Lorenz Stein and German Socialism 1835-1872 Diana Siclovan King’s College September 2014 This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Faculty of History, University of Cambridge This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except where specifically indicated in the text. It is not substantially the same as any that I have submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for a degree or diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. I further state that no substantial part of my dissertation has already been submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University of similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. The length of this dissertation is 78,171 words (excluding prefatory pages, footnotes and bibliography). It therefore does not exceed the word limit imposed by the Faculty of History Degree Committee. To Elena and Cristi Siclovan Lorenz Stein and German Socialism 1835-1872 Diana Siclovan This thesis traces the intellectual trajectory of Lorenz Stein (1815-1890), a German legal scholar and political thinker who, despite being a significant theorist during his lifetime, is an obscure figure today, especially in Anglophone scholarship. It focuses on Stein’s writings on socialism and argues that they provide crucial insights into the changing nature of socialist thought in the mid-nineteenth century. It contributes to the project of departing from a Marxist interpretation of the history of socialism that has long been predominant, and uses Stein’s intellectual biography to illustrate how contingent political, cultural and personal factors have shaped both the creation and reception of socialist ideas. The introduction contains a historiographical survey that examines the motivations of those who have endorsed or dismissed Stein since the end of the nineteenth century, and makes a case for his re-appraisal in light of recent historiographical trends, notably the improved understanding of the relationship between economics and politics in modern political thought. Chapter 1 traces Stein’s early intellectual influences and reconstructs how he in 1842 came to write his first book, Der Socialismus und Communismus des heutigen Frankreichs. Chapter 2 examines the reception of this work and shows how it inspired a tradition of radical socialism in Germany in the 1840s, a development that forced Stein to also elaborate his social theory. Chapter 3 discusses Stein’s experience of the revolution of 1848 and his interpretation of its impact on socialist thought which he presented in his second major work, Geschichte der sozialen Bewegung in Frankreich (1850). Chapter 4 shows how Stein continued his project of a ‘science of society’ in the transformed political environment of the 1850s. The fifth and final chapter explores why Stein was increasingly sidelined in the 1860s, the decade that saw the emergence of a political workers’ movement in Germany. Contents Table of figures ii List of abbreviations iii Acknowledgements iv Introduction 1 Chapter 1 30 Lorenz Stein’s youth and intellectual background, 1835-1842 Chapter 2 79 Lorenz Stein and German socialism, 1842-1848 Chapter 3 131 From Verfassung to Verwaltung: Lorenz Stein and the European revolutions of 1848 Chapter 4 177 Lorenz Stein and the transformation of socialist thought in the Nachmärz, 1851-1861 Chapter 5 223 Lorenz Stein and social democracy, 1862-1872 Conclusion 279 Appendix: German socialist publications in the 1840s 284 Bibliography 290 i Table of figures 4.1. Photograph of Lorenz Stein, middle-aged 186 4.2. Lithograph of Lorenz Stein in 1859 222 5.1. Chart from Lorenz Stein’s Verwaltungslehre 239 5.2. Oil painting of Lorenz Stein 251 5.3. Lithograph of the older Lorenz Stein 266 ii List of abbreviations ADB Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (56 vols, Leipzig, 1875- 1912; repr. Berlin, 1967-71) MECW Marx and Frederick Engels, Collected Works (50 vols, London, 1975-2004) NDB Neue Deutsche Biographie (25 vols, Berlin, 1853- ) iii Acknowledgements This thesis was funded by an Art and Humanities Council doctoral award. I am grateful to the Cambridge History Faculty and to the AHRC for selecting me for this award, without which I most certainly would not have embarked on doctoral study. I also thank King’s College for successive grants from the Graduate Fund, which allowed me to travel to archives in Germany and to attend several conferences. My most significant intellectual debt is to Gareth Stedman Jones, who inspired my interest in the history of socialist ideas when I was an undergraduate and helped me pursue my own research in it over many years. His support, encouragement and insights have been invaluable, and I consider myself privileged to have had such a generous advisor. I was also fortunate