You can send a text, include contact info to get a response.

In a great triumph for France, and Talleyrand personally, Belgium is born. This is one of history's true ironies because of how the existence of Belgium weakens France in the 20th century.

The episode ends with Talleyrand's last treaty, his treaty with Rome, over his own soul.

But the birth of Belgium requires a revolution which nearly becomes a general European war. The story of how that is avoided with Palmerston and Earl Grey is told.

Also, the activities of the Lieven's and the Barbarianization of Greece (almost) which leads to Greek independence.

Talleyrand's contrarian take on the Great Reform Act of 1832 and his entirely correct predictions of its consequneces are covered.

You can send a text, include contact info to get a response.

“Talleyrand was in a black mood. All that he had achieved over the past eighteen months had been destroyed: the bloodless and amiable return of the Bourbons in 1814 was being travestied by the vindictive and mean minded 2nd Restoration. The favorable conditions obtained for France by the Treaty of Paris in 1814 were to be revised and the equal status he had worked so hard to attain for her in Vienna was no more.”

That was Zamoyski on Talleyrand, not Duff Cooper. There is another reality, when you add the dimension of time. Over 3 years the terms against France lightened considerably. France’s financial infrastructure finally, finally, finally 3 times finally caught up the to greatness of the country., to its weight in the world. And after those 3 years, yeah France was a great power.

And once the Bourbon was overthrown in 1830, Soult began the process of creating a new overseas empire. And Europe finally got rid of that hive of scum and villainy, the slave taking corsairs of the Barbary Coast. It wasn’t just the triumph of civilization, however temporary over ancient horror slave states like the north African statelets. It was finally blocking the Russians from expanding in that area, which they were constantly proposing to do under the Christian duty to fight slavery and the other horrors of north Africa.

You can send a text, include contact info to get a response.

There is a commonplace, dismissive, reductive argument you will hear all the time. That napoleon stood no chance. Even if he had triumphed on the field at Waterloo, as in some ways he really could have. The forces arrayed against him were so massive he had really no hope. A huge Austrian and German army was coming in from the Rhine, in addition to the British army with its line of communications through Brussels and the Prussians with their line of communications further east. And a truly massive Russian force was gathering at Wurzberg.

Napoleon was strategically outnumbered 5:1. He could triumph for a day, for a battle, for a campaign perhaps. But the advantages of the French army, high quality leadership, the elan of its men, were just not so marked as they had been in the past. His own genius and energy was more fitful now that he was older. There was really no hope of French military triumph.

So that’s the common historical analysis you will see everywhere, in everything 21st century, and it is not wrong. But step in a little closer and there are a number of fascinating elements. Like, who is really the Legitimate ruler in France?