🚩 Sign up on HistoryHit and get 50% off your first 3 months by using the code HISTORYMARCHE access.historyhit.com/checkout/subscribe/purchase?code=historymarche&plan=monthly 🚩 This video was produced in collaboration with PMF Productions. Check out their channel and give them the credit that they deserve: ua-cam.com/channels/4so1hoJbYezZBndTwznHKQ.html
Hey history Marche, by the way love your videos, I just wanted to ask, that since you said your writing a crimean war video and now this has been made, are you going to be focusing on more modern wars (18th century to early 20th century) because I would love it if you did.
@@HistoryMarche Would you consider making videos on South American wars and battles, like the Cisplatine War, War of the Triple Alliance, Chaco War, etc.?
The Battle had another unexpected result: a young swiss Business man named Henry Dunant witnessed the aftermath of the Battle. Shocked by all the wounded and the lack of help for them, he decided to help himself. Bought bandages and medicine. He wrote down his impressions and told his friends who were all shocked. Nearly ten years later, the book he wrote sparked the foundation of an organisation to help the wounded no matter which side they were on. And they named it 'the red cross'.
Napoleon III, although not a natural military man, was a technocrat; his skills were in general administration, industrial, and agrarian thinking, and implementation. He essentially laid the foundation for modern-day France and also eradicated the periodic French famine.
The "periodic French famine" was a phenomenon following the "periodic stock market bubbles" with food-reserves, that dominated the time before the french revolution 1789, and led to it. Napoleon the 1st was a continuator of the ideals of the revolution, and Napoleon the 3rd his nephew, following similar ideals. The "periodic French famine" was homemade, in the residences of the aristocracy, and not a hit-of-bad-luck, that the revolution came to erase, and Napoleon the 3rd was standing in the tradition of the revolution.
Not really. You're correct in your description/evaluation, but the term technocrats is wrong. Technocrats are people formed to rule and with expertise in a specific technical field (thus the name), Napoleon III had some education (with his name, of course he did), but it's not like he was pre-destined for this.
Was there something about Napoleon III as a military genius in the video announcement? But he clearly showed that he was not a military genius in the war against the German small states in 1870-71. A unified German state was only possible in 1871 because he failed miserably in this war! The unification of the various small German states into a united German state was a terrible catastrophe for Europe! Actually the forerunner of the worst catastrophes of all times in the 20th century. Because without this unified Germany, neither World War I nor World War II would have happened. This united nation would not have had the opportunity to commit various genocides before WW1 and during WW2. Even if one denies the German-Austrian war guilt, the First World War would not have happened without the united German state. The result would be the same. So NO two world wars with a total of 70 million dead, NO opportunity for this united nation to commit various genocides, NO immeasurable destruction in two World Wars. The communists only became so powerful through these two world wars. So yes also NO strong communism that was able to oppress half of Europe for almost 50 years So this multiple NO regarding these various catastrophes for Europe would be the result of NO united German state of 1871. Prussia made this German state possible in the first place. That was actually the only relevant achievement by Prussia! So unfortunately, when the Poles had the opportunity to do so, they did not destroy Prussia! Too bad for Europe! Others also had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. The French twice in the 19th century and the Russians in the 18th century had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. Unfortunately they didn't use the opportunity to destroy Prussia either.
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars If you look at the French state at the time of the Franco-Prussian War, Napoleon III was not in actuality head of state, much like the British monarch of today, he was just the nominal leader of the country. He had surrendered power to the legislature by then. It was the parliament that decided to go to war. Napoleon III was merely accompanying the army for moral support and btw the French parliament let the news papers publish the army's movement toward Sedan days in advance, which of course alerted the Prussians on where to expect the French relief force.
Despite having received army training in Switzerland, Napoleon III wasn't much of a strategist and tactician, often relying on his subordinates for that, but he was interested in military matters, and was a great inspirational figurehead for the French army. He was in the field with them, inspiring them with his presence, and often risking his life. At Solferino he was so close to the fighting that he got an epaulette shot off one of his shoulders. 11 years later he did it again during the Franco-Prussian War, despite his failing health.
A combination of being courageous + knowing enough to listen to his subordinates actually makes this man a very competent wartime leader. After all, there are many forms of effective leadership, and Delegative + Inspirational is one of them. But I guess you can't beat the combination of Bismarck + Moltke unless you're an actual born genius.
@@day2148 It's true that those are good leadership skills. But Napoleon himself wasn't great with strategy and tactics(important skills for a general). And therefore he wasn't the main strategist and/or tactician of the army. Luckily, as we've discussed, he was smart enough to delegate that to, and listen to, people who were better at it than him. He was good at relying on their strenghts in areas where he was weak. So yes, he was a competent wartime leader, and he did serve a crucial role on the battlefield as the army's living standard. Those were indeed his strengths.
@@1987MartinT Considering Nappy 3rd is a statesman and not a general, it was certainly enough. Also... not all generals are good at tactics/strategy. George Marshall was the top American military commander of WW2. He was a brilliant organizer, manager, and logistician, but not particularly known for tactics/strategy.
@@day2148 I know. Strategic and tactical prowess aren't the only skills useful for a general, but they tend to be pretty crucial. For another example, George McClellan was a great builder and organizer of armies, but his skills as a field commander were somewhat less than stellar.
Adolphe Niel who commanded the heroic fourth corps at Medole during the battle of Solferino (the 50,000 Austrians lost about 10,000 men against 25,000 French who lost 5,000) was also the man who rearmed the entire French regular army with Chassepot rifles, and whose military reforms (basically all Frenchmen would have to serve in the army or in a mobile guard, on the Prussian model), supported by Napoléon III, following Prussian victory at Sadowa, were rejected by the Parliament. The same parliament that would push for war two years later...
And brilliant during the crimean war and the siege of roma and of bomarsund fortress an excellant tactician in the art of besieging and a great commander as he indeed showed in this batlle by using his cavalry, infantry and artillery in very good ways. A shame he died in 1869(he will be missed in the franco-german war, half of the ennemy soldiers were not prussians) from the same disease that will kill Napoleon III. Par ailleurs si tu ne l’as pas lue je te conseil sa biographie par le lieutenant colonel Stéphane Faudais elle est excellente, bonne journée.
@@tibsky1396 I'm indeed absolutely convinced that many members of the parliament were very happy when they saw the Empire fall and be replaced by a Republic...
@@lahire4943 Bah oui ,le parlement était remplis de Républicain qui n'attendais qu'une chose . La Chute de l'Empire ,pour pouvoir instaurer leur République . (Alors que la majorité de la population était Royaliste) (Fin au minimum les Ruraux était royaliste ,et 80% de la population Française était rurale au XIXème Siècle ,il a fallut attendre les années 1930 pour que la population urbaine soit la majorité)
My grandmother used to tell us the story how our ancestor saved Emperor Franz Josefs life in the battle and therefore was granted 12 or 10 glasses of fine Bohemian crystal with the letters FJ engraved. She - as an offspring of that man - still had 2 of this glasses the others supposedly spread in all directions. Story goes that young Emperor Franz Josef wanted to peek out of the trench and our ancestor shouted at him "Head down, majesty!" and tore him down while the bullets flew over their heads. This event was later on turned into the starting of the famous novel "Radetzkymarsch" by Joseph Roth. Don't know if this story my grandmother told us actually happened that way or if it was just a made up thing going around in the family. Never found any historic notes on that the event with the Emperor actually happened that way at Solferino.
People don't give credit to Napoleon III's achievements. He wasn't a conqueror like his uncle, but he was a phenomenal administrator who created the Paris we know today. Before him Paris was like Detroit, the city of horrible smells and Oh my god what's that floating in the Seine.
"Before him Paris was like Detroit", you really dont know what you are talking about, it's cringe, if you think pushing away poor people from the western and middle side of Paris up to Belleville, Bagnolet, Montrouge, Place d'Italy, Ivry, Picpus, the X, XI, XIII, XVIII and XXth districts in a way to "gentrify" and makes it a safe place for bourgeois is "cleaning up Paris", while making the East side of Paris even more poluted and overpopulated... Well, that's a hella bourgeois kind of view of the Hausmanienne reforms. They werent for cleaning up the city and making it more sane for his population, it was for, first, pushing away poor people from Paris intramuros, and second, making revolutions and barricades harder to organizes and to makes, and giving more way for repressive action from the Gendarmerie. And let's not talk that the second Empire was litteraly a police state, it took up to 1868 for this state to allow public reunions possible, and it was if it dont talk about the second Empire or makes critics of the state, if it was the case, you had a political commissar on all those reunions who could end up as his own wish the public reunion, and if people resisted, they were up to be put on a jail. It's litteraly the kind of shit you had on autoritarian state such as the USSR of Stalin.
@@CETGale went there this August with my family. They remembered it as a filthy city in 2010, but it has immensely improved now. No garbage in sight in or around the touristic center of France
For those who didn't know a small but interresting fact: Out of the horrors of the battle at Solferino the Swiss Red Cross Organisation was foundet by Henry Dunant.
Was there something about Napoleon III as a military genius in the video announcement? But he clearly showed that he was not a military genius in the war against the German small states in 1870-71. A unified German state was only possible in 1871 because he failed miserably in this war! The unification of the various small German states into a united German state was a terrible catastrophe for Europe! Actually the forerunner of the worst catastrophes of all times in the 20th century. Because without this unified Germany, neither World War I nor World War II would have happened. This united nation would not have had the opportunity to commit various genocides before WW1 and during WW2. Even if one denies the German-Austrian war guilt, the First World War would not have happened without the united German state. The result would be the same. So NO two world wars with a total of 70 million dead, NO opportunity for this united nation to commit various genocides, NO immeasurable destruction in two World Wars. The communists only became so powerful through these two world wars. So yes also NO strong communism that was able to oppress half of Europe for almost 50 years So this multiple NO regarding these various catastrophes for Europe would be the result of NO united German state of 1871. Prussia made this German state possible in the first place. That was actually the only relevant achievement by Prussia! So unfortunately, when the Poles had the opportunity to do so, they did not destroy Prussia! Too bad for Europe! Others also had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. The French twice in the 19th century and the Russians in the 18th century had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. Unfortunately they didn't use the opportunity to destroy Prussia either.
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars why do you spam it under multiple comments? The video never said he was a genius also. He was a brilliant politician and a talentless but decent general with a bit of experience. The fall of The 2nd French Empire is not entirely on his fault, parliament is clearly more responsible as it prevented many military reforms and the integration into high command of talented officers to improve the army. Another reason of the French defeat is the clearly superior command structure and the talent of Moltke couple with the genius politician that was Bismark. Excellent always beat the good. And yeah my polish friend, this is a tragedy Poland as all my sympathies.
I love the similarities of the style that it shares with Epic History TV's Napoleon series, which you helped to work on. It brings back good memories of when I watched the whole documentary.
Napoleon III is a somewhat underrated ruler. Yeah he was no military genius like his uncle was. But he made a lot of important and needed domestic reforms in France, did major infrastructure projects, and basically built modern Paris. And while he was not AS successful in foreign policy, he still accomplished some good things.
@@jerryx3253 Defeat is not betrayal. They tried to do the best for those they called their people / nation, hence the respect toward them. They weren't "influencers", they were patriots...
He built nothing except Berlin. Very bad diplomat, loosing against Prussia and forcing France to gave large war reparations in a so quick time. Far more than France asked after WW1 to Germany in comparison.
@@tot0m His military reforms in 1868 were rejected by the Parliament, he didn't want war with Prussia, he greatly expanded and upgraded the French navy which was very close to the British navy, he immensely expanded French railways and ports, etc
@@lahire4943 You are right about the Parliament, but all his diplomatic efforts were against France interests. Luxemburg crisis, unificate Italy and let them invading Two-Siciles, War against Russia, Intervention in Mexico, colonisation of Africa...
Watched your first video it gave me a good view of Napoleons campaing tbh the narroration wasnt Mind blowing but i didnt expect some one of the same caliber as epichistorytvs narrorator, was still a great expirience!
wow didn't expect too see a collab with PMF productions they have made some really good content on Napoleon's first campaign in Italy highly recommend watching it :D
From Italy, a small note to this interesting video: all the wars in Northern Italy , even during ww1, had to face the peculiar terrain features, that is, all those rivers descending from Alps to river Po crossing perpendicularly the Po valley, any river slows down the movement, any bridge becomes a relevant feature and river after river you have to reach the enemy always attested on the next river, a big tactical maze!
France would have had the industrial capacity and manpower to defeat prussia which could have prevented German unification and perhaps two world wars. But the commanding, army organisation and transports were simply outmatched.
Being from this area (guidizzolo) watching this is kind of surreal. Always heard about solferino and San Martino battles and knew the historical significance for our nation. These two towns both have towers that are always a reminder of these battles. But seeing the map bring this to life especially because I know how far apart these places are, you can tell me there were x amount of men and it doesn't hit home like seeing troops lined up from medole to San Martino
I was on a vacation to Peschiera this year, the star fortress still stands and you can walk through it, the fortress itself and the entire place is just breathtakingly beautiful.
Another interesting fact about this battle is that is was the last major battle in world history where each army was led personally on the field by the reigning monarch.
Bellissima ricostruzione della battaglia e dei fatti avvenuti. Abito vicino ai luoghi della battaglia e conosco bene i posti . Grazie, siete stati molto bravi.
The reason why I'm French and not Italian! Great video Mago - as always. Really glad you're covering this subject. Can we expect more Italian unification videos?
I know and I'm very grateful for that. It's still my favorite history series ever ! next is ur 2'nd punic war series. Why I like Epic History TV more is the narrator voice but this is highly subjective. Keep making videos !
@@vattghern257 same the series is more then epic the quats the music the Details epichistorytv stands by its name. I cant wait for the next punic war video its also truely epic to see a general to have flawless battles there also top1 and 2 in my opinion
A nice little fact from Napoleon's days in Italy. Once he was crowned emperor of France he wanted to be crowned king of Italy in the Duomo of Milan but the facade wasn't finished yet, because of financial issues. So he told the architect to finish the project and said when he is crowned he'll pay for everything. So the architect had the labourers finish the facade and the architect added a little statue of Napoleon to say thank you for financing the project. He was eventually crown king of Italy with the crown of Lombardi but never paid a single cent that he had promised. I really love this channel, so much so that it inspired me to create my own history channel! Thank you!
It's absolutely amazing how many people lost battles and entire wars because they were too busy sitting there with their thumb up their fundament making assumptions about what the enemy was doing rather than sending out scouts to actually find out what the enemy was doing.
It's not as easy as it sounds: 1.Scouting takes time. It can take the better part of a day for the scouts to complete their mission and return. What will you do then? Lose 1/2 each day waiting for reliable scouting information while the enemy continues their retreat? Or take the risk to scout less far ahead? 2.The enemy won't let you scout. Their rearguard will act as a screen that will chase away or cut down your scouts. 3.These armies are freakingly huge. Scouting reports from various units need to be compiled and transmitted up the chain of command. That also takes time.
@@salimbenchekroun7543 So your argument seriously is that reconnaissance is a waste of time, let’s not even try? Every consistently successful commander in history based his success on obtaining the best possible situational awareness.
@@ChristianThePagan All those points in your face and it blinded you. Scouting in those times are not very effective because they don't have drones or telephones that would immediately send back information. They would need to rely on scouts making it back to camp, which would take alot of time.
@@RJchaotic Dude, it literally says in the video that the two armies camped a few kilometres apart and were totally oblivious to each others presence. The distance from Austrian position at Solferino to Carpenedolo and Castiglione where the French were camping is about 11 km. I've not done much horseback riding but I've done enough to know that a horse can cover that in about **an hour at the trot** and I'm pretty sure an Austrian light cavalry man on patrol would be in one helluvalot more of a hurry than that if he discovered 83.000 Frenchmen sharpening their bayonets within striking distance of the Austrian army. But hey, doing a 12 km recon mission is so hard, lets not bother.
