CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Bombardment of Givet

1696 bombardment during the Nine Years' War

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 22, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

The Bombardment of Givet took place during the Nine Years' War on 16 March 1696. A Dutch army under Menno van Coehoorn and the Earl of Athlone closed in on the French town of Givet with the aim of destroying the supplies held there. In this way, they hoped that the French would not be able to mount an offensive that year. The action was a success and prevented the French from launching a major offensive.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Bombardment of Givet” as 1696 bombardment during the Nine Years' War. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Bombardment, Givet and bombardment.

Editorial reviewA useful synthesis for locating the documentary relationships between formal authority, participants and affected communities. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1696—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Bombardment, Givet and bombardment providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Bombardment of Givet”, the useful work is to connect “1696 bombardment during the Nine Years' War” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Contemporary correspondence, administrative files and participant testimony can test how later narratives organized the event or institution. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 22, 2026. The first chronological checks are 1696.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Bombardment of Givet”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Bombardment of Givet primary sources, Bombardment of Givet archive and Bombardment research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Bombardment of Givet”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  3. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Bombardment of Givet” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.