Facepalm... that man was a bigger danger then the Germans
Edit: what are the odds of our Tsar to visit a big war game and wanting to do the same which bring all problems to life?
No GNW (or “Peter goes South”)
- Thread starter alexmilman
- Start date
Edit: what are the odds of our Tsar to visit a big war game and wanting to do the same which bring all problems to life?
Look at Samsonov’s bio on wiki. 😢 Most of his career he was holding staff and administrative positions and his top field position was commander of the cavalry forces in the First Siberian Army Corps. After which he went again to the staff and administrative work. The rest had the same pattern even if they did not achieve the same notoriety.
To be fair, the main blame for Tannenberg goes to NN and his chief of staff. They knew of a potential scheduling problem between the two armies but choose to ignore it and then did nothing to keep situation under control. But two “heroes” at the front clearly were not used to making the fast decisions on their own and did not even arrange for the basic operational functions like adequate scouting of the area.
I’m thinking about something like that but I need to find more material regarding Roon’s reforms and to figure out how to make an impression not only on the tsar but also the military establishment. In OTL the Great Milutin and his cronies mostly ignored the lessons of 1870 and 1877-78 by which time the French model was thoroughly discredited), especially in the areas which directly impacted their personal well-being (practice of appointing the General Staff officers on commanding positions) . IIRC, the corps and army structures had been eventually restored but many other problems remained including inadequacy of the Russian General Staff to the modern war. The best thing I did come so far is to make the Prussian GS equally incompetent. 😂
And, of course, to avoid a major war…. Oops, I ended sounding like a doctor in an old joke about the guy who came for an advice on how to avoid one more pregnancy of his wife. To skip the intermediate details, the final advice was “and no sex!” 😂
If you keep American history somewhat on track you could have some lessons learned from American civil war (it was first war to use industrial warfare). And then if you still modernize Prussian military and use those same things in "Brothers War" , well some lessons need to be learned from those, Russia just need to pay close attention.
The OTL problem was that the Russian Ministry of War happily ignored not only a relatively remote USCW and Franco-Prussian War (in which the Russian officers, AFAIK, had been present as the observers) but even its own war of 1877-78. It is tempting to bring the old saying that a wise man learns on others’ mistakes and a fool on his own but what about someone who is unwilling to learn on his own mistakes? And Milutin was not a fool by any measure. So perhaps it was ego, which was standing on the way of changing the system he created?
I read that eventually corps and army structures had been restored but could not find when it did happen. The prevalence of the General Staff officers remained all the way to WWI and the results are well-known. System by which approximately half of the educated class were exempt from the military service (Prussian/German example already was there and ignored) produced terrible results during WWI: army found itself out of the professional officers at the front with a need to pass the more or less suitable cadres through the crash courses for the junior officers while plenty of the professional officers including the graduate of the General Staff Academy remained at the rear on all types of administrative positions. Ditto for the non-coms: no proper care had been taken to retain enough of them in a peace time army and when the war came the army wad running out of the people capable of teaching the new soldiers, etc.
I’ll do what I can including avoidance of a major war (which would be post-1900, and as a result out of the permitted time frame 😜 ).
How old was he at the time? Can't you just give him heart attack?
Otherwise the challenge later on would be to find someone capable enough to replace him and take the lessons to heart.
How about using the Boxer rebellion? You could easily have the Tsar appalled at the state and performance of his troops while seeing only the propaganda of the other Europeans & the Japanese.
He was born in 1816 and in OTL was Minister of War in 1861-81.
In OTL he did perform a great and highly necessary job of converting the old-style professional army into the modern one based upon, in theory, universal conscription. But besides the good part, there were numerous problems with the new system. And this part was shaped by his background:
He was born in 1816 in Moscow. He graduated from the Moscow University Noble Boarding School and became an officer of the guard artillery. In 1835, he enrolled into the Imperial Military Academy.
In 1856, Dmitry Milyutin was appointed the Head of the General Headquarters of the Caucasus Army.
In November 1861, he assumed office of the Minister for War and became an infantry general in 1866. In between he served as a field commander only sporadically and in the relatively minor roles.
The first service (after graduation) 1833-35 in Life-Guards artillery.
1835-36 - Imperial Military academy
after which General Staff of the Guards - 1836-39 (during that time wrote a number of articles on military subjects).
1839 - junior officer on the Caucasus (participated in numerous encounters demonstrating personal courage but from context it looks like he was a staff officer: no references to him commanding any unit and “reconnaissance” is attached to many of these occasions in all other cases “participated”).
1840 - quartermaster of the 3rd Guards Infantry Division.
1840-41 - leave by health reasons, traveled in Europe.
1843 - senior quartermaster of the Caucasian Line and then assigned to Headquarters of the Commander of the Caucasian Corps.
1844 - senior quartermaster of the Chechen corps and then assigned to the Ministry of War and General Staff. All that time keep writing on military subjects, both practical tactical issues and history.
1845 - professor of military geography in the Imperial Military Academy.
1848 - officer for special assignments in staff of the Minister of War. At the same time a member of the Scientific Committee of the Department of Transportation and Public Buildings.
1853 - member of the Emperor’s Personal Military Chancellery.
1854 - “paper pusher” (actually, this is a precise translation of that position; person responsible for documentation processing) of the Special Committee for defending the Baltic Coast.
1856 - more of the same in various committees.
1856 - 60 Chief of Staff of the Caucasian Army.
1860 - Deputy of the Minister of War
1861 - Minister of War
Member of the “circle” of Grand Duchess Helen Pavlovna and Grand Duke Constantine and one of the leading Russian liberals on his own right.
Now, from the above you can easily figure out that his experience as a commanding officer was close to zero and war experience in general was limited to small-scale Caucasus war(s) against the irregulars. OTOH, he definitely knew well all sorts of the military bureaucratic technicalities. None of the above was a problem on its own (Moltke and Roon also were mostly staff officers even if each of them had few years of a service in the army units) but he was a part of a very confused environment of AIIs reign and seemingly had a very high opinion about his own person and judgements. Then, the fundamental ideological differences between Russia and Prussia were:
- In Prussia the children had been indoctrinated in schools along the lines of Prussian patriotism and in Russia the broad school system was on the first stages of its development and the teachers tended to be on a “liberal” side which in this case meant that they would rather be anti-government or neutral because “hurrah patriotism” was a sign of being a retrograde. AFAIK, there was nothing ideological in the curriculum except for the religious studies.
- In Prussia pretty much everybody had to serve to become something (getting administrative, elective and even private employment) while in Russia the educated people and quite a few of the lower classes (merchants, artisans, etc.) had been exempt. Which meant a seriously different social attitude toward the army. And I strongly suspect that Milytin himself had a view of a member of “military intelligencia”: the army officers without academic education were something of a lower form of a life so the high positions must be held by the officers with a high education. This almost inevitably resulted in a low morale of the army officers with all obvious byproducts like a lax attitude toward the service and being generally uninterested in innovations.
Most probably Milytin was looking for the ready examples and in the early 1860s the obvious choice was France: 1st, it had reputedly the best system in Europe and 2nd it was, even as an empire, a liberal state. Prussian reform was going on in parallel with the Russian one and Prussia did not have any reputation whatsoever. Of course, why could not Milytin came with a less faulty system is an open question: it looks (to me) that he copied the worst things from the French and then contributed something not very good of his own.
As a side note, out of the heroes of 1877-78 Gurko did not have academic education and both Skobelev and Fyodor Radetzky both before and after served mostly as a field officers .
Brusilov did not attend the Academy. Denikin was expulsed, passed entry exam again and after the graduation was not assigned to the General Staff “for character”. To be fair, Peter Wrangel did (but served as a field officer before and after).
ITTL, most of the good part had been accomplished well before AII so Milytin is not such a great figure. OTOH, in OTL after his removal AIII did not do too much in the terms of fundamental changes and especially the cadres. And “the cadres are all important”. 😉
Last edited:
More reforms. Prussia
252. More reforms. Prussia
[May be somewhat boring but needed for understanding the future developments]
Prussia.
Things were not going too well for the Prussian monarchy, at least as far as the greater ambitions had been involved. On a positive side, Zollverein was working and economy was steadily improving. But the Erfurt Union started cracking soon after its creation and in the middle 1850s fall apart due to the combination of various factors:
The problem was that for the “state attached to the army” Prussia had an army too weak to be impressive in the modern times. The last war in which Prussia fought, the Great Polish War of 1805-06, already demonstrated the numeric inadequacy of the Prussian army but the problem was in the plain fact that economically poor Prussia could not afford a significant increase of its standing army. The only Prussian officer of that time who had both brains and enough of a clout to push through his ideas, Scharnhorst, was appointed Minister of War. One of his ideas was creation of up to 70,000 trained reservists: period of service in the army was cut short and the adequately trained soldiers had been discharged and replaced with the new recruits (the companies having 40-60 soldiers at the time of peace had been monthly discharging into reserve 5 soldiers). Another idea which he managed to push through in the face of a strong opposition was universal military service. If fully implemented, it would sharply increase size of a Prussian army demanding a number of officers much greater than their traditional supply source, Prussian nobility, could provide. Which meant a great influx of the bourgeoisie into the officers’ corps and, understandably, the resistance was quite serious but he prevailed, at least in theory. By 1813 Prussian army had 25 regiments and 142,000 troops including 70,000 reservists and 30,000 untrained new recruits. But this expansion of the standing army was not big enough to accommodate the great influx of the human material resulting from the universal military service while expansion beyond the existing limits was too costly for the Prussian finances.
The solution was Landwehr. Each province was obligated to mobilize as many men of the ages between 17 and 40 as it could equip. In other words, landwehr was intended to be a properly organized people’s militia that would fight side by side with the regular troops. By 1815 landwehr had 209 battalions of infantry and 174 squadrons of cavalry. At least initially, it was short of the uniforms and weapons but eventually these problems had been resolved. Still, until the 1850s, when its economic situation greatly improved, Prussian Ministry of War could not maintain an army numerically comparable to those of Austria, France or Russia: out of general budget of 48 millions thalers the military expenses amounted to 24 millions and as a result the standing regular army of a peace time was only 125,000.
For the ambitious plans of German unification this was inadequate and the question was how to increase these numbers significantly at the time of war. One of the needed things was to provide an adequate training of the new soldiers within a short period of their service and for this purpose the army units retained the huge proportion of the non-commissioned officers (up to 30 per infantry company). The poor economic situation allowed, for a very low salary and a promise of a low-level civic employment after 12 years of service, to promote and retain enough of the most promising of the soldiers conscripted for a short term. The mandatory 5 years service was broken to 3 years of active service and 2 years of reserve. This was good but a small size of the regular army did not allow to accumulate enough of a reserve in the case of war. An attempt to create “reservists of the reserve” proved to be a failure: these people passed through 4 months of training in a summer time (to save money on accommodations and their heating and uniforms - these reservists had been wearing their own trousers) after which they were for 5 years moved into a reserve. The maneuvers of 1830 demonstrated that these people were forgetting their brief training and were not usable.
An attempt to remedy this problem was a further shortening of the active service to 2 years with 3 in reserve adopted in 1832.
Landwehr still remained the major instrument for “consuming” surplus of the recruits but the issue was immediately politicized. The conservatives did not like a notion of the “armed masses”:
“To arm the people means to organize the resistance to the authorities, to exhaust the finances and even to damage the Christian principles” Wittgenstein, Prussian Minister of Police.
“It is better to weaken Prussia than the regime” Duke of Mecklenburg, commander of the Prussian Guards Corps.
Alexander I warned the Prussian generals that he may find himself forced to save the Kingof Prussia from his own landwehr and Nicholas I in 1846 recommended FWIV to get rid of it.
In the 1810s the leading British military authority, general Sir Arthur Wellesley, after visiting Prussia commented that thanks to landwehr Prussia is even in a more anarchic state than France because nobody has an authority.
Prince Wilhelm of Prussia was its convinced enemy: “communications and discipline are bad and unqualified officers can’t improve them.”
Landwehr’s cavalry, composed of the people coming with their own horses of all sizes and colors, looked silly and was a butt of numerous jokes.
On the opposite side of a political spectrum landwehr was considered a potentially useful tool of a potential opposition to the conservatives which was not endearing it to the King and military establishment and did not guarantee its loyalty to the regime.
Prussian Minister of War in 1841-47, Leopold Hermann Ludwig von Boyen, was quite supportive of this institution and was taking explicit care pf it being quite different from the regular army with its addiction to the parade-ground training but his efforts resulted only in a mutual hostility between these types of the troops.
Landwehr was divided into two classes. The 1st class - young men of 20-25 who did not get into the regular army and the men of 25-32 who passed through the regular service and whose reservist status was exhausted. The 1st class had some local training and once per year participated in the army maneuvers (14 - 28 days).
After the serving in the 1st class they were moved for 7 years into 2nd class which would perform the rear services and form garrisons of the fortresses. They were trained for 8 days per year.
Landwehr was organized based upon the existing administrative units with a battalion corresponding to the district with population of 50-60,000. It had its commander (who chaired the local military recruitment commission), a doctor providing at home services to the battalion’s members, warehouse of uniforms, weapons and other equipment. The battalions in a greater administrative areas were united into the regiments and in each province there was a general in charge.
The new officers had been elected by the serving battalion officers and confirmed by the King. The first candidates had been chosen mostly out of those who passed the regular service as the “volunteers” [3] who after the service went directly into landwehr bypassing the reserve. Then they could be the retired officers and non-coms if they possessed some real estate property and finally anybody with a property of at least 10,000 thalers. Obviously, unlike officer corps of the regular army dominated by the junkers, one of the landwehr was dominated by the bourgeoisie with the resulting differences in a political loyalty.
During mobilization a brigade was formed out of one regular and one landwehr regiment.
Reform.
In 1857 WFIV got a stroke and in 1858 his brother, Prince Wilhelm, became a regent and, after his death in 1861, a king Wilhelm I. By “profession” he was a military man serving starting from the age of 12 in various command positions and successfully performing various diplomatic missions in between. After the death of his father in 1840 and due to the childlessness of his brother, King Frederick William IV, Wilhelm, as the alleged heir to the throne, received the title of Prince of Prussia, was promoted to general from the infantry and appointed chairman of the Council of Ministers and the Council of State. During revolution of 1848 he insisted on suppressing uprising in Berlin by the force of arms and this did not add his popularity. The king and the ministers considered it more prudent to remove him abroad for a while.
In 1850 he was appointed commander in chief and got the first-hand experience of how mobilization should not be conducted.
