Born in Virginia in 1784, Zachary Taylor was a soldier and landowner who played a key role in America’s westward expansion. After winning early fame during the War of 1812, Taylor spent the following decades commanding frontier outposts and occasionally suppressing Native American uprisings. He achieved national recognition for his victories in Texas and northern Mexico during the Mexican-American War. His fame led him to the White House, but he died 16 months later in July 1850 at a time when disagreements over slavery threatened to tear the Union apart.

Young Zack

Zachary Taylor was born on November 24, 1784 in Orange County, Virginia. He was born into one of the most prominent families in the state and his father Richard was a Continental Army officer during the Revolutionary War. In recognition of his service, Richard Taylor had been granted a large parcel of land near Louisville, Kentucky. When Zachary was eight months old, he accompanied his family to Louisville.

As a young child, Taylor was educated at home by his mother. He quickly learned to farm the land and would become a shrewd businessman. In 1808, at a time when the US Army was being expanded at a time of increasing tensions with Britain in the wake of the Chesapeake Affair, the 23-year-old Taylor received a commission as a first lieutenant in the Seventh Infantry Regiment.

After recruiting a company of around 80 men, Taylor sailed with them to New Orleans in April 1809 to report for duty. Serving under the command of the incompetent and corrupt Brigadier General James Wilkinson, Taylor was among the hundreds of men who fell ill in the summer heat. Taylor was granted extended leave to recuperate at his home in Louisville, where he married Margaret Mackall Smith in June 1810.

After returning to the army as a captain in early 1811, Taylor was given command of Fort Knox on the Wabash River in the Indiana Territory to protect American settlements from Native American raids. The posting lasted for a month until Taylor received orders to appear as a witness in one of several courts-martial involving General Wilkinson.

War of 1812

During Taylor’s absence from Indiana, on November 7, 1811 General William Henry Harrison defeated an Indian ambush at Tippecanoe Creek led by Tenskwatawa, the brother of the legendary Shawnee chief Tecumseh. Following the victory, Harrison sacked Tenskwatawa’s base of Prophetstown, encouraging the Native American tribes to seek closer relations with the British in Canada.

In March 1812, three months before the formal outbreak of the War of 1812, Taylor returned to Indiana to command the small garrison at Fort Harrison. In early September, when most of Taylor’s men weakened from disease, the fort was attacked by a party of indigenous warriors, who set fire to the blockhouse with all of Taylor’s supplies. Taylor kept his head and ordered his men to put out the fire and repair the defenses, causing the raiders to abandon their attack the following morning.

Taylor’s success marked the first American victory in the War of 1812 and led Tecumseh to abandon his raids on Indiana Territory and retreat north to join the British. Since the northwestern theater had calmed down, Taylor unsuccessfully lobbied for a transfer to the northeast around New York and Lake Ontario.

After participating in a series of minor pacification actions in Indiana in 1813, Taylor took command of American forces in the Missouri Territory in 1814. In early September, Taylor was encamped on Credit Island on the Rock River when he was attacked by a Native American force. Although Taylor managed to drive them out of the island, the appearance of a British artillery unit led him to withdraw with minor losses.

Old Rough and Ready

By late 1814, Taylor was frustrated that he was still only a brevet major, and in early 1815 he received a promotion to full major. However, the War of 1812 had already ended and Taylor was once again reduced to captain. He refused the commission and retired to Louisville, but was commissioned as a major in the Third Infantry Regiment within a year.

Between 1816 and 1818, Taylor commanded the garrison at Fort Howard in Green Bay, Wisconsin. He then returned to Louisville and was promoted to lieutenant colonel in April 1819. Following a series of frontier postings in the 1820s, Taylor saw action in the Black Hawk War in 1832, named after the chief of the Sauk Indians who led an uprising in April 1832 in response to American encroachments on tribal land.

Taylor, who had fought against Black Hawk at Credit Island, led a mixed force of regulars and militia under Brevet Brigadier General Henry Atkinson. After the militia suffered initial reverses, Taylor received orders to establish a base for supplies and reinforcements, enabling Atkinson to defeat Black Hawk in July.

In 1837, Taylor arrived in Florida with 1,000 men to participate in the Second Seminole War, which had already frustrated several American generals’ efforts. On Christmas Day 1837, Taylor launched a frontal attack against the Seminoles at Okeechobee. Although Taylor broke the enemy line and forced the Seminoles to retreat, the victory had been won at a significant cost, with over 150 casualties. The Seminoles registered only 11 killed and 14 wounded. Nevertheless, Taylor’s conduct at Okeechobee earned him promotion to brevet brigadier general and while his men bestowed upon him the nickname Old Rough and Ready.

Landowner and Slaveholder

In addition to his career as a soldier, Taylor was a landowner and property speculator who profited from America’s westward expansion. Beginning in the 1820s, the Taylor family had its primary residence in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Two of Taylor’s daughters died in infancy in 1820, shortly after the move to Louisiana.

At around the time of the Black Hawk War, Taylor’s 18-year-old daughter Sarah fell in love with the young Jefferson Davis, future president of the Confederacy. Taylor was adamant that his daughter would not become a military wife, but this did not prevent the couple from eloping in 1835. Three months later, Sarah died of malaria at 21.

Taylor’s wife Margaret often accompanied him to his various postings, and they remained in Florida until 1840 when Taylor was granted leave to return to Louisiana. In April 1842, while commanding the outpost at Fort Smith in Arkansas, Taylor acquired the Cypress Grove Plantation in Jefferson County, Mississippi along with its 81 slaves, a number which increased to above 100. Low cotton prices and regular flooding meant that the plantation was not profitable during Taylor’s ownership.

Mexican-American War

In June 1845, Taylor received orders to take a small force to Fort Jesup in western Louisiana. While this appeared to be a routine frontier posting that Taylor had been used to throughout his military career, his latest command had considerable political significance in the context of the annexation of Texas.

In 1836, American settlers in Texas secured independence from Mexico. The Texans were vulnerable to a counterattack by the Mexicans and sought assistance from the United States. American political elites were split on the prospect of annexing Texas, which contributed to sectional tensions over the expansion of slavery. The election of Democrat James K. Polk in 1844, a protégé of President Andrew Jackson, led President John Tyler to initiate the process of annexation on the eve of his departure from office in March 1845.

With the Texas legislature due to vote on annexation on July 4, 1845, Taylor was ordered to advance to the village of Corpus Christi on the bank of the Nueces River, within a strip of disputed territory between Texas and Mexico. Taylor only arrived at the end of July and proceeded to spend several months drilling his men while Polk attempted to negotiate a major land purchase from Mexico.

By 1846, it was clear that Mexico would not sell any land to the United States at any price. In March, Taylor advanced on Matamoros on the Rio Grande, encountering minimal Mexican resistance. Following a tense stand-off, a Mexican cavalry detachment crossed the Rio Grande and attacked an American patrol, leaving 16 dead. This action marked the outbreak of the Mexican-American War.

With fewer than 3,000 men under his command, May 8, 1846 Taylor repulsed a Mexican attack by General Mariano Arista at Palo Alto thanks largely to his light artillery, which inflicted heavy casualties on the enemy. After Arista withdrew on the morning of the 9th, Taylor overruled his subordinate officers by launching a pursuit. Taylor caught up with Arista at Resaca de la Palma and secured a decisive victory by capturing the Mexican guns on the Matamoros road and breaking the Mexican line.

Taylor’s victories over Arista earned him national fame, and President Polk gave him authority to make operational decisions at his own discretion. By mid-May, Taylor had occupied Matamoros, where he spent the next three months attempting to integrate some 8,000 enthusiastic but ill-disciplined volunteers into his army. In August Taylor advanced on Monterrey with 6,000 men and captured the city by the end of September.

Taylor’s capture of Monterrey won him promotion to major general, but his decision to agree a truce with the Mexicans to reorganize his exhausted army angered President Polk. Polk believed that Taylor’s occupation of northern Mexico would eventually force the Mexicans to the negotiating table, but by late 1846 he was persuaded to support a plan for General Winfield Scott to lead an amphibious landing at Veracruz and march on Mexico City.

Taylor was incensed when Scott helped himself to his best men for the landing at Veracruz. Although he received new reinforcements to replace some of the men Scott had taken, he had no more than 5,000 men when Mexican dictator General Antonio López de Santa Anna launched an offensive with a force three times larger.

On the suggestion of his subordinate General John E. Wool, Taylor occupied a strong defensive position at Buena Vista. Although the Mexicans made good progress in outflanking Taylor’s position on February 23, Taylor ordered Jefferson Davis’s Mississippi Rifles to stem the Mexican advance. Taylor’s artillery continued to play a major role in beating off the Mexican attack. Both sides had sustained heavy losses, and Santa Anna withdrew on the morning of the 24th and hurried back to Mexico City to confront General Scott.

Following Scott’s conquest of Mexico City in September 1847, the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American War with Mexico ceding more than 500,000 square miles of territory to the United States.

President

Although Scott had the glory of capturing Mexico City, Taylor emerged from the conflict as a national hero. Both men sympathized with the Whig Party, but while Scott signaled his presidential aspirations in 1839, Taylor did not become a serious presidential candidate until 1847.

Taylor’s candidacy was championed by Kentucky senator John Crittenden, a moderate Whig who was alarmed at the sectional tensions over slavery. The Whigs were dominant in the free states in the north, while the Democrats controlled the slave states in the south. While the Whigs had opposed the Mexican-American War, a military hero and southern slaveholder like Taylor on the Whig ticket would appeal to both north and south.

After formally declaring himself a Whig in April 1848, Taylor beat Scott and veteran statesman Henry Clay to the presidential nomination in June. To balance the ticket, New York’s Millard Fillmore was chosen as the vice-presidential nominee. Taylor defeated Democrat Lewis Cass of Michigan and was inaugurated as president on March 4.

Despite being a slaveholder himself, Taylor was opposed to the prospect of newly conquered territories of New Mexico and California becoming slave states. The population of California had increased rapidly following the 1849 Gold Rush. Taylor encouraged California’s application for statehood, but their draft constitution explicitly prohibited slavery, which ensured that it would be denied by the southern-dominated Senate. Taylor’s hopes for statehood for New Mexico were held up on similar grounds.

Taylor’s administration also faced a number of foreign policy challenges, including the British presence in the Caribbean. Both the British and Americans hoped to build a canal through Central America, and in February 1850, Taylor’s secretary of state John Clayton negotiated the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty which prevented either country building such a canal unilaterally.

Death and Legacy

With Congress deadlocked on California and New Mexico, a trio of veteran senators warned that the issue could break apart the Union. These were John C. Calhoun of South Carolina, a champion of southern states’ rights, Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, a liberal stalwart, and Henry Clay of Kentucky, the Whig veteran nicknamed the Great Compromiser.

In early 1850, Clay proposed a legislative package with provisions for the admission of California as a free state while leaving the question open in Utah and New Mexico, and a strengthened Fugitive Slave Act that would be enforced by federal agents. The latter was a major concession to the south, but Taylor refused to support it and insisted on immediate statehood for California.

With matters still unresolved in Congress, Taylor attended the ceremony of the laying of the foundation stone for the Washington Monument on July 4, 1850. In the sweltering summer heat, the 65-year-old president ate apples and cherries washed down with cold milk. Taylor was soon suffering from acute gastroenteritis, likely caused by contaminated food and drink as a result of Washington’s poor sanitation systems. His condition quickly deteriorated, and he died at 10:35pm on July 9.

Taylor’s successor Fillmore supported an initiative to break up Clay’s compromise package into five separate bills, all of which were passed by September 20. While the Compromise of 1850 temporarily resolved disagreements over slavery, it did not prevent the outbreak of Civil War a decade later.

Owing to his brief tenure in office, historians rate Taylor as a poor president. However, his biographer John Eisenhower credits Taylor for being a committed Unionist when many southern officers, including his own son Richard, would go on to break away from the Union.

North Korea’s assault unleashed an attack that caught the world off guard. The KPA smashed through the ROKA (Republic of Korea Army), forcing a retreat. The ferocity of the KPA’s (Korean People’s Army) Soviet style assault took Seoul in three days after crossing the 38th Parallel. The KPA sought to capture the port city of Pusan to prevent American reinforcements. 

