Thanks for reacting to our collaborative video with HistoryMarche! We had a lot of fun making it, and always love to see what people think of it. You might also enjoy the rest of our series on Napoleon I's Italian campaign: ruclips.net/video/5W-YSwjGYfs/видео.html
About your point at 23:20 France was actually dmeographically challenge compared to most European nations over the 19th century as the Napoleonic wars wiped out many many of the country's young men who could have gone on to be fathers. This led to significant problems in WW1 and especially in WW2 with France consistently being significantly behind Germany in terms of population. In fact after ww1 Celemceau said ': 'There are 20 million Germans too many!'' and many Germans thought this meant he planned on wiping out 20 Million of them as part of the peace. It's also why France adopted such defensive attitudes in WW2 prefering to have faith in force multipliers like forts and using heavily armoured tanks with small crews because they just didn't have the manpower to spare like Germany could.
The Napoleonic wars changed little in the demographics France, in the long term. It's the birthrate that made France decline demographically. Though gradual, the problem really began to arise during the second half of the 19th century. It was a societal problem, just when Europe's population was booming, France's demography changed little, each couple didn't have that many children (the reasons are thought to be: inheritance laws, better access to contraceptives etc...). France made its demographic transition before other European countries, which kind of spelled its doom.
Your enthusiasm for these history videos makes you one of the better history-viewers on RUclips. Looking forward to your videos on PMF Productions’ videos on Napoleon’s Italian campaign.
wrong statement. Italian peninsula at the time was shared among 7 different states having huge differences in terms of politics, economy, social issues. This way there was not an Italian army, the only regular troops were the Reign of Sardinia's ones. Theorically there were hundreds of thousands of volunteers, but both Great Britain & France did not permit them to set a permanent army since the two european powers feared republic as form of government, which was equal to revolution for them. Geopolitics drove unification of Italy under constitutional monarchy.
@@carlobrotto7132 All this may be true but my statemnet said ' in this pivotal battle' so it dosen't really matter what was going on i nthe other states.
@@pharney5656 in fact the focus is on the political wills by France and mainly by Great Britain of not allowing a republic to be set in the Italian territories : Italian volunteers were at least 80% republican. If you check historic docs & sources you can find out all the manouvres, strategies and even warnings to Mazzini, Garibaldi & the patriotic movement displayed by the 2 lead countries ( France was a strong ally and defender of Papal State).
I could see Napoleon III serving as a good general of division. He doesnt have the strategic genius of his uncle, but he atleast seems willing to expose himself to enemy fire and has a good grip on basic military tactics.
He was also a good administrator, outside of military affairs. He would propably be a good president nowadays, he really improved things in France internally (before everything went out the window because of the loss against Prussia, but considering the effects it's understandable).
There is a US civil war-Italian unification connection many are unaware of. Right after unification, when the war in the US had just started, some Union politicians came over and asked Garibaldi to go to America to serve the Union as a general. He accepted on the condition that: 1. He was to be made supreme commander of the Union Army, not just corps commander as he was offered (he had been corps commander in the Lombardy campaign of 1859 and had issues with his superiors, this time he wanted no one above him) 2. President Lincoln had to publicly announce the abolition of slavery as an official Union war goal, this 2 full years before the Emancipation Proclamation (Garibaldi had no interest in the internal squabbles of foreign nations, he said, but was more than willing to fight for freedom). There was no way Lincoln would hand over control of the US Army to a foreigner, and denouncing slavery so early, when support in border states was still not guaranteed, was dangerous, so the deal fell through. But it would be an interesting what if.
The battle of Magenta gave us the name of a 'new' colour but Solferino gave birth to the Red Cross. Henry Dunant, a Swiss businessman was so moved by the suffering of the wounded men he saw in the bloody aftermath of the battle of Solferino that he published 'A Memory of Solferino' in 1862 in which he proposed the founding of an international relief organisation. The design of the red cross is the reverse of the flag of Switzerland
My great-great-grandfather fought in the Battle of Solferino. His name is Karl Bogusch. Austrian. He was shot in the leg and spent the rest of his life lame.
My Czech ancestors may have been here ... my Great-great-grandfather Albert was a conscript. His son Vaclav, another conscript, could have been involved in the defeat of AHE by Bismarck.
Cavalry was used for recon ... inexcusable! I would expect that Bismarck was paying close attention, gauging the weaknesses of both sides. Emperor Franz Joseph was dominated by his mother. Ancient Roman saying ... great battles are followed by great rains. Initially weak new monarchy in Italy, led to the rise of the Mafia in Sicily.