Taking into an account that the humiliating Die Olmützer Punktation, a deal which paved the way to disbanding of the Erfurt Union, had been conducted by Otto Theodor von Manteuffel who soon afterwards became unpopular Minister-President of Prussia, popularity of Prince Wilhelm (as a potential champion of the Prussian interests) kept growing. As a regent Wilhelm was trying to improve position of Prussia within the HRE but the opposition of Austria and the Middle German states convinced him that achieving the goal requires, first of all, the transformation of the military structure in Prussia itself, which he undertook, entrusting its implementation to the new Minister of War, Roon.
By 1858 Prussian army at the time of peace had 130,000 and during mobilization it was expanding to 200,000 plus 150,000 of the landswehr of the 1st class with 110,000 being left for the rear services. So, with the rear being well provided for, Prussia could move to the theater of war up to 350,000. Disadvantage of that system was that at the time of peace the Prussian army had been providing annual training of only 38,000 of new soldiers and three quarters of the eligible population did not get any training because army was not noticeably growing since 1815 and population between 1815 and 1860 grew considerably [4]. Landwehr, which consisted mostly of the fathers of the families in their 30s, was usable for a defensive war but not as good for the offensive ones as the younger units of a regular army not having any political ideas.
Actually, Wilhelm I had rather conventional ideas popular through out the major European armies: “I don’t need students and rich people in the army” (aka, “no bourgeoisie”). He preferred the well-drilled regular armies and was explaining the French success against the Austrians by the advantage of the long serving troops over the army half of which were the raw recruits.
Wilhelm with Roon outlined framework of the military reform as following:
As a result, size of a peacetime army almost doubled and military budget was increasing by 9 millions thalers and in the case of war the government had the same 350,000 but exclusively regular troops without landwehr. The army became younger and more uniform in its composition. Two parts of this program, increase of the active service by 1 year and practical elimination of landwehr, went against interests of the liberal bourgeoisie with a resulting fight in Landtag: even after the new regiments had been formed, Landtag refused the credit and for few years did not approve the budget. Wilhelm, who was facing opposition from all sides, including his own son, followed Roon’s advice and on 23 September 1862 appointed Bismarck Minister President and Foreign Minister. Bismarck managed to bully Landtag into the submission: from his bellicose speeches it was clear that he is not planning to keep an army as a royal toy (the main accusation against WI) and that rather soon it is going to be used for unification of Germany under Prussia, something that the Prussian liberals wholeheartedly approved of [5]. Now the Hell was in the details.
Commanders. Roon’s main goal was to have enough of the well-educated competent officers capable to educate the new recruits in the peacetime and during a war to choose the more suitable course of action. Starting from the early XIX the care was taken that the officers corps is monolith without any class distinctions. Prussian officer, regardless his small salary, had a high social status and all of them had been equal with the greatest respect going to those serving in the army units with the staff officers being somewhat inferior to them.
Education, service in the General Staff or the Guards were not guaranteeing a faster promotion. As a result, for the first 20 years of service the Prussian officers had been growing in rank very slowly and only at the high level the careers were accelerating, mostly because all officers unsuitable for the next eligible promotion had been mercilessly fired. Existing system of attestations, which involved “friendly” inputs from the colleagues, seemingly working well, except for the very top level.
The highest level commanders were not too impressive: most of them had been “heroes” of 1848. They had, at best, a vague idea regarding military history and if they did, this information mostly served as a ballast preventing from studying the new trends in the warfare.
General Staff. As established in 1814, the General Staff in a peacetime was a just school through which the big numbers of the capable officers have to pass to be able to accomplish the serious tasks during the war. In other words, it was just a part of the army providing a better education for the officers. Nobody would be allow to stay in it for more than 4 years and deep specialists in the bureaucratic paperwork and legalistic were not required. Each year 25% of its officers would return back to the field service and only very few outstanding individuals would later return to it to serve in the higher positions.
Preparation of the General Staff officers was taking 9 years: 3 in academy, then 6 years of the “assignment”: topographic studies in the Big General Staff, service in the staff of an army corps, then 2 years of field service in a branch in which officer did not serve yet. After 3-4 years of service in General Staff an officer would be sent back to the army service.
Jobs requiring deep professional knowledge (like those related to the railroads) had been done by the officers who graduated from the academy but did not make it into the General Staff. All bureaucratic work including details of mobilization had been delegated to “adjutanture”, specialists of the paper work, leaving the General Staff free to dedicate itself strictly to the issues of a military art. As a result, the Prussian General Staff was few times smaller than those of France and Russia.
Role of the General Staff in operational planning and development of the general strategies was negligible, mostly preliminary studies and statistics collection. There was also department of the military history. In 1821 the General Staff was separated from the Ministry of War and became the “Big” General Staff with his chief having a right of a direct report to the king. Well, every commander of an army corps had that right and it was rarely used because bypassing a Minister of War was tactless and plain foolish: the report would be transferred … to the Minister of War. Real task of the Chief of the General Staff was to monitor the military situation in Europe and be ready to report about the chances of war with specific neighbor and about preferable campaign scenario. However, Ministry of Foreign Affairs was not sending information to the General Staff and neither did Minister of War, except when he felt otherwise. By 1857 the General Staff had 64 officers 18 of which constituted the “Big” General Staff.
A big gap was deployment of the railroads in the military purposes. Basically, nobody was studying it with any seriousness.
To change situation a major authoritative and very talented figure was needed but there was none. [6]
Mobilization. An attempt of 1850 proved to be a fundamental fiasco. No work had been done by the Ministry of War to make a realistic usage of the available railroads. Mobilization of the reserves and all landwehr had been announced at the same day. Hundreds thousands of the reservists, high priority shipments of artillery and intendancy departments, and the army units hit the railroad stations simultaneously. Crowds of the hungry reservists had been staying for weeks near the stations, sleeping on a ground and loudly expressing their feelings. Due to the fact that infantry and artillery were in a process of rearmament, their supply caused additional misunderstandings. Landwehr was short of the uniforms and weapons and quite a few of his members found themselves with the smoothbore muskets, cartridges for the rifles and in the civilian clothes. The old ages of Landwehr had been leaving their families without means for existence and the special law was issued ordered the regional administrations to help them with a promise to compensate expenses later on. An operation that had to take a week, took 6 weeks.
It took a considerable effort to fix this problem by 1859. Ministry of War established mobilization schedule based on which the railroads had to prepare themselves to the future activities. Each corps military district was handling its own mobilization issues with the Ministry of War doing general management and in a peacetime replenishing the depots in military districts. Creation of a centralized military depot for the whole army (as was done in Vienna) was an obsolete idea.
Tactics. The weapons could be new but the brains of top level remained the same. Wilhelm I and his generals firmly held to the bayonet push in the close formations. Successful French bayonet charges in Italy only strengthened this idea but additional opportunities presented by Dreyse needle rifle were slowly creeping into the practice. It was definitely making sense to start with shooting before attacking. But this was still more or less a low level initiative to be tested in a real war.
____________
[1] Actually, AII tried to make him a general but he refused and retired. But he was (a) poet and (b) independently wealthy.
[2] Wishful thinking. 😂
[3] Usually well off people who joined army voluntarily and had certain privileges during the service.
[4] In OTL from 10 to 18 millions but I have no idea about the numbers without Polish territories and those on the left bank of the Rhine.
[5] The bellicose liberals were not uniquely British or Russian or French or American (did I miss some countries? feel free to add) phenomena: it was just a matter of a “good cause”, which was rarely absent. 😜
[6] After weighting all pros and contras I decided that von Moltke was not lucky enough to defeat the Turkish medicine and died in the Ottoman-Egyptian War. It will be considerably more fun without the Prussians having such an unfair advantage. 😂
“… most of the generals and officers in command of the small units do not possess significant knowledge of tactics and neither do they have noticeable military talents…”
Clausewitz
“Operations of the large military masses cannot be studied in peacetime. It is to be limited to the study of individual factors, for example, of the area and the experience of previous hikes. However, the success of technology, the improvement of means of communication and communication, new weapons, in short, a completely changed situation - make more inapplicable the means that previously gave victory, and even the rules established by the greatest commanders.”
Moltke
“There are only four types of officer. First, there are the lazy, stupid ones. Leave them alone, they do no harm…Second, there are the hard-working, intelligent ones. They make excellent staff officers, ensuring that every detail is properly considered. Third, there are the hard-working, stupid ones. These people are a menace and must be fired at once. They create irrelevant work for everybody. Finally, there are the intelligent, lazy ones. They are suited for the highest office.”Clausewitz
“Operations of the large military masses cannot be studied in peacetime. It is to be limited to the study of individual factors, for example, of the area and the experience of previous hikes. However, the success of technology, the improvement of means of communication and communication, new weapons, in short, a completely changed situation - make more inapplicable the means that previously gave victory, and even the rules established by the greatest commanders.”
Moltke
Manstein
“What a fool will be doing without a governmental employment? Where would he go?”
Leskov
“God, don’t let me to become a general and get stupid without any fault of mine!”
A.K.Tolstoy [1]
“Oh, damn, it's nice to be a general!”
N.V.Gogol [2]
“The ancient Prussian simplicity recommended by Frederick the Great to his representative in London, in the saying: "If you have to walk, say that 100,000 people follow you," testifies to bragging; the witty king could only say it in a fit of excessive stinginess. Now everyone has 100 thousand people, but it seems that we didn't have them in Dresden times.”
Bismarck
“What a fool will be doing without a governmental employment? Where would he go?”
Leskov
“God, don’t let me to become a general and get stupid without any fault of mine!”
A.K.Tolstoy [1]
“Oh, damn, it's nice to be a general!”
N.V.Gogol [2]
“The ancient Prussian simplicity recommended by Frederick the Great to his representative in London, in the saying: "If you have to walk, say that 100,000 people follow you," testifies to bragging; the witty king could only say it in a fit of excessive stinginess. Now everyone has 100 thousand people, but it seems that we didn't have them in Dresden times.”
Bismarck
[May be somewhat boring but needed for understanding the future developments]
Prussia.
Things were not going too well for the Prussian monarchy, at least as far as the greater ambitions had been involved. On a positive side, Zollverein was working and economy was steadily improving. But the Erfurt Union started cracking soon after its creation and in the middle 1850s fall apart due to the combination of various factors:
- Austrian diplomacy managed to persuade the electors of Saxony and Hanover that their interests will be better served by them remaining the top level personages of the HRE than by turning into the vassals of Prussia.
- Even without Austria, three governments could agree upon the common constitution and a joined parliament never materialized.
- In Prussia itself conservative nobility and feudal-corporate and anti-national (aka, pro-Prussian) groups ralliying around the General Ludwig Friedrich Leopold von Gerlach increasingly successfully opposed Union policy which they considered too liberal.
- Demonstrated Prussian military weakness. In 1850 Austria allied with Bavaria in the name of HRE planned to invade Hessen in order to assist the beleaguered prince there. However, the military roads that connected the western part of Prussia with the eastern part ran through Hessen. Prussia wanted to protect these roads militarily. Declared Prussian mobilization proved to be a clear disaster and FWIII had to back off with a terrible loss of face. His Erfurt allies choose to join a prevailed side.
The problem was that for the “state attached to the army” Prussia had an army too weak to be impressive in the modern times. The last war in which Prussia fought, the Great Polish War of 1805-06, already demonstrated the numeric inadequacy of the Prussian army but the problem was in the plain fact that economically poor Prussia could not afford a significant increase of its standing army. The only Prussian officer of that time who had both brains and enough of a clout to push through his ideas, Scharnhorst, was appointed Minister of War. One of his ideas was creation of up to 70,000 trained reservists: period of service in the army was cut short and the adequately trained soldiers had been discharged and replaced with the new recruits (the companies having 40-60 soldiers at the time of peace had been monthly discharging into reserve 5 soldiers). Another idea which he managed to push through in the face of a strong opposition was universal military service. If fully implemented, it would sharply increase size of a Prussian army demanding a number of officers much greater than their traditional supply source, Prussian nobility, could provide. Which meant a great influx of the bourgeoisie into the officers’ corps and, understandably, the resistance was quite serious but he prevailed, at least in theory. By 1813 Prussian army had 25 regiments and 142,000 troops including 70,000 reservists and 30,000 untrained new recruits. But this expansion of the standing army was not big enough to accommodate the great influx of the human material resulting from the universal military service while expansion beyond the existing limits was too costly for the Prussian finances.
The solution was Landwehr. Each province was obligated to mobilize as many men of the ages between 17 and 40 as it could equip. In other words, landwehr was intended to be a properly organized people’s militia that would fight side by side with the regular troops. By 1815 landwehr had 209 battalions of infantry and 174 squadrons of cavalry. At least initially, it was short of the uniforms and weapons but eventually these problems had been resolved. Still, until the 1850s, when its economic situation greatly improved, Prussian Ministry of War could not maintain an army numerically comparable to those of Austria, France or Russia: out of general budget of 48 millions thalers the military expenses amounted to 24 millions and as a result the standing regular army of a peace time was only 125,000.
For the ambitious plans of German unification this was inadequate and the question was how to increase these numbers significantly at the time of war. One of the needed things was to provide an adequate training of the new soldiers within a short period of their service and for this purpose the army units retained the huge proportion of the non-commissioned officers (up to 30 per infantry company). The poor economic situation allowed, for a very low salary and a promise of a low-level civic employment after 12 years of service, to promote and retain enough of the most promising of the soldiers conscripted for a short term. The mandatory 5 years service was broken to 3 years of active service and 2 years of reserve. This was good but a small size of the regular army did not allow to accumulate enough of a reserve in the case of war. An attempt to create “reservists of the reserve” proved to be a failure: these people passed through 4 months of training in a summer time (to save money on accommodations and their heating and uniforms - these reservists had been wearing their own trousers) after which they were for 5 years moved into a reserve. The maneuvers of 1830 demonstrated that these people were forgetting their brief training and were not usable.
An attempt to remedy this problem was a further shortening of the active service to 2 years with 3 in reserve adopted in 1832.
Landwehr still remained the major instrument for “consuming” surplus of the recruits but the issue was immediately politicized. The conservatives did not like a notion of the “armed masses”:
“To arm the people means to organize the resistance to the authorities, to exhaust the finances and even to damage the Christian principles” Wittgenstein, Prussian Minister of Police.
“It is better to weaken Prussia than the regime” Duke of Mecklenburg, commander of the Prussian Guards Corps.
Alexander I warned the Prussian generals that he may find himself forced to save the Kingof Prussia from his own landwehr and Nicholas I in 1846 recommended FWIV to get rid of it.
