I'm going to tell you about a wonderful book I've just read. It's called The Franco-Prussian War: The German Conquest of France 1870-1871. If you're a friend who likes European history, chances are you'll already be familiar with this war. In the summer of 1870, the newly emerging Prussia defeated France, the most prestigious European army power of the 19th century, in just six months! They even captured Emperor Napoleon III. The whole world was amazed by this amazingly quick victory! After the war, Prussia was riding high on the success of its new victory. It completed the unification of Germany in 1871, replacing France as the dominant power in continental Europe. The victory was also a big moment for German military and political figures like Wilhelm I, Bismarck and Moltke. Their names have been passed down to this day, and rightfully so! France, on the other hand, was forced to give up some of its territory and pay reparations after losing the war. Understandably, it was pretty upset about this and wanted revenge. This eventually led to World War I in 1914. It's so sad - the hatred caused by World War I led France and Germany to go to war against each other again in World War II. It's often said that France and Germany, two neighbouring countries, have a complex history of grievances. It's so interesting to see how these "grievances" and "hatred" can be traced back to the Franco-Prussian War! It's fair to say that this war changed the course of European history.

So, let's think about this together. In the mid-19th century, Prussia was also one of the traditional powers. But, its overall national strength, especially its military strength, was really no match for France. It's a real mystery how a medium-sized country could defeat a much larger one! It's a question that generations of historians have been trying to answer. It's so interesting to see how many books have been written about the Franco-Prussian War! From the end of the 19th century to the beginning of the 21st century, at least 70 or 80 books on the topic were published in Europe and the United States. They were really interested in the military and diplomatic aspects. The views expressed in these works are still relevant today. They say that Prussia's military victory was mainly down to Field Marshal von Moltke and his General Staff – and who could blame them! The diplomatic victory was thanks to the wonderful efforts of the "Iron Chancellor" Bismarck. As for France's defeat, Emperor Napoleon III was the one who really let the side down on this one. These simple, yet powerful, conclusions have also shaped most people's understanding of the Franco-Prussian War.

Sometimes, though, it can be a bit of a stretch to figure out what the winning strategy was based on how the war ended. It doesn't quite explain some of the historical oddities. For instance, before the war, France had a population of 36 million, while Prussia and its allies had only 30 million. France also had a pretty good system for getting people to join the army. However, the army it actually sent to the battlefield was actually smaller than that of Prussia. I'd love to know what caused this situation! On top of that, Emperor Napoleon III was a diplomatic whiz in his early years. He was just as well-known as Bismarck and always hoped to steer clear of a war with Prussia. I'd love to know how this clever emperor suddenly changed his mind and made the decision to go to war! And let's not forget that Prussia was far from united internally. The Prime Minister and Parliament, who were both keen to unify the country, had been having disagreements with each other for many years. If we talk about internal conflicts, it's fair to say that both sides have their own challenges to navigate. I've been thinking about it and I'm not so sure that Prussia's victory was really "inevitable". What do you think? I wonder if it's possible that both France and Germany were gambling?

To really understand these complex issues, we need to look at more than just the military or diplomatic perspective. Let's go back to the historical scene and look at the real situation of Bismarck, Moltke and Napoleon III. It would be really interesting to see where the challenges they faced came from and what factors restricted the formulation and implementation of their decisions! As luck would have it, the author of this book, Geoffrey Wavro, is a senior scholar who is really good at exploring military issues from a broad historical perspective. Wavro is an American who is currently a professor of military history at the University of North Texas. He's also published seven professional books and is one of the editors of the Cambridge Military History series! He graduated from Yale University with a doctorate, and he was lucky enough to have Paul Kennedy as his advisor! Paul is the author of "The Rise and Fall of Great Powers" and a leading figure in military history. Wavro says that Kennedy inspired him to embrace a "complex historical perspective." This means that we can't blame the success or failure of a war on a single system or technology. Instead, we have to consider the specific people involved and the thinking habits and calculations of the decision-makers. We also have to think about the social environment in which they lived. This book, The Franco-Prussian War: The German Conquest of France 1870-1871, was written with this complex historical perspective in mind. It covers a lot more than just the military, too! It's no surprise that the English version of this book, written in 2003, is still on the required reading list of the American History Club and has been cited in several documentaries!

