Bismarck's Folly - A Short TL

[Nassirisimo]

Paris, 16th August 1869​

An ordinance for sewer improvements in Marseilles. Extra provision for maintenance facilities on the Paris-Lyon railway. Paperwork is almost never an exciting activity by any stretch of the imagination, but every day, the mounds of paperwork seemed duller than ever for the Emperor of the French.

He was once a young man full of ideas and ambition, though Louis Napoleon had been worn down by almost two decades of governance. The almost permanent sullen look in his eyes was only the beginning of his physical ailments, as the gallstones which afflicted him took their toll, making the already severe strains of his life almost pure agony at times.

As if the physical problems which dogged him were not enough to produce misery in his life, the very process of government had begun to affect him adversely as things had not gone according to plan. The failure of his Mexican adventure was merely the first major blow to him, but far more severe was Sadowa. Even the mention of the name was enough to make him groan audibly, and had produced in him a fear of just what his previously little neighbour to the North East may have been planning next.

Though on the 13th of August, 1869, not all of the news that Napoleon III received would be negative. A rather gangly young man with an awkward manner and some important news was admitted to Napoleon’s office rather late in the day. A few moments after knocking on the doors of the office, he opened the doors and admitted himself to the room. Napoleon was slouched by his desk in a chair, visibly hurt from the pain of his gallstones. “You have come so late in the day. I was just preparing to retire…”

The young man bowed, unsure as to whether it was an appropriate way, though his manner became less uptight as he could see the Emperor was unconcerned with how he presented himself. He cleared his throat and spoke. “My Emperor, I was sent from the hospital. And I am most pleased to inform you that monsieur Niel seems to be recovering rather well from the surgery of the past week. Indeed, the doctors think that the problem of his gallstones may have been resolved entirely for the time being”

The Emperor did not seem to visibly react to the news, some weak nodding of his head aside. However, the news brought a great relief to Napoleon. “I could not afford to lose someone as vital as him. Not at this stage”

The young man continued to wait for the Emperor to reply to his words. After several seconds of an awkward silence, he finally spoke out again. “You wish me to take a message to monsieur Niel?”

The Emperor nodded, slightly more vigorously than the last time. “Just send my regards. Wish him well in his recovery and all of that. And perhaps ask some of the doctors about the feasibility of this surgery for me”. Napoleon forced a weak smile on his face.

The young man bowed again in acknowledgement. “At once, my Emperor”. And with that, he left the room, leaving Napoleon alone to close his office for the day. The mind that was usually drugged now raced with ideas that seemed to be within grasp now. The completion of the military reforms which France desperately needed if she was to have a chance when dealing with the upstart Prussians. He was certain that Niel would have a key role in the coming months and years, and in his efforts to secure the Napoleonic dynasty’s place in France.

 

[galileo-034]

Interesting beginning.
Still, having Niel surviving doesn't really help his reform progressing much.
The main problem was parliamentarian obstruction and the successive concessions Napoleon III made on the reform to get it adopted.
Had these reforms been passed a decade earlier while the Emperor was all powerful, this would have made a great difference, but the man of 1869 is sick, old, and he is about to give up to pressure in front of the Corps Législatif where the Republicans, despite being still a minority, have achieved a major breakout.
Napoleon III's attempt at setting up a ''Government of New Men'' with apparachiks of the imperial machine was his last attempt at gripping power and failed miserably, the Emperor being eventually compelled to appoint Ollivier to form a government (a de facto Prime Minister since the position doesn't officially exists).

What I can eventually see Niel doing is preventing the Imperial Army from entering the war in the state of disorganization and unpreparedness in which it was IOTL: ''Generals were looking for their divisions, colonels for their regiments'' (quote from Battesti's biography of Prince Napoleon regarding his time at Metz imperial HQ in July).

