Great update. Would be interesting to see an earlier Germany and Italy. Keep up the good work.
Down the Parallel Road: An Afsharid Persia Timeline
- Thread starter Nassirisimo
- Start date
Indeed I do! Thanks for pointing it out.
Surprisingly few wars are caused by the machinations of great men, and many are simply caused by the reaction of powers to events they have not directly instigated. I suppose that this war would come under that category.
Indeed, though I suppose France has the advantage of not quite having the whole continent arrayed against it. Still, it doesn't prove to be an easy war for France, and the coalition may well see France off yet.
Well, only so much fatherland can be liberated you see
. Unless you're Mussolini or something, in which case I would suppose you simply keep going until your army stops winning.It would be just Italy's luck, would it not? However, I'm sure one day Italy will get a break.
It may well change the perception of nationalism, as it has first appeared as a major disruptive force in nations that do not have a state. At least for a few decades, nationalism is likely to be very much an insurgent force, much as it was in the restoration. However, there are also those that are attempting to bend it to their whims such as France's King Henri.
French Intervention in Germany - Part Three
Achille MacNamare; European Warfare in the 19th Century
The war in 1829 and the Battle of Regensburg
With the French Victories in the winter of 1828, Devaux and the French had bought themselves some breathing room. The French now planned their next moves, despite their inferior forces. Devaux and King Henri both argued that it were the large foreign powers that needed to be taken out of the picture rather than the German Parliament. Henri believed that without the British and the Austrians, the German kings could be persuaded to turn against the revolutionaries in exchange for a French retreat across the Rhine. This would not only allow the French to cut the increasingly costly war short, but would convert the German kings and princes into allies against the rising force of German nationalism. Devaux thus planned the campaign of 1829 with political considerations as paramount. As Giuseppe Savona would later note approvingly, the French remembered the lesson that “War is only to be fought only with clear political objectives in mind”.
The First French army was to thrust into Hannover, defeating the British and cutting Germany off by sea from the rest of the world. From there, it could offer support to the Danes who were dealing with a low-level German insurgency of their own in the Duchies of Holstein and Schleswig. Meanwhile, the Second and Third armies would have the task of dispatching the Austrian army, now camped near Munich. In doing this, they would also have to prevent the Germans and the Austrians from joining forces. It would be a difficult juggling act, and some more cautious French commanders dismissed Devaux’s plan as foolhardy. Yet Devaux knew that another year of war would be hugely costly to the French treasury, and would drive France’s national debt dangerously high. Finance dictated the risky strategy.
In the North, the British under the Earl of Warwick had landed with an expeditionary force of 57,000 men. They had found themselves augmented by a force of around 40,000 Germans, some Hanoverian Landsturm and others regulars of the German Army who had escaped the desperate Battles in Hesse. Warwick, a talented defensive commander, managed to fight the French First Army to a draw at the Battle of Göttingen, inflicting 12,000 casualties on the French for around 8,000 of his own. He retreated in good order to Hanover, allowing the French to lick their wounds before pursuing him. Meanwhile, the remaining forces of the Germans and the Austrians agreed to meet at the town of Bayreuth, combining forces and pushing the French back. French military intelligence caught wind of this, and were determined to prevent the two from meeting.
The French reached Bayreuth before the Austrians, forcing the Germans to retreat. Rather than split his forces to chase the Germans, Devaux left a corps in Bayreuth to head off any attempt by the Germans to aid the Austrians, and took the other two armies to confront the Austrians. The Austrian Commander, the Archduke Franz Karl, was still a relatively inexperienced general. Nevertheless, he was aware of the French plan. Both the French and Austrian armies were comprised of slightly under 180,000 men, though Franz Karl was aware that his forces were inexperienced, and nervous at the prospect of facing the supposedly invincible French army. He knew that his only hope of victory would be to strike at each French army separately, allowing his superior numbers to tell against the two French armies individually.
