Napoleonic Victory Fragments

napolonic-europe-1815

The League of Europe, 1815

I’m currently working on a real post about Napoleon Bonaparte filled with actual history but as that has been delayed due to various reasons, I’ve decided to tide over my hordes of screaming fans with some creative writing. These are my Napoleonic Victory Fragments! The conceit is that they are excepts from history books written in a world where Napoleon won. I hope you find them amusing. 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

CHAPTER THREE: THE CONGRESS OF FRANKFURT (1814)

The degree to which the Continental System and associated French economic warfare brought about the British capitulation has long been debated, and this volume will not abstain from that discussion. Still, the deciding blow to British counsels certainly came on the 21st of June, 1813, at the Battle of Vitoria. When news reached London that the largest British army yet put into the field had been routed, and that the Marquess of Wellington was dead, financial markets plummeted. When, mere weeks later, word arrived that American troops had destroyed York, the capitol of Upper Canada, spirits sunk even lower. The news that Sir Thomas Graham had surrendered the remnants of the Anglo-Spanish army at Bilbo on July 11th was the final straw, and the Cabinet voted to agree to discuss the possibility of a peace settlement. It was not that British war capacity was exhausted that brought about this decision, but that it had become apparent that a British victory would take decades more. No more continental powers remained to take the field against the Corsican: Prussia was broken beyond recovery, Austria was bound to France by ties of marriage, and the Franco-Russian Alliance had proven surprisingly resilient. Finally shorn of puppets, British arms had dared take the field against the Titan—and had been cast down. Today, Britain’s concession seems foredoomed, but we should remember that even then peace negotiations could have broken down……

…….the Final Act of the Congress of Frankfurt was a massive document, understandably so given that it was an attempt to bring about a final solution to twenty-one years of general warfare. Essentially, the Congress was an attempt to balance the interests of three powers: Britain, the French Empire, and Russia. That France was the clear victor of the Wars gave them an advantage at the negotiating table, but not an insurmountable one: Czar Alexander I still possessed an unbeaten army poised at Europe’s throat, and Britain’s occupation the French colonial possessions and ongoing naval blockade proved a powerful bargaining chip……

….the terms were complex in the details, but simple in the abstract: with minor adjustments, Napoleon’s redrawing of the map of Europe were accepted, as were he and his siblings various Royal and Imperial titles. French suzerainty over the Continent was formalized in the creation of the new ‘League of Europe’, a free-trade and mutual defense association whose hereditary presidency was to be vested in Napoleon Bonaparte. The Austrian Empire was forced to accept membership in this League, though this blow was softened by Napoleon’s ‘magnanimous’ decision to reduce by half the indemnity they owned under the Treaty of Schönbrunn from 85 million francs to 40 million francs, and to guarantee Austrian commercial access to the Illyrian ports. Of the West European powers still outside the Napoleonic Sphere, Sweden Sardinia, and Sicily were able to remain fully independent, though the Houses of Savoy and Bourbon were forced to finally relinquish their respective claims to Piedmont and Naples. The Kingdom of Portugal entered the League, though it was allowed to retain its preexisting defensive alliances with the United Kingdom (an unusual situation that would not be resolved until the Oporto Crisis of 1884). The question of the Papacy was answered delicately—the Papal States were not restored to sovereignty, but the Pope was given direct ownership of most of the major public buildings of Rome and the right to appoint the city’s ruling Councilors, as well as a yearly stipend of 2 million francs. Napoleon was granted the title Lord Protector of the Church.

The Russian Empire, of course, received much more consideration than any western nation. Russian territorial gains in Bialystok, Tarnopol, Bessarabia, Finland, Georgia, and Persia were recognized, and the sovereignty of the Duchy of Oldenburg and several other small German states ruled by the Czar’s relatives were re-affirmed. In addition, the Septinsular Republic (a French protectorate) would grant a 99-year lease on the island of Antikythera to the Russian navy, giving the Czar a base in the Mediterranean. A Treaty of Amity and Friendship between the Russian Empire and the League of Europe was to be signed, and ‘legitimate Russian interests in the Balkans’ were to be protected. Finally, the Russian Empire was given rights of policing and intervention in the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, to prevent Polish irredentism. Likewise, Great Britain came out of the Congress with ample compensations for her loss. Though the Electorate of Hannover’s loss was acknowledged, the House of Hannover was awarded ownership of many of their mediate estates there, and the French Empire agreed to pay Great Britain a onetime lump sum of five million francs. In addition, Napoleon managed to avoid his mistake from the Peace of Amiens, signing a liberal trade agreement with Britain that opened up the Continent to British goods once again. Moving beyond Europe, the colonial settlement reached was quite favorable to the British, though Napoleon avoided undue losses through the expedient of trading away the colonies of his allies. As a result of the Congress of Frankfurt, Britain annexed St. Thomas, Tobago, Ceylon, the Seychelles, Cape Colony, São Tomé and Príncipe, Spanish East Florida, and received recognition of its rule in British Honduras. France picked up rights to Spanish Hispaniola, and Spain was obligated to sell West Florida to the United States as part of the settlement of the Second Anglo-American War.

It is questionable whether any of the signatories of this Peace intended to honor it for more than a few years, but events soon spiraled out of anybody’s control…

  • Excerpts from The New Caesars: Bonaparte and the Making of the Nineteenth Century

 

CHAPTER FIVE: THE REGENCY (1824–1832)

As late as the summer of 1823, Napoleon still spoke openly of the coming Christian Crusade against the Ottoman Empire, but it was clear to all that he was dreaming. Negotiations with the Russians broke down repeatedly, and the Emperor’s illness grew obvious to all as he spent more and more time in Paris…..

…….On May 5th, 1824, His Imperial and Royal Majesty passed away, leaving as his heir a fourteen-year old boy…..

……In hindsight, the event seems to pass almost without incident; riots in Genoa and Turin, minor uprisings in the Spanish and Naplolese highlands, and though a few vaguely revolutionary pronouncements from minor German princeling were issued, nothing much came of it. However, we must remember that at the time, it seemed likely that all of Europe was about to erupt at the death of the Corsican Ogre. That it did not is an accomplishment not of destiny, but of the prompt establishment of a Regency Council, an achievement not so easy as one might think. Paris was rife with factions, each seeking to seize power for itself, and each determined to block its rivals. More than a few of these factions were led by Marshals and enjoyed military support. Quite likely, fighting in the streets of the capitol was only avoided by a last-minute compromise between several of the major power-groups, achieved at the famous Meeting at the Tuileries on May 12th. None of the founders held official government posts, and their authority was questionable, but together they could command the support of the Old Guard, the civil ministries, the Bonaparte Clan, and the royal family itself. It is highly likely that the Senate would have happily ratified the Council’s creation, even without the presence of several brigades of Imperial grenadiers in the city.

