Frederick the Great and the Meanings of War, 1730-1755
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Frederick the Great and the Meanings of War, 1730-1755 Adam Lindsay Storring St. John’s College December 2017 This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy ii Summary – Frederick the Great and the Meanings of War, 1730-1755 Adam Lindsay Storring This dissertation fundamentally re-interprets King Frederick the Great of Prussia as military commander and military thinker, and uses Frederick to cast new perspectives on the warfare of ‘his time’: that is, of the late seventeenth to early eighteenth centuries. It uses the methodology of cultural history, which focuses on the meanings given to human activities, to examine Frederick and the warfare of his time on three levels: cultural, temporal, and intellectual. It shows that Frederick’s warfare (at least in his youth) was culturally French, and reflected the towering influence of King Louis XIV, with Frederick following the flamboyant masculinity of the French baroque court. Frederick was a backward-looking military thinker, who situated his war-making in two temporal envelopes: broadly in the long eighteenth century (1648-1789), which was dominated by the search for order after the chaos of religious and civil wars, but more specifically in the ‘Century of Louis XIV’: the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Frederick embraced French military methods, taking inspiration from generals like Turenne and Luxembourg, employing aggressive French battle tactics, and learning his concept of ‘total war for limited objectives’ from French writers like the Marquis de Feuquières. Frederick also sought to surpass the ‘personal rule’ of the Sun King by commanding his army personally. This work shows the early eighteenth century as a liminal period, which saw the Louisquatorzean paradigm interact with the beginnings of the Enlightenment, developments in scientific methods, and the growth of the administrative capacity of states, all of which would exercise an increasing influence as the century progressed. The combination of older traditions and newer ideas placed enormous pressure on the monarchs of this period, and this was seen in Frederick’s strained relations with his generals. Finally, this work examines how ideas are created. It shows military knowledge in the early eighteenth century as the product of power structures (and often an element within them). Military command was itself an element in the assertion of political power, and Frederick depended on ‘the power of (military) knowledge’ to maintain his authority with his generals. Power, however, is negotiated, and knowledge is typically produced collectively. In the early part of Frederick’s reign, the Prussian war effort was a collective effort by several actors within the Prussian military hierarchy, and ‘Frederick’s military ideas’ were not necessarily his own. iii iv Contents Preface vi Acknowledgements vii Introduction 1 Chapter 1 – Order 23 Chapter 2 – Glory 69 Chapter 3 – Knowledge 106 Chapter 4 – History 150 Chapter 5 – Power 205 Chapter 6 – The Military Laboratory 254 Conclusion 279 Bibliography 285 v Preface This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. It is not substantially the same as any that I have submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for a degree or diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. I further state that no substantial part of my dissertation has already been submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text It does not exceed the prescribed word limit for the relevant Degree Committee. vi Acknowledgements My debt to my supervisor, Christopher Clark, is more than I can express. He has inspired this work from its dimmest beginnings, has opened huge numbers of doors, and his incisive comments have been made the final dissertation a great deal better. My debt to Jürgen Luh is also huge. I am grateful for his help and advice, his kindness, and his great patience. He strained every nerve to place the academic resources of Berlin and especially the Prussian palaces at my disposal, and was invaluable both as I was first shaping the project and in the later stages. The acknowledgements pages of the books which have transformed our understanding of Frederick the Great in recent years make clear their debt to Jürgen, and I hope that the present dissertation does him credit. Tim Blanning not only introduced me to Jürgen Luh but also very kindly commented on early drafts of this dissertation, and his supervision of my master’s thesis laid the foundations for the present work. Brendan Simms was always willing to answer questions, great and small, and his kindness and good advice have been invaluable. Peter Wilson was also very generous in taking the time to discuss with me many aspects of long-eighteenth-century warfare and its political, social