In the 1810s the leading British military authority, general Sir Arthur Wellesley, after visiting Prussia commented that thanks to landwehr Prussia is even in a more anarchic state than France because nobody has an authority.
Prince Wilhelm of Prussia was its convinced enemy: “communications and discipline are bad and unqualified officers can’t improve them.”
Landwehr’s cavalry, composed of the people coming with their own horses of all sizes and colors, looked silly and was a butt of numerous jokes.
On the opposite side of a political spectrum landwehr was considered a potentially useful tool of a potential opposition to the conservatives which was not endearing it to the King and military establishment and did not guarantee its loyalty to the regime.
Prussian Minister of War in 1841-47, Leopold Hermann Ludwig von Boyen, was quite supportive of this institution and was taking explicit care pf it being quite different from the regular army with its addiction to the parade-ground training but his efforts resulted only in a mutual hostility between these types of the troops.
Landwehr was divided into two classes. The 1st class - young men of 20-25 who did not get into the regular army and the men of 25-32 who passed through the regular service and whose reservist status was exhausted. The 1st class had some local training and once per year participated in the army maneuvers (14 - 28 days).
After the serving in the 1st class they were moved for 7 years into 2nd class which would perform the rear services and form garrisons of the fortresses. They were trained for 8 days per year.
Landwehr was organized based upon the existing administrative units with a battalion corresponding to the district with population of 50-60,000. It had its commander (who chaired the local military recruitment commission), a doctor providing at home services to the battalion’s members, warehouse of uniforms, weapons and other equipment. The battalions in a greater administrative areas were united into the regiments and in each province there was a general in charge.
The new officers had been elected by the serving battalion officers and confirmed by the King. The first candidates had been chosen mostly out of those who passed the regular service as the “volunteers” [3] who after the service went directly into landwehr bypassing the reserve. Then they could be the retired officers and non-coms if they possessed some real estate property and finally anybody with a property of at least 10,000 thalers. Obviously, unlike officer corps of the regular army dominated by the junkers, one of the landwehr was dominated by the bourgeoisie with the resulting differences in a political loyalty.
During mobilization a brigade was formed out of one regular and one landwehr regiment.
Reform.
In 1857 WFIV got a stroke and in 1858 his brother, Prince Wilhelm, became a regent and, after his death in 1861, a king Wilhelm I. By “profession” he was a military man serving starting from the age of 12 in various command positions and successfully performing various diplomatic missions in between. After the death of his father in 1840 and due to the childlessness of his brother, King Frederick William IV, Wilhelm, as the alleged heir to the throne, received the title of Prince of Prussia, was promoted to general from the infantry and appointed chairman of the Council of Ministers and the Council of State. During revolution of 1848 he insisted on suppressing uprising in Berlin by the force of arms and this did not add his popularity. The king and the ministers considered it more prudent to remove him abroad for a while.
In 1850 he was appointed commander in chief and got the first-hand experience of how mobilization should not be conducted.
Taking into an account that the humiliating Die Olmützer Punktation, a deal which paved the way to disbanding of the Erfurt Union, had been conducted by Otto Theodor von Manteuffel who soon afterwards became unpopular Minister-President of Prussia, popularity of Prince Wilhelm (as a potential champion of the Prussian interests) kept growing. As a regent Wilhelm was trying to improve position of Prussia within the HRE but the opposition of Austria and the Middle German states convinced him that achieving the goal requires, first of all, the transformation of the military structure in Prussia itself, which he undertook, entrusting its implementation to the new Minister of War, Roon.
By 1858 Prussian army at the time of peace had 130,000 and during mobilization it was expanding to 200,000 plus 150,000 of the landswehr of the 1st class with 110,000 being left for the rear services. So, with the rear being well provided for, Prussia could move to the theater of war up to 350,000. Disadvantage of that system was that at the time of peace the Prussian army had been providing annual training of only 38,000 of new soldiers and three quarters of the eligible population did not get any training because army was not noticeably growing since 1815 and population between 1815 and 1860 grew considerably [4]. Landwehr, which consisted mostly of the fathers of the families in their 30s, was usable for a defensive war but not as good for the offensive ones as the younger units of a regular army not having any political ideas.
Actually, Wilhelm I had rather conventional ideas popular through out the major European armies: “I don’t need students and rich people in the army” (aka, “no bourgeoisie”). He preferred the well-drilled regular armies and was explaining the French success against the Austrians by the advantage of the long serving troops over the army half of which were the raw recruits.
Wilhelm with Roon outlined framework of the military reform as following:
- Increase annual call to the army by 66% (up to 63,000).
- Increase service from 2 to 3 years (this and previous measure increased peacetime army to 213,000).
- Increase service in a reserve from 5 to 7 years (as a result the reserve included 4 age groups and grew up more than by 100,000)
- Increase peacetime army by 49 new regiments which would increase mobilized army by 75% (350,000)
- Create reserve of 126,000 to compensate losses of the regular army during the war.
- Abolish landwehr of 2nd class.
- Landwehr of the 1st class lost two younger age groups (25-27) which became reserve of the regular army and would be used exclusively for the rear services; it also lost the young men of 20 who previously were not call into the regular army and now consisted only of the ages 27-32 who already served in the regular army and its reserve.
As a result, size of a peacetime army almost doubled and military budget was increasing by 9 millions thalers and in the case of war the government had the same 350,000 but exclusively regular troops without landwehr. The army became younger and more uniform in its composition. Two parts of this program, increase of the active service by 1 year and practical elimination of landwehr, went against interests of the liberal bourgeoisie with a resulting fight in Landtag: even after the new regiments had been formed, Landtag refused the credit and for few years did not approve the budget. Wilhelm, who was facing opposition from all sides, including his own son, followed Roon’s advice and on 23 September 1862 appointed Bismarck Minister President and Foreign Minister. Bismarck managed to bully Landtag into the submission: from his bellicose speeches it was clear that he is not planning to keep an army as a royal toy (the main accusation against WI) and that rather soon it is going to be used for unification of Germany under Prussia, something that the Prussian liberals wholeheartedly approved of [5]. Now the Hell was in the details.
Commanders. Roon’s main goal was to have enough of the well-educated competent officers capable to educate the new recruits in the peacetime and during a war to choose the more suitable course of action. Starting from the early XIX the care was taken that the officers corps is monolith without any class distinctions. Prussian officer, regardless his small salary, had a high social status and all of them had been equal with the greatest respect going to those serving in the army units with the staff officers being somewhat inferior to them.
Education, service in the General Staff or the Guards were not guaranteeing a faster promotion. As a result, for the first 20 years of service the Prussian officers had been growing in rank very slowly and only at the high level the careers were accelerating, mostly because all officers unsuitable for the next eligible promotion had been mercilessly fired. Existing system of attestations, which involved “friendly” inputs from the colleagues, seemingly working well, except for the very top level.
The highest level commanders were not too impressive: most of them had been “heroes” of 1848. They had, at best, a vague idea regarding military history and if they did, this information mostly served as a ballast preventing from studying the new trends in the warfare.
General Staff. As established in 1814, the General Staff in a peacetime was a just school through which the big numbers of the capable officers have to pass to be able to accomplish the serious tasks during the war. In other words, it was just a part of the army providing a better education for the officers. Nobody would be allow to stay in it for more than 4 years and deep specialists in the bureaucratic paperwork and legalistic were not required. Each year 25% of its officers would return back to the field service and only very few outstanding individuals would later return to it to serve in the higher positions.
Preparation of the General Staff officers was taking 9 years: 3 in academy, then 6 years of the “assignment”: topographic studies in the Big General Staff, service in the staff of an army corps, then 2 years of field service in a branch in which officer did not serve yet. After 3-4 years of service in General Staff an officer would be sent back to the army service.
Jobs requiring deep professional knowledge (like those related to the railroads) had been done by the officers who graduated from the academy but did not make it into the General Staff. All bureaucratic work including details of mobilization had been delegated to “adjutanture”, specialists of the paper work, leaving the General Staff free to dedicate itself strictly to the issues of a military art. As a result, the Prussian General Staff was few times smaller than those of France and Russia.
Role of the General Staff in operational planning and development of the general strategies was negligible, mostly preliminary studies and statistics collection. There was also department of the military history. In 1821 the General Staff was separated from the Ministry of War and became the “Big” General Staff with his chief having a right of a direct report to the king. Well, every commander of an army corps had that right and it was rarely used because bypassing a Minister of War was tactless and plain foolish: the report would be transferred … to the Minister of War. Real task of the Chief of the General Staff was to monitor the military situation in Europe and be ready to report about the chances of war with specific neighbor and about preferable campaign scenario. However, Ministry of Foreign Affairs was not sending information to the General Staff and neither did Minister of War, except when he felt otherwise. By 1857 the General Staff had 64 officers 18 of which constituted the “Big” General Staff.
A big gap was deployment of the railroads in the military purposes. Basically, nobody was studying it with any seriousness.
To change situation a major authoritative and very talented figure was needed but there was none. [6]
Mobilization. An attempt of 1850 proved to be a fundamental fiasco. No work had been done by the Ministry of War to make a realistic usage of the available railroads. Mobilization of the reserves and all landwehr had been announced at the same day. Hundreds thousands of the reservists, high priority shipments of artillery and intendancy departments, and the army units hit the railroad stations simultaneously. Crowds of the hungry reservists had been staying for weeks near the stations, sleeping on a ground and loudly expressing their feelings. Due to the fact that infantry and artillery were in a process of rearmament, their supply caused additional misunderstandings. Landwehr was short of the uniforms and weapons and quite a few of his members found themselves with the smoothbore muskets, cartridges for the rifles and in the civilian clothes. The old ages of Landwehr had been leaving their families without means for existence and the special law was issued ordered the regional administrations to help them with a promise to compensate expenses later on. An operation that had to take a week, took 6 weeks.
It took a considerable effort to fix this problem by 1859. Ministry of War established mobilization schedule based on which the railroads had to prepare themselves to the future activities. Each corps military district was handling its own mobilization issues with the Ministry of War doing general management and in a peacetime replenishing the depots in military districts. Creation of a centralized military depot for the whole army (as was done in Vienna) was an obsolete idea.
Tactics. The weapons could be new but the brains of top level remained the same. Wilhelm I and his generals firmly held to the bayonet push in the close formations. Successful French bayonet charges in Italy only strengthened this idea but additional opportunities presented by Dreyse needle rifle were slowly creeping into the practice. It was definitely making sense to start with shooting before attacking. But this was still more or less a low level initiative to be tested in a real war.
____________
[1] Actually, AII tried to make him a general but he refused and retired. But he was (a) poet and (b) independently wealthy.
[2] Wishful thinking. 😂
[3] Usually well off people who joined army voluntarily and had certain privileges during the service.
[4] In OTL from 10 to 18 millions but I have no idea about the numbers without Polish territories and those on the left bank of the Rhine.
[5] The bellicose liberals were not uniquely British or Russian or French or American (did I miss some countries? feel free to add) phenomena: it was just a matter of a “good cause”, which was rarely absent. 😜
[6] After weighting all pros and contras I decided that von Moltke was not lucky enough to defeat the Turkish medicine and died in the Ottoman-Egyptian War. It will be considerably more fun without the Prussians having such an unfair advantage. 😂
Last edited:
Peace and war(s)
253 Peace and war(s)
France.
The population of Paris had exploded from 759,000 in 1831 to more than a million in 1846 – despite regular outbreaks of cholera and typhoid that killed tens of thousands. The French capital was overcrowded, dingy, dirty and riddled with disease. The Consulate was not paying too much attention to these problems but Prince-President, who unlike his predecessors travelled extensively, wanted it to be “presentable” to the visiting dignitaries and, after experience of 1848, not too convenient for the rebellions. Well, last even not necessarily least, it should he liked by the population.
Georges-Eugène Haussmann was put in charge of the renovations in 1853. During their first meeting Prince-President produced his plan for Paris. It showed a map of the city with three straight, dark lines drawn over it: one running north-to-south and two east-to-west either side of the Seine, all cutting through some of the most densely populated but historic areas of central Paris. “This is what I want,” Oscar Bernadotte told Haussmann. It was the start of the most extensive public works programme ever voluntarily carried out in a European city, turning Paris into a vast building site for more than 17 years.
Haussmann cut a swathe through the cramped and chaotic labyrinth of slum streets in the city centre, knocked down 12,000 buildings, cleared space for the Palais Garnier, home of the Opéra National de Paris, and Les Halles marketplace, and linked the new train terminals with his long, wide and straight avenues. Less well known is Haussmann’s commissioning of an outstanding collection of street furniture – lampposts, newspaper kiosks, railings – and the decorative bandstands in the 27 parks and squares he created. Below ground, Haussmann oversaw the installation of les egouts, the city’s complex sewage network. He also commissioned reservoirs and aquaducts to bring clean drinking water to the city. On his orders, gas lamps were installed along the widened cobbled streets; now when the elegant flâneurs who strolled the 137km of new boulevards retired for the night, the revellers and prostitutes who emerged from the bars and the shadows could walk safely [1] . The new streets came with trees and broad pavements along which café terraces sprang up, soon to be filled with artist, artisans and all other types of the parasites which were making Paris the cultural center of Europe. But republican opponents criticised the brutality of the work. They saw his avenues as imperialist tools to neuter fermenting civil unrest in working-class areas, allowing troops to be rapidly deployed to quell revolt. [2] Haussmann was also accused of social engineering by destroying the economically mixed areas where rich and poor rubbed shoulders, instead creating distinct wealthy and “popular” arrondissements.
Critics also accused him of destroying the city’s medieval treasures, citing the enduring charm of the narrow winding streets of the Marais: the city’s oldest district and one which escaped Haussmann’s razing. [3]
By 1869 the bill will reach 2.9 billions francs about which the parliamentarians and the members of city council are going to complain [4] but Houssmann kept going “He believed if he resigned it would be assumed he had done wrong, when in fact he was very proud of what he had done… too. Hugo, the man who wrote Les Miserable about how desperate conditions were in Paris, accused Haussmann of destroying the city’s medieval charm! … this was the same “charm” that had brought epidemics to Paris; the charm that “had 20 people living in one room with no light and no toilets, just a common courtyard into which they did their business. People like Hugo forgot how truly miserable Paris had been for ordinary Parisians”.
Well, even before the work was completed everybody who came to Paris for the universal exhibitions or just to visit, including Queen Victoria, was astonished by the transformation of the city.
