I’ll admit, I was a little surprised but ultimately respected how you handled the 100 days. Treating it as more of a pause rather then the huge shockwave some portray it as to the peace process in order to really focus on the actual diplomacy going on was a novel choice I think.
@@SimuLord Huh. I’ll admit learning that the guy who voiced Mr. House is also related to flamboyant horse boy Murat wasn’t something I was expecting…ever really.
Its almost like they wanted to subtely humiliate Napolean by putting him so close to mainland Europe. As if to say "oh its right there. So close by, so simple..."
Some say Talleyrand purposefully lead the Congress to the island of Elba solution, knowing Napoleon would then attempt to flee and do something quite as stupid as he did. Because only after that, could men like Nikolas be moved from their initial stance of treating Napoleon a threat in passing, as an equal. By allowing Napoleon just enough leeway to escape, it was thus proved that if not for the penalty of execution, then nothing but absolute ostracism from Civilization would suffice as penalty for a military mind quite as bright as Napoleons. Talleyrand alongside Richelieu are probably the best political minds France has spawned.
The Treaty of Versailles is becoming my new obsession and having the Congress of Vienna to compare it to has made it so much more interesting to me. Vienna, despite having to overcome some serious clashes of personality, seems as if everyone eventually got onto the same page: create a new model of what Europe looks like that will ensure peace for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile Versailles is the wildest mix of France wishing it could Ctrl+X Germany while at the same time Wilson walks into the room and convinces the allies that what started as a Rube Goldberg machine of personal rivalries is actually about Truth, Justice and the American Way, and the only solution is to remake Central Europe in his image... and everyone kind of goes along with it. Anyway, thanks for sparking my interest
" everyone kind of goes along with it." - sure except like Hungary who got raped in central europe. Austria-Hungary had to be breaken up, okay, I can accept that but the borders were drawn increadibly bad (the brittish and french are pros at this...). The new borders didnt follow ethnic lines at all. Besides that they punished germany so bad that they started another world war (you can blame it Hitler alone, but there was a general dissent within the people and hitler rose up on that).
@@raczgabor659 I mean you could probably blame the dissent on the Great Depression which affected everywhere, the "stab in the back" where a sizable amount of people believed they could have won the Great War even at the eleventh hour, and the desire of various factions in the republic to use the Nazi's as a bludgon against the Communists and Socialists.
I find it hilarious that Austria's attempts to keep the French out of Italy is what eventually led to Italian unification and the gradual downfall of Austria as a great power. A strong Sardinia Piedmont will be able to resist outside influence, sure. But the French don't have any influence in Italy, it's all Austria, so Austria is going to be the main target of that resistance. And with French backing (looking to see a weakened Austria), Sardinia was able to snowball their way into the Kingdom of Italy
@@okbro3524 Garibaldi fought in the Italian war of independence on behalf of Victor Emmanuel II, king of Piedmont-Sardinia. Italian unification was basically Sardinia conquering the rest of Italy and then renaming themselves Italy.
Garribaldi did an expedition to Sicily and Napoli , and gave that lands to the Kingdom Sardinia-piedmont. But in war for Lombardia French army did heavy backing for Italians. Too bad they stopped early and not touched Venice that would have to wait 6 years more for unification.
14:20 -- The situation must have been dire. Tallyrand was never clear about _anything_ if he could help it. He was so well-known for saying things in oblique ways, and implying more than he actually said aloud, that when he died someone said to have remarked, "Died, has he? Now I wonder what he meant by that." (Variously attributed to Metternich or Louis-Philippe.)
I don't know which one, but that sure sounds like French humour. Edit: After some verifications, some say that Talleyrand said it himself after the death of another diplomat...
"If a diplomat says 'yes', he means 'maybe', if he says 'maybe' he means 'no' and if the says 'no' he is no diplomat". Was that Talleyrand? Edit: Just googled it. Yes it was
when he asked 3 American diplomats for a bribe for himself and certain French officers in order to secure a treaty with Napoleon, he apparently referred to it as a "sweetener"
@@amylaneio there’s a big difference between claiming neighbors land for the pride and preventing your hostile neighbors from coming close. The best comparison is with the us especially the current president
@@luisandrade2254 Russia didn't claim Poland for "pride", but to prevent Prussian and Austrians from fully absorbing Poland and coming closer to Russian heartland. Basically the same excuse Putin has for Ukraine or soviets had for the rest of ther neighbors. Russian foreign policy has never changed
@@luisandrade2254 Lol At least _try_ to disguise your bait as something more appealing than a steaming pile of bullshit xD The Historia Civilis audience is more.... erudite than the average comment section ;)
Its noteworthy, that for all his bluster, the Tzar got most of what he wanted. I do wonder if there was some method to his madness, especially when dealing with strategic minds who seem much smarter than him
He did enter the congress in a realy strong position. France was defeted, Austria and Prussia paled compared to his mobilized armies, Britain could only be half bothered to deal with matters in Europe and not The Empire. I will say the man knew how to through his weight around in negotiations. 😀
Am I the only one who thinks that the Tzar’s actions were deliberate? He is the master of a juggernaut, Shows up making wild threats and enormous, unreasonable demands and then accepts far less than what he had originally asked for; eagerly. He was ether brilliant or mad.
He was brilliant. Despite what has been implied in these videos he was an outstanding diplomat. He had to be - his life was hanging by a thread from a very young age. His powerful grandmother adored little Alex, but hated his father and wanted Alexander to ascend to the throne instead of him. In this situation one wrong move could cost him his life real quick. The fact that he managed to survive tells us he was a very shrewd and clever man. Not only did he survive, but he also took part in the coup against his father without making it obvious, and later quietly removed from power the men who carried it out.
Hey we have to remember, the accounts taken are from the perspective of the other diplomats who happened to dislike him It's clear that the man knew what he was doing and knew how far he could take things
@@leofwulf268 Well, that’s just it. Alexander not being liked by his rivals is presented as evidence of his faults as a ruler. Yeltsin and Gorbachev were well liked by the West - must have been great statesmen, those two..
@@Vukoslav_Miloradovich the Anglo nations have a deep hated of the Russians… it’s in their blood. Britain, Canada, and America are the most Anti-Russian nations - even more so than Poland and Lithuania.
Historia Civilis giving the people what they want: in-depth reviews of historical events. I see a new video drop and know I'm about to learn myself some great stuff.
True but I wish there was some closure on Octavius's time, but I would love if he re-oriented the channel around the French Revolution and the Revolutionary wars and Napoleonic wars
@@darioguerra3065 he’s probably gonna jump around a bit the next Rome video will be Antony vs Octavian and that’ll take a while so he’s probably gonna make a few more of these in between
@@darioguerra3065 I mean, there's also the Alexander campaign as well. I'm content to wait for them because, again, I know when it does arrive it will be worth it.
@@gaiusjuliuscaesar2309 I hope that he makes more lots more stuff on Rome, but I'd also like to see more non-rome videos as well. I think he's making a history channel, not a rome channel.
This could be seen as a dry topic, but you narrate it like a story of intrigue and suspense, with a great amount of humor. I’d never call myself a history buff but I always drop everything to watch your videos!
@@Rowlph8888 this so hard, my god the introduction of this batshit crazy dude would have made this topic so much better to study in highschool. All I'd ever known was that Russia threatened war over Poland but ultimately settled, I had no idea it was because their leader was somehow crazier than the most inbred Habsburgs out there
Even more crazy is that during all of this, there was a crisis in Norway, where after the Treaty of Kiel (which was to transfer Norway from Denmark to Sweden), Norway tried a declaration of independence and fought a two week war with Sweden before falling into a loose union. This also involved the United Kingdom's diplomats as they were arbitrators for this question during 1814. This video has an Easter Egg alluding to this: you can see Norway changing colors from Denmark's color at the start of the video to a shade resembling Sweden's color near the end.
Another crazy thing involving Sweden was the fact that since 1792 Finland had completely changed hands to Russia. This gave Russia a much stronger hold of the Baltic. I don't know why the other great powers let Sweden and Denmark beef themselves up by dividing up Norway between them (mainland Norway coming under Swedish influence and Greenland, Iceland, and the Faroese Islands going to Denmark) but it woudn't surprise me if it had to do with the fact that they wanted these two kingdoms to help out keeping Russia in check.
@@wack8697 Not since Sweden got it. And since 1905 it's fully independent. But this was about the great powers "letting" Sweden and Denmark beefing up on Norway. I tried to give context to show that by the congress of Vienna it would be strange to say that anyone had let Denmark do anything, since Norway had been a part of it for ages. And with regards to Sweden getting to mainland Norway, there were some context as well.
"Austria and Prussia would be the two anchors of the German Confederation, and it was paramount to the survival of the confederation that the two great powers within it got along." Spoiler warning: They don't end up getting along.
It’s almost like someone made an empire as unified as the Roman Empire at one point in the area I wonder what it’s called hrmmmmmmm ( I’m not even sure why I’m feigning ignorance at this point it should be obvious what happens later by process of elemenation
Talleyrand: So about this whole Poland thing- Alexander: You want to go to war? Talleyrand: Wait what?! Alexander: Yeah let's do it I'm down, let's go to war with them. Talleyrand: That's not what I- Alexander: Alright I'm gonna go hit the theater, we'll plan the war later.
I'm British and honestly part 1 was the first I'd heard of this event--I knew of the Napoleonic wars and the hundred days, but none of the peace talks, or other stuff
I don't remember being really taught this at all , just briefly mentioned. Most of History was basically ww2 over and over and how many atrocities happened again and again ans again. Little about why and what lead to ww2 . All of these events are connected
@@M_no_more Same, it was always black and white - how Poland got denied being independent, because Prussia, Austria and Russia wanted to keep their lands. Kind of sad, how history is shown in the two dimensional colours, when it's almost always very much grey and super complicated. Fun fact - I dont know about rest of the Europe, but I believe Poland is one of the few countries in which Napoleon is not looked upon as hungry, ego maniac that waged war on whole continent (don't mention that whole Europe started wars against France and ultimately on him on multiple occasions and he was in defensive wars for most of his miltiary career).
This channel helped me pass history in high-school. I wrote my final project (worth 30% of the final grade) based on the sources he provided in his Ceasar video. If I could i would have just made a transcript of his video but for obvious reason I couldn't without getting caught for plagiarism. Instead i went through his videos to find his sources and used them for my project. I got the highest grade in my class because of him. Even as a source of sources he is amazing. I am in love with this channel and anytime there is anew video, i drop everything. Thank you HC, you are incredible!!! Please, PLEASE keep up your work. I will always be here!!
This channel literally changed my life. I enrolled in community college after learning about the Roman Republic, this channel made history seem interesting. Love this dude
High schooler from Germany here! My history class is entirely in English and I am having a class test tomorrow. Thanks for helping me out it’s incredible that I was not once bored throughout 90 minutes of your video! Great job and thank you very much
*Structure of The Congress* 0:12 8 Member Committee 0:48 Economic Sub Committees *Subject-Matter of The Congress* 1:48 Borders 3:50 1792 Borders: Poland & Saxony 🇵🇱 Austria wants Poland as border Russia does not 5:23 Poland is Russia 🇷🇺 6:25 7:06 Francis I - “Saxony is not a bargaining chip” 8:31 DUEL 🤺 take it up with Francis 9:17 Prussia 🇩🇪 and Austria 🇦🇹 at odds over Saxony 10:30 Russia had sacrificed everything, Russia deserves Poland • You would make enemies of Austria and Prussia my friend 12:54 1, Enlarged Poland 2, Reduced Poland 3, Full Partition (3-Country Cut) 15:36 🇷🇺 Will have Poland! 🇩🇪 Will have Saxony! 16:42 🇦🇹 WE WILL FIGHT YOU IF YOU TAKE POLAND Russia and Prussia mobilize troops 18:00 🇬🇧 we need moderate and sound course 19:40 Independence SOLUTION: *1/2 Saxony* 23:27 SOLUTION: • Polish Lands given to 🇷🇺 and 🇩🇪 And A Constitutional Kingdom of Poland created 26:10 🇩🇪 1. Complete Independence OR 3. Loose Confederation ? 30:40 🇦🇹 ❤️ 🤝 🇩🇪 ? The German Diet *Italy* 31:47 🇬🇧 🇦🇹 34:04 Lombardy & Venice are Austrian Dutchies handed to Royal family 36:38 *The Hundred Days* Napoleon returns from Elba 38:36 Allies had far more military strength 39:33 IN SUMMARY • 1792 Borders • Russia Prussia Poland 🇵🇱 • Prussia 1/2 Saxony *The Slave Trade* 40:55 British Abolitionists 🇬🇧 The wedge wood medallion Slave Trade Act of 1807 43:47 Eventual Abolition Wait a minute, it’s only in Great Britain’s Interest! 46:14 “Declaration of Intent” a maybe 47:50 Cuba 🇨🇺 and Brazil 🇧🇷 *The Treaty of Vienna* 48:26 Great Powers Agree, 49:58 The Concert of Europe 50:29 (Next Time: Revolutions of 1848)
I wonder sometimes what a world without people like u would look like... Exactly the same, cuz this video is supposed to be watched in order and wouldn't make any sense otherwise... but thx for dedicating your time for this useless task u probably did for likes...