I love to see this channel growing , one of my favorite history channels here . I study history and did exams from 19th century about Italien independence and their political actions in 19th century so its nice to see this video about Battle of Solferino. Keep with great work . Greetings from Czech republic
Was there something about Napoleon III as a military genius in the video announcement? But he clearly showed that he was not a military genius in the war against the German small states in 1870-71. A unified German state was only possible in 1871 because he failed miserably in this war! The unification of the various small German states into a united German state was a terrible catastrophe for Europe! Actually the forerunner of the worst catastrophes of all times in the 20th century. Because without this unified Germany, neither World War I nor World War II would have happened. This united nation would not have had the opportunity to commit various genocides before WW1 and during WW2. Even if one denies the German-Austrian war guilt, the First World War would not have happened without the united German state. The result would be the same. So NO two world wars with a total of 70 million dead, NO opportunity for this united nation to commit various genocides, NO immeasurable destruction in two World Wars. The communists only became so powerful through these two world wars. So yes also NO strong communism that was able to oppress half of Europe for almost 50 years So this multiple NO regarding these various catastrophes for Europe would be the result of NO united German state of 1871. Prussia made this German state possible in the first place. That was actually the only relevant achievement by Prussia! So unfortunately, when the Poles had the opportunity to do so, they did not destroy Prussia! Too bad for Europe! Others also had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. The French twice in the 19th century and the Russians in the 18th century had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. Unfortunately they didn't use the opportunity to destroy Prussia either.
finally, a good quality documentary on the battle of solfarino. Thank you sir for this video and collaboration with PMF Productions as they had maded really good documentaries on 1796 Italian campaigns.
Things that people should know about Napoleon III and that I learned from this video and other works of literature. 1. He was actually a really solid monarch for France. I think he did better than the Bourbons did post restoration imo. Charles X was a nightmare. If you read into his reign any sane person could see there was no saving the Bourbon line after him. (I don't count the Orleanists as a part of this even though they're also Bourbons too. I view them as a separate part of French history and in its own little separate arc here.) 2. He was a solid general and understood when to seize moments on the battlefield. (Supporting Italian unification was a great call geopolitically. Having a united Italian ally meant he didn't have to garrison that border as much and could focus more on the Prussians while keeping the Austrians as far away as humanly possible from France itself.) 3. I think people should treat him more fairly when they learn about him. No one could live up to Napoleon I. Especially, since Europe was in a totally different era when Napoleon III took over France. People give him crap for losing to Prussia but I just view it as Bismarck just being a better politician overall and one of the smartest people to have ever graced the world stage. I don't believe if France was still a Republic they would've won, or under a different monarch for that matter. Prussia was in a way better position overall to deal a counterblow to France at that time. They had better generals, better equipment, logistics and better tactics. That's what beat France in the war. Nothing more, nothing less. Scapegoating Napoleon III for the defeat is not only a lazy and bad argument. It ignores all the circumstances leading up to that moment.
It is also prudent to note that Prussia had a superior general staff with Moltke heading them. Napoleon had tried to introduce some army reforms but resisted by the parliament. Probably due to his other earlier reforms that weren't as popular as he might have hoped. Finally the superior Prussian artillery with the steel barrels, rifling and breech loaders really proved the immense lethality of artillery. Funnily enough the French really took on the artillery innovations and developed the obturating ring and modern recoiling artillery.
I think this era along with the Napoleonic Wars are my favorite era in history. It is just so damn interesting. Also, listening to this video's soundtrack reminds me of the epic team of HistoryMarche & Epic History ;) History is fun.
Wow PMF Productions is really doing well for themselves. I am incredibly proud of them, and eagerly awaiting their conclusion of the Italian campaign in the War of the First Coalition.
Fascinating, I love these videos with a focus on a more operational grand scale (your Napoleon series remain one of the best things I've seen in UA-cam to date). Would you recommend any reads on the operational art of war? I always wanted to understand the movement and logistics of these gigantic 19th century armies and the whys of their strategic choices of battlefields, towns to attack and defend, how they predicted where a battle would take place given its features, etc.
There is also a fantastic channel but its in French. They discuss all the subject you mentioned and rarely seen on youtube the name is : Sur le Champs I hope you'll can manage audiodescription!
Was there something about Napoleon III as a military genius in the video announcement? But he clearly showed that he was not a military genius in the war against the German small states in 1870-71. A unified German state was only possible in 1871 because he failed miserably in this war! The unification of the various small German states into a united German state was a terrible catastrophe for Europe! Actually the forerunner of the worst catastrophes of all times in the 20th century. Because without this unified Germany, neither World War I nor World War II would have happened. This united nation would not have had the opportunity to commit various genocides before WW1 and during WW2. Even if one denies the German-Austrian war guilt, the First World War would not have happened without the united German state. The result would be the same. So NO two world wars with a total of 70 million dead, NO opportunity for this united nation to commit various genocides, NO immeasurable destruction in two World Wars. The communists only became so powerful through these two world wars. So yes also NO strong communism that was able to oppress half of Europe for almost 50 years So this multiple NO regarding these various catastrophes for Europe would be the result of NO united German state of 1871. Prussia made this German state possible in the first place. That was actually the only relevant achievement by Prussia! So unfortunately, when the Poles had the opportunity to do so, they did not destroy Prussia! Too bad for Europe! Others also had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. The French twice in the 19th century and the Russians in the 18th century had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. Unfortunately they didn't use the opportunity to destroy Prussia either.
Thank you for you a truly entertaining video. I know quite a lot about napoleon bonaparte, but I know next to nothing of the following napoleons afterwards. Would you be able to do more on them?
There is a connection of facts I can make of sorts with these events. Andre Massena, one of Napoleon's best marshals, was 51 when he fought his last successful campaign under Napoleon against the Austrians in 1809. When Napoleon's nephew, Napoleon III, participated in the Battle of Solferino 50 years later also against the Austrians, he was the same age. Also, another of the participants of this battle on the French side was Philip Kearny who would go on to command a division in the Armies of the Potomac and Virginia in 1862 and was killed in the Battle of Chantilly. He was honored by the French for his conduct at Solferino.
The Sardinian army in 1859 had 80,000 soldiers and 20,000 volunteers, and a year later with the army of the Tuscan-Emilian provisional government, made up of other 40,000 troops, prevented Austria from returning the dukes of Tuscany and Emilia
I've heard it said that Crème Solferino (soup) is named after this battle. The tomatoes represent the blood and the potatoes (spherical in shape) the cannonballs.
Well when with 270,000 combatants we still say the largest battle in the last 50 years. It tells us how bloodthirsty we, the entire human race, truly are.
Not bloodthirsty because we do not live for battle. We are, ultimately, a territorial and competitive animal species, something that we like to forget.
I first known about the battle when I was reading the history of the Red Cross. Thank you for making a vid about the battle! Made me understand the scale of the battle.
Too many Italians actually have forgotten the enormous sacrifice of young french lives. No other european nation has helped us like France. Yes we give them Savoy and Nice, but they were two french language regions. As an Italian I'm ashamed for some Italians actual behaviour.
"Helped" you say... If you think anyone would do something like this for free, just for some idealistic "love for the italian brothers/cousins", then you sir could be the proper definition of "naive". Everything that happened in this war, like any other war, was for gaining some political power. Sardinians (Victor Emmanuel II and Cavour) wanted to expand their kingdom while took the role of liberators, while the French (Napoleon III), wanted to take over austrian rival's influence in italian peninsula, while still gaining Nice and Savoy. The poor people's deaths in war are just the usual cost for human foolishness... the same it was anytime and anywhere. That's not much romantical, unless you very hardly try to give them some meaning.
