Jeffrey Tate succeeded Conlon, from 1991 to 1995. From 1995, Valery Gergiev served as principal conductor, and featured the orchestra in his Gergiev Festival presentations. Gergiev stepped down as principal conductor in August 2008, and subsequently took the title of eredirigent (honorary conductor) of the RPhO. He held this title until March 2022, when the RPhO terminated its artistic relationship with Gergiev, rescinded his title of eredirigent and discontinued its Gergiev Festival, following Gergiev's lack of denunciation of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

In December 2006, the orchestra voted unanimously to name Yannick Nézet-Séguin as their 11th Principal Conductor, as of the 2008–2009 season, with an initial contract of 4 years. In April 2010, the RPhO announced the extension of Nézet-Séguin's contract through 2015. In June 2013, the RPhO further extended his contract through the summer of 2018. In May 2015, the RPhO announced the scheduled conclusion of Nézet-Séguin's tenure as principal conductor at the end of the 2017–2018 season. Nézet-Séguin now has the title of Eredirigent with the RPhO.

In June 2016, Lahav Shani made his first guest-conducting appearance with the RPhO. On the basis of this concert, in August 2016, the RPhO unanimously elected Shani as its next chief conductor, effective with the 2018–2019 season, with an initial contract of 5 years. Shani is the youngest conductor ever to be named chief conductor of the RPhO. In March 2020, the RPhO announced the extension of Shani's contract as chief conductor through August 2026. In January 2023, the RPhO announced that Shani is to conclude his tenure as its chief conductor at the close of the 2025-2026 season.

Past principal guest conductors of the RPhO included Jirí Belohlávek, who held the title from the 2012–2013 season until his death on 31 May 2017. In May 2022, Tarmo Peltokoski first guest-conducted the RPhO. On the basis of this appearance, the RPhO announced the appointment of Peltokoski as its next principal guest conductor, effective with the 2023-2024 season, with an initial contract of 4 years.

The RPhO has made commercial recordings for such labels as Philips, EMI, BIS, and Deutsche Grammophon.

List of principal conductors

 * Willem Feltzer (1918-1928)
 * Alexander Schmuller (1928-1930)
 * Eduard Flipse (1930-1962)
 * Franz Paul Decker (1962-1967)
 * Jean Fournet (1968-1973)
 * Edo de Waart (1973-1979)
 * David Zinman (1979-1982)
 * James Conlon (1983-1991)
 * Jeffrey Tate (1991-1995)
 * Valery Gergiev (1995-2008)
 * Yannick Nézet-Séguin (2008–2018)
 * Lahav Shani (2018–present)

Discography

 * Frederica von Stade sings Mozart & Rossini Arias, conducted by Edo de Waart, Philips, 1976
 * Richard Strauss: Der Rosenkavalier, with Jules Bastin, José Carreras, Derek Hammonf-Stroud, Evelyn Lear, Frederica von Stade and Ruth Welting, conducted by Edo de Waart, Philips, 1977

title: Rotterdam Philharmonic Orchestra


text:
Battle of Dupplin Moor

The Battle of Dupplin Moor was fought between supporters of King David II of Scotland, the son of King Robert Bruce, and English-backed invaders supporting Edward Balliol, son of King John I of Scotland, on 11 August 1332. It took place a little to the south-west of Perth, Scotland, when a Scottish force commanded by Donald, Earl of Mar, estimated to have been stronger than 15,000 and possibly as many as 40,000 men, attacked a largely English force of 1,500 commanded by Balliol and Henry Beaumont, Earl of Buchan. This was the first major battle of the Second War of Scottish Independence.

The First War of Scottish Independence between England and Scotland ended in 1328 with the Treaty of Northampton, recognising Bruce as King of Scots, but the treaty was widely resented in England. King Edward III of England was happy to cause trouble for his northern neighbour and tacitly supported an attempt to place Balliol on the Scottish throne. Balliol and a small force landed in Fife and marched on Perth, then the Scottish capital. A Scottish army at least ten times stronger occupied a defensive position on the far side of the River Earn. The invaders crossed the river at night via an unguarded ford and took up a strong defensive position.

