Castlereagh vs Canning: How Britain Broke the Concert of Europe
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- Between 1812 and 1827, Britain was a key part of the European Congress System. This video aims to be a short documentary that describes the differences between Castlereagh and Canning, two of Britain's greatest Foreign Secretaries, and how they approached the system;
From Castlereagh's construction of it in the aftermath of Napoleon, to Canning's later destruction of it.
Patreon: / oldbritannia
#Britishempire, #Frenchempire, #History
I think Castlereigh not demanding more explicit benefits for Britain in peace deals, is a reflection of his understanding that Britain naturally was the winner of the peace in any case.
The US under President Truman did the same thing on a global scale. They could have taken anything material they wanted, but instead decided to create a peace that favoured commerce and free navigation while preventing any more forced conquests and annexations.
The British demand of Europe was that it be quiet while they ruled the world's oceans.
They did Keep some useful off shore bases like Malta.
@@alexv3357 That is the strangest interpretation of the Truman Doctrine I've read. Surely America today benefits from peacekeeping since they benefit from maintaining global order, but that wasn't the case during Truman's presidency. His and Secretary of State George Marshall's policies seemed primarily focused on encapsulating the growth of communism and (by logical extent) the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union.
@@geldarus I'm mostly pointing out that the US could have demanded territorial concessions and harsh reparations from the former Axis powers as empires of ages past were wont, but didn't, in a manner which is comparable to Britain after Napoleon's defeat. They had all the power in the world to take, but knew that because of that power, they didn't need to.
@@alexv3357 If you strictly compare what came out of the Potsdam conference to what was originally drafted in the Morgenthau Plan under Roosevelt, then the restrictions imposed on Germany are rather lenient. Even then, Germany still had rather large territorial concessions to the Soviet Union. I think it would be more logical to compare the outcome of the Potsdam conference to the Treaty of Versailles where the allied powers did enforce harsh reparations; the allied powers probably didn't want to repeat that mistake.
A video on how Churchill outmaneuvered Lord Halifax would be an excellent choice for a future video. I’d love to hear more about that.
Churchill had yew-ish support, halifax had not.
@@bader3677 Did someone forget to take their meds this morning?
@@bader3677I'm pretty anyone who wanted to fight Hitler had their support. I hope your favourite book gets a horrible Netflix live adaptation starring Justin Bieber.
@@bulletflight brother i don't read :)
@@LinkoofHyrule Yeah, you.
We love George Canning in Greece! He was the one who instrumented a major shift in the attitude towards our War of Independence and actively worked towards ensuring our statehood. There's even a major square named after him in Athens!
Canning was a good guy. His people now run around Greece every summer with their sunburned faces peeling off, too drunk to remember sunscreen. I must admit fun friendly blokes though, unlike the damn Koloitaloi, don't even try to speak Greek or English mix with others just stick to other Italian idiots and sing stupid Italian shit all day and night.
There is at least one street in Arhens named Byron as well 😊
A very interesting subject. If i can offer my own perspective as a Greek, in our history books Castlereagh is absolutely reviled as an enemy of the Greek Revolution of 1821 against the Ottoman Empire, an enemy of freedom and an Ottoman sympathizer (a simplistic view but his tenure did coincide with British hostility against the Revolution). Canning on the other hand is considered one of the main architects of Greek independence and a contributing factor in the final victory of the Revolution. We even have a public square with his name in the center of Athens. As you can easily deduce he's very well liked and depicted very positively in the history books.
Interesting. So does that mean Greeks also like Gladstone much more than Disraeli?
@@roundninjacan’t imagine Greeks think much about either
@@roundninjayes, very much so. There's even a large, prominent statue of Gladstone in front of the University of Athens. He's also quite liked in Bulgaria and Cyprus. Obviously I'm mostly referring to people who've bothered to read about 19th century history , not the average person who probably hasn't.
It's astonishing how many brilliant leaders or ministers Britain had in the XIX century. Even the ones mentioned in this video make an impressive list: Castlereagh, Canning, Disraeli, Palmerstor, Salisbury.