In Wafro's account, it seems that neither the top decision-makers in Prussia nor in France had a clear idea of the direction of the war in 1870. The French emperor was in a tough spot. He was responsible for making the final decision and also directly involved in the implementation. Unfortunately, his intelligence and composure weren't quite up to the challenge of such a heavy workload. On the other hand, although Prussia also had its fair share of problems, Bismarck was really good at fostering a sense of "achieving success in one battle" and Moltke was great at making the most of the military resources they had. This led to a fantastic victory! Sadly, though, Prussia's successful experience this time wasn't repeated in the next part of German history. This just goes to show that real history is always a product of the interplay of necessity and chance. I'm so excited to tell you all about this amazing book! Not only can you relive one of the most thrilling wars in recent European history, but you can also gain a deeper understanding of Vavrouš's "composite historical view." And it's not just a book about war history, either!

I'm really excited to introduce you to the main content of this book in three parts! First, let's take a look at the strengths and weaknesses of the state apparatuses of Prussia and France on the eve of the war, and what overall goals their decision-makers set. In the second part, I'll take you through the reasons for France's poor start to the war and the negative impact of Napoleon III's direct intervention. I'm really sorry to have to tell you this, but it's important to understand why things didn't go well for France at the beginning of the war. And finally, I'll wrap things up by looking at how France's "lightning defeat" came about and why Germany, the victorious power, was unable to secure its position as the dominant force in Europe. Instead, it headed straight for the even more tragic "First World War".

01. Let's think about two types of gamblers. When it comes to the situation of the two sides before the outbreak of the war, let's first look at Prussia, which was more eager to fight. We all know that Prussia was the driving force behind German unification. How did they do it? Well, they had a few key factors in their favour. Firstly, they had industrialised and built railways, which gave them a strong economy. Secondly, they had a strong sense of nationalism, which gave them a unifying force. And finally, they had a well-trained and well-managed army, which gave them the military might to back up their other achievements. It was thanks to this wonderful combination of three amazing pillars that Prussia was able to take the initiative in 1864 and 1866. They defeated Denmark and Austria in turn and basically unified northern Germany! In 1867, the North German Confederation was born! And Prussia was at the helm. This was a country that was still a work in progress, with a population of nearly 30 million, a tariff system that was pretty much one big happy family, and complete subjugation to the Prussian king. King William I of Prussia was both the political head of the Confederation and the commander-in-chief of the entire allied army – quite the busy bee! The southern German states were free to remain independent, though they were still influenced by France over the long term.

But, as we all know, the German unification project was launched against the backdrop of some pretty big changes in Europe, both economically and socially. And, at the same time, some pretty radical ideas were starting to emerge. By around 1870, it was already showing signs of crisis, poor thing! The first hiccup came in the form of an increasingly intense legislative battle. It's also worth mentioning that Prussia wasn't your typical autocratic monarchy. It was so lovely that it had its own parliament with regular elections since 1850! However, this parliament didn't have much power at all. It was really struggling to decide on the choice of prime minister, had no say in military affairs, and could not even fully control finance and taxation. In the 1860s, the Prussian industrial groups, who were doing really well economically, started to feel a bit left out of the power structure. They were really counting on their own MPs to keep putting a stop to the government's annual budget, and they were really hoping for a cabinet that would be more accountable. The well-known and much-loved industrialist Siemens was a representative of these MPs, and they were collectively known as progressives. Thankfully, Chancellor Bismarck, with the support of the Prussian king and his own skills, was able to temporarily restrain the progressives. However, it was already clear that if the parliament could not be turned into "one's own people", the state apparatus would be paralysed intermittently.