In the morning the Scots raced to attack the English, disorganising their own formations. Unable to break the line of English men-at-arms, the Scots became trapped in a valley with fresh forces arriving from the rear pressing them forward and giving them no room to manoeuvre, or even to use their weapons. English longbowmen shot into both Scottish flanks. Many Scots died of suffocation or were trampled underfoot. Eventually they broke and the English men-at-arms mounted and pursued the fugitives until nightfall. Perth fell, the remaining Scottish forces dispersed and Balliol was crowned King of Scots. By the end of 1332 he had lost control of most of Scotland, but regained it in 1333 with Edward III's open support. He was deposed again in 1334, restored again in 1335 and finally deposed in 1336, by those loyal to David II.

Background
The First War of Scottish Independence between England and Scotland began in March 1296, when Edward I of England ((r. 1272 – 1307)) stormed and sacked the Scottish border town of Berwick-upon-Tweed as a prelude to his invasion of Scotland. After the 30 years of warfare which followed, the newly crowned 14-year-old King Edward III was nearly captured in the English disaster at Stanhope Park. This brought his regents, Isabella of France and Roger Mortimer, to the negotiating table. They agreed to the Treaty of Northampton with Robert Bruce ((r. 1306 – 1329)) in 1328, recognising Bruce as King of Scots. The treaty was widely resented in England and commonly known as the turpis pax, "the cowards' peace". Some Scottish nobles, refusing to swear fealty to Bruce, were disinherited and left Scotland to join forces with Edward Balliol, son of King John I of Scotland ((r. 1292 – 1296)), who had been captured by the English in 1296 and abdicated.

Robert Bruce died in 1329 and his heir was 5-year-old David II ((r. 1329 – 1371)). In 1331, under the leadership of Edward Balliol and Henry Beaumont, Earl of Buchan, the disinherited Scottish nobles gathered in Yorkshire and plotted an invasion of Scotland. Edward III was aware of the scheme and officially forbade it, in March 1332 writing to his northern officials that anyone planning an invasion of Scotland was to be arrested. The reality was different, and Edward III was happy to cause trouble for his northern neighbour. He insisted Balliol not invade Scotland overland from England but turned a blind eye to his forces sailing for Scotland from Yorkshire ports on 31 July 1332. The Scots were aware of the situation and were waiting for Balliol. David II's regent was an experienced old soldier, Thomas Randolph, Earl of Moray, who was appointed to the role of guardian of Scotland. He had prepared for Balliol and Beaumont, but he died ten days before they sailed.

Prelude

Balliol's force was small, only 1,500 men: 500 men-at-arms and 1,000 infantry, the latter mostly longbowmen. He anticipated being joined by many Scots once he had landed. While they were underway, the Scots selected Donald, Earl of Mar, as the new guardian of Scotland, and so also regent for the young David. Mar was an experienced campaigner and a close blood relative to the young King David. He divided the large Scottish army: Mar commanded the part north of the Firth of Forth, while Patrick, Earl of March, commanded those to the south. Balliol had been in communication with Mar and hoped he would come over to his side with many of his troops. Knowing Mar to be commanding the troops on the northern shore of the firth, Balliol landed there, at Wester Kinghorn (present day Burntisland), on 6 August 1332.

While the invaders were still disembarking they were confronted by a large Scottish force commanded by Duncan, Earl of Fife, and Robert Bruce (an illegitimate son of King Robert the Bruce). The Scots attacked the part of the English force on the beach, but were driven off after a hard-pressed assault by the volleys of the English longbowmen and by their supporting infantry before Balliol and Beaumont's men-at-arms could get ashore.

Scottish accounts of the time dismiss their losses as trivial, while one English source gives 90 Scots killed, two give 900, and a fourth 1,000. One chronicle, the Brut, reports that Fife was "full of shame" at being defeated by such a small force. There is no record of the casualties suffered by Balliol's men. Mar withdrew his main force to the capital, Perth, amalgamated the survivors of Kinghorn and sent out a general call for reinforcements. Buoyed by their victory, Balliol and Beaumont's force completed their disembarkation and marched to Dunfermline, where they foraged, looted a Scottish armoury and then headed for Perth.