The KPA’s Soviet-influenced tactics relied on shock, speed, and rapid penetration to sustain the attack. By 1950, numerous veteran North Koreans filled the infantry’s ranks, having fought in China’s Civil War or against Japan. Tough and experienced, these men made up the KPA’s core. The KPA led with heavy artillery bombardments, followed by T-34 tanks and attached infantry. Enemy stabilization was to be prevented.

Outnumbered and Outgunned

The outnumbered ROKA’s defenses fell apart. The KPA’s scale, skill, and speed proved surprising. The Americans activated the 24th Infantry Division, the closest (Japan) and only cohesive deployable force nearby. The first lightly armed American troops arrived in Pusan on July 1, 1950. Quickly organized into “Task Force Smith” with brutally simple orders: delay the KPA. 

At 7 AM on July 5, at the village of Osan, KPA T-34 tanks and infantry met Task Force Smith. American anti-tank weapons bounced off the behemoths. For seven hours, the outnumbered, poorly armed U.S. soldiers fought. Yet the KPA crushed the American roadblock, mission accomplished.

Lead Up to the Main Battle 

The KPA barely slowed at Osan, keeping to the Soviet-style constant-pressure doctrine. The 24th ID fought four more delaying actions between July 6 and 14. These battles sought to impede and inflict casualties. The buildup behind them at Pusan needed time.

By July 14, 1950, the battered regiments of the 24th ID arrived in Taejon. This rail and road logistics hub was critical to each side. For the Americans, further retreat risked disintegration, such was the beating received from the KPA. The five consecutive actions resulted in 4,000+ casualties, wrecked equipment, and the loss of experienced officers.

The 24th ID commander, General William F. Dean, understood this. Yet his orders remained the same: delay at all costs; force the KPA to deploy and hold. 

The Battle Begins

Dean organized the 24th ID battered regiments in Taejon. By now, companies numbered only 30 to 40 men, had no heavy weapons, and little ammunition. And with little respite, as two KPA infantry divisions and an armored brigade arrived on July 15.

On July 16, the KPA launched probing attacks on two sides. Their heavy tank-infantry assaults began grinding down thinly held American defenses. 

Additionally, KPA infantry started infiltrating that same night. These tough soldiers slipped in via irrigation ditches, rice paddies, courtyards, or through defensive gaps. This would be important the next day during the street fighting. Other KPA forces swung around Taejon, encircling the city.

From July 17 onward, combat intensified. KPA infantry and armor fought to enter the city, with the broken American defenses behind them. Tanks probed the edges. In return, U.S. units fought house to house, unaware of any comrades around them. The communications breakdown had begun. Over the next few days, Dean’s situation with the 24th ID grew more desperate. The fighting even sucked in rear unit cooks, drivers, and MPs. This desperation displayed the Americans’ disadvantage in men and firepower. 

The General Fights Back

In a rare occurrence, General Dean fought directly too. Not the armchair general type, Dean drove around Taejon. He pressed scattered units back into the fight, directing bazooka teams to ambush T-34s, even knocking out one himself. Dean’s efforts slowed the KPA’s advance into Taejon, which required more troops. Dean’s efforts kept the 24th’ ID evacuation routes open longer. 

On the morning of July 20, General Dean conceded defeat. KPA infiltrators, attacks on his flanks, plus KPA armor breaking into the city, meant imminent collapse. He ordered a retreat. The 24th ID, ordered to hold for two days, held for three. His outnumbered, exhausted soldiers attempted a fighting withdrawal.

The North Koreans kept the pressure on. Communications and cohesion dissolved; units became groups. The withdrawal became a route; hundreds were killed or missing. General Dean stayed behind in vain to keep routes open. The KPA captured him days later, the highest-ranking American officer taken prisoner. 

The North Koreans defeated the U.S. at Tajeon. Yet this can’t be seen as a failure. The 24th ID’s sacrifice bought time for the Pusan Perimeter. This battle made the tiring KPA pause yet creating more time. Pusan would be the KPA’s next objective.

War stories or documentaries usually speak of operations of great strategic value. Picture events like Big Week, Britain’s Dunkirk, or America’s island-hopping plan. Correct forecasting itself evolved into an operational power. Accurate weather predictions mattered for convoy movements, aircraft deployment

From the get-go, Germany and Britain (later the U.S.) realized the importance of weather. Both sides, especially the Allies, expended great effort to obtain good data. All deployed planes, ships, or established weather stations. All knew the critical importance of the Atlantic convoys. Should U-boat wolfpacks sink sufficient ships to the bottom, Britain’s fate was sealed.

The Allies invested in weather ships, university-trained meteorologists, and balloon-borne upper-air soundings. Occasionally, this led to opportunities their German counterparts missed.

The North Atlantic Weather Battleground

As far as bad places to fight go, the North Atlantic checks nearly every box. In this churning environment, freezing, thick Arctic air is pushed south to meet the warm, damp Atlantic air. As a result of this collision, the atmosphere’s instability increases. Huge days-long storms, thick fog, and incredibly rough seas form, making both navigation and protection for the Allied convoys challenging. 

Despite the North Atlantic’s volatile weather, German and Allied personnel tried to make correct predictions. These calculations affected factors that could spell success or doom for operations, especially early in the war. 

Factors influenced by these forecasts included:

• Concealment-Allied convoys could use storm fronts or fog to hide from marauding wolfpacks.
• Visibility-spotting the enemy first was critical.
• Aerial Sorties-bad weather grounded bombers and reconnaissance flights. Convoys and U-boats always benefited from an eye in the sky. 

Fighting for Data and Survival

From the war’s start in 1939, the Allies and Germany sent aircraft and weather ships, or built Arctic stations, hoping for a first crack at weather data. Deployed around Greenland, Iceland, and the Labrador Sea, each sought to predict early data such as storm tracks or sea states. The Allies, with their better resources, stationed weather ships at sea or flew long-range flights.

 After 1941, Germany’s weather-collection methods became covert. The Germans relied on secret stations built on Greenland, Svalbard, or Labrador. Aircraft or U-boats backed these efforts. Such efforts, however, came with a cost. Allied forces intercepted weather trawlers or destroyed Arctic bases. Top secret Enigma logs and transmission schedules fell into Allied hands. Now they could peer into Nazi efforts.

As mentioned, accurate forecasts improved Allied convoys. Employing storms as camouflage, planners directed convoys into storms. The rough conditions reduction detection by periscopes or hydrophones.

But obtaining surface and atmospheric data came with risks. The Allies deployed slow, lightly armed weather ships. In turn, these sometimes fell victim to U-boat attacks. For example, the U.S. Coast Guard USCGC Muskeget disappeared with all hands in September 1942. 

1943: Forecasting Helps a Defeat

By early 1943, weather forecasting reached a crescendo in the Allies’ favor. As the Allies knocked out Germany’s meteorological abilities, it also affected U-boat operations. Harsh storms radically altered U-boat tactics. 

As one U-boat or patrol line sighted a convoy, the captain radioed in the position, drawing in other hunters. Different harsh weather created different results. Thick fog nullified visibility, low pressure disrupted radio coordination, and sea states disrupted torpedo electronics or torpedo runs. With no way to coordinate, the wolfpack broke away due to bad weather.

The Allies successfully weaponized forecasting, exploiting this advantage. With more weather ships, balloons, and Arctic stations, forecasting became more reliable. 

The Allies shared weather data. This data became an operational advantage. When combined with carrier hunter-killer groups, long-range aircraft, and improved radio detection finding (HF/DF), the U-boats stood little chance. 

“Black May” in 1943 marked the Kriegsmarine’s first decisive U-boat defeat. The Allies sank 41 U-boats, some 25% of Germany’s operational fleet. Yet March 1943 proved to be the U-boats’ greatest month, sinking 131 ships. In May, U-boats sank only 49 ships, a more than 50% decrease. Germany recalled nearly all its U-boats; losses like this meant annihilation within only a few months.

Weather Forecasting’s Crucial Role

Forecasting the weather in any environment can be tough. In conditions like the North Atlantic, it’s much worse. In this campaign, coincidentally, World War II’s longest-running battle, forecasting, helped defeat the U-boats. While not glamorous, it played an important part. 

History often remembers World War II for its beachhead landings and setpiece battles. These seven American generals in the Second World War were not only effective commanders but also shaped the course of global history for the rest of the century and up to the present day. They became the 20th-century Argonauts, leaders who epitomized the theory of the Great Man and built the foundations of American hegemony.

1. George Marshall: The Architect of Victory and Peace

Born in 1880 in Pennsylvania, General George Marshall proved to be one of the most powerful men in uniform of any country during WWII. A veteran of the Philippine-American War and the First World War, he was a graduate of the Virginia Military Institute and a lifelong infantryman. Marshall had a talent for staffwork and organization and was nicknamed “the noblest Roman of them all” by Winston Churchill.

From September 1939 to November 1945, Marshall held the role of Chief of Staff of the US Army. On his watch, the US Army underwent the largest expansion in its history from 200,000 men to over 8,000,000 men. Additionally, he oversaw the rehabilitation of a force degraded by years of poor commanders and insufficient training, turning the army into a well-honed machine. His leadership ensured that the Americans had a smooth chain of command throughout the war.

After the end of the war, he was appointed Secretary of State by President Truman in January 1947 and oversaw the implementation of the Marshall Plan, the aid program to support postwar reconstruction in Europe. In 1953, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, becoming the only career Army officer ever to receive the honor. Upon his retirement, he was one of the world’s most distinguished military commanders and public servants, a military statesman and icon of American power.

2. Dwight D. Eisenhower: Supreme Allied Commander

Marshall could not do it alone; he needed competent subordinates to execute the Allied war plans. One of these subordinates became one of the most famous military commanders in history, possibly more so than Marshall himself. Dwight D. Eisenhower was ten years younger than Marshall grew up in Texas. When war broke out in 1939, he was a lieutenant colonel; by 1945, he was General of the Army (five stars) and the Supreme Allied Commander in Northwest Europe.

Eisenhower oversaw the invasion of North Africa, the landing in Sicily, the Normandy invasion, and the march into Germany. By the end of the war in Europe, he commanded 91 divisions from a polyglot mixture of countries, led by prickly personalities such as British Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery and General George Patton.

Eisenhower was not always considered the best tactician or battle manager. He lacked command experience of large numbers of men in a war zone. Where he excelled was the implementation of the strategy devised by the Western Allied leadership and his ability to command a force composed of men from so many different countries. Even when there were major disputes between commanders of different Allied countries, he ensured that they didn’t hinder the plan to crush the Germans.

After the war, he succeeded Marshall briefly as Army Chief of Staff, became the 1st Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, and served as a two-term president from 1953-1961. Like George Marshall, Eisenhower was a military statesman who left a lasting global legacy in uniform and as a civilian political leader.

3. Douglas MacArthur: The Brilliant Insubordinate

On the other end of the globe, General of the Army Douglas MacArthur, leading the Southwest Pacific Area Command, was also able to execute the Allied war plan against Japan, though with considerably more notoriety. MacArthur’s career was topsy-turvy. He had risen through the ranks, fighting in WWI and even served as Chief of Staff several years before Marshall did.

When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and invaded Southeast Asia in December 1941, MacArthur was serving as the commanding officer of the Philippine military before they were due to get full independence. He was recalled to active service right before the Pearl Harbor attacks and led the doomed defense of the Philippines before being ordered to withdraw to Australia.

MacArthur took command of his headquarters and led a series of offensives against the Japanese in New Guinea and the Solomon Islands before fulfilling his vow to return to the Philippines. He pursued an island-hopping strategy to bypass heavily defended Japanese islands, taking advantage of Allied control of the sea. By the end of the war, he was the Supreme Allied Commander in Tokyo and oversaw the postwar reconstruction of Japan.

However, his reputation for braggadocio and feuding with the White House led to his downfall. Despite the operational brilliance of his landing at Inchon during the Korean War, MacArthur’s tendency to challenge President Truman’s policy led to his dismissal. Despite his insubordination, MacArthur continues to be regarded as one of the most talented field commanders in American history.