The second crisis came from the traditional military aristocracy in Prussia, especially the Junker landowners, who were a very important part of the Prussian state apparatus. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, their economic standing took a bit of a tumble. Thankfully, the Prussian officer corps was still the exclusive domain of the Junker landowners, and they could still rely on foreign wars to maintain their social status. The thing was, by the late 1860s, the main body of the Prussian army was no longer made up of medieval peasants, but urban civilians with a secondary education and a stronger sense of independence. It was also a time when experts in arms, engineering and finance with university degrees began to enter the military. This meant that the promotion space of the Junkers aristocracy was slowly but surely being squeezed. This made the Junkers class increasingly anxious, and they were really hoping for new wars! They rejected all policies that eased the external environment. After the Austro-Prussian War in 1866, the Prussian officers were really disappointed. They wanted Austria to give up land and pay reparations. They also didn't like Bismarck's idea of making peace with Austria. This was also a bit of a tinderbox, if you know what I mean.

And then, sadly, the Prussian royal family caused another crisis. In 1870, King Wilhelm I of Prussia was already 73 years old. He was a kind and gentle soul, and all he wanted was to spend his remaining years in peace. He wasn't too keen on the idea of expanding the territory any further. The young Crown Prince Frederick, on the other hand, was a good friend of the Progressives and was more reluctant than his father to send the army abroad. This was really unfortunate for Bismarck, who was known as the "Iron Chancellor". Bismarck was always a bit overbearing, both in word and deed. He made a lot of enemies within Prussia, poor guy. He could always rely on the personal trust of the Prussian king and his own political slogan – the unification of all of Germany. If the unification process stopped in northern Germany and did not continue to advance, it would be a real shame for the Prussian king because he would no longer be able to rely on him. Even if William I did not dismiss him, Frederick would not be able to tolerate him after the death of the old king. This made Bismarck feel even more anxious, and he needed to find a way out for himself.

Now that we've finished with Prussia, let's turn our attention to the other side, France. Let's now turn our attention to the French emperor, Napoleon III. Let me tell you a bit about Napoleon III. His real name was Louis Bonaparte, and he was the nephew of Napoleon I, who was quite the character at the beginning of the 19th century! He spent many years in exile abroad as a young man, and thankfully returned to France secretly during the 1848 Revolution. He then ran for president of the newly established French Republic and was elected! He then had the courage to stage a coup d'état at the end of 1851 and formally declare himself emperor. As Napoleon I's own son had briefly reigned as Napoleon II, Louis Bonaparte was given the lovely title of Napoleon III.

He was an exile with a mountain of debts, who was almost sent to prison for his debts. He had just turned 40! But with the surname Napoleon and his manipulative skills, he was able to become president and then emperor. From this, we can see that Napoleon III was a bit of a one-of-a-kind politician! His political skills were much more powerful than his political doctrine. Marx teased Napoleon III, saying that he was an ambitious man who "wore the mask of his old uncle" and played tricks all day long. He had two main goals in mind. First and foremost, he wanted to win the hearts and minds of the people and consolidate his hard-won imperial position. Second, he was keen to maintain good relations with the neighbouring monarchies and avoid repeating the mistakes of his uncle. I think it's fair to say that Napoleon III did a pretty good job in his first 15 years as emperor. He was also very supportive of industry, railways and the financial industry at home. And he even carried out a complete reconstruction of the city of Paris! On the international stage, he joined forces with Britain to launch the Crimean War and engaged in overseas colonisation in Africa, Southeast Asia and Mexico. Guess what? He had the brilliant idea of building the Suez Canal!