The resulting Council was a large and fluctuating body, usually consisting of between fifteen and twenty men, but for the entirety of its existence it was dominated by the four individuals who met the fateful day: Minister-at-Large Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord, Marshal Michael Ney of the Grande Armée, Joseph Bonaparte I, King of Spain and Mexico, and the Archduchess Maria Louise, the Empress Dowager.

Historians often overlook the Regency, sandwiched awkwardly as it between the shining glory of Napoleon the Great’s conquests and the pomp and splendor of the High Napoleonic Era that would fill the middle 19th century. But it’s importance in stabilizing the regime cannot be overstated. Of primary importance is King Joseph I and his liberal reforms. Freed of his brother’s influence, Joseph sought to bring the same freedoms he had introduced into his Spanish dominions north of the Pyrenees as well. Under the Regency, regular elections for the Chamber of Legislators were finally held, and appointments to the Senate were made to most of the Empire’s grandees. Joseph was not a republican, but he believed firmly that the propertied classes must be given a stake in the regime and a voice in Imperial Councils. Joseph loosened censorship laws, pardoned political prisoners, and allowed the formation of a Loyal Opposition, so long as it avoided Lèse-majesté or open attacks on the legitimacy of the state. This liberal tendency should not be overstated, as the brutal suppression of the Le Meurice plot of September, 1828 showed, the Regency Council was still able and willing to crush its opposition. Still, as the remainder of this chapter will show, the successes of Napoleon II and Charles Joseph I were unlikely without the Josephine Reforms.

Of equal importance were Talleyrand and Maria Louise’s efforts to stabilize the international situation. As of Napoleon I’s death, the situation with Austria remained tricky. She remained a powerful country, ruled by an ancient and native House, but she had been humiliated repeatedly during the Wars of French Supremacy (1792-1813), and Bonaparte had done little to assuage her during the years of peace that followed. It was the Regency Council that worked to truly make Austria “the bride of France and the mistress of Europe”, in Talleyrand’s famous words. Hapsburg officials were appointed to high-ranking positions in both the League and the Confederation of the Rhine, and Imperial French money was poured into helping the House of Hapsburg build up an international merchant marine and network of colonial outposts to compensate them for their territorial losses in Europe. Despite Emperor Franz I’s high hopes, his daughter was never able to secure the return of the Illyrian Provinces (with the exception of the cities of Cattaro and Ragusa, which were retroceded in 1825), but France supported Austrian military-diplomatic efforts in the Balkans that led to de facto Hapsburg protectorates in Bosnia, Serbia, and Wallachia. It should be noted that despite decades of rumors, it has never been proven that Talleyrand and the Dowager Empress were lovers at this time.

Meanwhile, Marshal Ney had a much more simple and straightforward task: to act as the Gendarmerie of Europe, a task admittedly made much easier by the 1818 British Revolution……

  • Excerpts from The New Caesars: Bonaparte and the Making of the Nineteenth Century

 

CHAPTER SIX: L’AIGLON TAKES FLIGHT (1832–1866)

Much ink has been spilled on the subject of Napoléon François Charles Joseph Bonaparte, i.e, His Imperial and Royal Majesty Emperor Napoleon II, much of it contradictory. If it is undeniable that he lacked the brilliance of his father, it is also undeniable that he was intelligent, studious, and determined to do right by his people and family. His youthful demands that he be allowed to cover himself in martial glory like his father were unfortunate, and his assumption of the personal command of the Algerian Expedition of 1835 was a disaster that led to the annihilation of the 19ème Régiment des Dragons at the Chott el Hodna, it be must be acknowledged that he learned from his mistakes: never again he would countermand one of his Marshals on the field of battle.

There are other criticisms of course, but all of them must be more or less qualified. He was more interested in the pageantry of high society than the hard work of government, yes, but he appointed competent ministers and left them to their work. He had a temper, true, but he was rarely cruel or arbitrary in his dealings. Disregarding youthful adventurism, he pursued an admirably conciliatory foreign policy, cooperating with the British Commonwealth to abolish Caribbean Slavery in the 1830s, mediating the peace to the Third Anglo-American War (1842-1845), and enforcing the General Arms Embargo on the Confederacy during the American Civil War (1861-1865). Politically, he attempted with moderate success to continue the liberalizing policies of his uncle Joseph; though these were generally abandoned after the 1848 German Revolts, he does deserve credit for undoing some of his father’s most reactionary legislation and restoring female property ownership and divorce laws to the French Empire (though many credit his friend and confidante Princess Sophie of Bavaria for this).

Undoubtedly, he was not the man most would have chosen to be Master of Europe, but it is clear that he made an admirable effort to rise to the challenge. This can be seen almost immediately following his assumption of full powers on March 20th, 1832…..

  • Excerpts from The New Caesars: Bonaparte and the Making of the Nineteenth Century

 

CHAPTER EIGHT: THE FOUNDATIONS TREMBLE (1893-1905)

Charles Joseph I’s death in the spring of 1893 marked the end of the direct Napoleonic line of descent, but there was no reason at the time to think it any other sort of demarcation point. When his cousin King Napoleon I of Holland was coronated as Emperor Napoleon III of France at Notre Dame cathedral the following month, the ceremony was presided over by His Holiness Pope Leo XIII in Carolingian style, and attended by the kings of Bavaria, Saxony, Westphalia, Naples, and Spain, the Emperor of Austria, and more dukes and princes than could be counted. No one who stood there that and watched the assembled crowned heads of Europe pay solemn tribute to the young emperor would guess that within a year he would be dead, gunned down by an anarchist’s bullet on a street corner in Brussels, and that six months later the largest war in nearly a century would be raging across the Mediterranean world.

Though undeniably dramatic, the emperor’s assassination is far less important to the events that followed than a long and tedious series of diplomatic maneuverings in the foreign ministries of St. Petersburg and Istanbul that had been going for years by this point. No doubt it was disorienting for both the French and their fellow Europeans to see a third branch of the Bonaparte Dynasty occupying the Tuileries within two years, but Crown Prince Victor of Westphalia (soon to be Emperor Victor Emmanuel I) is rightly regarded as the most capable sovereign of the Empire since Napoleon himself, and the actual impact on government policy was generally limited to the creation of several dozen new martyrs for the French left. Contrarily, when Czar Peter IV ordered Russian troops across the Danube on October 3rd, 1894, the war that followed resulted in over a million deaths, the virtual destruction of the Ottoman Empire, and a complete shift in the balance of power, ending eighty years of effortless Imperial French domination, and throwing the world into a sort of geopolitical chaos that would not really end until the 1904-1905 Russo-Japanese war.