4. George Patton Jr.: The Peerless Tank Commander

Like General Eisenhower, George Patton rose up the ranks rapidly in WWII from colonel in 1939 to four-star general in 1945. Unlike Eisenhower, Patton was a rambunctious, aggressive, controversial field commander who made his legend through his willingness to fight the enemy as much as possible and was disdainful of the other Allies during the war.

Born in 1885 in California, Patton was a veteran of the Mexico Expedition in 1916 and WWI. Unlike many other American generals, he was an experienced tank man, having commanded an armored brigade. This reinforced his sense of aggressiveness, leading him to drive his subordinates hard and insist that they lead their men from the front.

During the war, he commanded the II Corps in North Africa, the 7th Army in Sicily, and the 3rd Army in mainland Europe, where his aggressive instincts broke Germany’s formidable Siegfried Line. His command was marred with controversy; he slapped a shell-shocked soldier in the face, leading to his firing from the command of the 7th Army. He was later relieved of command from the 3rd Army after telling reporters he wanted to fight the Soviets.

Nonetheless, his reputation as a hard-driving officer ensured that he would be seen as a talented battlefield commander around the world. The 1970s movie Patton became a classic war film and a favorite of President Richard Nixon. While he was not as high ranking as the generals listed above, he was still one of the most well-known generals in military history.

5. Henry Hap Arnold: The Visionary of Global Air Power

The Second World War saw the rise of the use of mass aircraft in an offensive role independent from ground operations. While the independent US Air Force did not exist during the war, the US Army Air Force did operate as an independent force when conducting strategic bombing in Europe and Asia. The commander of the USAAF was General Henry Hap Arnold. Arnold was one of the first military pilots in history and learned to fly from the Wright Brothers in 1911. During WWI, he was responsible for converting civilian factories to produce thousands of planes and engines.

After taking over the USAAF in 1938, Arnold exhibited logistical mastery in transforming the force into a lethal tool that could shatter the enemy’s ability to make war. In 1939, the USAAF had 20,000 men and a few hundred planes. By the end of the war in 1945, it had over 2.4 million personnel and 80,000 aircraft. Arnold suffered from severe stress and had four heart attacks during the war, but he managed to continue in the role.

After the war ended, he lobbied heavily for the creation of the independent USAF, which came into being in 1947. In 1949, he was awarded the five-star rank of General of the Air Force to accompany his five-star General of the Army. He was considered one of the most ruthless air commanders during the war and became synonymous with the concept of strategic bombing.

6. Omar Bradley: The GI General and the Largest Field Command

As Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Eisenhower had three army groups under his command. The largest of these was the 12th Army Group of 1.3 million men under General Omar Bradley. This gave him the distinction of being the field commander to oversee the largest body of men in any American military formation to date. Bradley, whose calm demeanor and empathy for his men earned him the nickname the “GI General”, started the war as a staff officer at the Pentagon and ended it as one of the most prominent field commanders of any military during the war.

General Bradley took over command of the II Corps from General Patton and played a role in the destruction of the German and Italian forces in Tunisia. While he was initially Patton’s junior, he leapfrogged him as commander of the 1st Army in Normandy and then as commander of the 12th Army Group, which included Patton’s 3rd Army.

Bradley earned a reputation as a level-headed commander, overseeing the breach of the Siegfried Line, the counterattack in the Ardennes, and the crossing of the Rhine. After the war, he served as head of the Veterans Administration, Army Chief of Staff, and the 1st Chairman of the Joint Chiefs in US military history.

7. Curtis LeMay: The Ruthless Theorist of Strategic Bombing

General Curtis LeMay was the equivalent of Patton in the Army Air Force: a bombastic, aggressive commander who sought to use as much force against the enemy as possible. Unlike Patton, he lived to see much of the Cold War after his service as a commander in WWII.

General LeMay started the war as a Major and became a Major General by the end at a mere 38 years old. When he took over a bomb group in Britain, he devised the theory of the “combat box”, in which bombers flew as close to each other as possible to maximize the effect of their onboard machine guns. After commanding the 3rd Bombardment Division in 1943 in England, he transferred to the Pacific where Hap Arnold ordered him to take over the XX and XXI Bomber Commands.

America was bombing Japan ineffectually and LeMay sought to change that. On his watch, the US firebombed multiple Japanese cities, bringing home the war to the Japanese public. He also oversaw the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

This proved to be some of the most controversial acts of the war and earned LeMay a reputation as a ruthless commander.

After the war, he served as commander of Strategic Air Command, the Air Force Chief of Staff and the running mate for George Wallace’s segregationist presidential campaign in 1968. Like Arnold, he became one of the major architects of strategic bombing (so-called “bomber barons”) and a major proponent of air power.

Building American Hegemony

America has always had military commanders known for their competence and ruthlessness: Winfield Scott, William T. Sherman, Norman Schwarzkopf, and others. However, the generals that oversaw America’s effort to defeat the Axis Powers became legends akin to the most famous rockstars of the 20th century. These men understood the use of hard power as a tool of diplomacy and how their efforts could lead America to becoming a superpower.

The US Army started WWII with very limited resources, poor training, and a lack of confidence. Thanks to the efforts of these men, and many others, the army was transformed into one of the most powerful armies ever seen in human history. That is not to say that they were flawless. Many of them showed poor judgement in certain areas of command and morality. However, they were able to overcome whatever flaws they had to ensure Allied victory in the Second World War and facilitate American leadership in the postwar world.

The extinction of the Rurikid dynasty in Russia at the end of the 16th century sparked a 15-year period of political turmoil known as the Time of Troubles. During this period, Russia suffered a disastrous famine, the enthronement of a pretender of uncertain origins, unpopular aristocratic rule, and military intervention by Poland and Sweden, which encouraged the formation of patriotic Russian militias that liberated Moscow and restored order with the election of Mikhail Romanov as tsar in 1613.

The Extinction of the Rurikids

The Time of Troubles came about as a result of the extinction of the main Rurikid line—the Grand Princes of Moscow, who claimed descent from the Viking chieftain Rurik—in 1598. This had much to do with Tsar Ivan IV, better known as Ivan the Terrible, who had consolidated his power by executing rival claimants from his extended family.

Ivan the Terrible’s intended successor was his eldest son, Tsarevich Ivan Ivanovich. It is generally accepted that the tsarevich died in November 1581 after an altercation with his father, who chastised Ivan’s wife for not being suitably dressed while pregnant. When the tsarevich intervened on behalf of his wife, the tsar struck his son with his staff in a fit of rage. A famous painting by Ilya Repin depicts the tsar cradling the bloodied head of his mortally wounded son in a display of remorse.

When Ivan the Terrible died in 1584, he was succeeded by his surviving adult son, Fyodor Ivanovich. Nicknamed Fyodor the Bellringer for his piety, the new tsar may have had a mental disability and certainly lacked interest in state affairs, leaving the business of government in the hands of his minister Boris Godunov, the brother of his wife Irina.

When Fyodor became tsar, there was only one other possible successor from the Rurikid line. Fyodor’s half-brother, Tsarevich Dmitry, was born in 1582, but since his mother, Maria Nagaya, was Ivan IV’s sixth wife, the marriage was considered illegitimate by the Orthodox Church. Boris Godunov had them sent to the faraway town of Uglich, where Dmitry was found dead in 1591. While a delegation from Moscow concluded that the child died in a freak accident, it was rumored that Boris was responsible.

Boris Godunov

During the 16th century, the Russian state had tripled in size, and the military expenditure to support this expansion placed a significant tax burden on peasants. The exploitation of the peasantry, combined with population growth, high inflation, and a colder climate caused a series of famines at the turn of the 17th century.

As Tsar Fyodor’s regent, Boris restored order to state administration, albeit at the expense of making powerful enemies among leading Russian aristocrats known as boyars. Meanwhile, Boris’s efforts to address the economic challenges by enserfing peasants—restricting their movement to prevent the further dwindling of the tax base—did little to arrest the economic decline. This gave peasants even greater incentives to run away and become Cossacks on Russia’s southern frontier. Boris’s economic policies not only worsened the conditions of the peasantry but also reduced the status of the lower gentry, who served as militiamen for the tsarist army.

When Tsar Fyodor died childless in January 1598, marking the extinction of the Rurikid line, Boris was the obvious candidate to succeed to the throne. While his rivals amplified rumors of his involvement in the Uglich tragedy, Boris prevailed and was crowned in September.

As an excellent administrator and effective diplomat, Tsar Boris temporarily ended costly wars with Russia’s neighbors, but his reign was overshadowed by the Great Famine of 1601-1603. While he responded energetically by making state grain reserves available to hungry peasants at low prices, he struggled to overcome speculators who manipulated grain prices by buying up the supply. The famine killed around two million people, or just under a third of Russia’s population.

False Dmitry

The Great Famine—now understood to have been caused by global cooling following the eruption of the Huaynaputina volcano in Peru in February 1600—ruined the tsar’s reputation among his subjects. God-fearing Orthodox Russians believed that God was punishing Russia for choosing an illegitimate and sinful tsar, leading many to conclude that Boris had indeed murdered Tsarevich Dmitry.

Nevertheless, Tsar Boris did not face a major threat to his rule during the famine. The Russians still needed a tsar, and the alternative candidates were equally illegitimate. This was until 1604 when a young man claiming to be Tsarevich Dmitry invaded Russia at the head of a small army consisting of Cossacks and Polish soldiers.

When “Dmitry” emerged in Poland-Lithuania in 1603, King Sigismund III of Poland saw an opportunity to turn a rival state into an ally. Upon hearing the news, Boris claimed that the young man was a dangerous runaway monk named Grigory Otrepyev. While few people genuinely believed that the young man was Dmitry, it was enough for the anti-Godunov coalition in Russia to have an alternative candidate who could convincingly present himself as a prince of the Rurikid line.

After Dmitry crossed into Russia in October 1604 at the head of 4,000 men, several cities in southern Russia declared in his favor. On December 21, the rebel army defeated a much larger tsarist force near Novgorod-Seversky (now Novhorod-Siverskyi in Ukraine). Dmitry’s ranks swelled by the day, but a month later, he was defeated at Dobrynichi and barely escaped capture.

Rather than effectively pursuing the pretender, the tsarist forces allowed him to recover and carried out atrocities against the civilian population in regions that had supported Dmitry, while a large tsarist army fruitlessly besieged Kromy near Oryol, some 200 miles south of Moscow.

The tsarist cause was fatally weakened with Boris Godunov’s death on April 13. Although the boyars in Moscow initially swore allegiance to Boris’s 16-year-old son, Fyodor II, the defection of senior tsarist commanders Pyotr Basmanov and Vasily Golitsyn from the siege camp at Kromy proved decisive in bringing about the downfall of Fyodor II on June 11. On June 20, the deposed Tsar Fyodor and his mother were killed in captivity. The same day, the pretender entered Moscow in triumph and was welcomed as the new tsar.

The Fall of the Pretender

Dmitry was crowned tsar on July 21, becoming the first and only individual in Russian history to be raised to the throne by popular rebellion. Aside from the killing of the Godunovs and the banishment of Godunov’s ally Patriarch Job, the new tsar was magnanimous towards his foes. When the ambitious boyar Vasily Shuisky attempted to seize the throne for himself, Dmitry briefly exiled him and recalled him to the boyar council within a matter of months.

While Dmitry was rumored to have sworn allegiance to King Sigismund, offering to convert Russia to Catholicism and to cede large tracts of land to Poland, he took no steps to do so in power. However, his tolerance of Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and other religious groups caused some discomfort among the Orthodox faithful. Dmitry’s relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church deteriorated in late 1605 when he planned to marry the Polish princess Marina Mniszech. To the dismay of senior Orthodox clergy, Dmitry supported his bride’s refusal to convert to Orthodoxy. This amplified rumors that he was a secret Catholic.

Following his recall to the capital, Vasily Shuisky continued plotting to remove the tsar. He decided to strike on the occasion of Dmitry’s wedding in May 1606, shortly before the tsar planned to leave on a campaign against the Crimean Tatars.