No Zouave has ever been Algerian except in 1831. A zouave is a French soldier wearing an Ottoman-inspired uniform, like the Chasseurs d'Afriques (those who will save the British lancers at Balaclawa) are only French veterans of regular cavalry units. The Zwavaa tribe, Kabyle Berbers quickly pledged allegiance to the French as they did with the Ottomans, their former masters. Each tribe at the time saw noon at its doorstep. The first two battalions are made up of indigenous Muslim Kabyles, but very soon all the Zouave units will only be made up of French people from France, convicts and convicts, courageous but undisciplined. There is no native Muslim in the Zouaves from 1832 or the Chasseurs d'Afrique (cavaliers) who will fight all over the world, in Africa, Madagascar, Mexico, Indochina and Europe. The Muslim auxiliaries are all versed in the Algerian, Tunisian and Moroccan skirmishers. They wear a gray blue vest with a harem pants of the same color.😀
I think that Napoleon imposed lenient terms on Austria because he had no other choice. Prussia was about to join the war and there was few troops on the Franco-Prussian border to withstand a Prussian offensive, so effectively speaking had he asked for me too much out of Franz Joseph the war would have continued and Napoleon III would have found himself in an impossible situation where he could neither push towards Venice due to risking Prussia decimating France itself neither would he have been able to retreat and give up his Italian conquests without suffering a serious loss of face.
You’re absolutely right, there is a legend that Napoleon III ended the war because he was shocked by the human cost but it’s not true(i think he was a little like anybody ) but the morning of this battle he received a telegram that 100000 prussians were mobilised along the border guarded by 60000 french so he abandonned his plan to go break the « quadrilatére » obviously.
Probably the most talented and competent marshall of the second empire, Napoleon should have accepted his military reform along the Prussian model without the participation of parliament. He will be greatly missed during the Franco-Prussian war.
An excelent video. Thanks a lot. Just a point who i need to make, Napoleon III Emperor of the French was elected by the people as a "catch all" candidate, many believed who he like Napoleon I would become a liberty friend, and who will not allow monarchists around, yet he was too moderate, his diplomatic policy perpetuated the status quo, and by the time in wich he step for the ideas, his enemies were stronger, The fact of him crushing the revolt in Rome in support of the Pope was certainly not what all would have expected from "Napoleon's sucessor", yet he wasn't so bad, but he took his time to implement reforms, and some times he (besides his Bourbon Wife) show dynastic trendings rather than ideological trends. Ultimately he was liked by all, but no one was going to die for his government,
The only thing napoleon III have that surpassed his uncle's achievement was his longer reign with 4 years as president and 18 years as emperor. In terms of military career though, he wasn't a great nor a capable general at all except as a rallying symbol of his troops
There is not only military skill that matters. NIII was a good administrator and left a pretty decent legacy - incomes of Paris tourism are still flooding today for instance.
Great documentary of a battle that's rarely spoken of, especially in English. And I am happy to discover a new history channel as well ! I have a question: what is the software you use to make your maps ?
We want a video about the Almoravid state and its beginning from five people on an island to a state and the battle of Zalqa between the Kingdom of Castile and the kings of the Taifas and Almoravids
I know I read the information from Wikipedia in English. Muslims have become three times more, but I also read it in Arabic. The Castilian army came out twice as much as the Muslims. Kipedia showed the information according to the language in which it is written
@@2403lelo The Castillians had over 80,000 men whereas the Muslims had 48,000 men, what you're quoting is Reilly's number 900 years after Sagrajas to minimize the defeat.
Great generals are not always great strategists or tacticians, but are sometimes the ones who know their limitations and find others whose abilities fill in for the limitations.
Damn I gotta say, for all his inexperiances, Franz joseph did fairly well, though the apointment of Gyulay, and his lack of reliance on more competent generals, did cause great effect, but overall, hi innitial plans, and manuvers proved quite well, for if he had not taken them, it might of been a full fleged disaster for the Austrians.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
🚩 Sign up on HistoryHit and get 50% off your first 3 months by using the code HISTORYMARCHE access.historyhit.com/checkout/subscribe/purchase?code=historymarche&plan=monthly
🚩 This video was produced in collaboration with PMF Productions. Check out their channel and give them the credit that they deserve:
ua-cam.com/channels/4so1hoJbYezZBndTwznHKQ.html
Are you guys thinking of doing a video or a series on the Crimean War in the future?
@@emmanuelfernandez04 Working on a Crimean War video right now in fact.
Hey history Marche, by the way love your videos, I just wanted to ask, that since you said your writing a crimean war video and now this has been made, are you going to be focusing on more modern wars (18th century to early 20th century) because I would love it if you did.
@@HistoryMarche Cool, I can’t wait to see it
@@HistoryMarche Would you consider making videos on South American wars and battles, like the Cisplatine War, War of the Triple Alliance, Chaco War, etc.?
The Battle had another unexpected result: a young swiss Business man named Henry Dunant witnessed the aftermath of the Battle. Shocked by all the wounded and the lack of help for them, he decided to help himself. Bought bandages and medicine. He wrote down his impressions and told his friends who were all shocked. Nearly ten years later, the book he wrote sparked the foundation of an organisation to help the wounded no matter which side they were on. And they named it 'the red cross'.
❤️
So cool! Thanks for sharing I had no idea!
How nice of the man
Badass, the real hero of the war
LAIR!!
Napoleon III, although not a natural military man, was a technocrat; his skills were in general administration, industrial, and agrarian thinking, and implementation. He essentially laid the foundation for modern-day France and also eradicated the periodic French famine.
The "periodic French famine" was a phenomenon following the "periodic stock market bubbles" with food-reserves, that dominated the time before the french revolution 1789, and led to it. Napoleon the 1st was a continuator of the ideals of the revolution, and Napoleon the 3rd his nephew, following similar ideals. The "periodic French famine" was homemade, in the residences of the aristocracy, and not a hit-of-bad-luck, that the revolution came to erase, and Napoleon the 3rd was standing in the tradition of the revolution.
@@klausbrinck2137 any good materials to learn more about this?
Not really. You're correct in your description/evaluation, but the term technocrats is wrong. Technocrats are people formed to rule and with expertise in a specific technical field (thus the name),
Napoleon III had some education (with his name, of course he did), but it's not like he was pre-destined for this.
Was there something about Napoleon III as a military genius in the video announcement? But he clearly showed that he was not a military genius in the war against the German small states in 1870-71. A unified German state was only possible in 1871 because he failed miserably in this war! The unification of the various small German states into a united German state was a terrible catastrophe for Europe! Actually the forerunner of the worst catastrophes of all times in the 20th century. Because without this unified Germany, neither World War I nor World War II would have happened. This united nation would not have had the opportunity to commit various genocides before WW1 and during WW2. Even if one denies the German-Austrian war guilt, the First World War would not have happened without the united German state. The result would be the same. So NO two world wars with a total of 70 million dead, NO opportunity for this united nation to commit various genocides, NO immeasurable destruction in two World Wars. The communists only became so powerful through these two world wars. So yes also NO strong communism that was able to oppress half of Europe for almost 50 years So this multiple NO regarding these various catastrophes for Europe would be the result of NO united German state of 1871. Prussia made this German state possible in the first place. That was actually the only relevant achievement by Prussia! So unfortunately, when the Poles had the opportunity to do so, they did not destroy Prussia! Too bad for Europe! Others also had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. The French twice in the 19th century and the Russians in the 18th century had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. Unfortunately they didn't use the opportunity to destroy Prussia either.
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars If you look at the French state at the time of the Franco-Prussian War, Napoleon III was not in actuality head of state, much like the British monarch of today, he was just the nominal leader of the country. He had surrendered power to the legislature by then. It was the parliament that decided to go to war. Napoleon III was merely accompanying the army for moral support and btw the French parliament let the news papers publish the army's movement toward Sedan days in advance, which of course alerted the Prussians on where to expect the French relief force.
