QA问答：为什么普鲁士在1871年的普法战争中没有完全接管法国呢？
正文翻译
Why didn't Prussia completely take over France in the Franco-Prussian War?
为什么普鲁士在普法战争中没有完全接管法国呢？
Why didn't Prussia completely take over France in the Franco-Prussian War?
为什么普鲁士在普法战争中没有完全接管法国呢？
评论翻译
上面的地图显示了法普战争中战斗发生的地点。德国人在战争期间只能对法国被占领的地方进行军事控制，因为在1871年1月28日签署停战协议结束战争后，进一步的军事侵略是不可能的（除了第戎和亚眠附近的战线）。
只有法国东北部直接出现了军事行动，许多生活在南部的法国农村男子对战争结果漠不关心。让这些南方人无动于衷，远比用占领来激怒他们，让他们也加入战争要好得多。事实上，德国人已经在遭受来自法国东部的猛烈攻击，对双方的城镇和铁路进行破坏。
#2. 他们将如何保持严格的控制？
假设普鲁士真的占领了整个法国。
战争中德军的总共部署了150万人。就在停战协议签署之前，法国境内有73万德军。还有20万是德国陆军的二线预备队，当占领整个法国时，他们会被征召。但是，仅凭100万军队，你仍然无法遏制欧洲最大和人口最多的国家（不包括俄罗斯）。
事实上，战后的法国是极其不稳定的。出现了像巴黎公社那样的暴力叛乱，不仅仅是社会主义者和共产主义者，平民也觉得被新政府背叛了，而新政府没能挽救法国的失败。俾斯麦很聪明。他没有牺牲德国人的生命来镇压这些反政府的叛乱，而是释放了由麦克马洪领导的被俘法国军队来镇压共产主义者。这很有效。
#3. 德国人会喜欢这样吗？
这场战争是为了德国的统一。要成功维持统一，需要德国人民的支持。普法战争是一场昂贵的战争。
与普奥战争不同，德国人对他们的敌人进行了严厉的攻击。自然，他们的敌人也奋死抵抗，战争总共花了七个月时间才结束。
战争的持续不仅需要大量的食品和饲料供应，而且还牺牲了德国人民的便利。对普鲁士来说，政府有可能在战时接管私人铁路。战争物资，如重型攻城炮、弹药、增援部队总是优先考虑的，因此许多年轻人不得不被动员起来，远离平民生活。
占领整个法国就相当于继续进行战争，都需要大量的物资和牺牲。唯一不等同的是没有战斗，但其他方面将保持完全相同。
#4. 疲惫不堪
不仅仅是平民，战争的直接受害者将是真正的士兵。1870年8月以35,000人的兵力参战的巴伐利亚第一军团，到12月时已耗尽了差不多一半的兵力。对巴黎的围困的时间现在正被拉得越来越长。在围城期间，每个军官都得24小时值班，并在第二天休息一天。当这种生活持续下去时，人类自然会感到疲劳。战壕里的官兵们更是疲惫不堪。尽管补给没有问题，但从11月开始，天气变得寒冷。到了12月，地面结冰，下起了雪。第一平行线上的士兵是离敌人最近的战壕，是Chassepot步枪的射程范围，因此一直面临着被射杀的威胁。除此之外，法军还经常对固守的德国人进行轰炸。
疲惫是一个主要因素。毛奇最初计划在圣诞节前把这些孩子送回他们的家，但它一直在持续。俾斯麦不得不降低和平条件（从60亿法郎的赔偿金降低到50亿法郎，不包括对贝尔福特的吞并），最终让法国人同意谈判。战争在1871年2月以3月1日的快速胜利进军而匆匆结束。
占领整个法国将意味着让这些军队离开他们的家园更久。占领法国是对人力和资源的不必要的浪费，而德国现在已经在不断的战争和疲劳中干涸了，这是不可能接受的。
阿道夫-梯也尔，法国政府的现任领导人
对这个家伙说:
"听着，伙计，我需要你释放拿破仑的士兵来打败这些疯狂的无政府主义者，否则我无法支付你的50亿，因为我们永远找不到稳定的资金供给。" (注意，梯也尔的说话方式在他的时代非常不寻常）。
"用法国人对付法国人？"俾斯麦想。"听起来不错 "，他回答道。于是他允许梯也尔拿回他的战俘。
阿道夫-梯也尔建立了一支约17万人的军队，向巴黎进军。约有35000名“同志”（巴黎公社参与者的绰号）对抗这些士兵。
你以为你可以预测这件事的结果，对吗？是的，他们赢了，但我不认为你能猜到其残暴的方式：在7天内，梯也尔和他的手下杀死了3万名公社成员。他毫不犹豫地向他们发射了炮弹。这七天（1871年5月21日至28日）被称为 "血腥的一周"（la semaine sanglante，不言而喻）。
这就是为什么他们没有持久地"接管"法国：有一群共和党人坚决反对普鲁士人，宁愿死也不愿意被他们占领。
然而，当时大多数人都是和平主义者，大多数贵族和资产阶级也是如此。他们有什么共同点？钱和意愿，如果有必要的话，用这些钱尽可能快地购买和平。那么，为什么要把时间和金钱浪费在一个对你有持续威胁（即使是微不足道的威胁）的领土上，而你可以简单地占领它，直到他们支付你50亿，并且还可以设法夺取一些领土，而不必担心这种反对，因为法国政府自己在为你处理这个问题？
作为一个法国人，我不得不说俾斯麦为他的国家做了一个非常好的决定，得到了两全其美的结果：稳定的被吞并的领土，而不必花钱去稳定它们和巨额的赔款。
Domenic Norton
, lives in The United States of America (1984-present)
Because then they would have the responsibility of governing France and even the French don’t want to govern France.
It is questionable to the point of extremely doubtful that Austria-Hungary, the British Empire, and the Russian Empire would have stood idly by while Prussia/Germany de facto annexed all of metropolitan France. Attempts by Prussia/Germany to occupy, let alone occupy and annex, all of France, would have likely triggered a major continental war. Britain would have been sounding alarm bells that the apocalypse had begun because of the sudden overthrow of their balance of power schemes on the continent.