English approach
The Scottish army under Mar took up a position on the north bank of the River Earn, 2 mi south of Perth, and broke down the bridge. The Scots were enormously stronger than the English. Chronicles of the time give strengths of 20,000, 30,000 or – in seven cases – 50,000. The historian Clifford Rogers guesses they numbered something more than 15,000. Nearly all of the Scots were infantry. The English arrived on the south bank of the Earn on 10 August. They were in a difficult position: in enemy territory, facing an army of more than ten times their number in a good defensive position across a river and aware that the second Scottish army, under March, was moving towards them. The Scots were content to rest in their defensive positions, while planning to send a portion of their army on a wide outflanking manoeuvre the next day. Any attempt by the English to force the river would clearly have been foredoomed. The English may have been hoping Mar would desert to their cause, but he gave no indication of doing so. The two forces faced each other across the river for the rest of the day.

The Scots were so confident of victory that some started their celebrations that evening, according to a contemporary source "playing, drinking and making merry" late into the night. A guard was set by the broken bridge, but otherwise no precautions were taken against any action by the English. Realising they had no hope if they either retreated or remained where they were, the entire English force forded the river at an unguarded spot. Advancing in the dark, at about midnight they stumbled upon a Scottish camp and attacked it. Those Scots who were not killed or captured fled. The English believed they had overcome the main Scottish force, but were disabused at dawn when they saw the Scots advancing against them in two large bodies. This revelation demoralised the English, but according to the chronicles they were given heart by a stirring speech from one of their leaders.

The English arrayed themselves for battle on foot, except for 50 German mercenary knights who fought mounted. The other men-at-arms formed up in three tightly packed ranks with a fourth rank of pike-equipped ordinary infantry. The longbowmen were divided and assigned to each side of this central group. They were positioned where a valley narrowed as it entered hilly terrain. The infantry occupied the centre of this valley where it was about 600 ft wide with the archers on higher and rougher terrain on each side. The horses of the men-at-arms were kept to the rear.

Scottish attack

The Scots were still supremely confident and formed up in two large groups or battles – also referred to as schiltrons. These were tightly packed, deep, pike-armed formations. Mar suggested that the English be given the opportunity to surrender, so that they could have been ransomed – which would have raised a large sum. On seeing the English across the Earn, Bruce, who was in command of the leading schiltron, and who was aware, at least in part, of Mar's correspondence with Balliol, publicly claimed that this unopposed crossing was due to treachery by Mar. Mar denounced this as a lie and declared he would prove his loyalty by being the first to strike a blow against the English. Bruce claimed this honour for himself and the two Scottish schiltrons proceeded to race each other to come to grips with the English.

Bruce's schiltron, being already in the lead, won the race. But its headlong charge disorganised it and left the slower men behind. When it contacted the English only 800 men were still with Bruce, but they struck with such force that they drove the infantry in the English centre back nearly 10 yd. The English did not break, but turned their shoulders to the Scots, braced themselves and halted the Scottish onrush. The Scots in their haste had allowed themselves to be channelled by the terrain and all of them attacked the English men-at-arms in the centre, ignoring the longbowmen on the valley sides. Pushing back the English centre had the effect of exposing their flanks to these bowmen. The rest of Bruce's schiltron followed him into the valley, pressing their comrades in front of them forward against the English so strongly that the front ranks of neither force were able to use their weapons.

The Scots were either largely without helmets, or wore helmets without visors (face guards), for contemporaries noted that the English archers "blinded and wounded the faces" of those in the leading schiltron. Harassed by the longbowmen, the Scots on the flanks pressed closer to their main body, further compressing it and hampering the freedom of movement of its members. Mar's schiltron, which was also rushing towards the English, became disorganised due to its haste and was similarly channelled by the steep valley sides. They charged into the rear of Bruce's formation, causing chaos. The struggle continued from a little past dawn until after noon. In the centre of the Scottish mass the result was literally suffocating; men were pressed too tightly together to be able to breathe and any who lost their footing were trampled to death. Contemporary accounts speak of more than a thousand Scots being smothered without coming into contact with the English. One claimed that "more were slain by the Scots themselves than by the English. For ... everyone fallen there fell a second, and then a third fell, and those who were behind pressing forward and hastening to the fight, the whole army became a heap of the slain."