Despite having received army training in Switzerland, Napoleon III wasn't much of a strategist and tactician, often relying on his subordinates for that, but he was interested in military matters, and was a great inspirational figurehead for the French army. He was in the field with them, inspiring them with his presence, and often risking his life. At Solferino he was so close to the fighting that he got an epaulette shot off one of his shoulders. 11 years later he did it again during the Franco-Prussian War, despite his failing health.
A combination of being courageous + knowing enough to listen to his subordinates actually makes this man a very competent wartime leader. After all, there are many forms of effective leadership, and Delegative + Inspirational is one of them.
But I guess you can't beat the combination of Bismarck + Moltke unless you're an actual born genius.
@@day2148 It's true that those are good leadership skills. But Napoleon himself wasn't great with strategy and tactics(important skills for a general). And therefore he wasn't the main strategist and/or tactician of the army. Luckily, as we've discussed, he was smart enough to delegate that to, and listen to, people who were better at it than him. He was good at relying on their strenghts in areas where he was weak. So yes, he was a competent wartime leader, and he did serve a crucial role on the battlefield as the army's living standard. Those were indeed his strengths.
@@1987MartinT Considering Nappy 3rd is a statesman and not a general, it was certainly enough.
Also... not all generals are good at tactics/strategy. George Marshall was the top American military commander of WW2. He was a brilliant organizer, manager, and logistician, but not particularly known for tactics/strategy.
@@day2148 I know. Strategic and tactical prowess aren't the only skills useful for a general, but they tend to be pretty crucial. For another example, George McClellan was a great builder and organizer of armies, but his skills as a field commander were somewhat less than stellar.
There is a lot to be said about an emperor risking his life to the degree of actually getting shot. Not sure if it's bravery or foolishness though.
It's interesting to note that this battle shared a battlefield with another Napoleon vs Austria battle - Castiglione in 1796.
Many of battles were in this general vicinity.
Adolphe Niel who commanded the heroic fourth corps at Medole during the battle of Solferino (the 50,000 Austrians lost about 10,000 men against 25,000 French who lost 5,000) was also the man who rearmed the entire French regular army with Chassepot rifles, and whose military reforms (basically all Frenchmen would have to serve in the army or in a mobile guard, on the Prussian model), supported by Napoléon III, following Prussian victory at Sadowa, were rejected by the Parliament. The same parliament that would push for war two years later...
And brilliant during the crimean war and the siege of roma and of bomarsund fortress an excellant tactician in the art of besieging and a great commander as he indeed showed in this batlle by using his cavalry, infantry and artillery in very good ways. A shame he died in 1869(he will be missed in the franco-german war, half of the ennemy soldiers were not prussians) from the same disease that will kill Napoleon III.
Par ailleurs si tu ne l’as pas lue je te conseil sa biographie par le lieutenant colonel Stéphane Faudais elle est excellente, bonne journée.
@@tibsky1396
I'm indeed absolutely convinced that many members of the parliament were very happy when they saw the Empire fall and be replaced by a Republic...
@@bastienrannou6346
Merci !
Napoléon III était un grand... Saboté par ces politicards parisiens incapables de s'unir pour le destin de la France.
@@lahire4943 Bah oui ,le parlement était remplis de Républicain qui n'attendais qu'une chose .
La Chute de l'Empire ,pour pouvoir instaurer leur République . (Alors que la majorité de la population était Royaliste) (Fin au minimum les Ruraux était royaliste ,et 80% de la population Française était rurale au XIXème Siècle ,il a fallut attendre les années 1930 pour que la population urbaine soit la majorité)
Eterna gratitudine ai valorosi Francesi che aiutarono oltre ogni limite umano a liberare una grossa fetta d'Italia in mano agli Austriaci ! GLORIA !
My grandmother used to tell us the story how our ancestor saved Emperor Franz Josefs life in the battle and therefore was granted 12 or 10 glasses of fine Bohemian crystal with the letters FJ engraved. She - as an offspring of that man - still had 2 of this glasses the others supposedly spread in all directions.
Story goes that young Emperor Franz Josef wanted to peek out of the trench and our ancestor shouted at him "Head down, majesty!" and tore him down while the bullets flew over their heads.
This event was later on turned into the starting of the famous novel "Radetzkymarsch" by Joseph Roth.
Don't know if this story my grandmother told us actually happened that way or if it was just a made up thing going around in the family. Never found any historic notes on that the event with the Emperor actually happened that way at Solferino.
Interesting story
Nice story!
Legendary tell!
One glass for each bullet that flew over.
Amazing story!
People don't give credit to Napoleon III's achievements. He wasn't a conqueror like his uncle, but he was a phenomenal administrator who created the Paris we know today. Before him Paris was like Detroit, the city of horrible smells and Oh my god what's that floating in the Seine.
Then WTF has happened to Paris now? Last time I went to the Effile Tower it was nasty as fk around the whole city...
And Mexico City
"Before him Paris was like Detroit", you really dont know what you are talking about, it's cringe, if you think pushing away poor people from the western and middle side of Paris up to Belleville, Bagnolet, Montrouge, Place d'Italy, Ivry, Picpus, the X, XI, XIII, XVIII and XXth districts in a way to "gentrify" and makes it a safe place for bourgeois is "cleaning up Paris", while making the East side of Paris even more poluted and overpopulated... Well, that's a hella bourgeois kind of view of the Hausmanienne reforms. They werent for cleaning up the city and making it more sane for his population, it was for, first, pushing away poor people from Paris intramuros, and second, making revolutions and barricades harder to organizes and to makes, and giving more way for repressive action from the Gendarmerie.
And let's not talk that the second Empire was litteraly a police state, it took up to 1868 for this state to allow public reunions possible, and it was if it dont talk about the second Empire or makes critics of the state, if it was the case, you had a political commissar on all those reunions who could end up as his own wish the public reunion, and if people resisted, they were up to be put on a jail. It's litteraly the kind of shit you had on autoritarian state such as the USSR of Stalin.
@@CETGale went there this August with my family. They remembered it as a filthy city in 2010, but it has immensely improved now. No garbage in sight in or around the touristic center of France
@@CETGale migrants
For those who didn't know a small but interresting fact: Out of the horrors of the battle at Solferino the Swiss Red Cross Organisation was foundet by Henry Dunant.
Was there something about Napoleon III as a military genius in the video announcement? But he clearly showed that he was not a military genius in the war against the German small states in 1870-71. A unified German state was only possible in 1871 because he failed miserably in this war! The unification of the various small German states into a united German state was a terrible catastrophe for Europe! Actually the forerunner of the worst catastrophes of all times in the 20th century. Because without this unified Germany, neither World War I nor World War II would have happened. This united nation would not have had the opportunity to commit various genocides before WW1 and during WW2. Even if one denies the German-Austrian war guilt, the First World War would not have happened without the united German state. The result would be the same. So NO two world wars with a total of 70 million dead, NO opportunity for this united nation to commit various genocides, NO immeasurable destruction in two World Wars. The communists only became so powerful through these two world wars. So yes also NO strong communism that was able to oppress half of Europe for almost 50 years So this multiple NO regarding these various catastrophes for Europe would be the result of NO united German state of 1871. Prussia made this German state possible in the first place. That was actually the only relevant achievement by Prussia! So unfortunately, when the Poles had the opportunity to do so, they did not destroy Prussia! Too bad for Europe! Others also had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. The French twice in the 19th century and the Russians in the 18th century had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. Unfortunately they didn't use the opportunity to destroy Prussia either.
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars why do you spam it under multiple comments? The video never said he was a genius also. He was a brilliant politician and a talentless but decent general with a bit of experience.
The fall of The 2nd French Empire is not entirely on his fault, parliament is clearly more responsible as it prevented many military reforms and the integration into high command of talented officers to improve the army. Another reason of the French defeat is the clearly superior command structure and the talent of Moltke couple with the genius politician that was Bismark.
Excellent always beat the good.
