DOCSLIB.ORG

Jan 1219:30 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:34

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Jan 1219:30 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:31 Jan 1219:34 THE VIENNA CONGRESS The defeat of France didn’t remove the threat of international revolution and 1) Riding the Tiger war. One major objective with the viennasettlement was to maintain peace and To those rulers who believed it would be impoissible to dam the forces of stability. The Austrian chancellor, Prince Metternich introduced the idea of revolution completely the solution would be to attract support for the some sort of league between European rulers which would maintain the government and weaken the revolutionary forces by making moderate reforms. settlement and police the continent (The Metternich system). It was to be in Britain in the 1820s­40s where this policy was most succesfully applied. A series of economic, social and political reforms enabled the To the ruling classes in Europe the French revolution had been an traumatic aristocracy to maintain the real power and attract the support of the middle­ experience and one concluded that once change started it would get out of classes. control and produce chaos, terror, military dictatorship and international war. The rulers came up with two possible responses to this situation; jan 12­19:30 jan 12­19:31 2) Stemming the Torrent ASSESSING WHETHER THE PEACEMAKERS IN 1815 WERE GUIDED BY The more conservative rulers on the contrary feared that reforms would NATIONAL INTERESTS OR BY IDEALS AND PRINCIPLES. trigger off revolution. An obvious alternative was to stop the whole process of change before it had a chance to start. Metternich was the main architect of this view. jan 12­19:31 jan 12­19:31 .A. 1﴿Restauration, of the political situation of 1792 THE POLITICAL PRINCIPLES OF THE CONGRESS: Both Russia and Britain shared the common wish to settle the problems of Europe Though the Vienna settlement was a compromise between the rival aims and as a whole ­ other states ﴾especially France and Austria﴿ could and did benefit from ambitions of the great powers, there was also a considerable degree of general this. agreement at the congress about its purpose and the principles by which this Metternichs idea to reach a balance of powers was in danger to collapse already should be achieved. before the congress while Russia wanted to annex Poland and Prussia Saxony. As The statesmen of the Great Powers ﴾France included﴿ wanted a settlement which a result of Metternich's mediation ﴾1813﴿, and esp. under the impact of Napoleons would provide stability in Europe and prevent the outbreak of another general war. return from Elba, the powers reached a compromise. The balance of power This benefited Austria ­ The state would be in grave danger of collapse and between the 5 great powers was restored in june 1815. disintegration without this ­ The allies were ready to preserve and strengthen the Austrian empire. The German confederation ­ 39 states ﴾38 + Austria﴿. The purpose was to prevent the smaller states falling under French influence. Although Austria received quite a .lot of influence ﴾Metternich's objective﴿ it was bound to be rivalled by Prussia jan 12­19:31 jan 12­19:34 1 INTERNATIONAL PEACE ­ would best be maintained if no state was in a position to threaten the independence of the rest ­ A rule to guide the decisions made in 2﴿ Legitimacy ­ justification of the dynastic claims of the old rulers ­ actually .Vienna. ﴾Important when decisions upon territorial settlements were made, for Talleyrands idea to justify the claims of the Ancien Régime example both Austria and France accepted the settlements in Germany and Italy, FRANCE though they both had interests there﴿ When Napoleons defeat was obvious Foreign minister Talleyrand managed to restore the old monarchial rule in France and got the acceptance by the allied The statesmen of Vienna thought that revolutions comes from wars not viceversa. leaders ­ the restauration of the Bourbons. The First Treaty of Paris ﴾may 1814﴿ was lenient because the alliance didn't want to make it difficult for the new monarchy. The principle of Legitimacy was never of supreme importance in making of the settlement. Frontiers were redrawn and previously independent states extinguished in defiance of it ­ The principle of Legitimacy was definetely subordinate to the more important principle of the balance of power. jan 12­19:35 jan 12­19:35 Solidarity, common policies of the legitimate princes against the revolutionary THE QUADRUPLE ALLIANCE ­ Uphold the settlement with France, prevent the ﴿3 ideas and movements. return of Napoleon and maintain the army of occupation. The HOLY ALLIANCE was used by Metternich as an effective weapon to enforce This included the idea of possible meetings to settle international questions quickly his conservative policies. and peacefully. Both Britain and Austria feared an extension of Russian influence ﴾Austria ­ in Balkan and the german states, Britain ­ maritime and colonial powers, a Russian .