The English, being in a looser and less deep formation, had room to use their weapons more effectively, once they had withstood the initial onslaught. The survivors of Bruce's schiltron attempted to extricate themselves, adding to the confusion and making easy targets for the English men-at-arms. The chronicles record the English infantry having to climb over heaps of dead Scots to be able to strike at those still living. All the while, the longbowmen continued to shoot into the Scottish flanks. Eventually the Scottish resistance collapsed and they were routed. Several of the surviving Scottish nobles made their escape on horseback; the rest of the Scots fled on foot. The English men-at-arms mounted their own horses and pursued the Scots, hacking them down until sunset. The English then occupied Perth and set to work on improving its fortifications, against the anticipated arrival of March's army.

Casualties

Precise figures for the English dead are available: they lost 35 men-at-arms: 2 knights and 33 squires. Several accounts stress that not a single English archer was killed. The losses among the Scots are less certain, but all accounts agree they were very heavy. Mar and Bruce died on the field; as did 2 other earls, 14 barons, 160 knights and many less notable men. Of the contemporary accounts which estimate the number of Scottish dead, two English chronicles give more than 15,000. Two Scottish accounts record 2,000 or 3,000 dead, while a third specifies 3,000 "nobles" and "of other men an untold number". Most accounts refer to the Scottish dead lying in great heaps, some taller than a spear's length. The only high-ranking Scottish survivor was the Earl of Fife, who was captured and changed sides.

Aftermath
A week after the battle, March arrived outside Perth, having added the remnants of Mar's army to his own force. There was little he could do. Given that Balliol had defeated Mar in open battle, it would have been folly for March to assault him in a fortified town. Balliol had captured plentiful supplies of food in Perth and the ships which had landed his army defeated the Scottish navy, enabling food and reinforcements to be shipped in. In any event, before long the Scottish host had exhausted its own supplies, stripped the surrounding countryside of food and dispersed.

Balliol was crowned King of Scots at Scone – the traditional place of coronation for Scottish monarchs – on 24 September 1332. Within two months Balliol granted Edward III Scottish estates to a value of £2,000, which included "the town, castle and county of Berwick". Balliol's support within Scotland was limited and within six months it had collapsed. He was ambushed by supporters of David II at the Battle of Annan on 17 December. Balliol fled to England half-dressed and riding bareback. He appealed to Edward III for assistance. Edward III dropped all pretence of neutrality, recognised Balliol as King of Scots and made ready for war. After the defeat of the Scots at the Battle of Halidon Hill in July 1333 by the English Balliol was reinstated on the Scottish throne. He was deposed again in 1334, restored again in 1335 and finally deposed in 1336, by those loyal to David II. The Second War of Scottish Independence which had started with Balliol's invasion finally ended in 1357. The modern historian Ranald Nicholson states that Edward III copied the tactics used at Dupplin Moor – "all the men-at-arms dismounted, while archers were posted on either flank" – in the English victories at Halidon Hill and Crécy.

Location
Historic Environment Scotland has identified a site on Gaskmoor, which it suggests corresponds with the accounts in the chronicles. This is on the Dupplin plateau, south-east of Dupplin Loch, and 5 mi south-west of Perth. It points out that if correct

"The sides of the valley, and the narrowing of the valley, would have pushed the wings of the schiltrons into the centre, bunching the Scots and creating the deadly crush that appears to have been the main cause of the disaster. The steep slopes would have given a great deal of protection to the [English] from any flanking moves. The width of the valley would accommodate 500 or so dismounted men-at-arms, while the western end of the valley opens out; this is where the Scots would have started, and it would not have been immediately obvious that the topography was a funnel for them."

and concludes that this choice of terrain "is evidence of the tactical brilliance of the [English], who were battle-hardened veterans." Historic Environment Scotland added the battlefield to the Inventory of Historic Battlefields in Scotland on 21 March 2011.

title: Battle of Dupplin Moor


text:
Ramón del Valle-Inclán

Ramón María del Valle-Inclán y de la Peña (born in Vilanova de Arousa, Galicia, Spain, on October 28, 1866, and died in Santiago de Compostela on January 5, 1936) was a Spanish dramatist, novelist, and member of the Spanish Generation of 98. His work was considered radical in its subversion of the traditional Spanish theatre in the early 20th century. He influenced later generations of Spanish dramatists and is honored on National Theatre Day with a statue in Madrid.

Biography
Ramón María del Valle-Inclán was the second son of Ramón Valle-Inclán Bermúdez and Dolores de la Peña y Montenegro. As a child he lived in Vilanova and A Pobra do Caramiñal, and then he moved to Pontevedra in order to study high school. In 1888 he started to study law at University of Santiago de Compostela, and there he published his first story, Babel, at the Café con gotas magazine. He left his studies and moved to Madrid in 1890, where he wrote for various periodical newspapers such as El Globo, La Ilustración Ibérica or El Heraldo de Madrid.

He traveled to Mexico in 1892 to write for El Universal, El Correo Español and El Veracruza, before the following year returning to Pontevedra to write his first book, Femeninas (Feminine), published in 1895.

In 1895, he moved to Madrid again, working as an official at the Ministry of Public Instruction and Fine Arts. In Madrid he did some translations of José Maria de Eça de Queirós, Alexandre Dumas, Gabriele D'Annunzio, Jules Barbey d'Aurevilly, Paul Alexis and Matilde Serao. In spite of his economic difficulties, he started to have a name in the tertulias (literary gatherings) of many culturally significant coffeehouses in Madrid, such as Café Gijón, and to be noticed for his dandy attitude and his eccentric looks. His hot temper got him involved in various affrays. Because one of those, at Café de la Montaña in 1899, an unfortunate stick wound by writer Manuel Bueno caused one of his cufflinks to inlay in his arm. The wound produced gangrene, and Valle-Inclán had his arm amputated. That same year of 1899, he met Rubén Darío, and both of them became good friends. At that time, he published his first theater play, Cenizas (Ashes), and he started a very prolific literary period.

In 1907 he married the actress Josefina Blanco.

In 1910 he traveled for six months to various Latin American countries (Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay and Bolivia) escorting his wife on an acting tour.

In 1913 he returned to Galicia, and set his residence in Cambados. Then, after the death of his second son, he moved to A Pobra do Caramiñal.

In 1916 he published in the Cuban magazine Labor Gallega a poem in Galician language with the title of Cantiga de vellas (Son of old women), which is his most valuable contribution to Galician literature.

During World War I, he supported the allied army, visiting the front in various occasions as a war correspondent for El Imparcial.

In 1921 he traveled to México again, invited by the President of the Republic, Álvaro Obregón. There he participated in many literary and cultural events, and got conquered by the Mexican Revolution. On his way back to Spain, he spent two weeks in Havana, and two weeks in New York City. That same year, 1921, he was appointed President of the International Federation of Latin American Intellectuals.

He returned to Spain at the end of 1921, and there he started to write Tirano Banderas (Tyrant Banderas). He went back to Madrid in 1922, still inflamed by the spirit of the Mexican Revolution.

Since 1924 he showed his opposition to Miguel Primo de Rivera's dictatorship.

With the arrival of the Second Spanish Republic, he ran in the elections with the Partido Radical of Alejandro Lerroux, but he did not get a seat.

In 1932, Josefina Blanco filed for divorce. The same year, he was appointed Director of the Museum of Aranjuez and President of the Ateneo of Madrid. Also, the government of the Second Spanish Republic appointed him Curator of the National Artistic Heritage, but his confrontations with the Ministry because of the bad state of the palaces and museums under his direction forced his resigning. In 1933 he was the director of the Spanish Academy of Fine Arts in Rome, Italy.

He died in Santiago de Compostela, Galicia, Spain, on January 5, 1936.

Works
His early writings were in line with French symbolism and modernism; however, his later evolution took his works to more radical formal experiments. He despised literary realism and openly disregarded Benito Pérez Galdós, its most prominent Spanish representative. His political views, accordingly, changed from traditional absolutism (in Spain known as Carlismo) towards anarchism. This also caused him problems.

All his life he struggled to live up to his Bohemian ideals, and stayed loyal to his aestheticist beliefs. However, he had to write undercover for serialised popular novels.

Works by Valle-Inclán such as Divine Words (Divinas palabras) and Bohemian Lights (Luces de Bohemia) attack what he saw as the hypocrisy, moralising and sentimentality of the bourgeois playwrights, satirise the views of the ruling classes and target particular concepts such as masculine honour, militarism, patriotism and servile attitudes toward the Crown and the Roman Catholic Church. His dramas also featured irreverent portrays of figures from Spain's political past and deployed crude, obscene language and vulgar imagery in a mocking attack on theatrical blandness.