The roots of the Great Eastern War (1894-1899) can be traced back as far as the reign of Empress Catharine the Great if one wishes, but begin in earnest at the 1808 Congress of Erfurt, where Napoleon I had rather rashly promised Czar Alexander that……

  • Excerpts from The New Caesars: Bonaparte and the Making of the Nineteenth Century

 

CHAPTER NINE: APRES MOI, LE DELUGE (1905-1914)

As the 20th century dawned, it was clear to all who could see that the High Napoleonic Era was over. Russian ambitions in the Far East might have been stopped cold at Tsushima, but at the cost to France of an increasingly restive Japan. Nearer to home, the Czar now dominated the Dardanelles and the oil fields of Mosul and Kirkuk, and his sphere of influence now included all of the Balkans east of the Danube. The Commonwealth had secured a virtual monopoly over Egypt and the Suez Cannel, and was now sparring with St. Petersburg over which Power would rule Persia—a contest that notably excluded France entirely. Even within the League of Europe, the House of Bonaparte’s iron grip was failing. In the Great Eastern War, the Hapsburg Monarchy had won its first significant military victories since the 18th century, and Baron Max Wladimir von Beck’s Government was presiding over a programme of rearmament and “National Restoration”.

In Jean-Paul Sartre’s 1953 pamphlet Les Fantômes de ’89, he famously mocked the aristocrats and generals, “whose ancestors had clawed their way out of the gutter, a single Revolution ago”, spending the dying years of Empire obliviously dancing and drinking in Paris salons as “yet another France slowly collapsed around their ears”. This caricature has some truth to it, but it must be admitted by even the most ardent Republican that not everyone was so blind. Facing an emboldened Russia and Britain and a restless Europe, Victor Emmanuel turned farther afield to search for new allies while attempting to placate the discontented at home. In 1907, he named the Hapsburg Archduke Franz Ferdinand as the new Prince-Primate of the Confederation of the Rhine, giving that ancient family a degree of influence over the Germanies they had not known for nearly a century. Domestically, his government reached a wide-ranging agreement with Jean Jaurès’s SFIO to end the miners’ strike in Alsace, surprising many Leftists who had seen the Emperor as a hardliner. His greatest success came in the realm of foreign policy, in the form of the Entente Cordiale signed between the French Empire and the United States of America in 1910. The U.S.A was no friend of the British Commonwealth, but relations between that proud Western Republic and the Bonaparte Monarchies had always been rather chilly….

…..His Majesty could be forgiven for a degree of confidence in his success, at least initially. The alliance with the United States provided a formidable counterweight to Great Britain, and his domestic reforms seemed likely to weld Austria closer to France in the face of a renewed Romanov imperialism. Unfortunately for him, events would continue to move. Starting with the Agadir Crisis of 1911, the tensions within and without the League of Europe began to steadily rise…..

  • Excerpts from The New Caesars: Bonaparte and the Making of the Nineteenth Century

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

CHAPTER THREE: LET THE CANNONS ROAR

President Clay did not want war with the British Commonwealth, but by September of 1842 he was probably the only American who didn’t. Unlike far too many of his compatriots, Henry Clay was an astute observer of European politics, and he knew that the odds were against the American Republic. Britain desperately desired victory in a foreign war to wipe away the shame of their defeat in the Wars of French Supremacy and had spent twenty years preparing for it, while Emperor Napoleon II had made it clear that he would not intervene in any North American colonial dispute. For Clay, neither the St. John river valley or Oregon Country was worth the risks a war would entail. Unfortunately, the choice wasn’t up to him. Following the ‘Aroostook Incident’ that summer, war fever had swept the nation, and both the Whig and Democratic Parties now demanded war. Threatened with revolt within his cabinet, President Clay reluctantly requested a Declaration of War from Congress, who enthusiastically voted in it with only a few dozen votes against. As the cheering crowds filled the streets of Washington, President Clay is reputed to have muttered to Secretary of State Webster “This damn war! If they want to kill each other so much, why’d they have to involve me?”

Across the Atlantic, the reaction of the Commonwealth’s leader was quite different. Prime Minister Robert Peel gave a rousing speech to Parliament, promising victory. “Let the cannons roar!” he famously bellowed. Parliament nearly unanimously voted war credits for the government and the mobilization of the National Militia, several divisions of which were immediately embarked for the Canadas, along with three squadrons of the Home Fleet to blockade the American shores. The only opposition came from elements of the Radical Liberals, many of whom felt that the Republics of the world ought to form a common front against Monarchism and Bonapartism, but they were easily overwhelmed by the Conservative Coalition, the Liberal Unionists, and the right and center wings of their own party….

  • Excerpts from Fire on the Frontiers: The Third Anglo-American War, 1842-1845

 

CHAPTER TWELVE: DOWNFALL

…….Reconvening in Philadelphia after their inauspicious flight from Washington D.C and the advancing British marines, the U.S Congress then launched one of the most farcical incidents in the long history American politics. Declaring that the recent defeats suffered by the United States could only be explained by treason at the highest levels, Representative William Henry Haywood Jr. (D-NC) introduced articles of impeachment against President Clay on November 16th, 1844. Clay’s disapproval of the war had never been a secret, and now dozens of Democrats (and not a few Whigs) rose in the drafty courthouse temporally enlisted as a Capitol Building to level charges of treason and incompetence at the President. After the year of disasters that had come before and the weeks of terror as the government fled, it seems likely that many Congressmen were eager to find a target upon which to vent their spleen. After only two hours of debate, the articles passed on a vote of  159 to 64. With the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court being absent, the Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was drafted to preside over the Senate’s impeachment hearings, a questionably legal decision that would quite likely have invalidated the entire proceedings if Clay had not been too dignified to press a legal challenge. The next day, the Senate voted to convict, impeaching President Clay on charges of treason by 29 to 25.

President Clay, for his part, knew nothing of this, as he was still in Baltimore attempting to organize a new American defensive line north of Annapolis. When a messenger arrived from Philadelphia bearing the news, his initial reaction was disbelief. When convinced of its veracity, he swore violently for several minutes, then collapsed into a nervous faint. He would not fully recover for several days, at which point he departed for his Kentucky estates, forswearing politics forever.