﴿challenge to the Brittish commands of the seas jan 12­19:36 jan 12­19:36 BRITAIN B. The principle was to establish peace in Europe ­ a peaceful, settled Europe from NATIONAL INTERESTS whom Britain didn't have to fear no threat. Britain wanted to maintain her naval B.1. Before the Congress in Vienna supremacy and had no wish to extend her land frontiers AUSTRIA in Europe. In 1813 Metternich preposed a deal to Napoleon; Austria could join France in a Britain introduced the idea to abolish slave trade at the Congress ﴾The government military alliance if Austria would get full supremacy in Germany and Italy ­ no deal .had to take account of opinion at home﴿ ­ no final settlement on this issue. but definetely shows that Austria had great national interests When Metternich realized that there was nothing to gain from an alliance with France, Austria joined the European coalition against France. jan 12­19:37 jan 12­19:38 2 PRUSSIA B.2. The Congress of Vienna The first treaty of Paris ﴾1814﴿ was replaced by the Second Treaty of Paris in Though we discuss in terms of THE FOUR GREAT victorious Powers RUSSIA and BRITAIN november 1815 ﴾after the come­back of Napoleon﴿ and eventhough this was were foremost among these powers. They had played the most important part in defeating .harsher it still was a very lenient peace for France ﴾France lost some territory along Napoleon and were now each in their own way, in an outstanding position at the Congress RUSSIA was the decisive military power on the continent with an army of almost one million the border ﴾Savoy, Nice to Piedmont and Saar to Prussia﴿ but not for example men in 1815. .﴿Alsac­Lorraine to Prussia ­ Russia and Britain resisted this ﴾balance of power BRITAIN hadn't been defeated and now emerged with her superiority in industrial development, worldwide trade and naval strength increased. Both Russia and Britain shared the common wish to settle the problems of Europe as a .whole ­ other states ﴾especially France and Austria﴿ could and did benefit from this ,Through the Treaty of Vienna ﴾1815﴿ Britain and Russia achieved the aims they desired while Prussia and Austria were dependent upon the wishes of the other two powers, who were not always in agreement. jan 12­19:39 jan 12­19:39 RUSSIA BRITAIN Tsar Alexander I had quite traditional and farstretching national objectives; During the wars, Britain had made considerable overseas gains ­ colonies belonging to expansion towards the Balkan ﴾competition with Austria﴿ France, Spain and Holland. Castlereagh insisted that the Congress should not concern itself­ expansion towards the Baltic ﴾competition with Prussia﴿ with the question of overseas possessions and that it should be settled by a series of­ .Poland ﴾Austria, Prussia and Britain﴿ ­ Claimed the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, proposed that separate treaties with the countries concerned­ Prussia would be compensated for the loss of her polish territory by annexing the whole of Britain kept some profitable colonies and especially the colonies with strategic value. Saxony. Russian troops occupied both Poland and Saxony. Castlereagh and Metternich feared that this would undermine the balance of Power in Europe. Two of the territorial changes made on the continent were also desired by Britain for Talleyrand saw his opportunity to benefit from the conflict, France was still the strongest strategic reasons. country ﴾next to Russia﴿ on the continent. France ­ Britain ­ Austria joined in a defensive 1﴿ The transfer of Norway ﴾Denmark­Sweden﴿­ The entry to the Baltic was no longer Triple Alliance to oppose Russia. The threat forced Alexander I to compromise = Prussia controlled by a single state. and Austria received some Polish territory. Prussia = 3/5 of Saxony and Russia ­ 'Congress Poland'. 