SH Archive 1870: Franco-Prussian War. Missing Photographs.

[KD Archive]

Here is another 19th century photographic absentee. How historians were getting away with things like this is hard to understand. May be scrutinizing the absence of the photographic evidence was not really a thing, but I have hard time believing that we are the first ones to notice the lack of photographs.

Franco-Prussian War
19 July 1870 - 28 January 1871
(~6 months) ​

On 16 July 1870, the French parliament voted to declare war on Prussia and hostilities began three days later when French forces invaded German territory. The German coalition mobilized its troops much more quickly than the French and rapidly invaded northeastern France. The German forces were superior in numbers, had better training and leadership and made more effective use of modern technology, particularly railroads and artillery.

• A series of swift Prussian and German victories in eastern France, culminating in the Siege of Metz and the Battle of Sedan, saw French Emperor Napoleon III captured and the army of the Second Empire decisively defeated. A Government of National Defence declared the Third French Republic in Paris on 4 September and continued the war for another five months; the German forces fought and defeated new French armies in northern France. Following the Siege of Paris, the capital fell on 28 January 1871, and then a revolutionary uprising called the Paris Commune seized power in the city and held it for two months, until it was bloodily suppressed by the regular French army at the end of May 1871. ​
• Franco-Prussian War - Wikipedia​

​

KD: We allegedly had 3,500,000 people fighting after getting "mobilized". What would it take us today to mobilize 3.5 mil people?

• ~ 180,000 soldiers and 250,000 civilians died​

The Siege of Paris​

The siege of Paris, lasting from 19 September 1870 to 28 January 1871, and the consequent capture of the city by Prussian forces, led to French defeat in the Franco-Prussian War and the establishment of the German Empire as well as the Paris Commune.

• In Paris, the Governor and commander-in-chief of the city's defenses, General Louis Jules Trochu, assembled a force of 60,000 regular soldiers who had managed to escape from Sedan under Joseph Vinoy or who were gathered from depot troops. Together with 90,000 Mobiles (Territorials), a brigade of 13,000 naval seamen and 350,000 National Guards, the potential defenders of Paris totaled around 513,000.​
• Siege of Paris (1870–71) - Wikipedia​

KD: Approximately 750,000 soldiers were allegedly fighting it out in the city of Paris between 19 September 1870 and 28 January 1871.

Photographic Evidence - where?​

Obviously the entire Franco-Prussian was was more than just the Siege of Paris, but it's irrelevant for the purposes of this thread. We could analyze any other conflict within the limits of this specific war, i.e. the Siege of Metz, the Battle of Sedan, etc. The result is going to be the same - we have no photographic proof of the actual events. Yet, we are talking about 1870s here, and the proper technology was obviously there.

Source

Things we Do Have​

Just like with the US Civil War, and the Russian Crimean War, we have tons of drawings, paintings, sketches and other non-photographic images. Are we witnessing the images produced in order to support the made up narrative?

We also have some photographs which appear to be sharing certain common traits. I believe these traits suggest that these photographs were made using dressed up actors.

• Clean Uniforms​
• Shaved Faces​
• Not enough people to account for the alleged events​
• No combat photographs​

Photographs: The Siege of Paris​

I chose this Siege of Paris due to it being a good example of the ridiculousness of the PTB provided narrative. We have a demolished city, where in addition to 1,000,000 civilian population we were supposed to have 750,000 soldiers. Civilian and military casualties were supposed to be close to 70,000 people. What do we have for evidence?

Prussian artillery during the siege


A company of the French National Guards


Saint-Cloud after French and German bombardment during the battle of Châtillon


Siege of Paris


The Neptune, the first balloon used to carry mail during the Siege of Paris,
being prepared for launching, 23 September 1870


1871 Paris: People, Damages and Clean Up
Where are the people, what weapons caused these damages and who cleaned up the streets?





​

KD: This is just my opinion, but here is what I think as far as this Franco-Prussian war goes:

• We have multiple photographs of the aftermath of an unknown event which is being passed for the Franco-Prussian war.​
• Photographs where groups of soldiers are present appear to be created at some point after the event. Soldiers wear clean uniforms, are shaven and remind me of mass actors.​
• Not a single photograph pertaining to the actual combat, while drawings are plenty.​

I understand that making up explanations for the absence of photographic evidence of the actual event is super easy. At the same time it will remain just that - the absent evidence. We don't have any. Only the aftermath of something...

Note: This OP was recovered from the Sh.org archive.

Note: Archived Sh.org replies to this OP are included in this thread.