因为这样他们就有了治理法国的责任，而即使是法国人也不愿意治理法国。
奥匈帝国、大英帝国和俄罗斯帝国是否会在普鲁士/德国事实上吞并整个法国本土的时候袖手旁观，这一点是值得怀疑的，甚至可以说是极其怀疑的。普鲁士/德国试图占领，更不用说占领和吞并整个法国了，这很可能会引发一场大规模的大陆战争。英国会敲响警钟，认为世界末日已经开始，因为他们在欧洲大陆的权力平衡计划突然被推翻了。
, lives in The United States of America (1984-present)
Because then they would have the responsibility of governing France and even the French don’t want to govern France.
It is questionable to the point of extremely doubtful that Austria-Hungary, the British Empire, and the Russian Empire would have stood idly by while Prussia/Germany de facto annexed all of metropolitan France. Attempts by Prussia/Germany to occupy, let alone occupy and annex, all of France, would have likely triggered a major continental war. Britain would have been sounding alarm bells that the apocalypse had begun because of the sudden overthrow of their balance of power schemes on the continent.
因为这样他们就有了治理法国的责任，而即使是法国人也不愿意治理法国。
奥匈帝国、大英帝国和俄罗斯帝国是否会在普鲁士/德国事实上吞并整个法国本土的时候袖手旁观，这一点是值得怀疑的，甚至可以说是极其怀疑的。普鲁士/德国试图占领，更不用说占领和吞并整个法国了，这很可能会引发一场大规模的大陆战争。英国会敲响警钟，认为世界末日已经开始，因为他们在欧洲大陆的权力平衡计划突然被推翻了。
Jihoon Seo (서지훈)
, The Franco-Prussian war is a must to learn about
upxed Nov 9 · Upvoted by
Li Song
, Docter Mathematics & History, Colleges and Universities (2020) and
Philip W
, Major History Buff
#1. Because Germany never occupied the entirety of France during the war
The map above shows where the combat took place in the Franco Prussian war. The Germans could only have military control over France where it is occupied during the war because after signing the armistice to end the war in January 28th 1871, further military aggression was impossible (except for the front around Dijon and Amiens).
It was only the north east of France that directly saw military actions and many rural French men living in the south was indifferent with the wars outcome. It is far better to let these southerners indifferent rather than provoke them with occupation and let them join the war as well. In fact, the Germans were already suffering from francs-tireurs attacks from the east, destruction of towns and railroads by both sides.
#2. How would they maintain tight control?
Let’s say Prussia did take over entire France.
The entire deployment of German forces in the war was 1.5 million. Right before the sign of the armistice, there were 730,000 German troops in France. A further 200,000 were Landwehr-a German second-line reserve unit-and when occupying entire France, they would be called up. But, you still can’t contain Europe’s biggest and the most populated power (excluding Russia) with just 1 million troops.
In fact, France right after war time was extremely unstable. There were violent rebellions like the Paris Commune, not just the socialists and communists, but the commoners also felt betrayed by the new government which failed to save France from defeat. Bismarck was smart. Instead of sacrificing German lives suppressing these anti-government rebellions, he released captured French troops which was lead by MacMahon to suppress the Communards. It worked.
French government troops
#3. Would Germans like that?
The war was for the German unification. To successfully maintain unification, you need the German people to support it. The Franco-Prussian war was an expensive war.
Unlike the Austro-Prussian War, the Germans pushed a harsh term against their foe. Naturally, their foe fought to the death and it took a total seven months to end it.
Not only did the continuance of the war require massive amount of supplies for food and fodder, it also sacrificed the convenience of the German people. For Prussia, it was possible for the government to take over private railroads in times of war. War materials such as heavy siege guns, ammunition, reinforcements were always a priority and so many young men had to be mobilized away from civilian life.
The occupation of entire France would be equivalent to the continuance of the war both requiring heavy supplies and sacrifice. The only thing that is not equivalent is that there is no combat, but others would remain exactly the same.
1870 Prussian railway
#4. Exhaustion
Not just the civilians, but the direct victims of war would be the actual soldiers. The I Bavarian Corps which joined the war in 35,000 strength in August 1870 was depleted less than half strength by December. The Siege of Paris is now continuing awfully long. During the siege, every officer should stay in 24 hour duty and at the following day a one day rest. When this type of life continues, naturally would human beings feel fatigue. The rankers in the trenches were even more exhausted. Even though there were no problems in supplies, the weather got cold since November. By December, the ground froze and it snowed. The soldiers in the 1st parallel which would be the closest trench to the enemy could be reached by the Chassepot rifle, therefore under constant threat of getting shot. Besides that, the French frequently opened bombardments against the entrenched Germans.
Exhaustion was a major element. Moltke initially planned to send these boys to their home by Christmas, but it continued on and on. Bismarck had to lessen the terms for peace (5 billion francs indemnity from 6 billion, excluding Belfort from annexation) to finally get the French to talk. The war was ended in haste by February 1871 with a quick victory march in March 1st.
To occupy entire France would mean let these troops to stay away from their homes even longer. An unnecessary waste of manpower and resources to occupy France which was now dry of constant war and fatigue? That was never acceptable.
#1. 因为德国在战争期间从未占领过法国的全部领土
, The Franco-Prussian war is a must to learn about
upxed Nov 9 · Upvoted by
Li Song
, Docter Mathematics & History, Colleges and Universities (2020) and
Philip W
, Major History Buff
#1. Because Germany never occupied the entirety of France during the war
The map above shows where the combat took place in the Franco Prussian war. The Germans could only have military control over France where it is occupied during the war because after signing the armistice to end the war in January 28th 1871, further military aggression was impossible (except for the front around Dijon and Amiens).
It was only the north east of France that directly saw military actions and many rural French men living in the south was indifferent with the wars outcome. It is far better to let these southerners indifferent rather than provoke them with occupation and let them join the war as well. In fact, the Germans were already suffering from francs-tireurs attacks from the east, destruction of towns and railroads by both sides.
#2. How would they maintain tight control?
Let’s say Prussia did take over entire France.
The entire deployment of German forces in the war was 1.5 million. Right before the sign of the armistice, there were 730,000 German troops in France. A further 200,000 were Landwehr-a German second-line reserve unit-and when occupying entire France, they would be called up. But, you still can’t contain Europe’s biggest and the most populated power (excluding Russia) with just 1 million troops.
