Academic literature on the topic 'Quadruple Alliance, 1815'

Concert of Europe was a system that was built for the purpose of maintaining the status quo between the European states and the means by which the system rested were constructed during the course of the Congress of Vienna. The Holy Alliance and the Quadruple Alliance (later Quintet) not only enabled Europe's Great Powers to cooperate in building and maintaining order, but also succeeded in creating common values that would keep cooperation alive. While the liberal and nationalist ideas brought by the French Revolution and spread by Napoleon's campaigns were alive both in European societies and on the political map drawn by Napoleon in 1815, the victorious major powers were aware that the peace was to be established both by the suppression of these ideas and by reformation of the map. For this reason, the absolutist values and structure before the French Revolution formed the reference points that would form the basis of the new peace. This article aims to analyze the peace on which the so-called European Harmony is based, within the framework of international relations literature.

The situation of Russian World War I prisoners of war in the camps of the Quadruple Alliance countries is described. The relevance of the research lies in the study of the problem of captivity and comparison of the treatment of Russian prisoners of war in Germany and Turkey, using the preserved testimony of witnesses of the events of past years: diplomats, Russian soldiers who found themselves in German and Turkish captivity. The aim of the study is based on the analysis of previously unexamined documents of the State Archive of the Russian Federation, letters and memos. During the study, it was concluded that Soviet diplomats attempted to help improve the situation of Russian prisoners of war in German camps, their re-evacuation to their homeland after the signing of the Brest Peace Treaty, by participating in the work of mixed commissions and creating new international legal acts. It was found that the most difficult, unbearable and cruel captivity for the Russian soldiers was in Turkey. Unlike the Turkish captivity, the German one, in spite of all its flaws and severity, still left a chance for survival. Turkey had the highest death rate of prisoners of war.

The article examines and analyzes the portrayal of Austro-Hungary by correspondents of the Russian daily newspaper, “Russian Invalid,” during 1914–1915. This was a period when the Russian Empire was actively engaged in military conflict with the states of the Triple (and later, Quadruple) Alliance on the European front, with Austro-Hungary emerging as one of its primary adversaries on the Eastern Front. Established in February 1813, the “Russian Invalid” was the official print publication of the Military Ministry of the Russian Empire and served as a pivotal source of information on the empire’s foreign policies. This state-run newspaper was financed by the budget of Russia’s Military Ministry. In the early stages of World War I (1914–1915), the “Russian Invalid” correspondents devoted significant attention to the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Only Germany, Britain, and France received more coverage in this publication. The majority of the information about Austro-Hungary appeared under sections titled “Military Chronicle,” “Feuilleton,” “War,” “Telegram,” and “Articles.” The study concludes that during World War I, the “Russian Invalid,” the daily newspaper of the Military Ministry of the Russian Empire, played a pivotal role in shaping public opinion within the empire. It crafted diverse images of the states involved in the early 20th century’s major military conflict, designating them as either “enemy,” “neutral state,” or “ally.” The Austro-Hungarian Empire was depicted as a nation that had significantly exhausted its economic, military-technical, and human resources in the initial two years of the war. Such depletion was foreseen to not only incite widespread national unrest but also accelerate the empire’s eventual disintegration, an entity long referred to as a “prison of nations.”

We consider the activities of the Soviet press in 1918 to inform society about the problems of Russian war prisoners in the camps of the states of the Quadruple Alliance, re-evacuation home and providing them with comprehensive state assistance. The relevance of the study is to compare the printed publications of the First World War, which operated during the reign of Nicholas II, the Provisional Government and the Soviet government, and to consider how the pol-icy and ideology regarding Russian prisoners of war affected the media. The purpose of the article is based on the analysis of newspaper clippings from 1918 of the State Archive of the Russian Federation. During the study of works by Russian historians, printed publications of the Great War, it was concluded that the attitude towards Russian war prisoners by the tsarist leadership and the Soviet authorities were different. In the Russian press for 1914–1917, problems related to Rus-sian war prisoners were rarely mentioned, mass surrenders and statistics on the number of prison-ers of war languishing in foreign camps were kept silent. Due to the lack of information in printed publications in 1914–1915 borrowed articles from foreign newspapers. It seems that tsarism has forgotten about its compatriots in captivity. But local newspapers constantly talked about the situation of foreign prisoners of war in various regions and cities of Russia. Clippings from Soviet newspapers provided important information that was difficult to find in other historical sources, showing the social policy and ideology towards Russian war prisoners on the part of the Bolshe-viks. The government headed by V.I. Lenin tried in every possible way to help war prisoners who found themselves in a difficult situation, covering their activities and the fate of prisoners of war in newspapers, thereby gaining the confidence of the population of the country in order to enlist support for the young Soviet state.

This chapter shows that secondary rules help to explain the emergence of active practices of great power management of the international system after the Napoleonic Wars. Actors were aware of themselves as joint participants in a practice of rule-making and interpretation. They presented proposals according to the rules of that practice, both criticizing and justifying proposals on procedural grounds. The chapter covers the initial creation of great power management in the Congress of Vienna, and its development in the initial conferences of the Concert of Europe at Aix-la-Chapelle, Troppau, Laibach, and Verona. Actors who more skillfully employed secondary rules were more successful in obtaining their goals. Talleyrand secured France’s readmission to the ranks of the great powers, and Metternich and Castlereagh consistently employed procedural rules to achieve their objectives. Procedural rules also help explain the failure of the Tsar’s proposed Holy Alliance in contrast to the substantively similar Quadruple Alliance.