Supernatural Historical Wars.

[Con]

So in terms of wars in history. Saladin was a Knight of the Cross, Ebenezar, LTW and The Merlin were involved in the Seven Years War. Simon Pietrovich caused/ was involved in the Russian Revolution. We know WW1 was Kemmler, his disciples and allies, We know Klaus the Toymaker fought Nazi's in WW2 and that Luccio doubted how evil Nazi's were, Necro Bob had a defence set up reminiscent of the Nazi's, Kemmlers was killed in the 60s by an all out White Council attack, It's implied both Michael and Marcone were in Vietnam.

Jim has understandably stayed away from 9/11, as much as possible but it's known White Council has a strict policy of not getting involved.

Is there any other historical wars with supernatural elements?

[123Chikadee]

I think it's implied that the Battle of Hastings involved the fae, but I dunno if that counts as a war per se.
Oh, and there are the Sidhe Wars that Bob talked about in 'Ghost Story', about how they fought against the Fomor. So that one'll be plot relevant at least.

[Bad Alias]

Luccio doubted how evil Nazi's were

I think it's important that we add the qualifier "at the time."

The original Merlin established the English monarchy. That probably involved mortal wars, but King Arthur is ahistorical.

Vlad Dracula was involved in several armed conflicts. He lost a few. That implies, but doesn't necessitate, supernatural forces on the opposing side.

I'd be supernatural elements were involved in most historical wars to one degree or another. If nothing else, blamps thrive when there's a bunch of death to cover their feeding. I'm sure it's similar for a lot of supernatural predators.

I'd also bet that any large or long lasting historical war is going to draw supernatural elements in as their interests are inevitably affected. Whites, at least with Raiths leading them, would probably push peace or a decisive victory as peace benefits their feeding habits more than chaos. It would be hard for a German wizard to not be drawn into the Thirty Years' War as conflict was so widespread. The question would be more the scale of the involvement than the fact of it.

Another possibility is that parallel supernatural wars take place during the chaos of the mortal wars. Supernatural factions could use the chaos of a war as a cover to move more openly. That alone might be enough to set off a conflict.

[Arjan]

I think it's important that we add the qualifier "at the time."

The original Merlin established the English monarchy. That probably involved mortal wars, but King Arthur is ahistorical.

The original Merlin defended a British kingdom against the English.

Vlad Dracula was involved in several armed conflicts. He lost a few. That implies, but doesn't necessitate, supernatural forces on the opposing side.

I'd be supernatural elements were involved in most historical wars to one degree or another. If nothing else, blamps thrive when there's a bunch of death to cover their feeding. I'm sure it's similar for a lot of supernatural predators.

I'd also bet that any large or long lasting historical war is going to draw supernatural elements in as their interests are inevitably affected. Whites, at least with Raiths leading them, would probably push peace or a decisive victory as peace benefits their feeding habits more than chaos. It would be hard for a German wizard to not be drawn into the Thirty Years' War as conflict was so widespread. The question would be more the scale of the involvement than the fact of it.

Another possibility is that parallel supernatural wars take place during the chaos of the mortal wars. Supernatural factions could use the chaos of a war as a cover to move more openly. That alone might be enough to set off a conflict.

[Bad Alias]

The original Merlin defended a British kingdom against the English.

I guess it all ended in failure then. 

[vultur]

This highly depends on which version of Arthurian lore is true in the Dresdenverse.

The oldest sources make Arthur a commander of the Britons/Romano-British fighting against the Saxons, yes. But the early Celtic Arthur is a quite different figure from the more familiar king of Camelot. (Arthur was a general or war leader, not a king, in the earliest sources.)

[Arjan]

I guess it all ended in failure then. 

The British held out until after 1136:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwGxkj79Xkw

[Arjan]

This highly depends on which version of Arthurian lore is true in the Dresdenverse.

The oldest sources make Arthur a commander of the Britons/Romano-British fighting against the Saxons, yes. But the early Celtic Arthur is a quite different figure from the more familiar king of Camelot. (Arthur was a general or war leader, not a king, in the earliest sources.)

Of course we use as source the highly reliable historian Geoffrey of Monmouth:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_Regum_Britanniae

[vultur]

Given that Geoffrey essentially created the character of Merlin*, and it's likely that the Arthurian lore true in the Dresdenverse is the post-Geoffrey much more familiar version. (It's also referenced that Merlin was custodian of Amoracchius/Excalibur, IIRC.)

*IIRC, loosely based on Myrrdin Wyllt from Welsh legend, plus a story about Ambrosius Aurelianus [an actual historical person to whom a lot of legends became attached], which is why Geoffrey's composite character is "Merlinus Ambrosius")

[g33k]

I'm pretty sure Jim Butcher's "Merlin" & "Arthur" will be based more on faerie-tale & myth, with additional Dresdenverse spin, and less on current best historical understanding...

[Arjan]

I'm pretty sure Jim Butcher's "Merlin" & "Arthur" will be based more on faerie-tale & myth, with additional Dresdenverse spin, and less on current best historical understanding...

Be sure that Geoffrey of Monmouth is not our current best historical understanding 

[Con]

I wonder if Geoffrey of Monmouth was Venatori, it certainly sounds like their MO. Spread the good stories around for supernatural protection, slowly destroy the bad ones.

[Bad Alias]

The British held out until after 1136:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwGxkj79Xkw

Anglo-Saxon England was early medieval England, existing from the 5th to the 11th centuries from the end of Roman Britain until the Norman conquest in 1066.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Anglo-Saxon_England.

[Snark Knight]

The original Merlin established the English monarchy. That probably involved mortal wars, but King Arthur is ahistorical.

Vlad Dracula was involved in several armed conflicts. He lost a few. That implies, but doesn't necessitate, supernatural forces on the opposing side.

Arthur is ahistorical in real life, sure. In universe? That remains to be seen.

We also don't really know at what point during his recorded historical lifetime Vlad turned himself into the first Blampire in-universe. The obvious candidate would be at the time of his recorded death (for one, he was a political prisoner for a while until getting free and reestablishing his rule late in life, and it would be bloody hard to keep a blampire locked in a tower ... also it would have been hard to rule a nation for that last year or two if all the courtiers noticed him actively rotting and only coming out at night). Upshot is it's hard to say much with confidence about supernatural dimensions to his wars with the Ottoman empire.

[Bad Alias]

Arthur is ahistorical in real life, sure. In universe? That remains to be seen.

We also don't really know at what point during his recorded historical lifetime Vlad turned himself into the first Blampire in-universe.

The thread is about historical wars. That's why I mentioned that Arthur is ahistorical. Vlad, the son of "the Creature," was likely always tied into the supernatural.