Meanwhile, back in the new capitol, the new president, William Henry Harrison inaugurated his regime with a three-hour speech to Congress outside of Independence Hall, in which he swore to vigorously prosecute the war and drive the invaders from American soil. Unfortunately, it was raining that day. President Harrison soon came down with severe pneumonia, dying on December 14th. A baffled Senate President pro tempore  Willie Person Mangum was sworn in as President that day by the Chief Justice, who had finally caught up to the retreating government.

As the Year of the Three Presidents drew to a close, President Mangum was not in an enviable position. The American invasion of the Canadas had been decisively stopped, and though an American garrison still held out it Montreal, Commonwealth forces now held almost all of the State of Maine, as well as the cities of Buffalo and Rochester. The British Navy’s blockade had paralyzed U.S commerce worldwide, N.Y.C and Boston had been repeatedly bombarded, and British marines had seized New Orleans and Washington D.C. Thousands of former slaves armed with British rifles roamed the fields and swamps of South Carolina and Georgia, burning and killing virtually as they pleased. Only in Florida had American arms been universally successful, and even there the U.S occupation forces were being bled white in endless skirmishes with the Seminoles. And worse was to come: word would not reach Philadelphia for several months yet, but General Taylor’s invasion of Oregon had come to an ignominious end at the Battle of Spokane Falls. Left to his own devices, President Mangum would likely have begun peace negotiations that Christmas, but the specter of Clay hung over him. The war would continue for six more months, and tens of thousands would die uselessly.

  • Excerpts from Fire on the Frontiers: The Third Anglo-American War, 1842-1845

 

CHAPTER FIFTEEN: LEGACY & AFTERMATH

Since before the ink dried on the Treaty of Paris, Americans have been attempting to assert a victory in their third great conflict over the North American continent. Apologists for this position will invariably make the claim that, while the United States was forced to cede all claims on the entirety of Oregon Country and the Aroostook – Madawaska region of Maine, the American Republic did not truly surrender any sovereign territory to the foe, as both these regions were merely ‘disputed border provinces’. Meanwhile, the British Commonwealth ceded East Florida to the U.S.A, thus making the war at the very least an inconclusive draw and perhaps even an unlikely American triumph. If my colleagues will forgive me for my bluntness, this claim is completely specious.

It is true that both of the regions ceded to Commonwealth control by the 1845 Treaty were ‘disputed’ but it is also true that the United States considered them integral parts of their territory—else why go to war for them with such fanfare? As for East Florida, it is true that Britain allowed the United States to purchase it for the munificent sum of £15,000,000, a thinly-disguised indemnity if there ever was one. And even for that, the sale included neither the Florida Keys or St. Augustine, whose citadel remained untaken throughout the entirety of the war (the U.S.A purchased it in 1906 for an additional £500,000). No, unlike either of its predecessors the Third Anglo-American War was a clear victory for Great Britain. But however historically foolish this debate may be, it serves the very important purpose of demonstrating an important truth: the great effects of the war of 1842 were not geopolitical or economic, but psychological. To the British, it partially restored the confidence lost in Frankfurt in 1815. For the Americans, it directed attention away from expansion and towards internal issues, leading directly to the outbreak of Civil War a mere fifteen years later….

  • Excerpts from Fire on the Frontiers: The Third Anglo-American War, 1842-1845

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

INTRODUCTION

……but whatever one’s political views, one cannot deny that Bonapartism is a syncretic philosophy, perhaps because Napoleon I never consciously set out to create a philosophy, but rather to gather together whatever props he could find to support his decidedly shaky throne. As J. Christopher Herold puts it in The Age of Napoleon, “Whether it was politics, the arts, the sciences, religion, or history—whatever the subject of his inquiries—he never approached it with a desire to gain knowledge but as an arsenal he could ransack for whatever weapons he required for his purpose.” Thus, the Bonapartists support dynastic monarchy, and one with an absolute authority the Ancien Régime never could have dreamed of possessing, and yet they base their claims to authority not on divine right of kings or hallowed tradition but on an almost Robespierren ‘will of the people’ that is not expressed through majoritarian democracy but instead through the armed forces and a ‘national soul’ (Âme Nationale), interpreted by the ruler. If Bonaparte can be said to have ended the French Revolution, then it must also be admitted that he brought about many of its most cherished objectives; meritocracy in the military and civil government, a comprehensive unitary legal code, and the abolition of feudal privileges. If this seems contradictory it is, but only until you abandon any coherent political ideology and attempt to judge things solely from the perspective of ‘what increases Napoleon I’s power and makes it easier for him to rule’.

Bonapartism is often described as ‘centralized egalitarian monarchy’. This is not strictly true—it should be ‘centralized egalitarian autocracy’. The Bolivarian regime in the Republic of Gran Colombia (1821-1852) was certainty Bonapartist in nature, and the American Bonapartist Party has never advocated for the establishment of a monarchy (merely a military dictatorship). But given that Bonapartism’s strongest bases have always been in Bonaparte-ruled Imperial France and her sister kingdoms, this conflation is unsurprising. It has been said that only Bonapartism could have allowed monarchy to survive into the 19th century. This may be true, if so, it is also true that Bonapartism laid the foundations for monarchy’s destruction….

  • Excerpts from An Intellectual History of Napoleon Bonaparte

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

CLAUSOWITZ: A CASE STUDY

…….there is some evidence that the young and impetuous Clausewitz took part in one of the filibustering freikorps that bedeviled the northern Germanies throughout 1815-1817, but if so, he was discreet enough about it that no charges were ever filed, and by 1819 he was certainly back in regular Prussian service, assigned to the staff at the War College in Berlin……

……like many Prussian officers, Colonel Clausewitz chafed under the restrictions of the French-imposed Concert of Europe, and burned with a fierce desire to restore Prussian power to the heights it had achieved during the preceding century. In 1827, he took the route of so many of his colleagues, and applied to be seconded to the colonial ministry for overseas service. His request was granted, and he was named governor-general of Preußische Kamerun, then nothing but a string of trading posts hacked out of the jungles along the banks of the Wouri river and the Gulf of Guinea. With only two regiments of infantry and an artillery battery he sailed from Stettin on July 5th, arriving in Fredrick-Wilhelmshaven six weeks later. He would never again see his native land.

