This episode examines Tolstoy’s influences in the sense that Tolstoy takes attitudes from major events of his day, including the humiliating defeat of the Crimean War of 1856, and imposes them on his characters. Tolstoy was conceptualizing and writing War & Peace in the 1850s and 60s, when liberal reforms were being pursued. Tolstoy therefore brings an idealism to his rendition of the victory over Napoleon in 1812. The episode also has a brief review of Part 1 of Book 1 to ready the reader to take on Part 3, as many major characters were absent from Part 2.

Over the first two parts of Book 1, there is a contrast of storing-telling. Part 1 involves the more relatable domestic affairs of high society combined with an eye toward Napoleon’s advances in the Summer of 1805. Part 2 is a historical exposition of the acceleration of the War of the Third Coalition during the Fall of 1805.

War & Peace is the product of thousands of pages of drafts as well as the unfinished works, “The Distant Field” and “The Decembrists.” Greater exposition of this process is detailed on the 1996 book by Kathryn B. Feuer, “Tolstoy and the Genesis of War and Peace.”

The Decembrist Revolt was a failed movement some characters of War & Peace would have been involved with after the story ends. The rebellion occurred after Emperor Alexander died in 1825 and one of the goals was to replace the autocracy of Czar with a Constitutional monarchy. Many involved were executed or sent to Siberia. Exiles were only released around 1856, when reforms sought in 1825 were being re-evaluated. In one sense, this novel involves men similar to Pierre and Andrei, who could not imagine what they were being thrown into in 1805 and ultimately became Decembrists 20 years later.

Pierre, who can described as "the heart" of the novel, unpredictably inherits the largest fortune in the country, and was exposed to the ideals of his time. He pursued the goal of absorbing and implementing the best of reforms. That is perhaps the greatest hero journey of War & Peace.

Tolstoy also takes the reader back to when serfs were conscripted to fight in the major wars, which he witnessed the final stages of. Ironically, it was the serfs contact with Central and Western Europe that highlighted Russian authorities could no longer keep citizens tied to the land. Later in the novel, you will meet the symbolic Platon Karataev, a simple serf, who lives in the moment with a wisdom and decency that escapes members of Tolstoy’s class.

Yet the enduring nature of this work is how it did not result in a novel centered on politics or history, but became a work of morality and even spirituality.

War & Peace also presents number of everlasting contrasts beyond class, including traditional values v. reform and urban/government centers v. the countryside. The latter aspect involves Tolstoy’s descriptions of cultured landowners, who he believes should manage their estates as if there are Garden of Edens.

Bagration’s men held off the French for as long as practical and retreated in the darkness. The goal was to fight until the sun went down.

Tushin accompanied the working guns and encountered officers as well as some wounded. He was overwhelmed with grief, having come down from his heroic effort. Orders were to leave the wounded but those affected felt it best to keep up with the retreat. Among the injured was Nicholas Rostov, pleading for a seat on the gun carriage. Tushin gave him a spot.

They reached the village of Gruntersdorf and heard a nearby skirmish that repelled the French for the final time. Sounds from a gloomy river were overshadowed by hoofs, wheels and groans of the wounded. The soldiers became agitated amidst confusing orders. All remained stationary on the muddy road and fires were lit. From pain and cold, a feverish shivering overtook Rostov. His eyes were transfixed by the dazzlingly red fire. Tushin held great sympathy for the young man. Other soldiers appealed to Tushin for courtesies such as a spot at the fire, water, or moving his carriage a trifle, all which he accommodated. In contrast, two nearby soldiers quarreled over a boot.

Tushin was summoned by Prince Bagration, who was nearby with other commanders. Bagration was offering platitudes and getting updates. His gathering included the stubborn general who was in the standoff, who was now flushed by vodka and enjoying dinner. Also present was Zherkóv and Andrei. In a corner stood the accountant, shaking his head. It dawned on him that he had no place on the battlefield. Close by was a French colonel taken prisoner.

The general in the standoff relayed what he had wished to have done. “When I saw, Your excellency, that their first battalion was disorganized, I stopped…and thought: ‘I’ll let them come on and will meet them with the fire of the whole battalion!” So much chaos enveloped the situation that he convinced himself of what he said. Zherkov joined in the congratulatory banter.