In fact, France right after war time was extremely unstable. There were violent rebellions like the Paris Commune, not just the socialists and communists, but the commoners also felt betrayed by the new government which failed to save France from defeat. Bismarck was smart. Instead of sacrificing German lives suppressing these anti-government rebellions, he released captured French troops which was lead by MacMahon to suppress the Communards. It worked.
French government troops
#3. Would Germans like that?
The war was for the German unification. To successfully maintain unification, you need the German people to support it. The Franco-Prussian war was an expensive war.
Unlike the Austro-Prussian War, the Germans pushed a harsh term against their foe. Naturally, their foe fought to the death and it took a total seven months to end it.
Not only did the continuance of the war require massive amount of supplies for food and fodder, it also sacrificed the convenience of the German people. For Prussia, it was possible for the government to take over private railroads in times of war. War materials such as heavy siege guns, ammunition, reinforcements were always a priority and so many young men had to be mobilized away from civilian life.
The occupation of entire France would be equivalent to the continuance of the war both requiring heavy supplies and sacrifice. The only thing that is not equivalent is that there is no combat, but others would remain exactly the same.
1870 Prussian railway
#4. Exhaustion
Not just the civilians, but the direct victims of war would be the actual soldiers. The I Bavarian Corps which joined the war in 35,000 strength in August 1870 was depleted less than half strength by December. The Siege of Paris is now continuing awfully long. During the siege, every officer should stay in 24 hour duty and at the following day a one day rest. When this type of life continues, naturally would human beings feel fatigue. The rankers in the trenches were even more exhausted. Even though there were no problems in supplies, the weather got cold since November. By December, the ground froze and it snowed. The soldiers in the 1st parallel which would be the closest trench to the enemy could be reached by the Chassepot rifle, therefore under constant threat of getting shot. Besides that, the French frequently opened bombardments against the entrenched Germans.
Exhaustion was a major element. Moltke initially planned to send these boys to their home by Christmas, but it continued on and on. Bismarck had to lessen the terms for peace (5 billion francs indemnity from 6 billion, excluding Belfort from annexation) to finally get the French to talk. The war was ended in haste by February 1871 with a quick victory march in March 1st.
To occupy entire France would mean let these troops to stay away from their homes even longer. An unnecessary waste of manpower and resources to occupy France which was now dry of constant war and fatigue? That was never acceptable.
#1. 因为德国在战争期间从未占领过法国的全部领土
上面的地图显示了法普战争中战斗发生的地点。德国人在战争期间只能对法国被占领的地方进行军事控制，因为在1871年1月28日签署停战协议结束战争后，进一步的军事侵略是不可能的（除了第戎和亚眠附近的战线）。
只有法国东北部直接出现了军事行动，许多生活在南部的法国农村男子对战争结果漠不关心。让这些南方人无动于衷，远比用占领来激怒他们，让他们也加入战争要好得多。事实上，德国人已经在遭受来自法国东部的猛烈攻击，对双方的城镇和铁路进行破坏。
#2. 他们将如何保持严格的控制？
假设普鲁士真的占领了整个法国。
战争中德军的总共部署了150万人。就在停战协议签署之前，法国境内有73万德军。还有20万是德国陆军的二线预备队，当占领整个法国时，他们会被征召。但是，仅凭100万军队，你仍然无法遏制欧洲最大和人口最多的国家（不包括俄罗斯）。
事实上，战后的法国是极其不稳定的。出现了像巴黎公社那样的暴力叛乱，不仅仅是社会主义者和共产主义者，平民也觉得被新政府背叛了，而新政府没能挽救法国的失败。俾斯麦很聪明。他没有牺牲德国人的生命来镇压这些反政府的叛乱，而是释放了由麦克马洪领导的被俘法国军队来镇压共产主义者。这很有效。
#3. 德国人会喜欢这样吗？
这场战争是为了德国的统一。要成功维持统一，需要德国人民的支持。普法战争是一场昂贵的战争。
与普奥战争不同，德国人对他们的敌人进行了严厉的攻击。自然，他们的敌人也奋死抵抗，战争总共花了七个月时间才结束。
战争的持续不仅需要大量的食品和饲料供应，而且还牺牲了德国人民的便利。对普鲁士来说，政府有可能在战时接管私人铁路。战争物资，如重型攻城炮、弹药、增援部队总是优先考虑的，因此许多年轻人不得不被动员起来，远离平民生活。
占领整个法国就相当于继续进行战争，都需要大量的物资和牺牲。唯一不等同的是没有战斗，但其他方面将保持完全相同。
#4. 疲惫不堪
不仅仅是平民，战争的直接受害者将是真正的士兵。1870年8月以35,000人的兵力参战的巴伐利亚第一军团，到12月时已耗尽了差不多一半的兵力。对巴黎的围困的时间现在正被拉得越来越长。在围城期间，每个军官都得24小时值班，并在第二天休息一天。当这种生活持续下去时，人类自然会感到疲劳。战壕里的官兵们更是疲惫不堪。尽管补给没有问题，但从11月开始，天气变得寒冷。到了12月，地面结冰，下起了雪。第一平行线上的士兵是离敌人最近的战壕，是Chassepot步枪的射程范围，因此一直面临着被射杀的威胁。除此之外，法军还经常对固守的德国人进行轰炸。
疲惫是一个主要因素。毛奇最初计划在圣诞节前把这些孩子送回他们的家，但它一直在持续。俾斯麦不得不降低和平条件（从60亿法郎的赔偿金降低到50亿法郎，不包括对贝尔福特的吞并），最终让法国人同意谈判。战争在1871年2月以3月1日的快速胜利进军而匆匆结束。
占领整个法国将意味着让这些军队离开他们的家园更久。占领法国是对人力和资源的不必要的浪费，而德国现在已经在不断的战争和疲劳中干涸了，这是不可能接受的。
Arsene Wenger
, lives in France
upxed Mar 6
They did actually.
After the Prussians won against France (let's date it at the end of the Sedan battle when Napoléon III was captured with a fair amount of his soldiers : on 2 September of 1870)
From this time until 1873 France had Prussian troops in its territory (they seemed to like it enough to come back during WW2).
The question is : Why did they stay until then?
The answer is quite simple : they negotiated a treaty and the French were VERY compliant. This treaty was signed on 10 May of 1871 in Frankfurt.
They allowed the Prussians to annex “Alsace-Lorraine” which is 14,500 square kilometers (that’s more than a third of Swiss land area to put it into perspective)
Plus, they promised to pay 5 billion francs in reparation. Pretty good right ?
