DOCSLIB.ORG

Revolution in Hungary 1848

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revolution in Hungary 1848 Revolution in Hungary 1848 The Hungarian Revolution of 1848 was one of the many European Revolutions of 1848 and closely linked to other revolutions of 1848 in the Habsburg areas. The revolution in the Kingdom of Hungary grew into a war for independence from the Austrian Empire, ruled by the Habsburg dynasty. After a series of serious Austrian defeats in 1849, the Austrian State came close to the brink of collapse. Thus, the new young emperor Franz Joseph I had to call for Russian help in the name of the Holy Alliance. Czar Nicholas I answered, and sent a 200,000 men strong army with 80,000 auxiliary forces. Finally, the joint army of Russian and Austrian forces defeated the Hungarian forces. After the restoration of Habsburg power, Hungary was placed under brutal martial law. The anniversary of the Revolution's outbreak, 15 March, is one of Hungary's three national holidays. Vienna, the capital of the ethnically diverse Austrian Empire, was a leading cultural center in Europe. Full of artists, composers, writers, and intellectuals, Vienna was truly the jewel of the Austrian Empire, and the Austrian empire, led by Metternich, was the paragon of reactionary politics. Yet the various ethnic groups in Austria had become increasingly nationalist over the preceding decades, and by now they all yearned to express their individual volksgeist and gain independence. Metternich had worked for years to hold the Austrian Empire together, but now, in the wake of the French February Revolution, the ethnic groups vehemently opposed assimilation. In March 1848, a radical Hungarian Magyar group led by Louis Kossuth began a vocal independence movement. Kossuth's fiery speeches were soon printed in Vienna, where they started a sensation and soon an uprising. Metternich, monitoring the Revolutions throughout Europe, had become fearful. He decided to flee, and quickly snuck out of Vienna. The situation probably wasn't as bad as he thought, but once news got out that Metternich had left, the Austrian revolutionaries got truly excited. Austrian Czechs and numerous Austrian controlled Italian states followed the Magyars lead. Some of the revolutionary excitement also spilled into Prussia, where, to ease the pressure, the Prussian King Frederick William IV promised a constitution. On March 15, Kossuth's Hungary was granted independence under Hapsburg rule. The Czech movement in Bohemia soon received the same status, and Italian states like Milan soon overthrew Austrian occupation. In June 1848, the revolutions in Austria began to run out of steam. After all, it was a non- industrialized country that did not have a well-developed middle class. Their revolution, largely led by intellectuals and students, could not marshal the same amount of popular support as the bourgeoisie in Western Europe. In June 1848, in Prague, a group of Slavic nationalists held a Pan-Slavism conference in an attempt to stop Bohemia from being swallowed by Germany. The conference soon became violent. Emperor Ferdinand of Austria smashed the Prague insurrection using the army, and he also sent his forces against the rebellious Italian states of Lombardy and Milan, which were soon reconquered. In September and October of 1848, Louis Kossuth started a movement to make Magyar the official language of Hungary, even though only half of the population of Hungary spoke Magyar. The Serbo-Croatians, who did not speak the Magyar language, rebelled and asked the Hapsburgs for help. In December, another rebellion in Vienna led Emperor Ferdinand to abdicate, putting his son, Franz Joseph, into power. Franz Joseph quickly appealed to the Russians, who marched into Hungary and crushed the Magyars. The 1848 revolutions in Austria came to an end, restoring order in the Empire. The Austrian Empire was very large in 1848, and filled with around a dozen ethnicities, each with its own language. In some areas, certain ethnic groups dominated, while in other areas, other groups dominated. Austria itself had a German majority, while the Magyars were the predominant ethnicity in Hungary. Czechs dominated Bohemia, and various groups of Slavs made up most of the remaining population of the Empire. With the first spark, these separate nationalist ethnicities exploded. However, like France, after a moment of nationalist promise the revolutions of 1848 soon dissolved or were crushed. The big weakness of the Austrian revolutionaries lay in the structure of Austrian society. Unlike Britain and France, with its large middle class