In Brazil right after we became independent from Portugal Britain started to pressure us into abolishing slavery, but the government wasn't very enthusiastic about it, so in 1831 a law was passed saying that any slave brought to Brazil would be declared a free man, this was know as "lei pra inglês ver" (law to show to the Englishman) because the penalty was a fine that for the most part wasn't really enforced To this day we still use the expression "to show the Englishman" when referring to something that's done only for the optics and it's actually not doing anything substantial
@@MissionHomeowner What Americans don't like to discuss is that the Monroe Doctrine was 100% dependent on British support for it until about 1870. In fact it was originally supposed to be a joint declaration.
@@josecipriano3048 No, the British ensured that the entirety of America would remain an economical and business playground of the Americans and British.
I love history channels who focus on the real issues in history: Diplomacy, economics, culture, ideas instead of brute war, like so many others. Thank you for actually enlightening us on this very interesting diplomatic event that had wide-reaching implications until today and still serves as interesting material to learn about diplomacy.
This was a ludicrously pro-western watered down version of what went down that paints Alexander as mustache-twirling villainous buffoon but the day was saved by the competent selfless diplomacy of western diplomats. It fails to give Russia the credit it absolutely deserves for being the major reason of Napoleon's defeat. There is absolutely no way Napoleon would have been defeated if half his army had not been wiped out in Russia and he had to retreat in a crushing defeat. It fails to account for Alexander trying to navigate preventing being assassinated at home while negotiating with shrewd western diplomats. All while Alexander's army was occupying Paris and Poland
@@SteveghvffAnd Russia tried to emulate western fashion, statesmanship, Commerce and technology since Peter the Great. Russia always wanted to be a part of the exclusive club that is european civilization and society.
@@helmuthvonmoltke5518 And they are always way to aggressive and then get butthurt when the West calls them on their bs. They are that kid who is always there and everyone tolerates them but doesn't actually like them.
A note: the restored dukes of Modena and (eventually) Parma and the king of the Two Sicilies weren't just "some relatives of the king of Spain" or "a cousin of the Austrian Emperor". They were the direct heir of the guy who held that throne before the French Revolution (in the case of Parma), the same guy (Two Sicilies), and the heir of the designated heir (Modena. The last Este Duke of Modena had no heir and signed a deal with the Habsburgs to give his domain to one of their princes, this deal was signed in 1763 and in the end the son of that prince got to sit on the Modenese throne). They weren't random people pulled out of a hat like it is implied here.
@@PRubin-rh4sr Yeah I understand it may have bothered you, I think the reason he decided to gloss over the matter is not to add a level of complexity to the number of players involved in the ongoing political game of chess. Yet I agree it could have been covered in a slightly different way
Historia Civilis is so exceptional in that this is the highest quality history knowledge that you can get and there are no adverts at the beginning just right into the good stuff. We are truly blessed to have this man.
I agree with you, its been a while since i saw his first videos about ancient rome and i just LOVED them. One of the history youtubers that really worth the time.
I know it takes you forever to make each of your videos, considering all of the research, script writing, recording, and editing that goes into each and every one of them. I just want to say thank you so much for each of these masterpieces. Absence makes the heart grow fonder and because there is such time between videos, I get super excited whenever I see anything new from your channel because I know that it’s going to be of the highest quality. I’m fearful that all of these other larger channels with similar content will just end up pressuring you out of your videos, but I would explore you to keep making them because they are some of my absolute favorite content on TH-cam. Keep up all the fantastic work!
Well, Metternich’s decision to restore the Kingdom of Sardinia (which was really the kingdom of Piedmont) would definetly ovme back to bite Austria in the back. I have the strong feeling Historia Civilis would really like the long and complicated history leading up to the Italian unification. Lots of stuff happened between the Congress of Vienna and Garibaldi’s expedition.
Agreed. The unification of Italy is sadly overshadowed by the more romantic and alluring German unification and is hardly ever talked about outside of Italy.
And to give Prussia the Rhineland. I suppose that he couldn't have predicted the industrial revolution in Germany, but Prussia got the best lands for it in exchange of a poorer Saxony.
@@Dustz92 Saxony was one of the most industrialized regions in europe, as proven by the entire escalation of some little skirmish in america being Fredrick the great invading Saxony to seize its army, treasury and resources so it would be possible to fight a 4 front war vs Austria, France, Russia & Sweden
Actually Sardinia-Piedmont did not act alone, in revolution of 1848 they were supported by Papal states and Sicily. In 1860 France assisted them, in 1866 - Prussia. So even without recreation of Piedmont, France would eventually reclaim control over Italy. Fun fact : Savoyards actually wanted to be a part of Italy. They uprised against french in 1860s, and migrate in mass later.
These past two videos have been like nerd Christmas! A really good series, well researched and excellently produced. Thanks for making these and sharing them - our quiz team wouldn't be anywhere without your videos!
Considering how you characterized him last video, it sounds like Tsar Alexander got exactly what he wanted, at least for his heirs. I'm not saying he's a secret genius. "Baffle them with BS" is a very rookie but very effective realpolitik move. All it takes is the savvy to realize that you don't have anyone who could outmaneuver professional diplomats and to hold out with the crazy until they give you big concessions. Obviously threatening war is vile. Obviously. Still, based on your description, he got more than he could have expected and got exactly what he wanted.
As a stokie (someone from Stoke on Trent), I want to provide more info on the medallion. The medallions were designed by Josiah Wedgwood of Wedgwood pottery (still the most influential and most sought after pottery in the world, no shits, seriously) and he was at the time one of the largest advocates for the abolition of slavery as he believed that we are all the creations of god and should be treated with respect and equality. He is very well remembered in Stoke as one of the key drivers of the abolition of slavery in the empire. A truly magnificent man who sought equality. Im sharing this as outside of Stoke he is completely forgotten in Britain and it’s a national disgrace. So if you celebrate the end of slavery in Britain, be sure to raise a glass to Josiah Wedgwood, a lost by society a social and economic leader who put Stoke on the map for all the right reasons. Also if your interest look up Sir Stanley Mathews who formed the first all black professional football team in South Africa called ‘Stans Men’ (at the time breaking the law) and throughout Africa taught kids sports. Edit: Stanley Mathews is also a Stokie hence why I put it there.
what sucks is all the people today who think that white people are all evil because our ancestors were all slavers and especially hate on Britain for its involvement in the slave trade... but they don't appreciate the lengths we went to to abolish slavery around the world. The African tribes were the ones enslaving people, and the British are the ones who stopped it (after initially trading with them which sparked the public outcry).
About Waterloo, I am inclined to agree about the fact that a victory at Waterloo (although the battle itself was not planned by Napoleon, but was the consequence of incoordination within the now disorganised French army) and even the whole campaign of 1815 in general. However, it seems that Napoleon hoped to use the disagreements between the great power to create a wedge, perhaps some time to re-arm in the form of an armistice, and eventually even an alliance with one of the great powers (such as with Alexander. Once a supposedly dear friend of Napoleon. It was impossible to predict what Alexander would have done but he could have potentially struck an agreement with Napoleon. This didn't happen, however I don't think it would have been impossible. Had Alexander simply woken up on a different side of the bed). The fact that Castlereagh managed to get the other great powers to declare war on Napoleon was already against Napoleon's plan. Whom expected the dissonance of the congress of Vienna to stop the great powers from acting united and give France time to maneuver diplomatically. However, even after that failed, a victory at Waterloo, or even better, the separation and forced retreat of Blucher's and Wellington's armies and a quick annexation of Belgium, could have re-opened conflict between the other powers. Re-opening an opportunity for Napoleon. Seeing as Napoleon only alternative was practical exile, and for his French supporters the return of the Bourbon monarchy, I don't think his actions were out of delusion. Rather he saw an opportunity and took it, as he had done his whole career. This time he simply got unlucky (or at least, not lucky). Edit: As always, great video!!! When are we returning to Rome and the creation of the principate by Augustus.
I'd call it desperation rather than delusion, at least in regards to why Napoleon tried to regain power. Imo his best hope was a string of early victories and then an exhausted Europe aggrees to him keeping France in the borders of 1792. So he gambled on the other rulers hating each other more than they hated him and lost that gamble. The moment the gamble was lost, he had no shot at winning. With hindsight and considering the resources and lives everyone had invested into defeating him the first time, a change of heart - even by Alexander - seems unlikely, though it wasn't impossible of course. But a man like Napoleon would never have been satisfied just sitting around on Elba and the Bourbon King would probably soon tried to have him assassinated, since his pure existance was a threat to Bourbon rule.
I dislike that Alexander is represent in this video as erratic. The man had much pressure on his hands to keep his aristocrats happy, as his predecessor had been assassinated. Gaining Poland was incredibly important for the Russian state, as Poland could keep creating problems for Russia. Alexander most likely personally wanted to be a liberal “good king”, however he had the reality of having to keep his nobles from killing him.
You even changed the colour of Norway from red to blue during the course of the video without even a mention. I love it! Like watching a murder mistery film where you get to look for hidden clues along with the detective!
"Even more crazy is that during all of this, there was a crisis in Norway, where after the Treaty of Kiel (which was to transfer Norway from Denmark to Sweden), Norway tried a declaration of independence and fought a two week war with Sweden before falling into a loose union. This also involved the United Kingdom's diplomats as they were arbitrators for this question during 1814. This video has an Easter Egg alluding to this: you can see Norway changing colors from Denmark's color at the start of the video to a shade resembling Sweden's color near the end." From somewhere else in the discussion.
>be tsar of russia >occupy paris >meet with french foreign minister >he asks for a peaceful exchange of territory >threaten to declare a world war if russia has to give up a single inch of territory it occupies >tell him it's time to go to the threater >give him a massive bear hug >refuse to elaborate >leave gigachad
The best project of my history class was a class-wide 're-creation' of the Congress of Vienna. The defining feature was Russia, Spain, and the Papal State(???) ganging up into a pro-war faction VS everyone else. We paid off Russia with the Faroes and Tahiti, the Papal State with Provence, and Spain with IKEA and a Charizard card. It was wild and amazing. Also someone was assigned to represent the smaller German states and they immediately declared their intent to unify those states separately from Prussia and Austria, so that happened.
@@Aldiyawak The three of them were all having their own brinkmanship on the first day of negotiations: the Russian diplomats wanted a harsher peace, the Spanish diplomat just wanted to cause trouble, and the Papal diplomat wanted to see how far he could push the envelope. Then they banded together out of a common cause.
@@jerrellallen6271 Benefit of being an island, even if you don't meet your objectives, you don't really lose because there won't be a foreign army marching in anyway
Hey buddy, hope you’re doing well. Didn’t have a way to send you a message, just wanted to say I miss your videos, and I think you’re the best historian on the internet! Hope you can do this for a living.
I studied international relations in college, and it’s learning about stuff like this which got me interested in geopolitics and diplomacy in the first place. Great video!
Speaking as a Saxon: The Congress of Vienna was a traumatic event for Saxony. Not enough that the region had been devastated by war for years, now half of the country was annexed by the old arch-rival, Prussia. This rivalry goes back to the time after the Thirty Year's War and since the reign of Frederick II. of Prussia (who is not called "the Great" in Saxony, since he invaded it on two different occasions and greatly damaged Dresden), Prussia had tried to annex its southern neighbour. Even to this day, the southern part of the german state of Brandenburg calls itself "Saxon Brandenburg". (The Saxon King was held as a prisoner by the great powers and was not allowed to take part in the peace negotiations, because his "loyalty" to Napoleon. But what choice did he have? His country was effectively occupied by the French and he himself was a semi-hostage of Napoleon. And when Napoleon was finally defeated at Leipzig, Frederick Augustus was immediatly captured by the Coalition. The other "allies" of Napoleon, like Bavaria, were allowed to change sides and even profit from the peace agreements, but Saxony was barely able to survive. Since then (even to this day), there was no love for Prussia in Saxony...)
I thought this era was dead boring from what history class gave me. Guess it just needed better narration. This is a triumph - looking forward to more like this series.
Every history class would be more interesting with at least a little storytelling. (Not saying history classes are boring, they simply would be better) I think the wet dream of a student in history class is getting HC as teacher! It would be so fricking awesome.
“Might does not make right,” Talleyrand reminded. Has not Europe paid for it “with so much blood and so many tears”? The golden age of peace could be right around the corner, if only every peacemaker would follow this course of action.” ― David King, Vienna
I'm at the 8 minute make and I just want to say how freaking cool this video is. Your editing, voice, music, and style of story telling is so refreshing. I'm a serial history TH-cam watcher and this content is why I open this app. Just found you today and you earned a new big ol juicy subscriber.
The study of diplomatic history is the one of the most important least understood subjects out there. I’m doing an independent paper in the next month, but I hope you stick with this topic. Good luck!
@@tungstentrain1956 that’s what I am afraid of too. There isn’t that much on Metternich especially in English. The best sources for Metternich is in German. But I rather do a topic I love than one I don’t.
Part of that is because political science basically ceased to exist when the soviet Union fell in a way nobody expected. We basically accepted that you cant find logical reasons for complex human behaviour like politics, because all it needs is for one dude to have a bad day.
I found out that this was out for Patrons like half a week ago. I became a patron just to watch earlier and finally support one of the only channels covering historical topics and still managing to keep the hilarity to the perfect ratio. Overall, 10/10 video.