Horn of Africa. While the Parisians had been busy bitching about the noice and other inconveniences of the renovations, the life was going on. In anticipation of the finishing of the Suez canal the French government was, without raising of excessive noice, trying to get control of the Horn of Africa which would allow to secure the sea routes after canal’s opening. Djibouti was a base so Isaaq Sultanate just to the South of it was the next obvious step, the task simplified by the internal conflicts. The French occupied Hargeisa and after this proceeded moving Eastward taking Berbera, Zeila, Sagallo, and Bulhar. They build lighthouses, piers, improved coastal ports and helped to restore the failing trade of Berbera.
“Berbera held an annual fair during the cool rain-free months between October and April. This long drawn out market handled immense quantities of coffee, gum Arabic, myrrh and other commodities. These goods in the early nineteenth century were almost exclusively handled by Somalis who, Salt says, had "a kind of navigation act by which they exclude the Arab vessels from their ports and bring the produce of their country either to Aden or Mocha in their own dows."”
The French liked the part about exclusion of the Arabs but took a hint and occupied Mocha (Mokha) and Aden. The locals still had been allowed to continue their existing trade but a big part of the “commodities” were now loaded on the French ships to go to France. Inland territories remained in the hands of the local clans who were holding the trade routes.
The next step was Majeerteen Sultanate. This was a tougher nut to crack because its ruler Boqor Osman Mahamoud was making very good money from looting the numerous ships wrecked near the coast of his territory and the Gulf of Aden was the most profitable sector so why would he give it away without a fight? Somali had been brave but very short on the firearms so by 1865 they lost the territories to the north of Cal Madow Mountains and Kar Kar Mountains.
Madagascar. Of course, the French were not operating in a vacuum and their “dear friends” across the Channel would not sit idly looking at them grabbing the territories even if the said friends considered these territories absolutely useless for themselves. In a spirit of a good will, friendship, cooperation, civilizing mission and many other wonderful things [5] the French government volunteered to discuss the touchy issue of who is going to be entitled to looting Madagascar. The British saw Madagascar as a natural expansion of their influence in the Indian Ocean and in the early XIX the local king signed with them a treaty allowing activities of the Protestant missionaries. But his widow, who became a queen Ranavalona I, had different ideas and by the 1830s nearly all foreigners had chosen to leave or were expelled, and British influence was largely suppressed. An exception, the Frenchman Jean Laborde, was able to remain in the island to build foundries and an armament industry.
However, her son, Prince Rakoto, while his mother was still alive and ruling, signed the Lambert Charter on 28 June 1855, a document that granted Frenchman Joseph-François Lambert numerous lucrative economic privileges on the island, including exclusive right to all mining and forestry activities, and exploitation of unoccupied land, in exchange for a 10% fee to the Merina monarchy. He became a king in 1861 but in 1863 after failed assassination attempt pretended that this attempt was successful and lived to old age as a regular citizen outside the capital. He was succeeded to the throne by his apparent widow Rasoherina. The Prime Minister Rainivoninahitriniony revoked the Lambert Treaty in 1863.
In 1864 he was replaced as Prime Minister by Rainilaiarivony who was pro-British and behaved accordingly. In France both Catholic lobby and the parliamentarians from Reunion advocated an invasion of Madagascar in order to suppress British influence there. But Oscar decided otherwise: construction of the Suez canal was moving ahead and within few years route around Africa will become irrelevant but there was no need to explain this to the people who did not get it on their own. The Franco-British conference had been to discuss the issue of Madagascar specifically and the broader interests as well.
The French side agreed to consider Madagascar a zone of the British interests providing the British government guarantees protection of the local Catholics and the French missionaries. On their side the British government agreed to consider the Horn of Africa all the way to Sokotra Island as zone of French interests. Both sides had been quite happy with themselves and each other and in few years the Brits sent a naval squadron with an ultimatum to Antananarivo asking for recognition of the British rights to northeastern Madagascar, recognition of British property principles and an indemnity… This expedition was not as successful as expected because too many people involved, including both squadron’s commander and the Queen, died from a fever.
Across the Atlantic. To a general European entertainment and irritation of the British textile manufacturers there was a civil war in the United States. Of course, in the absence of the serious nasty events in Europe, it was quite interesting to read about the military exploits in the places very few people could point out on a map and to bet who is going to win.
The cotton issue was, of course, of some serious concern because for Britain the Southern states were the main supplier of a cotton which could not be adequately compensated by India. France, was much less impacted because its main supply source was Egypt and Russia was mostly relying upon its Central Asia with Egypt being a supplementary source of high quality cotton. Nobody really cared about small potatoes like Poland.
Surprisingly or not, this war produced very little interest among those who should be interested the most, the military. Of course, the European military establishments had been receiving information about ongoing fighting but in general considered the whole event as the amateurish affair with very little of true interest for the professionals. Of course, there were some reasons for such an attitude. The weaponry was quite unremarkable. Most of the field artillery were standard bronze French 12-pounders, either purchased or locally produced by both sides. There were few weird English Whitworth 12-pounder breechloading cannons: their bore was hexagonal in cross-section, and the projectile was a long bolt that twisted to conform to the rifling.
The infantry on both sides had been armed with a wide variety of the muzzle loading rifles, made locally or purchased in Britain and Austria. The prevailing was a Minie-type rifled musket but there were dozens of other types from the flintlocks to repeating rifles.
Probably much more attention could be paid to the tactics because it was pretty much traditional. The losses caused to the dense formations even by the muzzle-loading rifles were staggering and this fact deserved some serious attention but did not get it: this was “normal”.
Another completely overlooked subject was usage of the railroads all the way to a battlefield and even on a battlefield. The “great minds” of the general staffs of the European Great Powers simply shrugged this off. The railroads has to be used to bring troops to the theater and after that they’ll move on foot or horseback. Loading them on the trains and then unloading in a direct proximity to a battlefield will only result in a chaos and loss of the discipline.
There was some interest to the Gatling gun but quite moderate one: the consensus was that its deployment will result in a huge waste of the ammunition and, as one reputable military thinker remarked, “it does not make sense to kill the same person ten times” [6].
________
[1] Safe working environment of the most loyal and patriotic members of the working class never should be neglected.
[2] That was, of course, his oversight. He had to create a special district convenient for the rebellions with, perhaps, some materials stashed for building the barricades. This would be convenient for both sides. The rebels will know where to go to rebel and would not have to loot the buildings and take cobbles from the streets’ paving to build the barricades. The government troops also would not have to roam all over the city: they’d just march to the “barricades quarter”, wait until the rebels finish construction of the barricades and then open fire. Minimal damage to the innocent bystanders and private property and no need to re-pave the streets after each revolution. Actually, allegedly, in the early XX chief of St.Petersburg police presumably proposed to build barricades for the rebels to occupy and when this happens to shoot them. The contemporaries had been mocking this idea but there was definitely something rational in it. 😂
[3] Again, I agree with the criticism. Accommodations should be made for those loving the medieval charm. Just imagine all excitement of a true coonosier when a chamber pot had been emptied on his head from a window above…
[4] And quite understandable: they would prefer to steal ….oops… to use these money on their own projects. BTW, Haussmann seemingly was not pocketing the funds (this should be quite irritating) and after retirement lived on a quite modest pension.
[5] I run out of the good ones so feel free to add whatever comes to your minds. 😂
[6] In OTL general Dragomirov about machine guns.
“During his career he showed a maniacal ambition, an impudent opportunism and was, whatever he did, a genius of showmanship.”
Josephy Valynseele about Haussmann
“Colonialism. The enforced spread of the rule of reason. But who is going to spread it among the colonizers?”
Anthony Burgess
“Before a war military science seems a real science, like astronomy; but after a war it seems more like astrology.”
Rebecca West, The Book Of Military Quotations
“The art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike him as hard as you can, and keep moving on."
Ulysses S. Grant
Josephy Valynseele about Haussmann
“Colonialism. The enforced spread of the rule of reason. But who is going to spread it among the colonizers?”
Anthony Burgess
“Before a war military science seems a real science, like astronomy; but after a war it seems more like astrology.”
Rebecca West, The Book Of Military Quotations
“The art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike him as hard as you can, and keep moving on."
Ulysses S. Grant
France.
The population of Paris had exploded from 759,000 in 1831 to more than a million in 1846 – despite regular outbreaks of cholera and typhoid that killed tens of thousands. The French capital was overcrowded, dingy, dirty and riddled with disease. The Consulate was not paying too much attention to these problems but Prince-President, who unlike his predecessors travelled extensively, wanted it to be “presentable” to the visiting dignitaries and, after experience of 1848, not too convenient for the rebellions. Well, last even not necessarily least, it should he liked by the population.
Georges-Eugène Haussmann was put in charge of the renovations in 1853. During their first meeting Prince-President produced his plan for Paris. It showed a map of the city with three straight, dark lines drawn over it: one running north-to-south and two east-to-west either side of the Seine, all cutting through some of the most densely populated but historic areas of central Paris. “This is what I want,” Oscar Bernadotte told Haussmann. It was the start of the most extensive public works programme ever voluntarily carried out in a European city, turning Paris into a vast building site for more than 17 years.
Haussmann cut a swathe through the cramped and chaotic labyrinth of slum streets in the city centre, knocked down 12,000 buildings, cleared space for the Palais Garnier, home of the Opéra National de Paris, and Les Halles marketplace, and linked the new train terminals with his long, wide and straight avenues. Less well known is Haussmann’s commissioning of an outstanding collection of street furniture – lampposts, newspaper kiosks, railings – and the decorative bandstands in the 27 parks and squares he created. Below ground, Haussmann oversaw the installation of les egouts, the city’s complex sewage network. He also commissioned reservoirs and aquaducts to bring clean drinking water to the city. On his orders, gas lamps were installed along the widened cobbled streets; now when the elegant flâneurs who strolled the 137km of new boulevards retired for the night, the revellers and prostitutes who emerged from the bars and the shadows could walk safely [1] . The new streets came with trees and broad pavements along which café terraces sprang up, soon to be filled with artist, artisans and all other types of the parasites which were making Paris the cultural center of Europe. But republican opponents criticised the brutality of the work. They saw his avenues as imperialist tools to neuter fermenting civil unrest in working-class areas, allowing troops to be rapidly deployed to quell revolt. [2] Haussmann was also accused of social engineering by destroying the economically mixed areas where rich and poor rubbed shoulders, instead creating distinct wealthy and “popular” arrondissements.
Critics also accused him of destroying the city’s medieval treasures, citing the enduring charm of the narrow winding streets of the Marais: the city’s oldest district and one which escaped Haussmann’s razing. [3]
By 1869 the bill will reach 2.9 billions francs about which the parliamentarians and the members of city council are going to complain [4] but Houssmann kept going “He believed if he resigned it would be assumed he had done wrong, when in fact he was very proud of what he had done… too. Hugo, the man who wrote Les Miserable about how desperate conditions were in Paris, accused Haussmann of destroying the city’s medieval charm! … this was the same “charm” that had brought epidemics to Paris; the charm that “had 20 people living in one room with no light and no toilets, just a common courtyard into which they did their business. People like Hugo forgot how truly miserable Paris had been for ordinary Parisians”.
Well, even before the work was completed everybody who came to Paris for the universal exhibitions or just to visit, including Queen Victoria, was astonished by the transformation of the city.
Horn of Africa. While the Parisians had been busy bitching about the noice and other inconveniences of the renovations, the life was going on. In anticipation of the finishing of the Suez canal the French government was, without raising of excessive noice, trying to get control of the Horn of Africa which would allow to secure the sea routes after canal’s opening. Djibouti was a base so Isaaq Sultanate just to the South of it was the next obvious step, the task simplified by the internal conflicts. The French occupied Hargeisa and after this proceeded moving Eastward taking Berbera, Zeila, Sagallo, and Bulhar. They build lighthouses, piers, improved coastal ports and helped to restore the failing trade of Berbera.
“Berbera held an annual fair during the cool rain-free months between October and April. This long drawn out market handled immense quantities of coffee, gum Arabic, myrrh and other commodities. These goods in the early nineteenth century were almost exclusively handled by Somalis who, Salt says, had "a kind of navigation act by which they exclude the Arab vessels from their ports and bring the produce of their country either to Aden or Mocha in their own dows."”
The French liked the part about exclusion of the Arabs but took a hint and occupied Mocha (Mokha) and Aden. The locals still had been allowed to continue their existing trade but a big part of the “commodities” were now loaded on the French ships to go to France. Inland territories remained in the hands of the local clans who were holding the trade routes.
The next step was Majeerteen Sultanate. This was a tougher nut to crack because its ruler Boqor Osman Mahamoud was making very good money from looting the numerous ships wrecked near the coast of his territory and the Gulf of Aden was the most profitable sector so why would he give it away without a fight? Somali had been brave but very short on the firearms so by 1865 they lost the territories to the north of Cal Madow Mountains and Kar Kar Mountains.
Madagascar. Of course, the French were not operating in a vacuum and their “dear friends” across the Channel would not sit idly looking at them grabbing the territories even if the said friends considered these territories absolutely useless for themselves. In a spirit of a good will, friendship, cooperation, civilizing mission and many other wonderful things [5] the French government volunteered to discuss the touchy issue of who is going to be entitled to looting Madagascar. The British saw Madagascar as a natural expansion of their influence in the Indian Ocean and in the early XIX the local king signed with them a treaty allowing activities of the Protestant missionaries. But his widow, who became a queen Ranavalona I, had different ideas and by the 1830s nearly all foreigners had chosen to leave or were expelled, and British influence was largely suppressed. An exception, the Frenchman Jean Laborde, was able to remain in the island to build foundries and an armament industry.
However, her son, Prince Rakoto, while his mother was still alive and ruling, signed the Lambert Charter on 28 June 1855, a document that granted Frenchman Joseph-François Lambert numerous lucrative economic privileges on the island, including exclusive right to all mining and forestry activities, and exploitation of unoccupied land, in exchange for a 10% fee to the Merina monarchy. He became a king in 1861 but in 1863 after failed assassination attempt pretended that this attempt was successful and lived to old age as a regular citizen outside the capital. He was succeeded to the throne by his apparent widow Rasoherina. The Prime Minister Rainivoninahitriniony revoked the Lambert Treaty in 1863.
In 1864 he was replaced as Prime Minister by Rainilaiarivony who was pro-British and behaved accordingly. In France both Catholic lobby and the parliamentarians from Reunion advocated an invasion of Madagascar in order to suppress British influence there. But Oscar decided otherwise: construction of the Suez canal was moving ahead and within few years route around Africa will become irrelevant but there was no need to explain this to the people who did not get it on their own. The Franco-British conference had been to discuss the issue of Madagascar specifically and the broader interests as well.
