Ok, college international studies class and I am getting ready to write a paper for it. I need to come up with an event in history that was unexpected, or that, based on other precedents, should not have happened, and then explain why it did happen anyways.

E.g. The mongols conquered everyone they tried to except Japan which they invaded but failed every time. Why were the Japanese able to repel the Mongols?

So if anyone can come up with something else like that, where something sticks out as something out of the ordinary and the answer is not obvious it would be much apreciated. The time period is 1200-1914.

Berlin wall coming down?

Ok, college international studies class and I am getting ready to write a paper for it. I need to come up with an event in history that was unexpected, or that, based on other precedents, should not have happened, and then explain why it did happen anyways.

E.g. The mongols conquered everyone they tried to except Japan which they invaded but failed every time. Why were the Japanese able to repel the Mongols?

So if anyone can come up with something else like that, where something sticks out as something out of the ordinary and the answer is not obvious it would be much apreciated. The time period is 1200-1914.

It was rather unexpected that the backwater of Europe, Russia, would rise to become a superpower.

I guess this depends on what position you view international relations from.

If you are a liberal (in terms of International Relations theory, not domestic political views), then the two biggest surprises are:
1) Molotov-Von Ribbentrop Pact. That is, if you believe that domestic politics and idealogy are the dominant forces behind a nation's foreign policy (Liberal IR Theory), a Communist state and a Fascist state should never cooperate.

2) Sino-Soviet Split. Again, Commies should, according to Liberal IR Theory, naturally work closely with each other. See also Yugoslavia.

If you are a Realist, then the most surprising is probably WWI not starting in 1905. That is, if you believe that a nation's foreign policy is dictated primarily by the structure of the international system and nations act to maximize or at least improve relative power, then Germany should have gone to war with France after the Russian defeat against the Japanese, because Russia was temporarily knocked out of the European balance of power and a two-front war would have been either averted or rendered pathetically easy for the Germans on the Eastern Front.

Without engaging much in the reasons why they happened (that's your work ;)), here a few I can remember:
- Greeks staying out of the sphere of the Persians.
- Macedonia destroying the Persian Empire.
- What probably looked like a small and backward village away from the great centers of the civilized world ended up conquering that whole civilized world in a few centuries. Rome of course.
- That eventually that enormously powerful empire would end at the hands of germanic tribes.
- The excentric religion of a little nation in the Mediterranean became the basis for the religious beliefs of almost the entire world out of the Far East and India.
- An even more unknown people out of the sands of Arabia extended their domination over much of the mediterranean world and beyond in a very short time.
- Spices produced the other side of the world were the trigger of the expansion of an entire continent, Europe from the late XV century beyond.
- That a small country in the edge of said continent was the first to build a global empire, Portugal.
- At the same time this happening, China, the world's biggest and wealthiest nation gradually fell to a state of inertial bureaucracy and dismissive disdain from the outer world, and because of that, found herself much behind the West and worst of all, their japanese neighbours.
- That Japan turned from a feudal and closed country, centuries behind the west, into an industrial advanced power in about half a century.
- English becoming the de facto lingua franca of the educated world, when such thing didn't seem likely at all a couple of centuries before.
- The extremely fast process of the unification of Italy wouls have been unthinkable not a long time before, I think.
- The destruction of the Old Régime and tha absolutist state in France and much of Europe was almost uthopic at the end of the XVIII century and yet was a reality in the continent and the newly independent european american colonies 50 years later.
- The italians loosing an absolutely humilliating military defeat at the hands of an ethiopian enemy, whose technological inferiority was immense.
- When the year 1900 begun, quantum mechanics wasn't even born, 45 years later an atomic bomb was being tested in New Mexico (IIRC) and destroying cities in Japan.
- In the 30s and 40s, europeans were slaughtering each other. A few decades later were cooperating and building an economical and political union.
- Etc.

Not an event, per se, but how about the survival of Switzerland as an independent state? Not bloody likely that a bunch of peasants with sticks could repeatedly turn back French armies, but it happened. Your job would be to explain how and why.

Not an event, per se, but how about the survival of Switzerland as an independent state? Not bloody likely that a bunch of peasants with sticks could repeatedly turn back French armies, but it happened. Your job would be to explain how and why.

Not likely? The Swiss are bloody psychopaths, each of them armed to the damn teeth!

Not bloody likely that a bunch of peasants with sticks could repeatedly turn back French armies, but it happened.

Dude, have you seen those "sticks"?

They can give you nightmares.

Good points, but I remind you guys that the time period is 1200-1914, and my biggest interest in history is after that (Cold War) so I still need some help

That the death of the great Khan thousands of miles away could stop the Mongol invasion of Central Europe (not to mention that 19 years later a second Khan's death resulted in the withdrawal of much of Hulagu's force from the Near East, giving the Mameluks the opportunity to defeat the remaining force at Ain Jalut).