to work with Christopher Clark who was an expert instructor in German history and the art of writing. I greatly thank him for his help and inspiration. I owe many important insights to my participation in the ‘1848 as a turning point in the history of political thought’ working group at the Centre for History and Economics in 2012-13. The opportunity to discuss my work with so many knowledgeable scholars was vital to developing the arguments of this dissertation. I particularly thank Edward Castleton and Douglas Moggach who helped me with my research on several occasions. I also thank Mary-Rose Cheadle for helping organize the workshops and for much other help and support over the years. Similarly inspiring have been the seminars of the ‘Property and Poverty’ working group. I thank Tom Hopkins for inviting me to Helsinki, and Koen Stapelbroek, Iain McDaniel and Bo Stråth for their interest in my work. I also owe many thanks to Keith Tribe, Stefan Koslowski, Wolfgang Schwentker and especially to Norbert Waszek, who kindly made material on Stein available to me that I otherwise would not have been able to access. Warren Breckman’s feedback on a draft article helped me clarify some ideas which also benefitted this thesis. Richard Evans’s comments in the Modern German History Workshop were in equal measure helpful and encouraging. I have benefitted immeasurably from the intellectual stimulation provided by the Cambridge History of Political Thought and Intellectual History subject group. At countless Monday seminars and Pizza Express dinners I had the opportunity to get to know many brilliant and inspirational scholars. I wish to thank in particular Isaac Nakhimovsky and Duncan Kelly, with whom I was also fortunate to work on the ‘Cultural History of the History of Political Thought’ project at CRASSH in 2011. Istvan Hont, who originally convened the project, was one of the most inspiring people I have ever met. His death in April 2013 was a deeply painful event and he continues to be sorely missed. iv I was also fortunate to be able to draw on the help of many fellow doctoral students. I especially thank Anna Ross, Hanna Weibye, Or Rosenboim, Mary-Ann Middelkoop, Waseem Yaqoob, Sophie Smith, Katrina Forrester, Alex Hutton, Martin Otero Knott, Hanna Scally and Devyani Gupta for the support, company and, in many cases, feedback on draft work that they provided. At King’s College, I greatly enjoyed the company of Lorna Finlayson, Alyssa Bandow, Natalie Thomlinson, Alex Stuart and Anna Bachmann. I thank Reuven and Rochel Leigh for their hospitality during my years in Cambridge. Outside Cambridge, my friends Kelly Roche, Helen O’Rourke, Red Gibbons-Lejeune, Adina Judy Bernstein and Gregg Tysall have been a great source of support. My greatest debt is to those closest to me. My parents, Elena and Cristi Siclovan, have always believed in me and supported me in many more ways than I could name. This work is dedicated to them. Finally, without Joshua Newton’s love and support this dissertation would not have been completed. Our wedding in December 2012 will without doubt remain the most memorable event of my years of doctoral study. v INTRODUCTION Between 1917 and 1989, the Soviet Union served as the world’s preeminent model of a socialist state. However, throughout this period, the history of alternate or pre- Soviet ideas about state socialism was known only incompletely on both sides of the Iron Curtain. In both scholarship and wider political discourse, the history of socialism was commonly told as the story of the rise of Karl Marx’s ideas. Marx’s nineteenth-century interlocutors, who had articulated elaborate alternative visions of socialist or communist society, were either discussed as mere ‘forerunners’ or dismissed as his opponents. Their work was never used to challenge the teleological narrative of the ascent of Marx’s communism.1 The result was a skewed history that obscured the complexity and diversity of socialist ideas as they had existed in their nineteenth-century origins, and an increasingly narrow definition of socialism. Throughout the twentieth century, it became difficult to imagine a socialist state in a shape other than that of the totalitarian dictatorship embodied by the USSR. With the demise of most socialist states in the early 1990s, alternative visions of socialism became a viable topic of scholarship for the first time since the early twentieth century. Historians are now uncovering socialist thought in its original variety.2 This thesis is a contribution to this project of revision. It examines a figure that had a profound impact on the debate about the relationship between socialism and the state in nineteenth-century Germany: Lorenz Stein.3 Stein was a celebrated 1 For examples of such traditional histories see G.