A few things on Northern Italy. Although it might seem that Austria was putting in Austrian puppets out of the blue, in actuality, Lombardy had already been Austrian for a century, and the rightful heirs of the previous rulers were placed back on the thrones in Tuscany, Modena, and (eventually) Parma - it just so happened that these were either Habsburgs or closely related to them. Venice was the only real exception, but everyone was OK with the Austrians taking it as the old republic was seen as moribund, it geographically simplified and rounded out Austrian territory, and was seen as a fair exchange for Austria losing the southern Netherlands and its other scattered territories in southern Germany (again, part of that geographic simplification). By the way, I'm surprised that there wasn't more on the southern Netherlands (today's Belgium). There were actually some pretty serious negotiations concerning its future at the Congress... which were all for nought as they revolted 15 years later anyway...
It just sounds to me that due to centuries of Habsburg diplomacy, there was some legitimacy to installing Habsburg puppets in northern Italy. A distinction without a difference, perhaps.
I believe that just letting Austria have Venice was a mistake. All that Austrian overlordship in Italy backfired with endless revolts. Maximized in 1848, when real threat of Austrian fall apart came. Instead there should be more balanced Germany-like approach.
I love the Roman history videos and Roman history in general, but this two-part series may be my favorite Historia Civilis videos. He is so clear and concise when laying out these complex diplomatic negotiations that basically anyone can understand what is happening and why it's happening without glossing over anything. I hope he covers more stuff from the Early Modern Period-Late Modern Period- Industrial Revolution Eras.
In my college World History class (I don't care to mention when that was) only a page of the text book was devoted to the Congress, and most of that to Metternich. While I had some dim understanding all these years of the broad outlines of negotiations, it was so wonderful to view your detailed treatment. I love learning. Thank you. I must now check out what else you have produced.
Is it though? Isn’t the entire premise of these videos to show how Europe was able to achieve relative peace and stability for 100 years by avoiding great power conflicts?
I think the Hundred Days are so hyped up because of Waterloo. In France, Waterloo is the heroic defeat, the battle that could have changed the world if we had won it, and the swan's song of Napoléon. A lot more glorious to lose a battle because of the terrain, and the non-arrival of some reinforcments, than to lose a war cause overwhelming forces marched upon Paris and demanded the peace. For Britain, Waterloo is the occasion to show up Wellington, to make him a genius, the one who bested Napoléon Bonaparte himself, and also it helps to forget that there was four other countries in the war against Napoléon, Waterloo it's France vs Britain and Prussia, it's not hard to say they defeated Napoléon almost alone ^^ Of course for other great powers Waterloo is not that important.... But french and british historiography is a lot more well known than german or russian one :p
@@hammer3721 Which was mainly due to Grouchy, who ws charged to find the Prussians and block them. There's also a severe lack of coordination in french army, Ney charged with only cavalry, without orders, the Old Guard was send, ut with no support from artillery, etc... But I really talk about the discourse and the propaganda after the facts, it does not matter if Wellington was simply lucky, or if he was a really good general (probably both ^^), what amtters is that he can be painted as a genius that rivaled Napoléon ^^
@@hammer3721 but realistically Wellington wouldn’t have been there had Blucher given his assurance they would come. The British army’s initial position after Ligny was to just abandon the Prussians, go to the coast and regroup later. Wellington objected and instead, with Blucher’s runners, agreed to stick to the plan. Of course Wellington wouldn’t have done so well if Blucher hadn’t shown up The plan was always to fight with Blucher Wellington did what Wellington did best Great defensive strategies till the tide shifted in his favour.
@@Thelionpaladin My objection is not that Wellington defeated Napoleon, my objection is that this entire video has portrayed the Prussians as nothing more than everyone's pet monkeys. The neglect to emphasize their importance for the victory at Waterloo is just another example of this. Without the Prussians, the British would not have won, without the British, the Prussians would not have won. Yet this video really seems to imply that: Yeah, Wellington did all the work. Oh, and the Prussians were also there.
Outstanding work as always, 51 minutes was an absolute treat. I'd love to see you look at later events in the 19th century and how the Congress contextualizes them.
I wonder if then at a time, Russians already get the conclusion, that if they are going to war against all of united Europe, they need to control Poland bc it's the narrowest place between the Baltic Sea and Carpathia mountain
I'm so glad you are doing this series on the Concert of Europe and for the 2 videos you made before this one. They are frankly, beautiful and are of considerable quality. This is the kind of lesson plan/chapter I would have dreamed of in any of the schools I went to in any of the countries I learned in. Thank you for these gifts and keep up the great work
In Brazil we still refer to things done just for show as “ for Englishmen to look at / see “ to this day because of the issue with the antislavery agreements.
to clarify my fellow countryman's comment, during the 19th century, britain pressured brazil (because it declared its independence in 1822) to abolish slavery. so, instead of outright abolishing, the brazilian politicians at the time passed a bunch of laws that kind of abolished slavery. i.e.: in 1850, prohibition of bringing slaves from africa, in 1871, every infant born from a slave woman, was free (but how can an infant enjoy freedom?), and in 1885, every slave older than 60 years was to be free (but how can a person survive if they can not work? and slaves didnt reach the age of 60!!) so, thats how came the phrase: "for englishmen to see"
I think he is far too hard on Castlereagh. It's unlikely that Spain or Portugal would have done anything differently even if he had pushed extremely hard.
@@Spoonishpls He attempted to palm the responsibility of appeasing those million signatures off onto the other great powers, and used the Congress as a vehicle to do so. Politically savvy move or not for him and Liverpool it nevertheless represents a very real missed opportunity for serious change to have been made much earlier, not to mention weakened the reputation of Britain amongst its peers as a nation "committed to the abolition of slavery" so long as it didn't impact them that much financially.
@@MultiKommandant okay, then the alternative would have been him pushing hard, getting stonewalled, but at least he made his constituents feel like they tried, I'm sure all the slaves would have had their hearts warmed as a privileged group across the sea thought about them. I'm descended from Puerto Rican slaves and blaming him for the Spanish desire to keep their slavery at all costs is just similar grand standing
I feel that the way he unenthusiastically shrugged the matter off damaged British foreign relations in an unproductive way. Spain and Portugal were relatively minor powers at that point (at least compared to the big five in Europe), and if an uncooperative power like Alexander's Russia could be convinced to play along through diplomatic means then I doubt the Spanish and Portuguese could really do all that much about it. Then again, I'm not exactly too knowledgeable on the more regional politics of Post-Napoleonic Europe, and I'd hate to make too big a deal out of this. I do however feel like Castlereagh got out of this all pretty well, he still seemed to come across as a shrewd and level-headed diplomat, just it seems to me a bit of a missed opportunity for a man of his talents to make it so awkward at the end.
I loved this 2 part series. Really wonderfully made. Hope to see more content like this on modern events, just as beautifully made like your videos on more ancient events and societies.
This has to be one of the best history channels on youtube by a long way. It's so nice to see such in depth and well-presented coverage of lesser discussed historical events like this, it seems like military history gets so much more attention than these more political subjects but I find them so much more interesting. And can I just say how much I love the use of maps, they really help illustrate the different possible outcomes and look really satisfying and I love how detailed and accurately you draw the borders.
Yeah, I also like these diplomatic videos, because they're basically quite literally showing us what would have been possible. Like, it's not just us thinking about this later, there were powerful people pushing for these very different things at the time, and all it would have taken is 7 signatures
As sad as it sounds, I would guess that Castlereigh's antislavery addition to the treaty would have still been a failure if he was more sincere, though it certainly would have had a greater chance.
It's definitely hard to believe they all could've been persuaded to abolish slavery, given their economies depended so heavily on it. After what Europe had just been through, there probably wasn't a great appetite for more radical changes. But we'll never know because Castlereagh didn't try.
Radical abolitionist proposals would have merely led to the same result but with far more drama and grief. Britain had leverage but the essentially the rest of the congress was either pro-slavery or were indifferent (and likely to back the pro-slavery side to prevent a diplomatic crisis). I think it's too common in modern times to put too much emphasis on "what-ifs" like this. It wasn't happening and it is bordering on historical revisionism to pretend otherwise.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 tbh none of their economies depended that much on it; the issue was that it benefited a specific clique of rich people. Slavery itself is a an economic drag, and British ownership of sugar islands etc was a pure subsidy for ultra rich slaveowners
You forget what the conflict was all about from the first moment, Restore the old order. Why a Tory who create a war in Europe to restore a tyrant, will care about an issue, like that? In fact Britain keep the Slavery until 1830 when their main rival Earl Gray a Foxite and Pro Napoleon got into power
Historian Civilis, you’ve already earned my interest and view because of your fun and in informative analysis of otherwise unstimulating histories (that’s not war related) into pretty darn interesting and digestible ways of understanding our history. However, these last two videos earned my respect and awe at your creative and narrative capabilities. Texting you as graduate linguist that reads hundreds of papers and wishing those writings as TH-cam videos ( if not writing) similar to yours, I loved this. 👍🏼
I have been watching you with my private channel for quite a while now. I don't think I can really describe how much your content means to me it's the most fun I had while learning . It really reignited my love for history as well. Thank you so much
Not the most reliable source for history btw. Very bias, and likes to use his opinion a lot of the time. If you want a good recounting of the Roman and Byzantium times for example, listen to The History of Rome podcast.
Great work! I loved that you decided to tackle the issue of slavery abolition. Although the Congress failed to abolish it, getting in the idea of ending the slave trade would have huge implications in the South Atlantic. Greetings from Brazil!
Que balela hein, a ideia já existia e o povo ja falava disso, a promessa de uma dia abolir significa nada e isso se viu com a escravidão ter durado tanto alem deste congresso. Quando se trata deste asunto, Viena foi um falhanço total.
these videos blow me away every time. You put so much research and effort into them. Thank you for being one of the absolute best history channels on youtube!
Another gem from Historia Civilis, as usual. I really liked how you portrayed the Hundred Days as it actually was, a temporary interruption of a much larger diplomatic process. It’s always a good day when you drop a new video, keep up the great work!
Diplomats: "Can we please try to cooperate towards establishing an everlasting peace?" Monarchs: "But I want Poland/Saxony NOW! NOW, NOW, NOW!!" Other diplomats to Castlereagh: "You're so lucky that your king is essentially an invalid." Castlereagh: "Extremely rude, but very true"
242k views in basically one day. You’re a powerhouse, dude. I’m so happy to see how well your channel is doing. I hope you’re able to keep this up with the revenue you get from it.
It was considerably weaker than the EU In fact, even Austria was less unified than the EU is today We forget how extraordinarily massive governments have become, as for one of the weakest in the world, the EU, would have been much stronger and more centralized than almost every country in the 19th century, with the sole exception of France and perhaps Britain Had the eu, on its current form exist in the 19th century, it would have been a very co-ordinate, massive government that no-one would doubt to call a proper country
@@alphamikeomega5728 Yet. Its massive bureacratic machinery, control over currency, and enforcement of laws between members would make 19th century countries look like the ASEAN.
I swear, if I could only ever watch one historical video essay channel, Historia Civilis would be it. My brain is never left dissatisfied. I thank you for what you do.
You know more about this than I do, but I'm not sure how Castlereagh could've got anything done about slavery. 1. Britain hadn't abolished slavery, so anything forced onto the other countries would be hypocritical. 2. The other countries were united against Britain's push, with them collectively having much more influence that Britain. 3. As the nation with the biggest colonies, they were in the best position survive abolition (think of a modern equivalent situation to a developed country that got developed by using fossil fuels telling an undeveloped country not to use fossil fuels, or else). 4. The only way they would've got anything done would be to disperse with a large amount of resources and give them to their direct competitors, comprimising Britain and their geopolitical spot at the top. 5. Oh by the way, this was right after the largest war in history where no one wants to comprimise on anything unless it's to prevent another war.
fuckin finally, someone who seems to get that getting rid of slaves wasn't all that easy once it had already been allowed to grow that big and that Britain pretty much did all it could to abolish it.
He couldn't do anything, slavery was way too profitable at the time, when industrialization kicked in there was no need to have slaves anymore, therefore, they were abolished. He didn't even try, he knew he couldn't do anything, he just paid lip service in order to appease the abolishionists back in Britain.
Yeah, not really much he could do. The germans and swedws could abolish the trade, but the Portuguese, specially with Brazil being more important, the French and the Spanish really didn't want or were willing to accept losing everything because of a institution people saw as normal at the time.
@@irmaosmatos4026Clearly not if about 1'000'000 people cared enough about it to send letters across half a continent. Doesn't sound like something everyone agreed on.
@@SloveneAnon only the Brits cares about it, because only the Brits didn't have slaves. Later other countries also started to care. Even if there were abolitionists in these nations they were a small minority and not a majority as they would eventually become.
Great video. You could have included the "Disputed State of Olivença" as an interesting fact. In the prelude to the peninsular war in 1801 Spain and France invade the Alentejo region in Portugal. At the end of the conflict, the Badajoz treaty was signed, recognizing the annexation by Spain of the Portuguese Territory of Olivença. In the 1815 Vienna treaty, it is written that the powers "recognize that the return of Olivenza and its territories must be done", thus officially returning the occupied territory to Portugal. Btw Spain only signed this treaty in 1817. The funny thing is, the territory was never returned. There was never any official manifestation, after 1815, on the part of Portugal for the return of Olivença, but the border is not defined there, and Portugal does not recognize Spanish sovereignty over the territory in any doccument or treaty. This territory is effectively occupied illegally. But In practice, due to immigration and repression of the Portuguese language and culture in the past, there are currently few inhabitants in the territory who identify with Portugal, or who wish to be part of the country. So um the field trully nobody wants this status to change. Spain claims that the article of the vienna treaty is not mandatory, and Portugal does not exert significant pressure for the return of the territory, maintaining a status quo of de facto Spanish sovereignty, without official recognition from Portugal, and that will not change anytime soon. Its interesting to think that diplomatic issues directly derived from this treaty concluded more than 200 years ago still exist today.