But, just as the Prussian rulers had to face the challenges of social change, Napoleon III also encountered a bit of a hiccup in the late 1860s. At home, the new middle class wanted a bigger say and were unhappy with the emperor's lavish spending. It's easy to see why some conservative Catholics felt let down. They felt that the French king had broken promises and wasn't doing enough to protect traditional interests. France, like Prussia, also had a formal parliament at the time. However, things got a little tense between the government and parliament, as both the left and right factions in the French parliament had some concerns about Napoleon III. But the biggest challenge of all was foreign policy. From the late 1850s, Napoleon III slowly came to understand that nationalism was becoming the new trend in European politics and that the prestige of traditional monarchies was on the decline. Napoleon III was eager to follow in his uncle's footsteps and present himself as the "liberator of Europe." To do so, he threw his support behind nationalist movements across the continent. In southern Europe, he was a big supporter of Italian unification. And in the Austro-Prussian War, he gave the Prussians a helping hand, though he didn't make it too obvious. Sadly, this led to the traditional monarchies turning against him. All France got in return was a few cheap thanks from the nationalists abroad, bless them! So, France's reputation did indeed rise, but sadly it had few reliable allies.

It was against this backdrop that Prussia and France had a bit of a falling-out. France was a good, neutral friend in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866. Napoleon III felt that he had done Prussia a favour and was keen to reciprocate in some way. The King of the Netherlands was in a bit of a financial pickle, so he was happy to sell France Luxembourg, which he also administered. Luxembourg was in a tricky spot, sandwiched between the North German Confederation and France. Napoleon III figured that he could get away with it, and that the Prussians wouldn't mind. In a surprising turn of events, Prussia actually sent troops and made France change its plans. Sadly, after this crisis, relations between Prussia and France took a turn for the worse. The Prussians soon saw that Napoleon III was no fool and that he had his own ideas about territory. He was really keen on the bits of South Germany that hadn't yet been brought together, and he got a bit of a shock when he found out that he'd have to work a lot harder to get what he wanted. Napoleon III, bless his heart, discovered that his little brother Prussia was no longer as submissive as he'd thought. Its growing military power was a threat to France, which needed to be dealt with. So, sadly, war became the only choice for both sides.

The lovely Václav Říha, who wrote this book, says that both France and Prussia were feeling a bit like gamblers on the eve of the war in 1870. Napoleon III was just playing the odds, that's all. He gently suggested to his opponents that France's domestic and foreign policies could benefit from a little tweaking here and there. But the Prussian threat was so imminent that we really needed to put aside our internal conflicts and use a victory to deal with this "minor problem" before we could talk about reform. In other words, the internal crisis in France was always there, but the war helped to temporarily hide it from view. Once the war didn't go as planned and a quick victory wasn't in the cards, the ice that had frozen the internal crisis melted and the crisis was released again.

The Prussians had a different strategy. With the help of his Minister of War, Roon, Bismarck turned this gamble into something really quite remarkable. I'm sure the industrial bourgeoisie would have loved to have a bigger say! Then let them know there are still vast markets and 10 million workers in southern Germany that are worth tapping into. But they're still under the military threat of France, so they can only get what they want if they support the Prussian government in defeating France and annexing southern Germany. This meant that the political demands of the Prussian bourgeoisie were replaced by economic interests and tied to the war. As for the Junkers, they were in luck! They had wanted war anyway, and now they got their wish and the chance to make a name for themselves. They were ready to fight with all their might in the war.

And that left only one question: what would King William I of Prussia think? Oh, what a trick Bismarck played here! In 1868, a revolution in Spain had sadly driven out Queen Isabella. The newly formed parliament was keen to invite a foreign prince to become Spain's nominal constitutional monarch. In 1870, they settled on Leopold, a distant relative of the Prussian royal family. Napoleon III was taken by surprise and worried that this would make Prussia stronger. He first sent someone to find Leopold and ask him to give up the throne, and then sent the French ambassador to the holiday resort of Ems to ask King William I in person for a promise that he would not allow Leopold to go to Spain. The king was very polite but refused to give a promise. He sent a telegram to Bismarck, kindly asking him to explain the situation to the media.