Despite warnings of a plot against him, Dmitry took few precautions. On May 17, Shuisky spread rumors that the Polish wedding guests were intending to murder the tsar and all the Russians in Moscow. While an enraged mob stormed the Kremlin and hunted down the Poles, a group of conspirators broke into Dmitry’s quarters. The tsar attempted to escape out of a window but stumbled and fell, enabling the conspirators to catch up to him and kill him.

Tsar Vasily

Vasily Shuisky quickly moved to seize power and denounced the late tsar as an evil sorcerer and imposter. The dead tsar’s mangled body was initially put on public display before being cremated, after which the ashes were supposedly fired from a cannon towards Poland. Vasily hastily arranged his coronation as Tsar Vasily IV for June 1 before conveying the real Dmitry’s body to Moscow for burial and veneration as a saint.

After Shuisky’s opponents on the boyar council appointed his rival Filaret Romanov as the patriarch of Moscow, Tsar Vasily purged the council and appointed Metropolitan Hermogenes of Kazan as the new patriarch. The elderly Hermogenes proved an energetic ally to Vasily and helped him secure his hold on Moscow.

In the Russian countryside, Dmitry’s supporters claimed that he had miraculously escaped assassination once again and was still alive. Southern Russia once again rose up in rebellion in Dmitry’s name. By fall, rebel commander Ivan Bolotnikov relieved the siege of Kromy and occupied Oryol. By October, rebel columns led by Bolotnikov and Istoma Pashkov were laying siege to Moscow. However, the rebel commanders had fallen out, and elite tsarist forces under Vasily’s nephew, Mikhail Skopin-Shuisky, crushed the rebels on December 2.

Bolotnikov retreated to Kaluga and defeated besieging forces in early 1607 before falling back on Tula. Vasily personally led a large army to besiege Tula, and the tsarist army captured the city in October after diverting the waters of the river Upa. Despite Vasily’s promises to spare his life, Bolotnikov was killed in secret, and many of the rebels rallied to the banner of a man who claimed to be the resurrected Tsar Dmitry.

This new pretender, known to history as False Dmitry II, established his camp at Tushino to the northwest of Moscow and besieged the capital for the next 18 months. Filaret Romanov arrived in Tushino and was reconfirmed as patriarch of Moscow, while Marina Mniszech “recognized” her husband.

Although the rebels surrounded Moscow almost completely, the actions of rebel soldiers in the countryside inspired popular uprisings on behalf of the tsar. In the meantime, Prince Skopin-Shuisky led a force of Swedish mercenaries to defeat the rebels northwest of Moscow, and “Dmitry” was forced to leave Tushino in December 1609.

A Polish Tsar?

As a result of the agreement between Sweden and the Shuiskys, Russia came to serve as a new front for the Polish-Swedish War of 1600-1611. In September 1609, King Sigismund led a Polish army to besiege Smolensk while False Dmitry II rallied new support south of Moscow. The anti-Shuisky boyars considered offering the throne to Sigismund’s son Władysław on condition that he would convert to Orthodoxy.

Tsar Vasily’s cause was undermined by the unexpected death of Mikhail Skopin-Shuisky in April 1610, and it was widely believed that the tsar had murdered his popular nephew to prevent him from challenging his throne. On July 4, 1610, a Polish army decisively defeated a Russian force at Klushino.

The defeat encouraged Shuisky’s enemies to depose him two weeks later and imprison him in a Kremlin monastery. With Polish troops heading towards Moscow, a council of seven boyars headed by Fyodor Mstislavsky formally offered the crown to Władysław.

The Polish commander Stanisław Żółkiewski invited senior Russian dignitaries, including Filaret Romanov, Vasily Golitsyn, and the former Tsar Vasily, to the Polish siege camp at Smolensk on the pretext of negotiating the terms of Władysław’s accession. However, upon their arrival, Sigismund informed the boyars that he intended to rule Russia in his own right. When the Russians refused, they were all taken prisoner and escorted to Poland. Polish troops continued to attack Russian towns, and the council of seven eventually invited the Poles to occupy Moscow to restore order.

Minin and Pozharsky

The Polish occupation of Moscow was naturally unpopular with most Russians, and Patriarch Hermogenes was arrested for denouncing the treason of the seven boyars. Most of False Dmitry II’s supporters were also opposed to Polish intervention, and the pretender’s murder by a member of his entourage in December 1610 encouraged a united front against the Poles.

Patriarch Hermogenes was still able to write secret letters encouraging the townsfolk of Nizhny Novgorod to rise up, while the nobleman Prokopy Lyapunov organized a militia against the Poles in early 1611. After the militia attacked Moscow in April 1611, the Poles were restricted to the city core, while the suburbs were burned to the ground.

The fall of the Shuisky regime and the Polish occupation of Moscow encouraged Swedish troops to secure the submission of Novgorod in June 1611. Even King James I of England considered sending troops to north Russia to secure the trading routes through Archangelsk.

The unity of the Russian militia received a bitter blow when Lyapunov was murdered by Cossacks. The Cossack leader Ivan Zarutsky assumed effective command and championed the cause of the young Ivan Dmitrievich, the posthumous son of False Dmitry II and Marina Mniszech. These efforts were opposed by the Nizhny Novgorod militia led by the butcher Kuzma Minin, who joined forces with the minor aristocrat Dmitry Pozharsky, an opponent of Zarutsky.

Financed by the townsfolk in the Volga region, who had continued to conduct profitable trade throughout the Time of Troubles, Minin and Pozharsky organized the Second National Militia to challenge not only the Poles but Zarutsky, who had recently eliminated a third False Dmitry who emerged in northwestern Russia. From his base at Yaroslavl, Pozharsky attracted many Cossacks from Zarutsky’s ranks.

A New Dynasty

During the summer of 1612, the Second Militia’s prospects improved as the Poles and Zarutsky clashed repeatedly to the west of Moscow, with both sides sustaining heavy losses. In July, Zarutsky was abandoned by his ally, Dmitry Trubetskoy, who joined forces with Pozharsky. However, Trubetskoy was conscious of being a higher-ranking aristocrat and resented being under Pozharsky’s authority.

At the beginning of September, when the Polish commander Jan Karol Chodkiewicz led a relief force to attack Pozharsky’s army besieging Moscow, Trubetskoy remained on the sidelines. However, most of his Cossacks joined the battle and helped Pozharsky achieve victory.

Trubetskoy and Pozharsky soon came to an agreement in which Trubetskoy was appointed nominal commander-in-chief of the militia even though Pozharsky and Minin remained in charge. In early November, the national militia successfully liberated Moscow and forced the Polish garrison to evacuate the city. An interim government nominally led by Trubetskoy was installed while the Assembly of the Land was summoned to elect a new tsar.

The delegates were initially deadlocked, and Trubetskoy’s own candidacy was opposed by Pozharsky and the boyars. The Romanov family, who had supported the first two false Dmitrys before joining the seven boyars, proposed the 16-year-old Mikhail Romanov, son of the imprisoned Patriarch Filaret. While Trubetskoy and Pozharsky opposed the Romanov candidacy, a body of Trubetskoy’s cossack delegates declared in his favor, and Mikhail was elected tsar on February 7, 1613.

While rival boyar families were not enthusiastic about Mikhail, they believed that they could control him via the boyar council. While Mikhail’s position on the throne was initially precarious, Romanov propagandists moved to cover up the family’s association with the pretenders and the Poles, and the tsar’s agents quickly silenced anti-Romanov voices.

During the early years of his reign, Mikhail summoned the Assembly regularly to coordinate reconstruction efforts, but following Filaret’s return from captivity in 1619, the tsar’s father became the effective ruler of Russia until his death in 1633. The Romanov dynasty continued to rule Russia for three centuries until the 1917 Revolution.

Legacy

The Time of Troubles was an incredibly traumatic period of Russian history that has reverberated through the centuries. During the 19th century, Boris Godunov became one of the most famous tragic figures in Russian drama, firstly with Alexander Pushkin’s 1825 play Boris Godunov, which in turn inspired Modest Mussorgsky’s 1872 opera Boris Godunov.

When Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812, Tsar Alexander I made reference to Minin and Pozharsky as he rallied the Russian people to resist the invader. In 1818, a few years after Russia’s victory over Napoleon, a statue of Minin and Pozharsky was unveiled in Red Square, celebrating the militia leaders who liberated Moscow in the 17th century.

In 1815, the Italian court composer Catterino Cavos wrote a two-act opera, Ivan Susanin, based on the legendary tale of an old man who is supposed to have given his life to save Mikhail Romanov from Polish soldiers. Mikhail Glinka’s 1836 opera A Life for the Tsar on the same subject, renamed Ivan Susanin during the Soviet period, is considered Russia’s first national opera.

When Russia experienced a similar period of political turbulence and economic crisis at the beginning of the 20th century with the First World War, the Revolutions of 1917, and the Russian Civil War, opponents of the Bolshevik regime labeled the period as the krasnaya smuta or “Red troubles.”

In contemporary Russia, the Time of Troubles is used to justify the need for a strong ruler who can prevent anarchy and disorder. In 2005, Vladimir Putin’s government instituted a national holiday known as the Day of National Unity on November 4, marking the anniversary of the liberation of Moscow from Polish occupation in 1612.

A popular Red Army song began as follows:

“The White Army and the Black Baron
Are preparing to restore to us the tsar’s throne,
But from the taiga to the British seas,
The Red Army is the strongest of all!”

Many myths surround General Pyotr Wrangel. Famous for wearing a black Cossack uniform,  this charismatic commander played a major role in the Russian Civil War. He did not actually attempt to restore the Romanovs. Even after his defeat, the Soviets considered Wrangel a threat and may have plotted his unexpected death.

A Powerful Family

Born into a famous family of Baltic German origin in Lithuania in the Russian Empire on August 27, 1878, Baron Pyotr Nikolayevich Wrangel had aristocratic blood running through his veins.

His ancestor, Carl Gustaf Wrangel, led Swedish forces during the Thirty Years War and in the Second Northern War. The Wrangel family’s Latin motto, Frangas, non flectes (“You can break, but you can’t bend”), would represent Pyotr Wrangel’s life.

After graduating from St. Petersburg’s Mining Institute, Wrangel worked as an engineer, but his heart remained with the military. When the Russo-Japanese War broke out, Wrangel signed up as a volunteer. He received multiple awards, including the Order of St. Anna for bravery.

Before World War I, Wrangel changed careers by graduating from the Nikolaev Military Academy in Moscow. Next, he joined the Russian Army General Staff while finishing a course at the Officer Cavalry School. This strong affinity for the military set a defining course for the rest of Wrangel’s life.

Rising Star

In 1914, Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s assassination sparked a European powder keg. After the Russian Army’s mobilization, Colonel Wrangel led the Life-Guards Cavalry Regiment in a daring attack on an enemy battery in East Prussia. With his horse shot out from under him and suffering from a concussion, Wrangel led his men to victory on foot. Tsar Nicholas II awarded Wrangel the Order of St. George, making him the first officer to receive this military award for bravery during World War I.

Wrangel distinguished himself as a courageous commander for the rest of the war, participating in the successful Brusilov Offensive against Austria in 1916. Now a major general in the cavalry, Wrangel successfully screened the infantry’s retreat after a failed Russian offensive in the summer of 1917. Meanwhile, revolution loomed, threatening Wrangel’s army and his family.

The Coming Storm

After the February Revolution, the Russian Imperial Army began to disintegrate. Over the next several months, desertions increased and workers’ unrest intensified.

In October 1917, the Soviets led a coup that ushered in the Bolshevik Revolution. The Soviets came to power with the slogan “Bread, Peace, and Land,” promising to end the war with the Central Powers and give confiscated property to the people.

At Supreme Command Headquarters, Wrangel planned to raise a volunteer army to continue fighting Germany. When he realized his commander-in-chief had no intention of resisting the Bolsheviks, Wrangel headed south, where an anti-Soviet army started gathering.

Arrest and Escape

The October Revolution forced the general and his family to move to Yalta. But the situation in Crimea became more dangerous. Gangs of Bolshevik soldiers and sailors patrolled the streets. They broke into houses, helping themselves to cash, jewelry, and other valuables and dragging people before revolutionary tribunals.

One morning, Wrangel woke to loud voices, stamping feet, and slamming doors. As the general sat up in bed, six sailors, swathed in machine-gun cartridges and carrying rifles, rushed into the room.

Two sailors held him at gunpoint, shouting: “Not a muscle, you’re under arrest.”

The sailors hauled Wrangel onto a ship flying a red flag anchored in the harbor. Most interrogations ended the same way. In the water below their feet lay hundreds of drowned victims of summary Soviet trials.

An aristocrat and former tsarist general who openly wore his officer’s shoulder straps on the street in a move that almost got him killed, the baron represented everything the Bolsheviks hated.

His interrogation took place in a cell where a revolutionary chairman named Vakula asked the reason for his arrest.

“Probably because I am a Russian general,” Wrangel replied. “I know of no other guilt.”

The chairman turned to his wife, Olga Wrangel, who had accompanied the baron, and asked why they arrested her.

“I am not arrested,” she clarified. “I just want to be with my husband.”

The Baroness’ calm behavior evoked unusual sympathy among the tribunal.

An astonished chairman told Wrangel, “Not everyone has such wives, and you owe your life to your wife.”

He ordered the general’s release on the spot.

Unlike tens of thousands who disappeared under the Bolsheviks, Wrangel had a lucky escape. He moved to Miskhor, where he lived under a fake passport, avoiding the ongoing wave of raids and arrests.

After the Germans seized the area, Wrangel traveled to Ukraine, where he tried to join Hetman Pavlo Skoropadsky’s government. Having been installed as the leader of a nominally independent Ukraine by the German authorities, Skoropadsky’s government teetered on the brink of collapse. Wrangel therefore decided to join Anton Denikin’s Volunteer Army in September 1918.

Denikin gave him a frigid welcome. Due to his arrest, Wrangel could not participate in the brutal Ice March, which took the Volunteer Army south during the first Kuban Campaign. This meeting foreshadowed future tensions between the two men.

The Black Baron vs the Red Army

Despite frosty relations with Denikin, Wrangel had a reputation as one of the best cavalry commanders in the former imperial army. With a force primarily made up of Kuban Cossack horsemen, Denikin desperately needed a good cavalry general who could relate to the separatist-minded Cossacks.

One of Wrangel’s first actions during the Russian Civil War included taking the city of Stavropol back from the Bolsheviks. In December 1918, Denikin promoted him to lieutenant general.

By 1919, Wrangel began to push back against Denikin’s strategy. He argued that they should join forces with Admiral Aleksandr Kolchak’s troops moving toward the Volga and throw their forces into the fight to take back the critical town of Tsaritsyn (later renamed Stalingrad).

Denikin, feeling threatened, rejected Wrangel’s proposal. Instead, he insisted on defeating the Soviets in the Donbas first. This decision may have proved a fatal mistake.

If the Volunteer Army had joined the battle with the Reds during Kolchak’s Volga Offensive, they could have defeated the Bolsheviks in the Volga region. The Red Army would have had to withdraw troops from Siberia, relieving pressure on Kolchak’s front and enabling him to throw troops into combat at Tsaritsyn. Dividing and conquering the Red Army may have prevented the collapse of Kolchak’s eastern front and the downfall of the Omsk Siberian Provisional Government.

By this time, Wrangel distinguished himself as one of the prominent leaders of the White movement. A popular commander, he also had a reputation as a strict disciplinarian who punished violence and robbery among his troops. In contrast, he faced a ruthless Bolshevik commander named Joseph Stalin. During the second siege of Tsaritsyn (September–October 1918), Stalin clashed with Leon Trotsky, disobeyed orders, and illegally seized supplies sent through Tsaritsyn for the Red Army. Vladimir Lenin refused to tolerate his insubordination and recalled Stalin to Moscow.

On June 30, 1919, Wrangel captured Tsaritsyn in the most successful operation of his career. Vastly outnumbered and using only cavalry units, Wrangel defeated the Soviets at “Red Verdun” and took tens of thousands of prisoners.

March on Moscow

The conquest of the Donbas failed to strengthen the anti-Bolshevik cause. Instead, the campaign brought a largely antagonistic proletarian population under White control. Leon Trotsky’s attack through the Donbas proved fatal for the Volunteer Army. Although the area had rich steel and coal resources, the Whites did not control its military industry. The Volunteer Army, having failed to join Kolchak, proved unable to stop the admiral’s defeat later that year.

Denikin also overestimated the Reds’ defeat at Tsaritsyn. Ignoring the logistical issues his overstretched forces would face, Denikin issued his famous “Moscow Directive.” While aimed at capturing the capital, the Moscow Directive lacked any strategic details. Instead, the White Army marched in spread formation in a single direction. Each corps simply received a roadmap to Moscow.

Wrangel objected. He called the Moscow Directive a “death sentence.” He advised Denikin to strike at Moscow from the shortest possible route, transferring his main forces from Tsaritsyn without waiting for it to surrender.

Denikin refused to listen to Wrangel’s advice. Instead, he split his forces, sending a significant part of the Volunteer Army to capture Kyiv and right-bank Ukraine, a division of strength that dangerously diluted the main march to Moscow.

Wrangles With Denikin

Ultimately, the Moscow Directive failed because Denikin divided and stretched the Volunteer Army too thin across a key section of their front. The Whites also failed to mobilize enough Ukrainian peasants to support their campaign. Unable to concentrate his forces or defend his supply lines, Denikin’s offensive bogged down beyond Oryol, some 200 miles south of Moscow. In contrast, the Red Army mobilized the peasant population. With their chance to take the Soviet capital lost, the Volunteer Army retreated south.

After the Moscow disaster, Wrangel went public with his disagreement with Denikin. He issued a report criticizing Denikin’s strategy and blaming him for the Whites’ defeat. When copies of this report circulated among senior officers, many agreed.

This act came at a cost. In February 1920, Denikin dismissed Wrangel for his outspoken criticism. Facing defeat, Denikin then initiated a disastrous evacuation at Novorossiysk in March. Authorities failed to provide enough ships to evacuate an estimated 100,000 troops, in addition to civilians, fleeing the Red Army. The botched evacuation left thousands of soldiers and refugees behind. In the aftermath, the Bolsheviks executed 60,000 people who could not escape. It is considered the single largest massacre of the Russian Civil War.

A New Command

In April 1920, Denikin resigned. At a meeting of the Military Council, several officers nominated Wrangel to take his place. While not everyone, including Wrangel, agreed that subordinates should elect their commander-in-chief, a shout went up: “Long live General Wrangel!”

Denikin responded by appointing Wrangel commander of the Armed Forces of South Russia. Wrangel accepted the position with the words: “I have shared the glory of victories with the army and I cannot refuse to drink with it the cup of humiliation.”

By now, the Allies, who had funneled resources to the Volunteer Army despite official bans from getting involved in the Russian war, refused to supply further food, weapons, or supplies. Despite this blow, most of the generals voted to keep fighting.

One of Wrangel’s first acts as general was to rename the Volunteer Army the Russian Army. Meanwhile, an amphibious landing via the Black Sea and an advance through southern Ukraine in April met stiff resistance by the Red Army and collapsed.

A Model State

Setbacks in the North Caucasus and Ukraine pushed the Russian Army back toward Crimea. Wrangel used the peninsula as his base to establish law and order, reorganize the army, and create a model anti-Soviet state.

Under Wrangel’s administration, shops opened, postal services operated, and trains ran again. Despite these social and economic strides, the overall war effort kept deteriorating. The British withdrew aid and began negotiating with the Bolsheviks. Wrangel knew millions of pounds’ worth of supplies had been frittered away on Denikin’s army. But after Wrangel cracked down on corruption, foreign aid stopped.

As head of the anti-Soviet government in Crimea, Wrangel rolled out a more liberal social and political policy than Denikin entertained.

“I am trying to make life possible in Crimea, at least on this little patch,” Wrangel announced. “To show the rest of Russia: you have communism there, that is, hunger and emergency, and here…order and possible freedom are being established. No one is strangling you; no one is torturing you—live as you lived before.”

The Baron decided to avoid another march on Moscow. Instead, he concentrated on creating a model state characterized by democracy, economic stability, workers’ rights, and agrarian reforms. He also advocated for broad Ukrainian autonomy.

One of these laws transferred most of the landowners’ land to the peasants but held the government responsible for reimbursing the landowners. The problem was that this reimbursement exceeded the land value due to rampant inflation. If the imperial government had passed this law before 1917, it might have prevented the Revolution. Compared to the Soviets’ sweeping promises, most peasants had little incentive to join the Whites now.

For a time, Wrangel created a model state intended to make the citizens of “Sovdepia” envy them.

The outbreak of the Polish-Soviet War bought the anti-Bolsheviks some valuable time. Taking advantage of the Red Army’s troop diversion, Wrangel launched a cavalry attack to break out of the peninsula. His tactical combination of horses, tanks, airplanes, and armored trains resulted in a resounding victory that defeated Dmitry Zhloba’s cavalry units and captured 9,000 prisoners. Wrangel’s combined arms tactics anticipated those employed in future wars.

Last Stand

The anti-Bolshevik state in the Crimea only lasted six months.

In October 1920, the Red Army dealt the Russian Army a fatal blow at the Soviet bridgehead at Kakhovka on the left bank of the Dnieper. Meanwhile, the Polish Army overpowered the Red Army near Warsaw that autumn. Although the Polish Army could have marched on Moscow, Józef Piłsudski refused. Neither Wrangel nor Piłsudski supported each other in the past, and Wrangel had not recognized Polish independence. As a result, the Polish-Soviet truce in October 1920 sealed the fate of anti-Bolshevik Crimea.

While the French government recognized Wrangel’s Government of South Russia, the lack of internal resources and external aid proved fatal for the White movement. Without coal, oil, military supplies, or food resources, it became only a matter of time before the Russian Army collapsed under the onslaught of the victorious Red Army.

Flight From Crimea

In November 1920, the besieged White forces braced themselves for attack. Five Red Army columns combined to strike the exhausted Russian Army during the Perekop-Chongar Operation. Determined to prevent Wrangel from maintaining his foothold in Crimea, Lenin ordered his commanders to wipe the Russian Army off the map.

As winter came on, an unequal fight began. The Whites had only 41,000 infantry and cavalry, who fought on foot due to a lack of horses, and 213 artillery pieces. In contrast, the Soviets employed a force of 200,000 troops, 40,000 cavalry, 17 armored trains, and 98 artillery pieces.

The White defensive line clung on despite overwhelming enemy forces. In the early hours of November 11, 1920, the Red Army crossed the frozen Syvash Marsh in a surprise attack and broke through the Russian Army’s defenses at Perekop. Under cover of predawn, the White Army fell back to the sea to avoid annihilation.

With fate staring him in the face, Wrangel tried to ensure that this evacuation did not mimic Denikin’s disastrous attempt.

After the Perekop breakthrough, Wrangel appealed to the people: “The Government of the South of Russia considers it its duty to warn everyone about the severe trials that await those arriving from within Russia…The government advises all those who are not in immediate danger from enemy violence to remain in the Crimea.”

Many people decided to stay. Tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians subsequently succumbed to the Red Terror which the victorious Soviets dealt out after conquering Crimea. Still, Wrangel managed to evacuate 145,693 people on 126 ships from the ports of Yalta, Sevastopol, and Feodosia. This number included 50,000 soldiers, army officials, civilians, and 6,000 wounded. The ships transported the refugees to the Gallipoli Peninsula and the Greek island of Lemnos.

Despite its limitations, Wrangel’s evacuation avoided mass panic, demonstrated greater organization, kept the core of the Russian Army together, and shipped about 100,000 more people to safety compared to the previous evacuation attempt.

An Opponent in Exile

Life for refugees on Lemnos was hard. They had no resources, no passports, and no country.

Wrangel landed in Constantinople, where he organized the army for the next two years. In 1922, Wrangel founded the Russian All-Military-Union to unite and support 100,000 military émigrés and continue a political and psychological struggle against Soviet power.

The Black Baron’s strong reputation in the émigré community and his ability to successfully lead troops meant that the Soviets kept trying to discredit or destroy him.

Sickness or Murder?

In 1924, Wrangel emigrated to Belgium where he worked as an engineer. Now the man who once faced down the Bolsheviks on the battlefield feared only one thing: poisoning.