Beyond them I, as a firm Royalist, feel obliged to add Queen Victoria and King George III (unfortunately past his best due to bad health but still a magnificent Monarch). I would NOT add King George IV who, apart from his truly fine art collection, had no redeeming qualities. The video also mentioned Liverpool, who really wasn't bad in his own right. And we have barely got the best of the bunch in this list.
@@HundredyacrewoodsI must agree
@@Hundredyacrewoods What is a royalist
@@mrquokka4733 Someone who supports Keeping the Royal family in power, Since there seems to be some Anti-monarchy sentiment in Britain, acting like it will fix problems by removing the monarchy instead of fixing the actual root problems of having a Low cultural esteem
@@mrquokka4733 as Donnellgreen said "someone who supports keeping the Monarchy". I would point out not necessarily in daily power, but culturally and emergency power just as much or (as in Britain) even more. But more than that someone who supports the Monarch as well (or even more) than the Monarchy itself. I don't just support the King, I support King Charles. The distinction between a Monarchist and a Royalist is mostly irrelevant except in times of civil war, coue de tat or revolution. In theory if a situation occurred where the Royal Family were in danger but escaping would allow a republican (remember a Republic is any government without a Monarch) revolution a Monarchist would keep the Royals there to preserve the Institution whereas a Royalist would get them out alivr at the cost of republican tyranny. Ironically, as WW2 proved the Royal Family themselves are Monarchist not Royalistl
In Latin America, George Canning is generally revered for how he handled France and Spain in regards to the new independent republics. He turned out to be right, as a few decades after the Napoleonic Wars France (and the UK as well) were intervining in Latin American affairs, like the Anglo-French blockade of Buenos Aires or France's adventure in México. In my country, Argentina, which is not nowadays very anglophile, Canning has streets and even a municipality named after him.
Screw Sleeping or Studying for Tomorrow's Exam, Old Britannia just uploaded.
literally me 💀
gotta do some simulations using a supercomputer... my simulations can wait for a while!
This counts as history paper 2 revision right?
I was hoping for a Lord Hardthrasher. This also works.
@@sagagis. When I was doing a similar project years back, there was no internet and I put my TV in a cupboard. I stayed up all weekend to write up my report as the university was closing the building three weeks earlier than expected. I would not have watched this as strangely after being awake for three days, I was asked out by a half French half Spanish lass from Clermont-Ferrand, which seems to fit with the subject matter in the video.
I like how your videos have evolved from general summaries of events to critiques of certain academic points of view and digging down to the facts to present the strongest argument. I hope you keep up the good work.
I strongly support your point.
I never got why HistoriaCivilis conceived of Canning as a "conservative conservative." He was pro-alignment, unreservedly abolitionist, and supported the expansion of voting rights. By any definition he was far more liberal than Castlereagh.
What bothered me so much was his continuous mispronunciation of Anglo words when he could just look them up. Caning, vis-count ect.
His views may have something to do with his preference for socialist history, as opposed to whig, revision or post-revision. This doesn't come up in his classical videos but is increasingly prevalent in his more modern videos (see "work" which also uses outdated evidence for how long people are off work for - 51% indeed!).
His videos are still good - entertaining and informative - and classical videos most of all. Rome is his area of expertise and those videos are wonderful. But unfortunately I've increasing found you have to take his videos with a strong pinch of salt (like ExtraHistory).
Why did it Autocorrect English to Anglo?!? WHY!?!
I think that it’s because how the video demonstrates he was much more nationalistic. Conserving liberal values of your liberal country is still conservatism. Look at the USA for example
@@Hundredyacrewoodsyeah, after his 'work' video I was put off. Didn't even need my history expertise to see through that, asking my father who grew up on a substinence farm was enough
@@konradvonschnitzeldorf6506His political leanings are undoubtedly becoming the undoing of his legitimacy when it comes to telling history properly.
In Athens we have a square named after Canning "Πλατεία Κάνιγγος", in honour of him. Greetings from Greece!
I'd take either Castlereagh or Canning over the various clowns that we have today.
The fact that Britain had so many brilliant men to choose from for leadership back then shows the vast difference in levels of governmental competence. Now Britain would be lucky to have even a middling intellect at the helm
If you think it's bad now give the country another 20 years and it'll look like Zimbabwe
ANY country with one of these men in power today would dominate the world in only a few years.