buoyed by industrialized wealth and its urban working class, Austria had no well-developed middle class. The Austrian revolutions, particularly in Vienna, therefore had no powerful support base. The students and intellectuals couldn't sway the illiterate and rural peasants who had no notion of nationalism and who primarily made up the army. The army thus stayed loyal to the Hapsburgs and helped to suppress the revolution. With Vienna intact, the Hapsburgs were able to move out through their empire and reconquer it, with the help of the Russians. With all of the revolutions suppressed, Austria became an even more autocratic state. While the other European countries were generally moved towards change by the revolutions of 1848, Austria's Reactionary state, even with the fall of Metternich, became even more conservative and repressive. Incidentally, during the revolutions of 1848, a small nationalist German minority in Bohemia, in the area called the Sudetenland, made clear their desire to become a part of Germany. Though of minor significance in 1848, this desire would become important almost a century later when the Germans seized it as their ostensible reason for annexing the Sudetenland at the beginning of World War II. The Hungarians were lucky to have Louis Kossuth as leader. He gave great force and a sense of direction to the revolution. He was a leading figure in the Hungarian Diet, a brilliant speaker and was able to galvanise the members of the Diet into action. From a British history textbook published in 1985. Describe the role of Kossuth in the Hungarian Revolution, 1848–49. [4] Kossuth was a leading figure in the revolution. In 1848, he addressed the Hungarian Diet. He demanded independence for Hungary. Kossuth was a brilliant speaker and able to inspire people into action. He demanded the immediate implementation of the 1847 reforms which had already been agreed by the Diet. Kossuth was a Magyar and believed that Croat and Slovak nationalism had no place in the new Hungary. Kossuth declared Hungary an independent republic with himself as president. The Croats reacted angrily to Kossuth’s suggestions. The Croats invaded Magyar territory supported by the Austrians. The Austrians asked the Russians to help defeat Kossuth’s forces. Kossuth’s forces could not resist the troops of Tsar Nicholas l. After the Hungarian surrender to the Russians, Kossuth fled. Describe the events of the Hungarian Revolution of 1848–9. In 1848, Kossuth addressed the Hungarian Diet and demanded independence for Hungary within the Empire. Kossuth was a brilliant speaker and was able to inspire people into action. Austrian control of Hungary was temporarily taken over by the Hungarian Diet in Budapest. The Hungarian Diet passed laws which abolished serfdom, introduced religious freedom and abolished press censorship. Kossuth could see no room in the new Hungary for Croat or Slovak nationalism. The Croats reacted angrily and invaded Magyar territory. Kossuth declared Hungary an independent republic, but the Austrians persuaded the Russians to bring about surrender. The Austrians then resumed overall control of Hungary after their own problems were overcome. Describe how the Hungarian Revolution had ended by 1849. He demanded independence for Hungary. Kossuth demanded the immediate implementation of the 1847 reforms, which had already been agreed by the Diet. Kossuth was a Magyar and believed that Croat and Slovak nationalism had no place in the new Hungary. In April 1849, Kossuth declared Hungary an independent republic with himself as president. The Croats reacted angrily to Kossuth’s suggestions. The Croats invaded Magyar territory supported by the Austrians. The Austrians asked the Russians to help defeat Kossuth’s forces. Kossuth’s forces could not resist the troops of Tsar Nicholas I. After the Hungarian surrender to the Russians, Kossuth fled. The Hapsburg regained control of Hungary. Reprisals were taken against the Hungarian army, including executions. Describe the part played by Kossuth in events leading to the March Laws of 1848. [4] In 1848, he addressed the Hungarian Diet. He demanded independence for Hungary. Kossuth was a brilliant speaker and able to inspire people into action. He demanded the immediate implementation of the 1847 reforms, which had already been agreed by the Diet. Kossuth was a Magyar and believed that Croat and Slovak nationalism had no place in the new Hungary. Kossuth declared Hungary an independent republic with himself as president. The Croats reacted angrily to Kossuth’s suggestions. The Austrian Emperor, Ferdinand I, at first constitutionally confirmed the March Laws. Later, the Austrians with Russian support defeated Kossuth’s forces. Why did the Hungarian Revolution of 1848–49 fail? Kossuth could see no room in the new Hungary for Croat or Slovak nationalism and that there was no question of them gaining their independence from Hungary. The Croats reacted angrily and there was an invasion into Magyar territory secretly supported by Austria Kossuth excluded Croats and Slovaks Austria secretly supported the Croatians The Austrians asked Russia for help. Russian involvement meant fighting a large army Kossuth’s forces were not experienced Kossuth made mistakes about nationalism.’ The 1848–49 Revolution in Hungary was more successful than that in France.’ How far do you agree with this statement? Explain your answer. [10] The Austrians were not powerful enough and so gained assistance from Russia to put down the rebellion.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1848 Revolutions Special Subject I READING LIST Professor Chris Clark
    1848 Revolutions Special Subject I READING LIST Professor Chris Clark The Course consists of 8 lectures, 16 presentation-led seminars and 4 gobbets classes GENERAL READING Jonathan Sperber, The European Revolutions, 1848-1851 (Cambridge, 1994) Dieter Dowe et al., eds., Europe in 1848: Revolution and Reform (Oxford, 2001) Priscilla Smith Robertson, The Revolutions of 1848, a social history (Princeton, 1952) Michael Rapport, 1848: Year of Revolution (London, 2009) SOCIAL CONFLICT BEFORE 1848 (i) The ‘Galician Slaughter’ of 1846 Hans Henning Hahn, ‘The Polish Nation in the Revolution of 1846-49’, in Dieter Dowe et al., eds., Europe in 1848: Revolution and Reform, pp. 170-185 Larry Wolff, The Idea of Galicia: History and Fantasy in Habsburg Political Culture (Stanford, 2010), esp. chapters 3 & 4 Thomas W. Simons Jr., ‘The Peasant Revolt of 1846 in Galicia: Recent Polish Historiography’, Slavic Review, 30 (December 1971) pp. 795–815 (ii) Weavers in Revolt Robert J. Bezucha, The Lyon Uprising of 1834: Social and Political Conflict in the Early July Monarchy (Cambridge Mass., 1974) Christina von Hodenberg, Aufstand der Weber. Die Revolte von 1844 und ihr Aufstieg zum Mythos (Bonn, 1997) *Lutz Kroneberg and Rolf Schloesser (eds.), Weber-Revolte 1844 : der schlesische Weberaufstand im Spiegel der zeitgenössischen Publizistik und Literatur (Cologne, 1979) Parallels: David Montgomery, ‘The Shuttle and the Cross: Weavers and Artisans in the Kensington Riots of 1844’ Journal of Social History, Vol. 5, No. 4 (Summer, 1972), pp. 411-446 (iii) Food riots Manfred Gailus, ‘Food Riots in Germany in the Late 1840s’, Past & Present, No. 145 (Nov., 1994), pp. 157-193 Raj Patel and Philip McMichael, ‘A Political Economy of the Food Riot’ Review (Fernand Braudel Center), 32/1 (2009), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Revolution of 1861: the American Civil War in the Age of Nationalist Conflict
    Civil War Book Review Fall 2012 Article 25 The Revolution of 1861: The American Civil War in the Age of Nationalist Conflict. Frank Towers Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cwbr Recommended Citation Towers, Frank (2012) "The Revolution of 1861: The American Civil War in the Age of Nationalist Conflict.," Civil War Book Review: Vol. 14 : Iss. 4 . DOI: 10.31390/cwbr.14.4.26 Available at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cwbr/vol14/iss4/25 Towers: The Revolution of 1861: The American Civil War in the Age of Nati Review Towers, Frank Fall 2012 Fleche, Andre M. The Revolution of 1861: The American Civil War in the Age of Nationalist Conflict.. University of North Carolina Press, $39.95 ISBN 978-0-8078-3523-4 Understanding the Civil War in a Broader Context Andre Fleche adds to the burgeoning literature on the international dimensions of the Civil War in this valuable study of American nationalism in a transatlantic context. Contrary to dominant popular narratives of the Civil War as a purely domestic conflict, Europe’s 1848 revolutions had a profound influence on northern and southern conceptions of the nation state. Viewed in this framework, the Civil War fits into a broader pattern of revolution wherein the fledgling concept of the nation state matured into the form that guided it through the next century of modern history. Although 1860s Americans paid attention to other revolutionary precedents, especially their own against Great Britain, Fleche argues that the most influential were the failed nationalist revolutions of 1848 in Europe, a series of revolts against the monarchies that took control of the continent after Napoleon’s defeat in 1815.
    [Show full text]
  • Revolutions Against the State*
    Revolutions Against the State* Colin J. Beck Pomona College Forthcoming. The New Handbook of Political Sociology, edited by Thomas Janoski, Cedric de Leon, Joya Misra, and Isaac Martin. New York: Cambridge University Press. Address correspondence to: Colin J. Beck Department of Sociology Pomona College 420 N Harvard Ave Claremont, CA 91711 [email protected] * Acknowledgments: This chapter was informed by conversations with the participants of the Rethinking Revolutions Workshop at the London School of Economics and Political Science in May 2017. In particular, I thank Mlada Bukovansky, Erica Chenoweth, George Lawson, Sharon Nepstad, and Daniel Ritter. I also thank John Foran for his comments on a prior version. Beck Revolutions Against the State Introduction The way social scientists think that others think about revolutions has been shaped primarily by Jack Goldstone. In his influential review essays, Goldstone (1982, 2001) presents the 20th century study of revolution as occurring in generations—from natural historians of the 1930s to general theorists of the mid-20th century, from state-centered scholars in the 1980s to a contemporary fourth generation basket of approaches. Because it is so familiar, his reading animates nearly all contemporary literature reviews in revolution studies. Goldstone’s categorizations have even impelled new work, as in Sohrabi’s (1995) research on models of revolution or Lawson’s (2016) recent theoretical synthesis. There is a problem with this way of thinking about the field of revolution studies, however. Social science of any sort, let alone in the study of revolution, does not cohere in neat generations. I offer a few examples. During the so-called natural history phase, other scholars like Merriman (1938) argued for general structural theories of revolution that look much more like the state-centered accounts of four decades later.
    [Show full text]
  • VLADIMIR PUTIN: an ASPIRANT METTERNICH? by Mitchell A
    JANUARY 2015 VLADIMIR PUTIN: AN ASPIRANT METTERNICH? By Mitchell A. Orenstein Mitchell A. Orenstein is Professor and Chair of the Department of Political Science at Northeastern University in Boston and an affiliate of both the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies and the Minda de Gunzberg Center for European Studies at Harvard University. As Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his military into Ukraine in 2014, people were quick to compare him to Adolph Hitler, whose annexation of Austria and invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland set off World War II. Hillary Clinton commented in March 2014 that if Putin’s justification for taking Crimea to protect ethnic Russians sounded familiar, it was because, “it’s what Hitler did back in the ’30s. Germans by ancestry were in places like Czechoslovakia and Romania and other places, [and] Hitler kept saying they’re not being treated right. I must go and protect my people.” Since that time Ukrainian Euromaidan supporters have published dramatic images of Putin as “Putler,” mashups that have trended wildly on social media and become a staple of public protests. Yet, Putin’s approach to world affairs is more similar to that of another Austrian, Prince Klemens von Metternich. Like Metternich, the dominant force in post-Napoleonic era diplomacy, Putin is a conservative imperialist who seeks to create a balance or “concert” between the great powers in Europe, while suppressing liberal democratic politics and the aspirations of small nations. By comparing Putin’s worldview with that of Metternich, one can gain more insight into Putin’s approach to world affairs than can be understood from much contemporary debate.