Clausewitz spent the next nine years of his life in a whirlwind of activity. In a series of initial campaigns, he either destroyed or forced into submission the major coastal tribes. From their remnants, he raised battalions of askaris, strengthening his forces enough to push Prussian control into the interior. In 1833, he founded the town of Neue Magdeburg on the Nyong river, nearly 300 kilometers away from the colonial capitol, and began construction on a road between the two (thought it would not be completed until 1852). He encouraged the establishment of cocoa, coffee, and banana plantations, and built schools for both the settlers and the native population. By the time of his death of malaria in 1836, Kamerun was undoubtedly one of the most successful European colonies in Africa.

Two years after Clausewitz passed away, his wife published his unfinished writings on military theory, titled simply On War. Amongst military professionals, the book was a nearly instant sensation, and generals in Prussia, Austria, and the Confederation of the Rhine seized upon its precepts as proof that the French did not have a monopoly on martial prowess, and as a path towards regaining military supremacy, or at least parity. In the French Empire, the book was initially banned due to its rather vicious criticisms of Emperor Napoleon I, but within a year a censored version was on the curriculum at the École Militaire and the École Saint-Cyr…….

  • Excerpts from Up From The Ashes: Blücher, Bismarck, and the Revival of the German National Spirit

 

YOUNG BISMARCK: PART ONE

……..on July 19th, 1848, the II Corps of the Grande Armée stormed the City of Frankfurt, violently suppressing the ‘All-German National Assembly’. Accounts of casualties remain greatly contested, with German sources putting the number of dead somewhere between 4,000-8,000, while French authors argue it was closer to 1,500, most of whom were militiamen defending the street barricades and not ‘babes and young mothers, spitted on bayonets’, as the liberal propaganda broadsheets would have it. Whatever the case may be, the assault marked a turning point in the Revolutions of ’48, as Emperor Napoleon II abandoned his attempts at compromise with the rebels and unleashed his Legions. Three days later, a combined Franco-Russian force retook Kraków from the Polish Irredentists who held it, unleashing an even worse bloodbath. And in France proper, La Sûreté Nationale began rounding up dozens of suspected dissidents, socialists, and liberal agitators. To Otto Von Bismarck and other Prussian reactionaries, it seemed only a matter of time until Berlin felt the Bonaparte’s wrath….

…..Prussia had been in a state of paralysis for months at this point, with King Frederick Wilhelm IV in a self-imposed internal exile in Potsdam and an illegally-elected liberal Landtag holding court in Berlin. Cautious constitutional negotiations between the two parties had been ongoing since March, a situation barely tolerated by the Monarchist Right on the grounds that retaking Berlin and Prussia’s other cities by force would be extremely bloody and give possible justification for Imperial intervention into Prussian affairs. But in the waning days of July, with French army columns fanning out across central Europe the stakes had changed. Bismarck was still just a newly-elected Landtag member, but he had the ear of some of the Conservative party’s most powerful figures, as well as connections with some of the Prussian army’s more right-wing generals. Determined to forestall any further French encroachments into his beloved Prussia, Bismarck would now demonstrate for the first time his trademark audacity, and earn the epithet that he would never lose: “Blutigen Bismarck”. “Bloody Bismarck”.

  • Excerpts from Up From The Ashes: Blücher, Bismarck, and the Revival of the German National Spirit

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

BYZANTIUM, PATRIARCHATE OF: The Patriarchate of Byzantium is an ecclesiastic state under an Imperial Russian protectorate, centered around the Sea of Marmara and the city of Constantinople. Byzantium’s head of state is the Patriarch of Constantinople, guided and assisted by the Russian Ambassador, and the nation is run according to Orthodox Christian law, though freedom of worship has been guaranteed to its Muslim inhabitants since 1908. The Patriarchate has land borders with the Tsardom of Bulgaria to the northwest and the Turkish Sultanate to the east, as well as an oft-disputed maritime border with the Hellenic Kingdom.

Byzantium officially considers itself to be the successor state to the Eastern Roman Empire, a position internationally disputed but supported by the Russian Empire and the Principality of Armenia. The Patriarchate was officially founded on Easter Sunday, 1898, during the Great Eastern War, and received international recognition under the terms of the Treaty of Alexandria in 1899. Among the state’s most well-known accomplishments are the reconsecration of Hagia Sophia as a cathedral and the…..

  • Excerpts from the Encyclopedia Britannica, 1911 Edition

 

FIRST ITALIAN UNIFICATION PLEBISCITE (1876): The First Plebiscite on the Political Unification of the Italian Peninsula was held by the League of Europe on May 22nd, 1876, the result of decades of agitation and demands by the Liga Liberale and other allied intellectuals. Voting was done by the principle of universal manhood suffrage, and the question put to the voters was: “Should the Kingdom of Italy and the Kingdom of Naples amalgamate into a single state?” Voting was not held in the Imperial Prefecture of Rome, the French Illyrian & Piedmontese provinces, the Republic of San Marino, or the sovereign principalities of Lucca, Pontecorvo, and Benevento, a fact much protested at the time.

The ballots were not fully counted until the following July, when it was announced that “No” had won a narrow victory of 17,000 votes. Immediately, accusations were made against both King Lucien I of Naples and the Italian Hereditary Viceroy Eugène de Beauharnais II of vote-tampering and election-rigging. Rioting broke out in Florence, Bologna, and Naples, and a dozen smaller cities, while a general strike was declared by the Tuscan United Industrial Workers. In Milan, the Senate Consultant withdrew its support from the government, and Eugène II was forced to govern by decree for the next two years. Peace was not fully achieved until Emperor Charles Joseph I deployed VI Corps of the Grande Armée across the Alps to restore order.

At the time, foreign observers mostly believed the charges made by the Liga Liberale, though more recently historians have begun to question…..

  • Excerpts from the Encyclopedia Britannica, 1911 Edition

 

SLAVEHOLDER’S REVOLT (1835-1836): The Slaveholder’s Revolt was a failed rebellion by American expatriate landholders in the Mexican provinces of Tejas and Nuevo México, prompted by Mexico City’s renewed push to enforce King Joseph I’s 1829 abolition of slavery. In October 1835, the leading Tejano residents pre-empted the expected arrival of a new High Commission on Manumission by declaring the independence of the “Republic of Texas”, and calling on local militia units to seize Royal armories and forts within the province. By December, President Sam Houston had raised a force of 2,500 men and successfully taken control of most of Tejas, along with eastern Nuevo México.

Initially the ‘Texans’ had hoped to win diplomatic recognition and open support from the U.S.A., but when that failed to materialize the rebel army marched south to San Antonio, where it engaged a Royal Mexican army of approximately 10,000 men under the personal command of Viceroy López de Santa Anna. After a series of bloody skirmishes, Generals Bowie and Travis ordered the Texan army to withdraw into the Alamo Mission, which was then subject to 48-hour bombardment by an Imperial French artillery company. On the third day of the Battle of the Alamo, the surviving rebels surrendered.