But do you know what’s even better ?
The Prussians didn’t have to handle the crazy republicans that didn’t let their army enter Paris (cf : Paris Commune - Wikipedia).
Basically, when the Prussians signed the treaty, there was some kind of proto-anarchist thing going on in Paris that considered the current pacific French government as traitors because, well they signed a treaty with the goddamn boches !!
Now the Prussians already know how much of a pain in the ass these Parisians can be since they had to siege Paris for 4 months between 1870 and early 1871 for them to finally start negotiating.
So literally two weeks after he signed the treaty this guy :
Adolphe Thiers, current leader of the French government
Says to this guy :
“Look man I need you to release Napoleon’s soldiers to defeat these crazy anarchists, otherwise I can’t pay your 5 billions, since we’ll never find the stability to do so.” (note that Thiers had a very unusual way to speak for his time).
“French against French?” thinks Bismarck. “Sounds good” he answers. So he allows Thiers to get back his POWs.
Adolphe Thiers builds an army of approximately 170,000 and marches to Paris. The “Communards” (surname for the participants of the Commune of Paris) were around 35,000 against these soldiers.
You’d think you can predict the outcome right ? Yes, they won, but I don’t think you could guess the atrocious manner: in 7 days, Thiers and his men killed 30,000 communards. He didn’t hesitate to fire cannonballs on them. These seven days (21-28 may of 1871) were called “la semaine sanglante” (“the bloody week”, self-explanatory).
That’s why they didn’t just “take over” France durably, there was a bunch of Republicans that were completely opposed to the Prussians and would have prefered dying to being under their occupation.
However, most people were pacifists at the time and most nobles and bourgeois too. What do they have in common ? Money and the will, if necessary, to use this money to buy peace as fast as possible. So why waste your time and money in a territory where there is a constant threat (even if marginal) against you when you can simply occupy it until they pay the 5 billions and still manage to keep some of its territory without having to fear this opposition since the French government itself is handling it for you ?
As a French guy, I have to say Bismarck made a very good decision for his country and got the best of both worlds: stable annexed territories without having to spend money to stabilize them and huge reparations.
他们确实这么干了。
在普鲁士人赢得对法国的胜利后（让我们把时间定在色当战役结束后，拿破仑三世和他的大量士兵被俘的时间：1870年9月2日）。
从这时起直到1873年，法国在其领土上都有普鲁士军队（他们似乎很喜欢这里，在第二次世界大战期间又回来了）。
问题: 他们为什么要留到这个时候？
答案很简单：他们对一项条约进行谈判，而法国人则非常顺从。该条约于1871年5月10日在法兰克福签署。
他们允许普鲁士人吞并"阿尔萨斯-洛林"，面积为14500平方公里（从这个角度看，这超过了瑞士土地面积的三分之一）。
此外，他们还承诺支付50亿法郎的赔偿金。很不错吧？
但你知道更棒的是什么吗？
普鲁士人不必处理那些不让他们的军队进入巴黎的疯狂共和党人（参见：巴黎公社--维基百科）。
基本上，当普鲁士人签署条约时，巴黎发生了某种原始的无政府主义的事情，他们认为目前的法国和平政府是叛徒，因为，他们与该死的波克人签署了条约！！
现在普鲁士人已经知道这些巴黎人有多讨厌了，因为他们在1870年和1871年初之间围攻了巴黎4个月，才让他们最终开始谈判。
因此，在他签署条约的两周后，这个家伙：
, lives in France
upxed Mar 6
They did actually.
After the Prussians won against France (let's date it at the end of the Sedan battle when Napoléon III was captured with a fair amount of his soldiers : on 2 September of 1870)
From this time until 1873 France had Prussian troops in its territory (they seemed to like it enough to come back during WW2).
The question is : Why did they stay until then?
The answer is quite simple : they negotiated a treaty and the French were VERY compliant. This treaty was signed on 10 May of 1871 in Frankfurt.
They allowed the Prussians to annex “Alsace-Lorraine” which is 14,500 square kilometers (that’s more than a third of Swiss land area to put it into perspective)
Plus, they promised to pay 5 billion francs in reparation. Pretty good right ?
But do you know what’s even better ?
The Prussians didn’t have to handle the crazy republicans that didn’t let their army enter Paris (cf : Paris Commune - Wikipedia).
Basically, when the Prussians signed the treaty, there was some kind of proto-anarchist thing going on in Paris that considered the current pacific French government as traitors because, well they signed a treaty with the goddamn boches !!
Now the Prussians already know how much of a pain in the ass these Parisians can be since they had to siege Paris for 4 months between 1870 and early 1871 for them to finally start negotiating.
So literally two weeks after he signed the treaty this guy :
Adolphe Thiers, current leader of the French government
Says to this guy :
“Look man I need you to release Napoleon’s soldiers to defeat these crazy anarchists, otherwise I can’t pay your 5 billions, since we’ll never find the stability to do so.” (note that Thiers had a very unusual way to speak for his time).
“French against French?” thinks Bismarck. “Sounds good” he answers. So he allows Thiers to get back his POWs.
Adolphe Thiers builds an army of approximately 170,000 and marches to Paris. The “Communards” (surname for the participants of the Commune of Paris) were around 35,000 against these soldiers.
You’d think you can predict the outcome right ? Yes, they won, but I don’t think you could guess the atrocious manner: in 7 days, Thiers and his men killed 30,000 communards. He didn’t hesitate to fire cannonballs on them. These seven days (21-28 may of 1871) were called “la semaine sanglante” (“the bloody week”, self-explanatory).
That’s why they didn’t just “take over” France durably, there was a bunch of Republicans that were completely opposed to the Prussians and would have prefered dying to being under their occupation.
However, most people were pacifists at the time and most nobles and bourgeois too. What do they have in common ? Money and the will, if necessary, to use this money to buy peace as fast as possible. So why waste your time and money in a territory where there is a constant threat (even if marginal) against you when you can simply occupy it until they pay the 5 billions and still manage to keep some of its territory without having to fear this opposition since the French government itself is handling it for you ?
As a French guy, I have to say Bismarck made a very good decision for his country and got the best of both worlds: stable annexed territories without having to spend money to stabilize them and huge reparations.