The Austrians decided to stop marching at Regensburg. Here, the Austrian army decided to entrench themselves, build barricades and ramparts. They were determined to stop any French attack dead in its tracks. In the space of two weeks, the Austrians built defences in and around the town of Regensburg whilst resting, and the French force marched their way from Bayreuth to the vicinity of the Austrian army. The French armies were divided, the Second Army positioned near the village of Lappersdorf, two and a half kilometres from Regensburg, and the Third Army having crossed the Danube at Donaustauf and making its way towards Barbing. However, Devaux was not aware of how far away the Third army was from its objective, and launched his attack at around 5:00 on the 30th of June.
The first objective of the French Second army was a hill to the North West of Regensburg, which was heavily defended by Austrians. French Chasseurs cleared isolated bands of Austrian Grenzer from the hamlet of Kareth, before launching an assault on the main hill. The initial skirmishes seemed promising, and the Austrian positions on the hill seemed weak. However, Franz Karl sent reinforcements to the hill, assured that the French Third army was far away and seeing the opportunity to give the French a bruising. By 7:00, the Austrians had two hold army corps on the hill, ready to absorb an attack by the French. Devaux sent MacNeil to prove the left of the Austrian position, but found that the defences there were strong. MacNeil was beaten back by an Austrian “wall of lead”, which lead Devaux to conclude that the right was denuded of forces. However, a probing attack was held, and the Austrians launched a counter-attack that savaged the French. By 10:00, the French had made little progress, and the confidence of the Austrian forces was now buoyed.
At 10:45, Devaux rallied his forces and now attempted to blast the Austrians off the hill with his powerful artillery. The Austrians attempted to respond with counter-battery fire, but after half an hour of an artillery duel the Austrians were forced to give way. However, the initial French assault on the hill was beaten off by the retreating Austrians. Despite this, by 11:35 the French had captured the hill, giving them a clear view of the city of Regensburg. Devaux was now determined to hold the Austrians in Regensburg, allowing the Third Army to cut off any retreat and press the Austrians from the South. He sent in Bernadotte to assault the town, with his die-hard veterans of the Java campaign. These men, having survived the rigours of guerrilla warfare in the jungle, were held to be some of France’s best soldiers. However, their attack was bogged down, and attempts to reinforce them were blown back by fierce Austrian artillery fire.
This stalemate continued until 15:00, when the first skirmishers of the Third French Army appeared to the East of the Austrians. Franz Karl’s Grenzers held them off initially, but sooner the army was looming, and Franz Karl was faced with an enormous dilemma. Retreating from Regensburg would be an enormous blow to the morale of his army, and it was not an entirely safe move, considering the tactical mobility of the French armies. However, staying in Regensburg would mean being surrounded by the French, and very possibly defeat. At 16:10, the decision was made to retreat. However, this appeared to be too late, and the “Java Soldiers” of Bernadotte broke into the main part of the town. The Austrian forces in the city were now in disarray, attempting to put up resistance wherever possible, and streaming out of the town.
Franz Karl attempted to rally the men, but was now troubled by the Third Army pressing on his flank. It appeared as if it would smash into the Austrian army, which was now in disarray. Franz Karl decided to launch one of the most famed manoeuvres of the war to save his army, the “Great Charge” of Regensburg. His largely untouched cavalry reserves were gathered, and thrown at the unsuspecting French Third Army. In a war where cavalry forces had hitherto been relegated to a secondary role, the initial success of the charge, and the decisive role that it played in allowing much of the Austrian Army to retreat was noted by all military observers in Europe at the time. In particular, the Hungarian Hussars acquitted themselves well, gaining a reputation as some of Europe’s most excellent cavalry. Although only half of the Austrian cavalry force managed to escape the battle, they had ensured that Austria had lost only 34,000 casualties dead, wounded and captured at Regensburg. The French had suffered a similar number, and were in no condition to chase after the Austrians.
The Battle of Regensburg had been France’s best chance to destroy the Austrians as a fighting force, and she had failed. The Archduke Franz Karl had made his reputation as the man who fought France’s best and survived to tell the tale. However, the French war effort seemed to take a turn for the better once again when the main British army had been forced to surrender at Celle. Henri now saw an opening to end the war before it became a quagmire. He invited emissaries from Britain, Austria, Saxony, Prussia and Bavaria (though notably not Hesse) to Paris for a conference intended to settle the issues which had provoked the war in the first place. By the end of August, the Paris Conference was ready to proceed.