Then, the better the French can expect achieving, if war was still to happen, would be a stalemate that Prussia can ill afford, to the contrary of France. If you are looking for some noticeable and great victory, the reform would need to be enacted at least a decade earlier, around the time of the Italian war; it is my opinion that even if France had intervened in 1866 on Austria's side, the Imperial Army would still have been badly mauled by Prussians in Rhineland to say my estimation of the quality of French army of the time.

He was certain that Niel would have a key role in the coming months and years, and in his efforts to secure the Napoleonic dynasty’s place in France.

There would just have to wait 1874, the time Napoleon III planned to abdicate.

 

[galileo-034]

The Emperor nodded, slightly more vigorously than the last time. “Just send my regards. Wish him well in his recovery and all of that. And perhaps ask some of the doctors about the feasibility of this surgery for me”. Napoleon forced a weak smile on his face.

I just noticed that.
If they are removed before the summer of 1870, Napoleon III would have the strength to resist pressure from the pro-war party headed by the Empress and prevent war from occuring.
There would still be public uproar because of pro-war fervour, but the refusal of Napoleon III would leave time for Benedetti's account of Ems meeting to be heard and make the diplomatical crisis over. Maybe Gramont could then be replaced by someone more experienced as Marquis de La Valette or Drouyn de Lhuys, two very able former Ministers of Foregin Affairs.

 

[Damascius]

Still if nothing else, it would be fascinating to see what happens if Niel is at least alive long enough to get a better airing for his reforms.

 

[Historyman 14]

So, does this mean no war witn Prussia? Or a longer one?

 

[galileo-034]

The removal of gallstones would likely mean no war, or at least a delayed one, but the title makes thinking to some disastrous (with the hindsight) aventure caused by Bismarck.

 

[Grouchio]

I read this exact premise in a copy of "What If?" Very glad to finally see it adapted.

 

[Nassirisimo]

Interesting beginning.
Still, having Niel surviving doesn't really help his reform progressing much.
The main problem was parliamentarian obstruction and the successive concessions Napoleon III made on the reform to get it adopted.
Had these reforms been passed a decade earlier while the Emperor was all powerful, this would have made a great difference, but the man of 1869 is sick, old, and he is about to give up to pressure in front of the Corps Législatif where the Republicans, despite being still a minority, have achieved a major breakout.
Napoleon III's attempt at setting up a ''Government of New Men'' with apparachiks of the imperial machine was his last attempt at gripping power and failed miserably, the Emperor being eventually compelled to appoint Ollivier to form a government (a de facto Prime Minister since the position doesn't officially exists).

What I can eventually see Niel doing is preventing the Imperial Army from entering the war in the state of disorganization and unpreparedness in which it was IOTL: ''Generals were looking for their divisions, colonels for their regiments'' (quote from Battesti's biography of Prince Napoleon regarding his time at Metz imperial HQ in July).

Then, the better the French can expect achieving, if war was still to happen, would be a stalemate that Prussia can ill afford, to the contrary of France. If you are looking for some noticeable and great victory, the reform would need to be enacted at least a decade earlier, around the time of the Italian war; it is my opinion that even if France had intervened in 1866 on Austria's side, the Imperial Army would still have been badly mauled by Prussians in Rhineland to say my estimation of the quality of French army of the time.


There would just have to wait 1874, the time Napoleon III planned to abdicate.

I just noticed that.
If they are removed before the summer of 1870, Napoleon III would have the strength to resist pressure from the pro-war party headed by the Empress and prevent war from occuring.
There would still be public uproar because of pro-war fervour, but the refusal of Napoleon III would leave time for Benedetti's account of Ems meeting to be heard and make the diplomatical crisis over. Maybe Gramont could then be replaced by someone more experienced as Marquis de La Valette or Drouyn de Lhuys, two very able former Ministers of Foregin Affairs.