and cultural dimensions, including on one occasion writing an impromptu summary by email in the absence of published literature to answer my questions. I am also grateful to Frank Althoff, Andrew Arsan, David Bell, Thomas Biskup, Philip Blood, Erica Charters, Guy Chet, Frank Göse, Henning Grunwald, Winfried Heinemann, Michael Hochedlinger, Jürgen Kloosterhuis, Mary Lindemann, Benjamin Marschke, Renaud Morieux, William O’Reilly, Andreas Pečar, Ralf Pröve, Wolfram Pyta, Guy Rowlands, Wolfgang Schmale, Hamish Scott, Emile Simpson, Hew Strachan, Ashley Truluck, and Keith Tribe, all of whom were very generous in giving me advice. Without them, this work would be much the poorer. In Mainz, Fabian Klose and Thomas Weller greatly shaped the development of this dissertation, and I am grateful also for the thoughts of Johannes Paulmann, Eveline Bouwers and Joachim Berger. Stephen Badsey’s advice was very important in helping me decide to return to academia. Matthew Ford and Jan Tattenberg pushed me to recognize the broader implications of my ideas about operational military history. Finally, I am grateful to two anonymous peer reviewers of the Historical Journal, whose comments fundamentally shaped the direction of the work. I owe a particular debt to Dennis Showalter, as it was his wonderfully engaging account of Frederick’s campaigns, which I read as a teenager, which really inspired my interest in the subject. His view of the Prussian king, as able but often making mistakes, and blaming others for them in an unjust but deeply human way, has fundamentally shaped my own approach to this charismatic and deeply flawed historical figure. Among those of my own generation, I am grateful in particular to two mentors who have done so much to keep me on the straight and narrow: Ilya Berkovich and Jasper Heinzen have guided my work from the very beginning, and helped to imbue me with sound principles for academic life. I am deeply grateful. vii I am indebted to Ulrike Sträßner for inspiring me to examine the gendered aspects of history, to Hedwig Richter for suggesting how this could be applied to this project, and to Johanna Blume for advice on how to make the finished product fit for purpose. At a time of government austerity, I am keenly aware of the great privilege of being funded to spend years researching and writing about the past. I am grateful in particular to the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), which funded not only my PhD but also the MPhil that preceded it. It was the intensive German language courses in Berlin, funded by the AHRC, the Faculty of History and St. John’s College, which enabled me finally to achieve a strong command of the language. Not only my research but also much of my engagement with German and Austrian society over the last years would have been much the poorer without this. The Leibniz-Institut für Europäische Geschichte in Mainz provided me not only with a long stipend but also the excellent facilities of the institute and its Wohnheim. The Geheimes Preußisches Staatsarchiv generously gave me a stipend, and I am grateful for substantial funding from St. John’s College, Cambridge, for research expenses. Sylvana Tomaselli, my undergraduate director of studies, very kindly arranged for years of tuition that formed the basis of my knowledge of German. Without them, this project would have been inconceivable. Alongside these institutional funders, I would like to extend a special thank you to Dr. Sabine Bolstorff-Bühler, whose Bühler-Stiftung, alongside the Stiftung Preußisher Schlößer und Gärten (SPSG), gave me a generous stipend for the crucial phase of my research in Berlin. This dissertation is in many ways the product of the five cities in which it was researched and written: London, Cambridge, Berlin, Vienna and Mainz. I am grateful in particular for the marvelous facilities of a series of public libraries, which were made available to me at little or no cost: in London, the British Library, where this dissertation took its first steps and then its last; in Berlin, the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, the Geheimes Preußisches Staatsarchiv, the Knoll Bibliothek of the SPSG in Potsdam, and the libraries of the Humbold-Universität zu Berlin and Freie Universität; in Vienna, the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, the libraries of the Universität Wien and the Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv. In a time of financial pressure on public services in many countries, it cannot be emphasized enough how valuable such facilities are for researchers. Particular thanks are due to Sabine Hahn, librarian of the SPSG, who was not only very kind in making the books of the Knoll- Bibliothek available to me, but also took Frederick’s original books – currently displayed as exhibits in the Prussian palaces – off the shelves so I could examine them.