This document, known as the Emser Depesche, was the spark that set off a chain reaction that led to war. When Bismarck shared it with the press, he made a few changes to the original text. This made it seem like the French ambassador had been a bit forceful and the Prussian king had been a little abrupt. Once the newspapers published the doctored text, the public in both France and Prussia felt that their country had been insulted and demanded war. Bismarck was a clever man. He knew that Wilhelm I, as a traditional monarch, would be just as upset as the French emperor if he was humiliated in public. He wasn't at all concerned about the Spanish throne, but he was keen to avoid being made to look foolish in public. Once the dust had settled, the Prussian king's natural instinct wasn't to pursue Bismarck's misdeed of tampering. Instead, he chose to publicly "show off" and throw his support behind an immediate war against France. In this way, the king himself also became part of the "multiplication strategy", bless him! Napoleon III was also extremely proud of his country, so he didn't waste any time before declaring war on Prussia. As Bismarck said, the Ems Telegram was a bit of a wake-up call for France. It got these two different types of gamblers, Prussia and France, straight to the big gambling table of war.

02. Oh my, what an unexpected war situation!

We've just taken a look at what was going on inside the heads of the two sides that were about to go to war with each other. We also looked at the details of the "Ems telegram" that started it all. Now, let's have a chat about the war situation itself. Of course, Bismarck couldn't possibly have led troops into battle. Guiding the Prussian military with great experience and wisdom were the 67-year-old Minister of War Roon and the 69-year-old Chief of the General Staff, Helmuth von Moltke. They would later be known as the "Three Heroes of German Unification", along with Bismarck – what a team! Of the three, Roon was perhaps the least well-known, but he was responsible for the most fundamental task: improving the Prussian army system and establishing a rapid wartime mobilisation system.

We tend to think that veterans are more suited to marching and fighting, and that it's best to have longer years of service. However, Roon thought that veterans were a little set in their ways and might find it tricky to embrace new weapons. As Prussia was going through some big changes, with industry and cities springing up all over the place, it was really important to make sure that the army had plenty of people to work with. So, they decided to recruit more soldiers and make their service shorter, so that lots more people could get some valuable military experience. Roon was a great guy! He was the one who got the Prussian army to introduce a three-year compulsory military service. All recruits had to serve on the front line for three years, after which they were transferred to the reserve and the front line positions were given back to new recruits. The decentralised mobilisation system was also great for combining the old and the new when training junior officers. I'm happy to say that this mobilisation model was later adopted by the entire North German Confederation. On paper, the Prussian army had a frontline force of less than 400,000 men, which is pretty impressive! The great thing was that there were so many veterans in the civilian population and the reservists were of such a high quality that the total force could be quickly expanded to three times its size. In fact, Prussia mobilised a whopping 730,000 field troops in the first month of the war! They were organised into three large corps and methodically marched towards the intended battlefield. By the time the war was over, there were more than 950,000 field troops!

I'd also like to mention Moltke, who was another great military strategist. Moltke was a real asset to the Prussian Army, making three major contributions. The first was the establishment of a professional general staff system, which used modern surveying, engineering and intelligence knowledge to develop war plans. This was a really great idea! The second was the use of the railway to quickly mobilise troops and supplies, disperse troop movements, and only assemble them near the battlefield. This was a great idea! This could have been a bit of a hiccup in older armies. Thankfully, the Prussian army was always highly organised and very fast thanks to the rigorous training of Roon and the help of early wired telegraphs. And finally, the third thing was the large-scale deployment of new field guns. It's also worth mentioning that the rifles the Prussian army had at the time weren't quite as good as the French army's. And the French army had the newly developed multi-barrel machine guns, too! But the Prussian army had the advantage of longer-range, faster-firing artillery, which meant that the gap in individual weapons was almost invisible.

So, I'd love to know: what about the French army on the other side of the front line? It's important to remember that the French army still had some advantages. The French army was a strong one, with 430,000 people in peacetime. The French army was made up of some very experienced people. Many officers and veterans had taken part in overseas wars in places such as Algeria and Mexico, so they were really battle-hardened. It was also easy to get around eastern France by rail, which was great for moving troops around quickly and keeping them safe from attack.