The French side agreed to consider Madagascar a zone of the British interests providing the British government guarantees protection of the local Catholics and the French missionaries. On their side the British government agreed to consider the Horn of Africa all the way to Sokotra Island as zone of French interests. Both sides had been quite happy with themselves and each other and in few years the Brits sent a naval squadron with an ultimatum to Antananarivo asking for recognition of the British rights to northeastern Madagascar, recognition of British property principles and an indemnity… This expedition was not as successful as expected because too many people involved, including both squadron’s commander and the Queen, died from a fever.
Across the Atlantic. To a general European entertainment and irritation of the British textile manufacturers there was a civil war in the United States. Of course, in the absence of the serious nasty events in Europe, it was quite interesting to read about the military exploits in the places very few people could point out on a map and to bet who is going to win.
The cotton issue was, of course, of some serious concern because for Britain the Southern states were the main supplier of a cotton which could not be adequately compensated by India. France, was much less impacted because its main supply source was Egypt and Russia was mostly relying upon its Central Asia with Egypt being a supplementary source of high quality cotton. Nobody really cared about small potatoes like Poland.
Surprisingly or not, this war produced very little interest among those who should be interested the most, the military. Of course, the European military establishments had been receiving information about ongoing fighting but in general considered the whole event as the amateurish affair with very little of true interest for the professionals. Of course, there were some reasons for such an attitude. The weaponry was quite unremarkable. Most of the field artillery were standard bronze French 12-pounders, either purchased or locally produced by both sides. There were few weird English Whitworth 12-pounder breechloading cannons: their bore was hexagonal in cross-section, and the projectile was a long bolt that twisted to conform to the rifling.
The infantry on both sides had been armed with a wide variety of the muzzle loading rifles, made locally or purchased in Britain and Austria. The prevailing was a Minie-type rifled musket but there were dozens of other types from the flintlocks to repeating rifles.
Probably much more attention could be paid to the tactics because it was pretty much traditional. The losses caused to the dense formations even by the muzzle-loading rifles were staggering and this fact deserved some serious attention but did not get it: this was “normal”.
Another completely overlooked subject was usage of the railroads all the way to a battlefield and even on a battlefield. The “great minds” of the general staffs of the European Great Powers simply shrugged this off. The railroads has to be used to bring troops to the theater and after that they’ll move on foot or horseback. Loading them on the trains and then unloading in a direct proximity to a battlefield will only result in a chaos and loss of the discipline.
There was some interest to the Gatling gun but quite moderate one: the consensus was that its deployment will result in a huge waste of the ammunition and, as one reputable military thinker remarked, “it does not make sense to kill the same person ten times” [6].
________
[1] Safe working environment of the most loyal and patriotic members of the working class never should be neglected.
[2] That was, of course, his oversight. He had to create a special district convenient for the rebellions with, perhaps, some materials stashed for building the barricades. This would be convenient for both sides. The rebels will know where to go to rebel and would not have to loot the buildings and take cobbles from the streets’ paving to build the barricades. The government troops also would not have to roam all over the city: they’d just march to the “barricades quarter”, wait until the rebels finish construction of the barricades and then open fire. Minimal damage to the innocent bystanders and private property and no need to re-pave the streets after each revolution. Actually, allegedly, in the early XX chief of St.Petersburg police presumably proposed to build barricades for the rebels to occupy and when this happens to shoot them. The contemporaries had been mocking this idea but there was definitely something rational in it. 😂
[3] Again, I agree with the criticism. Accommodations should be made for those loving the medieval charm. Just imagine all excitement of a true coonosier when a chamber pot had been emptied on his head from a window above…
[4] And quite understandable: they would prefer to steal ….oops… to use these money on their own projects. BTW, Haussmann seemingly was not pocketing the funds (this should be quite irritating) and after retirement lived on a quite modest pension.
[5] I run out of the good ones so feel free to add whatever comes to your minds. 😂
[6] In OTL general Dragomirov about machine guns.
AII reigns
254. AII reigns
“He found that he was going too fast and in a wrong direction.”
Saltykov-Schedrin, ‘History of a city’
“What do you want after all? Constitutional system? . You probably think that I don't want to give up my powers driven by petty vanity! I give you my word: immediately, right here, I would sign any constitution if I was sure that it would benefit Russia. But it's quite obvious, if I do it today, tomorrow Russia will fall apart. Is that what you want?”
Alexander II
“The spirit grabbed Bobrinsky by the right leg and made him spin with the chair on which he was sitting. Extremely playful for the spirit!”
Tutcheva about seance of spiritism
“Russian resorts have always been located in border places and were a paradoxical combination of places for recreation and military facilities.”
A. Malgin
“Even ladies, despite the fact that they have to ride 250 versts and be subjected to unusual worries and dangers for them, take this difficult path - of course, they cry, repent of the continuation of it, but at the end they enthusiastically talk about the miracles they saw.”
Unknown author about travel to the Crimea in 1815
State affairs.
Alexander II was taking his duties very seriously. In terms of character and position, he loved order. And nothing symbolized order in Russia as much as the army. Since early childhood, he adored military parades. His heart always faded at the sight of a marching regiment. He was able to spend hours discussing with his Minister of War what color the new uniforms should be, the advantages and disadvantages of a shoulder backpack, replacing the Russian bayonet with one Prussian style, the introduction of pointed helmets in some military units. Somehow all that was fitting nicely into his sense of duty toward his subjects. He seriously wanted to do good and to go forward if the people followed him, keeping order. Being a tireless worker, he was sitting down to study documents early in the morning. He chaired countless commissions, councils, committees. The main problem was that his mental capacities were not up to the tasks he was trying to accomplish and as a result his good intentions had been handicapped by fear of the results.
In his ministers he saw not the responsible specialists but just the tools for implementing his ideas and some of these ideas more than once had been changing 180 degrees. When Reutern, his Minister of Finances, and outspoken free trader resigned in protest against some of the economic practices [1], he was replaced by general Greig who did not have any previous experience in financial area and in his previous position of the State Controller was a strong advocate of the protectionism.
Two years later by the purely political reasons (new switch to the left), he was replaced by A.A.Abaza who was economist and a free trader but advocated the railroads policy opposite to one implemented by Reutern.
His Minister of War, Milutin, hold his position but here Alexander went to another extreme making him pretty much immune against any criticism no matter how justified and serious.
Basically, the country seemed to Alexander as a puff cake, each layer of which lived its own life, obeying its own rules and following its purpose. At the very top of it there was an imperial court; immediately below it was the highest society of two capitals, consisting of several aristocratic families that spent most of their time in entertainment - at French performances, musical evenings and balls; even lower were landowners, merchants and industrialists who suppressed with their wealth pathetic small nobles who led an idle life in their over-mortgaged little estates; further down followed a new middle class consisting of engineers, doctors, lawyers, officials, architects, students, artists. These people, who fountained ideas, even if they were not nihilists, wanted to change the world. They had to be kept as far as possible from the huge, gray, amorphous mass of peasants at all costs. Thank God, the peasants have still been protected from revolutionary contagion with their ignorance. But for how long?
So the only people really needed for success of the planned reforms were exactly the same people whom AII distrusted the most. Small wonder that as soon as they figured out his attitude they reciprocated in the kind: intelligentsia started to view criticism of the government as its main social duty. On his side from time to time AII was making the feeble attempts to get the “public support” but their potential result was usually negated by the twist to the right that followed shortly afterwards. The same, in a reverse order, applied to the conservatives (many of whom were not useless nincompoops). As a result, AII was moving ahead/backward/sidewise based strictly upon his uncontested divine right. For a while this was working to a degree. Unfortunately, swings from the right to left and back quite often resulted in having on the important positions who were out of synch with a current swing (and some of them even had principles) and, without getting a warning from the top, kept acting as usual creating the angry reaction from those whom Alexander was planning to placate at that specific moment.
Especially difficult in that sense were the universities. The charter of 1863 revived the scientific and educational life of universities, but did not solve all the problems and like all other reforms of Alexander II, education reform was subjected to strong criticism. The reforms carried out from above were taken by society in bayonets. At some point, there was a paradoxical situation - the tsarist government carried out one reform after another, and society, which vocally criticized the current situation and, seemingly, wanted change, vigorously fought both reforms and reformers. In the case of high education the critics (professors of the universities) had a willing and energetic following, the students who had been easily politicized and possessed very little in the terms of self-restraint and the norms of behavior. With a very little of encouragements they tended to behave violently. It did not took a long for the functions of dog and tail to be reversed and the liberal professors found themselves being hostages of much more radical students and forced to adopt even more radical views out of fear to lose their influence and popularity (they had been paid based upon attendance) and even a physical violence. On the initial stages the problem probably could be solved by application of the really harsh measures to a small number of the extremists but the moment was missed and the problem kept growing with the real extremists intimidating into the obedience not just the fellow students and their professors but the “intellectuals” outside the academia.
Court events were pretty much the same as during his father’s reign but, unlike his father who dominated them as all other events at which he had been present, AII felt himself noticeably uncomfortable. But the luxury of these events kept growing. British Ambassador Lord Loftus stated that the evenings at the Winter Palace "surpass everything he saw in other countries in luxury and splendor." Théophile Gautier, who was (by whatever reason) invited to attend a court ball, left grossly exaggerated description (what else to expect from a person who wrote “Captain Fracasse” and admired Hugo’s “Hernani”) full of plain idiocies, probably to impress the French readers:
“A huge hall opened in front of me, all in marble and white plaster... Everywhere you could see uniforms with gold bibs, epaulettes dotted with diamonds, order bars covered with enamel and precious stones... Men's uniforms and ceremonial costumes were so bright, shiny, diverse, so overloaded with gold that the women in their elegant dresses were simply lost among them.”
The main entertainment at home was the same as for overwhelming majority of the Russian population with a possible exception of the lowest classes: cards. Everybody played them regardless social status, wealth and political affiliation [2]. However, unlike many of his subjects, AII never forgot his more important duties:
“If there are guests to the evening, he sits down with them to play cards; if not, he sits down at a special table on which pencils, brushes, paints and ink are prepared, and is engaged in an important and useful thing... drawing sketches of new military uniforms, trousers, headgear, helmets and uniforms of other Russian state institutions.”
Alexander's long double-breasted half-caftans were welcomed by society. And let's not go down to indecent hints about why society and Alexander liked the new form! Of course, solely because it was much more convenient and comfortable than the previous one. Men's corsets, by the way, have been getting out of use since then.
Empress and Empress mother from time to time enjoyed reading. Meaning that somebody was reading them a book. It does not look like AII never was around on these occasions. Emancipated Grand Duchess Helen Pavlovna cultivated all types of artists and musicians in her palace but Emperor and Empress rarely, if ever, attended these concerts.
But the rage was “spiritism”. The “educated classes” loved it. All that stuff with the raising tables, the spirits communicating through the mysterious knocks, and other supernatural things had been absolutely fascinating. Understandably, the imperial family could afford the best performers who could stage really impressive shows. Below are descriptions of some of them left by Tutcheva, Empress’ lady in waiting, who had enough brains for being somewhat skeptical:
“Session of spiritism in the Grand Palace in the presence of Emperor, Empress, Empress Mother, Crown Prince of Wurttemberg, Count Shuvalov, Count Adlerberg, Alexei Tolstoy, Alexei Bobrinsky, Alexandra Dolgorukova and me. All of us were seated around a round table, with our hands on the table; the sorcerer sat between the Empress and Grand Duke Constantine. Soon, knocks produced by spirits were heard in different corners of the room. Questions began, which were answered by knocks corresponding to the letters of the alphabet. Meanwhile, the spirits acted sluggishly, they announced that there were too many people, that it would paralyze them and it was necessary to exclude Alexei Bobrinsky and me. Subsequently, they fell in love with Bobrinsky, but kept a tooth against me forever. We were removed to the next room, from where, however, we heard everything that was happening very well. The table rose to the height of the half-arshin above the floor. The Empress Mother felt some hand touch the flounces of her dress, grabbed her hand and took off her wedding ring. Then this hand grabbed, shook and pinched all those present, except for the Empress, whom she systematically bypassed. From the hands of the sovereign, she took a bell, carried it through the air and handed it over to the Prince of Württemberg.”
“This week on Tuesday there was an evening at Empress Maria Alexandrovna. Present: Baron Lieven, Adlerberg spouses, Prince Gorchakov and Count Bobrinsky. They talked about ghosts, about magnetism - always a favorite topic of conversation in the presence of Bobrinsky.”
Then, of course, there was a hunt “church service in the morning then hunting with the dogs”. There were two main types of the hunt: rifle hunt (birds and serious animals) and dog hunting [3]. Alexander liked both.
And, of course, there was rest and relaxation, which required the resorts, preferably on a sea-side. The Baltic option was already fully developed but one on the Black Sea just started.
Resorts of the Crimea.
As a resort area the Crimea became popular in the second half of the XIX century even if some members of the top aristocracy had their estates here much earlier. In 1861 Livadia estate near Yalta had been bought by AII from Count Pototski and converted into the imperial summer residence that included Big Palace (for Emperor), Small Palace (for Tsesarevich), housing for the retinue, and the kitchen. Construction continued from 1861 till 1866.
Construction of the railroads connecting Crimea with the “mainland” removed the problems earlier related to the trips to the southern part of the peninsula and made the area easily accessible to the general public.
One of the reasons for the popularity of the peninsula in the 19th and early 20th centuries was the then rampant tuberculosis epidemic in Russia. Crimean healing air was the last hope that residents of Russia could afford with average income. "A merry, well-fed, idle crowd walking to the sounds of joyful music - and in the middle of it are the living dead..."
The Simferopol newspaper "Salgir" was indignant that the locals profited from vacationers with terrible force: "Suffice it to say that 30 kopecks are charged for a glass of ordinary vodka," - the monstrous prices of Gurzuf's most elite restaurant at that time.
Those concerned of morality were worried about the intoxicating spirit of permissiveness reigning in the Crimean resorts. The press wrote: "Yalta is not a resort, but a university of depravity." By the 1870s, a large-scale industry of sexual services had developed in Crimea, but since local police officers were usually “gainfully involved”, it seemed that prostitution did not exist on the Southern Shore. Add to this romantic young ladies who decided to escape to Crimea from somewhere in their native Samara with a passing officer. Or bored elegant female adventurers...
The handsome Tatars offered lonely vacationing young ladies horseback riding in the surrounding area - and often not only walks. The public condemned such "debauchery", but many ladies were ready to defend their "pages". A certain person wrote to the editorial office of the newspaper "Crimean Courier" - "...these are men with soul and temperament, about which our Russian males have no idea." It turns out that healthy Crimean air contributed to the emancipation of morals and the success of the First Sexual Revolution in Russia.