As it turned out, his fears may have been justified.

During the 1920s, the Soviets ramped up their espionage activities in Europe. The next few years witnessed an increase in former White émigrés-turned-Soviet-spies and double agents. This resulted in the kidnapping, disappearance, and murder of several high-profile anti-Bolshevik leaders.

Things took a turn in March 1928 when Wrangel’s orderly, Yakov Yudikhin, asked Wrangel to take in his refugee brother. The baron agreed.

As it turned out, this “brother” was a sailor on a Soviet ship.

When the sailor left on March 8, the general fell suddenly and violently ill. At first, it seemed like a winter cold, accompanied by a high fever, stomach pain, and coughing. Doctors could not agree on a diagnosis. Doctor Weiner diagnosed the baron with intestinal issues. Meanwhile, Ivan Aleksinsky thought Wrangel had influenza. Three days later, three doctors admitted the situation looked more dire than they initially realized.

An analysis revealed that the baron’s lungs were riddled with Koch’s bacilli. The general grew worse daily. He began to hallucinate. Imagining himself back on the battlefield, he tried to get up, directed military operations, and gave endless orders.

After suffering for over a month, General Baron Pyotr Nikolayevich Wrangel died on April 25, 1928. The Black Baron’s sudden death convinced his family and some later historians that an OGPU agent used poison to infect him with a fast-acting bacteria. He died just six months before the discovery of penicillin. For the hundreds of emigrants at his funeral, Wrangel’s death seemed like the end of their hopes to restore their motherland.

Always With Honor

It’s no secret that Wrangel was a strict commander who balanced courage and a sense of honor with military expediency.

While he was a monarchist, the baron believed Russia needed an elected, democratic form of government. He created a short-lived model state based on democratic principles and agrarian reform.

In exile, the general fought for his soldiers’ welfare and waged an ideological war against the Soviets. The Black Baron’s reputation as arguably the most competent anti-Bolshevik commander made him a formidable opponent until his death.

Elizabeth Woodville, also known as the White Queen, was a formidable figure in history. Though she was not born into nobility, Woodville’s status did not deter Edward IV, who fell in love with and secretly married her. A wife, mother, and queen consort, she navigated a court that disliked her, took refuge in Westminster Abbey twice during the turbulent years of the Wars of the Roses, and fought to save her family’s claim to the throne. Her daughter, Elizabeth of York, would go on to marry King Henry VII and establish the Tudor dynasty, while two of her sons would disappear under mysterious circumstances.

The White Queen’s Early Life

Born in 1437, Elizabeth Woodville was the eldest daughter of Richard Woodville, 1st Earl Rivers, and Jacquetta of Luxembourg, Duchess of Bedford. Her parents’ marriage was “scandalous” at the time, due to the fact that the Duchess, a wealthy widow and a member of King Henry VI’s extended family, decided to marry for love.

Richard was a knight who came from a modest family, having also served as a squire for Jacquetta’s deceased husband. They married in secret without permission from the royal family, a stipulation the couple ignored. The court was furious at Jacquetta for marrying “beneath” her, and the couple were fined a thousand pounds and stripped of their lands. Later, they received a royal pardon and had their lands restored to them.

Elizabeth grew up at Grafton Regis in Northamptonshire, England, alongside her 13 brothers and sisters in a respectable household. She was known for her beauty and had many suitors even from a young age. Her father’s career flourished under King Henry VI, and eventually, he was granted the title of Baron Rivers, thereby elevating him to nobility.

Jacquetta was an influential figure at court and formed a close bond with Queen Margaret of Anjou, wife of King Henry VI, serving in various roles for the Queen. They were loyal supporters of the Lancastrian cause.

A Fortuitous Meeting

Elizabeth’s family became entangled in a violent upheaval that became known as the Wars of the Roses, a series of civil wars fought between the Houses of Lancaster and York for the English throne. This period of English history was later named from the supposed badges of the contending Houses: the white rose for York and the red rose for Lancaster.

The Woodville family sided with the Lancastrian King Henry VI and Queen Margaret of Anjou. In 1452, Elizabeth married a Lancastrian knight by the name of Sir John Grey. The couple had two sons together before Grey was killed less than ten years later, defending the House of Lancaster at the Second Battle of St. Albans in 1461. As the Yorkist cause grew, the widow Elizabeth and her sons were forced to return to Grafton Regis while their lands were seized by the Crown.

However, the return home proved fortuitous for Elizabeth as she was introduced to King Edward IV of the House of York while he was hunting in the area. Edward, who had defeated King Henry VI’s forces in 1460, fell in love with Elizabeth’s beauty and charm and started a hidden romance that eventually led to a secret marriage on May 1, 1464. A year later, on May 26, 1465, Elizabeth was crowned in Westminster Abbey in a lavish coronation ceremony.

Elizabeth Woodville: Queen Consort of England

Though Edward and Elizabeth were happily married, the royal court was furious with their marriage. Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, also known as “the Kingmaker,” was particularly angry as he had been secretly creating an alliance with France that would involve Edward marrying a French princess.

As queen consort, Elizabeth’s family’s status grew in prominence and prestige. Her siblings and children benefited from the advantageous marriage, further angering the court. With Elizabeth’s father and her first husband being staunch Lancastrians, many members of the House of York disapproved of her union with King Edward IV and resented Elizabeth. Despite this, Edward and Elizabeth remained married and had ten children together, securing the York lineage.

However, the rift between the Earl of Warwick and Edward IV continued to grow, causing “the Kingmaker” to switch alliances to the House of Lancaster. He allied himself with George, Duke of Clarence, Edward IV’s brother, who accused Elizabeth and her mother of practicing witchcraft. The two even led a revolt and fled to France.

Warwick’s new allegiance to the Lancastrian Queen Margaret of Anjou felt personal to Elizabeth, as her father and brother both were executed at the hands of Warwick in 1469 after the Battle of Edgcote. In October 1470, Edward was deposed and Henry VI ascended the throne for a second time. Edward was forced to flee the country while Elizabeth and their daughters were left at the Tower of London.

One cold night in October of that same year, Elizabeth secretly fled the Tower with her family, including her mother, and claimed Sanctuary at Westminster Abbey. The Abbey was a chartered sanctuary for political figures, traitors, and felons, giving them immunity from justice within its walls and houses nearby. Thomas Millyng, the Abbot of Westminster, cared for the royal family, including Edward V, who was born and baptized while in Sanctuary.

Warwick was defeated a year later at the Battle of Barnet, and Edward was restored to the throne in April of 1471. Elizabeth and her family left the Abbey once her husband regained the throne. Later, Elizabeth would commission the construction of the chapel of St. Erasmus, which adjoined the Lady Chapel at Westminster Abbey, though it was later demolished by Henry VII.

A Scorned Woman

Elizabeth once again was scrutinized and her status was in peril when her husband Edward IV died in 1483, making Elizabeth a widow for the second time. The court planned to usurp her power and her son’s right to be king. Briefly, her son became King Edward V, but this was short-lived due to his uncle Richard of Gloucester, King Edward IV’s younger brother, who seized Edward V and took him to the Tower of London.

Elizabeth and her family once again found sanctuary at Westminster Abbey, though her other son, Richard, Duke of York, was forced to join his brother Edward V in the Tower of London. With the two boys imprisoned in the Tower, Richard of Gloucester could claim the throne. However, he first had to accuse Elizabeth of engaging in a bigamous marriage with Edward IV, thus making her two sons illegitimate heirs to the throne, in order to gain favor from the public for his rightful kingship. The rumors worked, and Richard of Gloucester was crowned King Richard III on June 26, 1483.

Elizabeth was subsequently stripped of her lands and title of Dowager Queen and was then referred to as “Dame Elizabeth Grey.” Whilst in sanctuary, Elizabeth learned that her two sons in the Tower had died, presumably murdered by their rivals. The two boys became known in history as the “Princes in the Tower.” Grieved by the death of her children, Elizabeth became determined to get revenge.

Advantageous Political Alliances

Elizabeth found herself in an alliance with Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham, and Margaret Beaufort, the mother of Henry Tudor, the future King Henry VII. They worked together to make sure that Henry Tudor, a direct descendant of Edward III, would claim the throne.

The conspirators created a plan to unite the families, bringing an end to the fighting and establishing one powerful royal family line. Therefore, Elizabeth and Margaret agreed that Henry and Elizabeth’s eldest daughter, Elizabeth of York, heiress to the House of York, would marry. In December 1483, Henry Tudor swore an oath, agreeing to the plan.

Elizabeth and Margaret continued to plot behind the scenes as Elizabeth and her daughters were allowed back at King Richard III’s court. Henry Tudor, exiled in France, made his first attempt to invade England in 1483, though he was unsuccessful due to a storm. In August of 1485, however, Henry and his army arrived in Wales and began to march to London, amassing a large number of followers who joined his army.

A New Era

Henry Tudor’s army met Richard and his supporters in Leicestershire, and a conflict ensued in what would become known as the Battle of Bosworth Field. On August 22, 1485, the Lancastrians secured a victory over the House of York. This battle was significant as King Richard III died on the battlefield, ensuring that Henry Tudor would become king which ushered in the Tudor dynasty. After decades of conflict, the Wars of the Roses were finally over. Henry Tudor was crowned King Henry VII and married Elizabeth of York.

Elizabeth Woodville was named the Dowager Queen. Her titles were restored, though she had to submit to Lady Margaret Beaufort’s prominence and power. Eventually, the Dowager Queen moved to Bermondsey Abbey, where she spent the final years of her life in quiet solitude. On June 8, 1492, she died and was buried at Windsor Castle next to her second husband, King Edward IV.

Legacy of the White Queen

Elizabeth Woodville’s legacy is tied to her role in shifting the English monarchy toward the Tudor era. Her choices and alliances shaped the course of English history. She found herself at the center of the conflict between the Houses of Lancaster and York, with her crown taken away and then restored, and two of her children presumably murdered at the hands of her opponents. She was forced to take sanctuary at Westminster Abbey and hide her children away from danger.

Yet, she was also able to use her political prowess to secure an alliance that would ultimately lead to her daughter becoming the head of a new dynasty in England. The Tudor dynasty saw the reign of the infamous King Henry VIII, and the current royal family is distantly connected to the Tudors through Queen Margaret of Scotland, who was the grandmother of Mary, Queen of Scots, and the sister of King Henry VIII.

Elizabeth Woodville’s life reflected the volatility and complexity of noble and royal women’s roles in late medieval England—balancing personal ambition, family loyalty, and political survival.

The Hôtel des Invalides in Paris was founded by King Louis XIV as a soldiers’ retirement home. While it continues to serve this function to the present day, the complex is also home to the Museum of the French Army as well as two churches. The Dome Church of the Invalides, originally Louis XIV’s Royal Chapel, is best known as the location of Napoleon’s tomb. However, the Dome Church and the adjacent Cathedral of Saint-Louis-des-Invalides serve as the final resting place for dozens of famous French soldiers besides Napoleon himself.

1. Henri de La Tour d’Auvergne, Viscount of Turenne

Henri de la Tour d’Auvergne, Viscount of Turenne, was born in 1611 into a distinguished French noble family. His father, the Duke of Bouillon, was a Marshal of France, and his mother, Elizabeth, was the daughter of William the Silent, Prince of Orange, who launched the Dutch revolt against the Spanish Habsburgs in 1568.

As a Huguenot, Turenne began his military career in Dutch service and became a captain in 1626 at the age of 15. He transferred to the French Army as a colonel in 1630 and distinguished himself at the siege of La Mothe in the Duchy of Lorraine in 1634. Following the French intervention in the Thirty Years War, Turenne successfully relieved Turin in 1640 and conquered Roussillon, Spain, in 1642.

After being promoted to Marshal of France in 1643, Turenne led a key flank attack against the Bavarians at the Battle of Freiburg in August 1644, gaining the strategic initiative for the capture of Philippsburg from Imperial forces. His invasion of Bavaria in 1646, alongside Carl Gustaf Wrangel’s Swedish forces, forced Bavaria to make peace.