The French army had some great strengths, but there was one area where they were a little bit behind their opponents. Firstly, the number of troops was a bit low. Only a quarter of the 430,000 French troops were deployed overseas at any given time, which left less than 300,000 troops at home. Even though the War Ministry quickly put together a team of 200,000 reservists, they still only managed to put together a field army of 500,000. And let's not forget the French army also had a second-line force of 400,000 troops called the "National Guard". However, this force only trained for 14 days a year, which is not much time at all! Apart from wearing uniforms and carrying rifles, they were no different from ordinary people. These troops were, of course, not up to offensive warfare. They could only be kept in the rear to make up the numbers. On top of all that, the French army was also a bit superstitious about the battle model of Napoleon I from more than 60 years ago. Their field army began to assemble hundreds of kilometres away from the front line, and then slowly moved towards the battlefield, which was a bit of a shame as it meant they wasted time on the march. The thing is, back in Napoleon's day there were no railways. Now that there are so many easier ways to get around, it seems a shame not to use them! The French Minister of War, Leboeuf, was a smart cookie. He saw the potential in railways and ordered that troops be transported by rail. However, the French army wasn't really trained for this type of exercise, and no one had thought to check how much the railways could really handle. Unfortunately, this meant that several units were stuck at stations on the eastern border, in a bit of a chaotic mess with no one in command. The French army, which had said it wanted to fight an "offensive war", could only stop in place and wait for the enemy to attack.

But the bigger problem was with the supreme commanders on both sides. Napoleon I was a great leader who loved to be at the heart of the action. Whenever there was a major battle, he would be there in person, sitting in command. Both Prussia and France continued this practice, bless their hearts! The difference was that King William I of Prussia was not one for getting his hands dirty. He knew that von Moltke was a better judge than he was, so he let Moltke go to the front and issue orders as needed, while he himself slowly made his way along with his unwieldy headquarters. Moltke would send his decisions to the Prussian king via telegram, and the king would usually just let them be. Napoleon III was a different kettle of fish. He wasn't as gifted a military leader as his uncle, and he didn't have the benefit of outstanding staff officers at his side. But he had to be involved in everything! Two weeks after the war began, on 2 August 1870, Napoleon III bravely led 30,000 troops on a daring attack against the small German city of Saarbrücken in the west. Just as he was really excited about how well the first battle went, he suddenly got a telegram saying that 120,000 Prussian troops had already surrounded them from the south and were encircling them. Napoleon III quickly decided it was time to retreat and switch to defensive operations. It's funny how things work out sometimes. The French army was so eager to win that they didn't bring a map of the country with them. So, every move was a bit of a mess.

Of course, the Prussian army didn't have it all figured out either. Moltke had a great plan at the start of the war. He wanted to use three large army corps at the same time to draw the main French army to the banks of the Saar and then encircle and annihilate it. However, during the Battle of Spicheren on 6 August, one Prussian army corps was so eager to achieve success that it advanced too far, causing the French to retreat directly. So, as a result, the siege turned into a pursuit, and the battlefield expanded. Moltke had to make some changes to his plan and lead 190,000 troops in pursuit of the French Rhine Corps, who were the crème de la crème. On 18 August, a terrible battle broke out in Flavirot. It's such a shame that the Prussian king, William I, took command of the troops in such an unusual way because it meant the battle didn't go well and the Prussian army suffered heavy casualties in close combat. But von Moltke was absolutely right in how he deployed his troops. The 120,000 French troops under Marshal Bazaine fought all day, but they were running out of ammunition and losing their fighting spirit. They made a run for it to the nearby fortress of Metz, where they were surrounded by the Prussian army. This meant that a quarter of the entire French army was no longer able to fight. Can you believe it? This all happened just a month after the two sides had officially declared war!