And yeah my polish friend, this is a tragedy Poland as all my sympathies.
I love the similarities of the style that it shares with Epic History TV's Napoleon series, which you helped to work on. It brings back good memories of when I watched the whole documentary.
yess,,i got epic history vibes from this🔥🔥
Best history series out there Numbers 1 no meater what
My two favorite history channels.
Yeh cause they made the animation its cool
Even the music used is the same!
Napoleon III is a somewhat underrated ruler. Yeah he was no military genius like his uncle was.
But he made a lot of important and needed domestic reforms in France, did major infrastructure projects, and basically built modern Paris.
And while he was not AS successful in foreign policy, he still accomplished some good things.
It’s weird that both Napoleon emperors were actually loved by the French, even after their eventual defeat.
@@jerryx3253 Defeat is not betrayal. They tried to do the best for those they called their people / nation, hence the respect toward them. They weren't "influencers", they were patriots...
He built nothing except Berlin.
Very bad diplomat, loosing against Prussia and forcing France to gave large war reparations in a so quick time. Far more than France asked after WW1 to Germany in comparison.
@@tot0m
His military reforms in 1868 were rejected by the Parliament, he didn't want war with Prussia, he greatly expanded and upgraded the French navy which was very close to the British navy, he immensely expanded French railways and ports, etc
@@lahire4943 You are right about the Parliament, but all his diplomatic efforts were against France interests. Luxemburg crisis, unificate Italy and let them invading Two-Siciles, War against Russia, Intervention in Mexico, colonisation of Africa...
Thank you HistoryMarche for the great collab!
My pleasure. Here's hoping we'll get more under our belt in the future. It's been fantastic working with you!
Watched your first video it gave me a good view of Napoleons campaing tbh the narroration wasnt Mind blowing but i didnt expect some one of the same caliber as epichistorytvs narrorator, was still a great expirience!
wow didn't expect too see a collab with PMF productions they have made some really good content on Napoleon's first campaign in Italy highly recommend watching it :D
Indeed. Check out PMF Productions channel. Link is in the description.
They are definetely amazing, I would argue they are one of my favorite youtube contend creators
From Italy, a small note to this interesting video: all the wars in Northern Italy , even during ww1, had to face the peculiar terrain features, that is, all those rivers descending from Alps to river Po crossing perpendicularly the Po valley, any river slows down the movement, any bridge becomes a relevant feature and river after river you have to reach the enemy always attested on the next river, a big tactical maze!
Despite his failures in Mexico and against Prussia, Napoleon III was truly a great and is still a terribly underappreciated ruler of France.
german war was not his fault. he was litteraly sick during that war
France would have had the industrial capacity and manpower to defeat prussia which could have prevented German unification and perhaps two world wars. But the commanding, army organisation and transports were simply outmatched.
That's because you never read my pamphlet where I tank about him
Being from this area (guidizzolo) watching this is kind of surreal. Always heard about solferino and San Martino battles and knew the historical significance for our nation. These two towns both have towers that are always a reminder of these battles. But seeing the map bring this to life especially because I know how far apart these places are, you can tell me there were x amount of men and it doesn't hit home like seeing troops lined up from medole to San Martino
15:50
Emperor Franz Joseph : "Why do I hear the boss music ?"
French Imperial Guards: "Bonjour, we need your onions."
Vive le second empire
Aimons l'oignon les amis.
@@benjamin2382 un discord peut-être ?
The quality you put out never ceases to amaze me!
I was on a vacation to Peschiera this year, the star fortress still stands and you can walk through it, the fortress itself and the entire place is just breathtakingly beautiful.
Another interesting fact about this battle is that is was the last major battle in world history where each army was led personally on the field by the reigning monarch.
That was mentioned in the video
3:11 Slight correction: in 1848, Belgium had already separated from the Netherlands for over a decade and a half.
Bellissima ricostruzione della battaglia e dei fatti avvenuti. Abito vicino ai luoghi della battaglia e conosco bene i posti . Grazie, siete stati molto bravi.
Another fine piece here. I knew nothing about this battle before watching this.
The reason why I'm French and not Italian! Great video Mago - as always. Really glad you're covering this subject. Can we expect more Italian unification videos?
Hey Barris! Possibly yes. But in the meantime check out PMF, they have excellent content! Link is in the description.
@@HistoryMarche will do Mago!
Wait, you are from savoy?
@@andreascovano7742 or Nice
@@Sojju7 it’s nice to be from Nice
Epic History TV vibes as hell
Well we worked together on EHTV's Napoleon series, so it makes sense.
I know and I'm very grateful for that. It's still my favorite history series ever ! next is ur 2'nd punic war series.
Why I like Epic History TV more is the narrator voice but this is highly subjective. Keep making videos !
@@HistoryMarche such a great day first bazbattle Uploads after 5 months now i see that animation still again thought i'll never see it again thx
@@vattghern257 same the series is more then epic the quats the music the Details epichistorytv stands by its name. I cant wait for the next punic war video its also truely epic to see a general to have flawless battles there also top1 and 2 in my opinion
The details on the map are wonderful. Thank you very much for this video.
this makes ever epichistorytv fan happy to see something like this
A nice little fact from Napoleon's days in Italy. Once he was crowned emperor of France he wanted to be crowned king of Italy in the Duomo of Milan but the facade wasn't finished yet, because of financial issues. So he told the architect to finish the project and said when he is crowned he'll pay for everything. So the architect had the labourers finish the facade and the architect added a little statue of Napoleon to say thank you for financing the project. He was eventually crown king of Italy with the crown of Lombardi but never paid a single cent that he had promised.
I really love this channel, so much so that it inspired me to create my own history channel! Thank you!
Valeu!
Thank you so much!
It's absolutely amazing how many people lost battles and entire wars because they were too busy sitting there with their thumb up their fundament making assumptions about what the enemy was doing rather than sending out scouts to actually find out what the enemy was doing.
It's not as easy as it sounds:
1.Scouting takes time. It can take the better part of a day for the scouts to complete their mission and return. What will you do then? Lose 1/2 each day waiting for reliable scouting information while the enemy continues their retreat? Or take the risk to scout less far ahead?
2.The enemy won't let you scout. Their rearguard will act as a screen that will chase away or cut down your scouts.
3.These armies are freakingly huge. Scouting reports from various units need to be compiled and transmitted up the chain of command. That also takes time.
@@salimbenchekroun7543 So your argument seriously is that reconnaissance is a waste of time, let’s not even try? Every consistently successful commander in history based his success on obtaining the best possible situational awareness.
@@ChristianThePagan That's not what they said. Listen to the argument instead of inventing a strawman.
@@ChristianThePagan All those points in your face and it blinded you. Scouting in those times are not very effective because they don't have drones or telephones that would immediately send back information. They would need to rely on scouts making it back to camp, which would take alot of time.
@@RJchaotic Dude, it literally says in the video that the two armies camped a few kilometres apart and were totally oblivious to each others presence. The distance from Austrian position at Solferino to Carpenedolo and Castiglione where the French were camping is about 11 km. I've not done much horseback riding but I've done enough to know that a horse can cover that in about **an hour at the trot** and I'm pretty sure an Austrian light cavalry man on patrol would be in one helluvalot more of a hurry than that if he discovered 83.000 Frenchmen sharpening their bayonets within striking distance of the Austrian army. But hey, doing a 12 km recon mission is so hard, lets not bother.
You should have done a separate video on the Battle of Magenta! It also gave us a color.
Another masterpiece! Thanks HM
Thanks so much for stopping by KHK
Another masterpiece from HistoryMarche good job💯
Much appreciated! Make sure to check out PMF Productions channel, link is in the description.
@@HistoryMarche I’m already subscribed to him, he’s really good too
"did you defeat Austria?"
Napoleon: "Yes"
"what did it cost?"
Napoleon: "Everything"
Very informative. Thank you very much you also explained some circumstances ahead of this battle for better understanding!
Amaizing video! the first step of unification of italy!