 

[Dielectric]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-20 05:05:54
Reaction Score: 1

This is one of several thread's I spotted that interests me. You're right, I've done a little scraping on this and there just aren't any real photograph's. This makes no sense at all and when you examine the photo's you've posted there is only one which shows anything that could be the result of shell fire with pock marks. All the others have this look as if they were photo's of demolishing buildings. There's no impression of damage from war.

The other question is were there even weapons capable of inflicting that kind of damage in the first place. I looked at the conventional weapons of the foot soldiers and though impressive for the epoch they were still, after all, black powder weapons. I'm going to have to do some more digging just because, but I think this is something worth examining because to what end's doth it avail thee? Know what I mean? It's like a psyop but to what ends?

 

[KD Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: KorbenDallas
Date: 2019-09-20 07:14:56
Reaction Score: 1

It's like a psyop but to what ends?

I think you might enjoy this thread as well:

• American Civil War a Photographic History

As well as this section in general:

• Missing Photographs

 

[Dielectric]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Dielectric
Date: 2019-09-20 08:04:41
Reaction Score: 0

I think you might enjoy this thread as well:

• American Civil War a Photographic History

As well as this section in general:

• Missing Photographs

The thing here is it's like how much is faked because this lack of evidenc does test credibility. Even the damage shown in the photo's doesn't add up. Portable artillery capable of inflicting the damage depicted just didn't exist. Really only naval cannons had a potential to create damage like that and even there it would have taken a seige like bombardment.

You have to think that it was engineered to create an impression on a gullible population that more was happening than was really taking place. Like maybe evacuate area's then loot and burn to cover the crime. Make claims about lost and destroyed equipment that was really being stolen for resale.
It certainly does have some suspicious qualities to it.

Post automatically merged: 9/20/19

I think you might enjoy this thread as well:

• American Civil War a Photographic History

As well as this section in general:

• Missing Photographs

Yea, pretty interesting to take a critical eye to isn't it?
I'm also with you on the Great Fires, or what I call fingerprints of the powers that be, so I can tell I will spending a lot time here. Glad I stumbled in to you people. There's still just hordes of people wearing blinders and damn glad to have them too apparently. Lol~

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Casimir
Date: 2019-09-20 18:05:58
Reaction Score: 1

I spent a while browsing through getty images DB of Fr/Pr war pics. I really couldn't find photos that were blatantly of action. It's amazing to me there are so many paintings depicting the epic battle, you'd think one of the photographers of the aftermath would've at least snapped a photo of the ongoing battle, regardless of how far away they might have been.

I only found 2 photos I could imagine are of the actual action though both could very well be staged.

Weird dust blow up in front of the cannon, is that a post-fire phenomenon or something else? source



Looking at the building on fire, its hard for me to tell if its just a bad quality photo or another illustration. The people hiding look real enough, to me. Could this photo be manipulated? bigger source



Action aside, Napoleon 1 had some interesting garb in the statue, not a surprise around here I'm sure. source



What is the difference between these 3 photos and the work of Piranesi? To me, little, aside from the fact we are simply told one is fiction while the other is not. source1 source2 source3



This is about the same time period we start seeing a lot of Phrygian caps as well for what its worth. French officials surrendering Freedom/Justice to the Prussians and some weird siege/famine political art. source1 source2




One final picture struck my interest. "French camp in the Garden of the Tuileries, Paris, France, Franco-Prussian War, illustration from the magazine The Illustrated London News, volume LVII, October 29, 1870" source

I wonder why the artist specifically chose to illustrate the statue of Hercules killing Achelous. Called specifically "Hercules Battling Achelous Metamorphed into a Serpent"




Here is the smithsoian's lore on the depicted battle: link

Achelous was the god of the most powerfully flowing river in Greece, and so was the chief of all the river gods. The land along the river was ruled by the king of the nearby city of Calydon. The king had a beautiful daughter named Dejanira. When it came time for Dejanira to marry, her father announced a contest: the strongest of her suitors would win her hand.
Achelous, the river god, was by far the strongest in the region. But Dejanira’s beauty was known everywhere, so it wasn’t long before Hercules came to Calydon to try his luck.

Hercules was the strongest mortal in the world, but Achelous, being a god, had some advantages over him. He could change his shape at will. He could become a snake that curved like the winding river. He could become a bull that roared like the roaring river. And when he was a bull he could tear the very earth with his massive horns, just as the river carved away the land when it overflowed its banks.

When Hercules came to town, all other suitors withdrew. He alone would wrestle Achelous for the hand of Dejanira.