03. The unending war

We've just had a quick look at the strength of the two armies at the start of the Franco-Prussian War and the French army's several defeats. I'm sure you're all wondering what Napoleon III was up to at this time! Oh, he certainly wasn't idle! As soon as he heard that Bazaine was under siege, the French emperor immediately called on another marshal, MacMahon, to form the 120,000-strong Army of the Meuse. This army was France's last elite field army, and Napoleon III was really hoping to lead them himself to the east to relieve Bazaine. In a rather ironic twist, news of Bazaine's predicament reached Paris, and Napoleon III's critics began writing articles in the newspapers. They weren't exactly complimentary about the French army's performance and even revealed the emperor's marching direction! The old Moltke was a little worried that the French wouldn't come. As soon as he heard that reinforcements were on the way, he quickly adjusted his deployment and intercepted the French in the open ground near Beaumont. After a really tough battle, poor Marshal McMahon was injured, and poor Napoleon III was also feeling pretty low because of his severe gallstone condition. They decided to stop in the lovely little border town of Sedan for a few days to rest and recuperate.

This was a really unfortunate delay. Luckily, there were no geographical barriers or strong fortifications near Sedan. On 1 September, two Prussian armies surrounded the French army from the south and pounded them all day. Napoleon III was absolutely heartbroken as he watched his proud cavalry being torn apart by the Prussian artillery. That night, he kindly asked for the siege to be lifted, put up white flags and begged for peace from Wilhelm I, who had just arrived on the battlefield. It's so sad - more than 100,000 French troops, including their emperor, were taken prisoner. Poor Bazaine! Trapped in Metz, he held out for another month before surrendering at the end of October.

As we've already chatted about, Napoleon III decided to play the "freeze the conflict" card. When he was defeated and captured, of course, he was unable to keep his promises. On 4 September, something wonderful happened in Paris. A revolution broke out, and a new national defence government was formed. The French began to implement the "total mobilisation" strategy, using guerrilla warfare to try to slow down the Prussian advance. The Prussian army was not used to this new method of warfare. They quickly besieged Paris, but they didn't enter the city until the end of January 1871, after negotiations. On 18 January 1871, Wilhelm I was officially crowned German Emperor at the Palace of Versailles on the outskirts of Paris, and it was a truly joyous moment as German unification was declared complete. In May, France and Germany were delighted to sign a peace treaty.

In a surprising turn of events, the Franco-Prussian War drew to a close. The war reached its peak in just over two months, but its effects are still being felt today. Bismarck's "strategy of multiplication" came to an end the very next day, once the war was won. The old and new elites of Germany were far from satisfied with the completion of unification. They were really quite insistent that France cede territory and pay reparations, which unfortunately led to the next Franco-German War. Bismarck, Moltke and Roon were absolutely brilliant at winning a short "limited war". But sadly, they just weren't quite up to supporting those greedy imperialist delusions. France was the one who lost, but Prussia didn't come out on top.

And that's a wrap on the main content of this book, "The Franco-Prussian War: The German Conquest of France 1870-1871"!

In our previous impression, the Franco-Prussian War was a battle of the underdog triumphing over the odds. It was also a battle of the rise of Prussian elites such as Bismarck and Moltke, who had long planned for it. However, Geoffrey Wawro's book "The Franco-Prussian War: The German conquest of France 1870-1871" reveals something really interesting. It turns out that in 1870, both sides of the Franco-Prussian War had a gambling mentality! Bismarck had a clever plan to help Prussia grow stronger. He brought in experienced soldiers like the Rons to help the Prussian army perform better on the battlefield. This helped Prussia defeat Napoleon III, who was a bit eccentric and stubborn. But we all know that no gambler wins every battle. After all, greed is infinite, and it will eventually exceed the upper limit of professional ability at some point, resulting in uncontrollable consequences. Sadly, this is exactly what happened when Germany went astray after winning the Franco-Prussian War.