On April 21st, 1836, the only other major rebel army was decisively defeated at the Battle of San Jacinto, leading to the collapse of the Austin Government. Hispano-Mexican troops continued to advance, and by late summer of 1836 had fully pacified the provinces, although Houston and several other rebel leaders managed to escape over the border into the U.S. The consequences of the Slaveholder’s Revolt for the Anglo-Texan community would be severe. Not only was slavery fully abolished at last but the plantations of prominent rebels were distributed to the freedmen, leading to a general exodus of Anglos to Louisiana and Arkansas. To this day, the economy of East Tejas remains dominated by Afro-Mexican yeoman farmers.

  • Excerpts from the Encyclopedia Britannica, 1911 Edition

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

PART III: “SIR, I WILL NOT OBEY THAT ORDER”

….the unrest continued to grow throughout 1818, with protests occurring on a near daily basis in many cities. Grievances included oppressive working conditions in the factories, the Corn Laws and the associated high food prices, tyrannical land-owners, aristocratic incompetence, and a general charge of misrule leveled against the aristocracy. The outcome of that year’s general parliamentary election, announced on the 4th of August merely intensified the fury, with polls delivering a resounding victory to the Tories—a result that certainly never would have happened if the urban middle class and bourgeoisie had been enfranchised, to say nothing of the proletariat and the peasantry. Violent protests in London were met with volleys of musketry by the 69th (South Lincolnshire) Regiment of Foot, leaving seventeen dead. This was followed by Prime Minister Earl Liverpool’s introduction into parliament of a bill that would grant the government extraordinary authority to suppress ‘sedition’ and ‘treason’….

……the Manchester Convention was not, as many Whig historians have alleged, the first ‘nationally representative’ parliament in British history. The peasantry was completely excluded, as were most of the urban industrial workers, and the Irish boycotted the entire proceedings, as could be expected. The Convention consisted of the industrialists, the manufacturers, the merchants, the petty bourgeoisie—in short, the new middle class—in alliance with the more liberal members of the gentry, some scapegrace peers, and mid-ranking military officers. It was, however, the first parliament since 1678 to include Catholic representation, and it was far more representative than the ‘legitimate’ London Parliament….

……on November 5th, after two weeks of deliberation, the Manchester Convention declared itself to be the legitimate governing parliament of the United Kingdom, electing Robert Owens as Chief Minister of the Emergency Government. Initially, they had offered the position to the Earl Grey, but he and the moderate Whigs continued to dither in London. It would not be until after the first wave of mutinies that Grey would declare for the Republic, and his delay forced him to settle for ceremonial office of President. Many of the revolutionaries begrudged him even that, but Owns understood the value of compromise….

  • Excerpts from A Very Whigish Revolution

 

PART IV: “ENGLISH LIBERTIES FOREVER!”

From his perch in Lisbon, the Prince Regent continued to rail against the new government, and the Royalist holdouts in northern Ireland and the Channel coast were not totally subdued by the new National Militia for several months yet. But the Winsor Accords, signed by Robert Owns and the Duke of York on February 18th, 1819, effectively cut the legs out from any further resistance. On behalf of his incapacitated father, Prince Fredrick agreed to formally surrender any titles or claims to the throne in return for a state pension, possession of most of their hereditary lands, and Own’s promise to limit any nationalization or confiscations to those nobles still actively resisting the Emergency Government. Many Royalists still curse Fredrick as a traitor to this day, but at the time, most aristocrats were almost religiously grateful for the chance to escape the revolution with their lives and fortunes intact. Today we remember the 1818 Revolution as much for its moderation as anything else, but it must be kept in mind that at the time there was a powerful Jacobin faction in the Convention calling for universal land reform in addition to universal suffrage. Owns would spend much of his political capitol resisting these demands from the left over the coming weeks and months, though events in foreign quarters would soon seemingly vindicate his approach.

Prior to the Windsor Accords, only the United States of America and the Kingdom of Sweden had extended provisional recognition of the new government. But with the King (or at least a representative of the House of Hannover) now accepting the Revolution, the dam burst open. On February 17th, ambassadors from the Empire of Austria and the Kingdom of Denmark presented their credentials to the Provisional Cabinet. On February 23rd, the same day that Southampton surrendered to a brigade of republican soldiers, an emergency meeting of the Conseil d’État was held, at which Emperor Napoleon I decided to accept the situation. The other Napoleonic Kingdoms swiftly followed suit, as did the Kingdom of Prussia, the Confederation of the Rhine, and the Empire of Brazil. By spring, only the ‘Island Kingdoms’ of Sardinia and Sicily and the Empire of Russia persisted in their recognition of the Monarchy….

  • Excerpts from A Very Whigish Revolution

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

CHAPTER FIVE: THE END OF THE SAKOKU

As the terms of the 1858 Treaty of Amity and Commerce show, the French Empire’s initial interests in Japan were marginal and wholly economic in nature. Ambassador Jean-Baptiste Louis Gros demanded trading rights for foreigners in half a dozen cities, extraterritoriality for French citizens, and the right to establish coaling and resupply stations for European whaling fleets, and showed little interest in the internal affairs of the Shogunate. For their part, the Tokugawa were well pleased with this arrangement, having only agreed to this western encroachment under duress, they still hoped to contain it to a few coastal enclaves. But as the years went on, pressure from both sides began to force drastic changes in this policy.

As the Russians consolidated their hold in Outer Manchuria, Kamchatka, and Alaska, and British influence in China and the Hawaiian Kingdom grew, the Quai d’Orsay increasingly looked upon the Japanese isles as one of the few potentially friendly regions in a hostile northern pacific. In 1862, a military convention was signed, leasing the Imperial French Navy land near Nagasaki to build a permeant base and sending several hundred samurai to train at the French war college, and starting in 1865, the Shogun was pressured into accepting an increasing number of French ‘advisors’ within his government. The Tokugawa would likely have put up a much fiercer resistance to this if they had not been so desperate. By the mid-19th century, the military feudalism of the Bakafu was starting to collapse under the weight of its inefficiencies, and the Shogunal court in Edo found itself relying on Imperial aid to prop up its regime, both legally and militarily.