Good points, but I remind you guys that the time period is 1200-1914, and my biggest interest in history is after that (Cold War) so I still need some help

How about the rise and fall of the Asian economic tigers for example? Or soviets beating the americans with the Sputnik, and then, only 12 years later, an american was walking on the moon? The sudden death of the soviet empire and desintegration of the country, a communist revolution in America's backyard (Cuba) and still vociferates its commitment to defying the superpower, America loosing her lead in terms of industrial output and ingenuity to her destroyed former enemy in a matter of a couple of decades (see n.1 of this post), Thatcher and the "conservative revolution" in the UK, or how the past internationalist movement of the hard left wing turned into the anti-globalization movement of today, although maybe this is not that unexpected.

Edit: And how can we forget two of the most unlekily conflict outputs on the height of the Cold war: Vietname and Afghanistan?

McDread, he stated the time frame is 1200 to 1914, you are naming events that happened afterwards.

McDread, he stated the time frame is 1200 to 1914, you are naming events that happened afterwards.

Oops. :blush: I guess when I read about his interest in the Cold War, I stopped noticing that upper limit.

Dude, have you seen those "sticks"?

They can give you nightmares.
True enough, although the pointiest of the sticks weren't developed until well after Switzerland was independent.

And I undersold the Swiss peasants: they also had rocks.

And I undersold the Swiss peasants: they also had rocks.

ANd those little knifes

ANd those little knifes
The knives laddie! they have reduced the strongest men to tears!
On a much smaller scale, the probability Archduke Ferdinand's driver would take a wrong turn.

Britain while loosing the war against Napoleon, cuts and runs for North America and conquers the French.

9/11.
That was totally unexpected. In the 21st Century, with the aid of tens of spy satellites, bugging equipment, the CIA and FBI failed stop 9/11 or to know about it.

E.g. The mongols conquered everyone they tried to except Japan which they invaded but failed every time. Why were the Japanese able to repel the Mongols?


Wrong, The Mamelucks of Egypt were the second power to defeat the Mongols (and not the other way around, the Mongols going back because of the death of one of their leaders). And since, the Japanese were only successful in defeating the Mongols due to a 'taifun', or (lucky) storm, the Mamelucks deserve the title of Mongol-killer much more... ;) More details, the battle was the one at Ain Dschalut (which means "Goliath sources") in the year 1260 (that was two years after the destruction of THE city or Arab power, Baghdad). The Mamelucs - mercenaries from the Black Sea region - afterwards continued in holding military control over Egypt until 1517).

On the Swiss topic. I don't know what you are talking about in here, but it's totally wrong.

1) the Swiss were one of the most dreaded soldiers during the Middle Ages, due to the 'Helbard'. Their "Reisläufer" were after Marignano (which stopped our hegemonical stance, although it was only a pyrrhic victory for the French and Milanese) the most wanted and best payed mercenaries for many centuries, think only of the Swiss Guard in the Vatican (even today!) or the services they brought to the French Kings during the French Revolution.

2)We actually lost against the French. As I said in Marignano and afterwards against Napoleon (this one without a discussion). Perhaps you are mixing up the French with the Habsburg/Austrians whose asses whe kicked many many times (Morgarten, Grandson, the Tellstory, ... ). And it does say something, that the home castle of the mighty Habsburgs (THE dynasty of Europe!), the Habsburg, lies in Switzerland which therefore is the home of this dynasty... ;)

mfG mitsho

I was under the impression that the Swiss tradition of military excellence emerged only well after the cantons confederated. Am I wrong?

Bailen in the Napoleonic Wars

A French army of 23,000 surrounded by 30,000 Spanish and forced to surrender. The French commander Dupont was jailed for it when he got back to France. The French army was at the time the finest in Europe, the Spanish one of the worst.

The British infantry at Minden

Roughly speaking the outnumbered British/Hannover/Hess/Prussian force (41,000 strong) faced off against the French (51,000 strong), who were considered a very fine army in that period. The British infantry were in the center, facing the mass of French cavalry. The British were ordered to "Advance at the sound of drums" but the order was garbled and was given as "Advance with the sound of drums". The British foot (joined part way through by "german" troops) duly set off towards the French cavalry and proceeded to beat back one attack after another from them through firepower and the bayonet before breaking them completely. Contades, the French commander said:

I never thought to see a single line of infantry break through three lines of cavalry ranked in order of battle and tumble them to ruin

Unfortunately the Lord Sackville commanding the cavalry refused 4 orders to attack, an attack that would have probably broken the French almost completely.

Interesting note: Sackville was tried by court martial after the battle at his own insistence. He got away with the sentence of never serving George II again. He did serve George III though, funnily enough as the minister for war during the American Revolution.

Hmm... methinks I just found excuse No 35 for why we didn't win against those damn colonials :lol:

Well, the question is what you mean with after the cantons confederated. I suppose you're talking of 1848 (the Swiss Civil War - Sonderbundskrieg - and the following foundation of the Swiss national state). Then you're wrong.