2﴿ The union of Holland and Belgium into a united kingdom ­ The mouths of the rivers Rhine and Scheldt in the possession of a neutral state. ﴿.Russia kept the gains it had made during the wars ­ Finland ﴾Sweden﴿ and Bessarabia ﴾Britain also assissted the Dutch government in fortifying the frontier with France ﴿Turkey﴾ jan 12­19:40 jan 12­19:40 AUSTRIA PRUSSIA While it was quite obvious that Austria couldn't gain any real predominance in Germany Minister, Prince Hardenberg wanted Prussia to regain the power and prestige she Metternich looked instead for the creation of Austrian power over the several states in Italy ­ had lost through her defeat by Napoleon. Weak position and could only hope to tried to persuade the other powers that peace and good government in the peninsula benefit from the possible disagrements between the other powers. needed this. Though Prussia didn't receive the whole of Saxony ﴾3/5﴿ it was Prussia that made Fear of a renewal of French influence in Italy lad the allies to support Metternich's wish to the relatively the greatest territorial and economic gains. The territory in Saxony gain compensation for Austria's inferiority ﴾lägre ställning﴿ in Germany and loss of the was rich and industrial.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 9781501756030 Revised Cover 3.30.21.Pdf
    , , Edited by Christine D. Worobec For a list of books in the series, visit our website at cornellpress.cornell.edu. From Victory to Peace Russian Diplomacy aer Napoleon • Elise Kimerling Wirtschaer Copyright © by Cornell University e text of this book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives . International License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/./. To use this book, or parts of this book, in any way not covered by the license, please contact Cornell University Press, Sage House, East State Street, Ithaca, New York . Visit our website at cornellpress.cornell.edu. First published by Cornell University Press Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Wirtschaer, Elise Kimerling, author. Title: From victory to peace: Russian diplomacy aer Napoleon / by Elise Kimerling Wirtschaer. Description: Ithaca [New York]: Northern Illinois University Press, an imprint of Cornell University Press, . | Series: NIU series in Slavic, East European, and Eurasian studies | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Identiers: LCCN (print) | LCCN (ebook) | ISBN (paperback) | ISBN (pdf) | ISBN (epub) Subjects: LCSH: Russia—Foreign relations—–. | Russia—History— Alexander I, –. | Europe—Foreign relations—–. | Russia—Foreign relations—Europe. | Europe—Foreign relations—Russia. Classication: LCC DK.W (print) | LCC DK (ebook) | DDC ./—dc LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/ LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/ Cover image adapted by Valerie Wirtschaer. is book is published as part of the Sustainable History Monograph Pilot. With the generous support of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Pilot uses cutting-edge publishing technology to produce open access digital editions of high-quality, peer-reviewed monographs from leading university presses.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Policy Regarding the Greek and Romanian Questions. Around the 1821 Revolution
    ΣΥΝΕΔΡΙΟ ΡΗΓΑΣ ΦΕΡΡΑΙΟΣ, ΙΩΑΝΝΗΣ ΚΑΠΟΔΙΣΤΡΙΑΣ, ΦΡΑΝΣΙΣΚΟ ΝΤΕ ΜΙΡΑΝΤΑ - η Ελληνική Σκέψη στην Αυτοθέσμιση των Κοινωνιών, τον Διαφωτισμό και την Γνώση ΑΞΟΝΑΣ Ι: Η ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ ΣΚΕΨΗ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΠΟΧΗ ΤΩΝ ΜΕΓΑΛΩΝ ΟΡΑΜΑΤΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΤΩΝ ΔΙΕΚΔΙΚΗΣΕΩΝ www.academy.edu.gr The European Policy Regarding the Greek and Romanian Questions. Around the 1821 Revolution ΛΕΩΝΙΔΑΣ ΡΑΔΟΣ, Ερευνητής στο Ινστιτούτο Ιστορίας «Α.D. Χenopol» της Ακαδημίας της Ρουμανίας Email: [email protected] The 1821 events led to one of the most intense challenges for the Concert of Europe. The Great Powers were facing an unprecedented situation considering the Greek insurrection and how it and the Romanians' move- ment led by Tudor Vladimirescu affected the equilibrium of force and the destiny of ”the sick man of Eu- rope” (as the Ottoman Empire was called). At the time, the two mutinies drew the attention of the Great Powers because they generated tension throughout Europe on the one hand and because the issues they en- compassed bore solutions for the continental peace on the other. Is well known that at the Troppau conference (October-December 1820), Austria, Prussia and Russia agreed on the principle of intervention for fear the Naples revolution, perceived as part of a larger European prob- lem, might generalize and turn into a revolutionary torrent.[1] Therefore, the diplomatic maneuver area was rather restricted. The two movements were connected both openly and underground, as was much discussed by the historical literature. As many others, we consider that the Romanians' mutiny started as part of the Philiki Etaireia and then diverged and gradually progressed on its own, based on its needs which were not always similar to the Greek revolutionaries'.