Thus, it was a committee of French ministerial advisors who overhauled and modernized the Japanese tax structures between 1865 and 1868, and when the Tokugawa feudal levies crushed the Satsuma Revolt of 1872, they did so assisted by two battalions of the French Foreign Legion and the guns of the armored cruiser L’Orient. This created a vicious feedback cycle; the more reliant Edo became on foreign aid, the less legitimate it appeared to the daimyo and the samurai, and the more it needed that very same aid to reassert its lost authority. Meanwhile, in the League-administered Treaty Ports….

  • Excerpts from The Eagle and the Dragon: French Imperialism in the Far East

 

CHAPTER EIGHT: A PLACE IN THE SUN?

Europe was slow to react to the Boxer Rebellion, perhaps understandably given the chaotic situation remaining in the Eastern Mediterranean as the Great Powers struggled to reassess their strategic situations in the wake of the first major war in nearly a century. Though the Dowager Empress Cixi had declared a state of war between the Qing Empire and ‘all foreign powers’ on June 21st, 1900, it was not until September 15th that the High Council of the League of Europe formally ordered the dispatch of an expeditionary force, and an agreement for cooperation with the British Commonwealth was not signed until October 3rd. The convoys carrying 35,000 French, German, Austrian, Spanish, Prussian and British troops would not depart from Dover and Brest until December 7th, and the ‘Eight Nation Army’ would not arrive in China until spring of the following year, at which point the Peking Legation Quarter had been under siege for almost nine months! This extraordinary delay was marked upon at the time, and cannot solely be explained by the need to redeploy soldiers from their occupation of the former Ottoman Empire…..

…….in truth, the League’s sudden interest in China had less to do with the Chinese Empress’s Declaration of the 21st and more to do with the Czar’s announcement on August 10th that he had ordered 250,000 Russian troops into Manchuria and Mongolia to ‘put an end to the disturbances’. So long as it was mostly British missionaries and diplomats being harassed and murdered, the French were content to allow their local forces to contain the conflagration at their leisure. But the thought of Imperial Russia, flushed with glory from her Near Eastern victories, gaining control over the Qing Domains was a bridge too far…..

…..while waiting for the Ministry of War to assemble the expeditionary force, the Quai d’Orsay turned to a closer solution: Japan. That September, the French ambassador approached the Shogunal Court with a cautious question: would His Majesty’s Government be willing to deploy troops onto the Asian mainland to help protect European lives and property? The answer from Tokugawa Yoshinobu was an alacritous yes. In the wake of the Meiji Reforms, the leadership of the Japanese Empire was eager to demonstrate its newfound prowess to its French patron, and troops were being dispatched from Yokohama Military Point by weeks’ end. But while the Quai d’Orsay envisioned a limited Japanese role helping British marines to defend the Treaty Ports, the Tokugawa quickly went far beyond that remit. On October 5th, three brigades of the Second Shogunal Rifles landed at Lüshun on the Kwantung peninsula under the covering fire of the protected cruisers Takachiho and Yoshino and stormed the city, slaughtering the Boxer defenders. They were reinforced by the Satsuma and Jōzai Divisions, which proceeded a general advance down the Liaodong peninsula into Manchuria. Simultaneously, five companies of the Takamatsu Division supported by the Third Battalion of the Denshūtai Corps landed in Tientsin, reducing the harbor forts to rubble with their howitzers…..

……undoubtedly, the Japanese detachments had prevented much loss of life in Shanghai and Tsingtao, helping to hold back the Boxers until the Eight Nations Army’s arrival. But the Shogun’s willingness to disobey French instructions boded ill for continued Japanese subordination to Napoleonic direction in the Far East. And though little-noticed at the time, clashes between Cossack patrols and Shogunal mounted rifles in Manchuria in the spring of 1901 were a foretaste of things to come……

  • Excerpts from The Eagle and the Dragon: French Imperialism in the Far East

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

PART FIVE: SETBACKS AND SUCCESSES

For all of the melodrama with which it is treated in certain academic circles, the Décret Infâme of April 7th, 1868, had little effect on the Left. The power of the French Socialists rested in their cooperative societies, their trade unions, and their volunteer associations, not the now-banned Revolutionary Worker’s Party. Most of the former P.R.T. Legislators who were unceremoniously expelled from Palais Bourbon that April would return after the October elections, serving under the banner of Les Républicains Radicaux. Much to the chagrin of their more moderate colleagues, the Républicains Radicaux would serve as the de facto Socialist party from that point forward….

 

…..it remains arguable whether or not Emperor Charles Joseph I saw the banning of the P.R.T. as the beginning of a serious attempt to destroy the French Left. If so, it was a truly remarkable failure. In the elections later that year, the newly-radicalized R.R newly doubled the size of its caucus. Les Républicains Modérés and L’Union Libérale performed well above expectations as well, and for the first since 1799 republican parties held a majority of seats in the Legislative Chamber. If not for the failure of the socialists and L’Union to reach an accord, this could have proved quite embarrassing for His Imperial Majesty’s Government, but even so the Bonapartistes were forced to form a plurality coalition with the Légitimistes, an uneasy alliance based only on an existential dread of ‘anarchy’.

 

If the Emperor had hoped to crush French socialism through legislative fiat, the elections of ’68 put an abrupt end to that strategy. Arrests and monitoring of leftist agitators and legislators continued apiece, but the 1870s also saw the beginning of a new approach: co-option. Beginning with the 1869 Fair Hours & Working Conditions Bill and the 1870 Worker’s Compensation Insurance Guarantee, the Louis-Jules Trochu Government began working to undermine the appeal of socialism by improving the material conditions of the workers. This was an approach that would have some success in Prussia and Westphalia in the 1880s, and would undoubtedly have been more successful in the Empire if not for the fierce resistance of the French captains of industry….

 

  • Excerpts from A Comprehensive History of the French Socialists, 1848-1918

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

CHAPTER FOUR: THE FRANCO-RUSSIAN ALLIANCE

……at Tilsit, Alexander had been infatuated with bold Bonaparte, but it was not until the Congress of Erfurt that the details of this new relationship were settled satisfactorily. Though today the alliance seems a forgone conclusion, it must be remembered that a substantial anti-French faction still existed in the St. Petersburg court, and Napoleon’s arrogant actions in Spain and Poland had enraged and frightened the Czar…..