Yeah it's interesting, but honestly I feel like people need to remember it was a limited operation for the French, a bit like how nowadays America sent few ressources in Afghanistan in the last decade, but could have done a lot more if there was a point to it. Afaik France sent like 6,000 soldiers in Mexico. Even in Italy against the Austrians, the war had a limited scope with those 100k (for the Austrians too), as a million could be levied in case of total war.
He was looking closely. He made several observations: - The Austrian army drew the wrong lesson from this war. They became convinced that melee and bayonet charges were the way of the future, not rifle fire. They could then be easily defeated by the new Prussian needle guns and Krupp rifle artillery. - Sardinia/Italy didn't get what they wanted from this war: the understanding with Napoleon III was that he would help drive the Austrians from the peninsula entirely, but instead he didn't want a too powerful neighbour to the south, so he just took Lombardy. Thus the new Kingdom of Italy could become an ally, if Prussia helped them get the missing pieces (Venetia) and would likely not rush to France's aid should a Franco-Prussian war break out.
@@blede8649 I was more specifically talking about the fact that Napoleon III didn't want to be seen as the aggressor, purposely provoked the Austrians, hoping they would overreact emotionally and commit to war in a hurry without thinking about the consequences, and taking time to prepare the war and the use of railroads to move quickly a lot of soldiers. It looks oddly similar to Bismarck/Prussian tactics against France decades later.
Not really, Bismarck was a intelligent man and it doesn't takes much to think that a train, something that can carry a lot of weight relatively fast and for long distances, can also carry troops, supplies and field guns @@shakya00
Thanks for reacting to our collaborative video with HistoryMarche! We had a lot of fun making it, and always love to see what people think of it.
You might also enjoy the rest of our series on Napoleon I's Italian campaign: ruclips.net/video/5W-YSwjGYfs/видео.html
I love the videos! You guys do such a good job helping people understand topics like these. Thanks so much PMF Productions!
This video felt a lot more like an EpicHistoryTV video than their usual videos. I really liked it.
The battle of Solferino led to the creation of the Red Cross and the Geneva convention!
About your point at 23:20 France was actually dmeographically challenge compared to most European nations over the 19th century as the Napoleonic wars wiped out many many of the country's young men who could have gone on to be fathers. This led to significant problems in WW1 and especially in WW2 with France consistently being significantly behind Germany in terms of population.
In fact after ww1 Celemceau said ': 'There are 20 million Germans too many!'' and many Germans thought this meant he planned on wiping out 20 Million of them as part of the peace. It's also why France adopted such defensive attitudes in WW2 prefering to have faith in force multipliers like forts and using heavily armoured tanks with small crews because they just didn't have the manpower to spare like Germany could.
The Napoleonic wars changed little in the demographics France, in the long term. It's the birthrate that made France decline demographically. Though gradual, the problem really began to arise during the second half of the 19th century. It was a societal problem, just when Europe's population was booming, France's demography changed little, each couple didn't have that many children (the reasons are thought to be: inheritance laws, better access to contraceptives etc...). France made its demographic transition before other European countries, which kind of spelled its doom.
Your enthusiasm for these history videos makes you one of the better history-viewers on RUclips. Looking forward to your videos on PMF Productions’ videos on Napoleon’s Italian campaign.
lol at the italians not exactly getting up to much in this pivotal battle for italian independence.
France carried this country since its creation
Not really, Germany more, France protected the pope and stole Tunisia from Italy @@smal750
wrong statement. Italian peninsula at the time was shared among 7 different states having huge differences in terms of politics, economy, social issues. This way there was not an Italian army, the only regular troops were the Reign of Sardinia's ones. Theorically there were hundreds of thousands of volunteers, but both Great Britain & France did not permit them to set a permanent army since the two european powers feared republic as form of government, which was equal to revolution for them. Geopolitics drove unification of Italy under constitutional monarchy.
@@carlobrotto7132 All this may be true but my statemnet said ' in this pivotal battle' so it dosen't really matter what was going on i nthe other states.
@@pharney5656 in fact the focus is on the political wills by France and mainly by Great Britain of not allowing a republic to be set in the Italian territories : Italian volunteers were at least 80% republican. If you check historic docs & sources you can find out all the manouvres, strategies and even warnings to Mazzini, Garibaldi & the patriotic movement displayed by the 2 lead countries ( France was a strong ally and defender of Papal State).