他们确实这么干了。
在普鲁士人赢得对法国的胜利后（让我们把时间定在色当战役结束后，拿破仑三世和他的大量士兵被俘的时间：1870年9月2日）。
从这时起直到1873年，法国在其领土上都有普鲁士军队（他们似乎很喜欢这里，在第二次世界大战期间又回来了）。
问题: 他们为什么要留到这个时候？
答案很简单：他们对一项条约进行谈判，而法国人则非常顺从。该条约于1871年5月10日在法兰克福签署。
他们允许普鲁士人吞并"阿尔萨斯-洛林"，面积为14500平方公里（从这个角度看，这超过了瑞士土地面积的三分之一）。
此外，他们还承诺支付50亿法郎的赔偿金。很不错吧？
但你知道更棒的是什么吗？
普鲁士人不必处理那些不让他们的军队进入巴黎的疯狂共和党人（参见：巴黎公社--维基百科）。
基本上，当普鲁士人签署条约时，巴黎发生了某种原始的无政府主义的事情，他们认为目前的法国和平政府是叛徒，因为，他们与该死的波克人签署了条约！！
现在普鲁士人已经知道这些巴黎人有多讨厌了，因为他们在1870年和1871年初之间围攻了巴黎4个月，才让他们最终开始谈判。
因此，在他签署条约的两周后，这个家伙：
阿道夫-梯也尔，法国政府的现任领导人
对这个家伙说:
"听着，伙计，我需要你释放拿破仑的士兵来打败这些疯狂的无政府主义者，否则我无法支付你的50亿，因为我们永远找不到稳定的资金供给。" (注意，梯也尔的说话方式在他的时代非常不寻常）。
"用法国人对付法国人？"俾斯麦想。"听起来不错 "，他回答道。于是他允许梯也尔拿回他的战俘。
阿道夫-梯也尔建立了一支约17万人的军队，向巴黎进军。约有35000名“同志”（巴黎公社参与者的绰号）对抗这些士兵。
你以为你可以预测这件事的结果，对吗？是的，他们赢了，但我不认为你能猜到其残暴的方式：在7天内，梯也尔和他的手下杀死了3万名公社成员。他毫不犹豫地向他们发射了炮弹。这七天（1871年5月21日至28日）被称为 "血腥的一周"（la semaine sanglante，不言而喻）。
这就是为什么他们没有持久地"接管"法国：有一群共和党人坚决反对普鲁士人，宁愿死也不愿意被他们占领。
然而，当时大多数人都是和平主义者，大多数贵族和资产阶级也是如此。他们有什么共同点？钱和意愿，如果有必要的话，用这些钱尽可能快地购买和平。那么，为什么要把时间和金钱浪费在一个对你有持续威胁（即使是微不足道的威胁）的领土上，而你可以简单地占领它，直到他们支付你50亿，并且还可以设法夺取一些领土，而不必担心这种反对，因为法国政府自己在为你处理这个问题？
作为一个法国人，我不得不说俾斯麦为他的国家做了一个非常好的决定，得到了两全其美的结果：稳定的被吞并的领土，而不必花钱去稳定它们和巨额的赔款。
André Teissier du Cros
I add only one point to this excellent paper: Bismarck didn’t want Lorraine, only Alsace which was truly German (he was right). It was Von Molkte who insisted on Lorraine to control the big three fortresses: Metz, Toul and Verdun. If William I had supported Bismark better, could be that WW1 wouldn’t have happened.
对于这篇优秀的答文，我只补充一点。俾斯麦不想要洛林，只想要真正属于德国的阿尔萨斯（他是对的）。是冯-莫克特坚持要洛林来控制三大要塞：梅兹、图尔和凡尔登。如果威廉一世能更好地支持俾斯麦，可能第一次世界大战就不会发生。
I add only one point to this excellent paper: Bismarck didn’t want Lorraine, only Alsace which was truly German (he was right). It was Von Molkte who insisted on Lorraine to control the big three fortresses: Metz, Toul and Verdun. If William I had supported Bismark better, could be that WW1 wouldn’t have happened.
对于这篇优秀的答文，我只补充一点。俾斯麦不想要洛林，只想要真正属于德国的阿尔萨斯（他是对的）。是冯-莫克特坚持要洛林来控制三大要塞：梅兹、图尔和凡尔登。如果威廉一世能更好地支持俾斯麦，可能第一次世界大战就不会发生。
Jihoon Seo (서지훈)
You are true, but the annexation of Metz, Toul, Verdun was crucial and simply because of the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine the First World War escalated is just a cliché. The three cities were major fortress towns which the French could’ve used for rearmament which would be more hazardous.
Also, the French felt immense hatred towards the German due to their defeat whether the Germans took Alsace-Lorraine or not.
Furthermore, the First World War didn’t happen just because of the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine. It’s because Germany invaded France and many Frenchmen felt an obligation to serve their country against a foreign invasion.
你的说法是对的，但是吞并梅斯、图尔、凡尔登是至关重要的，说仅仅因为吞并了阿尔萨斯-洛林就导致了第一次世界大战，这只是一种陈词滥调。这三个城市是主要的要塞城市，法国人可以用它们来重新武装法国，这将是更危险的。
另外，无论德国人是否占领了阿尔萨斯-洛林，法国人都会因为失败而对德国人感到无比的憎恨。
此外，第一次世界大战的发生并不只是因为对阿尔萨斯-洛林的吞并。而是因为德国入侵法国，许多法国人感到有义务为国家服务，对抗外国入侵。
You are true, but the annexation of Metz, Toul, Verdun was crucial and simply because of the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine the First World War escalated is just a cliché. The three cities were major fortress towns which the French could’ve used for rearmament which would be more hazardous.
Also, the French felt immense hatred towards the German due to their defeat whether the Germans took Alsace-Lorraine or not.
Furthermore, the First World War didn’t happen just because of the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine. It’s because Germany invaded France and many Frenchmen felt an obligation to serve their country against a foreign invasion.