Gotta say I really respect this new direction of historia, I still want my Octavian videos but I am really looking forward to learning about the 99 year peace and the sheer amount of effort they went through to maintain it. Loving it
Love this detour into the 19th century. I'd love to see you cover the slow breakdown of this international order into the apocalyptic catastrophe and crisis of capital that is the Great War.
These two videos were awesome. Thanks for doing them. Would love to see an addendum video discussing smaller topics of the Congress. What was the experience of Sweden, Spain and Portugal? How did the Netherlands negotiations go? What of the colonies? The Swiss question? etc.
What's so astounding about this conference is how despite all of the moving pieces they managed to pave the way for a CENTURY of *relative* peace Edit to be more historically accurate: I’ve been reading up on the congress recently and I actually think it’s really interesting how the whole house of cards began to collapse. For the first 50 years or so the great powers functioned on the basis of legitimacy and adherence to balance of power principles. The 5 power balancing act only really worked when Germany was disunited. The appeal of the German federation, especially to the British was under that system the German states had enough coordination to mount an effective defence which put France and Russia in check, but never enough to mount an offensive to be a threat to the balance. So when Austria became increasingly isolated after the Crimean war no great power was willing to intervene on their behalf to stop the unification of Germany. This destroyed the balancing act by making what used to be Prussia extremely powerful and threatening in its own right. This transitioned the national aims of the great powers from maintaining the legitimacy of their new system, to vying for power and dominance outright within the system. Especially since Bismarck was a cold pragmatist who openly stated that he didn’t believe in adopting a policy of acting in order to help other countries, because all foreign policy is only made in the interests of the state, so it would never be reciprocated. This is a stark contrast to Metternich who if you recall was the architect of the balance of power system, who believed in following a policy to maintain it, even at no direct immediate benefit to Austria. And for that matter I don’t want to overemphasise the role of Germany in this whole mess. Other things such as a new Bonaparte in France and the rise of nationalism also played notable roles in the transition of great power policy from legitimacy of the system to power within the system.
@@Puckosar less than a million people died in the Crimean and Franco-Prussian wars. Several million died in both the Napoleonic wars and the 1st World War. They aren't on the same scale.
the situation that Talleyrand found when he arrived on September 24. He refused to accept it and was supported by Spain’s representative, the marqués de Labrador. Talleyrand denied that either the “four” or the “six” was a legally constituted body and desired that the congress should be summoned to elect a directing committee.
Truly an excellent pair of videos, there are too few videos that explain the Congress of Vienna as well and detailed as this. I only wish there were more, such as covering the United Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, and issue of Hanover. Other than that a completely amazing video
ot even the return of Napoleon from Elba and the eruption of new war diverted the Congress from its forward-looking agenda. The congress was not suspended nor was a new peace treaty made at Vienna. After Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo and the second restoration of the Bourbons to the French throne, a new set of peace treaties was made under the Second Peace of Paris of 20 November 1815
Fantastic videos about the Congress of Vienna. I had zero idea how complicated and convoluted the negotiations were between the great powers. These two videos have been the most enjoyable videos I have ever, repeat, ever watched on TH-cam. Quick question to everyone here. Did this channel do a video on the negotiations in Paris after The Great War? Damn, I hope so. These two videos are exactly why TH-cam exists. Thank you so very much. Reid.
I've been waiting for this! From one history nerd to another, your channel is single-handedly the best of the best on the web. And as always, I'm vibing so hard when that outro drops.
I can wait as long as it takes for new videos because each one is better, longer, and more fascinating than the last. One of the best channels on TH-cam!
Superb survey of Vienna Conference. It’s a clear understandable narrative and explains background of the 5 major powers. Excellent maps accompany it as well.
I was really waiting for this video. Thank you. I'm Polish and regarding the Congress of Vienna, we're only taught that it occurred in 1815, some deals were made and Poland became a small duchy within Russia so your material is super educational.
It's about now, that I check in to see if there is a new video. I would really love to see the notification that @historia civilis has posted something. Then I know I have 10-20 mins of pleasure and relaxation / learning to brighten up the week.
41:15 You know a term has become immortalized when it not only meshes so seamlessly into major historical events but improves our understanding of them!
Great video , though I would interject that Castlereagh being neutral on slavery and being an imperialist has no real connection, anti slavery actually pushed for imperialism especially for the british. West Africa was mainly colonised by the support of abolishionists who wanted to end slavery in the region which native Kingdoms did not want to give up. It also gave a caus belli agnaist many slave states such as the otttomans allowing for imperial expansion.
Its funny how the last state in Africa to abolish slavery was Ethiopia - a country that was never colonised by Europeans (Italy conquered it for a while in the 1930's). During WW2 Ethiopia had an insane amount of slaves for the populace.
Thank God someone said it, I he was rather harsh on Castlereagh. I mean how could have marched in and demand complete abolition of slavery while Britain hadn't done it? Wouldn't he just have been seen as hypocritical?
West Africa was colonized not by abolitionists per say, but by ex-slave and free black people. America also did the same in Liberia as the British did in Sierra Leon, the slavers actually specifically supported them doing this. Slavers were in constant fear of all out slave revolt like in Haiti, and also sought to take away power from maroon groups like in Jamaica by shipping them away to Africa. Much of the populace shipped to Africa often was very similar to the mixed elite of Haiti, usually very well assimilated into protestant English/American culture and actively oppressed the inhabitants, and very much needed the support of their home country to keep up their colonies. Moreover the British still practiced slavery after abolition, Indian “indentured servants” were shipped to the Caribbean and sold to the French and Dutch to replace the ex-slaves and serve as a wedge between the white elite and the black populace. That’s why there are so many Indians in Guyana. Slavery also wasn’t ended in india after abolition, mainly because India had begun to replace the Caribbean and slavery there was incredibly important especially considering the British had been passing laws allowing the land holding aristocracy tighter control over their lands and peasants.
@@fredbreadbun6277 He could of promised that soon after Britain’s did the same. Course he couldn’t really, but he didn’t even try to sell them on ending trade when Britain had already done so. Sure it would of been difficult to do so, but Britain already had established the blockade of Africa alongside the Americans, they had already been flexing their naval muscle and there wasn’t really a state in the world that could stop them. If you wanna talk about them making everyone upset, we’ll they already seized a ton of colonies from France and the Dutch, including the ever important cape colony.
I remember this in school. It was talked about in one lesson and focused only on the new political ideas in the German states that failed in the end because of it. Metternich did it all. Thats kind of all i remember. Great and interesting video. Thx mate.
...BEEFY
BEEF
BEEF
BEEFY
CHICKEN
BEEF
I’ll admit, I was a little surprised but ultimately respected how you handled the 100 days. Treating it as more of a pause rather then the huge shockwave some portray it as to the peace process in order to really focus on the actual diplomacy going on was a novel choice I think.
@@SimuLord Huh. I’ll admit learning that the guy who voiced Mr. House is also related to flamboyant horse boy Murat wasn’t something I was expecting…ever really.
@@SimuLord And M*A*S*H (the Movie)
there wasn't even a pause. the Congress of Vienna wrapped up a full nine days before Waterloo.
Its almost like they wanted to subtely humiliate Napolean by putting him so close to mainland Europe. As if to say "oh its right there. So close by, so simple..."
Some say Talleyrand purposefully lead the Congress to the island of Elba solution, knowing Napoleon would then attempt to flee and do something quite as stupid as he did.
Because only after that, could men like Nikolas be moved from their initial stance of treating Napoleon a threat in passing, as an equal.
By allowing Napoleon just enough leeway to escape, it was thus proved that if not for the penalty of execution, then nothing but absolute ostracism from Civilization would suffice as penalty for a military mind quite as bright as Napoleons.
Talleyrand alongside Richelieu are probably the best political minds France has spawned.
The Congress of Vienna should be a limited drama series. So many layers to all of these negotiations, it’s actually insane.
ioh yi
@MusicMaster1987 What Blackadder episode did the congress of vienna?
tbh i feel like with all the characters involved something like The Death of Stalin would be a good fit
@@jasonhaven7170 Must have been the 3rd season.
There is something very close to it and it's a masterpiece: Fall of the Eagles, I highly recommend it.
The Treaty of Versailles is becoming my new obsession and having the Congress of Vienna to compare it to has made it so much more interesting to me. Vienna, despite having to overcome some serious clashes of personality, seems as if everyone eventually got onto the same page: create a new model of what Europe looks like that will ensure peace for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile Versailles is the wildest mix of France wishing it could Ctrl+X Germany while at the same time Wilson walks into the room and convinces the allies that what started as a Rube Goldberg machine of personal rivalries is actually about Truth, Justice and the American Way, and the only solution is to remake Central Europe in his image... and everyone kind of goes along with it.
Anyway, thanks for sparking my interest
A happy little clown fiesta lol
France wanting to delete germany and Russia wanting all of poland are pretty funny coincidences
" everyone kind of goes along with it." - sure except like Hungary who got raped in central europe. Austria-Hungary had to be breaken up, okay, I can accept that but the borders were drawn increadibly bad (the brittish and french are pros at this...). The new borders didnt follow ethnic lines at all.
Besides that they punished germany so bad that they started another world war (you can blame it Hitler alone, but there was a general dissent within the people and hitler rose up on that).
@@raczgabor659 I mean you could probably blame the dissent on the Great Depression which affected everywhere, the "stab in the back" where a sizable amount of people believed they could have won the Great War even at the eleventh hour, and the desire of various factions in the republic to use the Nazi's as a bludgon against the Communists and Socialists.
@@raczgabor659 the borders of Hungary after trianon followed ethnic lines pretty well, except maybe slovakia.
@@raczgabor659 Yea, Hitler used the Versailles Treaty as his personal whipping target on the way to power and beyond. Germans as a whole hated it.
I find it hilarious that Austria's attempts to keep the French out of Italy is what eventually led to Italian unification and the gradual downfall of Austria as a great power. A strong Sardinia Piedmont will be able to resist outside influence, sure. But the French don't have any influence in Italy, it's all Austria, so Austria is going to be the main target of that resistance. And with French backing (looking to see a weakened Austria), Sardinia was able to snowball their way into the Kingdom of Italy
Wasn't it Garibaldi?
@@okbro3524 Garibaldi fought in the Italian war of independence on behalf of Victor Emmanuel II, king of Piedmont-Sardinia. Italian unification was basically Sardinia conquering the rest of Italy and then renaming themselves Italy.
Garribaldi did an expedition to Sicily and Napoli , and gave that lands to the Kingdom Sardinia-piedmont. But in war for Lombardia French army did heavy backing for Italians. Too bad they stopped early and not touched Venice that would have to wait 6 years more for unification.
Respectfully, I think this argument is made from hindsight. Austria had no way of knowing ethnic nationalism would be such a potent force
@@justinhighum2892 Oh absolutely.
14:20 -- The situation must have been dire. Tallyrand was never clear about _anything_ if he could help it. He was so well-known for saying things in oblique ways, and implying more than he actually said aloud, that when he died someone said to have remarked, "Died, has he? Now I wonder what he meant by that." (Variously attributed to Metternich or Louis-Philippe.)
I don't know which one, but that sure sounds like French humour. Edit: After some verifications, some say that Talleyrand said it himself after the death of another diplomat...
@@Xerxes2005 That's true too, and it's almost as characteristic that Tallyrand himself would take dying as having some other meaning.
@@Xerxes2005 that’s the most Talleyrand thing I have ever read
"If a diplomat says 'yes', he means 'maybe', if he says 'maybe' he means 'no' and if the says 'no' he is no diplomat". Was that Talleyrand?
Edit: Just googled it. Yes it was
when he asked 3 American diplomats for a bribe for himself and certain French officers in order to secure a treaty with Napoleon, he apparently referred to it as a "sweetener"
Tsar Alexander being the funniest character in the whole series and just leaving after getting what he wanted is such a chad move honestly.
Alexander not Nicholas
@@RandomVidsforthought thanks. My bad
"I have to go return some video tapes" -Tsar Alexander
this made me want to watch more about him hes hilarious
🤣The ultimate psychopathic, Schizophrenic, chad
Of all the people there, Tsar Alexander seems to be the most timeless. Can imagine him in any century.
*cough* Putin *cough*
*tiresome
@@amylaneio there’s a big difference between claiming neighbors land for the pride and preventing your hostile neighbors from coming close. The best comparison is with the us especially the current president
@@luisandrade2254 Russia didn't claim Poland for "pride", but to prevent Prussian and Austrians from fully absorbing Poland and coming closer to Russian heartland. Basically the same excuse Putin has for Ukraine or soviets had for the rest of ther neighbors. Russian foreign policy has never changed
@@luisandrade2254
Lol
At least _try_ to disguise your bait as something more appealing than a steaming pile of bullshit xD
The Historia Civilis audience is more.... erudite than the average comment section ;)
Its noteworthy, that for all his bluster, the Tzar got most of what he wanted. I do wonder if there was some method to his madness, especially when dealing with strategic minds who seem much smarter than him
he is beyond our mortal comprehension
He did enter the congress in a realy strong position. France was defeted, Austria and Prussia paled compared to his mobilized armies, Britain could only be half bothered to deal with matters in Europe and not The Empire.