Napoleon isn't going to get everything he wants. There will still be many aspects of the French army that are unreformed, though the survival of Niel means that there is another senior competent French figure to balance out the incompetence ones such as Bazaine. I'm hoping that the TL will hold some genuine surprises as to how Bismarck engages in the folly alluded to in the title, so I won't mention too much on that regard.

Still if nothing else, it would be fascinating to see what happens if Niel is at least alive long enough to get a better airing for his reforms.

Again, Niel and the Emperor won't be able to magically push all the legislation they want to through. However, maybe one or two key pieces that were rejected in OTL may make their way through.

So, does this mean no war witn Prussia? Or a longer one?

All will be revealed in good time my man.

The removal of gallstones would likely mean no war, or at least a delayed one, but the title makes thinking to some disastrous (with the hindsight) aventure caused by Bismarck.

It will make perfect sense to Bismarck at the time, or at least he will feel that it is the only option worth taking.

I read this exact premise in a copy of "What If?" Very glad to finally see it adapted.

I don't think I've read it. I confess that I don't keep up to date with alternate history publications usually.

 

[Matteo]

Interesting beginning.
Still, having Niel surviving doesn't really help his reform progressing much.
The main problem was parliamentarian obstruction and the successive concessions Napoleon III made on the reform to get it adopted.
Had these reforms been passed a decade earlier while the Emperor was all powerful, this would have made a great difference, but the man of 1869 is sick, old, and he is about to give up to pressure in front of the Corps Législatif where the Republicans, despite being still a minority, have achieved a major breakout.
Napoleon III's attempt at setting up a ''Government of New Men'' with apparachiks of the imperial machine was his last attempt at gripping power and failed miserably, the Emperor being eventually compelled to appoint Ollivier to form a government (a de facto Prime Minister since the position doesn't officially exists).

What I can eventually see Niel doing is preventing the Imperial Army from entering the war in the state of disorganization and unpreparedness in which it was IOTL: ''Generals were looking for their divisions, colonels for their regiments'' (quote from Battesti's biography of Prince Napoleon regarding his time at Metz imperial HQ in July).

Then, the better the French can expect achieving, if war was still to happen, would be a stalemate that Prussia can ill afford, to the contrary of France. If you are looking for some noticeable and great victory, the reform would need to be enacted at least a decade earlier, around the time of the Italian war; it is my opinion that even if France had intervened in 1866 on Austria's side, the Imperial Army would still have been badly mauled by Prussians in Rhineland to say my estimation of the quality of French army of the time.


There would just have to wait 1874, the time Napoleon III planned to abdicate.

I disagree on several points.

The imperial régime was stronger than ever at the eve of the franco-prussian war. The plebiscite of 1870 on the parlementarian evolution of the constitution was a real triumph for Napoleon III. France was going to some kind of british model, but with universal suffrage (since 1848).

What caused the fall of the regime was the disastrous military defeat. Nothing else would have caused it at the time. A wide majority of the country did not trust republican regime because, for them, republican regime meant anarchy and violence (the national trauma of the years 1792-1799 which were a kind of civil war inflicted on the country by a minority of extremists).

Post franco-prussian war, the choice of republican regime was only a compromise because monarchiste could not agree on the kind of monarchy.

As far as the war is concerned, Prussia had a very hard time defeating the austrian army (and its german allies) which resisted and fought better than the french army.

So if the french had intervened on the austrian side, the prussians would have been forced to split forces and would certainly have lost the war.

 

[galileo-034]

I disagree on several points.

The imperial régime was stronger than ever at the eve of the franco-prussian war. The plebiscite of 1870 on the parlementarian evolution of the constitution was a real triumph for Napoleon III. France was going to some kind of british model, but with universal suffrage (since 1848).

What caused the fall of the regime was the disastrous military defeat. Nothing else would have caused it at the time. A wide majority of the country did not trust republican regime because, for them, republican regime meant anarchy and violence (the national trauma of the years 1792-1799 which were a kind of civil war inflicted on the country by a minority of extremists).