你的说法是对的，但是吞并梅斯、图尔、凡尔登是至关重要的，说仅仅因为吞并了阿尔萨斯-洛林就导致了第一次世界大战，这只是一种陈词滥调。这三个城市是主要的要塞城市，法国人可以用它们来重新武装法国，这将是更危险的。
另外，无论德国人是否占领了阿尔萨斯-洛林，法国人都会因为失败而对德国人感到无比的憎恨。
此外，第一次世界大战的发生并不只是因为对阿尔萨斯-洛林的吞并。而是因为德国入侵法国，许多法国人感到有义务为国家服务，对抗外国入侵。
André Teissier du Cros
You are absolutely right about Metz, Toul and Verdun. As for World War 1 it happened beause of Sarajevo, because Austria then declared war on Serbia, and because Czar Nicolas declared war to Austria to respect his treaty with Serbia. Then of course Germany declared war on Russia to defend Austria. And then of course the UK and France declared war to Germany and Austria as per their treaty with Russia. Alsace-Lorraine was a cherry on top for the French.
Now, I bet you that if in 1871 Bismarck had followed his own common sense (which was big) and annexed only Alsace, things would have been way easier. It was Von Molkte who insisted in taking Lorraine as well, for the reasons you mentioned. because he was thinking like a stubborn, short term minded military, and not as a history-conscious politician. Von Molkte was Prussian, but Bismarck was a German with the right vision. And that was a serious mistake, because Lorraine, historically, was French…
关于梅兹、图尔和凡尔登，你说得很对。至于第一次世界大战，它的发生是因为萨拉热窝，因为奥地利当时向塞尔维亚宣战，也因为沙皇尼古拉向奥地利宣战以尊重他与塞尔维亚的条约。然后当然是德国向俄国宣战以保卫奥地利。然后当然是英国和法国按照他们与俄国的条约向德国和奥地利宣战。阿尔萨斯-洛林是法国人蛋糕上的一颗樱桃。
现在，我跟你打赌，如果1871年俾斯麦遵循自己的常识（这很重要），只吞并阿尔萨斯，事情就会容易得多。正是冯-莫尔克特坚持要拿下洛林，原因就像你提到的那样。因为他是像一个顽固的、只有短期思维的军人那样思考，而不是像一个有历史意识的政治家。冯-莫克特是普鲁士人，但俾斯麦是一个具有正确眼光的德国人。这是一个严重的错误，因为从历史上看，洛林是法国的......
You are absolutely right about Metz, Toul and Verdun. As for World War 1 it happened beause of Sarajevo, because Austria then declared war on Serbia, and because Czar Nicolas declared war to Austria to respect his treaty with Serbia. Then of course Germany declared war on Russia to defend Austria. And then of course the UK and France declared war to Germany and Austria as per their treaty with Russia. Alsace-Lorraine was a cherry on top for the French.
Now, I bet you that if in 1871 Bismarck had followed his own common sense (which was big) and annexed only Alsace, things would have been way easier. It was Von Molkte who insisted in taking Lorraine as well, for the reasons you mentioned. because he was thinking like a stubborn, short term minded military, and not as a history-conscious politician. Von Molkte was Prussian, but Bismarck was a German with the right vision. And that was a serious mistake, because Lorraine, historically, was French…
关于梅兹、图尔和凡尔登，你说得很对。至于第一次世界大战，它的发生是因为萨拉热窝，因为奥地利当时向塞尔维亚宣战，也因为沙皇尼古拉向奥地利宣战以尊重他与塞尔维亚的条约。然后当然是德国向俄国宣战以保卫奥地利。然后当然是英国和法国按照他们与俄国的条约向德国和奥地利宣战。阿尔萨斯-洛林是法国人蛋糕上的一颗樱桃。
现在，我跟你打赌，如果1871年俾斯麦遵循自己的常识（这很重要），只吞并阿尔萨斯，事情就会容易得多。正是冯-莫尔克特坚持要拿下洛林，原因就像你提到的那样。因为他是像一个顽固的、只有短期思维的军人那样思考，而不是像一个有历史意识的政治家。冯-莫克特是普鲁士人，但俾斯麦是一个具有正确眼光的德国人。这是一个严重的错误，因为从历史上看，洛林是法国的......
Ed Mercier
To further clarify, most of Lorraine did not become German, only the département of the Moselle in the north.
进一步澄清一下，洛林的大部分地区并没有德国化，只有北部的摩泽尔省。
To further clarify, most of Lorraine did not become German, only the département of the Moselle in the north.
进一步澄清一下，洛林的大部分地区并没有德国化，只有北部的摩泽尔省。
Greg Yount
Had Wilhelm II not been such an impetuous fool, and listened to Von Bismarck, I highly doubt WWI would have occurred. There might have been small territorial skirmishes like the First and Second Schleswig wars, but probably nothing like the Great War!
如果威廉二世不是这样一个急躁的傻瓜，而是听从冯-俾斯麦的话，我非常怀疑第一次世界大战会发生。可能会有像第一次和第二次石勒苏益格战争那样的小规模领土冲突，但可能不会发展成像世界大战那样的战争！
Had Wilhelm II not been such an impetuous fool, and listened to Von Bismarck, I highly doubt WWI would have occurred. There might have been small territorial skirmishes like the First and Second Schleswig wars, but probably nothing like the Great War!
如果威廉二世不是这样一个急躁的傻瓜，而是听从冯-俾斯麦的话，我非常怀疑第一次世界大战会发生。可能会有像第一次和第二次石勒苏益格战争那样的小规模领土冲突，但可能不会发展成像世界大战那样的战争！
André Teissier du Cros
Good report. One word: Bismarck was forced into what he knew would be a mistake. He only wanted Alsace which, let’s face it, was a German country. Von Molkte, the Marshall in Command, wanted Lorraine as well, to take possession of the Metz, Toul and Verdun fortresses. He insisted, and Bismarck wanted to put the matter to end because William I was beginning to ask questions. “We might come to regret it”, said Bismarck. He was right, in 1918.
好答案。一句话：俾斯麦是被迫的，他知道这将是一个错误。他只想要阿尔萨斯，而对于阿尔萨斯，让我们面对现实吧，之前确实是一个日耳曼国家。但是指挥官冯-莫克特也想要洛林，以占有梅兹、图尔和凡尔登要塞。他坚持要这样做，而俾斯麦想结束这件事，因为威廉一世已经开始提出质疑了。俾斯麦说，"我们可能会后悔"。他说对了，在1918年。
Good report. One word: Bismarck was forced into what he knew would be a mistake. He only wanted Alsace which, let’s face it, was a German country. Von Molkte, the Marshall in Command, wanted Lorraine as well, to take possession of the Metz, Toul and Verdun fortresses. He insisted, and Bismarck wanted to put the matter to end because William I was beginning to ask questions. “We might come to regret it”, said Bismarck. He was right, in 1918.