I will say the man knew how to through his weight around in negotiations. 😀
"Task failed successfully"
No matter what HC wants you to think it's very clear that Tsar Alexander was incredibly shrewd
@@superchacho777 hc is incredibly bluepilled, he understands solid politics but he has no understand of genius politics like aleksandr's or caesar's
Am I the only one who thinks that the Tzar’s actions were deliberate? He is the master of a juggernaut, Shows up making wild threats and enormous, unreasonable demands and then accepts far less than what he had originally asked for; eagerly. He was ether brilliant or mad.
He was brilliant. Despite what has been implied in these videos he was an outstanding diplomat. He had to be - his life was hanging by a thread from a very young age. His powerful grandmother adored little Alex, but hated his father and wanted Alexander to ascend to the throne instead of him. In this situation one wrong move could cost him his life real quick. The fact that he managed to survive tells us he was a very shrewd and clever man. Not only did he survive, but he also took part in the coup against his father without making it obvious, and later quietly removed from power the men who carried it out.
Hey we have to remember, the accounts taken are from the perspective of the other diplomats who happened to dislike him
It's clear that the man knew what he was doing and knew how far he could take things
@@leofwulf268 Well, that’s just it. Alexander not being liked by his rivals is presented as evidence of his faults as a ruler. Yeltsin and Gorbachev were well liked by the West - must have been great statesmen, those two..
@@Vukoslav_Miloradovich the Anglo nations have a deep hated of the Russians… it’s in their blood. Britain, Canada, and America are the most Anti-Russian nations - even more so than Poland and Lithuania.
@@Vukoslav_Miloradovich well yeah
All I'm saying is the dude despite derailing the whole thing and being weird knew what he was doing
Historia Civilis giving the people what they want: in-depth reviews of historical events. I see a new video drop and know I'm about to learn myself some great stuff.
True but I wish there was some closure on Octavius's time, but I would love if he re-oriented the channel around the French Revolution and the Revolutionary wars and Napoleonic wars
@@darioguerra3065 he’s probably gonna jump around a bit the next Rome video will be Antony vs Octavian and that’ll take a while so he’s probably gonna make a few more of these in between
@@darioguerra3065 I mean, there's also the Alexander campaign as well. I'm content to wait for them because, again, I know when it does arrive it will be worth it.
The diplomatic negotiations are surprisingly interesting.
@@gaiusjuliuscaesar2309 I hope that he makes more lots more stuff on Rome, but I'd also like to see more non-rome videos as well. I think he's making a history channel, not a rome channel.
It's incredible how hyped I was for the sequel to The Congress of Vienna.
Saaame
Seqel begins with the murder of a certain Austrian Archduke in the streets of Serbia :p
@@petrmiros9908 Nah, he has to do a 1848 one first.
This could be seen as a dry topic, but you narrate it like a story of intrigue and suspense, with a great amount of humor. I’d never call myself a history buff but I always drop everything to watch your videos!
Also have to say, I always get chills at the end of the videos, love how you end them!
Just mentioning Alexander intermittently, is enough to keep it entertaining
@@Rowlph8888 this so hard, my god the introduction of this batshit crazy dude would have made this topic so much better to study in highschool. All I'd ever known was that Russia threatened war over Poland but ultimately settled, I had no idea it was because their leader was somehow crazier than the most inbred Habsburgs out there
The humour is to mask their own current political judgements
Even more crazy is that during all of this, there was a crisis in Norway, where after the Treaty of Kiel (which was to transfer Norway from Denmark to Sweden), Norway tried a declaration of independence and fought a two week war with Sweden before falling into a loose union. This also involved the United Kingdom's diplomats as they were arbitrators for this question during 1814.
This video has an Easter Egg alluding to this: you can see Norway changing colors from Denmark's color at the start of the video to a shade resembling Sweden's color near the end.
And the UK was also simultaneously at war with the US.
that's attention to detail!
Oh good, I'm not going senile.
Another crazy thing involving Sweden was the fact that since 1792 Finland had completely changed hands to Russia. This gave Russia a much stronger hold of the Baltic. I don't know why the other great powers let Sweden and Denmark beef themselves up by dividing up Norway between them (mainland Norway coming under Swedish influence and Greenland, Iceland, and the Faroese Islands going to Denmark) but it woudn't surprise me if it had to do with the fact that they wanted these two kingdoms to help out keeping Russia in check.
@@wack8697 Not since Sweden got it. And since 1905 it's fully independent. But this was about the great powers "letting" Sweden and Denmark beefing up on Norway. I tried to give context to show that by the congress of Vienna it would be strange to say that anyone had let Denmark do anything, since Norway had been a part of it for ages. And with regards to Sweden getting to mainland Norway, there were some context as well.
"Austria and Prussia would be the two anchors of the German Confederation, and it was paramount to the survival of the confederation that the two great powers within it got along."
Spoiler warning: They don't end up getting along.
Hilarious how they did everything possible to prevet them from just conquering the smaller states but that's exactly what happened
Morgan Freeman: but the two powers within would not get along.
It’s almost like someone made an empire as unified as the Roman Empire at one point in the area I wonder what it’s called hrmmmmmmm ( I’m not even sure why I’m feigning ignorance at this point it should be obvious what happens later by process of elemenation
Until World War II. xD
@@korosuke1788 till 40 ish years before world war 1
Talleyrand: So about this whole Poland thing-
Alexander: You want to go to war?
Talleyrand: Wait what?!
Alexander: Yeah let's do it I'm down, let's go to war with them.
Talleyrand: That's not what I-
Alexander: Alright I'm gonna go hit the theater, we'll plan the war later.
~BEEFY~ PRIORITIES
I´m austrian and we get this taught in school. Still never appreciated the full importance of this "event". Great video and greetings from austria!
yeah but not really much about it, it just happened and that's it. Why? Because it was in vienna
I'm from Poland, but it was never even mentioned that there was any kind of Saxony and Poland Crisis. Just what was decided upon in the end.
I'm British and honestly part 1 was the first I'd heard of this event--I knew of the Napoleonic wars and the hundred days, but none of the peace talks, or other stuff
I don't remember being really taught this at all , just briefly mentioned. Most of History was basically ww2 over and over and how many atrocities happened again and again ans again. Little about why and what lead to ww2 .
All of these events are connected
@@M_no_more Same, it was always black and white - how Poland got denied being independent, because Prussia, Austria and Russia wanted to keep their lands. Kind of sad, how history is shown in the two dimensional colours, when it's almost always very much grey and super complicated. Fun fact - I dont know about rest of the Europe, but I believe Poland is one of the few countries in which Napoleon is not looked upon as hungry, ego maniac that waged war on whole continent (don't mention that whole Europe started wars against France and ultimately on him on multiple occasions and he was in defensive wars for most of his miltiary career).
This guy is literally my favorite TH-camr. When I seen this video dropped - everything else is on hold. Sorry wife and kids !
I had to force myself to hold off watching it for another ten minutes. 10/10 would not recommend.
Bro I literally postponed my date with my girl just to watch this lmao 🤣
Priorities in check
This channel helped me pass history in high-school. I wrote my final project (worth 30% of the final grade) based on the sources he provided in his Ceasar video. If I could i would have just made a transcript of his video but for obvious reason I couldn't without getting caught for plagiarism. Instead i went through his videos to find his sources and used them for my project. I got the highest grade in my class because of him. Even as a source of sources he is amazing. I am in love with this channel and anytime there is anew video, i drop everything. Thank you HC, you are incredible!!! Please, PLEASE keep up your work. I will always be here!!
This channel literally changed my life. I enrolled in community college after learning about the Roman Republic, this channel made history seem interesting. Love this dude
Wife is bossy. Bossy is temporary. Kids die, sometimes of cancer, hence temporary. Epic Napoleonic era geopolitical maneuvering? *forever*
High schooler from Germany here! My history class is entirely in English and I am having a class test tomorrow. Thanks for helping me out it’s incredible that I was not once bored throughout 90 minutes of your video!
Great job and thank you very much
Strange, why usual history class in English?
In Sweden there are some international programs for high schoolers which are mostly in English. Might be one of those.
@@Rowlph8888 it’s a bilingual school
how did it go? I’m from Italy and I also was watching this for a test even though mine is was in italian
@@doublethenunit went alright :)
Video still helped alot
*Structure of The Congress*
0:12 8 Member Committee
0:48 Economic Sub Committees
*Subject-Matter of The Congress*
1:48 Borders
3:50 1792 Borders: Poland & Saxony 🇵🇱
Austria wants Poland as border
Russia does not
5:23 Poland is Russia 🇷🇺 6:25
7:06 Francis I - “Saxony is not a bargaining chip”
8:31 DUEL 🤺 take it up with Francis
9:17 Prussia 🇩🇪 and Austria 🇦🇹 at odds over Saxony
10:30 Russia had sacrificed everything, Russia deserves Poland
• You would make enemies of Austria and Prussia my friend
12:54
1, Enlarged Poland
2, Reduced Poland
3, Full Partition (3-Country Cut)
15:36 🇷🇺 Will have Poland!
🇩🇪 Will have Saxony!
16:42 🇦🇹 WE WILL FIGHT YOU IF YOU TAKE POLAND
Russia and Prussia mobilize troops
18:00 🇬🇧 we need moderate and sound course
19:40 Independence
SOLUTION: *1/2 Saxony*
23:27 SOLUTION:
• Polish Lands given to 🇷🇺 and 🇩🇪 And A Constitutional Kingdom of Poland created
26:10 🇩🇪
1. Complete Independence OR
3. Loose Confederation ?
30:40 🇦🇹 ❤️ 🤝 🇩🇪 ?
The German Diet
*Italy*
31:47
🇬🇧 🇦🇹
34:04 Lombardy & Venice are Austrian
Dutchies handed to Royal family
36:38 *The Hundred Days*
Napoleon returns from Elba
38:36 Allies had far more military strength
39:33 IN SUMMARY
• 1792 Borders
• Russia Prussia Poland 🇵🇱
• Prussia 1/2 Saxony
*The Slave Trade*
40:55 British Abolitionists 🇬🇧
The wedge wood medallion
Slave Trade Act of 1807
43:47 Eventual Abolition
Wait a minute, it’s only in Great Britain’s Interest!
46:14 “Declaration of Intent” a maybe
47:50 Cuba 🇨🇺 and Brazil 🇧🇷
*The Treaty of Vienna*
48:26 Great Powers Agree,
49:58 The Concert of Europe
50:29 (Next Time: Revolutions of 1848)
Thank you.
I wonder sometimes what a world without people like u would look like...
Exactly the same, cuz this video is supposed to be watched in order and wouldn't make any sense otherwise... but thx for dedicating your time for this useless task u probably did for likes...
50:29 It's the Revolutions of 1830.
In Brazil right after we became independent from Portugal Britain started to pressure us into abolishing slavery, but the government wasn't very enthusiastic about it, so in 1831 a law was passed saying that any slave brought to Brazil would be declared a free man, this was know as "lei pra inglês ver" (law to show to the Englishman) because the penalty was a fine that for the most part wasn't really enforced
To this day we still use the expression "to show the Englishman" when referring to something that's done only for the optics and it's actually not doing anything substantial
And then in 1850 Royal Navy warships entered Brazilian ports to seize and destroy the Brazilian slave fleet.
Feels good man.
@@adamlakeman7240 So rude! England violating the Monroe Doctrine.
@@MissionHomeowner What Americans don't like to discuss is that the Monroe Doctrine was 100% dependent on British support for it until about 1870. In fact it was originally supposed to be a joint declaration.
@@adamlakeman7240 so the Brits helped America get to a position where America has treated the UK like a lapdog for a century now?
Feels good man.
@@josecipriano3048 No, the British ensured that the entirety of America would remain an economical and business playground of the Americans and British.
I love history channels who focus on the real issues in history: Diplomacy, economics, culture, ideas instead of brute war, like so many others. Thank you for actually enlightening us on this very interesting diplomatic event that had wide-reaching implications until today and still serves as interesting material to learn about diplomacy.
you need to know millitary history to understand political history I love both and they are both important
This was a ludicrously pro-western watered down version of what went down that paints Alexander as mustache-twirling villainous buffoon but the day was saved by the competent selfless diplomacy of western diplomats.
It fails to give Russia the credit it absolutely deserves for being the major reason of Napoleon's defeat. There is absolutely no way Napoleon would have been defeated if half his army had not been wiped out in Russia and he had to retreat in a crushing defeat.
It fails to account for Alexander trying to navigate preventing being assassinated at home while negotiating with shrewd western diplomats. All while Alexander's army was occupying Paris and Poland
@@SteveghvffAnd Russia tried to emulate western fashion, statesmanship, Commerce and technology since Peter the Great. Russia always wanted to be a part of the exclusive club that is european civilization and society.
@@helmuthvonmoltke5518 And they are always way to aggressive and then get butthurt when the West calls them on their bs. They are that kid who is always there and everyone tolerates them but doesn't actually like them.
A note: the restored dukes of Modena and (eventually) Parma and the king of the Two Sicilies weren't just "some relatives of the king of Spain" or "a cousin of the Austrian Emperor". They were the direct heir of the guy who held that throne before the French Revolution (in the case of Parma), the same guy (Two Sicilies), and the heir of the designated heir (Modena. The last Este Duke of Modena had no heir and signed a deal with the Habsburgs to give his domain to one of their princes, this deal was signed in 1763 and in the end the son of that prince got to sit on the Modenese throne). They weren't random people pulled out of a hat like it is implied here.