While the Peace of Westphalia ended the Thirty Years War in 1648, the policies of King Louis XIV’s regent, Cardinal Mazarin, provoked a civil war in France known as the Fronde. In 1649, Turenne joined the rebellion but reconciled with Mazarin in 1651 and commanded the Royal Army’s efforts to suppress the rebels, who were allied to Spain. He recaptured Paris in 1652, and in 1654, he defeated a large Spanish army besieging Arras. Turenne’s victory at the Battle of the Dunes on June 14, 1658, near Dunkirk paved the way for the end of the Franco-Spanish War (1635-1659).

After Louis XIV assumed control of the government following Mazarin’s death in 1661, Turenne was promoted to Marshal General of France. During the latter third of the 17th century, French policy was determined by Louis XIV’s efforts to gain control of the Spanish inheritance following the expected death of the sickly King Charles II of Spain. In 1667, Turenne’s army overran the Spanish Netherlands, though Louis was forced to give up most of his gains after the Dutch and English sided with Spain against France.

In 1672, France went to war with the Netherlands. Turenne reached Amsterdam before his progress was checked by the opening of the dikes and the flooding of the surrounding countryside. Following back-and-forth campaigns in 1673 and 1674 against Imperial forces around the Rhineland, Turenne was killed by a cannonball at the Battle of Salzbach on July 27, 1675, at the age of 64. He was initially buried at the Basilica of Saint-Denis, but in 1800, Napoleon transferred his remains to the Invalides.

2. Sébastien Le Prestre, Marquis of Vauban

Sébastien Le Prestre, Marquis de Vauban, is widely regarded as one of the greatest military engineers in history. Born in 1633, Vauban began his military career fighting in the Fronde rebellion against Louis XIV but joined the Royalist Army after being captured in battle. He was recognized as a skilled engineer, and in 1655, he was appointed Royal Engineer.

As a result of the Franco-Spanish War of 1635-1659 and other conflicts in the Low Countries, France acquired a number of towns in Flanders, including Dunkirk and Lille. Vauban was responsible for fortifying these towns, and he did so by constructing trace italienne (Italian-style) star fortresses. These types of fortifications first appeared in 15th-century Italy as a response to developments in artillery technology. The low profiles were more resistant to cannon shots, and the angular bastions eliminated any blind spots for the garrison, exposing attackers to interlocking fields of fire.

Vauban was appointed Commissioner General of Fortifications in 1677, and during his career, he was responsible for the design and construction of over 300 sets of fortifications. Twelve groups of Vauban’s fortifications in France were collectively added to the UNESCO World Heritage List in 2008.

While Vauban is best known for the construction of fortifications, he was also an accomplished siege leader. In June 1673, he supervised the successful siege of Maastricht during the Franco-Dutch War (1672-1678), and in June 1684, he secured the capitulation of Luxembourg from the Spanish garrison. Vauban refortified Luxembourg and turned the city into a formidable fortress nicknamed the Gibraltar of the North.

During the War of the Spanish Succession, the English commander, the Duke of Marlborough, preferred to defeat French armies on the field rather than resort to costly sieges of Vauban’s fortresses. However, despite Marlborough’s great victories at Blenheim in 1704 and Ramillies in 1706, Vauban’s chain of border fortresses helped secure the French frontier and prevented an invasion of France. He was made Marshal of France in 1703 and died in 1707. He was buried near his estate at Bazoches. After his grave was destroyed during the French Revolutionary Wars, in 1808, Napoleon ordered his heart to be reburied in the Dome Church of Les Invalides.

3. Claude Joseph Rouget de Lisle

Although he served in the French Army for a decade between 1784 and 1793, Claude Joseph Rouget de Lisle is not known for any exploits on the battlefield but rather as the composer and writer of La Marseillaise, the French national anthem.

Despite his fame as the composer of the famous revolutionary anthem, Rouget de Lisle was actually a royalist. Born at Lons-le-Saunier in eastern France, Rouget de Lisle was a captain stationed in Strasbourg in April 1792 when the War of the First Coalition broke out. At this point, King Louis XVI was still a constitutional monarch, though he was effectively under house arrest in the Palace of the Tuileries.

Rouget de Lisle was a musician of some ability. On April 25, 1792, he was asked by the Mayor of Strasbourg to compose a song to rally the men of the Army of the Rhine, who were defending France’s eastern frontier from invasion. He duly wrote the words and music to The Battle Song for the Army of the Rhine and dedicated it to its commander, Marshal Nicolas Luckner.

The stirring song soon spread around the country and became particularly popular among revolutionary soldiers from Marseille. A battalion of Marseille volunteers who participated in the storming of the Tuileries of August 10, 1792, to overthrow the constitutional monarchy popularized the song in Paris, inspiring the name La Marseillaise.

Rouget de Lisle refused to swear an oath of loyalty to the new republican government and was dismissed from service in 1793. Since La Marseillaise came to be associated with revolutionary bloodletting, Napoleon Bonaparte asked Rouget de Lisle to write a new anthem in 1800, but his Chant des combats was not popular. The anthem Vive le roi, composed for the restoration of Louis XVIII in 1815, also proved a flop. Rouget de Lisle died in 1836 at Choisy-le-Roi near Paris. In July 1915, his remains were transferred to the vault below the Church of Saint-Louis-des-Invalides, known as the Governors’ Crypt, since 28 governors of the Invalides were buried there.

4. Dominique-Jean Larrey

Aside from the Tomb of Napoleon Bonaparte, Les Invalides serves as a resting place for a host of Napoleonic marshals and officers. Among these is Dominique-Jean Larrey, the pioneering military surgeon. Born in 1766, Larrey served in the French Army during the War of the First Coalition, during which he pioneered the use of “flying ambulances,” light horse-drawn carriages that enabled medical staff to treat wounded soldiers on the spot and evacuate them quickly. He also pioneered the concept of triage by prioritizing the treatment of soldiers based on the extent of their injuries rather than military rank or nationality.

After meeting Napoleon for the first time in 1794, Larrey was appointed surgeon-in-chief of Napoleon’s Army of Italy in 1796 and accompanied him to Egypt in 1798. Although he was invited to return to France with Napoleon in 1799, he stayed behind with the army that had been left under the command of Jean-Baptiste Kléber. Following Kléber’s assassination in June 1800, he embalmed the general’s body and returned it to France for burial.

After returning to France, Larrey accompanied the army throughout the Napoleonic Wars. He often exposed himself to enemy fire to retrieve wounded soldiers from the field, earning the respect of his own men and of enemy commanders. At the Battle of Aspern-Essling in 1809, he amputated the leg of his close friend Marshal Jean Lannes but was unable to save the marshal’s life.

During Napoleon’s Russian campaign in 1812, Larrey performed wonders during the bloody Battle of Borodino. During the Battle of the Berezina, he avoided being stranded on the eastern bank when soldiers carried him over their heads over a weakening bridge. Three years later, he was wounded at Waterloo and taken prisoner by Prussian troops. His life was saved by a German soldier who recognized him and brought him to Field Marshal Blücher. Larrey had saved the life of Blücher’s son at the Battle of Dresden in 1813, and the Prussian commander treated him as an honored guest and allowed him to return to France.

Larrey continued to serve in the French Army after Napoleon’s second abdication, and in 1830, he was appointed medical director at Les Invalides by King Louis Philippe I. He died in Lyon in 1842 and was initially buried at the Père-Lachaise Cemetery in Paris. One hundred fifty years later, his remains were transferred to Les Invalides in December 1992.

5. Patrice de MacMahon

The descendant of an Irish noble family who had lost their land during the Cromwellian confiscations, Patrice de MacMahon’s military and political career spanned over five decades. After spending much of the 1830s and 1840s serving in Algeria, he was promoted to General of Division in 1852 and given command of the 1st Infantry Division during the Crimean War, where in September 1855, he captured the Malakoff Redoubt during the Siege of Sevastopol.

After briefly returning to Algeria, MacMahon accompanied Emperor Napoleon III’s army to Italy in 1859 to support the cause of Italian independence from the Austrian Empire. At the Battle of Magenta on June 4, MacMahon led the decisive attack that forced the Austrians to retreat. MacMahon was created Marshal and received the title of Duke of Magenta.

After six years as Governor-General of Algeria between 1864 and 1870, MacMahon resigned from the office and returned to France. During the Franco-Prussian War, he was given command of the 130,000-strong Army of Châlons formed to relieve the siege of Metz. After being joined by Napoleon III, MacMahon was defeated at Sedan on September 1 and fell into Prussian captivity alongside the emperor.

After returning to France in March 1871, President Adolphe Thiers appointed MacMahon to lead the Army of Versailles, which crushed the Paris Commune. In 1873, MacMahon was elected president by royalist and conservative deputies in the National Assembly seeking to restore the Bourbon monarchy. He governed effectively for a few years but struggled after the left-wing Republicans won the 1877 elections and resigned in 1879. He died in October 1895 and was buried at Les Invalides.

6. Ferdinand Foch

One of the most famous French soldiers of the 20th century, Ferdinand Foch is best known for his leadership during the First World War as Supreme Allied Commander in 1918. Born in October 1851, Foch became a noted military theorist at the turn of the 20th century while serving as an instructor at the French War College.

Inspired by the campaigns of Napoleon and Prussian general Herman von Moltke and the theories of Carl von Clausewitz, Foch promoted the concept of the offensive in French military doctrine. In the years before World War I, Foch’s ideas inspired Plan XVII of the French Army, which envisaged an eastern offensive to retake Alsace and Lorraine in the event of a German invasion. Upon the outbreak of war in August 1914, Foch commanded XX Corps of the French Army in Lorraine but was forced to retreat.

Although his reputation suffered after the failure of the eastern offensives, he was transferred to the north and led a successful counterattack at Châlons on September 12 to stop the German advance during the First Battle of the Marne. He was then appointed assistant commander-in-chief to Joseph Joffre with responsibility for the Northern sector, which involved liaising with British forces during the Race to the Sea. After successfully holding off the Germans at Ypres, Foch led offensives at Artois in 1915 and the Somme in 1916. He was criticized for his aggressive tactics, which resulted in heavy losses without much gain and temporarily fell out of favor.

In May 1917, when General Philippe Pétain was appointed commander-in-chief, Foch was made Chief of the General Staff. As a result of heavy losses suffered by the French Army, Foch pursued a more defensive approach, counting on the arrival of General Pershing’s American Expeditionary Force to make the difference on the Western Front.

In late March 1918, the German Army launched its spring offensive in an attempt to win the war before American forces could effectively be mobilized on the Western Front. Foch was soon given the responsibility of coordinating between Allied armies and forming a common reserve to respond to a potential breakthrough of the Allied line. On account of these responsibilities, in April 1918, he was formally recognized as Supreme Allied Commander.

As the German offensive ran out of steam, Foch launched a successful counterattack at the Marne in July, for which he was promoted to Marshal of France in August. In conjunction with British commander Sir Douglas Haig, Foch planned the Hundred Days Offensive that led to Germany’s final defeat on November 11, 1918.

After the war, Foch favored imposing harsh peace terms on Germany and believed the Treaty of Versailles was too lenient. He retired from the French Army in 1923 and died in March 1929 at the age of 77. He was given a grand funeral and buried at Les Invalides. His remains were initially placed in the Governors’ Crypt but later transferred to a grand tomb sculpted by Paul Landowski in St. Ambrose’s Chapel in the dome church.

By 1936, Europe’s descent into war had begun. Across Europe, fascism seemed ascendant, especially in Germany and Italy. The Spanish 1931 elections saw left-wing parties elected, effectively sidelining the Spanish king. Socialists and Republicans assumed control, declaring a new Republic. In opposition stood the Nationalists, mostly conservatives and the Catholic Church. Quickly escalating violent clashes and assassinations began, lasting until 1936. The slow burn towards civil war had begun.

In July 1936, General Francisco Franco’s troops, transported by Italian and German planes from Spanish Morocco, crossed into southern Spain and attempted a coup. As the war escalated, Republicans, fearful, appealed for Soviet aid in September 1936. Next, the call for volunteers went out, making Spain an ideological frontline.

Creation of the International Brigades

In September 1936, from Moscow, the Communist International (Comintern) began organizing international brigades. The Comintern actively recruited worldwide through local Communist parties. This controversial group paid the volunteers’ travel expenses plus forged identity papers. The future fighters traveled to France, often smuggled into the warzone.

