Adonis Diaries

Archive for September 11th, 2009

“Once upon a time, there was a King…”  

            What else?  If not a king, then a queen, or a chivalrous knight, or a young beautiful princess, anyone that strikes the imagination of the common people who never have seen secretive “noble” individuals.  There are no new stories to invent; they were all told by the many cultures that we don’t know the languages and had never read their stories; the most enduring stories through the ages are the most common ones. Do not invent stories; just tell it.

            Once upon a time, there was a King.  The astrologer warned the King that all his children must be males or he will lose the kingdom.  The first child was a girl and she was executed.  The second child was a girl and did not survive the day.  The third child was a girl; it was becoming such a habit that control got lax and the mother got to see, hold, and feed her daughter.  This time around it was out of the question that this girl dies. The Queen bribed the executioner to save the child and fled the castle with the kid and a few servants.

            The King tracked the Queen; in his journey he had to conquer other kingdoms, burn, and maim.  One tiny kingdom resisted and the Queen refused to meet and negotiate with the invading King. The Queen of the steadfast territory was ready to burn her kingdom and to fight to the last willing men.  The daughter finally decided to meet with the King, spent the night with him, and saved her Kingdom.

            The Queen was beside herself and suspected the worst for the generosity of this cruel King. “What do you think was the end of this story?” said grand mom to the listening grandchildren. The kids wanted an ending to the story but grandmother refused to offer any: that was a mystery. No one had a satisfactory happy ending.

            As she married, Safiya told her old father-in-law the story and asked him what the ending was. He replied “I did not even know the story. Anyway, it could not be but a tragedy since incest was consummated.”  The next day, the old man relented and told Safiya that there could be an alternative happy ending; in general for one happy event there are two tragic events. 

            The ending should be decided on who must be happy the daughter, the Queen, or the King.  Should the moral Queen die? (What morality is there in the destruction of an entire population?) Should the law enforcer of King die? (What kinds of laws are so lawful to execute the supposed “traitors” for a King personal satisfaction?)  Should the daughter die in order to let her parents live “happily”?

            We try hard to find a happy ending at the detriment of our own because morality and customs decided that parents, relative, and community take precedent to our happiness.  In Greek tragedies everyone dies; in Shakespeare’s tragedies everyone dies or goes mad. 

            There is lack of imagination on the outcomes of the ending and people still flip the last page to know how the story ends.  It is so easy to let everyone die so that custom, tradition, ignorance, and censure win.  And yet, all these stupid tragedies are considered work of art for the ages.  No wonder society did not progressed at the same pace as sciences: stories fundamentally lack courageous alternatives that defy acceptable “common sense” outcomes.


Note 1: This story, with minor alterations, is taken from “Stone of Patience” (Syngue sabour) by the Iranian Atiq Rahimi.


Note 2: I won’t let this post ends without a joke.  An Afghani army recruit is asked by the sergeant “what are you carrying on your shoulder Ahmad?” The soldier replied “This is my rifle.”  The sergeant screams “This is your mother’s honor Ahmad, your sister, and your wife.”  Then the sergeant asks the next soldier “what are you holding in your arms?”  The soldier shouts “I am holding Ahmad’s mother, Ahmad’s sister, and Ahmad’s wife”. (Most probably this naïve soldier got shot in the neck at recess!)

Napoleon enters Moscow; (September 10, 2009)


            Napoleon Bonaparte, the self appointed Emperor of France, gathered a large army “La Grande Armee”.  This army was over 680,000 soldiers strong, including 175,000 cavalry men.  The Big Army converged from many parts of Europe to Dresden; it included 270,000 French soldiers, 20,000 Italians, 80,000 from the Rhine Confederacy, 30,000 from Poland, 30,000 from the Austrian Empire, and 20,000 from Prussia.  The objective was to punish the Russian Czar Alexander I.  No one among the politicians and the Generals saw any cause for this war.  The Czar simply was the only independent monarch in the European continent not to obey promptly to the ducats of the Emperor.  Napoleon’s avowed reason for this war was that Alexander I did not sign on a tariff treaty that bind all the other monarchies in Continental Europe and thus was alienated from the continental system.

            Napoleon declared war unilaterally on June 22, 1812 at Wilkowiski proclaiming that second Polish war has started.  The army needed 3 days to cross the Niemen River to the Russian frontier; no enemy army was waiting to give battle to Bonaparte. In Witepsk he had a second thought of postponing the invasion to next year because he sensed that it was dangerous to remain in Russia during the coming winter season.  Then, as the Czar refused to reply to his letters or envoys for negotiation Bonaparte got pretty upset; he reasoned “Moscow, the Saint City with hundreds of churches and the remaining bastion of Christianity, is 20 days march for the army.  By the time the Czar calls up his recruits he will be in Moscow.  The Czar will be forced to initiate negotiation.”

            The Russian army under Barclay refused Bonaparte battles and continued its retreat toward Moscow.  There was a battle at the city of Smolensk; Bonaparte could either attack Moscow or move toward Saint Petersbourg where the Czar resided; he opted for the Capital Moscow.  General Kutuzov replaced Barclay at the head of the Russian army.  A major battle took place on Borodino or Moskowa on September 6; the two armies were equal in numbers of about 125,000 but the Russians had strong defenses. One thousand canons from both sides are vomiting fire; 80,000 perished in 5 hours of engagement, including over 50 generals from both sides; cold rain and violent wind dominated the dark landscape. The Imperial guard of 25,000 strong did not participate in the battle; Marechal Ney exploded “Since the Emperor refuses to be a General then let him go back to Paris and be Emperor”

            Bonaparte saw Moscow on September 14; the Russian troops had vacated their Capital. Emperor Bonaparte moved in the Kremlin the next day. The third day Moscow was burned down by order of its Russian’s governor Rostopschine; all the Russian prisoners were let out of jails with ordered to burn their Capital. General Kutuzoff who had moved east returned toward Voronowo. 

            Napoleon wavered for an entire month for the next step; he could have marched to Saint Petersburg to force the Czar to negotiate but he opted to wait for the Czar to take the initiative for a political settlement.  Napoleon decided to retreat by October 18; he had ordered Marechal Mortier to blow up the Kremlin after he leaves; it was done at 1:30 am on October 23.  

            Bonaparte decided to take a different route but was forced to follow the same route to Smolensk because the troops of Kutuzoff had blocked the way.  The French army had to watch the previous battlefields; the carcasses were still strewn everywhere and the wolves were roaming.  The harsh Russian winter arrived during the long retreat. Over 300,000 of the Big Army died mostly of frost, famine, drowning, and diseases within two months of the retreat.  Of the thousands of horses only 1,500 remained. All canons, carriages, and baggage were left behind for lack of horses.

            Napoleon parted with his army and returned to Paris to take care of “revolts”. Only about 120 thousands French soldiers arrived to their homelands; there are no documents how many of the survivors lived within weeks after arriving home. Napoleon wrote to the French Senate “Your Emperor never felt healthier during the entire campaign”. 

            The Russian army could have easily captured Napoleon as prisoner and totally eliminate the remaining French regiments but it must have been a political decision to let Bonaparte return safe and sound to Paris.  Europe did not expect the disintegration of the French army so quickly and thus had no political alternatives after Napoleon.  It was better to keep Napoleon as the target enemy to unite Europe against a unique enemy than to start political infighting among the monarchs.

            The worst crossing was the Beresina River. What happened before and during the crossing of the Beresina River? Bonaparte just wrote “The French army crossed the Beresina”; period. My next post will expose the harrowing details.


Note: My contention for this war is simple.  Napoleon was feling terribly bored. I was the master of Europe. He was bored by his new wife Emperess Marie-Louise of Austria; he was a new dad. Administration was giving him terrible headache.  He needed a long excursion at the head of the largest army; he wanted to break new Guiness records.  This topic was from Chateaubriand.




September 2009

Blog Stats

  • 1,519,089 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 764 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: