Biggest "You Blew it!" moments in History (Pre-1900)

[stevej713]

Napoleon III.
I could just leave it at that, but I'll qualify by saying Nap III in 1870, blundering in to a declaration of war on Prussia over a matter which had already been settled in France's favour. It wasn't his 1st blunder, but it was the one which cost him his throne.
Seldom in modern history has a reasonably intelligent and undoubtedly talented man done so many just plain dumb, DUMB things in relatively rapid succession...

I think you're being a little unfair here. The Franco-Prussian War was preceded by political turmoil that a large segment of the French government (including the Empress) and the public thought would be remedied by a quick war. Many in France (and indeed, the rest of the world) perceived at the time that France was a cutting edge military power and was essentially unbeatable. Napoleon III reacted to this domestic pressure in true populist form. Yes, as the head of state he ultimately bore the responsibility for the war's outcome, but he doesn't deserve ALL the blame.

 

[Sertorius126]

The expedition to Sicily is a very good proof of how one terrible general could doom a military operation that, by all means, should have been a huge success. Not only it turned into a colossal defeat, Athens lost its sovereignty over Greece forever because of it.

 

[Curtain Jerker]

I think it was mentioned earlier but everything the Byzantines did during the Fourth Crusade.

Honorable mention: the various Italian states inviting Charles VIII to Italy, thinking they could control him (whoops!) and jump-starting the Italian Wars and reducing all of them to the status of second-rate powers as a result of decades of fighting.

 

[bguy]

Napoleon rejecting the Frankfurt proposals.

 

[Abd ar-Rahman II]

I think you're being a little unfair here. The Franco-Prussian War was preceded by political turmoil that a large segment of the French government (including the Empress) and the public thought would be remedied by a quick war. Many in France (and indeed, the rest of the world) perceived at the time that France was a cutting edge military power and was essentially unbeatable. Napoleon III reacted to this domestic pressure in true populist form. Yes, as the head of state he ultimately bore the responsibility for the war's outcome, but he doesn't deserve ALL the blame.

From what I remember he was one of the rare man in France to have understand the need of military reform to face Prussia and tried to do it with the Niel reform but failed because of the general hostility gainât the idea in all part of the French population and the loss of his absolute power in the liberal empire

 

[Aghasverov]

I think you're being a little unfair here. The Franco-Prussian War was preceded by political turmoil that a large segment of the French government (including the Empress) and the public thought would be remedied by a quick war. Many in France (and indeed, the rest of the world) perceived at the time that France was a cutting edge military power and was essentially unbeatable. Napoleon III reacted to this domestic pressure in true populist form. Yes, as the head of state he ultimately bore the responsibility for the war's outcome, but he doesn't deserve ALL the blame.

I think you're being a little unfair here. The Franco-Prussian War was preceded by political turmoil that a large segment of the French government (including the Empress) and the public thought would be remedied by a quick war. Many in France (and indeed, the rest of the world) perceived at the time that France was a cutting edge military power and was essentially unbeatable. Napoleon III reacted to this domestic pressure in true populist form. Yes, as the head of state he ultimately bore the responsibility for the war's outcome, but he doesn't deserve ALL the blame.

I'll concur with that. Heh, a couple months ago I even penned a sort of apologium for Nap III, for being a little too hard on him. Still though, damn... The French had the best rifles in the world at the time, but that was about all they had going for them.
I'll stick with what I've said before about Nap III - had he stuck to domestic improvements, he would be very well-remembered today... his foreign meddling and muddling usually turned out badly (Mexico) and when it turned out successfully (for him) wound up leaving a bad taste even in his allies' mouths (Italy).

 

[Drizzt]

- Prime Minister Wang Yun not offering amnesty to Dong Zhuo's subordinates.

- The Carthagian Senate/Council/Assembly half assing the 2nd Punic War. Either giving full support to Hannibal or not fighting Rome at all would have been preferable, but their OTL "strategy" pretty much ensured that Rome would end up extremely pissed with Carthage, while also making it impossible for Hannibal to take the city since he didn't have siege engineers.

- Boudica going after the shiny Roman Towns with loot instead of going after the three Legions while they were still split up and could have been defeated in detail.

- Ceasar Augustus marrying Livia.

- The Scottish Nobility inviting the King next door to settle their succession dispute.

 

[Darth_Kiryan]

Abraham Lincoln changing his running mate, and Mary Todd Lincoln rejecting the Grants' invitation for Ford's Theatre

IIRC I though Julia said no because not many people liked Mary Todd.

Well, Mary Todd Lincoln was nuts. And incredibly jealous.

- Ceasar Augustus marrying Livia.

Why? It was a decent political move, unless you specifically ascribe to the "Livia is evil" theory in that she killed every contender to the throne in order to put Tiberius as Emperor.

 

[sampleswift]

Would this be a "You Blew It" moment...
Intolerable acts
Pickett's Charge

 

[Bregil]

Pickett's Charge

I would argue against Pickett's Charge being a "You Blew It" moment. It certainly hastened the end but Lee was never going to win at that point (either at Gettysburg on the 3rd day specifically or the war in general). The CSA was facing such odds that the only way they could have militarily won that war was by not making a single mistake and the Union giving up.

I would submit basically everything associated with Girard de Ridefort as Grand Master of the Templars. Guy & Sibylla's Coup, the Battles of Cressen and Hattin, ordering the surrender of a Templar castle to ransom himself....... Seriously, that guy was poison to everything he touched. How much longer would the Kingdom of Jerusalem have lasted without his self-serving meddling?

 

[sampleswift]

I would argue against Pickett's Charge being a "You Blew It" moment. It certainly hastened the end but Lee was never going to win at that point (either at Gettysburg on the 3rd day specifically or the war in general). The CSA was facing such odds that the only way they could have militarily won that war was by not making a single mistake and the Union giving up.

I would submit basically everything associated with Girard de Ridefort as Grand Master of the Templars. Guy & Sibylla's Coup, the Battles of Cressen and Hattin, ordering the surrender of a Templar castle to ransom himself....... Seriously, that guy was poison to everything he touched. How much longer would the Kingdom of Jerusalem have lasted without his self-serving meddling?

Another you blew it Crusades moment
Reynald de Chatillon attacking Muslim caravans, which made the Muslims more likely to support Saladin who led Muslim armies to beat the Crusaders.
Frederick Barbarossa drowning on crusade

 

[Sertorius126]

Ceasar Augustus marrying Livia.

Why? She was an invaluable ally and advisor, a well connected aristocratic woman with two sons who served Augustus well while he ruled. After he died, she did her best to keep the Julian and the Claudian side of the family to harm each other, and until the day she died, she preserved the empire from Sejanus’ clutches. Plus, Augustus and Livia loved each other, 51 years of loving marriage are no common thing even in our days, and especially in those.

 

[UCB79]

Richard *didn't* trust Stanley, which is why he took his son hostage. If he "blew" Bosworth it was by gambling everything on decapitating the opposition, but even that is doubtful as he seems to have been already losing.

If anyone "blew it" in the WotR, it was surely the Earl of Oxford at Barnet, when he attacked the wrong army.

Touche Mikenstone I forgot all about that. Can I just say that I wasn’t completely sure, which is why I put a
question mark after my entry re Richard III. Back to the history books!

 

[GuildedAgeNostalgia]

In the 18th-19th-20th century, I would say that the biggest you blew it moment was when the Russian Tsar Peter III decided to make peace with Prussia during the 7 Years War, aka The Miracle of the House of Brandenburg.

Russia had the chance to literally destroy Prussia. Prussia was surrounded on all sides, it's military completely evicsorated and 3/4 of its country under occupation. Instead the Fredrick the Great fanboy Tsar Peter III made peace and withdrew.

Prussia would later become the major power in Europe and unify all of Germany, leading to the following atrocities that Russia had to face:
- World War One
- Russian Civil War
- World War Two and Holocaust
- Communist Oppression and economic stagnation.

Had Peter III destroyed Prussia in 1762, Russia would be a premier World Power with the world's largest economy and a population of 400 to 500 million and there's be no one in Europe who'd be able to stand in their way.

 

[RedSword12]

In the 18th-19th-20th century, I would say that the biggest you blew it moment was when the Russian Tsar Peter III decided to make peace with Prussia during the 7 Years War, aka The Miracle of the House of Brandenburg.

Russia had the chance to literally destroy Prussia. Prussia was surrounded on all sides, it's military completely evicsorated and 3/4 of its country under occupation. Instead the Fredrick the Great fanboy Tsar Peter III made peace and withdrew.

Prussia would later become the major power in Europe and unify all of Germany, leading to the following atrocities that Russia had to face:
- World War One
- Russian Civil War
- World War Two and Holocaust
- Communist Oppression and economic stagnation.

Had Peter III destroyed Prussia in 1762, Russia would be a premier World Power with the world's largest economy and a population of 400 to 500 million and there's be no one in Europe who'd be able to stand in their way.

That's with the benefit of hindsight, and 100% a preposterous suggestion. A wide variety of events led up to the series of disasters that befell Russia. You can't seriously lay it all down on Czar Peter, not when the incompetence and stupidity of countless Russian policymakers contributed far more and more directly. Destroying Prussia is not guaranteed to make the timeline better for Russia. You can't know how things would have gone down in that alternate timeline. Prussia did not need to be destroyed for there to be a better world. There are a million other ways people can make things even worse than OTL, even if Prussia is destroyed (which was not exactly on the table, anyway). This is not a case where it's a clear shot between failure and success. This is so, so far removed so as to be almost irrelevant to the exact events that occurred almost 2 centuries later. It's like blaming Horatio Nelson for the Bengal Famine of 1943.

 

[schai]

The Qing Dynasty dismantling the Woosung Road, which was China's first railway and operated for less than a year.

How did that change the course of history?

 

[Mikestone8]

One of my teachers had "Don't worry, I have everything under control" attributed to him on one of the bilboards.

But as much as it sucked for the 7th Cav. It's not like your country ceased to exist or you were guillotined other cool interesting things.

The one I remember is the one about Custer's last words. "Oh, don't be such an old woman. The Indians couldn't possibly score a hit at this dist - - - AARGGH!"

 

[Mikestone8]

Abraham Lincoln changing his running mate, and Mary Todd Lincoln rejecting the Grants' invitation for Ford's Theatre

Agree with the second part but not the first.

As a perceived Radical, Hamlin was of no value for the 1864 election. He would bring no votes to the ticket that Lincoln woudln't get w/o him. To maximise his appeal Lincoln needed a Democrat, and preferably a Southern or Border State loyalist, though there were other possibles beside Johnson. .

 

[Mikestone8]

Commodus was a symptom of the problems, not the cause.

And even had he predeceased his father, sooner or later *some* Emperor would have left a son, and such a son is more than likely to be a spoiled brat. Whatever happens you can't get good ones all the time.

 

[RMcD94]

In the 18th-19th-20th century, I would say that the biggest you blew it moment was when the Russian Tsar Peter III decided to make peace with Prussia during the 7 Years War, aka The Miracle of the House of Brandenburg.

Russia had the chance to literally destroy Prussia. Prussia was surrounded on all sides, it's military completely evicsorated and 3/4 of its country under occupation. Instead the Fredrick the Great fanboy Tsar Peter III made peace and withdrew.

Prussia would later become the major power in Europe and unify all of Germany, leading to the following atrocities that Russia had to face:
- World War One
- Russian Civil War
- World War Two and Holocaust
- Communist Oppression and economic stagnation.

Had Peter III destroyed Prussia in 1762, Russia would be a premier World Power with the world's largest economy and a population of 400 to 500 million and there's be no one in Europe who'd be able to stand in their way.

Catherine could have immediately undone the deal but she did not, rather she strengthened the Russian and Prussian ties. Peter getting the blame is just part of her great propaganda. So if he blew it then so did Catherine. Never mind that it was a pretty great political decision that benefited Russia for a long time

Germany uniting under Austria would not have led to a better situation for Russia, and Prussia was almost the only thing that stood in their way.