I have had various conversations with publishers over the years about writing a biography of the Archduke. The usual issue tends to be that, Napoleon aside, he was the only period personality to hold military and political responsibilities at the same time, yet 1809 aside, his other campaigns are not that well-known. So, any biography would finish up being either a ‘Campaigns of the Archduke’ or limit the audience by leaving a lot of military material out.
Now, it may be possible to write something on his greatest campaign, 1796 in Germany, and Second Caldiero is the subject of my contribution to Helion’s upcoming essay collection ‘Glory is Fleeting’.
So, I am wondering what readers outside the obvious 1809/Austria audience might find attractive?
I am actively seeking authors to write on the 1790s campaigns for the From Reason to Revolution series; anyone interested in doing a volume on 1796 would be most welcome.
The advantage those writing about Wellington have is that the political part comes pretty distinctly behind the military part. Likewise, many authors writing about Napoleon barely cover his campaigns as they know the reader either knows them or can access decent material easily. Charles essentially crams his active phase into 14 years, which covers his attempts to influence foreign policy, views on the real long term threat being Russia, early monetarism, government reform, army reform - and then there are his campaigns, which are not that well-known aside from 1809. There is then a cast of unfamiliar characters - Mayer, Fassbender, Thugut, Cobenzl and Colloredo - working in unfamiliar institutions and facing problems with Hungarian magnates inside the empire and Serb insurrections outside.
A doorstep biog would not be commercially viable as it would put off the casual reader, so it is a lot of complex material to get into the standard 320pp.
I would love to see a biography of Archduke Charles and I really don't see why his being a politician as well as a military man would be a problem, but then (as a historian who specialises in the interaction between the political and the military) maybe my perspective on the question might be a bit skewed ;) Like Zack, I was going to point out Rory Muir's "Wellington" as being an example of a biography that covers both political and military aspects of one man's career and works.
It is interesting that prior to Nafziger’s translations of Jomini’s commentary and Jourdan’s memoirs some years ago, the only material in English on 96 was Phipps: Armies of the First French Republic and Hamley: Operational Art (1866). Yet in his pithy 14 pages, Hamley flags up the importance of the road network in the campaign.
It is a difficult task, Karl was a prolific writer of a lot of books and essays - a book about his part of the campaign in Germany - der Retter Deutschlands - would be most welcome, but then in fact the whole campaign of 1796 in Germany had to be covered - which is overdue and stands in the shadow of the Italian campaign on 1796.
Speaking both as an editor and a potential reader, I would suggest that 1796 has merit as a standalone book on its own; with that covered, it would be then a simpler matter to do a biography without having to include quite so much by way of campaign narrative. The structure employed by McLynn's Napoleon biography, with alternating chapters of narrative and analysis, might lend itself here, perhaps? I'd agree that the Mirror of Napoleon approach would give you a good marketing hook.
That’s an interesting point. When I have tried to do this previously, I have become bogged down in campaign narrative and explaining the background. It would make more sense to argue a particular position -Archduke Charles: Mirror of Napoleon maybe as they operated very differently, although many people make the same mistake in thinking the basic model is the same. It has worked with the likes of Zamoyski on Napoleon and Eysturlid’s book on Charles’s military philosophy. It would be that direct contrast with Napoleon that would make it of more interest to those outside the obvious buyers.
This might be a bit grandiose, but if it's going to be done, it's going to be a seminal work. Why not therefore dream big? (A very hard sell to a publisher I know) I think the model for this sort of thing was honestly set by Rory Muir's mind-blowing biography of Wellington. The Archduke needn't be as long as two 900 odd page volumes, but I think it makes sense to do campaign and politics together. Charles Esdaile (@epsom) would tell you that one cannot be done without the other. I would honestly want to know both. A lot depends on whether you want to adopt a grand narrative style, or argue a case as you go though... The latter adds further value, and sees that we would debate the book well into the second half of the century, but forces the volume to be longer. (Not sure that any of this helps, but keep us posted on how you get on!)