Common Goal: Stop Fascism

Volunteers who came to Spain had one primary goal: to stop fascism. Spain became the first real opportunity to fight. Often, their motivation to fight resulted from past encounters with fascism. They came from different walks of life. Democratic freedoms such as free press, political dissent, and trade union membership were banned or broken up. Opposition meant imprisonment or worse. 

Such was the case with thousands of Germans, Austrians, or Italians. With Spain’s sudden shift to open war, such men now took up the Republican cause.

Fueled by anger and a desire for change, volunteers hoped that fighting would stop fascism. The International Brigades became that chance. Spain became Europe’s last democratic barrier. 

Cohesion, Unity, and the Comintern

For Western left-wing groups, the Spanish Civil War offered a global stage for their struggle. These groups came from Communist, socialist, and labor organizations. Spain represented an opportunity to determine whether democracy and socialism could survive fascism. The fight became imperative. Despite ideological differences, unity against fascism mattered more.

Yet for any cause, logistics are the backbone of war. Here, starting in mid-September 1936, the Comintern stepped in, becoming the International Brigade’s cohesive glue. As a true multinational, only the Comintern could coordinate all the volunteers. Paris became the headquarters, with recruits sent here before moving on to Spain. Besides travel, build the International Brigade’s structure profited from Soviet military advice. With their administrative experience, only the Comintern could funnel men, materials, and supplies through France to Spain.

For High Stakes, Self-Worth, and the Risk

For some foreigners, especially Jews, the Spanish Civil War meant direct revenge. Fascism, especially Germany’s flavor, contained antisemitism as a central belief. As the 1930s progressed, fascism took a stronger hold across Europe. Events like Germany’s Nuremberg Laws, mobs, and even state-sanctioned violence became common. In Spain, Jewish fighters had the opportunity to fight fascism directly. Like other volunteers, Jews saw Spain as a high-stakes battle for survival and to stop fascism.

Others saw Spain as a redemption of self-worth. The Great Worldwide Economic Crash of the 1930s left millions jobless. With that went people’s sense of purpose, or self-worth. The International Brigades returned that value, offering structure and fighting for a greater purpose. Fascism embodied what had been lost-their jobs or livelihoods. These people knew what fascism brought.

For the better educated, fascism proved to be anathema to their beliefs. Like their blue-collar compadres, staying on the sidelines represented collusion. Spain’s Civil War became an idealistic opportunity to fight.

Whatever their origins, foreigners fighting in Spain knew the risk. For most, Spain could be the last opportunity to do their part. Should Spain fall, the rest of Europe would be next. Given the war’s intensity and their convictions, death was worth the risk.

Into the Grinder

The International Brigades deployed to the front in October 1936. Soon-to-be-famous, grouped by nationality, emerged in the fighting. Names like the Abraham Lincoln Battalion or the Commune de Paris Battalion. Used as shock troops, the Brigades fought in major battles like Madrid, the Ebro, and Jarama. At their height, they numbered around 18,000, with a total of 32,000-60,000 over the war. Casualties were horrendous, sometimes reaching 50%. 

Franco’s Nationalists eventually prevailed. However, despite the eventual cost (30% KIA), foreigners from 50+ countries fought in Spain. Motivation probably differed. Yet they viewed themselves as an anti-fascist vanguard tasked with a cause.

Transylvania, a land famous for its culture, identity, and its association with Dracula, was the target of a vicious struggle between Hungary and Romania during the first half of the 20th century. Like Alsace, Galicia, and Silesia, it was a heavily contested territory that became a brutal battleground during and after World War I. While Romania was awarded Transylvania in 1919, it was compelled to give up Northern Transylvania during WWII but was given the whole of Transylvania in 1945 after switching sides near the end of the conflict.

Transylvania in the Habsburg Empire

For much of its medieval history, the region of Transylvania had been closely part of the Kingdom Hungary. By the beginning of the 18th century, Transylvania became an independent principality under the Habsburg Dynasty. The region had a mixed population of Romanians, Hungarians, Germans, Jews, Roma, and other peoples. The authorities in Vienna granted the territory some autonomy because it had been an independent region after the 1848 uprising. Vienna hoped to placate the different minority communities in the region and sought to rule the region benignly.

However, the Compromise of 1867 which created the Dual Monarchy of the Austro-Hungarian Empire caused major issues for the Romanian community in Transylvania. The principality was abolished and the territory came under the Hungarian Crown. This made the local population vulnerable to Magyarization, the policy of cultural assimilation into Hungarian society. This led to an awakening of Transylvanian Romanians, who believed that they were facing serious threats to their identity. Efforts by ethnic Romanians to protest were met with force, contributing to the destabilization of the Habsburg Empire. This especially became prominent in the late 19th century with the rise of modern European nationalist movements.

When Romania gained independence in 1878, many Romanian nationalists sought to build their state by unifying it with other territories outside the country with large Romanian communities. Transylvania was high on this list because of its prominence in Romanian culture and national identity. Part of Romania’s justification for entering WWI on the Entente side was to seize Transylvania from the Habsburg Empire. Despite Romania’s heavy losses, the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire created a power vacuum for Romania to exploit.

Territorial Dispute After WWI

Despite being temporarily forced out of WWI by the Central Powers, Romania reentered the war after the Habsburg Empire disintegrated. The Hungarian Monarchy crumbled in the face of the Aster Revolution, which brought to power a government that sought to demilitarize Hungary. However, when the Romanian National Council informed the government in Budapest that it intended to take control of much of Transylvania, Hungary rejected it and insisted that it had legal jurisdiction over all of Transylvania.

On November 12, 1918, Romanian forces crossed the demarcation line on the Mureș River and faced no opposition. They received assistance from Transylvanian Romanians, who believed that they were on the verge of unity with their brethren in Romania proper. This was followed by elections in the National Assembly for Romanians in Hungary and Transylvania. Candidates supporting unification did very well. The Hungarians were powerless to stop these events because they lacked credibility in the region and their military was almost nonexistent.

On December 1, 1918, the National Assembly for Romanians in Transylvania and Hungary convened in Alba Iulia. This body unanimously voted to unify Transylvania with Romania, offering equal rights to the non-Romanian population. Facing Hungarian protests in the international media, Romanian troops kept advancing to maintain control over the territory and deny Hungary the ability to contest its control. Hungarian Prime Minister Mihály Károlyi was forced to resign, leading to the rise of Hungary’s first communist government and setting the stage for the Romanian-Hungarian War of 1919.

Start of the Romanian-Hungarian War

In March 1919, a former officer of the Austrian Army, Béla Kun, led a revolution that created a communist government in Budapest. He combined Hungarian nationalism with revolutionary socialism and vowed to oppose any reduction of Hungarian territory. The ruthlessness of his revolutionary policies enraged other European governments, who feared that the whole continent could fall to communism. In the eyes of King Ferdinand of Romania and his government, Kun was a particularly dangerous threat.

In March 1919, Romanian Prime Minister Ion Brătianu sent a letter to representatives of other Entente governments calling for Romanian control up to the Tisza River. This was rejected, but Entente leaders hoped to negotiate a solution and sent South African Prime Minister Jan Smuts to meet with Kun. The latter refused to back down, insisting that Romanian forces fall back to the Mureș River. King Ferdinand received word that the Hungarians were repressing Romanians in the areas of Transylvania they still controlled. As a result, he ordered the army to prepare a general offensive aimed at defeating the Hungarian Red Army.

Hungarian forces noted the Romanian preparations and launched a preemptive strike. This failed and Romanian forces pushed forward with a plan to drive onto the Tisza River. Over the next several months, the Romanians emerged victorious in several pitched battles against the Hungarians. Their forces, backed by France, pushed to the Tisza and repelled a Hungarian counterattack. By August 1919, Romania successfully seized Budapest.

The Treaty of Trianon

Romanian forces remained in Budapest until November 1919 while a new Hungarian government more acceptable to the Entente was established. The Trans-Tisza region remained under occupation for an even longer period because Romania wanted guarantees that it could keep control over Transylvania without Hungarian interference. The Entente was pleased with Romania’s actions and promised to support its territorial claims. This formed a major component of the Treaty of Trianon.

As the Versailles Conference established the new order of Europe, the question of what Hungary’s borders would be remained. The weakness of the state meant that Romania had a stronger hand at the negotiating table. Despite the new Hungarian government’s pleas that the status of the disputed territories should be determined by a plebiscite, the Entente issued an ultimatum that insisted on Hungary ceding territories to its neighbors.

On June 4th, 1920, Ágost Benárd and Alfréd Drasche-Lázár signed the Treaty of Trianon on behalf of the Hungarian government. This confirmed Romania’s control over Transylvania and deeply weakened Hungary. It also fueled the rise of Hungarian Admiral Miklós Horthy’s nationalist dictatorship. Thousands of ethnic Hungarians living in the region left while many others remained, hoping that Hungary would one day return to retake the territory. Many Hungarian nationalists were enraged with the terms they faced and vowed to recover Transylvania when they were strong enough to do so. For King Ferdinand, the Trianon Treaty validated Romania’s decision to enter WWI.

Second Vienna Award

From 1920 to 1940, Romania maintained control over Transylvania and sought to incorporate its population into Romanian society. The country underwent political turmoil common to Central and Eastern Europe in the interwar period. In 1930, Prince Carol von Hohenzollern took power in a coup and led an autocratic government as King Carol II. Notwithstanding his German roots, he began to suspect Nazi Germany of supporting far-right factions in his country that he considered a threat. The mistrust between Germany and Romania encouraged Admiral Horthy to seek closer ties with Berlin.

The close ties between Germany and Hungary paid off for Budapest. In 1936, they gained some territory back in the north through the First Vienna Award. This was followed by Horthy’s greatest feat: convincing Germany to back Hungary’s claims over Transylvania. Romania was concerned about the Soviet Union and could not afford to pick fights with other European powers. King Carol tried to gain support from the British and the French, but this failed with the Fall of France in 1940. As a result, Bucharest started to cede territory it gained after WWI.

In 1940, Germany mediated an agreement between Hungary and Romania called the Second Vienna Award. At the Belvedere Palace in Vienna on August 30, 1940, Romanian Foreign Minister Mihail Manoilescu and Hungarian Foreign Minister István Csáky signed the accord, relinquishing North Transylvania to Hungary. King Carol ordered the Romanian army to withdraw. Romanians living in the territory were offered Hungarian citizenship or told to leave. This contributed to the fall of Carol and the rise of Marshal Ion Antonescu in Bucharest.

Romania Regains Permanent Control After WWII

Despite Romanian anger at losing control over Transylvania to Hungary, Marshal Antonescu feared the Soviets more and signed the Pact of Steel and Anti-Comintern Pact to join the Axis Powers. For the next several years, Romanian forces battled alongside other Axis countries, including Hungary, with the aim of controlling Bessarabia (modern-day Moldova) and Bukovina. Their forces advanced deep into Soviet territory. Transylvanians were obliged to fight in either the Romanian or Hungarian militaries or assist the Axis war effort in other ways. The Jewish and Roma communities in Transylvania were subject to discriminatory legislation and abuse, but were left alone until Germany’s takeover of Hungary, after which both communities began to face deportation and extermination.

As Romania’s military fortunes deteriorated, Antonescu found himself under attack from Romanian politicians that wanted out. On August 23, 1944, Antonescu was ousted in a coup led by King Michael and Romania signed an agreement with the Soviets to cease hostilities. Subsequently, Romanian forces advanced alongside the Red Army and retook North Transylvania from Hungary. Regent Horthy was also under threat: he was ousted in a coup by pro-German factions that vowed to fight on. It was a lost cause and Hungary was overrun by Soviet and Romanian forces in 1945. Both Hungary and Romania would remain under communist rule in 1989.

The Allies did not want either Romania or Hungary to fight over Transylvania again and the Soviets hoped to appease Romanian anger over the loss of northern Bukovina and Bessarabia. In 1947, treaties signed in Paris reversed the terms of the Second Vienna Award and granted Romania full control over Transylvania. This was the final time the region changed hands, marking an end to one of the most intense border disputes in 20th century Europe.