In addition to being politically subversive, though, Valle-Inclán's plays often required staging and direction that went far beyond the abilities of many companies working in the commercial theatre, often featuring complex supernatural special effects and rapid, drastic changes of scene. For this reason, some of his works are regarded as closet dramas.

Valle-Inclán also wrote major novels including the Tyrant Banderas (Tirano Banderas), which was influential on the Latin American 'dictator' novel (for example, I, the Supreme by Augusto Roa Bastos), although it was received with disdain by many Latin American authors. Rufino Blanco Fombona, for example, pokes fun of "the America of tambourine" ("la América de pandereta") of that novel where you could be in the jungle one day and the Andes the next. Some critics view him as being the Spanish equivalent to James Joyce; however, due to a lack of translations his work is still largely unknown in the English-speaking world, although his reputation is slowly growing as translations are produced.

Diego Martínez Torrón has studied and published El ruedo ibérico, the first annotated edition of this work, a lot of unpublished manuscripts of this work.

Plays

 * Cenizas. Drama en tres actos (1899)
 * El marqués de Bradomín. Coloquios románticos (1907)
 * Águila de blasón. Comedia bárbara (1907)
 * Romance de lobos. Comedia bárbara (1908)
 * El yermo de las almas (1908)
 * Farsa infantil de la cabeza del dragón (1909)
 * Cuento de abril. Escenas rimadas en una manera extravagante (1910)
 * Farsa y licencia de la Reina Castiza (1910)
 * Voces de gesta. Tragedia pastoril (1911)
 * El embrujado. Tragedia de tierras de Salnés (1913).
 * La marquesa Rosalinda. Farsa sentimental y grotesca (1913)
 * Divine Words-Divinas palabras. Tragicomedia de aldea (1919)
 * Farsa italiana de la enamorada del rey (1920)
 * Farsa y licencia de la Reina Castiza (2nd edition, 1920)
 * Bohemian Lights-Luces de bohemia. Esperpento (1920) (12 scenes)
 * Silver Face ''Cara de Plata. Comedia bárbara (1922)
 * ¿Para cuándo son las reclamaciones diplomáticas?  (1922)
 * Bohemian Lights-Luces de bohemia. Esperpento (2nd edition, enhanced, 1924) (15 scenes)
 * La rosa de papel. Novela macabra (1924)
 * La cabeza del Bautista. Novela macabra (1924)
 * Los cuernos de don Friolera. Esperpento (1925)
 * Tablado de marionetas para educación de príncipes (1926). Contains: Farsa y licencia de la Reina Castiza, Farsa italiana de la enamorada del rey, Farsa infantil de la cabeza del dragón
 * El terno del difunto (1926) (renamed as Las galas del difunto in 1930)
 * Ligazón. Auto para siluetas (1926)
 * La hija del capitán. Esperpento (1927)
 * Sacrilegio. Auto para siluetas (1927)
 * Retablo de la avaricia, la lujuria y la muerte (1927). Contains: Ligazón. Auto para siluetas, La rosa de papel, La cabeza del Bautista, El embrujado, Sacrilegio. Auto para siluetas
 * Martes de Carnaval. Esperpentos (1930). Contains: Las galas del difunto (El terno del difunto), Los cuernos de don Friolera. Esperpento, La hija del capitán. Esperpento

Prose

 * The Pleasant Memoirs of the Marquis de Bradomín – Sonatas: Memorias del Marqués de Bradomín
 * Spring and Summer Sonatas – Sonata de primavera y Sonata de estío (1904 and 1903)
 * Autumn and Winter Sonatas – Sonata de otoño y Sonata de invierno (1902 and 1905)
 * Flor de santidad (1904)
 * La pipa de kif (lyric poem) (1919)
 * Tyrant Banderas – Tirano Banderas (1926)
 * Mr Punch the Cuckold
 * The Lamp of Marvels

Film

 * 1948: L'Amore (second episode based on Flor de santidad)
 * 1959: Sonatas (based on Sonatas: Memorias del Marqués de Bradomín)
 * 1973: Flor de santidad
 * 1976: Beatriz (based on Beatriz y Mi hermana Antonia)
 * 1977: Divinas palabras
 * 1985: Luces de bohemia
 * 1987: Divinas palabras
 * 1993: Banderas, the Tyrant

title: Ramón del Valle-Inclán