Purtroppo
@@fabikovongot3978 Ma purtroppo de che?
I love to see this channel growing , one of my favorite history channels here . I study history and did exams from 19th century about Italien independence and their political actions in 19th century so its nice to see this video about Battle of Solferino. Keep with great work . Greetings from Czech republic
Was there something about Napoleon III as a military genius in the video announcement? But he clearly showed that he was not a military genius in the war against the German small states in 1870-71. A unified German state was only possible in 1871 because he failed miserably in this war! The unification of the various small German states into a united German state was a terrible catastrophe for Europe! Actually the forerunner of the worst catastrophes of all times in the 20th century. Because without this unified Germany, neither World War I nor World War II would have happened. This united nation would not have had the opportunity to commit various genocides before WW1 and during WW2. Even if one denies the German-Austrian war guilt, the First World War would not have happened without the united German state. The result would be the same. So NO two world wars with a total of 70 million dead, NO opportunity for this united nation to commit various genocides, NO immeasurable destruction in two World Wars. The communists only became so powerful through these two world wars. So yes also NO strong communism that was able to oppress half of Europe for almost 50 years So this multiple NO regarding these various catastrophes for Europe would be the result of NO united German state of 1871. Prussia made this German state possible in the first place. That was actually the only relevant achievement by Prussia! So unfortunately, when the Poles had the opportunity to do so, they did not destroy Prussia! Too bad for Europe! Others also had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. The French twice in the 19th century and the Russians in the 18th century had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. Unfortunately they didn't use the opportunity to destroy Prussia either.
This guy seems to spam every comment in this comment section 🙄
@@DarthVader-ig6ci Ridiculous to call additional information on the topic spam!
finally, a good quality documentary on the battle of solfarino. Thank you sir for this video and collaboration with PMF Productions as they had maded really good documentaries on 1796 Italian campaigns.
Thank you for watching. Indeed, I'd recommend to anyone who hasn't checked out PMF to do so. Link is in the description.
@@HistoryMarche I have already watched his all videos and I am waiting for his new videos.
Solferino! E
This video was amazing!!! I love the time period choice! I’ve never seen this covered before! Keep it up! :)
I think you really missed out mentioning about the Red Cross and the Geneva Conventions, as this battle led to those things being created.
Didnt expect this video today, what a treat! Thanks!
Hope you enjoyed it!
You have achieved Epic history tv level of greatness. Keep it up!
I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS VIDEO FOR THREE YEARS!!!! THANK YOU SO MUCH!
I appreciate you guys putting out new video thank you for your hard work.
Things that people should know about Napoleon III and that I learned from this video and other works of literature.
1. He was actually a really solid monarch for France. I think he did better than the Bourbons did post restoration imo. Charles X was a nightmare. If you read into his reign any sane person could see there was no saving the Bourbon line after him.
(I don't count the Orleanists as a part of this even though they're also Bourbons too. I view them as a separate part of French history and in its own little separate arc here.)
2. He was a solid general and understood when to seize moments on the battlefield. (Supporting Italian unification was a great call geopolitically. Having a united Italian ally meant he didn't have to garrison that border as much and could focus more on the Prussians while keeping the Austrians as far away as humanly possible from France itself.)
3. I think people should treat him more fairly when they learn about him. No one could live up to Napoleon I. Especially, since Europe was in a totally different era when Napoleon III took over France. People give him crap for losing to Prussia but I just view it as Bismarck just being a better politician overall and one of the smartest people to have ever graced the world stage. I don't believe if France was still a Republic they would've won, or under a different monarch for that matter. Prussia was in a way better position overall to deal a counterblow to France at that time. They had better generals, better equipment, logistics and better tactics. That's what beat France in the war. Nothing more, nothing less. Scapegoating Napoleon III for the defeat is not only a lazy and bad argument. It ignores all the circumstances leading up to that moment.
It is also prudent to note that Prussia had a superior general staff with Moltke heading them. Napoleon had tried to introduce some army reforms but resisted by the parliament. Probably due to his other earlier reforms that weren't as popular as he might have hoped. Finally the superior Prussian artillery with the steel barrels, rifling and breech loaders really proved the immense lethality of artillery. Funnily enough the French really took on the artillery innovations and developed the obturating ring and modern recoiling artillery.
Love the Epic History TV Channel vibe with the music!
Keep going...
Videos of PMF production channel are brilliant.
I think this era along with the Napoleonic Wars are my favorite era in history. It is just so damn interesting.
Also, listening to this video's soundtrack reminds me of the epic team of HistoryMarche & Epic History ;)
History is fun.
20:44 You're welcome. That was an awesome and well made video. Thank you!
Love your videos! Ever thought of making a video on the battle of fontenoy? A great campaign but Ive never seen a youtube documentery on it.
Great suggestion!
Et Malplaquet et Denain !
@@Raisonnance. Yes definitely
Terrific video! I also subscribed to PMF, thanks to you both.
EPIC HISTORY TV VIBES!!! NICE VIDEO!!!
Wow PMF Productions is really doing well for themselves. I am incredibly proud of them, and eagerly awaiting their conclusion of the Italian campaign in the War of the First Coalition.
Ive been waiting for adecent doco on this battle for years!!! One of my favourites of all time
Fits well with the recent upload from Epic History TV about the 1848 revolutions of Europe.
First rate quality, yet again! Thank you HistoryMarche and PMF Productions!
Thank you so much for this one History Marche! Good job!
Fascinating, I love these videos with a focus on a more operational grand scale (your Napoleon series remain one of the best things I've seen in UA-cam to date).
Would you recommend any reads on the operational art of war? I always wanted to understand the movement and logistics of these gigantic 19th century armies and the whys of their strategic choices of battlefields, towns to attack and defend, how they predicted where a battle would take place given its features, etc.
On War by Carl von Clausewitz
There is also a fantastic channel but its in French. They discuss all the subject you mentioned and rarely seen on youtube the name is :
Sur le Champs
I hope you'll can manage audiodescription!
@@yc2673 Thank you! I'll try my luck, I can actually understand French reasonably well. =)
You ever watch epic history tv napoleon series best thing I’ve ever watched
Was there something about Napoleon III as a military genius in the video announcement? But he clearly showed that he was not a military genius in the war against the German small states in 1870-71. A unified German state was only possible in 1871 because he failed miserably in this war! The unification of the various small German states into a united German state was a terrible catastrophe for Europe! Actually the forerunner of the worst catastrophes of all times in the 20th century. Because without this unified Germany, neither World War I nor World War II would have happened. This united nation would not have had the opportunity to commit various genocides before WW1 and during WW2. Even if one denies the German-Austrian war guilt, the First World War would not have happened without the united German state. The result would be the same. So NO two world wars with a total of 70 million dead, NO opportunity for this united nation to commit various genocides, NO immeasurable destruction in two World Wars. The communists only became so powerful through these two world wars. So yes also NO strong communism that was able to oppress half of Europe for almost 50 years So this multiple NO regarding these various catastrophes for Europe would be the result of NO united German state of 1871. Prussia made this German state possible in the first place. That was actually the only relevant achievement by Prussia! So unfortunately, when the Poles had the opportunity to do so, they did not destroy Prussia! Too bad for Europe! Others also had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. The French twice in the 19th century and the Russians in the 18th century had the opportunity to destroy Prussia or to weaken it decisively. Unfortunately they didn't use the opportunity to destroy Prussia either.
Such an amazing video once again HistoryMarche! Love the content keep it up!! 😊😊👍👍
Finally, I’ve been waiting on this one for years
Thank you for you a truly entertaining video. I know quite a lot about napoleon bonaparte, but I know next to nothing of the following napoleons afterwards. Would you be able to do more on them?
Fascinating stuff.