* * * * * *
Frederick Cregan; A History of Modern Europe
Piedmont's Last Hurrah?
Frederick Cregan; A History of Modern Europe
Piedmont's Last Hurrah?
In the October of 1829, Italy was a sullen place. The revolutions of the previous year which looked set to deliver a unified Italian nation state in the north had given way to a foreboding amongst many of the peoples of North Italy. The Piedmontese had unified the North following revolutions in the previous year, though this new enlarged kingdom was riven by regional tensions, as well as a brewing conflict between the Conservatives, now led by Asti, and the National Liberals. Following the peace treaty between France and Austria, which omitted any reference to the situation in Italy, the Conservatives had become increasingly worried about the prospects of an Austrian intervention to restore the Ancien Regime governments in North Italy. They were well aware that Piedmont lacked the military might to take on the Austrians, though some of the National Liberals saw hope with a policy of “National Mobilization”.
However, the idea of “National Mobilization” had less traction amongst the peasants who made up the vast majority of Italian society. Most were resentful at the higher taxes that had come alongside the imposition of Piedmontese rule, and saw little beneficial impact in other areas of their lives. It wasn’t to say that they would love positively on the re-imposition of the old order, but there were few on the lower rung of society who were willing to sacrifice themselves for nationalistic ideals. Without the support of the peasantry, it seemed that there was little chance for the Piedmontese to hold their newly-won territories against the Austrian counter-revolution. Even the enlarged Piedmontese army of 89,000 would struggle against an Austrian army that would likely be twice its size. Asti, aware of the incoming Austrian counter-revolution, put out secret peace feelers to Vienna, promising a withdrawal from all territories beyond Sardinia’s 1827 borders. However, when these secret communications were discovered, Asti was disgraced, and exiled by the King.
With Asti out of the picture, the more liberal Charles Emmanuel now prepared for a showdown with the Austrians. A call for volunteers went out, attracting around 10,000 more men to the army. He attempted in vain to secure French help, and he even supported other budding nationalist movements within Austria itself such as the Hungarians and the Czechs. However, these movements were of a very limited scale at these points, and the vast majority remained loyal as the Austrian army began massing at Gorizia. With no help coming from outside, the course of the campaign seemed to be a foregone conclusion. The capable Austrians under Franz Karl were able to hammer the numerically inferior Sardinians out of Venetia. Efforts at securing a ceasefire floundered, and the Austrians pushed ahead, forcing the Sardinians to make a last stand at Milan. In a catastrophic battle that lasted for two days, the Sardinian army was smashed to pieces and the new king Charles Emmanuel was killed in the fighting.
With its army smashed and its homeland now open to Austrian forces, the Sardinian government surrendered to the Austrians after merely two months of fighting. The life’s work of Asti had seemingly been ruined, as Sardinia barely preserved her independence and territorial integrity following the war. Eventually, it was French pressure more than anything that preserved some semblance of Sardinian power, but it seemed as though she had been smashed and would struggle to play an independent role on the Italian peninsula. In Italy, not only had the forces of National Liberalism been defeated, but the victory of Conservatism was so comprehensive that it seemed Nationalism was a dead letter in the country.
* * * * * *
Author's Notes - The war has been won and France's continental hegemony has been defended. However, the question for France is how long she can keep nationalism down in Germany. Were German nationalists to unleash themselves again when France was tied up elsewhere, it is possible that they could establish a German state before France could crush it in the cradle. For now, the German question is closed by the potential lies ready to rise again.
In Italy, Italian Nationalism appears like a spent force, but a martyr can always be a powerful rallying symbol. Again, the question is how long Austria can expend her energies suppressing the national ambitions of Italians. Another book which seems closed but could burst open in the future.
This is the last update of the current cycle! Next update comes with an overview and that pretty world map I've been promising you all.
Very nice! Sad to see Germany and Italy go down so hard. I'm surprised Britain didn't put up more of a fight. I bet they will be begging for s rematch. Can we get a casualty list by nation?
Thanks for the comment!