…..despite Talleyrand’s unfortunate absence, the two delegations made substantial progress. Napoleon’s agreement to accept Russian demands vis-à-vis the Dardanelles and Poland mollified Alexander, as did the glamor of the endless series of balls, masquerades, and banquets held to celebrate this assemblage of Europe’s heads of state…

…. like all compromises, the Erfurt Convention left everyone dissatisfied. Napoleon gained Alexander’s acquiescence to alliance against Britain and Austria, as well as continued membership in the Continental System. But the Emperor of the French was forced to accept give up a number of his dreams, both of French imperium in the Near East and of a Franco-Russian Army marching through Central Asia into British India. For his part, Alexander gained confirmation of his conquest of Finland, a treaty guaranteeing the present borders of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, a series of much-needed loans, and assurances of French support of Russians goals in the Balkans. This last promise would see fulfillment in Constantinople Convention of 1812, under which the Turks ceded Russia the entirety of Bessarabia, Western Georgia, transit rights through the Straits, and a series of financial and religious concessions in the Balkans and Levant. But the price he paid for this was continuing economic lassitude, a seemingly endless war with Britain, and the irritation of an independent Polish state on his borders. Neither Alexander or Napoleon were men accustomed to setbacks, and the Congress broke up with a general feeling of disappointment. In hindsight, however, it is clear that the agreements forged in Erfurt would be instrumental for both nation’s futures….

  • Excerpts from The Third Rome: The Rise and Fall of Imperial Russia

 

CHAPTER ELLEVEN: THE NOVYYE PETROVSKIYE REFORMY

……but the first serious break with his predecessor’s reactionary policies came in 1884 when the Emperor appointed the young Sergei Witte as director of the newly formed Imperial Railways Bureau. Peter IV was not the first Czar to build railways, but he was the first to truly understand both the costs and potentials, and by 1886 he nearly tripled the state’s investments in new line construction. Witte supplemented this with shrewd investments and a positive genius for attracting foreign loans; mostly from Austrian banks. In 1887, revenues from the I.R.B rose to 90 million rubles per annum, and that same year Witte announced the beginning of construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway, a project that dwarfed even the Anglo-Canadian Transcontinental Railroad. By 1889, the Russian Empire was laying more meters of track per year than any other country, though issues of quality control continued to be a serious issue….

……following the arrest of the Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich on June 16th, 1890, Witte’s faction moved into total control of the government. With the Czar firmly behind them and the nobility cowed for the time-being, the Reformers were able to implement a stunning array of legislation. Between 1892 and 1894, customs laws were totally reworked and a new national alcohol monopoly went into effect, creating surpluses of revenue for the first time in decades. This largess was reinvested by the new Ministry of Industry, nearly doubling the economic growth rate. Agricultural reform was attempted, with some success, and a professional civil service was created. In 1893, the Russian Empire finally accepted the French International Gold Standard, and foreign investment soared. But while Peter was more than happy to accept Witte’s economic prescriptions, he violently rejected his political ones, and the 1893 Consultative Duma act remained unsigned….

….Witte remained President of the Council of Ministers until 1903, but his influence began to wane following the outbreak of the Great Eastern War in 1894. The pressures of the conflict forced Peter to draw upon the old nobility, and the Reactionaries began to regain some of their lost influence. The Czar was not foolish enough to allow any major rollbacks of his reforms, but the pace slowed dramatically as the government began re-emphasizing the old values of “Nationalism, Autocracy, and Orthodoxy”. Most notably, Peter vetoed Witte’s attempt to abolish the Pale of Settlements in 1897 after a leaked draft of the edict provoked riots in several Cossack regiments. This was despite the Czar’s personal sympathy for the proposal…..

 

  • Excerpts from The Third Rome: The Rise and Fall of Imperial Russia

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

CHAPTER FIVE: THE SOUTH RISES AGAIN

The hopes of some Republicans that Horatio Seymour would prove less amenable to Southern interests than his campaign had implied died within days of his inauguration when the new National Unionist majority in Congress voted to reject the proposed 15th Amendment that would have constitutionally protected the rights of all citizens to vote regardless of race. Over the coming weeks, it became clear that the so-called policy of ‘National Reconciliation’ amounted to nothing more than a complete capitulation to the old ‘Slave Power’, risen again. A flurry of Executive Orders were dispatched from the White House, advising Federal Governors to ‘respect local customs and traditions whenever possible’ in the Reconstructed States, and ordering occupation forces to ‘leave matters of local justice in local hands’. This cannot be seen as anything but a direct order for the tacit toleration of lynching. Worse was to come. In June, 1869, Georgia became the first state of strip the franchise from all African-American residents……

…..as Reconstruction was replaced with Reconciliation it rapidly became clear to African-Americans that the new state governments in the South (many staffed in whole or in part by former Confederate officials) were intending to re-impose slavery under a new name. But while these neo-Confederates and their N.U.P. lackeys in Washington D.C still persisted in believing their own propaganda about the innate cowardice and docility of their negros, the reality would prove quite different. Many freedmen now had combat experience, either in the Union army or in the various insurgent groups that had flourish among the ruins of the collapsing Confederacy. And all had watched the flower of Southern manhood beaten into the bloody ground. Skirmishing between white and black militias began as early as the spring of 1869, but exploded in the summer of 1870 when South Carolina, Mississippi, and Texas attempted to impose work requirements and movement controls on their African-American populations. Hundreds of guerilla bands took to the hills and swamps, fighting an internecine and bloody struggle with the state militias and those elements of the Federal army willing to assist them in prosecuting what soon became known alternatively as the ‘Black Bandit Wars’ or the ‘Freedom Uprisings. This aid was not always forthcoming. Much of the army’s leadership still remained in the hands of Republicans, who, while having little love for black insurgents, had less for upstart and arrogant Confederates. General Frémont, commandant of the Fifth Military District, is even believed to said quietly opened his armories to the leadership of the ‘Lincoln Brigades’, before his 1872 dismissal for insubordination…

…..in the North, some Radical Republicans continued to fight, but their time was passing. The irreplaceable Representative Thaddeus Stevens would die in 1868, not having lived to see Seymour’s triumph. William Seward died in 1872, Senator Charles Sumner in 1874. Ulysses Grant lived until 1885, but retired totally from public life after his electoral humiliation. His only appearance in the national news until the posthumous publication of his memoirs was his 1877 arrest for public intoxication. Fredrick Douglass remained an active speaker and activist for freedom but only from his home in London, where he moved after the 1872 Republican Convention voted to strip all mention of equal rights from the party platform……

  • Excerpts from Betrayed! The Unfulfilled Promise of Reconstruction

 

——————————————————————————————————————————-

 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Napoleonic Victory Fragments

  1. What a fascinating world! It reads like a true text. Perhaps we can’t trust what we read, even if it sounds good.

    That being said, this must be true since Britain clearly lost to Bonaparte, but managed to claim victory anyway and limit French domination in the second half of the century.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s