Ah, penny-pinching on subsidies to beleaguered allies and almost blowing a major geopolitical opportunity. I have not heard about that recently.
Right? Fortunately history never repeats itself.
Ukraine has not lacked for American funds, unless one takes the period where Republicans in the House sought to impose conditions on the aid. The US has been very generous and even the House Republicans caved and gave all of the money requested. Ukrainians' problems lie elsewhere. The war was supposed to be won through sanctions, which the US imposed to the hilt, but which failed miserably to collapse the Russian economy. Then, magical thinking took hold and the West convinced itself that Ukraine could knock out Russia on the battlefield, even though Russia is 4 times larger by population, has an economy 10 times larger and has a powerful domestic MIC located thousands of miles behind the front. This was a fool's errand but Ukrainians seem to have willingly accepted it.
@@charlesiragui2473 Ukraine has not lacked for American funds, except in the instances in which they did.
@@charlesiragui2473America beat a global superpower (The British Empire) with subsidies from Spain and France. Should we go back in time to ask them not to provide said subsidies?
@@bulletflightSpain and France were direct combatants, attacking British ships, colonies and sending troops to aid the Americans. That's a notable difference
I don't think it's fair to say Austria intervened unilaterally against the liberal regime in Naples. Metternich was actually careful to gain the support of the other powers beforehand, judging that to intervene unilaterally, even with the tacit approval of the other great powers, would set a dangerous precedent. It would allow other powers to intervene unilaterally in their own spheres of interest, which is something that Austria did not want, especially given that the most likely scenario for this would have involved Russia moving against the Ottomans in the Balkans on some pretext. The ongoing Greek war of independence would have furnished precisely this sort of pretext, if Metternich had acted high-handedly in Italy.
The congress system seems to me to have failed at being any different than the previous "balance of conquest" system. On paper, the cooperation in the first ~30 years seems to indicate its ability to deal with competing European interests, but as pointed out, by the time of the Crimean war, the ineffectual system had no ability to prevent war between great powers if their interests were great enough. A true multilateral alliance between all the great powers would have been a much more potent solution to these issues, as all the other great powers presenting a unified front against a rogue power would be deterrent enough. However, I don't believe that any statesman in the history of the world would have been skilled enough to negotiate such a system at the time, and wouldn't be able to until 150 years later with the formation of NATO and eventually the EU (which were not easy to do, by any means.)
The failure to form such a powerful multilateral alliance of the great powers might have been a blessing for the world though as it would have made it unlikely for Western Europe to liberalise as quickly as it did.
@@hydrolifetech7911 If the followed the paths the french and british were doing then it likely would still go on. Perhaps even faster and messier.
I was going to do something else but Old Britannia videos simply cannot wait
Imo Castlereigh's actions seem like a direct response to the British diplomatic position after the 7-years-war; when it won everything but became a diplomatic pariah - which not 30 years before the Congress led to all of European opposing it during American Independence. Castlereigh cemented British global supremacy gained after the 7-years-war, and undid its diplomatic isolation. Funny how Canning seems to have reverted back to the haughty stance - luckily (for the British) without becoming a pariah again.
old britannia uploaded, gotta cancel my plans.
Also, if you ever couldn’t find ideas, here is a couple
Aims of the powers in the Balkan Wars, Franco-Prussian war, Crimean war (that one would be very interesting)
A short video covering de-colonialist events like the French war in Algeria (1954-1962) or the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya or the Portuguese wars in Angola, As well as the Sino-Soviet split.
I know you don’t really make videos post WW2 but these would be very interesting
Finally, the video I've been waiting for ever since you gave a brief contrast between the two in your Castlereagh doc. Enjoyed every second of it ... including when Salisbury got mentioned again. Keep up the good work!!
Old Britannia is one of the best history channels on youtube. Been watching your videos for a while now, very good content!