    [Show full text]
  • Congress System”: the World’S First “International Security Regime”1
    The “Congress System”: The World’s First “International Security Regime”1 © 2015 Mark Jarrett In his State Paper of May 5, 1820, British Foreign Secretary Lord Castlereagh argued that the post-Napoleonic alliance of great powers was never intended as a “union for the government of the world, or for the superintendence of the internal affairs of other states.”2 Notwithstanding Castlereagh’s powerful denial, was this new system, known to historians as the “Congress System,” an attempt at great-power supervision of the rest of Europe? Was it, as Professor Beatrice de Graaf has suggested, a new type of “security regime,” or as Dr. Stella Ghervas contends, a novel and innovative approach for the maintenance of peace after two decades of bloodshed? Was this new system, as Professor Brian Vick asserts, inextricably linked to constitutionalism—perhaps constitutionalism extended to Europe at large? A handful of scholars would deny that this system existed at all, or at least they would argue that its impact was negligible. Others go to the opposite extreme and see it as part of a new system of norms and self-restraint that replaced traditional balance of power rivalries.3 And still others would decry its existence as a repressive conspiracy of monarchs against their own peoples. My contention is simply that there was such a system. My focus will be on the set of concrete institutions created in Paris in November 1815, which loosely bound together the European great powers during the first decade after the Napoleonic Wars. The Congress System was indeed, despite Castlereagh’s later disavowal, an audacious attempt at multilateral world government, but it never developed a strong institutional basis and eventually foundered on differences between the powers over the question of counter- revolutionary intervention.
    [Show full text]
  • A Pilgrim of Historiography: Byron and the Discourses of History in Early Nineteenth-Century Britain
    A Pilgrim of Historiography – Ivan Pregnolato A Pilgrim of Historiography: Byron and the Discourses of History in Early Nineteenth-Century Britain Ivan Pregnolato, BA, MA Thesis Submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2015 Page 1 of 363 A Pilgrim of Historiography – Ivan Pregnolato Abstract This thesis aims to understand Byron’s œuvre in relation to the discourses of history in early nineteenth-century Britain. As a contribution to the historicist critical approaches of the past decades, my dissertation discusses the different ideas surrounding the concept of ‘history’ in the first two decades of the 1800s, a period marked by change. As shown, these discourses of history were notorious for their heterogeneity and, by analysing Byron’s poetry and letters, it becomes evident that Byron engaged with these multiple interpretations as well. Roughly, three types of discourses of history are discussed below: the classical knowledge which was perpetuated in the educational system of the time and discussed in travelogues; the whig interpretation of history and the teleological concept of ‘liberty’ through time; and the idea of powerful forces that act ‘behind’ history, such as economics and the inseparability of power embedded in creating historical narratives. This thesis concludes that is impossible to speak of a single Byronic historical narrative and, rather, argues that Byron’s texts espouse pluralistic conceptualisations of history. Page 2 of 363 A Pilgrim of Historiography – Ivan Pregnolato To my mother ‘A fila anda…’ Page 3 of 363 A Pilgrim of Historiography – Ivan Pregnolato Acknowledgements Several people have helped me in the years that it has taken to write this thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Turks in Europe (1919)
    wmfni\ f/t 5 \ii'^/Mr<,'^/1''i i P 1 1, 1 f '' ' '^ li ^ ^1 THE TURKS IN EUROPE A 2 Qu'est ce que la Turqiiie ? La Turquie est le pays classique dea massacres. Son con- histoire se resume k ceci : pillages, meurtres, vols, cussions— sur toutes les echelles—revoltes, insurrections, repressions, guerres ^trangeres, guerres civiles, revolutions, contre-r^volutions, seditions, mutineries. ARsi:NE Perlant, Eternelle Turquie. " a is To murder a man is a crime ; to massacre nation a question." , Victor Hugo, 1876. THE TURKS IN EUROPE A SKETCH-STUDY BY W. E. D. ALLEN WITH A PREFACE BY BRIG.