Yeah, one qualm here, he mentions "guys" like they werent significant historical figures. Kind of infuriating tbh
The re-appointed monarchs knew who buttered their bread.
@@PRubin-rh4sr Yeah I understand it may have bothered you, I think the reason he decided to gloss over the matter is not to add a level of complexity to the number of players involved in the ongoing political game of chess. Yet I agree it could have been covered in a slightly different way
That actually charaterizes Metternich work, he done a number of "putting our guy here".
Monarchs are the least interesting part of history.
Historia Civilis is so exceptional in that this is the highest quality history knowledge that you can get and there are no adverts at the beginning just right into the good stuff.
We are truly blessed to have this man.
couldn't have said it better myself. this man is a gift to the historical community.
I agree with you, its been a while since i saw his first videos about ancient rome and i just LOVED them. One of the history youtubers that really worth the time.
… and I haven’t had three ad breaks in the first eight minutes.
Historia Civilis for Imperator!
Top 0.1% in TH-cam, pure quality
I know it takes you forever to make each of your videos, considering all of the research, script writing, recording, and editing that goes into each and every one of them. I just want to say thank you so much for each of these masterpieces. Absence makes the heart grow fonder and because there is such time between videos, I get super excited whenever I see anything new from your channel because I know that it’s going to be of the highest quality. I’m fearful that all of these other larger channels with similar content will just end up pressuring you out of your videos, but I would explore you to keep making them because they are some of my absolute favorite content on TH-cam. Keep up all the fantastic work!
Well, Metternich’s decision to restore the Kingdom of Sardinia (which was really the kingdom of Piedmont) would definetly ovme back to bite Austria in the back. I have the strong feeling Historia Civilis would really like the long and complicated history leading up to the Italian unification. Lots of stuff happened between the Congress of Vienna and Garibaldi’s expedition.
Agreed. The unification of Italy is sadly overshadowed by the more romantic and alluring German unification and is hardly ever talked about outside of Italy.
And to give Prussia the Rhineland. I suppose that he couldn't have predicted the industrial revolution in Germany, but Prussia got the best lands for it in exchange of a poorer Saxony.
@@Dustz92 Saxony was one of the most industrialized regions in europe, as proven by the entire escalation of some little skirmish in america being Fredrick the great invading Saxony to seize its army, treasury and resources so it would be possible to fight a 4 front war vs Austria, France, Russia & Sweden
@@Dustz92 For real. Prussia was very lucky with its ressources in the Rhineland and in Silesia
Actually Sardinia-Piedmont did not act alone, in revolution of 1848 they were supported by Papal states and Sicily. In 1860 France assisted them, in 1866 - Prussia. So even without recreation of Piedmont, France would eventually reclaim control over Italy. Fun fact : Savoyards actually wanted to be a part of Italy. They uprised against french in 1860s, and migrate in mass later.
These past two videos have been like nerd Christmas! A really good series, well researched and excellently produced. Thanks for making these and sharing them - our quiz team wouldn't be anywhere without your videos!
History is not a "nerd" area if study in my opinion.
Learning about your ancestors is "nerdy" 🤓🤓🤓🤓 redditors on god
@@MrLoobu Ha Nerd!
You sir, are an astounding teacher. Your videos have imbued apon me an insatiable thirst for learning history I wish I had when I was younger.
Considering how you characterized him last video, it sounds like Tsar Alexander got exactly what he wanted, at least for his heirs. I'm not saying he's a secret genius. "Baffle them with BS" is a very rookie but very effective realpolitik move. All it takes is the savvy to realize that you don't have anyone who could outmaneuver professional diplomats and to hold out with the crazy until they give you big concessions.
Obviously threatening war is vile. Obviously. Still, based on your description, he got more than he could have expected and got exactly what he wanted.
he got everything he wanted because he had 200,000 soldiers in poland. It would have been impossible for him to get nothing without losing militarily.
@@easysnake205 well yea, and he successfully used that fact do get what he wanted
@Sam Wallace Amateur, then? All I meant was that it doesn't take much experience to do what he did on purpose, and he didn't have much experience.
that tactic only works when you're the only person doing it. when there's more than one, you get a war. it's basically a prisoner's dilemma
@Sam Wallace What experience do you have?
I love how the Congress was supposed to be about sorting out France after everyone was at war with them, but Russia ended up being the bigger problem
The green question was more then settled it was the polish question and thanks to methernich now the Saxon question that was really divisive
"Russia ended up being the problem"
A phrase that can be ambiented at anytime in the last 400 years and it would still hold true
@@riograndedosulball248 Europe will one day have to "deal" with the "russia questions"
@@riograndedosulball248 except it has actually been the west the problem british American propaganda is just really good at changing the focus
Similar thing happened at the end of WWII
As a stokie (someone from Stoke on Trent), I want to provide more info on the medallion. The medallions were designed by Josiah Wedgwood of Wedgwood pottery (still the most influential and most sought after pottery in the world, no shits, seriously) and he was at the time one of the largest advocates for the abolition of slavery as he believed that we are all the creations of god and should be treated with respect and equality. He is very well remembered in Stoke as one of the key drivers of the abolition of slavery in the empire. A truly magnificent man who sought equality. Im sharing this as outside of Stoke he is completely forgotten in Britain and it’s a national disgrace. So if you celebrate the end of slavery in Britain, be sure to raise a glass to Josiah Wedgwood, a lost by society a social and economic leader who put Stoke on the map for all the right reasons. Also if your interest look up Sir Stanley Mathews who formed the first all black professional football team in South Africa called ‘Stans Men’ (at the time breaking the law) and throughout Africa taught kids sports.
Edit: Stanley Mathews is also a Stokie hence why I put it there.
what sucks is all the people today who think that white people are all evil because our ancestors were all slavers and especially hate on Britain for its involvement in the slave trade... but they don't appreciate the lengths we went to to abolish slavery around the world. The African tribes were the ones enslaving people, and the British are the ones who stopped it (after initially trading with them which sparked the public outcry).
No one cares dude
Us stokies will always remember Wedgewood and Stanley Matthews, it's a shame that the rest of England think of us as trash
@@aurelia8028 about you, no they don't.
But about this? Yes, they do.
Now off you pop.
Neat, thanks! Crazy how much power the act of creating and disseminating a symbol for a movement can be. Very rad.
About Waterloo,
I am inclined to agree about the fact that a victory at Waterloo (although the battle itself was not planned by Napoleon, but was the consequence of incoordination within the now disorganised French army) and even the whole campaign of 1815 in general. However, it seems that Napoleon hoped to use the disagreements between the great power to create a wedge, perhaps some time to re-arm in the form of an armistice, and eventually even an alliance with one of the great powers (such as with Alexander. Once a supposedly dear friend of Napoleon. It was impossible to predict what Alexander would have done but he could have potentially struck an agreement with Napoleon. This didn't happen, however I don't think it would have been impossible. Had Alexander simply woken up on a different side of the bed).
The fact that Castlereagh managed to get the other great powers to declare war on Napoleon was already against Napoleon's plan. Whom expected the dissonance of the congress of Vienna to stop the great powers from acting united and give France time to maneuver diplomatically. However, even after that failed, a victory at Waterloo, or even better, the separation and forced retreat of Blucher's and Wellington's armies and a quick annexation of Belgium, could have re-opened conflict between the other powers. Re-opening an opportunity for Napoleon.
Seeing as Napoleon only alternative was practical exile, and for his French supporters the return of the Bourbon monarchy, I don't think his actions were out of delusion. Rather he saw an opportunity and took it, as he had done his whole career. This time he simply got unlucky (or at least, not lucky).
Edit:
As always, great video!!!
When are we returning to Rome and the creation of the principate by Augustus.
Napoleon was more noble and fair than the rest of those European Monarchs.
I'd call it desperation rather than delusion, at least in regards to why Napoleon tried to regain power. Imo his best hope was a string of early victories and then an exhausted Europe aggrees to him keeping France in the borders of 1792. So he gambled on the other rulers hating each other more than they hated him and lost that gamble. The moment the gamble was lost, he had no shot at winning.
With hindsight and considering the resources and lives everyone had invested into defeating him the first time, a change of heart - even by Alexander - seems unlikely, though it wasn't impossible of course.
But a man like Napoleon would never have been satisfied just sitting around on Elba and the Bourbon King would probably soon tried to have him assassinated, since his pure existance was a threat to Bourbon rule.
I dislike that Alexander is represent in this video as erratic. The man had much pressure on his hands to keep his aristocrats happy, as his predecessor had been assassinated. Gaining Poland was incredibly important for the Russian state, as Poland could keep creating problems for Russia. Alexander most likely personally wanted to be a liberal “good king”, however he had the reality of having to keep his nobles from killing him.
Napoleon knew of course he wouldnt win 10 Waterloos. He was aiming for a peace treaty after being them up.
Vive le Empreur.
You even changed the colour of Norway from red to blue during the course of the video without even a mention. I love it! Like watching a murder mistery film where you get to look for hidden clues along with the detective!
:( poor norway
@@Elenrai naaah, fuck 'em. They got their oil.
"Even more crazy is that during all of this, there was a crisis in Norway, where after the Treaty of Kiel (which was to transfer Norway from Denmark to Sweden), Norway tried a declaration of independence and fought a two week war with Sweden before falling into a loose union. This also involved the United Kingdom's diplomats as they were arbitrators for this question during 1814.
This video has an Easter Egg alluding to this: you can see Norway changing colors from Denmark's color at the start of the video to a shade resembling Sweden's color near the end."
From somewhere else in the discussion.
>be tsar of russia
>occupy paris
>meet with french foreign minister
>he asks for a peaceful exchange of territory
>threaten to declare a world war if russia has to give up a single inch of territory it occupies
>tell him it's time to go to the threater
>give him a massive bear hug
>refuse to elaborate
>leave
gigachad
The best project of my history class was a class-wide 're-creation' of the Congress of Vienna. The defining feature was Russia, Spain, and the Papal State(???) ganging up into a pro-war faction VS everyone else. We paid off Russia with the Faroes and Tahiti, the Papal State with Provence, and Spain with IKEA and a Charizard card. It was wild and amazing. Also someone was assigned to represent the smaller German states and they immediately declared their intent to unify those states separately from Prussia and Austria, so that happened.
Poor France:)
Russia, Spain, and the Papal State?
Is it some kind of Christian alliance going on??? 🗿
@@Aldiyawak Actually, The Holy League established by Russia, Austria, Prussia and Spain was a christian alliance.
@@Aldiyawak The three of them were all having their own brinkmanship on the first day of negotiations: the Russian diplomats wanted a harsher peace, the Spanish diplomat just wanted to cause trouble, and the Papal diplomat wanted to see how far he could push the envelope. Then they banded together out of a common cause.
We did a similar thing in our history class. I was on Team Britain, and we managed to finagle "every island in the world" for ourselves.
Historia Civilis: "...and we will see, in time, wheter these frenzied and far-reaching negotiations were worth it."
Poland: "NO"
Italy: "NO"
*further in time*
Russia: NO
Austria: NO
Poland: YES
Italy: kinda
Germany: Yes
France: Yes.
Britain: Yes.
It always seems to work out for Great Britain
World War I has entered the chat.
@@jerrellallen6271 Until WWII happened.
@@jerrellallen6271 Benefit of being an island, even if you don't meet your objectives, you don't really lose because there won't be a foreign army marching in anyway
Hey buddy, hope you’re doing well. Didn’t have a way to send you a message, just wanted to say I miss your videos, and I think you’re the best historian on the internet! Hope you can do this for a living.
Same. Came back here to beg for more videos about literally anything
Me too I miss him to much
Same
Why does this sound like a love ballad?
@@kamalindsey It was too hard to find something that rhymes with Historius Civilus
I studied international relations in college, and it’s learning about stuff like this which got me interested in geopolitics and diplomacy in the first place. Great video!
Do you know the classic board game "Diplomacy" (from 1954)? If not, I need to tell you about it, you're going to love it
Two months and already we have a new video? You’re too good to us Historia
Yooo I was shocked when I saw a 50 min video from Hciv so quik 😳
Argee
It'll still be another couple months till we get the continuation of Augustus tho
@@8kuji I'm willing to wait as long as it takes. One can't rush perfection.
@@RT-qd8yl yeah that's true 👍
Speaking as a Saxon: The Congress of Vienna was a traumatic event for Saxony. Not enough that the region had been devastated by war for years, now half of the country was annexed by the old arch-rival, Prussia. This rivalry goes back to the time after the Thirty Year's War and since the reign of Frederick II. of Prussia (who is not called "the Great" in Saxony, since he invaded it on two different occasions and greatly damaged Dresden), Prussia had tried to annex its southern neighbour. Even to this day, the southern part of the german state of Brandenburg calls itself "Saxon Brandenburg".
(The Saxon King was held as a prisoner by the great powers and was not allowed to take part in the peace negotiations, because his "loyalty" to Napoleon. But what choice did he have? His country was effectively occupied by the French and he himself was a semi-hostage of Napoleon. And when Napoleon was finally defeated at Leipzig, Frederick Augustus was immediatly captured by the Coalition. The other "allies" of Napoleon, like Bavaria, were allowed to change sides and even profit from the peace agreements, but Saxony was barely able to survive. Since then (even to this day), there was no love for Prussia in Saxony...)