I could see Napoleon III serving as a good general of division. He doesnt have the strategic genius of his uncle, but he atleast seems willing to expose himself to enemy fire and has a good grip on basic military tactics.
He was also a good administrator, outside of military affairs. He would propably be a good president nowadays, he really improved things in France internally (before everything went out the window because of the loss against Prussia, but considering the effects it's understandable).
Great reaction, actually the best I can see. Great to see how much you are passionate
There is a US civil war-Italian unification connection many are unaware of. Right after unification, when the war in the US had just started, some Union politicians came over and asked Garibaldi to go to America to serve the Union as a general. He accepted on the condition that:
1. He was to be made supreme commander of the Union Army, not just corps commander as he was offered (he had been corps commander in the Lombardy campaign of 1859 and had issues with his superiors, this time he wanted no one above him)
2. President Lincoln had to publicly announce the abolition of slavery as an official Union war goal, this 2 full years before the Emancipation Proclamation (Garibaldi had no interest in the internal squabbles of foreign nations, he said, but was more than willing to fight for freedom).
There was no way Lincoln would hand over control of the US Army to a foreigner, and denouncing slavery so early, when support in border states was still not guaranteed, was dangerous, so the deal fell through. But it would be an interesting what if.
The battle of Magenta gave us the name of a 'new' colour but Solferino gave birth to the Red Cross.
Henry Dunant, a Swiss businessman was so moved by the suffering of the wounded men he saw in the bloody aftermath of the battle of Solferino that he published
'A Memory of Solferino' in 1862 in which he proposed the founding of an international relief organisation.
The design of the red cross is the reverse of the flag of Switzerland
I highly recommend reacting to some stories about cavour, as he was maybe the conteporary of Bismarck in germany
My great-great-grandfather fought in the Battle of Solferino. His name is Karl Bogusch. Austrian. He was shot in the leg and spent the rest of his life lame.
My Czech ancestors may have been here ... my Great-great-grandfather Albert was a conscript. His son Vaclav, another conscript, could have been involved in the defeat of AHE by Bismarck.
“1861? stuff is not doing well in America right now…”
* ’hell on the wabash’ playing off in the distance *
14:08 If Franz was born in 1830 then he would be 29 in 1859 which I was not say he was bearly over 20 lol
Cavalry was used for recon ... inexcusable! I would expect that Bismarck was paying close attention, gauging the weaknesses of both sides. Emperor Franz Joseph was dominated by his mother. Ancient Roman saying ... great battles are followed by great rains. Initially weak new monarchy in Italy, led to the rise of the Mafia in Sicily.
maybe you could react to the second french intervention in Mexico during the times of Napoleon III
we also need an indepth analysis of the long lasting and glorious Pastry war between Mexico and France.
Yeah it's interesting, but honestly I feel like people need to remember it was a limited operation for the French, a bit like how nowadays America sent few ressources in Afghanistan in the last decade, but could have done a lot more if there was a point to it. Afaik France sent like 6,000 soldiers in Mexico. Even in Italy against the Austrians, the war had a limited scope with those 100k (for the Austrians too), as a million could be levied in case of total war.
Why do I see parallel with the Franco-Prussian war ? Was Bismark inspired by it or is it just a coincidence ?
He was looking closely. He made several observations:
- The Austrian army drew the wrong lesson from this war. They became convinced that melee and bayonet charges were the way of the future, not rifle fire. They could then be easily defeated by the new Prussian needle guns and Krupp rifle artillery.
- Sardinia/Italy didn't get what they wanted from this war: the understanding with Napoleon III was that he would help drive the Austrians from the peninsula entirely, but instead he didn't want a too powerful neighbour to the south, so he just took Lombardy. Thus the new Kingdom of Italy could become an ally, if Prussia helped them get the missing pieces (Venetia) and would likely not rush to France's aid should a Franco-Prussian war break out.
@@blede8649 I was more specifically talking about the fact that Napoleon III didn't want to be seen as the aggressor, purposely provoked the Austrians, hoping they would overreact emotionally and commit to war in a hurry without thinking about the consequences, and taking time to prepare the war and the use of railroads to move quickly a lot of soldiers. It looks oddly similar to Bismarck/Prussian tactics against France decades later.
Not really, Bismarck was a intelligent man and it doesn't takes much to think that a train, something that can carry a lot of weight relatively fast and for long distances, can also carry troops, supplies and field guns @@shakya00
👍