The result of the referendum was maybe a landslide, especially compared to the Republican breakout in the previous elections of 1869, but the repartition of votes is more speaking.
The main places where ''no'' votes were a majority were towns, something no surprising given that urban middles are the main source of opposition to the Empire, with Paris, Lyon, Marseille, Bordeaux, Toulouse, among the great towns of the Empire. It is in the countryside that the Imperial Regime found its main source of support, among this traditionnally conservative middle (either loyal to monarchists or to Bonapartists). They are what we could name the ''silent majority'' but were by nature far less active than urban based Republicans; they well tried to oppose replacement of mayors by the Republican dominated National Defense Government during autumn 1870 but were unsuccessfull.
And if we examine the electoral results since 1857 (the election of The Five, first Republicans to enter the parliament since 1851), the Republicans were on the rise. 1869 is the year of the breakout with 3,4 millions to the opposition against only 4,4 millions for the government supported candidates, and only in Paris, it's 234,000 against 77,000 in favour of the opposition.

And you're right to point out to the defeat of Franco-Prussian War as cause for the fall of the Empire. At the time, the Empire was a colossus with feet of clay. The liberal concessions of Napoleon III had weakened his hold on the country (since the free tade agreement of 1860, he lost his traditional base in industrialist and merchant class) and the imperial regime was at a perilous crossroads, it was a ''make-or-break time'' for the Empire.

Had it survived to the war, either with victory or stalemate (officially considered a victory), legitimacy for the Empire would have been highly strengthened. Already, the result of the referendum, a setback after their success in 1869, had scared the Republicans, with Gambetta saying ''the Empire is stronger than ever''.
This legitimacy would have been even more strengthened by the crowning of the Imperial Prince around 1874 (Napoleon III, old, sick and tired planned to abdicate and retire when the Prince would be 18). He was popular and not associated like his father to the overthrow of the Republic. This new youth brought to the Empire would burry deeper and deeper the prospect of Republican restoration and the opposition mantle would be taken up by some other group.

But to come back on the more immediate causes of the Empire fall, the situation in 1870 was still volatile.
The funerals of Victor Noir, journalist mortally shot by a distant scion of the Dynasty (of the Lucien House, pariahs of the Bonaparte dynasty since the days of Napoleon I), trigerred so much uproar that the organizers had a very hard time preventing the funerals from degenerating into uprising (a scenario which to me looks like the funerals of General Lamarque in 1832 and the following uprising immortalized by Victor Hugo in Les Misérables), a scenario as much feared by the government.
And the uprising that led to proclamation of the Third Republic on September 4th was more due to Trochu apathy and deception with Napoleon III, having lost hope with him since he had given up the Plan of Chalons (as I would call it) that Trochu, Prince Napoleon and some members of the Imperial staff had engineered to have the Emperor returning to Paris and put an end to the Regency of Empress Eugénie. Under this plan, Trochu would be appointed Military Governor of the capital, the Emperor would return to Paris, the Regency would be ended, the Army would retreat and use the cover of Paris' defenses to recover. However, at some point, Napoleon III had the idea to ''consult'' his beloved wife who easily convinced him to reject the plan; it is a fact that Eugénie did everything to keep her husband away from the capital and remain Regent. When Trochu, already appointed military governor of the capital, learned of the Emperor's change of mind, he was deeply angered and had this conversation with Prince Napoleon in the afternoon of August 17th:

- All is lost.
- Does it mean that you will help to overthrow our dynasty?
- No, I wouldn't help, but I wouldn't defend it.

Quote from PLON-PLON, The Red Bonaparte by Michèle Battesti, pp499-500​

Actually, the demonstrations which led to the Corps Législatif voting the proclamation of the Republic by a ''reluctant'' Gambetta (he doesn't want to make a coup, reminding the one of 1851), could have easily be dispersed by Paris garrison, but Trochu did nothing to oppose the crowds which converged on the Palais Bourbon and the Gendarmes entrusted with its protection stood aside.