__________
[1] In OTL this happened only after the War of 1877-78 but here it is not going to happen so he got pissed off more than a decade earlier. Say, after finding out that the corruption related to the railroads construction is sponsored by Alexander himself.
[2] There was a nasty rumor that a liberal icon, poet Nekrasov, tended to …er… correct mistakes of the Fortune. True or not, his mistress (a socially advanced lady with the literary aspirations who openly lived both with him and her husband; the only thing that cow could write about the visit of Alexander Dumas was that he ate a lot and talked too much) left a description of him playing cards with his friends (all of them socially advanced and either writers or literary critics) while doing a mandatory social bitching. But the conservatives also favored this past time.
[3] This is a special subject - hunting with the dogs was a cultural phenomena mixing a semi-religious dedication with the very complicated science of breeding. It was quite different from British version. If there is an interest, I’ll make a separate chapter on it.
“He found that he was going too fast and in a wrong direction.”
Saltykov-Schedrin, ‘History of a city’
“What do you want after all? Constitutional system? . You probably think that I don't want to give up my powers driven by petty vanity! I give you my word: immediately, right here, I would sign any constitution if I was sure that it would benefit Russia. But it's quite obvious, if I do it today, tomorrow Russia will fall apart. Is that what you want?”
Alexander II
“The spirit grabbed Bobrinsky by the right leg and made him spin with the chair on which he was sitting. Extremely playful for the spirit!”
Tutcheva about seance of spiritism
“Russian resorts have always been located in border places and were a paradoxical combination of places for recreation and military facilities.”
A. Malgin
“Even ladies, despite the fact that they have to ride 250 versts and be subjected to unusual worries and dangers for them, take this difficult path - of course, they cry, repent of the continuation of it, but at the end they enthusiastically talk about the miracles they saw.”
Unknown author about travel to the Crimea in 1815
Alexander II was taking his duties very seriously. In terms of character and position, he loved order. And nothing symbolized order in Russia as much as the army. Since early childhood, he adored military parades. His heart always faded at the sight of a marching regiment. He was able to spend hours discussing with his Minister of War what color the new uniforms should be, the advantages and disadvantages of a shoulder backpack, replacing the Russian bayonet with one Prussian style, the introduction of pointed helmets in some military units. Somehow all that was fitting nicely into his sense of duty toward his subjects. He seriously wanted to do good and to go forward if the people followed him, keeping order. Being a tireless worker, he was sitting down to study documents early in the morning. He chaired countless commissions, councils, committees. The main problem was that his mental capacities were not up to the tasks he was trying to accomplish and as a result his good intentions had been handicapped by fear of the results.
In his ministers he saw not the responsible specialists but just the tools for implementing his ideas and some of these ideas more than once had been changing 180 degrees. When Reutern, his Minister of Finances, and outspoken free trader resigned in protest against some of the economic practices [1], he was replaced by general Greig who did not have any previous experience in financial area and in his previous position of the State Controller was a strong advocate of the protectionism.
Two years later by the purely political reasons (new switch to the left), he was replaced by A.A.Abaza who was economist and a free trader but advocated the railroads policy opposite to one implemented by Reutern.
His Minister of War, Milutin, hold his position but here Alexander went to another extreme making him pretty much immune against any criticism no matter how justified and serious.
Basically, the country seemed to Alexander as a puff cake, each layer of which lived its own life, obeying its own rules and following its purpose. At the very top of it there was an imperial court; immediately below it was the highest society of two capitals, consisting of several aristocratic families that spent most of their time in entertainment - at French performances, musical evenings and balls; even lower were landowners, merchants and industrialists who suppressed with their wealth pathetic small nobles who led an idle life in their over-mortgaged little estates; further down followed a new middle class consisting of engineers, doctors, lawyers, officials, architects, students, artists. These people, who fountained ideas, even if they were not nihilists, wanted to change the world. They had to be kept as far as possible from the huge, gray, amorphous mass of peasants at all costs. Thank God, the peasants have still been protected from revolutionary contagion with their ignorance. But for how long?
So the only people really needed for success of the planned reforms were exactly the same people whom AII distrusted the most. Small wonder that as soon as they figured out his attitude they reciprocated in the kind: intelligentsia started to view criticism of the government as its main social duty. On his side from time to time AII was making the feeble attempts to get the “public support” but their potential result was usually negated by the twist to the right that followed shortly afterwards. The same, in a reverse order, applied to the conservatives (many of whom were not useless nincompoops). As a result, AII was moving ahead/backward/sidewise based strictly upon his uncontested divine right. For a while this was working to a degree. Unfortunately, swings from the right to left and back quite often resulted in having on the important positions who were out of synch with a current swing (and some of them even had principles) and, without getting a warning from the top, kept acting as usual creating the angry reaction from those whom Alexander was planning to placate at that specific moment.
Especially difficult in that sense were the universities. The charter of 1863 revived the scientific and educational life of universities, but did not solve all the problems and like all other reforms of Alexander II, education reform was subjected to strong criticism. The reforms carried out from above were taken by society in bayonets. At some point, there was a paradoxical situation - the tsarist government carried out one reform after another, and society, which vocally criticized the current situation and, seemingly, wanted change, vigorously fought both reforms and reformers. In the case of high education the critics (professors of the universities) had a willing and energetic following, the students who had been easily politicized and possessed very little in the terms of self-restraint and the norms of behavior. With a very little of encouragements they tended to behave violently. It did not took a long for the functions of dog and tail to be reversed and the liberal professors found themselves being hostages of much more radical students and forced to adopt even more radical views out of fear to lose their influence and popularity (they had been paid based upon attendance) and even a physical violence. On the initial stages the problem probably could be solved by application of the really harsh measures to a small number of the extremists but the moment was missed and the problem kept growing with the real extremists intimidating into the obedience not just the fellow students and their professors but the “intellectuals” outside the academia.
Court events were pretty much the same as during his father’s reign but, unlike his father who dominated them as all other events at which he had been present, AII felt himself noticeably uncomfortable. But the luxury of these events kept growing. British Ambassador Lord Loftus stated that the evenings at the Winter Palace "surpass everything he saw in other countries in luxury and splendor." Théophile Gautier, who was (by whatever reason) invited to attend a court ball, left grossly exaggerated description (what else to expect from a person who wrote “Captain Fracasse” and admired Hugo’s “Hernani”) full of plain idiocies, probably to impress the French readers:
“A huge hall opened in front of me, all in marble and white plaster... Everywhere you could see uniforms with gold bibs, epaulettes dotted with diamonds, order bars covered with enamel and precious stones... Men's uniforms and ceremonial costumes were so bright, shiny, diverse, so overloaded with gold that the women in their elegant dresses were simply lost among them.”
- While the parade uniforms of the high ranks, especially the civic and court ones, had a lot of gold on them, there were no “bibs” or any other things made of gold and worn atop of them.
- The epaulets had been made of gold but there were no diamonds on them.
- The precious stones (diamonds) could be on the stars (1st class) or (as in case of St. Anne) on the 2nd class worn around the neck but not on the “order bars” (lower degrees). BTW, in most cases these “precious stones” were just rhinestones made of glass. Getting the real diamonds was an extra privilege, usually granted to someone who already had an award.
- An idea that on these events the women had been wearing just elegant dresses and no jewelry is beyond being silly.
The main entertainment at home was the same as for overwhelming majority of the Russian population with a possible exception of the lowest classes: cards. Everybody played them regardless social status, wealth and political affiliation [2]. However, unlike many of his subjects, AII never forgot his more important duties:
“If there are guests to the evening, he sits down with them to play cards; if not, he sits down at a special table on which pencils, brushes, paints and ink are prepared, and is engaged in an important and useful thing... drawing sketches of new military uniforms, trousers, headgear, helmets and uniforms of other Russian state institutions.”
Alexander's long double-breasted half-caftans were welcomed by society. And let's not go down to indecent hints about why society and Alexander liked the new form! Of course, solely because it was much more convenient and comfortable than the previous one. Men's corsets, by the way, have been getting out of use since then.
Empress and Empress mother from time to time enjoyed reading. Meaning that somebody was reading them a book. It does not look like AII never was around on these occasions. Emancipated Grand Duchess Helen Pavlovna cultivated all types of artists and musicians in her palace but Emperor and Empress rarely, if ever, attended these concerts.
But the rage was “spiritism”. The “educated classes” loved it. All that stuff with the raising tables, the spirits communicating through the mysterious knocks, and other supernatural things had been absolutely fascinating. Understandably, the imperial family could afford the best performers who could stage really impressive shows. Below are descriptions of some of them left by Tutcheva, Empress’ lady in waiting, who had enough brains for being somewhat skeptical:
“Session of spiritism in the Grand Palace in the presence of Emperor, Empress, Empress Mother, Crown Prince of Wurttemberg, Count Shuvalov, Count Adlerberg, Alexei Tolstoy, Alexei Bobrinsky, Alexandra Dolgorukova and me. All of us were seated around a round table, with our hands on the table; the sorcerer sat between the Empress and Grand Duke Constantine. Soon, knocks produced by spirits were heard in different corners of the room. Questions began, which were answered by knocks corresponding to the letters of the alphabet. Meanwhile, the spirits acted sluggishly, they announced that there were too many people, that it would paralyze them and it was necessary to exclude Alexei Bobrinsky and me. Subsequently, they fell in love with Bobrinsky, but kept a tooth against me forever. We were removed to the next room, from where, however, we heard everything that was happening very well. The table rose to the height of the half-arshin above the floor. The Empress Mother felt some hand touch the flounces of her dress, grabbed her hand and took off her wedding ring. Then this hand grabbed, shook and pinched all those present, except for the Empress, whom she systematically bypassed. From the hands of the sovereign, she took a bell, carried it through the air and handed it over to the Prince of Württemberg.”
“This week on Tuesday there was an evening at Empress Maria Alexandrovna. Present: Baron Lieven, Adlerberg spouses, Prince Gorchakov and Count Bobrinsky. They talked about ghosts, about magnetism - always a favorite topic of conversation in the presence of Bobrinsky.”
Then, of course, there was a hunt “church service in the morning then hunting with the dogs”. There were two main types of the hunt: rifle hunt (birds and serious animals) and dog hunting [3]. Alexander liked both.
And, of course, there was rest and relaxation, which required the resorts, preferably on a sea-side. The Baltic option was already fully developed but one on the Black Sea just started.
Resorts of the Crimea.
As a resort area the Crimea became popular in the second half of the XIX century even if some members of the top aristocracy had their estates here much earlier. In 1861 Livadia estate near Yalta had been bought by AII from Count Pototski and converted into the imperial summer residence that included Big Palace (for Emperor), Small Palace (for Tsesarevich), housing for the retinue, and the kitchen. Construction continued from 1861 till 1866.
Construction of the railroads connecting Crimea with the “mainland” removed the problems earlier related to the trips to the southern part of the peninsula and made the area easily accessible to the general public.
One of the reasons for the popularity of the peninsula in the 19th and early 20th centuries was the then rampant tuberculosis epidemic in Russia. Crimean healing air was the last hope that residents of Russia could afford with average income. "A merry, well-fed, idle crowd walking to the sounds of joyful music - and in the middle of it are the living dead..."
The Simferopol newspaper "Salgir" was indignant that the locals profited from vacationers with terrible force: "Suffice it to say that 30 kopecks are charged for a glass of ordinary vodka," - the monstrous prices of Gurzuf's most elite restaurant at that time.
Those concerned of morality were worried about the intoxicating spirit of permissiveness reigning in the Crimean resorts. The press wrote: "Yalta is not a resort, but a university of depravity." By the 1870s, a large-scale industry of sexual services had developed in Crimea, but since local police officers were usually “gainfully involved”, it seemed that prostitution did not exist on the Southern Shore. Add to this romantic young ladies who decided to escape to Crimea from somewhere in their native Samara with a passing officer. Or bored elegant female adventurers...
The handsome Tatars offered lonely vacationing young ladies horseback riding in the surrounding area - and often not only walks. The public condemned such "debauchery", but many ladies were ready to defend their "pages". A certain person wrote to the editorial office of the newspaper "Crimean Courier" - "...these are men with soul and temperament, about which our Russian males have no idea." It turns out that healthy Crimean air contributed to the emancipation of morals and the success of the First Sexual Revolution in Russia.
__________
[1] In OTL this happened only after the War of 1877-78 but here it is not going to happen so he got pissed off more than a decade earlier. Say, after finding out that the corruption related to the railroads construction is sponsored by Alexander himself.
[2] There was a nasty rumor that a liberal icon, poet Nekrasov, tended to …er… correct mistakes of the Fortune. True or not, his mistress (a socially advanced lady with the literary aspirations who openly lived both with him and her husband; the only thing that cow could write about the visit of Alexander Dumas was that he ate a lot and talked too much) left a description of him playing cards with his friends (all of them socially advanced and either writers or literary critics) while doing a mandatory social bitching. But the conservatives also favored this past time.
[3] This is a special subject - hunting with the dogs was a cultural phenomena mixing a semi-religious dedication with the very complicated science of breeding. It was quite different from British version. If there is an interest, I’ll make a separate chapter on it.
Last edited:
Well heres updated map of Europe, France got in little prestige war against Austria and also diminished its influence in Italy (though Austira beeing punching bag is getting kinda boring as there wasnt any sense in them making rash move in Italy without consulting other powers given their perilous position ITTL, then again we might see ol Franz dethroned as this string of defeats doesnt bode well for Habsburgs, or for Austrias long term independence , give Germans a generation to get used to their indetity and Germans in Austria to get desillusioned from notion of Granduer and we might see Anschlasuss in 1900).Russian borders on Caucasus got a little diminished from previous version to something i believe more correct .
Formally, Austria was an aggressor against Piedmont and there was no reason for the Austrians to assume that they are going to be beaten: unlike the French army their own had a recent experience of the European wars, which was in OTL considered a valid argument before Austro-Prussian War.
As for the rest, it may end up somewhat better for Austria than in OTL (definition of “better” is not a precise science 😉).
BTW, prestige is an important thing for the rulers and in this case there was a domestic support to it. But the pluses are going to be at least somewhat offset by the high French losses and in the future Oscar has to be much more cautious in his foreign policies (unlike NIII). The colonial conquests are OK (unless they involve serious military disasters, but there is always the Foreign Legion and the professional troops) but a major European war must be warranted by something more serious than a “matter of honor”.
Thanks for the map.