-GEN. H. CONYERS SURTEES, C.M.G., D.S.O. LONDON JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET 1919 f; All rights r«s«rved. DEDICATION To My Beloved Father— To you I dedicate this chronicle of men's savageness and meanness. To you, who brilliant so so faultless were so and simple ; your- tolerant of fault in others so self yet so ; gentle not kill a bird so kind that men that you could ; so that marvelled ; forbearing they thought you weak so that fool. ; generous they thought you You were so quick of comprehension, yet so patient of stupidity in others. You could always forgive, and always understand. Men wondered when you repaid vilest ingratitude with renewed kindness. You who so loved Music and Books and Art, and to roam in the wild places of the earth, and linger in its ancient cities, were for ever im- prisoned in an office. You began to work when to learn the best most boys begin ; you spent years of your life in drudgery, working often till mid- night.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great European Treaties of the Nineteenth Century
    JBRART Of 9AN DIEGO OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY EDITED BY SIR AUGUSTUS OAKES, CB. LATELY OF THE FOREIGN OFFICE AND R. B. MOWAT, M.A. FELLOW AND ASSISTANT TUTOR OF CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE, OXFORD WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY SIR H. ERLE RICHARDS K. C.S.I., K.C., B.C.L., M.A. FELLOW OF ALL SOULS COLLEGE AWD CHICHELE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND DIPLOMACY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD ASSOCIATE OF THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AMEN HOUSE, E.C. 4 LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW LEIPZIG NEW YORK TORONTO MELBOURNE CAPETOWN BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRAS SHANGHAI HUMPHREY MILFORD PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY Impression of 1930 First edition, 1918 Printed in Great Britain INTRODUCTION IT is now generally accepted that the substantial basis on which International Law rests is the usage and practice of nations. And this makes it of the first importance that the facts from which that usage and practice are to be deduced should be correctly appre- ciated, and in particular that the great treaties which have regulated the status and territorial rights of nations should be studied from the point of view of history and international law. It is the object of this book to present materials for that study in an accessible form. The scope of the book is limited, and wisely limited, to treaties between the nations of Europe, and to treaties between those nations from 1815 onwards. To include all treaties affecting all nations would require volumes nor is it for the many ; necessary, purpose of obtaining a sufficient insight into the history and usage of European States on such matters as those to which these treaties relate, to go further back than the settlement which resulted from the Napoleonic wars.
    [Show full text]
  • The Eastern Question (Up to the War of Greek Independence)
    Magadh Mahila College Patna University, Patna HISTORY B.A. – II PAPER – IV HISTORY OF MODERN EUROPE Unit – 7 EASTERN QUESTION Topic: - THE EASTERN QUESTION (UP TO THE WAR OF GREEK INDEPENDENCE) By:- Dr. Amit Raj (Guest teacher) Department of History Magadh Mahila College Patna University, Patna Email : [email protected] Mob : 9472811500 Introduction AFTER THE sack of Constantinople by the Muslims in 1453, the Ottoman Turks carved out a vast empire in south-eastern Europe and along the north coast of Africa in the 16th and 17th centuries. There were bitter wars between them and the Christian rulers of Europe. In 1682 the Turks over-ran Hungary and in 1683 appeared at the very gates of Vienna and Emperor Leopold I was terribly hard-pressed. The existence of the Holy Roman Empire itself was in danger. But John III (Sobieski), King of Poland, came to his rescue and defeated the Turks. The siege of Vienna was raised and the wave of Turkish conquests was halted. With this defeat began a steady decline of the Turkish Empire which continued right up to the end of the First World War. This steady and gradual fall of the Turkish Empire gave rise to an "intractable and interwoven tangle of conflicting interests" and to "the problem of filling up the vacuum created by the gradual disappearance of the Turkish Empire from Europe". This problem has been popularly called the "Eastern Question". A Russian diplomat has defined the problem in the following words, "This damned Eastern Question is like a gout. Sometimes it takes you in the leg, sometimes it nips your hand.