Bagration praised all divisions but inquired how the guns in the center were abandoned. He turned to the staff officer initially sent to Tushin, who could only relay how contentious the battle was. Tushin then presented himself. While Tushin was Herculean in the field, he was rendered timid. He stumbled over a captured French standard and was laughed at. Confronted, he felt undeserved guilt and could only offer, “I don’t know... Your excellency... I had no men.”

Andrei came to his defense, noting he found most of Tushin’s men and horses knocked out, two guns smashed, and no support. He announced, “We owe today’s success chiefly to the action of that battery and the heroic endurance of Captain Tushin and his company.” Andrei left the table and depression enveloped him over the reality of war being so unlike what he envisioned.

This section closes by centering on Rostov’s thoughts as sat by the fire. “When will all this end?” Rostov closed his eyes thinking rest could quell his pain. He envisioned his mother’s care for him, Sónya’s love and Natasha’s laughter. He compared this to current life, which included Captain Denísov as well as Telyánin and the affair over the stolen money. When able to sleep, nightmares would manifest that soldiers were pulling his wounded arm. He opened his eyes and noticed flakes of snow. “There is no one to help me or pity me. Yet I was once at home, strong, happy, and loved.” As Rostov absorbed the snowflakes and reflected on winters at home. He thought of his gliding sleigh, fur coat, and affection of his family. “And why did I come here?”

The next day the French army did not renew their attack and the remnants of Bagration’s detachment was reunited with Kutuzov’s army.

In his Sevastopol Sketches, Tolstoy develops his ability to depict the reality of death within military conflict.

His proficiency stemmed from service including three years in the Caucuses as well as action during the Crimean War (1853-56), both as a junior artillery officer.

During his time near Chechnya (north of Georgia and west of Dagestan), Tolstoy observed such brutal Russian tactics as punitive raids and the indiscriminate the shelling of small villages. He was also affected by the burning of forests to deny Chechens cover. This area hosts a Muslim population by reason of Ottoman influence. Russia has attempted to purge Chechens from what Russia claimed as a southern frontier multiple times and this area remains filled with tension.

With respect to the Crimean War, in 1853, Czar Nicholas declared war on the Ottoman Empire, Russia’s historic rival. Nicholas asserted the obligation to protect Christians in Ottoman territory and reasserted land-claims in the Danubian principalities. Russian leadership has long dreamed of retaking Istanbul (Constantinople), which was a center of Christianity for centuries.

Napoleon III was at the forefront of the response to the Czar’s ambitions in 1853. A coalition (Turks, French & English) united to neutralize Russian expansion and protect the balance of power in Europe. It was hardly lost on Tolstoy that Russia served as a similar bulwark against Napoleon I. Tolstoy lived through the great humiliation of losing of the Crimean War but immortalized one of Russia’s great triumphs in repelling Napoleon I in 1812. It makes his great influences -- A Tale of Two Napoleons.

A thread through The Sevastopol Sketches and War & Peace is that Tolstoy conveys war's horrific nature. He does not glorify the subject.

The Sketches involve three vignettes of the 11-month Siege: November of 1854, May of 1855, and August of 1855. It was late in the Summer of 1855 when Sevastopol finally fell.

The Sketches read like novellas. The first takes the reader on tour of Sevastopol – from the relative safety of a bay, through an infirmary, marketplace, and finally toward the front line. Notably, we are taken inside the Assembly Hall -- a make-shift hospital filled with causalities and disease. Tolstoy then depicts the everyday activity of soldiers and citizens. He discusses merchants going about their trade as well as carriage drivers delivering goods and transporting the dead.

The second vignette delves into the senseless vanity of war and pursuit of truth, which Tolstoy describes as the hero of any effort. The last and longest story provides a view of the end of the Siege through the eyes of fictional brothers. We are given a glimpse of the spectacle of incoming and outgoing artillery, the charges of the allies, and the valiant defense.

Amidst the Crimean war, Czar Nicholas died in March of 1855 and Alexander II took the throne. He holds the reputation of a reformer. There was societal reflection that so much of the fighting was done by serfs tied to the land. These serfs were exposed to ideas of freedom and nationhood and there was a reckoning that their system could not stand. The serfs (over 20 million souls) were freed in 1861.

Tolstoy also proceeds on one of his great explorations - regarding the cause of historical events. He finds that people hold the ultimate power and are often somehow (all at once) ready to be moved. This is opposed to the theory a few great leaders move men.

Lastly, the experience of the Crimean War transformed Tolstoy from traditional patriot to an everlasting dissident.