Good job Prussia doesn’t exist anymore!
Have you ever played EU4 as Saxony to get revenge and kick Brandenburg's ass?
@@sam08g16 Yes. 😅
At least Saxony outlived Prussia
@@untruelie2640 Good, that will teach them 👍🏻
I thought this era was dead boring from what history class gave me. Guess it just needed better narration. This is a triumph - looking forward to more like this series.
Every history class would be more interesting with at least a little storytelling. (Not saying history classes are boring, they simply would be better)
I think the wet dream of a student in history class is getting HC as teacher! It would be so fricking awesome.
Teach this shit a hundred times on some bunch of bored kids I think you'd lose a bit of your passion in History too.
“Might does not make right,” Talleyrand reminded. Has not Europe paid for it “with so much blood and so many tears”? The golden age of peace could be right around the corner, if only every peacemaker would follow this course of action.”
― David King, Vienna
I'm at the 8 minute make and I just want to say how freaking cool this video is. Your editing, voice, music, and style of story telling is so refreshing. I'm a serial history TH-cam watcher and this content is why I open this app. Just found you today and you earned a new big ol juicy subscriber.
"I'm a stinky little baby poopy boy" - Tsar Alexander I
yoooooo its stoney
I've been waiting so long
Thats sad bro...
@@clutrike7956 it's no different than appointment television imo
yo stoney Historia fan?
Part 1 was a masterpiece, let’s go for Part 2. I’m seriously considering doing my dissertation on the congress of Vienna or Metternich.
The study of diplomatic history is the one of the most important least understood subjects out there. I’m doing an independent paper in the next month, but I hope you stick with this topic. Good luck!
@@tungstentrain1956 that’s what I am afraid of too. There isn’t that much on Metternich especially in English. The best sources for Metternich is in German. But I rather do a topic I love than one I don’t.
@@henrygustavekrausse7459 yes and he done work on Castlereagh too
@@henrygustavekrausse7459 yeah I’m reading his book on this period called ‘A World Restored: The Politics of Conservatism in a Revolutionary Age’
Part of that is because political science basically ceased to exist when the soviet Union fell in a way nobody expected. We basically accepted that you cant find logical reasons for complex human behaviour like politics, because all it needs is for one dude to have a bad day.
I found out that this was out for Patrons like half a week ago. I became a patron just to watch earlier and finally support one of the only channels covering historical topics and still managing to keep the hilarity to the perfect ratio.
Overall, 10/10 video.
A few things on Northern Italy. Although it might seem that Austria was putting in Austrian puppets out of the blue, in actuality, Lombardy had already been Austrian for a century, and the rightful heirs of the previous rulers were placed back on the thrones in Tuscany, Modena, and (eventually) Parma - it just so happened that these were either Habsburgs or closely related to them. Venice was the only real exception, but everyone was OK with the Austrians taking it as the old republic was seen as moribund, it geographically simplified and rounded out Austrian territory, and was seen as a fair exchange for Austria losing the southern Netherlands and its other scattered territories in southern Germany (again, part of that geographic simplification).
By the way, I'm surprised that there wasn't more on the southern Netherlands (today's Belgium). There were actually some pretty serious negotiations concerning its future at the Congress... which were all for nought as they revolted 15 years later anyway...
It just sounds to me that due to centuries of Habsburg diplomacy, there was some legitimacy to installing Habsburg puppets in northern Italy. A distinction without a difference, perhaps.
I believe that just letting Austria have Venice was a mistake. All that Austrian overlordship in Italy backfired with endless revolts. Maximized in 1848, when real threat of Austrian fall apart came. Instead there should be more balanced Germany-like approach.
Bit of stretch to say anyone living in the Republic was 'OK' with the Austrian takeover. Because they most certainly were not.
@@gustavonecca7256 I meant the Great Powers. Sorry for not being clearer on that.
I think that might be covered in a future video? HC seemed to hint at that fact at the end of the video.
I love the Roman history videos and Roman history in general, but this two-part series may be my favorite Historia Civilis videos. He is so clear and concise when laying out these complex diplomatic negotiations that basically anyone can understand what is happening and why it's happening without glossing over anything. I hope he covers more stuff from the Early Modern Period-Late Modern Period- Industrial Revolution Eras.
In my college World History class (I don't care to mention when that was) only a page of the text book was devoted to the Congress, and most of that to Metternich. While I had some dim understanding all these years of the broad outlines of negotiations, it was so wonderful to view your detailed treatment.
I love learning. Thank you. I must now check out what else you have produced.
In hindsight the geopolitics of the early 19th century are like watching a train wreck that will take centuries to finish. I love it.
Is it though? Isn’t the entire premise of these videos to show how Europe was able to achieve relative peace and stability for 100 years by avoiding great power conflicts?
@@Sam-bn5bb Would you call 1848 "peace and stability"?
@@sean668 Pretty much, in the sense that even the continent-wide revolutions and upheavals didn't lead to war
Yeah it's almost like large times of peace are bookended on either side by nasty wars.
@@Sam-bn5bb 100 years... ending in the World Wars, which would be the crash of this analogy
I think the Hundred Days are so hyped up because of Waterloo. In France, Waterloo is the heroic defeat, the battle that could have changed the world if we had won it, and the swan's song of Napoléon. A lot more glorious to lose a battle because of the terrain, and the non-arrival of some reinforcments, than to lose a war cause overwhelming forces marched upon Paris and demanded the peace.
For Britain, Waterloo is the occasion to show up Wellington, to make him a genius, the one who bested Napoléon Bonaparte himself, and also it helps to forget that there was four other countries in the war against Napoléon, Waterloo it's France vs Britain and Prussia, it's not hard to say they defeated Napoléon almost alone ^^
Of course for other great powers Waterloo is not that important.... But french and british historiography is a lot more well known than german or russian one :p
Wellington got lucky Blucher reached the battlefield in time to save the Brits.
@@hammer3721 Which was mainly due to Grouchy, who ws charged to find the Prussians and block them. There's also a severe lack of coordination in french army, Ney charged with only cavalry, without orders, the Old Guard was send, ut with no support from artillery, etc...
But I really talk about the discourse and the propaganda after the facts, it does not matter if Wellington was simply lucky, or if he was a really good general (probably both ^^), what amtters is that he can be painted as a genius that rivaled Napoléon ^^
@@hammer3721 but realistically Wellington wouldn’t have been there had Blucher given his assurance they would come.
The British army’s initial position after Ligny was to just abandon the Prussians, go to the coast and regroup later. Wellington objected and instead, with Blucher’s runners, agreed to stick to the plan.
Of course Wellington wouldn’t have done so well if Blucher hadn’t shown up
The plan was always to fight with Blucher
Wellington did what Wellington did best
Great defensive strategies till the tide shifted in his favour.
@@Thelionpaladin My objection is not that Wellington defeated Napoleon, my objection is that this entire video has portrayed the Prussians as nothing more than everyone's pet monkeys. The neglect to emphasize their importance for the victory at Waterloo is just another example of this. Without the Prussians, the British would not have won, without the British, the Prussians would not have won. Yet this video really seems to imply that: Yeah, Wellington did all the work. Oh, and the Prussians were also there.
Outstanding work as always, 51 minutes was an absolute treat. I'd love to see you look at later events in the 19th century and how the Congress contextualizes them.
"Russia didn't want Poland to exist at all"
Times truly never change
I wonder if then at a time, Russians already get the conclusion, that if they are going to war against all of united Europe, they need to control Poland bc it's the narrowest place between the Baltic Sea and Carpathia mountain
Russia seems to have outsandingly constant geopolitical positions. I'm impressed and a bit astounished at the same time
I was thinking the same thing. Seems like historical personalities of these countries like Russia carry on to this day.
Russia's only goal in Europe is to push West.
If USA and nukes didn't exist Russia right now would be rushing Madrid and Paris.
You succesfully install a puppet Tsar just ONCE and you spend centuries getting erased from the maps. I guess Russia realy holds a grudge 😄.
It’s insane how many layers there are in the congress of Vienna. I had no idea it was this complex. I wish strategy games had this level of nuance.
I'm so glad you are doing this series on the Concert of Europe and for the 2 videos you made before this one. They are frankly, beautiful and are of considerable quality. This is the kind of lesson plan/chapter I would have dreamed of in any of the schools I went to in any of the countries I learned in. Thank you for these gifts and keep up the great work
In Brazil we still refer to things done just for show as “ for Englishmen to look at / see “ to this day because of the issue with the antislavery agreements.
to clarify my fellow countryman's comment, during the 19th century, britain pressured brazil (because it declared its independence in 1822) to abolish slavery. so, instead of outright abolishing, the brazilian politicians at the time passed a bunch of laws that kind of abolished slavery. i.e.: in 1850, prohibition of bringing slaves from africa, in 1871, every infant born from a slave woman, was free (but how can an infant enjoy freedom?), and in 1885, every slave older than 60 years was to be free (but how can a person survive if they can not work? and slaves didnt reach the age of 60!!)
so, thats how came the phrase: "for englishmen to see"
I think he is far too hard on Castlereagh. It's unlikely that Spain or Portugal would have done anything differently even if he had pushed extremely hard.
@@Spoonishpls He attempted to palm the responsibility of appeasing those million signatures off onto the other great powers, and used the Congress as a vehicle to do so. Politically savvy move or not for him and Liverpool it nevertheless represents a very real missed opportunity for serious change to have been made much earlier, not to mention weakened the reputation of Britain amongst its peers as a nation "committed to the abolition of slavery" so long as it didn't impact them that much financially.
@@MultiKommandant okay, then the alternative would have been him pushing hard, getting stonewalled, but at least he made his constituents feel like they tried, I'm sure all the slaves would have had their hearts warmed as a privileged group across the sea thought about them. I'm descended from Puerto Rican slaves and blaming him for the Spanish desire to keep their slavery at all costs is just similar grand standing
I feel that the way he unenthusiastically shrugged the matter off damaged British foreign relations in an unproductive way.
Spain and Portugal were relatively minor powers at that point (at least compared to the big five in Europe), and if an uncooperative power like Alexander's Russia could be convinced to play along through diplomatic means then I doubt the Spanish and Portuguese could really do all that much about it.
Then again, I'm not exactly too knowledgeable on the more regional politics of Post-Napoleonic Europe, and I'd hate to make too big a deal out of this. I do however feel like Castlereagh got out of this all pretty well, he still seemed to come across as a shrewd and level-headed diplomat, just it seems to me a bit of a missed opportunity for a man of his talents to make it so awkward at the end.
I loved this 2 part series. Really wonderfully made. Hope to see more content like this on modern events, just as beautifully made like your videos on more ancient events and societies.
This has to be one of the best history channels on youtube by a long way. It's so nice to see such in depth and well-presented coverage of lesser discussed historical events like this, it seems like military history gets so much more attention than these more political subjects but I find them so much more interesting. And can I just say how much I love the use of maps, they really help illustrate the different possible outcomes and look really satisfying and I love how detailed and accurately you draw the borders.
Yeah, I also like these diplomatic videos, because they're basically quite literally showing us what would have been possible. Like, it's not just us thinking about this later, there were powerful people pushing for these very different things at the time, and all it would have taken is 7 signatures
It's so unreasonably good.
I can't believe it, i just finished watching part 1 and this gets released. Thank you, i love your channel !
I love how during the entire Congress, everyone's worst fear was negotiating with the Tsar, and everyone after doing so was left thoroughly baffled
Metternich was such a fucking genius, no one he's so famous in the halls of diplomacy.
As sad as it sounds, I would guess that Castlereigh's antislavery addition to the treaty would have still been a failure if he was more sincere, though it certainly would have had a greater chance.
It's definitely hard to believe they all could've been persuaded to abolish slavery, given their economies depended so heavily on it. After what Europe had just been through, there probably wasn't a great appetite for more radical changes. But we'll never know because Castlereagh didn't try.
Radical abolitionist proposals would have merely led to the same result but with far more drama and grief. Britain had leverage but the essentially the rest of the congress was either pro-slavery or were indifferent (and likely to back the pro-slavery side to prevent a diplomatic crisis).
I think it's too common in modern times to put too much emphasis on "what-ifs" like this. It wasn't happening and it is bordering on historical revisionism to pretend otherwise.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 tbh none of their economies depended that much on it; the issue was that it benefited a specific clique of rich people. Slavery itself is a an economic drag, and British ownership of sugar islands etc was a pure subsidy for ultra rich slaveowners
@@cmbeadle2228 "specific clique"
You forget what the conflict was all about from the first moment, Restore the old order. Why a Tory who create a war in Europe to restore a tyrant, will care about an issue, like that? In fact Britain keep the Slavery until 1830 when their main rival Earl Gray a Foxite and Pro Napoleon got into power
Simply amazing "trilogy" of videos. Well done. I aspire to know and talk about history in a similarly informed but passionate way.
Glad how videos from this guy just start like they should- no begging for subs, shilling some vpn or mobile game, etc
Amazing work, keep it up 👍👍👍
Historian Civilis, you’ve already earned my interest and view because of your fun and in informative analysis of otherwise unstimulating histories (that’s not war related) into pretty darn interesting and digestible ways of understanding our history. However, these last two videos earned my respect and awe at your creative and narrative capabilities. Texting you as graduate linguist that reads hundreds of papers and wishing those writings as TH-cam videos ( if not writing) similar to yours, I loved this. 👍🏼
The synth that the end of the video is like a relief of the tension built up throughout the story. I love your work, and this was a great video
I have been watching you with my private channel for quite a while now.