Swiss history more or less starts in the Middle Ages with the city foundations of some noble families. The Zähringer (or actually the Habsburg also) being important ones. They founded Berne for example which afterwards was going to gain territories around these cities, Bern advanced well into French-speaking territory, resulting into two languages. These cities were Berne, Basel, Lucerne, Zurich, Aarau and Geneva mainly. Then these cities got some treaties with each other and as most of them were on the North-South trading route, they wanted to gain control of the most important knot point of the trade, the Gotthard pass. This involved getting hold of the region on the other side of the pass, the italian-speaking Ticino (which belonged to the 'Duke' of Milano), this lead to the three-language Switzerland. this Phase ended with the defeat of Marignano (that only came into being, because the French King Francis paid half the army of the Swiss to retreat, which shows also that the Swiss (army) was just an assemblation of Swiss cities and regions...). After Marignano, Switzerland never again expanded and thus stayed within its boundaries. With the Peace of Westphalia we were at last accepted internationally. Then Napoleon conquered us and this way got rid of the 'Ancien Regime'-system, allowing us to develop our Neutrality - with the treaty of Vienna 1815 and finally - after a Civil War between the catholic conservatives and the liberal rest become one of the first (or probably the first) real democratic modern nation states in 1848. After this, the time of peace and of armament follows, which heightens in 1914 - 1990: "We need to be able to sustain ourselves and defend us from everyone outside (Germany, the Allies or in the Cold War the Russians)." This resulted in a ridicously big army (as much men (or even more?) than Germany atm!) which we are reducing more and more atm. I nevertheless have to go to recruitment next tuesday...
Now, to your question, where's the military?
At first, the expansion of the cities was mostly military and there were still these noble families that had to be defeated, the Habsburg (which by now were kings in Vienna!) being the most prominent example. That's why we have many beloved and memoried victories over them (Morgarten, Hinterägeri, Grandson, Murten, ... ) and also the Tell-story deals with them. After they were expelled, the trained armies of the mountaineers needed someone else to fight, which were first the French and Milanese in Italy (up til Marignano) and afterwards they were mercenaries everywhere in Europe. That's also why the Dutch in civ3 has us as unique unit! Although we weren't involved in great wars, we stayed were militarious, which can be seen in our big army today...

Is your question answered?
mitsho

Henry V's death a mere six weeks before he would have become King of France, leaving his 8 month year old son on the throne. By 1453, all the English had left in France was Calais. If Henry V survives, who knows what would have happened. A similar thing happened with Richard I 220 years earlier.

Admirably. Thank you. Clearly my grasp of Swiss history wasn't very well-ordered.

Margaret the Maid of Norway dying on her way to Scotland throwing the whole succession of Scotland in the air, bringing about the situation which allowed Edward I to intervene in the country.

Margaret the Maid of Norway dying on her way to Scotland throwing the whole succession of Scotland in the air, bringing about the situation which allowed Edward I to intervene in the country.

She was always a weak child, so it wasn't that unexpected. They didn't try to bring her over until they absolutely needed to. However, Alexander's death was certainly unexpected and led to this whole situation to begin with.

Well, then let's go to REALLY important and unexpected events in world history:

The 2004 Red Sox coming back from a 3-0 deficit and doom in game four of the American League Championship Series against their traditional enemies to win eight games in a row and become World Champions for the first time in 86 years.:)

You couldn't do that in Hollywood.

The historical equivalent is that a child who was driven out of his own home would rise to become the greatest conqueror the world has ever known.

Was this mentioned? Columbus 'discovering' a new continent. Also Canada not joining the USA in revolting against England/the Monarchy. I believe those happend in your time frame.

The disappearence of the Huns.

Well they didn't disappear but considering how powerful they were, they faded rather quickly.

Also Canada not joining the USA in revolting against England/the Monarchy.

That wasn't surprising. The only part of Canada at the time with a large English population was Nova Scotia, which became an English colony 50 years before the rest of Canada. And there was an attempt there to rebel, but it didn't really go anywhere and was easily defeated.

England was exceptionally lenient to Quebec after the French & Indian War (Quebec Act 1774), and since the English colonists were very much against this at the time, the vast majority of the French population in North America either stayed neutral or sided with the English.

How Rudolf I from a minor swiss noble family (Habsburg) became head of the Holy Roman Empire 1273 and could defend this titel against his competitors.
Some 250 years later they ruled under Karl V. half Europe + had colonies in South America.

The King of Bohemia, whose name I just forgot, should have become German emperor, but the Electors didn´t trust in his ambitions and so they elected a new one to be king. He defeated his opponent, who died in the battle.

Adler

The disappearence of the Huns.

Well they didn't disappear but considering how powerful they were, they faded rather quickly.
I always thought they dragged their decline out slowly after Atilla died... to each his own I suppose.

How Rudolf I from a minor swiss noble family (Habsburg) became head of the Holy Roman Empire 1273 and could defend this titel against his competitors.
Quite easily, actually :p Having Austria as a territory certainly helped, as well as having very capable brothers to defend against the Premyslids of Bohemia and other ambitious and hostile dynasts. And Rudolph I was chosen because the Habsburg territories were outside of the Empire - the electors were looking out for themselves and their power only.

Some 250 years later they ruled under Karl V. half Europe + had colonies in South America.
This is more impressive and unexpected :)

BTW: Is it just me or are there a lot of necromancers around on the forums recently? :confused: :smug:

The battle of Assaye.