    [Show full text]
  • The Failure of a Revolution France, Germany and the Netherlands in 1848: a Comparative Analysis
    The Failure of a Revolution France, Germany and The Netherlands in 1848: A Comparative Analysis Willem Cleven MA Comparative History Utrecht University Spring 2008 Supervised by dr. I. de Haan Image on front page: Horace Vernet – Barricade at Rue Soufflot, Paris 1848. 2 Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction……………………………………………..……………………..1 Chapter 2. The Comparative Method………………………………………………….10 2.1 Units of Historical Study 2.2 What is a Revolution? 2.3 Outline Chapter 3. The Events of the Revolutions...…………………………………………..20 3.1 Spring 1848: Revolution 3.2 Confrontation Chapter 4. Why the Revolution Failed…………………………………………………32 4.1 Internal Coherence of the Revolutionary Faction 4.2 Internal Coherence of the Incumbent Faction 4.3 Control over Sources of Power 4.4 External Intervention Chapter 5. Conclusion: A Theory of Failed Revolutions?...…………………………48 Bibliography 3 Chapter 1. Introduction “The tricolor republic now bears only one color, the color of the defeated, the color of blood.” 1 Karl Marx after the June Days uprising (Neue Rheinische Zeitung, 29 June 1848) As I am writing this opening paragraph, it is 160 years ago to the day that the French National Guard ended a bloody uprising among the Parisian workers. Sometimes labeled a ‘class war’2, the so-called ‘June Days’ uprising posited the urban working class against the Provisional Government of the French Second Republic. It shall become clear in the following chapters that this clash between the revolutionary regime and the masses which had been vital in its victory four months prior, ultimately represented the failure of that revolution, a revolution which made an end to the French monarchy, instated universal male suffrage for a short time and set off a wave of revolutions across the continent.
    [Show full text]
  • Fourth Generation’ of Revolutionary Theory
    Within and Beyond the ‘Fourth Generation’ of Revolutionary Theory George Lawson (LSE)1 September 2015 1 George Lawson, Associate Professor, Department of International Relations, LSE, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, United Kingdom. Within and Beyond the ‘Fourth Generation’ of Revolutionary Theory Recent years have seen renewed interest in the study of revolutions. Yet the burgeoning interest in revolutionary events has not been matched by a comparable interest in the development of revolutionary theory. For the most part, empirical studies of revolutions remain contained within the parameters established by the ‘fourth generation’ of revolutionary theory. This body of work sees revolutions as conjunctural amalgams of systemic crisis, structural opening, and collective action, which arise from the intersection of international, economic, political, and symbolic factors. Despite the promise of this approach, this article argues that fourth generation scholarship remains an unfulfilled agenda. The aim of this article is to work within – and beyond – fourth generation theory in order to establish the theoretical foundations that can underpin contemporary work on revolutions. It does so in three ways: first, by promoting a shift from an attributional to a processual ontology; second, by advocating a relational rather than substantialist account of social action; and third, by fostering an approach that sees revolutions as inter-societal ‘all the way down’. The (unfulfilled) promise of fourth generation theory2 Recent years have seen renewed interest in the study of revolution (e.g. Chenoweth and Stephan 2011; Goldstone 2011, 2014; Nepstad 2011; Beck 2011, 2014, 2015; Colgan, 2012, 2013; Weyland 2012; Beissinger 2014; Lawson 2015a and 2015b; Ritter 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Paul-Marie Arpaia on the Revolutions in Europe 1848-1849. From
    R.J.W. Evans, Hartmut Pogge von Strandmann, eds.. The Revolutions in Europe 1848-1849. From Reform to Reaction. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. xiii + 250 pp. $60.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-19-820840-2. Reviewed by Paul-Marie T. Arpaia Published on H-W-Civ (February, 2001) In 1998, a group of former and present mem‐ out Europe attacked the ancien regime, demanded bers of the Faculty of Modern History at Oxford broader political participation in government, University gave a series of lectures to commemo‐ and focused attention on the social question. Al‐ rate the sesquicentenary of the Revolutions of though nationalism played a lesser role in some 1848. The lectures, published in the present vol‐ countries, it was pronounced in central and ume, offer the reader a panorama of the areas southern Europe--even though it wound up be‐ that directly experienced revolutions (France, coming a more divisive than cohesive force. Pogge Italy, Germany, and Austria) as well as several von Strandmann insists that despite the defeat of countries on the periphery (Great Britain, Russia the revolutions, in the long term, they had impor‐ and the United States). Essays by the editors on tant domestic and international consequences. the nature of the Revolutions of 1848 and on the In his essay, "Liberalism, Nationalism, and the decades leading up to the Revolutions, together Coming of the Revolution," R.J.W. Evans offers an with an essay on the meaning of the revolutions overview of European history from 1789 and to subsequent generations, serve as foreword and 1848.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence from the Forty-Eighters in the Civil War