I think that Britain is likely to put more of her resources overseas in any future war with France, though her strategy will likely be compromised by the fact that Austria is no longer a match for France. This could lead to warmer British relations with Russia interestingly enough, provided that tensions in Persia don't become too high. Any casualty lists given would be approximate, though the German Federal forces as well as those of the kingdoms likely suffered the heaviest losses. Austria got off relatively lightly, so while her prestige has taken a big hit the majority of her capability is still intact.
France won't settle for anything less than the dismantling of the German Federal State. She is likely to want to keep Austria out of Germany, as an Austrian-led Germany would likely be too much for France to handle in the future, though may be willing to leverage Italy for this. Britain will want to do something to curb French power on the continent, but without a land army her deck is limited.
He will certainly be a big player in Austria in the upcoming years, especially with the prestige won at Regensburg. His supporters will likely trumpet his virtues, positing that a different commander would have met disaster when faced with Devaux and the cream of the French army. How much interest he will take in domestic reform and the overall grand strategic picture for Austria remains to be seen however.
Well, it has been "disproved" in the sense that it isn't seen as an explosive, strong force, more the cry of the oppressed which will certainly have interesting ramifications in the future.
The Age of Revolutions - Third Cycle Introduction (1830 to 1862)
The Age of Revolutions
Had 1829 been a false start in Europe? Devaux and King Henri had managed to wring a great victory against the scattered forces of a coalition assembled to thwart French hegemony in Western Europe. However, the French forces had hammered those of the Germans, the Austrians and the British, dissolving the Frankfurt Parliament and leaving Germany as a “no man’s land”, an enormous buffer that would protect France’s eastern flank and leave her free to concentrate on overseas expansion. However, though armies had been easy for France to dispatch, this was not true of the ideas that had led to the convening of the German Parliament in the first place. The sense of powerlessness and resentment in Germany began to grow ever stronger, as educated Germans asked themselves why their country should be the battleground of Europe, always involved in war but never as a serious player. At least among the educated, the regional identities that had dominated for centuries began to weaken as the inevitable answer to “The German Question” became, at least for the Germans, National Union.
The Great King Henri, who had expanded France’s borders, vanquished her enemies and given her unparalleled prosperity had seemingly provided her the key to permanent security. This was the consolation which eased his worsening condition as cancer began to eat away at his body at an early age. His heir Louis was known as an uninspired wastrel, though it was felt by many that the French “ship of state” as it were was such a sturdy one that it could survive even the worst captain at the helm. This contrasted with the perilous position of Austria. Chased out of Germany and overshadowed by the two great continental colossi, France and Russia, Austria seemed to have her purpose ripped away from her. The ruling class of Austria now had to find a new role for her, but also had to contend with the growth of nationalism among the different peoples of the Empire as Hungarians, Czechs and others all questioned why they must be ruled by Germans.
While Europe reeled from the impact of new national ideas, much of the rest of the world was beginning to feel the first small waves of modernity. India and much of the East Indies had both come under the dominion of the English and French respectively, though vast swathes of Asia still saw little to no European influence. Japan still maintained its policy of Sakoku, determined to keep “Barbarians” out, while the Chinese only opened the southern port of Canton to the Europeans, wary of giving them too much influence. Nevertheless, as European interest in these nations grew alongside their power in the region, it seemed only a matter of time that the nations of East Asia would be forced to adjust themselves to meet the challenges that Europe and Modernity presented. How East Asia would meet the challenge however, was yet to be seen.
In South East Asia, the chaos that had marked the end of the 18th century had given rise to a new, seemingly stable order based around three major kingdoms, Burma, Siam and Vietnam. As these nations consolidated themselves and refined their administrations, the smaller kingdoms that surrounded them such as Kedah, Cambodia and Vientiane feared for their own independence. Vietnamese and Siamese agents jockeyed for influence at the Cambodian court, and the Sultan of Kedah attempted to make the most of his marginal resources to maintain his independence, though as Siam consolidated, would Kedah’s great strides be enough to stave off its far more powerful neighbour forever? And what of European influence in the region, previously confined only to the islands of the East Indies but now making itself felt through merchants and adventurers. What effects would the growth of European power in the region have?