I don't think I can really describe how much your content means to me it's the most fun I had while learning .
It really reignited my love for history as well.
Thank you so much
Not the most reliable source for history btw. Very bias, and likes to use his opinion a lot of the time. If you want a good recounting of the Roman and Byzantium times for example, listen to The History of Rome podcast.
Great work! I loved that you decided to tackle the issue of slavery abolition. Although the Congress failed to abolish it, getting in the idea of ending the slave trade would have huge implications in the South Atlantic. Greetings from Brazil!
Que balela hein, a ideia já existia e o povo ja falava disso, a promessa de uma dia abolir significa nada e isso se viu com a escravidão ter durado tanto alem deste congresso. Quando se trata deste asunto, Viena foi um falhanço total.
these videos blow me away every time. You put so much research and effort into them. Thank you for being one of the absolute best history channels on youtube!
Another gem from Historia Civilis, as usual. I really liked how you portrayed the Hundred Days as it actually was, a temporary interruption of a much larger diplomatic process. It’s always a good day when you drop a new video, keep up the great work!
Diplomats: "Can we please try to cooperate towards establishing an everlasting peace?"
Monarchs: "But I want Poland/Saxony NOW! NOW, NOW, NOW!!"
Other diplomats to Castlereagh: "You're so lucky that your king is essentially an invalid."
Castlereagh: "Extremely rude, but very true"
Tzar: “I WILL FIGHT ALL OF YOU TREATIE NORMIES TO DEATH”
"REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"
Said the Tsar, calmly
Funny how the monarch seemed to be the most rational. Metternich wanted to strengthen Austria's worst rival ffs.
Simply superb. A true masterpiece.
I watch many history channels but yours is my favorite
I find interesting to know more on the public's attitude especially on slavery and other diplomatic events.
242k views in basically one day. You’re a powerhouse, dude. I’m so happy to see how well your channel is doing. I hope you’re able to keep this up with the revenue you get from it.
00:00 Introduction
1:40 Borders
3:40 Poland & Saxony
26:10 Germany
31:40 Italy
36:40 The Hundred Days
39:26 The Slave Trade
48:27 The Treaty of Vienna
The German Confederation always reminded me of a "proto-European Union" of sorts, especially the customs union and free movement aspects.
It was considerably weaker than the EU
In fact, even Austria was less unified than the EU is today
We forget how extraordinarily massive governments have become, as for one of the weakest in the world, the EU, would have been much stronger and more centralized than almost every country in the 19th century, with the sole exception of France and perhaps Britain
Had the eu, on its current form exist in the 19th century, it would have been a very co-ordinate, massive government that no-one would doubt to call a proper country
@@Azknowledgethirsty just American delusion
@@Azknowledgethirsty The EU doesn't have a single army, nor a unified foreign policy.
@@alphamikeomega5728 Yet. Its massive bureacratic machinery, control over currency, and enforcement of laws between members would make 19th century countries look like the ASEAN.
German federalism is one of the main reasons why Germans are very comfortable with the idea of further European integration via EU.
I swear, if I could only ever watch one historical video essay channel, Historia Civilis would be it. My brain is never left dissatisfied. I thank you for what you do.
You know more about this than I do, but I'm not sure how Castlereagh could've got anything done about slavery.
1. Britain hadn't abolished slavery, so anything forced onto the other countries would be hypocritical.
2. The other countries were united against Britain's push, with them collectively having much more influence that Britain.
3. As the nation with the biggest colonies, they were in the best position survive abolition (think of a modern equivalent situation to a developed country that got developed by using fossil fuels telling an undeveloped country not to use fossil fuels, or else).
4. The only way they would've got anything done would be to disperse with a large amount of resources and give them to their direct competitors, comprimising Britain and their geopolitical spot at the top.
5. Oh by the way, this was right after the largest war in history where no one wants to comprimise on anything unless it's to prevent another war.
fuckin finally, someone who seems to get that getting rid of slaves wasn't all that easy once it had already been allowed to grow that big and that Britain pretty much did all it could to abolish it.
He couldn't do anything, slavery was way too profitable at the time, when industrialization kicked in there was no need to have slaves anymore, therefore, they were abolished.
He didn't even try, he knew he couldn't do anything, he just paid lip service in order to appease the abolishionists back in Britain.
Yeah, not really much he could do. The germans and swedws could abolish the trade, but the Portuguese, specially with Brazil being more important, the French and the Spanish really didn't want or were willing to accept losing everything because of a institution people saw as normal at the time.
@@irmaosmatos4026Clearly not if about 1'000'000 people cared enough about it to send letters across half a continent. Doesn't sound like something everyone agreed on.
@@SloveneAnon only the Brits cares about it, because only the Brits didn't have slaves. Later other countries also started to care. Even if there were abolitionists in these nations they were a small minority and not a majority as they would eventually become.
Great video. You could have included the "Disputed State of Olivença" as an interesting fact. In the prelude to the peninsular war in 1801 Spain and France invade the Alentejo region in Portugal. At the end of the conflict, the Badajoz treaty was signed, recognizing the annexation by Spain of the Portuguese Territory of Olivença. In the 1815 Vienna treaty, it is written that the powers "recognize that the return of Olivenza and its territories must be done", thus officially returning the occupied territory to Portugal. Btw Spain only signed this treaty in 1817.
The funny thing is, the territory was never returned. There was never any official manifestation, after 1815, on the part of Portugal for the return of Olivença, but the border is not defined there, and Portugal does not recognize Spanish sovereignty over the territory in any doccument or treaty.
This territory is effectively occupied illegally. But In practice, due to immigration and repression of the Portuguese language and culture in the past, there are currently few inhabitants in the territory who identify with Portugal, or who wish to be part of the country. So um the field trully nobody wants this status to change.
Spain claims that the article of the vienna treaty is not mandatory, and Portugal does not exert significant pressure for the return of the territory, maintaining a status quo of de facto Spanish sovereignty, without official recognition from Portugal, and that will not change anytime soon.
Its interesting to think that diplomatic issues directly derived from this treaty concluded more than 200 years ago still exist today.
Gotta say I really respect this new direction of historia, I still want my Octavian videos but I am really looking forward to learning about the 99 year peace and the sheer amount of effort they went through to maintain it.
Loving it
Franco-Prussian war, Crimean war?
Its been 6 months since last video. Is Historia Civilis alright? Historia Civilis, if you're reading this show sign of life please.
Love this detour into the 19th century. I'd love to see you cover the slow breakdown of this international order into the apocalyptic catastrophe and crisis of capital that is the Great War.
I enjoy seeing such diverse and well researched topics never stop!
These two videos were awesome. Thanks for doing them. Would love to see an addendum video discussing smaller topics of the Congress. What was the experience of Sweden, Spain and Portugal? How did the Netherlands negotiations go? What of the colonies? The Swiss question? etc.
What's so astounding about this conference is how despite all of the moving pieces they managed to pave the way for a CENTURY of *relative* peace
Edit to be more historically accurate:
I’ve been reading up on the congress recently and I actually think it’s really interesting how the whole house of cards began to collapse. For the first 50 years or so the great powers functioned on the basis of legitimacy and adherence to balance of power principles. The 5 power balancing act only really worked when Germany was disunited. The appeal of the German federation, especially to the British was under that system the German states had enough coordination to mount an effective defence which put France and Russia in check, but never enough to mount an offensive to be a threat to the balance. So when Austria became increasingly isolated after the Crimean war no great power was willing to intervene on their behalf to stop the unification of Germany. This destroyed the balancing act by making what used to be Prussia extremely powerful and threatening in its own right. This transitioned the national aims of the great powers from maintaining the legitimacy of their new system, to vying for power and dominance outright within the system. Especially since Bismarck was a cold pragmatist who openly stated that he didn’t believe in adopting a policy of acting in order to help other countries, because all foreign policy is only made in the interests of the state, so it would never be reciprocated. This is a stark contrast to Metternich who if you recall was the architect of the balance of power system, who believed in following a policy to maintain it, even at no direct immediate benefit to Austria.
And for that matter I don’t want to overemphasise the role of Germany in this whole mess. Other things such as a new Bonaparte in France and the rise of nationalism also played notable roles in the transition of great power policy from legitimacy of the system to power within the system.
Peace... except for the multiple wars between great powers in the 19th century
A century without wars of the scale of the Coalition Wars would be more accurate.
and the conquest of Asia and Africa
@@Puckosar less than a million people died in the Crimean and Franco-Prussian wars. Several million died in both the Napoleonic wars and the 1st World War. They aren't on the same scale.
@@morgand820 sure, but it's still not exactly peace as such
the situation that Talleyrand found when he arrived on September 24. He refused to accept it and was supported by Spain’s representative, the marqués de Labrador. Talleyrand denied that either the “four” or the “six” was a legally constituted body and desired that the congress should be summoned to elect a directing committee.
Really hope this series gets a follow up video, never thought I'd be so interested in high politics of the 1800s?
Truly an excellent pair of videos, there are too few videos that explain the Congress of Vienna as well and detailed as this. I only wish there were more, such as covering the United Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, and issue of Hanover. Other than that a completely amazing video
ot even the return of Napoleon from Elba and the eruption of new war diverted the Congress from its forward-looking agenda. The congress was not suspended nor was a new peace treaty made at Vienna. After Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo and the second restoration of the Bourbons to the French throne, a new set of peace treaties was made under the Second Peace of Paris of 20 November 1815
Fantastic videos about the Congress of Vienna. I had zero idea how complicated and convoluted the negotiations were between the great powers. These two videos have been the most enjoyable videos I have ever, repeat, ever watched on TH-cam. Quick question to everyone here. Did this channel do a video on the negotiations in Paris after The Great War? Damn, I hope so. These two videos are exactly why TH-cam exists. Thank you so very much. Reid.
I've been waiting for this! From one history nerd to another, your channel is single-handedly the best of the best on the web. And as always, I'm vibing so hard when that outro drops.
I can wait as long as it takes for new videos because each one is better, longer, and more fascinating than the last. One of the best channels on TH-cam!
Superb survey of Vienna Conference. It’s a clear understandable narrative and explains background of the 5 major powers. Excellent maps accompany it as well.
I was really waiting for this video. Thank you. I'm Polish and regarding the Congress of Vienna, we're only taught that it occurred in 1815, some deals were made and Poland became a small duchy within Russia so your material is super educational.
Timestamps:
00:00 Introduction
1:40 Borders
3:40 Poland & Saxony
26:10 Germany
31:40 Italy
36:40 The Hundred Days
39:26 The Slave Trade
48:27 The Treaty of Vienna
Can you pinpoint the beef? I came back for the beef.
It's about now, that I check in to see if there is a new video. I would really love to see the notification that @historia civilis has posted something. Then I know I have 10-20 mins of pleasure and relaxation / learning to brighten up the week.
41:15 You know a term has become immortalized when it not only meshes so seamlessly into major historical events but improves our understanding of them!
What term though?
Great video , though I would interject that Castlereagh being neutral on slavery and being an imperialist has no real connection, anti slavery actually pushed for imperialism especially for the british. West Africa was mainly colonised by the support of abolishionists who wanted to end slavery in the region which native Kingdoms did not want to give up. It also gave a caus belli agnaist many slave states such as the otttomans allowing for imperial expansion.
Its funny how the last state in Africa to abolish slavery was Ethiopia - a country that was never colonised by Europeans (Italy conquered it for a while in the 1930's). During WW2 Ethiopia had an insane amount of slaves for the populace.
Thank God someone said it, I he was rather harsh on Castlereagh. I mean how could have marched in and demand complete abolition of slavery while Britain hadn't done it? Wouldn't he just have been seen as hypocritical?
@@fredbreadbun6277 i love spain's reaction.
West Africa was colonized not by abolitionists per say, but by ex-slave and free black people. America also did the same in Liberia as the British did in Sierra Leon, the slavers actually specifically supported them doing this. Slavers were in constant fear of all out slave revolt like in Haiti, and also sought to take away power from maroon groups like in Jamaica by shipping them away to Africa.
Much of the populace shipped to Africa often was very similar to the mixed elite of Haiti, usually very well assimilated into protestant English/American culture and actively oppressed the inhabitants, and very much needed the support of their home country to keep up their colonies.
Moreover the British still practiced slavery after abolition, Indian “indentured servants” were shipped to the Caribbean and sold to the French and Dutch to replace the ex-slaves and serve as a wedge between the white elite and the black populace. That’s why there are so many Indians in Guyana. Slavery also wasn’t ended in india after abolition, mainly because India had begun to replace the Caribbean and slavery there was incredibly important especially considering the British had been passing laws allowing the land holding aristocracy tighter control over their lands and peasants.
@@fredbreadbun6277 He could of promised that soon after Britain’s did the same. Course he couldn’t really, but he didn’t even try to sell them on ending trade when Britain had already done so. Sure it would of been difficult to do so, but Britain already had established the blockade of Africa alongside the Americans, they had already been flexing their naval muscle and there wasn’t really a state in the world that could stop them. If you wanna talk about them making everyone upset, we’ll they already seized a ton of colonies from France and the Dutch, including the ever important cape colony.
Whatever you think of Alexander I as a negotiator, he did get everything he wanted
I remember this in school. It was talked about in one lesson and focused only on the new political ideas in the German states that failed in the end because of it. Metternich did it all. Thats kind of all i remember. Great and interesting video. Thx mate.