There is a connection of facts I can make of sorts with these events. Andre Massena, one of Napoleon's best marshals, was 51 when he fought his last successful campaign under Napoleon against the Austrians in 1809. When Napoleon's nephew, Napoleon III, participated in the Battle of Solferino 50 years later also against the Austrians, he was the same age. Also, another of the participants of this battle on the French side was Philip Kearny who would go on to command a division in the Armies of the Potomac and Virginia in 1862 and was killed in the Battle of Chantilly. He was honored by the French for his conduct at Solferino.
Man as soon as I hear the background music I gotta hit the like button
The content and your voice match perfectly
The Sardinian army in 1859 had 80,000 soldiers and 20,000 volunteers, and a year later with the army of the Tuscan-Emilian provisional government, made up of other 40,000 troops, prevented Austria from returning the dukes of Tuscany and Emilia
I've heard it said that Crème Solferino (soup) is named after this battle. The tomatoes represent the blood and the potatoes (spherical in shape) the cannonballs.
Well when with 270,000 combatants we still say the largest battle in the last 50 years. It tells us how bloodthirsty we, the entire human race, truly are.
Not bloodthirsty because we do not live for battle. We are, ultimately, a territorial and competitive animal species, something that we like to forget.
I first known about the battle when I was reading the history of the Red Cross. Thank you for making a vid about the battle! Made me understand the scale of the battle.
I bet this gives Napoleon III deja vu of his uncle defeating the Austrians decisively in northern italy.
I loved It so much, cannot wait to see more battles from the italian front
Too many Italians actually have forgotten the enormous sacrifice of young french lives.
No other european nation has helped us like France. Yes we give them Savoy and Nice, but they were two french language regions.
As an Italian I'm ashamed for some Italians actual behaviour.
"Helped" you say... If you think anyone would do something like this for free, just for some idealistic "love for the italian brothers/cousins", then you sir could be the proper definition of "naive". Everything that happened in this war, like any other war, was for gaining some political power. Sardinians (Victor Emmanuel II and Cavour) wanted to expand their kingdom while took the role of liberators, while the French (Napoleon III), wanted to take over austrian rival's influence in italian peninsula, while still gaining Nice and Savoy.
The poor people's deaths in war are just the usual cost for human foolishness... the same it was anytime and anywhere. That's not much romantical, unless you very hardly try to give them some meaning.
That is very true. No other country helped Italy. And Italy kept Aoste which is another French speaking region.
@@walideg5304 yes and France have Corsica.
@@stefanocamoni229 it was sold by Genoa.
@@walideg5304 Bro, 11.000 people out of 44.000 left Nice(then Nizza), when the french annexed it.
History marche videos have been so heat lately
Who's here after EpicHistoryTV's Battle of Castiglione??
Literally learning about AED/CPR and this is apart of the learning process.
No Zouave has ever been Algerian except in 1831.
A zouave is a French soldier wearing an Ottoman-inspired uniform, like the Chasseurs d'Afriques (those who will save the British lancers at Balaclawa) are only French veterans of regular cavalry units.
The Zwavaa tribe, Kabyle Berbers quickly pledged allegiance to the French as they did with the Ottomans, their former masters. Each tribe at the time saw noon at its doorstep.
The first two battalions are made up of indigenous Muslim Kabyles, but very soon all the Zouave units will only be made up of French people from France, convicts and convicts, courageous but undisciplined.
There is no native Muslim in the Zouaves from 1832 or the Chasseurs d'Afrique (cavaliers) who will fight all over the world, in Africa, Madagascar, Mexico, Indochina and Europe. The Muslim auxiliaries are all versed in the Algerian, Tunisian and Moroccan skirmishers. They wear a gray blue vest with a harem pants of the same color.😀
here, a commentary tribute to the channel who made my day every time a new video got released!
I think that Napoleon imposed lenient terms on Austria because he had no other choice. Prussia was about to join the war and there was few troops on the Franco-Prussian border to withstand a Prussian offensive, so effectively speaking had he asked for me too much out of Franz Joseph the war would have continued and Napoleon III would have found himself in an impossible situation where he could neither push towards Venice due to risking Prussia decimating France itself neither would he have been able to retreat and give up his Italian conquests without suffering a serious loss of face.
You’re absolutely right, there is a legend that Napoleon III ended the war because he was shocked by the human cost but it’s not true(i think he was a little like anybody ) but the morning of this battle he received a telegram that 100000 prussians were mobilised along the border guarded by 60000 french so he abandonned his plan to go break the « quadrilatére » obviously.
This one was excellent
great battle detail
Oh my god the music at the start of the video!!..once your ears hear it your feet start marching with the Emperor
Maréchal Niel pulling off an Iron Marshal moment.
Yeah I did get Jena Auerstedt vibes there.
Probably the most talented and competent marshall of the second empire, Napoleon should have accepted his military reform along the Prussian model without the participation of parliament. He will be greatly missed during the Franco-Prussian war.
The video was a true masterpiece.
Another great video. Thank you for your work.
An excelent video. Thanks a lot.
Just a point who i need to make, Napoleon III Emperor of the French was elected by the people as a "catch all" candidate, many believed who he like Napoleon I would become a liberty friend, and who will not allow monarchists around, yet he was too moderate, his diplomatic policy perpetuated the status quo, and by the time in wich he step for the ideas, his enemies were stronger, The fact of him crushing the revolt in Rome in support of the Pope was certainly not what all would have expected from "Napoleon's sucessor", yet he wasn't so bad, but he took his time to implement reforms, and some times he (besides his Bourbon Wife) show dynastic trendings rather than ideological trends. Ultimately he was liked by all, but no one was going to die for his government,
He was not liked by many. Republicans in particular. The most famous one : Victor Hugo for instance.
@@walideg5304 Yes that was right after he "betrayed" them, altought it is already implicit there.
Love this guy's especially the animations keep it up love you guys
The only thing napoleon III have that surpassed his uncle's achievement was his longer reign with 4 years as president and 18 years as emperor. In terms of military career though, he wasn't a great nor a capable general at all except as a rallying symbol of his troops
There is not only military skill that matters. NIII was a good administrator and left a pretty decent legacy - incomes of Paris tourism are still flooding today for instance.
This is the best channel for strategy and historical battles, greetings from Brazil🇧🇷
7:04 - 7:22 You seriously put Garibaldi on screen for 18 seconds without acknowledging him?
I think everyone who is interested by this period knows who Garibaldi is
@@waliddrissi8370 I'm sure thousand acknowledged him
great channel
Great documentary of a battle that's rarely spoken of, especially in English. And I am happy to discover a new history channel as well !
I have a question: what is the software you use to make your maps ?
I'm very happy to see a videos about solferino Franz Joseph and napoléon III thanks you for the French subtile I love this area
We want a video about the Almoravid state and its beginning from five people on an island to a state and the battle of Zalqa between the Kingdom of Castile and the kings of the Taifas and Almoravids
Even though the leadup is cool, the actual would be boring since the Muslim army was 3 times as big as the Christian force
I know I read the information from Wikipedia in English. Muslims have become three times more, but I also read it in Arabic. The Castilian army came out twice as much as the Muslims. Kipedia showed the information according to the language in which it is written
@@2403lelo The Castillians had over 80,000 men whereas the Muslims had 48,000 men, what you're quoting is Reilly's number 900 years after Sagrajas to minimize the defeat.
Great generals are not always great strategists or tacticians, but are sometimes the ones who know their limitations and find others whose abilities fill in for the limitations.
How sad it is that the second Empire did not survive to our times ... oops, I think the Bonapartist spoke in me😋
The video is once again nice and your voice is unique!
Amazing video!!! Took my breath, similar to EPIC HISTORY TV great in every aspect🤘🏻 please consider doing more battles from 19th century
PMF looks great! Glad to see 2 glorious history channels collaborating! Especially if it provides me more content.
Damn I gotta say, for all his inexperiances, Franz joseph did fairly well, though the apointment of Gyulay, and his lack of reliance on more competent generals, did cause great effect, but overall, hi innitial plans, and manuvers proved quite well, for if he had not taken them, it might of been a full fleged disaster for the Austrians.