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES LEADERSHIP AND SOCIAL NORMS: EVIDENCE FROM THE FORTY-EIGHTERS IN THE CIVIL WAR Christian Dippel Stephan Heblich Working Paper 24656 http://www.nber.org/papers/w24656 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 May 2018 We thank Daron Acemoglu, Toman Barsbai, Jean-Paul Carvalho, Dora Costa, James Feigenbaum, Raquel Fernandez, Paola Giuliano, Michael Haines, Tarek Hassan, Naomi Lamoreux, Gary Libecap, Jakob Schneebacher, Nico Voigtänder, Romain Wazciarg, Gavin Wright, Guo Xu, and seminar participants at UCLA, U Calgary, the NBER DAE and POL meetings, the EHA meetings, and the UCI IMBS conference for valuable comments. We thank Andrea di Miceli, Jake Kantor, Sebastian Ottinger, and Anton Sobolov for excellent research assistance. We thank Michael Haines for sharing his cleaned version of the 1850 and 1860 town- level data. We thank Yannick Dupraz and Andreas Ferrara for data-sharing and joint efforts in collecting the Civil War soldier and regiments data. We thank John Wallis and Jeremy Darrington for helpful advice in locating sub-county voting data for the period, although we ultimately could not use it. Dippel acknowledges financial support for this project from the UCLA Center of Global Management, the UCLA Price Center and the UCLA Burkle Center. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.
    [Show full text]
  • The Revolutions of 1848 in Germany, Italy, and France Jonathan Richard Hill
    Eastern Michigan University DigitalCommons@EMU Senior Honors Theses Honors College 2005 The Revolutions of 1848 in Germany, Italy, and France Jonathan Richard Hill Follow this and additional works at: http://commons.emich.edu/honors Part of the European History Commons Recommended Citation Hill, Jonathan Richard, "The Revolutions of 1848 in Germany, Italy, and France" (2005). Senior Honors Theses. 45. http://commons.emich.edu/honors/45 This Open Access Senior Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College at DigitalCommons@EMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@EMU. For more information, please contact lib- [email protected]. The Revolutions of 1848 in Germany, Italy, and France Abstract The Revolutions of 1848 were a widespread uprising that took place across Europe in response to social and economic pressures brought on by the eighteenth century Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution. Conservative monarchs throughout Europe were threatened as middle and working class people attempted to establish new governments that allowed the common man a voice in government function. This thesis explores the reasons why the revolutions occurred in Germany, Italy, and France and why in each case the revolutions failed to achieve any significant change in each country. Degree Type Open Access Senior Honors Thesis Department History and Philosophy First Advisor Dr. Ronald Delph Keywords Revolutions Europe History 19th century Subject Categories
    [Show full text]
  • Barricades in Berlin: Social Unrest, Constitutionalism, and Revolt in 1848
    Barricades in Berlin: Social Unrest, Constitutionalism, and Revolt in 1848 By Josh Teixeira Figure 1: The Frederic Street Barricade, Berlin, 18 March, 1848 JOSH TEIXEIRA I | Introduction he year 1848 gripped the continent of Europe and initiated significant historical changes. Prussia was caught in events that one historian named the “year of revo- T lution” and saw the bloodiest uprising of all the countries that experienced revolu- tion in 1848.1 As can be seen in Figure 1, the protest caused many people to build barri- cades in an attempt to reduce any further violence. Prussia had one of the most absolutist monarchies of Europe in the nineteenth century, and one of the best militaries with a widely renowned discipline. The military prowess and absolutism was the characteristic of the Hohenzollern Dynasty (r. 1701-1918), from which King Frederick William IV (1795-1861; ruled 1840-1861) of Prussia descended, the king in Prussia’s charge during the revolution.2 For Frederick William IV’s authority to be challenged was unheard of, especially from the peasants and lower nobility, the main social strata that took part in the revolution in Berlin. Figures 2 and 3 lends a visual aid to the geographical location of Prussia and its place within Europe. The revolution that started on March 18 with mass protest and bloodshed ended with a constitution imposed by the monarchy on December 5, 1848. This constitu- tion imposed by the monarch appeased the moderate liberals and peasantry, thus effectively destroying the numerical strength the radical liberals possessed at the outbreak of the rev- olution in Berlin.