好答案。一句话：俾斯麦是被迫的，他知道这将是一个错误。他只想要阿尔萨斯，而对于阿尔萨斯，让我们面对现实吧，之前确实是一个日耳曼国家。但是指挥官冯-莫克特也想要洛林，以占有梅兹、图尔和凡尔登要塞。他坚持要这样做，而俾斯麦想结束这件事，因为威廉一世已经开始提出质疑了。俾斯麦说，"我们可能会后悔"。他说对了，在1918年。
Tom Simunovic
The amount of reparations was so small for the size of the French economy that it was paid rapidly and France became powerful again and built the tallest tower in the world.
对于法国的经济规模来说，赔款数额太小了，所以赔款很快就付清了，法国又变得强大起来，并建成了世界上最高的塔。
The amount of reparations was so small for the size of the French economy that it was paid rapidly and France became powerful again and built the tallest tower in the world.
对于法国的经济规模来说，赔款数额太小了，所以赔款很快就付清了，法国又变得强大起来，并建成了世界上最高的塔。
Arsene Wenger
It was small for the bourgeoisie, yes.
是的，这对资产阶级来说是很小。
It was small for the bourgeoisie, yes.
是的，这对资产阶级来说是很小。
Ed Mercier
As a proportion of GDP, the 1871 reparations were very similar to those imposed on Germany after World War I.
就国内生产总值的比例而言，1871年的赔款与第一次世界大战后对德国施加的赔款非常相似。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
As a proportion of GDP, the 1871 reparations were very similar to those imposed on Germany after World War I.
就国内生产总值的比例而言，1871年的赔款与第一次世界大战后对德国施加的赔款非常相似。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Eugene M Steinfeld
What the French did made a lot more sense than the Germans did after they lost a war. They assassinated the signers of the WW1 armistice and treaty, then started a war that wrecked the world.
法国人的所作所为比德国人在战败后的所作所为要合理得多。他们暗杀了一战停战协议和条约的签署者，然后发动了一场毁坏世界的战争。
What the French did made a lot more sense than the Germans did after they lost a war. They assassinated the signers of the WW1 armistice and treaty, then started a war that wrecked the world.
法国人的所作所为比德国人在战败后的所作所为要合理得多。他们暗杀了一战停战协议和条约的签署者，然后发动了一场毁坏世界的战争。
Joe Smith
And it must be said that Bismarck’s German-Jewish banker/advisor, Gerson von Bleichroder, helped him negotiate that arrangement and also played no small part in helping him weld together the unified German nation that was born in the nineteenth century.
而且必须说，俾斯麦的德裔犹太银行家/顾问格尔森-冯-布莱希罗德帮助他谈判达成了这一安排，也在帮助他将19世纪诞生的统一的德意志国家焊接起来方面发挥了不小的作用。
And it must be said that Bismarck’s German-Jewish banker/advisor, Gerson von Bleichroder, helped him negotiate that arrangement and also played no small part in helping him weld together the unified German nation that was born in the nineteenth century.
而且必须说，俾斯麦的德裔犹太银行家/顾问格尔森-冯-布莱希罗德帮助他谈判达成了这一安排，也在帮助他将19世纪诞生的统一的德意志国家焊接起来方面发挥了不小的作用。
Wayne Huber
Wow a long Quorian answer which , once again, misses the point.
The w a r was defensive. B wanted France to stay out of German affairs so that German y could unite. France could n't stand the idea of a united Germany. It was a war of national liberation not one of conquest. Louis fancied himself another Napoleon and got put in his place
Good !
哇，这又是一个很长但是又搞错了重点的答案。
这场战争是防御性的。俾斯麦希望法国不要插手德国事务，这样德国就可以统一了。法国不能忍受一个统一的德国的想法。这是一场民族解放的战争，而不是一场征服的战争。路易自以为是地认为自己是另一个拿破仑，结果却被打倒在地。
很好!
Wow a long Quorian answer which , once again, misses the point.
The w a r was defensive. B wanted France to stay out of German affairs so that German y could unite. France could n't stand the idea of a united Germany. It was a war of national liberation not one of conquest. Louis fancied himself another Napoleon and got put in his place
Good !
哇，这又是一个很长但是又搞错了重点的答案。
这场战争是防御性的。俾斯麦希望法国不要插手德国事务，这样德国就可以统一了。法国不能忍受一个统一的德国的想法。这是一场民族解放的战争，而不是一场征服的战争。路易自以为是地认为自己是另一个拿破仑，结果却被打倒在地。
很好!
Arsene Wenger
The subject isn't the nature of the war (which can be debated) but the effect it had on France once it was over.
You are missing the point of both this question and the answer I wrote.
主题不是战争的性质（可以争论），而是战争结束后对法国的影响。
你错过了这个问题和我写的答案的重点。
The subject isn't the nature of the war (which can be debated) but the effect it had on France once it was over.
You are missing the point of both this question and the answer I wrote.
主题不是战争的性质（可以争论），而是战争结束后对法国的影响。
你错过了这个问题和我写的答案的重点。
Richard McConnel
After the Roman Empire (disregarding colonial expansion) , most countries did not “take over” whole countries they defeated - why add to their problems - as in this case. They usually took prosperous adjacent territories and money and signed a treaty. Napoleon was a perfect example - looking back at Napoleon’s French empire days - one wonders exactly what he was fighting all those wars for??? He always seemed to be on the offensive??
自罗马帝国之后（不考虑殖民扩张），大多数国家并不会"接管"他们打败的整个国家--为什么要自寻烦恼--就像本案例一样。他们通攫取繁荣而邻近的领土和金钱，并签署条约。拿破仑就是一个完美的例子--回顾拿破仑的法兰西帝国时代--人们不禁要问，他打那么多战争到底是为了什么？他似乎总是在攻城略地停不下来？
After the Roman Empire (disregarding colonial expansion) , most countries did not “take over” whole countries they defeated - why add to their problems - as in this case. They usually took prosperous adjacent territories and money and signed a treaty. Napoleon was a perfect example - looking back at Napoleon’s French empire days - one wonders exactly what he was fighting all those wars for??? He always seemed to be on the offensive??