And what of the Muslim world? First the superior of the West, then its rival, now seemed if anything its inferior cousin. Once the terror of Europe, the Ottoman Empire had been battered by its neighbours for a century, and was reduced from a continent-spanning Empire to the Balkans and Anatolia, threatened by its neighbours to every side. And yet, the seeds for renewal had been sown, and the Ottoman Empire frantically modernised to meet the challenges it faced. The same could not be said for Persia, once hopeful to be the leader of the Muslim world but now wracked by growing internal troubles and the aggressiveness of the Russians to the north. Islamic India had become nothing more than buffer kingdoms, fought over by the British and their Hindu and Sikh neighbours. Could the growing Sahelian Kingdom of the Fulani peoples be a source of renewal for the Islamic world however? Only time could tell.
The New World was in the process of separating itself from the Old at least politically, though many of the same ideological and economic currents could be found in both. The Anglophone colonies of North America had separated, divided by the question of slavery which seemed to be at the route of the social and political differences between Allegheny and Columbia, the Northern and Southern Nations. The French colonies still remained linked to the home country, though especially in Quebec, the opinion that they should go the way of England and Spain’s colonies was an increasingly popular one. And in Latin America, the newly independent nations remained wracked by internal divisions as Centralists clashed with Unionists, Conservatives with Liberals and Mestizos with Natives.
On top of these other changes, those of the Industrial Revolution seemed poised to make the greatest difference in the long run, as technologies such as the railroad and the steamship shortened distances, while all a manner of machines threatened to make hand-powered industries obsolete. It would be this revolution that would power the economic growth that would make some parts of the world dominant. The 19th century was well and truly underway, and promised to transform the world like no other century before it.
The world in 1829
Every time a read one of your updates it makes me want to play Empire: Total War.
The America's will most likely see the former Spanish Colonies following the same if not bloodier route they did OTL. Colombia meanwhile will probably start a war with the French Empire at some point in the Future, but probably in alliance with another power that has a beef with France to be on the safe side of things.
Well for South East Asia would see British and Nam Viet benefit the most in this era since the Kedah Sultan would seek British assistance against the Siamese, giving the British a springboard for obtaining sovereignty over the Malacca Straits and a possible ally for Siam's rival to help modernize.
The Muslim World will be in dire straits if a Anglo Russian Alliance comes into full affect since they could coordinate how to carve up the Ottoman and Egyptian Empires, with Constantinople becoming an Anglo Russian Consortium. Though such an arrangement could lead to Constantinople being transformed into something akin to OTL Singapore, which could change Economic dynamics throughout Europe and the Middle East.
Well for South East Asia would see British and Nam Viet benefit the most in this era since the Kedah Sultan would seek British assistance against the Siamese, giving the British a springboard for obtaining sovereignty over the Malacca Straits and a possible ally for Siam's rival to help modernize.
The Muslim World will be in dire straits if a Anglo Russian Alliance comes into full affect since they could coordinate how to carve up the Ottoman and Egyptian Empires, with Constantinople becoming an Anglo Russian Consortium. Though such an arrangement could lead to Constantinople being transformed into something akin to OTL Singapore, which could change Economic dynamics throughout Europe and the Middle East.
Deleted member 67076
Spain keeping New Spain ironically enough probably prevents the latter from sinking into secondary power status for a while, given the Bourbon Reforms did some excellent work in reinvigorating Mexico, Guatemala and Santo Domingo.
I'm wondering though if the French have been sending mass settlers to Louisiana. Given recent decades have engorged the metropole and the colonies, they certainly have the manpower to do it and the economic incentive. Spice plantations in Louisiana anyone?
I'm wondering though if the French have been sending mass settlers to Louisiana. Given recent decades have engorged the metropole and the colonies, they certainly have the manpower to do it and the economic incentive. Spice plantations in Louisiana anyone?
I do enjoy a game of it from time to time even now, though I have less time these days.Every time a read one of your updates it makes me want to play Empire: Total War.
I guess the bright spot for Latin America would be that Mexico would not be as threatened by an influx of American settlers, though this is likely to benefit Native American inhabitants of the West as much as anyone. They may get a few more decades without the domination of white settlers, and North America may see surviving pockets of Natives who aren't forced into reservations in the long run. In addition, the Dual Portuguese-Brazilian monarchy could be an interesting set up if they manage to pull it off.
South East Asia may be rather quite interesting, especially if there is a stronger France in the mix. It is likely that Vietnam and Siam may duel once again for mastery of the area, and the intensifying control of both states may see Vientiane and Cambodia absorbed into the larger kingdoms. For Kedah, the questions are if she can develop a network of support amongst other Muslim states in the area, and whether she can secure British aid, without which she would likely lose her independence.
The Ottomans may well have to rely on a French alliance. The poor French seem to have their work cut out propping up various governments, though it would have the benefit of allowing France to establish a commercial zone of influence as large as Britain's. For this, reason as well as geopolitical considerations she may well choose to support the Ottomans against the British and Russians. Assuming the Brits support the Ruskies in the first place...
Poor map colouring choice on my part. New Spain is independent, though Spain holds the Caribbean. Spain could have indeed have maintained its Great Power status if it had held onto some American colonies, but at least she has the Philippines. No Yanquis to seize it off of her this time around and everything! Of course, the Spanish in OTL did try to make their Caribbean colonies into cash cows, and might do the same here.
French immigration to the colonies is increasing, mostly to Quebec but there are increasing numbers in Louisiana too. By 1830, numbers have probably increased to a sufficient degree that American expansion beyond the Mississippi is a difficult proposition at best.
Persia - 1830 to 1850
In the Shadows of the Shahs: Persia in the Islamic Period to the Modern Day
The Early Reign of Tahmasp
Tahmasp had almost had the throne hoisted upon him at the tender age of 16 following the assassination of his older brother Hassan, who had died without any male children despite possessing an enormous harem. In contrast to his brash, but unintelligent and weak brother, Tahmasp was noted for being a rather quiet, even subdued young boy. He showed great promise in his studies, but had trouble asserting himself even as a royal prince. Not expecting to rule, he spent his adolescent years in further study, learning how to speak French as well as Persian, Arabic, Turkish and Urdu. When officers involved in Abbas’ assassination came to him and announced his succession to the throne, he was said to have been speechless for a whole day afterward. This was a Shah who was certainly not born to rule.
Following his coronation, he took up residence in the city of Isfahan, and set to work on the “Firman Isfahan” or the Edict of Isfahan. While not resembling the constitutions of France and Sardinia-Piedmont in Europe, this document may well have been inspired by some of the ideas articulated in them. It promised that Persia would be ruled in accordance with the best interests of the Persian people, and that the Persian government would be reformed to eliminate corruption and work in the best interests of the people. These were lofty ideas, but were not backed by any kind of representative body. The Shah was confirmed as the ultimate interpreters of the people’s will. Perhaps more startlingly, although the document confirmed the Shah as the Amir-ul-Mu’minin (Commander of the Faithful), there was no reference made to the powerful ulema, who saw themselves as snubbed by the new direction that Tahmasp seemed to be heading towards.
Tahmasp had been brought to power by the support of the army, who viewed his natural tendency to avoid conflict as a way to ensure their own positions in Persian society. Indeed, Tahmasp in the first years of his reign avoided any kind of attempt to impede on the status quo within the army, confirming his brother’s murderers in their positions. His first attempt at reform came with a rationalisation of Persia’s tax system, ensuring that all land in Persia had a registered owner who would be liable to pay tax assessed by the bureaucracy, and paid directly to the Persian government rather than to regional governors. Making governors dependent on their incomes on the Shah reinforced the centralisation of the country already guaranteed by the military, and gave the Shah more power to spend the government’s income as he pleased. This would aid him greatly in the rest of his reform efforts.
However, the reforms generated much in the way of resentment among sections of the Persian population. The Ulema went as far as to condemn the Firman Isfahan, with both Sunni and Shia scholars joining forces to condemn what they saw as the overreach of the Shah. Although he had not gone as far as the Ottoman Sultan in imposing a Civil Law Code on the country and abrogating the Sharia, there were fears that he would eventually do so. The Firman also left the Waqf alone, though Shia Waqf were now liable to pay a levy, as were holdings by the Armenian Church. For now, those affiliated with the state-supported Jafari’ Madhab of Sunni Islam were exempt from any kind of payment to the government, though suspicions were raised. While not too similar to the contemporary secular reforms of the Ottomans, the spirit of the Firman Isfahan began to split the religious establishment to a much greater degree than before, whilst winding down some state support for some religious foundations.