I truly admire the great grasp of detail and then the shrewdness of these videos. Thanks so much for the nuanced evaluation of the Castlereagh - Canning relationship. I was alerted to the figure of Castlereagh by Lord Byron's visceral satire on him in "Don Juan", and sought to build my own opinion by reading Alan Palmer's book "Metternich", actually a study of the Congress of Vienna and its aftermath. This made me into an enthusiastic fan of Castlereagh, the last British truly European statesman (I'm including Churchill in that).
Castlereagh being a European rather than Englishman is all the more reason to detest him.
The story telling and animations in this channel are amazing. A true inspiration to small history youtubers like myself
I cannot exaggerate how much i love this channel. Thank you sir.
I’m quite sensitive to the quality of the speaker’s voice in a documentary, but, apart from the interesting topics, and a very good way of delivering these topics, you have one of the best voices and ways of speaking I have heard on youtube! I love your videos, please keep making them! 🙏🏻
Amazing video mate, just found your channel and subscribed! Love from Brazil!
Another outstanding job from you. I have always admired the work of British diplomacy with great intellectual interest. And that there is a space on CZcams that is dedicated to telling us in great detail the stories of its statesmen. With its errors and successes it seems phenomenal to me. Without a doubt I highly appreciate this channel and your work in particular.
I certainly consider myself part of the Castlereagh-Salisbury line. But Canning and Disraeli were enormous statesmen too. Especially Benjamin with his progressive policies
By far my favorite channel
Thanks for you’re work
great content as always. I suggest a topic: the relationships of Britain towards the Ottoman Empire between the Crimean War to the Berlin Conference of 1878. I think is a very interesting showdown of different personalities (Disraeli, Gladstone and Palmerston) and how geopolitics and public opinion shape external relations.
Excellent analysis
Great video
I think a video explaining Britain's relationship with Ireland between 1850-1922 would be a very interesting topic for you to discuss.
Another great video
Very interesting new type of video
Title: *Castlereagh vs Canning: How Britain Broke the Concert of Europe*
0:01 Who was the most influential statesman of the early 19th century/(also known as the Early 1800s)
0:41 The Era of The Concert of Europe.
2:07 Ex. Prussia's Annex of Hanover.
2:27 The Pivotal Year 1812.
2:51 Lord Liverpool's Government chooses Viscount Castlereagh over George Canning.
*Castlereagh's Contributions to European History*
3:50 What set Castlereagh apart from others?
4:06 Castlereagh's impact during 1812
5:11 The Treaty of Cheaumont, 1 March 1814, commits the allies against Napoleon to finish the war.
5:55 The Congress System. Discussion rather than Warfare to resolve, compromise.
6:43 Catstlereagh's Impartial Arbiter Position for Britain.
7:34 How would Canning have dealed with this 1812-1814 period?
8:51 Castlereagh failed to give England adequate returns.
*Summary Charts*
9:05 Castlereagh's Policy
9:18 Canning's Policy.
10:06 Castlereagh thanked Canning for his support.
*The Congress System*
10:23 The Next 7 Years: The Congress System
12:13 Canning in 1816.
12:26 Canning in 1820.
13:12 12th August 1822 overworked and mentally exhausted, Castlereagh's self-committed-death.
14:06 Canning long celebrated as the Liberal Opponent was a Reactionary Restorationist.
14:47 Canning & Castlereagh agreed about Spain's Monarch.
17:18 Temperly's description of Canning's System.
*Castlereagh and Canning*
18:06
18:24 Castlereagh was pro-congress system, Canning was anti-congress system.
18:36 Canning's vision of British foreign policy won out.
19:25 Whose policy was right in the end?
This is very cool.
I would love to here your take on Zelikow's book with a specific and deeper dive into the British cabinet during the war
I’m struck by the quality of your maps, and your art style. What do you use to animate them in your videos?
I can really get behind this more historiographical bend to your channel; reminds me a lot of those “problems in European civilization” editorials.
Personally while I do like Castlereagh, his emphasis on the Concert of Europe is only as effective in so far as the concert system itself was willing to be sustained. You mentioned the Crimean war as the turning point of the concert system, but I believe that the Concert of Europe fundamentally undermined itself with the Greek Revolution a mere 5 years after the peace; proving that they were fully willing to undermine an established European power and bring about a new player in the region in spite of the concerts emphasis on status quo preservation; not to mention the ideological bend of suppressing liberal activity was inherently misguided and would have inevitably collapsed.
Britain, whether as a diplomatic or military power, could only do so much to help a system that could not sustain itself. And while I do not believe Canning thought this way, his actions were nonetheless perspicacious and beneficial to Britain in the long term. That is however not to preclude the possibility that continued involve in the Concert system saving the system.
Why sleeping if you can watch Old Britannia ❤
Lord Liverpool's deference to his Foreign Secretaries seems remarkable to the modern viewer. He was Prime Minister for fifteen years and few remember him.
eh at that time foreign secrataries could get away with alot more back then due to the length it took for communication between london and say vienna or wherever the Foreign sec was. So unless they really blundered, they could get away with alot because by the time the PM found out what was going on it's not like they could do much to stop it.
@@manrajatwal8008
Liverpool was an excellent delegator. He trusted Castlereagh to understand the manoeuvres in Vienna and to thread his way through the maze.
I can recommend the Historia Civilis videos about The Congress.
Everyone with an interest in this period should read John Bew's magnificent biography of Castlereagh. I am firmly in the Castlereagh camp, and many of the vitriolic attacks levelled at Castlereagh by high profile Whigs (think Byron) I think come from a place of jealousy and political impotence. This was a time of Tory dominance and in Europe, Castlereagh predominated in a way no British statesman has ever replicated.
He was a remarkable mix of wisdom and psychosis.
He really wanted to kill Canning, and that wasn't something British gentlemen were supposed to seek in duels.
Please do a video for the 1707 Treaty and Acts of Union
One tour de force after another with you. 🙂
THIS. This is the video I had been waiting for since coming across your channel and watching the Castlereagh video.
Where did your videos on the history of the British Empire go?
Can you please do a remake?
He is , polled it on patreon several times. I think it start again after his next habsburg video
@@jared_hall
That's good to know.
Thanks.
@@pratyushbhattacharjee5532 your very welcome
This is... an extremely impressive comments section. I actually just read one where the author acknowledged they'd misunderstood and said thank you for the correction. On the internet!
Hi, I have always wondered, where do yu get your map from?
Canning was brilliant absolute genius probably one of the smartest diplomats in history, he wanted to secure the British Empire for the foreseeable future starting the Pax Britannica.
Also by the way how do you make your maps.
Banger
As you say, the difference in their actual policies was more a matter of tone than material differences in policy. I think their duel and mutually ambitious nature within the structures of state meant that partisans of both sides tended to exaggerate their differences. Often in foreign affairs the actions of the party are constrained but domestic politics requires the exaggeration of some kind of distinction in order to demonstrate the dominition of the will of one statesman over the other.
The same is true of the arguments between Halifax and Churchill. From everything I have read Halifax regarded it as unlikely that Hitler would offer reasonable terms and merely wished to signal via Italy the possibility of an accord so that at least posterity couldn't have accused them of having tried nothing in the face of invasion and occupation. Whereas Churchill saw any such move as demonstrating weakness that would negatively affect Britain's position with France (and indirectly the US). Both thought by far the most likely outcome was a continuation of war with Germany to the death.
For what it is worth, I think the political (and economic) cultures and material interests of the mercantile and colonial Western powers, Britain and France, were so different to those of the agricultural and effectively feudal Eastern powers like Prussia, Austria and Russia (who did retain a more limited system of co-operation) that realistically the Congress system was pretty much destined to spliter as soon as the mutual threat of a Napoleonic resurgence abated. Canning in that sense was pushing an open door politically and with Castlereagh's suicide it seems to me that without a figure of his political cunning and stature that had a less parochial understanding of the broader threads of international affairs there was no one capable of swimming against the tide. The sheer temptation of the possibilities offered by his foreign policy means Britain would have defaulted towards a Canningite direction without anyone blocking it. Ultimately the British (and then later French) colonial system had a great deal to be gained from the recognition of 'limited revolutions' - liberal constitutional monarchies (as in Spain or France) or aristocratic republics (as in South America) whose governments were often both dependent on British military support and open for British financial and industrial domination. It allowed the expansion of an informal empire without the risks and defrayed expenses of formal colonial administration that could be justified only on military and strategic grounds. Whereas the Eastern powers accurately saw that such limited revolutions would be a timebomb that would destroy them within their own political systems.
I would love to see that comparison! Metternich and Bismarck!
What music do you use for your videos?
I hope that you will do a video on the French Invasion of Russia in 1812.
Hi Britannia, I'd love to hear your analysis of how the USSR got into such a bad diplomatic position by the late Cold War: Losing influence in Middle East countries like Egypt, becoming outright enemies with China, the split with Warsaw Pact satellites like Romania and Albania, their failure to make lasting Détente with the US and Western Europe, and of course the Afghan debacle - How Russia went from the aggressive Socialist leader state of the Khrushchev years to the isolated and paranoid gerontocracy of Andropov.
I think there's a unique case of both men's ideas and working being best suited for the specific timeframe they were working under, together achieving the best outcome we could in retrospect ask of them. Where their differences worked to achieve a better grand picture
Still crazy how Spain was ignored in the Congress of Europe...
9:40 this is the best
Can you please do a video or videos on austrias decline as a major power which resulted in its way of compromise in 1867, starting post Napoleon in 1815
He'll probably cover that later on in his series about Habsburg Austria
A question I'd ask, as someone who's quite ignorant on all this, is whether the apparent lack of ambition in Britain's peace demands were due to our perhaps "learning our lesson" at the end of the Seven Years War?
Is it an oversimplification to say that Britain had to be instructed, quite harshly, that the greed shown at the end of the 7YW was what led to Europe standing by and watching as she was cut down to size in the American War of Independence?
Beneficence in victory earns goodwill that could pay future dividends, after all.
Most interesting.
excellent as usual 👌 👏 👍
Amazing as always! Love seeing your channel grow!
Two able men, each with an excellent grasp of foreign affairs, who didn’t fall over each other and consequently enjoyed relative freedom to implement clearly-focussed policies. Perhaps these factors were more important in the advancement of British interests than were the details and differences of the policies themselves.
Babe! Old Britannia just uploaded!
Do Peel and Lord Russel next.
I feel like previous videos have been building up to this, which feels like a crescendo of British diplomatic history. I saw echoes of modern Europe throughout, but you stuck to the subject matter, except for a couple of name drops to keep the uninitiated, like me, interested.
"Most Influential Statesmen of early 19th Century"
Metternich and Talleyrand, obviously.
You don't need to share their nationality to see their influence and importance to the shaping of history.
Incredible work as always! Always an instant watch :D
The Problem with pursuing National Interest is the Question "so what is the National Interest"? I.E. is it better to take the Dutch Colonies, or return some to strenghten the Netherlands as a Block for French (and later on German) Attempts to control the Coast of the Channel?
Would castlereagh have tolerated Prussian expansion during the 19th century?
Here I am, an Egyptian, learning about British statesmen on a random Sunday afternoon.
I feel ya. I'm an American and I too am learning about British statesman. Cheers
Do the dutch 80 years war next lol
Here I am, an Omani, doing the same thing.
Just think. If you lived in those time. These 2 stuck up public schoolboys who couldn’t even piss straight. Would have a say who governed your shithole countries. This is why so many innocent young British soldiers died for nothing inWW1. Because of dicks like these. Let us never forget
To be fair, they have a big effect on people like Salisbury and thus Egypt too.
Fantastic video. It's a great overall analysis on the two great men of their time. It's a total travesty that Castlereigh killed himself. Brilliant men like him often shine the brightest during their respective countries greatest trials.
Never been this early before
Canning was brilliant
Would you say that he was... cunning? ;-)
I'm surprised you didn't trot out Byron's famous lines:
Posterity will ne’er survey
a Nobler grave than this:
Here lie the bones of Castlereagh:
Stop, traveller, and piss!
Lord Byron, Epigram, 1822
It is videos like this is why you are one of the best edutainers in CZcams. No one else makes videos purely in the lense of international relations of states without being generalized, over-sensationalized, and borderline propegandized other than you.
Well to be fair this is a bit propaganda. He clearly thinks Britain was better than other countries and Napoleon was bad
@@luisfilipe2023 to be fair, Napoleon was pretty bad
@@11th_defender51 for British imperialism and outdated monarchies
@@luisfilipe2023yeah. To be fair. Napoleon was pretty bad.
@@luisfilipe2023 The UK goverment imperialist definitely... however, emperor Napoleon and is siblings were worse..
Historia Civilis is fast food tabloid
Old Britannia is Michelin star documentary
Both are good.
@@CSDragonno. Historia Civilis has shown himself to be unabashedly biased and clearly knows very little outside of Roman History.
@@migamaos3953 And so is Old Britannia against the Whigs (and the left once we get to the 20th century) - and that's fine, I can still watch and enjoy both of them, so maybe you've got a skill issue because you can only enjoy videos that are suit your own worldview.
@@CSDragon
The HC videos on The Congress of Vienna are outstanding, probably the best thing he's ever done.
LETS GOOOOO
Maybe it was spending 10 years having to cope with Alexander which drove poor Castlereagh to suicide.
what a coincidence, i made an AI song on my channel about the concert of vienna last night. I guess that's why this got rec'd to me.
Man I was just watching your old video on these guys.
Valid points here....
I will say i can't look past how things ended for Castlereigh. Whatever else was going on in his personal life, he made himself so miserable that he took his own life.
I know that seems an unfair metric on which to judge a philosophy. But its a spector for me.
Personally, I think both Castlereagh and Canning were the right person in the right position at the right time. Castlreagh was friendly enough towards the rest of Europe, and especially Metternich, that he was able to help rebuild the continent with a very clear eye toward peace. Canning, however, was the best person on the planet to be in the Foreign Secretary's office in the years following the treaty, because he absolutely hated the idea of getting too involved in European affairs, was able to assert Britain's power, publicly pushed hard for the abolition of slavery, and was able to build a very good relationship with America through Secretary of State. John Quincy Adams.
historia civilis did a video on this just 2 months ago
New Old Britannia upload detected, all other essential tasks suspended immediately.
👍
Lore of Castlereagh vs Canning: How Britain Broke the Concert of Europe momentum 100
So Castlereigh, Canning and the Duke of Wellington were all Irish, hrm.
also Lansdowne aka Shelbourne who was PM after the American Revolution
Wellington would never have described himself as irish see born in a stable comment but both canning and castlereaugh did so. Certainly i would always preface it with it with anglo- but it would be folly to describe no connection to the western isle. Saying that, much like english it usually describes an ethnic connection not a national one. Though canning mother was irish while castlerauegh family were scotish orignally.
@@jared_hallO'Connell made the horse comment about the Duke; the Duke did not make it himself. The comment was in a very specific political context of the rise of Cultural Gaelic Nationalism in Ireland during the Emancipation and Repeal movements. All 3 men were Anglo-Irish which, by the late 18th century, had developed its own aristocratic culture that was apart from Britain's own. It relied heavily on Irish influences. They were not British by any means, either in how they viewed themselves, or in how the British viewed them
Correction, if they were to ask about the most influential statesman, they'd actually say Joe from the Royal Oak down the road. Came to him in a dream, his dreams never been wrong, did you know?
WAKE UP BABE OB MADE A NEW CASTLEREAGH VIDEO
They both come across as rational statesmen, England hath need of such now.
Not a lot on the horizon that Wapping cannot erase.
YEAH, First.
Where are your sources?
Ok you mention them in video I always check description first which is why I asked
Another fantastic video which makes me drop whatever it is I’m doing to watch, great job as always!
I love how this channel doesn't unilaterally glaze one character like some other channel we know (Shitstoria Civilis)
To be a red coat in disguise, you are not that bad
Are you trying to tell me that two politicians with opposing viewpoints and a straight up rivalry were able to be civil with one another? Idk bruh
They literally shot each other????
@@lovablesnowman i knew it!
9:40 This made me laugh out loud and nearly choke on my supper
Comment for the algorithm.
The jury is unanimous in this being an informative and engaging history lesson.