Last edited:
Just a thought, but the fact was that Austria really didn't have a lot of choice, it was either to back away from a minor power and be humiliated on European stage, or to try and force Piedmont to back out via force and save face. Plus i doubt anyone really expected French intervention.
Otherwise yea, Austria in it's diminished form has a quite solid base so morbid predictions of Anschluss may not come to be, with healthy Adriatic coast and no otl mess they might be able to pursue colonial empire as I said earlier.
The Game Changer?
255. The Game Changer?
Unlike OTL:
(a) Bismarck does not serve as an ambassador to France: all the time between Frankfurt and PM assignment is spent in Russia where it went in 1860 (instead of 1859). His OTL tenure in France did not produce anything tangible or even clear mutual understanding as was demonstrated by meeting in Biarritz. Anyway, ambassadorship in France lasted only from May 1862 till September.
(b) There is no Schleswig Question - The Grand Duchy of Gottorp, unlike OTL, is united with Kingdom of Denmark and Norway with the same succession rules allowing male heirs through female line (I know that this was not specifically mentioned in the previous chapters but there was nothing to the contrary as well and, the Grand Duchy, being an artificial byproduct of the complicated land swap arrangement designed by @Jürgen 😜, does not have the same succession rules as OTL Schlezwig and (last but not least) the whole “triple union” is a part of the Baltic League so attacking it may end up being an extremely unhealthy exercise for the third parties regardless of the fact that Gottorp is still formally a part of the HRE.
]
Bismarck
Emperor Alexander II met Bismarck in St. Petersburg: in 1860 - 1862 he headed the Prussian diplomatic mission in Russia. Prussia's role in Russia's foreign policy was then insignificant. Since the first meeting, Alexander II received the Prussian representative kindly. "It is curious that I started my work on April 1, because on this day there was my audience with the Emperor, which became a real gift for my birthday thanks to his courtesy," Bismarck wrote to his wife. At the military parade, "the Emperor... in general, especially attentive to me, kept me next to him from the very beginning to the end and told me everything himself. The Emperor devoted himself so exclusively to me as if he had staged a parade for me."
The beginning of Bismarck's mission in Russia coincided with another round of the Austro-French confrontation. The Italian conflict threatened to plunge Europe into a new continent-wide war. The localization of hostilities and the prevention of the spread of the conflict largely depended on Prussia's position regarding the coming war. The beginning of the Prussian mobilization disturbed Russian government, and the way of action of the Prussian Prince Regent Wilhelm upset his nephew, the Russian Emperor Alexander II. Numerous reports from St. Petersburg, in which Bismarck with a cold calculation proved the need to curtail Prussian military preparations and improve relations with Russia, strengthened Alexander’s confidence in him: "Frankly speaking, I am grateful to the Prince Regent for sending me in your person a representative with whom I like to talk and negotiate with full confidence and with all intimacy. "
In a letter to the councelor to the Prussian Embassy in Frankfurt, Bismarck noted: "The Emperor distinguishes me in a manner that provides me with the position of a family envoy, as in the time of his father; I am the only diplomat who has most intimate access to his person." These words were fair. Bismarck's audiences with Alexander II became longer, and the nature of communication became more trustworthy. In one of the reports to Prince Regent Bismarck wrote: "His Imperial Majesty received me as graciously as always, and if it could be foreseen that the official position of Russian politics would base its guiding thread exclusively on personal feelings, like those that His Majesty, for his part, expressed towards me …, then the sincere cordiality of the relations of both Supreme Governments could not wish for anything else.”
During the audiences, Alexander II permitted Bismarck to smoke cigars, which was allowed a very narrow circle of people. In addition to foreign policy issues, topics not related to international relations were raised at the meetings. Alexander II shared with Bismarck his experiences regarding implementation of the peasant reform, and the fate of the autocracy. Bismarck was a frequent guest at official dinners in the Winter Palace and in Peterhof, was repeatedly honored to sit next to the emperor himself.
He took part in Russian royal fun - bear hunting and even killed two bears, but stopped this occupation, saying that it was dishonest to perform a gun against unarmed animals. In one of these hunts, he froze his legs so much that there was a question of amputation.
On the eve of his departure to Germany on the occasion of the end of his diplomatic mission, Bismarck was awarded the Order of St. Alexander Nevsky and received an offer from Alexander II to switch to Russian service, which he gratefully refused.
Bismarck made a deep impression on the Russians. Minister of War D.A. Milyutin recalled: "His appearance was not attractive: tall, dense, broad-shouldered, with a reddish face, a large redd mustache and an almost solid bald head. In his conversation and appeal, he did not look like a stubborn diplomat at all; rather, he could be mistaken for a retired military man. He spoke simply, at ease, with the appearance of a frank person, with an admixture of sarcastic wit. At that time, of course, it never occurred to anyone that this man was destined to become a historical celebrity, the manager of the destinies of the whole world in the near future.”
The idyll lasted all the way into 1862 when Wilhelm I of Prussia faced the crisis: the liberal Prussian Diet (Landtag) refused to authorize funding for a proposed re-organization of the army. The King's ministers could not convince legislators to pass the budget, and the King was unwilling to make concessions. Wilhelm threatened to abdicate in favour of his son Crown Prince Frederick William, who opposed his doing so, believing that Bismarck was the only politician capable of handling the crisis. Wilhelm was initially hesitant because Bismarck was requesting, as a precondition, a complete freedom of actions in the foreign affairs. Only in September 1862, when the Abgeordnetenhaus (House of Deputies) overwhelmingly rejected the proposed budget, that Wilhelm was persuaded to recall Bismarck to Prussia on the advice of Roon. On 23 September 1862, Wilhelm appointed Bismarck Minister President and Foreign Minister.
To clarify a possible misunderstanding, the Prussian liberals were not anti-military. Militarism was a part of the liberal cause since the early XIX. What they were against was an army as a royal tool. Which meant that they favored Landwehr, in which they had a considerable influence, at the expense of a regular army, in which they did not have influence.
Despite the initial distrust of the King and Crown Prince and the loathing of Queen Augusta, Bismarck soon acquired a powerful hold over the King by force of personality and powers of persuasion. Bismarck was intent on maintaining royal supremacy by ending the budget deadlock in the King's favour, even if he had to use extralegal means to do so. Under the Constitution, the budget could be passed only after the king and legislature agreed on its terms.
Bismarck contended that since the Constitution did not provide for cases in which legislators failed to approve a budget, there was a "legal loophole" in the Constitution and so he could apply the previous year's budget to keep the government running. Thus, on the basis of the 1861 budget, tax collection continued for four years. Without even being aware of it, Bismarck applied the venerable Russian principle of “finding the legal justifications to the violations of the laws”. By 1863 Abgeordnetenhaus finally decided that it could no longer come to terms with Bismarck, which was a clear indication of their collective stupidity on two accounts: first, from the very beginning how would they expect to come to terms with a person who proudly defined himself as a “reactionary” and second, by that time the military reform already advanced far enough to de facto eliminate Landwehr as a meaningful military force and the parliamentarians simply did not have in their disposal any real tool of enforcement.
The King simply dispersed the Diet accusing it in various unconstitutional activities. Bismarck followed up with restricting freedom of the press and as a result losing popularity, something about which he could not care less. His supporters lost the election in which the liberal opposition won over two-thirds of the seats. The House made repeated calls for Bismarck to be dismissed, but the King supported him, fearing that if he did dismiss the Minister President, he would most likely be succeeded by a liberal.
But even before this, in 1862, Bismarck made his political course clear:
“Prussia must concentrate and maintain its power for the favorable moment which has already slipped by several times. Prussia's boundaries according to the Vienna treaties are not favorable to a healthy state life. The great questions of the time will not be resolved by speeches and majority decisions – that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849 – but by iron and blood.”
Of course, what exactly amounts to the “favorable borders” was left to everyone’s imagination and more than one German state did not exactly cherish a possibility to became a Prussian province. Even the former members of the Erfurt Union did not want that. Obviously, the stated goal could not be achieved peacefully, and Bismarck was quite open about this, and this meant almost inevitable military confrontation within the HRE and probably even destruction of the HRE itself. It was also obvious that the leading Prussian opponent is going to be Hapsburg monarchy so each German state will have to chose with whom it is going to side.
In theory, there was a “three party” scenario in which France actively getting into the confrontation creating some kind of a vassal confederation of the states located close to its border. However, in a reality, Emperor Oscar already was widely criticized for getting involved in the Austrian-Italian conflict which resulted in the considerable French losses and did not produce anything besides military glory and moral satisfaction. It took a considerable effort to repair the damage and since then Oscar’s declared policy was “neutrality in Europe”. Unless, of course, the French territory is going to be attacked.
In Russia, Sweden and Denmark Bismarck’s political program was generally supported: the German territories of Sweden and Denmark were unequivocally defined as being outside the future unification efforts in exchange for the friendly neutrality and diplomatic effort to keep Poland off Prussian back.
With the Austria-occupied territories being back in the Polish hands and a considerable state income from the oil boom in Galicia, there were renewed demands in the “patriotic circles” to get back the Prussian part. Of course, even the most enthusiastic patriots would dare to make noises about the Swedish and Russian shares but it was quite reasonable to expect that in the case of a big scale military confrontation Poland may join Hapsburg-led coalition making strategic position of Silesia quite precarious and forcing Prussia to keep a considerable force even further North to protect Pozen.
Then, if such a confrontation ends with a serious Prussian defeat, who will guarantee that emboldened Austria is not going to try to attack Hungary and Poland will not became unreasonably ambitious? Then, there will be a war in which the Baltic League is going to be directly involved and, most probably, Britain will use situation by trying to cause some mischief somewhere and grabbing some pieces of others’ territories. For example, by attacking Swedish New Zealand or the Russian possessions on the Pacific or the Danish West India.
In the HRE Prussia could with various degrees of reliability to count upon Mecklenburg, Brunswick, Oldenburg, various Saxonian duchies and the Hanseatic cities of Hamburg, Lubeck and Bremen.
Pretty much everybody else in the HRE were going to either side with Austria or remain neutral (there was a strong indication that at least Wurttemberg is preferring such an option).
Most probably Italy will join a war against Austria because it wanted Venice, already got an experience of fighting Austria on its own and will be welcoming a potentially strong ally. Its usefulness on a battlefield and on the sea was going to be, in the most optimistic scenario, rather limited except for getting some Austrian forces engaged.
Hungary was more problematic because it already got almost everything it wanted from Austria (getting back Croatia and access to the sea was not too critical with the open route by the Danube and new railroads) and because King Szilard being an outspoken liberal was not a great admirer of the Prussian conservatism. Of course, there was still a considerable anti-Hapsburg sentiment on a national level but most of the bellicosity was already gone (and Austria was a major consumer of the Hungarian agricultural exports) and Hungary, being a predominantly agricultural and not very rich country, modernization of the army had been moving slowly and Hungary already missed an opportunity to join Austro-Piedmontese-French War.
Anyway, there was a remaining fundamental problem: Prussian diplomatic and military reputation in Europe was not very high, to put it mildly. In 1860 the Times of London put it this way:
“always leaning on somebody, always getting somebody to help her, never willing to help herself … present in congresses but absent in battles … ready to supply any amount of ideals and sentiments, but shy of anything that savours of the actual. She has a large army, but notoriously one that is in no condition for fighting … no one counts on her as a friend; no one dreads her as an enemy. How she become a great power, history tells us; why she remains so nobody can tell.”
To be fair, so far it was rather difficult for the already unified European states to contemplate the HRE situation with a complete seriousness and the developments in Prussia were generally overlooked or shrugged off, especially taking into an account that its military did not distinguish themselves in any way for more than half of a century and that Prussian obsession with an order was a popular subject for the jokes. Even in the German caricatures the Prussian military looked like caricature within a caricature.
Obviously, getting other countries on board for the future war was not going to be an easy task with the reputation like that. It was up to Bismarck and Roon to show, as Figaro put it, that they are better than their reputation.
“The laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.”
“When a man says he approves of something in principle, it means he hasn't the slightest intention of carrying it out in practice.”
“Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.”
“The secret of politics? Make a good treaty with Russia.”
Otto von Bismarck
“Frankly speaking, I am grateful to the Prince Regent for sending me in your person a representative with whom I like to talk and negotiate with full confidence and with all intimacy.”
Alexander II to Bismarck, then Prussian Ambassador to Russia
“He is a smart but extraordinary weirdo; his head is constantly busy with chaotic plans to exalt Prussia and almost recreate the whole of Europe... he is a kind guy and ready to tell his fantasies to anyone.”
Count Ignatiev about Ambassador Bismarck
“The relations between the courts of Berlin and St. Petersburg were the most friendly. Regardless of official, diplomatic relations, the sovereigns themselves exchanged related, sincere greetings, mutual advice and services.”
Milyutin
[“When a man says he approves of something in principle, it means he hasn't the slightest intention of carrying it out in practice.”
“Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.”
“The secret of politics? Make a good treaty with Russia.”
Otto von Bismarck
“Frankly speaking, I am grateful to the Prince Regent for sending me in your person a representative with whom I like to talk and negotiate with full confidence and with all intimacy.”
Alexander II to Bismarck, then Prussian Ambassador to Russia
“He is a smart but extraordinary weirdo; his head is constantly busy with chaotic plans to exalt Prussia and almost recreate the whole of Europe... he is a kind guy and ready to tell his fantasies to anyone.”
Count Ignatiev about Ambassador Bismarck
“The relations between the courts of Berlin and St. Petersburg were the most friendly. Regardless of official, diplomatic relations, the sovereigns themselves exchanged related, sincere greetings, mutual advice and services.”
Milyutin
Unlike OTL:
(a) Bismarck does not serve as an ambassador to France: all the time between Frankfurt and PM assignment is spent in Russia where it went in 1860 (instead of 1859). His OTL tenure in France did not produce anything tangible or even clear mutual understanding as was demonstrated by meeting in Biarritz. Anyway, ambassadorship in France lasted only from May 1862 till September.
(b) There is no Schleswig Question - The Grand Duchy of Gottorp, unlike OTL, is united with Kingdom of Denmark and Norway with the same succession rules allowing male heirs through female line (I know that this was not specifically mentioned in the previous chapters but there was nothing to the contrary as well and, the Grand Duchy, being an artificial byproduct of the complicated land swap arrangement designed by @Jürgen 😜, does not have the same succession rules as OTL Schlezwig and (last but not least) the whole “triple union” is a part of the Baltic League so attacking it may end up being an extremely unhealthy exercise for the third parties regardless of the fact that Gottorp is still formally a part of the HRE.