自罗马帝国之后（不考虑殖民扩张），大多数国家并不会"接管"他们打败的整个国家--为什么要自寻烦恼--就像本案例一样。他们通攫取繁荣而邻近的领土和金钱，并签署条约。拿破仑就是一个完美的例子--回顾拿破仑的法兰西帝国时代--人们不禁要问，他打那么多战争到底是为了什么？他似乎总是在攻城略地停不下来？
Desmond Ng
, Highly interested in history, 8 years of history reading behind me.
Because the Prussians were very practical people.Europe was already reeling from shock from the rise of Prussia. The Congress of Vienna had been planned to balance out all the powers of Europe so that no one country could ever dominate Europe in the style of Napoleon. Austria was supposed to keep Prussia in check, and France if Austria failed to do so. But now both had been defeated badly by Prussia, and Prussia looked as if she was going to become the dominant power in Europe. This was making countries like UK and Russia very nervous. If Prussia outright annexed France, it’s possible that most of Europe would turn on her, fearful of Prussia’s power and hunger for territory.
Not to mention annexing France would be detrimental to Prussia. Prussia’s main purpose was to unite the disunited German states into one solid, strong power. Why would they want 40 million French in a German country? Not to mention the uprisings that might have occurred if they did. And many nations would likely have condemned them for it, hell the demand for Alsace Lorraine already made many heads turn, best exemplified by this quote by an Italian senate member:”Yesterday i said to you, war to the death with Bonaparte. Today i say to you, rescue the French Republic by any means.” The Germans wanted Europe to view them positively, annexing France would achieve the exact opposite of that.
因为普鲁士人是非常务实的人。
欧洲已经从普鲁士崛起的震惊中回过神来。维也纳会议的计划是为了平衡欧洲的所有势力，以便没有一个国家可以像拿破仑那样主宰欧洲。奥地利本应牵制普鲁士，如果奥地利做不到这一点，就让法国来。但现在这两个国家都被普鲁士完全打败了，而普鲁士看起来似乎要成为欧洲的主导力量。这让英国和俄国等国家非常紧张。如果普鲁士直接吞并法国，可能欧洲大部分国家都会反过来对付她，害怕普鲁士的力量和对领土的饥渴。
更不用说吞并法国会对普鲁士不利了。普鲁士的主要目的是将不团结的德意志各邦统一为一个稳固的、强大的力量。他们为什么要让4000万法国人在一个德意志国家里？更不用说如果他们这样做，可能会发生的起义。许多国家可能会因此而谴责他们，对阿尔萨斯-洛林的要求已经让许多人头疼了，一位意大利参议员的这句话就是最好的例证："昨天我还在对你说，要与波拿巴（拿破仑三世）决一死战。今天我对你们说，要不惜一切代价拯救法兰西共和国。" 德国人希望欧洲能积极看待他们，而吞并法国将实现与此完全相反的目标。
, Highly interested in history, 8 years of history reading behind me.
Because the Prussians were very practical people.Europe was already reeling from shock from the rise of Prussia. The Congress of Vienna had been planned to balance out all the powers of Europe so that no one country could ever dominate Europe in the style of Napoleon. Austria was supposed to keep Prussia in check, and France if Austria failed to do so. But now both had been defeated badly by Prussia, and Prussia looked as if she was going to become the dominant power in Europe. This was making countries like UK and Russia very nervous. If Prussia outright annexed France, it’s possible that most of Europe would turn on her, fearful of Prussia’s power and hunger for territory.
Not to mention annexing France would be detrimental to Prussia. Prussia’s main purpose was to unite the disunited German states into one solid, strong power. Why would they want 40 million French in a German country? Not to mention the uprisings that might have occurred if they did. And many nations would likely have condemned them for it, hell the demand for Alsace Lorraine already made many heads turn, best exemplified by this quote by an Italian senate member:”Yesterday i said to you, war to the death with Bonaparte. Today i say to you, rescue the French Republic by any means.” The Germans wanted Europe to view them positively, annexing France would achieve the exact opposite of that.
因为普鲁士人是非常务实的人。
欧洲已经从普鲁士崛起的震惊中回过神来。维也纳会议的计划是为了平衡欧洲的所有势力，以便没有一个国家可以像拿破仑那样主宰欧洲。奥地利本应牵制普鲁士，如果奥地利做不到这一点，就让法国来。但现在这两个国家都被普鲁士完全打败了，而普鲁士看起来似乎要成为欧洲的主导力量。这让英国和俄国等国家非常紧张。如果普鲁士直接吞并法国，可能欧洲大部分国家都会反过来对付她，害怕普鲁士的力量和对领土的饥渴。
更不用说吞并法国会对普鲁士不利了。普鲁士的主要目的是将不团结的德意志各邦统一为一个稳固的、强大的力量。他们为什么要让4000万法国人在一个德意志国家里？更不用说如果他们这样做，可能会发生的起义。许多国家可能会因此而谴责他们，对阿尔萨斯-洛林的要求已经让许多人头疼了，一位意大利参议员的这句话就是最好的例证："昨天我还在对你说，要与波拿巴（拿破仑三世）决一死战。今天我对你们说，要不惜一切代价拯救法兰西共和国。" 德国人希望欧洲能积极看待他们，而吞并法国将实现与此完全相反的目标。
Steve Jordan
Bismarck didn't even want the two territories Germany took in the war--Alsace & Lorraine.
He gave in to the demands of the military for territory as a prize of victory, but thought it would only inspire future French governments to revenge.
In this he was right--as he was in most things political.
俾斯麦甚至不想要德国在战争中夺取的两块领土--阿尔萨斯和洛林。
他屈服于军方对领土的要求，作为胜利的奖赏，但他认为这只会激励未来的法国政府进行报复。
在这一点上，他是对的--就像他在大多数政治事务上一样。
Bismarck didn't even want the two territories Germany took in the war--Alsace & Lorraine.
He gave in to the demands of the military for territory as a prize of victory, but thought it would only inspire future French governments to revenge.
In this he was right--as he was in most things political.
俾斯麦甚至不想要德国在战争中夺取的两块领土--阿尔萨斯和洛林。
他屈服于军方对领土的要求，作为胜利的奖赏，但他认为这只会激励未来的法国政府进行报复。
在这一点上，他是对的--就像他在大多数政治事务上一样。
很赞 2
收藏