    [Show full text]
  • British Foreign Policy Under Canning
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2008 British Foreign Policy Under Canning Andrew Montgomery Endorf The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Endorf, Andrew Montgomery, "British Foreign Policy Under Canning" (2008). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 160. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/160 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY UNDER CANNING By Andrew Montgomery Endorf B.A., University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, 2004 Thesis presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In History The University of Montana Missoula, MT Summer 2008 Approved by: Perry Brown Associate Provost for Graduate Studies Dr. John Eglin, Chair History Dr. Linda Frey History Dr. Louis Hayes Political Science i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE – CANNING THE POLITICIAN 12 Biography 12 Domestic Politics 16 CHAPTER TWO – REVOLUTION ON THE IBERIAN PENNINSULA 24 Spain 24 Portugal 36 CHAPTER THREE – LATIN AMERICA AND RECOGNITION 44 North America 48 Latin America 52 CHAPTER FOUR – GREECE AND THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE 66 Stalemate and Neutrality 68 Shifting Alliances and Intervention 77 CONCLUSION 86 BIBLIOGRAPHY 99 ii Endorf, Andrew, M.A., Summer 2008 History British Foreign Policy Under Canning Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • THE RUSSIAN ARMY and the EASTERN QUESTION, 1821-34’ Ph.D
    1 ‘THE RUSSIAN ARMY AND THE EASTERN QUESTION, 1821-34’ Ph.D. ALEXANDER BITIS THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2000 UMI Number: U615B58 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615B58 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 lH £ S £ S F 3530 • ^ ,p 0' ^ t ABSTRACT This dissertation consists of a study of the role of the Russian army in Russo-Turkish relations from the outbreak of the Greek War of Independence to the conclusion of the Mohammed Ali crisis. It focuses primarily on the activities of the Russian Second Army - a force quartered in the southern regions of the Russia and designated to conduct military operations against the Ottoman Empire in Europe. Under the leadership of General P. D. Kiselev, the General Staff of this army conducted a thorough research of previous Russo-Turkish wars (1711-1812) and integrated the lessons of these campaigns into a new strategic and tactical doctrine. Ultimately, this research was to result in the formulation of an innovative new Turkish war plan which proposed that the Russian army, for the first time in its history, cross the Balkan mountain range and march on Constantinople.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Pentarchy and the Congress of Verona, 1822 the Europeanpentarchy and the Congress of Verona, 1822
    THE EUROPEAN PENTARCHY AND THE CONGRESS OF VERONA, 1822 THE EUROPEANPENTARCHY AND THE CONGRESS OF VERONA, 1822 by IRBY C. NICHOLS, JR. North Texas State University MARTINUS NIJHOFF / THE HAGUE I 1971 @ 1971 by Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands All rights reserved, including the right to translate or to reproduce this book or parts thereof in any form ISBN-13: 978-90-247-1110-9 e-ISBN-13: 978-94-010-2725-0 DOl: 10.1007/978-94-010-2725-0 TO MY MOTHER PAULINE WRIGHT NICHOLS AND THE MEMORY OF MY FATHER IRBY COGHILL NICHOLS WHO INSPIRED ME TO BECOME A DISCIPLE OF CLIO CONTENTS PREFACE XI PART I GENESIS OF THE CONGRESS: FEBRUARY 1821-0CTOBER 1822 1 PROLOGUE THE DIPLOMATIC BACKGROUND OF THE CoNGRESS 3 1. The Congress is called 3 2. The Eastern Question 5 3. The Hanoverian Rendezvous 8 4. The Shift from Castlereagh to Canning 13 CHAPTER I THE ROAD TO VIENNA 19 1. The Castlereagh Instructions 19 2. The Wellington Mission 23 3. The Ascendancy of Villele 25 4. Franco-Spanish Relations, 1820-1822 27 5. The Villele-Wellington Interview 34 CHAPTER II THE VIENNA STALEMATE 40 1. The Conference Convenes 40 2. The Spanish Question 42 3. The Eastern Question 48 4. Italian Questions 54 5. A Retrospect 59 VIII CONTENTS PARTn THE CONGRESS AT WORK: OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1822 63 CHAPTER ill FROM VmNNA TO VERONA: PRELlMINARmS TO THE CoNGRESS 65 1. Exodus 65 2. The Canning Instructions 68 3. The Villcle Instructions 72 4. Reunion in Verona: The Congress at Play 75 5.