]
Bismarck
Emperor Alexander II met Bismarck in St. Petersburg: in 1860 - 1862 he headed the Prussian diplomatic mission in Russia. Prussia's role in Russia's foreign policy was then insignificant. Since the first meeting, Alexander II received the Prussian representative kindly. "It is curious that I started my work on April 1, because on this day there was my audience with the Emperor, which became a real gift for my birthday thanks to his courtesy," Bismarck wrote to his wife. At the military parade, "the Emperor... in general, especially attentive to me, kept me next to him from the very beginning to the end and told me everything himself. The Emperor devoted himself so exclusively to me as if he had staged a parade for me."
The beginning of Bismarck's mission in Russia coincided with another round of the Austro-French confrontation. The Italian conflict threatened to plunge Europe into a new continent-wide war. The localization of hostilities and the prevention of the spread of the conflict largely depended on Prussia's position regarding the coming war. The beginning of the Prussian mobilization disturbed Russian government, and the way of action of the Prussian Prince Regent Wilhelm upset his nephew, the Russian Emperor Alexander II. Numerous reports from St. Petersburg, in which Bismarck with a cold calculation proved the need to curtail Prussian military preparations and improve relations with Russia, strengthened Alexander’s confidence in him: "Frankly speaking, I am grateful to the Prince Regent for sending me in your person a representative with whom I like to talk and negotiate with full confidence and with all intimacy. "
In a letter to the councelor to the Prussian Embassy in Frankfurt, Bismarck noted: "The Emperor distinguishes me in a manner that provides me with the position of a family envoy, as in the time of his father; I am the only diplomat who has most intimate access to his person." These words were fair. Bismarck's audiences with Alexander II became longer, and the nature of communication became more trustworthy. In one of the reports to Prince Regent Bismarck wrote: "His Imperial Majesty received me as graciously as always, and if it could be foreseen that the official position of Russian politics would base its guiding thread exclusively on personal feelings, like those that His Majesty, for his part, expressed towards me …, then the sincere cordiality of the relations of both Supreme Governments could not wish for anything else.”
During the audiences, Alexander II permitted Bismarck to smoke cigars, which was allowed a very narrow circle of people. In addition to foreign policy issues, topics not related to international relations were raised at the meetings. Alexander II shared with Bismarck his experiences regarding implementation of the peasant reform, and the fate of the autocracy. Bismarck was a frequent guest at official dinners in the Winter Palace and in Peterhof, was repeatedly honored to sit next to the emperor himself.
He took part in Russian royal fun - bear hunting and even killed two bears, but stopped this occupation, saying that it was dishonest to perform a gun against unarmed animals. In one of these hunts, he froze his legs so much that there was a question of amputation.
On the eve of his departure to Germany on the occasion of the end of his diplomatic mission, Bismarck was awarded the Order of St. Alexander Nevsky and received an offer from Alexander II to switch to Russian service, which he gratefully refused.
Bismarck made a deep impression on the Russians. Minister of War D.A. Milyutin recalled: "His appearance was not attractive: tall, dense, broad-shouldered, with a reddish face, a large redd mustache and an almost solid bald head. In his conversation and appeal, he did not look like a stubborn diplomat at all; rather, he could be mistaken for a retired military man. He spoke simply, at ease, with the appearance of a frank person, with an admixture of sarcastic wit. At that time, of course, it never occurred to anyone that this man was destined to become a historical celebrity, the manager of the destinies of the whole world in the near future.”
The idyll lasted all the way into 1862 when Wilhelm I of Prussia faced the crisis: the liberal Prussian Diet (Landtag) refused to authorize funding for a proposed re-organization of the army. The King's ministers could not convince legislators to pass the budget, and the King was unwilling to make concessions. Wilhelm threatened to abdicate in favour of his son Crown Prince Frederick William, who opposed his doing so, believing that Bismarck was the only politician capable of handling the crisis. Wilhelm was initially hesitant because Bismarck was requesting, as a precondition, a complete freedom of actions in the foreign affairs. Only in September 1862, when the Abgeordnetenhaus (House of Deputies) overwhelmingly rejected the proposed budget, that Wilhelm was persuaded to recall Bismarck to Prussia on the advice of Roon. On 23 September 1862, Wilhelm appointed Bismarck Minister President and Foreign Minister.
To clarify a possible misunderstanding, the Prussian liberals were not anti-military. Militarism was a part of the liberal cause since the early XIX. What they were against was an army as a royal tool. Which meant that they favored Landwehr, in which they had a considerable influence, at the expense of a regular army, in which they did not have influence.
Despite the initial distrust of the King and Crown Prince and the loathing of Queen Augusta, Bismarck soon acquired a powerful hold over the King by force of personality and powers of persuasion. Bismarck was intent on maintaining royal supremacy by ending the budget deadlock in the King's favour, even if he had to use extralegal means to do so. Under the Constitution, the budget could be passed only after the king and legislature agreed on its terms.
Bismarck contended that since the Constitution did not provide for cases in which legislators failed to approve a budget, there was a "legal loophole" in the Constitution and so he could apply the previous year's budget to keep the government running. Thus, on the basis of the 1861 budget, tax collection continued for four years. Without even being aware of it, Bismarck applied the venerable Russian principle of “finding the legal justifications to the violations of the laws”. By 1863 Abgeordnetenhaus finally decided that it could no longer come to terms with Bismarck, which was a clear indication of their collective stupidity on two accounts: first, from the very beginning how would they expect to come to terms with a person who proudly defined himself as a “reactionary” and second, by that time the military reform already advanced far enough to de facto eliminate Landwehr as a meaningful military force and the parliamentarians simply did not have in their disposal any real tool of enforcement.
The King simply dispersed the Diet accusing it in various unconstitutional activities. Bismarck followed up with restricting freedom of the press and as a result losing popularity, something about which he could not care less. His supporters lost the election in which the liberal opposition won over two-thirds of the seats. The House made repeated calls for Bismarck to be dismissed, but the King supported him, fearing that if he did dismiss the Minister President, he would most likely be succeeded by a liberal.
But even before this, in 1862, Bismarck made his political course clear:
“Prussia must concentrate and maintain its power for the favorable moment which has already slipped by several times. Prussia's boundaries according to the Vienna treaties are not favorable to a healthy state life. The great questions of the time will not be resolved by speeches and majority decisions – that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849 – but by iron and blood.”
Of course, what exactly amounts to the “favorable borders” was left to everyone’s imagination and more than one German state did not exactly cherish a possibility to became a Prussian province. Even the former members of the Erfurt Union did not want that. Obviously, the stated goal could not be achieved peacefully, and Bismarck was quite open about this, and this meant almost inevitable military confrontation within the HRE and probably even destruction of the HRE itself. It was also obvious that the leading Prussian opponent is going to be Hapsburg monarchy so each German state will have to chose with whom it is going to side.
In theory, there was a “three party” scenario in which France actively getting into the confrontation creating some kind of a vassal confederation of the states located close to its border. However, in a reality, Emperor Oscar already was widely criticized for getting involved in the Austrian-Italian conflict which resulted in the considerable French losses and did not produce anything besides military glory and moral satisfaction. It took a considerable effort to repair the damage and since then Oscar’s declared policy was “neutrality in Europe”. Unless, of course, the French territory is going to be attacked.
In Russia, Sweden and Denmark Bismarck’s political program was generally supported: the German territories of Sweden and Denmark were unequivocally defined as being outside the future unification efforts in exchange for the friendly neutrality and diplomatic effort to keep Poland off Prussian back.
With the Austria-occupied territories being back in the Polish hands and a considerable state income from the oil boom in Galicia, there were renewed demands in the “patriotic circles” to get back the Prussian part. Of course, even the most enthusiastic patriots would dare to make noises about the Swedish and Russian shares but it was quite reasonable to expect that in the case of a big scale military confrontation Poland may join Hapsburg-led coalition making strategic position of Silesia quite precarious and forcing Prussia to keep a considerable force even further North to protect Pozen.
Then, if such a confrontation ends with a serious Prussian defeat, who will guarantee that emboldened Austria is not going to try to attack Hungary and Poland will not became unreasonably ambitious? Then, there will be a war in which the Baltic League is going to be directly involved and, most probably, Britain will use situation by trying to cause some mischief somewhere and grabbing some pieces of others’ territories. For example, by attacking Swedish New Zealand or the Russian possessions on the Pacific or the Danish West India.
In the HRE Prussia could with various degrees of reliability to count upon Mecklenburg, Brunswick, Oldenburg, various Saxonian duchies and the Hanseatic cities of Hamburg, Lubeck and Bremen.
Pretty much everybody else in the HRE were going to either side with Austria or remain neutral (there was a strong indication that at least Wurttemberg is preferring such an option).
Most probably Italy will join a war against Austria because it wanted Venice, already got an experience of fighting Austria on its own and will be welcoming a potentially strong ally. Its usefulness on a battlefield and on the sea was going to be, in the most optimistic scenario, rather limited except for getting some Austrian forces engaged.
Hungary was more problematic because it already got almost everything it wanted from Austria (getting back Croatia and access to the sea was not too critical with the open route by the Danube and new railroads) and because King Szilard being an outspoken liberal was not a great admirer of the Prussian conservatism. Of course, there was still a considerable anti-Hapsburg sentiment on a national level but most of the bellicosity was already gone (and Austria was a major consumer of the Hungarian agricultural exports) and Hungary, being a predominantly agricultural and not very rich country, modernization of the army had been moving slowly and Hungary already missed an opportunity to join Austro-Piedmontese-French War.
Anyway, there was a remaining fundamental problem: Prussian diplomatic and military reputation in Europe was not very high, to put it mildly. In 1860 the Times of London put it this way:
“always leaning on somebody, always getting somebody to help her, never willing to help herself … present in congresses but absent in battles … ready to supply any amount of ideals and sentiments, but shy of anything that savours of the actual. She has a large army, but notoriously one that is in no condition for fighting … no one counts on her as a friend; no one dreads her as an enemy. How she become a great power, history tells us; why she remains so nobody can tell.”
To be fair, so far it was rather difficult for the already unified European states to contemplate the HRE situation with a complete seriousness and the developments in Prussia were generally overlooked or shrugged off, especially taking into an account that its military did not distinguish themselves in any way for more than half of a century and that Prussian obsession with an order was a popular subject for the jokes. Even in the German caricatures the Prussian military looked like caricature within a caricature.
Obviously, getting other countries on board for the future war was not going to be an easy task with the reputation like that. It was up to Bismarck and Roon to show, as Figaro put it, that they are better than their reputation.
Probably even more so than otl given Prussia is weaker than otl, plus no military genius like Moltke to make Prussian army above rest of Europe, leaving it roughly on European average.
This means that Bismarck reading diplomatic situation correctly and doing backhand diplomatic deals behind closed doors will leave a lot greater impact on German unification and Germany down the line than crushing military victory over two great powers otl. Not to mention that Austria itself isn't Great power as it was otl and while it's looked as stronger German state (due to its army having actual experience in European warfare), victory over them might not be as impressive.
So whatever deal Bismarcks Germany makes down the line German elite's might actually be inclined to follow it even after his departure, opposed to otl where Germany was drunk on success. Basically once Germany does launch it's Weltpolitik it might be more along the Bismarckian model with diplomacy being seen as way forward than over otl force.
Well, it is actually above the average but not as much as in OTL, mostly due to the top level. In OTL AP war mobilization process had been handled by the army structures and Moltke had an upper hand just because he had good connections with the royal family and WI made him his chief of staff (the General Staff had no reputation or influence). Even then the army commanders had been persistently trying to fight their own war.
They still have an advantage of the faster mobilization, better training of the troops and better rifles and one may always count upon the Austrian staff officers to come with the incomprehensible plan of campaign and FJI making the worst appointments possible (as in OTL) but even in OTL the Prussian army commanders had been very actively trying to wrestle a defeat from the jaws of victory so this is going to be a sluggish and bloody mess on both sides.
But the whole thing may not end with OTL schema of unification if Prussia is not so spectacularly successful. It seems that in Biarritz Bismarck was talking about the lesser scope of it. Of course, nobody can tell for sure what both sides had been talking about because neither of them understood another. 😉
So I think that a split Germany will be a realistic possibility. Prussia may absorb most of the Northern Germany along the OTL lines and the rest may form some kind of the Austria-dominated alliance under whatever name with perhaps one or two border (border with France) states making themselves fully independent (under the French protection). The HRE is no more. After all, in the 1848s Bismarck was denouncing the South Germany states as having nothing in common with Prussian “values”. Even in his “blood and iron” speech he was talking about the better Prussian borders (at least in the piece that I read), not complete unification.
If ITTL Germany is smaller and less aggressive quite a few things may go differently.
Well, honestly, this is somewhat of a distraction: I’m still trying to figure out how to deal with the coming issue of the Russian revolutionaries without dramatically changing personalities of the Russian rulers and certain social attitudes: it is increasingly tempting to get anachronistic and use post-1917 experience but where to get the right people?… 😢
I mean he was talking about modified borders, but you should really look at long term outcome to get the idea what was original goal which was more, or less unification, or Prussian leadership of Germany. Not to mention that there are other factors in play beside Bismarck (who is still most influential player).
Otherwise i don't think that France wants to offer protection to border state's (that is if it doesn't want to start another great power competition on the continent), nor do I really see German state's wanting French protection over something they'll get anyway as once HRE is gone from who are they going to be independent from? As for protection, well...
Regarding the southern states, i doubt they will form alliance with Austria , nor do I see Bismarck starting the war just to empower Austria down the line. Smaller German solution was viable idea and Prussia was gearing up for German leadership and the fact is that he concluded military alliance with South German state's (war with France just hastened the process).
Generally what i see happening is South German state's and enlarged Prussia building up on already established structures and forming an alliance as to many things play in Prussian hands (why ally with Austria when they can be independent states allied to Prussia ) and there is already established Prussian interest in rest of Germany via Zollverein (with every German state but Austria basically joining in), so in the end we can see that Prussia more or less had built up necessary structure if not for German unification then for Prussia leading Germany even before the war with war just serving to kick Austria out.
Also this model more, or less removes any legitimacy problem South German state's would have with Prussian overlordship as Prussian King doesn't rule them directly and they are more, or less independent. Not to mention diplomatically and economically it makes far more sense to remain allied to Prussia and once again why would Prussia forgo it's weary existent interests in Southern Germany? Otherwise for the naysayers, well Bismarck is pragmatic enough to toss some micro states to the dogs (Bavaria, Baden, Württemberg), in order to get them on his side (better than tossing entire south Germany to Austria).
Last edited: