Battle of Sedan in Franco-Prussian War

Battle of Sedan in Franco-Prussian War The Battle of Sedan was fought September 1, 1870, during the Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871). With the beginning of the conflict, Prussian forces won several quick victories and besieged Metz. Moving to lift this siege, Marshal Patrice de MacMahons Army of Chà ¢lons, accompanied by Emperor Napoleon III, engaged the enemy at Beaumont on August 30, but suffered a setback. Falling back on the fortress city of Sedan, the French were pinned in place by Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltkes Prussians and then encircled. Unable to break out, Napoleon III was forced to surrender. While a stunning victory for the Prussians, the French leaders capture precluded a quick end to the conflict as a new government was formed in Paris to continue the fight. Background Beginning in July 1870, the early actions of the Franco-Prussian War saw the French routinely bested by their better-equipped and trained neighbors to the east. Defeated at Gravelotte on August 18, Marshal Franà §ois Achille Bazaines Army of the Rhine fell back to Metz, where it was quickly besieged by elements of the Prussian First and Second Armies. Responding to the crisis, Emperor Napoleon III moved north with Marshal Patrice de MacMahons Army of Chà ¢lons. It was their intention to move northeast towards Belgium before turning south to link up with Bazaine. Plagued by poor weather and roads, the Army of Chà ¢lons exhausted itself during the march. Alerted to the French advance, the Prussian commander, Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke, began directing troops to intercept Napoleon and McMahon. On August 30, troops under Prince George of Saxony attacked and defeated the French at the Battle of Beaumont. Hoping to re-form after this setback, MacMahon fell back to the fortress town of Sedan. Surrounded by high ground and hemmed in by the Meuse River, Sedan was a poor choice from a defensive standpoint. Battle of Sedan Conflict: Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871)Dates: September 1-2, 1870Armies Commanders:PrussiaWilhelm IField Marshal Helmuth von Moltke200,000 menFranceNapoleon IIIMarshal Patrice MacMahonGeneral Emmanuel Fà ©lix de WimpffenGeneral Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot120,000 menCasualties:Prussians: 1,310 killed, 6,443 wounded, 2,107 missingFrance: 3,220 killed, 14,811 wounded, 104,000 captured Count Helmuth von Moltke. Public Domain Prussians Advance Seeing an opportunity to inflict a crippling blow on the French, Moltke exclaimed, Now we have them in the mousetrap! Advancing on Sedan, he ordered forces to engage the French to pin them in place while additional troops moved west and north to encircle the town. Early on September 1, Bavarian troops under General Ludwig von der Tann began crossing the Meuse and probed towards the village of Bazeilles. Entering the town, they met French troops from General Barthelemy Lebruns XII Corps. As fighting began, the Bavarians battled the elite Infanterie de Marine which had barricaded several streets and buildings (Map). Fighting at La Moncelle during the Battle of Sedan. Public Domain Joined by VII Saxon Corps which pressed towards the village of La Moncelle to the north along Givonne creek, the Bavarians fought through the early morning hours. Around 6:00 AM, the morning mist began to lift allowing Bavarian batteries to open fire on the villages. Using new breech-loading guns, they began a devastating barrage which forced the French to abandon La Moncelle. Despite this success, von der Tann continued to struggle at Bazeilles and committed additional reserves. The French situation quickly worsened when their command structure was shattered. French Confusion When MacMahon was wounded early in the fighting, command of the army fell to General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot who initiated orders for a retreat from Sedan. Though a retreat earlier in the morning may have been successful, the Prussian flanking march was well underway by this point. Ducrots command was cut short by the arrival of General Emmanuel Fà ©lix de Wimpffen. Arriving at headquarters, Wimpffen possessed a special commission to take over the Army of Chà ¢lons in the event of MacMahons incapacitation. Relieving Ducrot, he immediately canceled the retreat order and prepared to continue the fight. Completing the Trap These command changes and the series of countermanded orders worked to weaken the French defense along the Givonne. By 9:00 AM, fighting was raging all along the Givonne from Bazeilles north. With the Prussians advancing, Ducrots I Corps and Lebruns XII Corps mounted a massive counterattack. Pushing forward, they regained lost ground until the Saxons were reinforced. Backed by nearly 100 guns, Saxon, Bavarian, and Prussian troops shattered the French advance with a massive bombardment and heavy rifle fire. At Bazeilles, the French were finally overcome and forced to cede the village. This, along with the loss of the other villages along the Givonne, compelled the French to establish a new line west of the stream. During the morning, as the French focused on the battle along the Givonne, Prussian troops under Crown Prince Frederick moved to encircle Sedan. Crossing the Meuse around 7:30 AM, they pushed north. Receiving orders from Moltke, he pushed V and XI Corps into St. Menges to completely surround the enemy. Entering the village, they caught the French by surprise. Responding to the Prussian threat, the French mounted a cavalry charge but were cut down by enemy artillery. Map of the Battle of Sedan, 10 A.M., September 1, 1870. Public Domain French Defeat By midday, the Prussians had completed their encirclement of the French and had effectively won the battle. Having silenced the French guns with fire from 71 batteries, they easily turned back a French cavalry assault led by General Jean-Auguste Margueritte. Seeing no alternative, Napoleon ordered a white flag raised early in the afternoon. Still in command of the army, Wimpffen countermanded the order and his men continued to resist. Massing his troops, he directed a breakout attempt near Balan to the south. Storming forward, the French nearly overwhelmed the enemy before being turned back. Late that afternoon, Napoleon asserted himself and overrode Wimpffen. Seeing no reason to continue the slaughter, he opened surrender talks with the Prussians. Moltke was stunned to learn that he had captured the French leader, as were King Wilhelm I and Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, who were at headquarters. The following morning, Napoleon met Bismarck on the road to Moltkes headquarters and officially surrendered the entire army. Aftermath In the course of the fighting, the French incurred around 17,000 killed and wounded as well as 21,000 captured. The remainder of the army was captured following its surrender. Prussian casualties totaled 1,310 killed, 6,443 wounded, 2,107 missing. Though a stunning victory for the Prussians, Napoleons capture meant that France had no government with which to negotiate a quick peace. Two days after the battle, leaders in Paris formed the Third Republic and sought to continue the conflict. As a result, Prussian forces advanced on Paris and laid siege on September 19.

Behistun Inscription - Message to the Persian Empire

Behistun Inscription - Message to the Persian Empire The Behistun inscription (also spelled Bisitun or Bisotun and typically abbreviated as DB for Darius Bisitun) is a 6th century BCE Persian Empire carving. The ancient billboard includes four panels of cuneiform writing around a set of three-dimensional figures, cut deep into a limestone cliff. The figures are carved 300 feet (90 meters) above the Royal Road of the Achaemenids, known today as the Kermanshah-Tehran highway in Iran. Fast Facts: Behistun Steel Name of Work:  Behistun InscriptionArtist or Architect: Darius the Great, ruled 522–486 BCEStyle/Movement: Parallel CuneiformTextPeriod: Persian EmpireHeight: 120 feetWidth: 125 feetType of Work: Carved inscriptionCreated/Built: 520–518 BCEMedium: Carved Limestone BedrockLocation: Near Bisotun, IranOffbeat Fact: The earliest known example of political propagandaLanguages: Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian The carving is located near the town of Bisotun, Iran, about 310 miles (500 kilometers) from Tehran and about 18 mi (30 km) from Kermanshah. The figures show the crowned Persian king Darius I stepping on Guatama (his predecessor and rival) and nine rebel leaders standing before him connected by ropes around their necks. The figures measures some 60x10.5 ft (18x3.2 m) and the four panels of text more than double the overall size, creating an irregular rectangle of approximately 200x120 ft (60x35 m), with the lowest part of the carving some 125 ft (38 m) above the road. Behistun Text The writing on the Behistun inscription, like the Rosetta Stone, is a parallel text, a type of linguistic text that consists of two or more strings of written language placed alongside each other so they can be easily compared. The Behistun inscription is recorded in three different languages: in this case, cuneiform versions of Old Persian, Elamite, and a form of Neo-Babylonian called Akkadian. Like the Rosetta Stone, the Behistun text greatly assisted in the decipherment of those ancient languages: the inscription includes the earliest known use of Old Persian, a sub-branch of Indo-Iranian. A version of the Behistun inscription written in Aramaic (the same language of the Dead Sea Scrolls) was discovered on a papyrus scroll in Egypt, probably written during the early years of the reign of Darius II, about a century after the DB was carved into the rocks. See Tavernier (2001) for more specifics about the Aramaic script. Royal Propaganda The text of the Behistun inscription describes the early military campaigns of the Achaemenid rule King Darius I (522–486 BCE). The inscription, carved shortly after Dariuss accession to the throne between 520 and 518 BCE, give autobiographical, historical, royal and religious information about Darius: the Behistun text is one of several pieces of propaganda establishing Dariuss right to rule. The text also includes Dariuss genealogy, a list of the ethnic groups subject to him, how his accession occurred, several failed revolts against him, a list of his royal virtues, instructions to future generations and how the text was created.   So, What Does it Mean? Most scholars agree that the Behistun inscription is a bit of political bragging. Dariuss main purpose was to establish the legitimacy of his claim to Cyrus the Greats throne, to which he had no blood connection. Other bits of Dariuss braggadocio are found in others of these trilingual passages, as well as big architectural projects at Persepolis and Susa, and the burial places of Cyrus at Pasargadae and his own at Naqsh-i-Rustam. Historian Jennifer Finn (2011) noted that the location of the cuneiform is too far above the road to be read, and few people were likely literate in any language anyway when the inscription was made. She suggests that the written portion was meant not only for public consumption but that there was likely a ritual component, that the text was a message to the cosmos about the king. Translations and Interpretations Henry Rawlinson is credited with the first successful translation in English, scrambling up the cliff in 1835, and publishing his text in 1851. The 19th-century Persian scholar Mohammad Hasan Khan Etemad al-Saltaneh (1843–96) published the first Persian translation of the Behistun translation. He noted but disputed the then-current idea that Darius or Dara might have been matched to King Lohrasp of the Zoroastrian religious and Persian epic traditions.   Israeli historian Nadav Naaman has suggested (2015) that the Behistun inscription may have been a source for the Old Testament story of Abrahams victory over the four powerful Near Eastern kings. Sources Alibaigi, Sajjad, Kamal Aldin Niknami, and Shokouh Khosravi. The Location of the Parthian City of Bagistana in Bistoun, Kermanshah: A Proposal. Iranica Antiqua 47 (2011): 117–31. Print.Briant, Pierre. History of the Persian Empire (550–330 BC). Forgotten Empire: The World of Ancient Persia. Eds. Curtis, John E., and Nigel Tallis. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. 12–17. Print.Daryaee, Touraj. Persianate Contribution to the Study of Antiquity: Etemad Al-Saltanehs Nativisation of the Qajars. Iran 54.1 (2016): 39–45. Print.Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell, and Jarie Ebeling. From Babylon to Bergen: On the Usefulness of Aligned Texts. Bergen Language and Linguistics Studies 3.1 (2013): 23–42. Print.Finn, Jennifer. Gods, Kings, Men: Trilingual Inscriptions and Symbolic Visualizations in the Achaemenid Empire. Ars Orientalis 41 (2011): 219–75. Print.Naaman, Nadav. Abrahams Victory over the Kings of the Four Quadrants in Light of Darius Is Bis itun Inscription. Tel Aviv 42.1 (2015): 72–88. Print. Olmstead, A. T. Darius and His Behistun Inscription. The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 55.4 (1938): 392–416. Print.Rawlinson, H. C. Memoir on the Babylonian and Assyrian Inscriptions. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 14 (1851): i–16. Print.Tavernier, Jan. An Achaemenid Royal Inscription: The Text of Paragraph 13 of the Aramaic Version of the Bisitun Inscription. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 60.3 (2001): 61–176. Print.Wilson-Wright, Aren. From Persepolis to Jerusalem: A Reevaluation of Old Persian-Hebrew Contact in the Achaemenid Period. Vetus Testamentum 65.1 (2015): 152–67. Print.