    [Show full text]
  • (1821-1827)1 I Henry Middleton of South Carolina Was Appointed United States Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary (T
    James J. F assolas An American Ambassador at the Court of St. Petersburg, Russia: Henry Middleton of South Carolina and John Capodistrias (1821-1827)1 I Henry Middleton of South Carolina was appointed United States Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary (the equivalent of present day Ambassador), to the Court of St. Petersburg, Russia, in the fall of 1820 and served at that post until the summer of 1830. During his ten-year diplomatic assignment to the Russian capital, he left A volumi­ nous correspondence of dispatches, letters, memoranda, notes, and vari­ ous papers and documents, covering the broad spectrum of Russian- American relations, European politics and diplomacy, and the Greek Revolution, beginning with Alexander Ypsilanti’s insurrection in the Romanian Principalities in March of 1821 and up to the conclusion of the Treaty of Adrianople and the recognition of Greece’s independence by the Sublime Porte in 1829 and later by the Great powers12. 1. In preparing this tudy, I would like to thank the International Research and Exchange Board (IREX), which provided A research grant to Romania and Greece in 1976-1977, and the School of Humanities and Fine Arts, Coastal CarolinA University - Conway-Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for granting me A Sabbatical leave from my teaching duties in 1991. 2. Middleton’s diplomatic correspondence from Russia covers the period from February 2, 1820 through July 27, 1830. His correspondence is deposited in the U.S. National Archives, Microfilm Publications, Microcopy No 35, “Despatches from United States Minis­ ters to Russia, 1808-1906”, Rolls 8-11, Volumes 8-11 (The National Archives and Record Service, General Service Administration: Washington, 1953).
    [Show full text]
  • Interconf» | № 53 the Impact of the Verona Conference
    SCIENTIFIC COLLECTION «INTERCONF» | № 53 Sadraddinova Gulnara Eldar Doctoral Candidate, Baku State University, Republic of Azerbaijan THE IMPACT OF THE VERONA CONFERENCE AND THE AKKERMAN AGREEMENTS ON THE GREEK REBELLION Abstract. At the Congress of Verona, held by members of the Holy Alliance in October 1822, Russia wanted to use it to carry out its insidious policy against the Ottoman state. Unable to do so, however, Tsarist Russia encouraged foreign powers to intervene in the Gr eek uprising. As a result, on October 7, 1826, the Akkerman Treaty was signed in an unfair political environment for the Ottoman state. This agreement represents an important stage in Ottoman-Russian political relations and in the formation of a map of the Balkans. However, this was a stage of development against the Turks and strengthened Russia's influence in the Balkans. Keywords: Congress of Verona, Akkerman Convention, Ottoman, Tstarist Russia, greek rebellion. The Ottoman Empire, weakened for internal and external reasons in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, faced political confrontation during the Greek uprising that began in 1821. The situation of the Ottoman state became even more tense as the rebels, who took advantage of the privileges granted to the Greeks by the Ottoman government, relied on the help of European states. Although the rebellion was organized by the Filiki Etherya Society, its secret leader was Tsarist Russia. Tsarist Russia, through the newly independent Greek state, wanted to strengthen its position in the Balkans and realize its plans for the Mediterranean. The interference of European states in the Greek question, which sought to thwart Tsarist Russia's intentions, led to the development of international relations.
    [Show full text]