    [Show full text]
  • An American Response to the European Revolutions of 1848: John C
    An American Response to the European Revolutions of 1848: John C. Calhoun v. the Reformists and Revolutionaries Travis Alan Moore HST 499 Senior Seminar Professor: Dr. Lowe Read by 1st Reader: Dr. Doellinger 2nd Reader: Dr. Pettenger June 9th, 2006 Copywritten by Travis Alan Moore In an age of fops and toys, Wanting wisdom, void of right, Who shall nerve heroic boys, To hazard all in Freedom’s fight. Ralph Waldo Emerson 2 Introduction: Revolution. This elegant and devious word strikes fear and dread into every level of government. From presidents and monarchs to the simple senator or legislator everyone tiptoes around the sheer thought of it, the idea of it, but mostly the reality of it. That reality came into being in Europe in the early spring of 1848 just as winter’s grip was ebbing from the European continent. The European revolutions of 1848-49 signaled a great change in the political world. The revolutions that swept across Europe brought to light the issues of freedom, democratic representation, equality, worker’s rights, national rights, and the emancipation of persecuted peoples. The United States was the successful model of democratic freedoms in a world dominated by imperialistic power. It was only a matter of time until the movement of ideals and political reforms that began in America returned to Europe from across the Atlantic. This paper will examine the various American responses to the European revolutions and why they became important to the American social, cultural, and political landscape in 1848 and the years beyond. The various American responses in many ways included political statements and laws, statements by governmental officials, works by famous authors and artisans, or rallies and gatherings by supportive citizens of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • 5. Europe Surrenders to Nationalism, 1848-1871 Robert L
    Section XIII: Political Liberalism and Nationalism, Contemporary Civilization (Ideas and Institutions 1815-1871 of Western Man) 1958 5. Europe Surrenders to Nationalism, 1848-1871 Robert L. Bloom Gettysburg College Basil L. Crapster Gettysburg College Harold L. Dunkelberger Gettysburg College See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/contemporary_sec13 Part of the European History Commons, European Languages and Societies Commons, and the Models and Methods Commons Share feedback about the accessibility of this item. Bloom, Robert L. et al. "5. Europe Surrenders to Nationalism, 1848-1871. XIII: Political Liberalism and Nationalism, 1815-1871." Ideas and Institutions of Western Man (Gettysburg College, 1958), 56-62. This is the publisher's version of the work. This publication appears in Gettysburg College's institutional repository by permission of the copyright owner for personal use, not for redistribution. Cupola permanent link: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/ contemporary_sec13/6 This open access book chapter is brought to you by The uC pola: Scholarship at Gettysburg College. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of The uC pola. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 5. Europe Surrenders to Nationalism, 1848-1871 Abstract As we have already seen, the year 1848 saw the European continent distracted by insurrectionary outbreaks that touched every one of the major powers. Liberalism and democracy contributed greatly to the undercurrents of discontent under the apparent calm of the previous decade, but it was nationalist aspirations that furnished most of the fuel for the revolutionary fires of that fateful year. In England and France, where the struggle for unification had long before been won, nationalism played no part.
    [Show full text]