Then, had the Plan of Chalons worked, it would have essentially sidelined Empress Eugénie, and given the weak mind of Napoleon III after the string of defeats, his cousin Prince Napoleon would have likely taken charge of the military matters, having a better reputation within the Army and the Navy than the Emperor himself, Trochu even saying ''there was at Chalons no other Napoleon than him'' (while both the Emperor and his cousin were here).

Post franco-prussian war, the choice of republican regime was only a compromise because monarchiste could not agree on the kind of monarchy.

As far as the war is concerned, Prussia had a very hard time defeating the austrian army (and its german allies) which resisted and fought better than the french army.

So if the french had intervened on the austrian side, the prussians would have been forced to split forces and would certainly have lost the war.

I was not saying that France would have lost; to the contrary, French intervention would have mean Prussian defeat, but even with Prussian forces split, the French Army of 1866 would have had a hard time defeating them in Rhineland (look at what happened in 1870 when the French moved into Germany, not even with their full strength involved), given Prussian far better organization and training.
Though, I don't think that Bismarck would have waited for a defeat in Rhineland. This man was smart enough to recognize a defeat in waiting and ask for a cease fire soon after the French Army would have begun operations. Having already fooled Napoleon III once, he could have tried another time and asked for a peace conference, what Napoleon III would have very willingly agreed to (I don't know why, but he seemed to be a fan of such conferences).

 

[galileo-034]

the survival of Niel means that there is another senior competent French figure to balance out the incompetence ones such as Bazaine.

There were many senior competent figures to balance Bazaine.
The first tht comes to my mind is Canrobert who should have led the Army of the Rhine (AoR) on the planned retreat to Chalons instead of Bazaine, but he was afraid of so much responsibilities. Still, he had done a good job in Crimea, and he was a man to follow orders (ie Bazaine had been appointed purposely to bring the Army of the Rhine back to Chalons).
There also was LeBoeuf, a good organizer, but Bazaine went ahead of him in the list of possible commanders for the AoR.

On the lesser level, there were de Ladmirault, Frossard, one of the most agressive generals of the time, de Cissey, Faidherbe ...

The incompetent behaviour of Bazaine during the War of 1870 comes as a surprise regarding his previous exploits in Crimea and Italy. Mexico was maybe too much for him.

Another point to rise: contrary to their First Empire predecessors, most of the officers of the French Army during the Second Empire had been raised at the ''Algerian School'' for the conquest of Algeria was actually the only war they were occupied to lead since the fall of Napoleon I. Crimea and Italy are in this regard exceptions. This reflected in the mentalities of officers in 1870 and was a disadvantage.

 

[Nassirisimo]

One of Frossard's problems was that he was one of the chief proponents of the defensive school of French doctrine. This wasn't so much defensive as outright passive, and was at least partially responsible for the French defeat in the war. Keeping Niel isn't really going to do much to change this, and the big differences are going to be in other areas.

And I agree with you on the point that France would not have done well in 1866. The French army's equipment was rather outdated, and even distracted the Prussians could have done well against her army. At least held them off until such time that forces could be redeployed.

 

[Nassirisimo]

Matthew Howard; The Franco-Prussian War (London: Harrison & Bernard, 1981)
​

In contrast to the conscientious reforms of the Prussian army, the efforts of the French army to bring itself up to a modern standard following the Austro-Prussian War were far more haphazard. Although Niel was a capable Minister of War (and after the December of 1869, Chief of the General Staff), the French army was held back by its many institutional faults. Niel did not have the time to improve the quality of recruits into the French army, ensuring that many were still comparatively illiterate. French officers remained comparatively incompetent compared to their Prussian adversaries, being older and less educated than them. The army continued to see problems with the discipline of the men, and Niel’s efforts to curb the heavy drinking of the average French solider made almost no impact whatsoever on the level of alcohol consumption in the French army. This indirectly encouraged the lax attitude of the solider toward military drills and the like.

The army also continued to suffer the ravages of the corruption that afflicted the French government as a whole. Funds that were intended for the army were sometimes siphoned off by corrupt officials, or with the case of receipts for those who had paid their way out of the draft, were actually taken by Napoleon III himself. When considering the amount that was taken away from the French army in terms of money, it was a wonder that the army managed to remain adequately funded throughout the 1860’s, and was a testament to the impressive resources that France could call upon despite the slow nature of her industrialization. The funding situation became easier following the Prussian victory at Sadowa, when some republican resistance to the military withdrew their previous objections.

This enabled Napoleon III to make key purchases that would see the French better armed than the Prussians. The centrepiece of the French army was now to the be newly designed Chassepot. This was a weapon that was widely admired as much outside of France as within. Several German officers displayed a huge amount of admiration for what they labelled an “elegant killing machine”. Certainly, considering its range, its stopping power and its additional advantages (smaller cartridges) the Chassepot was undoubtedly superior to the Prussian needle gun, which was almost a quarter of a century old and was most definitely showing its age. Although some historians have gone as far as the call the Chassepot the decisive weapon in terms of its effect on the war, this may too strong of a statement when the course of the battles are analysed in further detail. Nevertheless, the Chassepot represented perhaps the largest advantage that the French had over the German armies in terms of equipment.

The rearmament of the French artillery was far less dramatic than that of their small arms. The money spent on acquiring the Krupp breach-loading cannons already used by their Prussian opponents was almost ten times less that spend on the development of the Chassepot. Nevertheless, the Krupp cannons represented an enormous improvement to what the French had used before, despite the grumbling on the part of some for Napoleon not choosing a French firm to produce the artillery pieces needed. French commanders were certainly impressed by the quick firing capabilities of the Krupp cannons, though saw them as more of a support weapon than anything else, failing to appreciate their potential on the battlefield. This however was hardly a trait that was unique to the French army, and was one of many examples of a general failure across Europe to grasp the importance of artillery in modern warfare.

Equipment was an area in which the French unquestionably held an advantage over their Prussian adversaries, but it was perhaps the only area in which this is true. As mentioned before, the quality of French recruits did not match up to those of Prussia’s, and this had effects on the way the French army operated. Whereas Moltke encouraged the use of personal initiative among his officers, French military thought was centred on the static defence, focusing on holding what were termed to be “positions magnifique” at almost all costs. This lack of flexibility was admired by some but in practical terms almost led the French to disaster on more than one occasion. And of course, the lack of education among the French officer corps would ensure that throughout the war, there would be a distinct lack of initiative among the French.

At the very least, the French should be praised for their adoption of a Prussian-style general staff system. Napoleon III had originally intended to make Niel the chief of the reformed French general staff in the summer of 1869 but was unable to due to a bout of bad health on the part of Niel. The appointment finally came in the December of 1869, and this brought a large change to the way that the French army operated. Napoleon hoped that the General Staff would prove adequate to coordinate an army mobilized for any future Franco-German war, which would probably be the largest army that France had assembled since the ill-fated Russian campaign of 1812. It had showed that France was going some way toward adopting the key military innovations that had been pioneered by Prussia as well, which was a promising development for French military power.

 

[galileo-034]

Regarding his actions, I see Frossard as one of the most competent generals of the Imperial Army (including de Ladmirault, Cissey and cie), showing more agressivity and tenacity than any other general. He performed very well at Forbach but was forced to withdraw because of Bazaine refusal to committ reinforcements. At Mars-la-Tour, he bore much of the initial shock, resisting all the morning, until the other corps arrived in early afternoon.

Now, if you can remove Bazaine from the equation (at least during the retreat from Metz) with Niel in charge, France would be safer.

 

[galileo-034]

Regarding the officer corps, I wouldn't say it is in such a bad condition. In fact, it was a matter where France had an advantage over Prussia. The problem with Prussian military establishment is that they trade quality and quantity: Prussian officers are better than French officers, but there is more French officers than Prussian officers.
And then, if the defensive doctrine is so strong, it is by default. As I said, the French Army isn't doctrinally adapted to continental wars, just good for colonial wars, resulting in lack of coherent tactics and strategy.

On breach-loading steel guns, I would have rather imagined that French would have begun a production of their own. And I doubt that they would have acquired enough of these guns to make a serious difference on tactical level.

Maybe Niel could remedy the problem of the use of Reffye mitrailleuse, of which the potential was neglected. When the French thought to kept it a secret (while soon the Prussians knew about the weapon thanks to Montigny) and as soon as the mitrailleuses were out of factories, they were locked up in stores, only to be delivered with their manual to troops when the war broke out. Thus, when on use, they were manned by inexperienced servants. If Niel could get them out of stores and begin training servants, I think than even a few months would make a difference.

 

[Inquisitor Tolkien]

In contrast to the contentious reforms of the Prussian army,

Successful? I think contentious is the wrong word here unless I'm gravely mistaken.

taken away from the Prussian army in terms of money, it was a wonder that the army managed to remain adequately funded throughout the 1860’s, and was a testament to the impressive resources that France could call upon despite the slow nature of her industrialization.

I think you're referring to the French army here.

I'm watching this thread, if you don't mind :s

 

[Nassirisimo]

Regarding the officer corps, I wouldn't say it is in such a bad condition. In fact, it was a matter where France had an advantage over Prussia. The problem with Prussian military establishment is that they trade quality and quantity: Prussian officers are better than French officers, but there is more French officers than Prussian officers.
And then, if the defensive doctrine is so strong, it is by default. As I said, the French Army isn't doctrinally adapted to continental wars, just good for colonial wars, resulting in lack of coherent tactics and strategy.

On breach-loading steel guns, I would have rather imagined that French would have begun a production of their own. And I doubt that they would have acquired enough of these guns to make a serious difference on tactical level.

Maybe Niel could remedy the problem of the use of Reffye mitrailleuse, of which the potential was neglected. When the French thought to kept it a secret (while soon the Prussians knew about the weapon thanks to Montigny) and as soon as the mitrailleuses were out of factories, they were locked up in stores, only to be delivered with their manual to troops when the war broke out. Thus, when on use, they were manned by inexperienced servants. If Niel could get them out of stores and begin training servants, I think than even a few months would make a difference.

The problem with French officers was that they were rather ill-educated, and that they were often quite old in comparison to their Prussian counterparts. While defensive strategies were superior even by this point (battles such as Plevna would show this), the French tended not to play an active role in defence. While the lack of caution that the Prussians showed (such as at Mars La Tour) almost doomed them, the extreme caution shown by the French ensured that these mistakes would not become disasters, and that the Prussians would be able to bounce back from them fairly easily.

The Mitrailleuse may have more of an emphasis on its actual practice than its role as a surprise weapon. While not a war winner in itself, it can certainly contribute to the swarm of bullets that the French army was capable of putting out OTL. Prussian armies might be stopped even more easily.

Successful? I think contentious is the wrong word here unless I'm gravely mistaken.


I think you're referring to the French army here.

I'm watching this thread, if you don't mind :s

I should have proofread this a third time before I posted. Thanks for pointing the mistakes out and for following.

 

[Richter von Manthofen]

INteresting new (for me) approach

 

[Nassirisimo]

Paris, March 12th 1870​

Paris had changed greatly in the reign of the third Emperor Napoleon. The fetid streets of medieval Paris had given way to perhaps the most modern city in the world. Wide tree lined avenues dominated the city, which was increasingly renowned around the world for its modernity. However, Pierre Montagne would not be impressed by the cheap tricks of the man who had crushed the Republic dreamed of by urban revolutionaries such as himself.