Also alienated were groups such as the nomads, and non-Persians. Despite the Turkic Afshar origins of Tahmasp, he renewed efforts both to reduce the size and influence of the tribes in Persian society, as well as to reinforce efforts in the Civil Service to make Persian the sole language in use. By the 1840s, the Lur language, which had been spoken by hundreds of thousands of Lur tribesmen in the Zagros Mountains only a hundred years previously, was by the 1850s reduced to a few thousand speakers, the language and culture of whom were documented by the Italian Orientalist, Francesco Rossi. Similarly, Turkomen tribes in Persia such as the Qajar and Afshar groups found themselves integrated either with their Persian-speaking or Azeri-speaking neighbours. Many of the tribal peoples remaining maintained a strong resentment against the Shah for turning his back on the people who had brought his family to power (the Afsharid Dynasty took its name from its Afshar Tribe). However, with the ascendency of the musket in Persian warfare, there was little that tribal powers could do to challenge the Shah.
A more serious challenge to the Shah’s power came from the Persian Military. Unlike the civilian arm of the Persian government, minorities such as the Afghans, Uzbeks and Kurds were well represented in the army. Sher Ali Khan, who famously lost the Battle of Malatya against the Ottomans in 1848 was an Afghan, and his replacement who fought a holding action a few days was an Uzbek. While some resentment was created in Tahmasp’s attempts to “Persianise” the bureaucracy, more was created in his seemingly neglectful conduct towards the Persian military. Following the defeat at the hands of the Russians in the 1820s, but picking up momentum following the unsuccessful war against the Ottomans, there was a growing movement within the Persian court to pay more attention toward the enlargement and modernization of the military. The military itself had not grown much since the days of Reza Shah, despite the fact that Persia’s population had doubled. Tahmasp had dedicated some funds toward the military, but this was only enough to modernize its equipment, not to increase it to the size needed to protect Persia.
By the 1850s, the Shah’s negligence in military matters was now being criticised outside of the court too. The reformist advisor adviser turned rabble-rouser Mohsin Ali al-Hamdani wrote a tract warning of the danger posed by European powers, who were flexing their muscles in India, and who Hamdani felt would soon turn their attention to the Middle East. The Shah was still powerful enough to ward off criticism from these elements, but the fact that the emerging Persian civil society seemed to be aligning against him was a worrying auger for the future.
In the end, it would not be events in Persia that avoided the seemingly impending coup-de-tat, but events in India. As a great crisis brewed in the subcontinent, Persia’s eyes once again turned to the East…
* * * * * *
A True Civil Society? Social Change in Persia in the Early 19th Century
It has often been argued that one of the factors that contributed to the success of certain Western countries in the 18th and 19th centuries was their possession of what would come to be known as “Civil Society”, people and institutions which form opinion independently of government. A contentious point of Persianists and Historians was whether or not the changes which affected Persian society in the early 19th century constituted the emergence of a civil society. Certainly, the nature of Persian society had been changing greatly at this point, as the population had been increasing since the establishment of the Afsharid Dynasty. As in other areas of the world such as Europe and China, the adoption of New World Crops as well as more refined agricultural techniques enabled Persia’s population to explode, reaching a high point of 36 million in 1850.
Persia had long had a record of urbanization and great cities, though the rate of urbanization in Afsharid Persia exceeded that even of Safavid Persia. Isfahan possessed 750,000 inhabitants in 1850, with numerous other cities growing to large seizes as well. Persia had around 7 cities with a population higher than 100,000, a rate which compared favourably to many parts of the world, including a number of European countries. However, Persia’s cities were not as prosperous, and for those unable to find work in manufacturing, life was precarious, and many depended on the charity of richer inhabitants as well as the ulema. Especially as Central Asia became settled with Persians, the cities filled up with the former inhabitants of the countryside, unable to find land and now unable to find work in the cities.
These people, who the reformed al-Hamdani referred to as the “Great Unfortunates”, found seasonal work and attempted to live as best they could with the proceeds. However, living conditions were appalling, as the French visitor Richard Lefergey noted.
