The Prussians Held the Banner for Germany

[Liam]

Do you think that from the Napoleonic Period, even before with Frederik the Great... The Prussians and Brandenburgers held the Torch more or less for the Germans?

I am descended from that lineage right back into the 1800s and I know for a fact, that at Waterloo, during the Franco-Prussian War and the Unification of Germany it was all Prussian and at the least Brandenburger. Even during WW1, the Prussians were notorious for the warrior attitude meanwhile the other Germans were notable for their TeaCookie layed back sort of qualities.

Austrians in particular were maulled by every other nation on the Continent, and in WW1 hell, they only dragged Germany in the mud. I think that it should be noted that Prussia likely on it's own held the Torch for the rest of Germany and that they did a Majority of the fighting. This is very unique to other countries, as Germany was made up of States(many of which were a lot softer than their icy brethren from the NorthEast), Italy cannot boast the same though was united in a similar sort of fashion. France, Russia and Great Britian were united for a much greater duration.

[Guest Mike]

No. not at all.

Prussian ascendancy in Germany only occured after the Austro-Prussian war of 1866 - before then the Austrians were the dominant German state, but their policies weer to keep that domination by way of controlling the Holy German Empire rather than by unification.

Prussians may have been the leading state of Germany in the Franco-Prussian War, and the only one at Waterloo, but there weer other German armies - the Bavarian army participated fully in hte Franco-Prussian War for example, and was still a seperate entity from the Prussian army in WW1.

Austria was not at Waterloo, but had 2 or 3 other armies mobilising to fight Napleon - ie several times as many troops as the British or Prussians had at Waterloo.

Austria-Hungary may have started WW1, and certainly their military was not as good as German troops, but that was mainly a leadership problem - when under German command at high levels the AH troops performed fine.

The Brusilov offensive was successful against troops with the indolent AH officer corps in command, but faltered agaisnt troops with German leadership - even when that leadership was only at army level.

Austro-hungarian troops also took a major part in the Gorlice-Tarnow battles in 1915 and halted the Italians by themselves - later taking a full part in the successful Carporetto offensives and getting Stosstruppen taining from the Germans.

The weakness of hte AH Empire was that it was largely NOT-German. It's policies were focused on preserving teh whole of the empire, and not just on the German part.

Prussia on the other hand had no such limitations, and could, and did, emphasis its "German-ness" and could easily take advantage of natinoalist German sentiment.

If Austria started getting "too German" then Hungary and al the other non-Germans in hte empire tended to get a bit upset!

[Liam]

Stalin's Organist,

indeed you may have shed "some light" on the topic, however not entirely. It is still true, Austrians were outperformed, were their German side more potent than their Hungarian and Balkan? Likely... Though seperately Serbians fought well, and many did in the Balkans

Name a General aside from an Austrian one in History of Greatness? in the AH, few if any, but I suppose the aristrocacy was in Austria Proper primarily.

You tell any Prussian this information though, they were the Creme of the Crop so to speak

[JerseyJohn]

Prussia used to be called a country with an army, rather than the other way around.

Toward the end of WWI it was usually said that Germany fought the rest of Europe alone.

A bit unfair to Austria which did win some victories and also tied down a lot of Russian troops, but essentially it's true.

The Ottomans, who shouldn't have been in the war at all, fought extremely well at Gallipoli, also tied up a lot of Russians (in the Caucasus), but ultimately collapsed -- along the way committing the Armenian attrocities which, per % of victims and victimizers was worse than the Hollocaust.

Getting back to the original point. Blucher wanted to name the decisive 1815 battle at Mont St Jean after the nearby town of La Belle Alliance, which would have been very appropriate. But Wellington chose Waterloo after a British sounding town a bit farther away.

-- Even beyond the battle, in which the Prussians played a decisive part in the late afternoon, when it was still up for grabs, they also played a pivitol role in fighting Napoleon at Ligny. They caused the diversion of a large part of Napoleon's army under Grouchy, sent in pursuit of a Prussian army Napoleon assumed would head back to Germany. 35,000 troops that were sorely needed in the main battle. Grouchy, for his part, is unjustifiably criticized for having fought at Wavre instead of heading to the sound of the guns. Ridiculous as he couldn't simply turn west and get there due to the terrain and esisting roads.

So, indeed, Waterloo is as much a Prussian victory as British. It really ought to be called The Battle of La Belle Alliance.

-- Though, of course, there were Russian armies entering France via Northern Italy and also Holland at almost the same moment, so even a decisive French victory in the campaign might not have been enough.

True that the Prussians were dominant till late into the 19th Century. As late as 1870 it isn't the French-German War, but the Franco-Prussian War. The third in an impressive string of Prussian victories to establish the German Empire.

But I think by WWII the rest of Germany was about as militaristic as Prussia. Rommel, for example, came from traditionally peaceful Swabia. And the Waffen SS was an open attempt to have a large military arm that wasn't controled by the vons of the old Junkers class.

-- Italy, I think is an entirely different case. Italian states had centuries military glory a thousand years after the Roman Empire collapsed. But, as Germany and France had to be hard due to their geographical situations, Italy was able to follow a steadily more mercantile path, relying on the sea and the Alps for protection, and, ultimately, that made all the difference in which countries entered the 20th Century with the dominant military traditions.

[JerseyJohn]

Continued from above post:

Stalin's Organist Liam's post put up the same time as my own. Very interesting points from both, hats off to Stalin's Organist, as usual.

And a very interesting topic, Liam. -- Also, as usual.

[Liam]

Contraversial I'm certian to many of the Southern and Western Germans on these boards John. However one cannot mistaken the more beautiful landscape of Southern Germany and Austria to the rest.

Interesting info on Waterloo, Napoleon had a massive Army at his heels a victory may have divided the Allies. Also Prussian Leadership was a step above Austrian Leadership later in time.

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

Continued from above post:

Stalin's Organist Liam's post put up the same time as my own. Very interesting points from both, hats off to Stalin's Organist, as usual.

And a very interesting topic, Liam. -- Also, as usual.

[JerseyJohn]

Liam,

Glad you like the take on Waterloo; one of history's most fascinating turning points.

Basically, I agree with what you're saying. It's a sort of historical law that the military edge goes to the less comfortable society. The old Stay Hungry over being soft and complacent.

Reminds me of the line in the old movie, The Third Man, about Switzerland having been the victim of too long a time of unbroken peace.

[Guest Mike]

Liam I have no idea how many Austro-Hungarian commanders were Hungarian or other non-German nationalities - but here's a page of their senior field commanders - perhaps you can figure it out from the names?

Clicking on some of them shows they had Serbs, Hungarians, Croats and others at the highest ranks.

Austrian field commanders

[Madmatt]

Just a reminder, this forum is for discussions pertaining to the game. This post is more political and historical in nature and as such belongs on the General Forum. You may continue it there if you would like. I am closing this one down.

Just to be clear, no one did or said anything wrong as such, I just want to try and clean up some of the cross posts I have been seeing.

Madmatt