He walked through the boulevards of Paris, witnessing the contented lives of the middle classes. Overhearing the discussions of France’s military reforms, or even worse more vapid topics such as art or literature. He was not sure what he hated more. Was it the bourgeois which built its own wealth on the misery of the Parisian poor. Or maybe it was the military, who he held nothing but contempt for. “Nothing but the dogs of the June criminal” more or less summed up Pierre’s attitude toward the French army, and he thought even less of yet more Frenchman. For someone who thought himself a man of the people, he seemed to hate an inordinately high number of them.

He approached an unremarkable door in a rather dimly lit alleyway. Looking to his sides to make sure the coast was clear, he knocked on the door, and was almost immediately allowed entrance. “Haha, the big man Pierre! Our table is finally complete. Take a seat, won’t you?” Pierre obliged and sat down next to Albert, the man who had welcomed him. Albert finished the beer in his glass called out to the overworked barmaid for another and turned to Pierre. “How is your life my comrade? I trust that all is well?”

Pierre nodded. “As well as it can be for the time being. Work is hard and my son is not getting any better, though I should be glad that his condition is not worsening either. We will be able to afford a doctor in the next month I think”

Albert spoke with a solemn look on his face, though whether or not this was feigned or genuine was known only to himself “Of course, what a lack of doctors there is sometimes! In this city, a rich man can see one right away, even if he has merely stubbed his toe on a piece of furniture, while a poor man waits weeks even with a broken leg. An example of the decadence of the times we live in, I would guess.”

Pierre threw up his shoulders. “You speak the truth my friends, but we cannot move for now. Napoleon may be weakening, yet he still has the support of country bumpkins and the army. I am sure even they will desert him within time. I have already heard grumbling from the army over his military reforms. It would appear he seeks to make our society as militaristic as that of the Prussians”. He spat on the floor to emphasise his distaste for France’s North-eastern neighbours.

Gustave, who had previously been finishing off the food he had ordered now spoke out. “But what if it does come to war? What if the nation does rally around our incompetent Emperor? Or worse, what if he could win?”

Albert dismissed him. “I do not think so. He was too afraid to take on the Prussian’s after Sadowa and we all know why. We are simply, outmatched. Our forces could not even win in Mexico, so how they would deal with the best of Europe I cannot quite imagine…”

Pierre challenged this. “Surely the reforms have gone some way toward resolving the weaknesses of our armies. With the Chassepot and those new cannons, there has to be at least some improvement made.”

Albert began to lecture his two friends, both of whom seemed not to be enjoying the prospect. “An army’s might is derived principally from its strength of will. Soldiers who are propelled by superior morale, gained from a superior cause can overwhelm even those who are better armed than they. Why do you think that the armies of Revolutionary France made so many conquests all those years ago?”

Gustave chuckled as he gave an unexpected answer to Albert’s rhetorical question. “Why, Napoleon of course!”

Albert did nothing except roll his eyes at Gustave’s barbed joke. As he was preparing to speak again, two men entered from the same door that Pierre had gone through just a few minutes before. Gustave nudged Albert. “I do not think it is best to continue our discussion here, comrade. Perhaps we should retire to my apartment, where we may be able to discuss these things without fear.” Both Albert and Pierre nodded, and the three men left the table and exited through the door, the whole time being watched by the two men who had entered.

 

[galileo-034]

This update about revolutionnary agitation makes me thinking of Chevandier de Valdrome, Minister of the Interior under Ollivier, very firm and having great self-control, which he made the proof during the funerals of Victor Noir in January 1870, keeping things quiet while the government feared an imminent insurrection.
I would be curious of what would happen to him during the war. He was a man with the capacity of keeping things quiet on the domestic front.

Also, March 12th, it's barely two months ahead of the referendum.