I found houses of mud-brick, scarsely sufficient for a family of eight, housing as many as five or six families of eight or more. Any kind of privacy was impossible in these conditions, as families often shared rooms, making the caged life for women found in the Persian upper classes impossible for these wretched people. The situation for their health is beyond belief, as the only facility for sanitation is a latrine shared with many other houses, which flows into an open sewer. I had never experienced before this kind of deprivation, even in the worst slums of Manchester and Liverpool.
Although Persia as a whole was fairly prosperous and secure, the living conditions for those at the bottom were arguably worse than any seen in Persian history. Beyond the efforts of private charity, there were some tracts published which suggested that something needed to be done for these unfortunates.
Issues such as these led to a growing consciousness in society that was marked by the publication of the first non-government newspaper in Isfahan in 1844. The paper, named Ettela'at or “Information”, proved to be something of a success, so much so that by the time of its closing in 1848, it had an estimated circulation of around 5000. It reported on an array of international events as well as happenings in Persia. It’s criticism of the government, especially in the wake of the Perso-Ottoman War however earned it the ire of Tahmasp, and the newspaper was closed down in 1848. The editor, Abbas Ali Sabouri, was exiled to Syria, where he founded a periodical with a more philosophical bent, al-Nadha (the Renaissance). However, the Persian government could not keep a lid on the spread of the press, and it is estimated that by 1851, underground newspapers and journals had a circulation of around 30,000 throughout Persia, a not-too-insignificant number.
Do these developments mark the development of a civil society? Certainly it seems as though a kind of common consciousness had been established by the 1850s. Among literate Iranian society, criticism of the government, as well as concern for others in society beyond religious obligations were all present. Although political parties were still in the future, there appeared to be a split of government loyalists and those who wanted deeper and more meaningful reform. The conflict Loyalists and Reformists would certainly make its mark following the Indian War.
* * * * * *
Author's Notes - The first waves of the modern world are lapping Persia's shores. Life for many Persians is if anything getting worse, and the successive losses are starting to erode the prestige of the Afsharid Dynasty. Change is taking place within Persia, but it is not fast enough to keep pace with the change of the world around it, though it remains to be seen whether Persian efforts abroad may enable it to gain the resources needed to modernize.
From the look of things Afsharid Persia will be going through something similar to what OTL Russia did in the 19th century. Though hopefully the Persia leadership can actually reform enough to catch up with the West since they have more frequent and consistent contact with Europe.
This is not now, and certainly was not then, practical. The Ligurian Appenines are too steep and high. The only river running north from Genoa dead-ends in a tangle of mountains about 700 meters high at the lowest point of the crest.
India, eh? Wonder what's going on...I imagine the British are certainly going to expand now that they have a viable territorial and population base (the area shown on the map has OTL 2017 at least half the population or more of Bengal+Bangladesh, although I dunno what the relative populations were in 1829), and those states in the South of India lack the raw population needed to counterbalance superior European military technique and organization: some at least are going to end up British sphere of influence/puppets. And then there's that wee remnant of the Mughal empire: will it yet revive, will the Mughal heir become a figurehead like the late medieval caliphs for some new expanding power (a number of leaders of the Indian revolt/revolution of 1857 actually wanted to use the existing Mughal heir of the time to serve as just that, a royal figurehead people could rally around - speaking of which, will the British have similar problems ATL? One thinks their more precarious position would lead to greater caution, but who knows...)
I imagine the Russians are going to be pressing Iran _hard_ in the Caucuses and Central Asia within a generation - I am assuming a real showdown doesn't happen by the time the story cuts off here, or the Persians would have even bigger worries.
I imagine the Russians are going to be pressing Iran _hard_ in the Caucuses and Central Asia within a generation - I am assuming a real showdown doesn't happen by the time the story cuts off here, or the Persians would have even bigger worries.
Well from the foreshadowing in the latest update, it seems like Persia will get dragged into this Indian War by supporting the Muslim regimes(Specifically Mughal remnant) against British and native Hindus. The outcome will probably will all be determined by the size, organization, and how modernized of the armies of each side are.