“Here is Hercules,” Achelous said to the king. “He is a stranger, from distant Thebes. Do you want a stranger for a son-in-law? You and I are neighbors. You know me well. So often has my river flooded your fields and crops, fields and crops that are Dejanira’s too. Her land and my flooding river have already joined. I feel as if you and I are already family!”

Achelous was like his river in another way. Words flowed from him always, just as the river, when it wasn’t roaring, babbled and babbled.

Hercules, in contrast, was a man of very few words. He listened patiently and politely and then gave his answer: he grabbed the river god, threw him, and pinned him to the ground. As Achelous would later say, “It was as if a mountain had fallen on me. Hercules was a mountain of a man.”

The god saw he could not beat Hercules in a regulation wrestling match. It was then that he took the form of a snake that slithered out of the strong man’s arms. He coiled himself and gave a hiss. Hercules laughed and spoke for the first time.

“A snake!” he said. “Is that the best you can do? I’ve been killing snakes since I was a babe in the crib.”

What might have seemed a wild boast was entirely true, and Achelous knew it. Hercules’s famous first feat in life was strangling two snakes that had crawled into his crib.

Achelous the snake decided to become Achelous the furious bull. He lowered his broad head to point his sharp horns at Hercules. He scratched at the dirt and then he charged. The crowd let out a gasp.

But to a man like Hercules, the horns of a bull were just two convenient handles. He seized Achelous by both of them and flipped him to the ground. He then gave a mighty jerk to one of the horns. It snapped off.

Hercules won the match and won Dejanira’s hand in marriage. And the people of Calydon won as well. The goddess named Plenty ordered that the bull’s broken horn be filled with all the fruits and vegetables of the harvest. It became the Cornucopia, or Horn of Plenty. With one horn missing, Achelous lost much of his power to flood the kingdom.

If you are ever in Greece, you might go to see his river. It is in the rainiest part of a fairly dry country. It is still called the Achelous. You would find a quiet stream that flows along fertile fields—fields that are safe for farming.

I know this was apparently in the garden at the time of the battle, but it seems like its the centerpiece of the illustration. Hercules only started his "12 labors" to prove his remorse for murdering his wife and kids. link

Hera was so annoyed at Heracles’ growing fame that she cast a spell of madness over him. Out of control, Heracles killed his own wife and children. His remorse was so profound that when he returned to his senses he could find no peace of mind. He visited the oracle of Delphi to see how he could demonstrate his remorse.

The oracle advised him to obey the orders of Eurystheus, the king of Tiryns and Mycenae. Eurystheus ordered Heracles to accomplish twelve difficult tasks (the so-called Twelve Labors of Heracles). Heracles completed the twelve labors and is celebrated to this day for his great courage and strength.

What is the artist telling us about France's loss to Prussia here, if anything?

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: rengel
Date: 2019-10-01 17:45:20
Reaction Score: 1

...
The other question is were there even weapons capable of inflicting that kind of damage in the first place.

These cannons look pretty impressive (Source):

Post automatically merged: 10/1/19

Here is another 19th century photographic absentee. How historians were getting away with things like this is hard to understand. May be scrutinizing the absence of the photographic evidence was not really a thing, but I have hard time believing that we are the first ones to notice the lack of photographs.

How about: The time of photo journalism hadn't yet arrived. Just look at the first pages of the newspapers on the first day after the war (source). The few illustrations in these newspapers are mainly drawings (I couldn't check all of them).

 

[Archive]

Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: ajricca
Date: 2020-04-02 18:34:35
Reaction Score: 0

Франко-Прусская война 1870-1871 » Сайт военной фотографии

I found 2 pic from this link ( Russian)

 

[Truth Lover]

The military actor guys in the first photo are all smiling, almost smirking and laughing.
People are talking about the mud floods, the shaking of the Earth, up to 200 years ago perhaps. What if a lot of these War Stories are made up to explain the devastation that happened in the cataclysmic event that caused the mud everywhere, as well as the destruction of so many buildings. This reminds me of Gone With The Wind. That is our one major collective memory and "proof" that the Civil War was real. Maybe the War Stories and staged War photographs have the same purpose.
FYI I saw an old video of a person telling how the very old films were staged. She said they had lots of actors that kept criss-crossing the road in front of the camera. They walked quickly as if they had a purpose for hurrying across the street. She said they hurried to their next position so they could cross the street again as the camera was rolled down the street. Making an empty area look as if it was inhabited. Most of us have seen those films.