Chapter 13
Revolutions and Nationalism, 1500 to 1900

 

I - Popular Sovereignty and Enlightenment Ideals

In Chapter Two, we saw how both Plato, and Aristotle despised tyranny and mob rule. They both wanted a just and stable society. Plato felt that Philosopher Kings should rule and Aristotle favored Polity or a Constitutional Government dominated by members of the middle class. Aristotle developed the idea that rulers themselves are both the guardians of the law and subject to the law. This Rule of Law lies at the heart of the Enlightenment and ideal brought forth a new political idea: Popular Sovereignty or the idea that legitimate political authority resides not in kings, but rather in the people who make up society. In the American Declaration of Independence of 1776 this idea is clearly stated: We hold these truths to be self evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Throughout history, kings or emperors ruled almost all settled agricultural societies. Small societies (like Athens) occasionally instituted democratic governments, in which delegates or citizens represented the interests of themselves or various constituencies. Some societies, especially those with weak central leadership, relied on aristocratic governments, and in which privileged elites usually supervised public affairs. Kings and nobility often justified their power by claiming that a deity sanctioned their authority; for example, the Divine Right of Kings or the Mandate of Heaven. On this basis, the kings and elite would claim sovereignty – that is, political supremacy with authority to rule.

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the philosophes began to question long-standing notions of sovereignty; they rarely challenged the kings’ right to rule, but sought to make kings responsible to the people. They commonly regarded government as a contract between rulers and the ruled. In 1690, John Locke formulated the theory of contractual government in his Second Treatise on Civil Government. In the past, he maintained, people had given up their political rights to rulers in order to promote the common good. Locke was convinced that, although people had granted political rights to kings and elites, the people still retained their personal rights of life, liberty and property. Any ruler who violated these rights lost the right to hold his sovereignty and ought to be deposed. Furthermore, rulers logically derived their power or sovereignty from the consent of those whom they governed. If subjects withdrew their consent, they had the right to replace their rulers. Locke not only removed the divine out of the equation of government, he also set up the justification for revolution, or the overthrow of a government because the king or elites had betrayed the trust given to him or them by the people.

Enlightenment thinkers also called for freedom and equality. They (Voltaire in particular) felt that a government or the church had no right to censor or prevent books being printed. These were the first calls for religious toleration and freedom of expression. They also condemned the legal and social privileges held by aristocrats who made less contribution to society than a peasant, artisan or craftsman. To them equality meant a society in which everybody was equal before the law. The most prominent advocate of political equality was the Swiss-French thinker Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), who identified with the working people and in his book, The Social Contract (1762), argued that all members of a society were collectively the sovereign. In an ideal society, he felt, all individuals would participate directly in the running of the government.

The bottom line was that the philosophes sought to limit aristocratic privilege and establish a society with Enlightenment ideas. It is important to understand that these philosophes were most often from the middle class and enjoyed a comfortable lifestyle: merchants, businessmen, professionals. On one hand, they sought to restrict the power of the rich and powerful, but on the other they did not foresee men of their intellect and means sharing power with women, children, slaves, serfs or peasants. However, ironically, the day would come when these lower classes would demand to be included and became included, based on the groundwork laid by the philosophes and the Enlightenment.

Many national states and the church fought back with censorship and restrictions on publishing, So, Philosophes often disguised their ideas in works of fiction. Montesquieu’s Persian Letters and its criticism of European royalty is a perfect example. Another was Voltaire’s Candide, which was a humorous novel in which the main character, Candide, travels around Europe, the Americas and even the Middle East in search of the best of all possible worlds.  What Voltaire really does is expose the corruption and hypocrisy of Europe’s nobility dominated society. Neither Voltaire nor Montesquieu suggested specific reforms, but they did a serious challenge to long-held ideas on government.

II - Enlightened Despots

In the latter half of the eighteenth century, many kings embraced Enlightenment ideals. Some of them were constitutional, like the Hanoverian kings of England and others were absolute and conservative, like Louis XIV of France. But some absolute monarchs felt that if they could enlighten the elites of their countries, they would be able to bring about reform. These rulers were called Enlightened Despots.

 

Frederick the Great (b. 1712): We have already met this arguably most famous king of Prussia who reigned from 1740-1786 and made Prussia a key player in European politics as a result of the Seven-Year’s War. He had a vision of a united Germany and, although he exerted extremely tight control of his Prussian subjects and used daring military strategies to expand the size and strength of his kingdom, he nevertheless saw himself (like Peter the Great) as the first servant of the state. He was as tough on himself as on any subordinate. Frederick admired Voltaire and got him to come to Berlin to establish an Academy of Science. Frederick also worked to make the bureaucracy more “enlightened” which also made them more efficient and thus made the state and his monarchy stronger. Frederick had swamps drained and introduced new crops, especially the potato. He was tolerant of all expressions of religion and boasted that in his kingdom everyone could go to heaven in his own way.

Catherine the Great of Russia (1729-1796), whom we met in the last chapter, like Frederick, admired Enlightenment thinking but intended to hold on to her power. She was the most able of Peter the Great’s successors. She was born a German princess who became Tsarina after the death of her Tsar-husband, Peter III (1762), the grandson of Peter the Great.  Except for her determination to hold on to her autocracy, she was a follower of Enlightenment principles. She continued Peter’s reforms and was responsible for the Russian Enlightenment of the Eighteenth Century. Yet (as we saw in the noted chapter) she cooled towards reform as a result of Pugachev’s Rebellion and the French Revolution.

Joseph II (1741-1790) was the son of the Austrian Empress, Maria Theresa, the great opponent of Frederick the Great. (He was also the brother of Queen Marie Antoinette of France, who would lose her head in the French Revolution) Joseph was perhaps the greatest of the Enlightenment monarchs. He traveled among his subjects in disguise to learn their problems and to try to improve their lives, which earned him the title of the Peasant Emperor. He gave freedom of worship to Protestants and Jews, ended censorship, curbed the influence of the Catholic Church and abolished serfdom. After his death, his brother and successor canceled his reforms.

III - Conservatism and Liberalism

The Enlightenment ideal of Popular Sovereignty also generated the emergence of two modern ideologies: conservatism and liberalism. An ideology is a coherent (well thought out) vision of human nature, human society and the larger world that proposes some particular form of political and social organization as the ideal. Some ideologies defend a current state of affairs and others attack the current state of affairs.

The modern ideology of Conservatism arose as political and social theorists responded to the challenges of the American War of Independence and the French Revolution. Conservatives viewed society as an organism that changes (or ought to change) very slowly over the generations. The English political philosopher Edmund Burke (1729-1797) held, for example, that society was a compact between a people’ ancestors, the present generation, and their descendents yet unborn (Latin, conservare = to preserve). Conservatives admit the need for change, but change must be by consensus (broad or general agreement). Thus Burke condemned radical revolutionaries and the anarchy the resulted. Burke approved of the American Revolution and condemned the French Revolution.

Liberalism, on the other hand, takes change to be the norm and welcome change as a healthy sign of progress. They viewed conservatism as an effort to justify the status quo (existing state of affairs), which often meant disenfranchisement for women and poorer peoples. Liberals (Latin, liber = free) championed Enlightenment values of freedom and equality, which they thought would lead to higher standards of morality and prosperity. The most prominent leader of the idea of Liberalism was another Englishman, John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), who called for freedom to pursue economic and intellectual interests. He advocated universal suffrage even for women.

IV - Women’s Rights: testing the limits of Revolution

Philosophes called for restructuring of government and society, but did not generally extend this restructuring to include women (and men without property). Women however became involved in Enlightenment ideas and Popular Sovereignty.

One way was through Salons. The Salon originated in early 1600s, when a group of noblewomen in Paris began opening their homes for poetry readings, discussion groups (on Enlightenment themes) or musical recitals; and only the wittiest, most intelligent and best-read persons were invited. By the 1700s, some middle class women began holding salons in which middle class citizens could meet with the elites (nobility) on an equal basis to discuss themes of the Enlightenment.

The most famous Salonière (hostess) was Madame Geoffrin who in the 1750s entertained the brightest and best philosophers, artists and musicians. Her salon was the perfect ideal of politeness, civility and intellectual discussion. The young Mozart performed in her Salon and Denis Diderot was a regular. Madame Geoffrin corresponded with Catherine the Great and Maria Theresa. Nevertheless by 1800, the influence of woman’s salons had ended, but they marked an important step in women’s equality.

The next step were the voices that called for the equality of women which would grow louder and more influential. Mary Astell, (1666 – 1731) was an English proto-feminist writer who, working on John Locke’s thinking, attacked the absolute sovereignty of the male head of the household. She dared to ask that 'If all men are born free, why are all women born slaves?' 

During the French Revolution, Olympe de Gouges (1748 – 1793), a feminist playwright and writer whose book Declaration of the rights of Woman and the Female Citizen demanded that women receive the same rights as men. In the fury of the Reign of Terror in 1793, de Gouges was guillotined.

An English feminist, Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797), a self educated woman, published and influential essay in 1792, A Vindication of the Rights of Women, in which she argued that women possessed all rights that men possessed. Moreover she argued that education for all women would actually make them better mothers and wives and prepare them for professional occupations and even participation in political life.

In more pragmatic (less radical) areas of life, women often played crucial roles in the revolutions of the late 18th century. Some women supported efforts of the men by sewing uniforms, rolling bandages, or managing farms, shops or businesses. Other actually fought in the conflict. America has its revolutionary war heroines: Deborah Samson and Molly Pitcher.

In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, a growing women rights movement gained strength and began to focus on Suffrage (the right to vote). The American feminist, Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815-1902) led the feminist movement in the United States. She organized a famous women’s rights conference at Seneca Falls, New York, in 1848. The conference demanded that lawmakers grant women the same rights as those enjoyed by men. The women’s movement of the nineteenth century did not win the vote or enable women to enter professions, save for schoolteachers, but did form widespread academic, literary and civic organizations and paved the way for twentieth century social changes.

In Great Britain, Emmeline Pankhurst led a suffrage movement with violent rhetoric and protests that included smashing windows and even arson. She justified her tactics with the statement, “There is something that governments care for more than human life and that is property; so it is through property we shall strike the enemy.”  In France, the fight for women’s suffrage was led (less violently) by Jeanne-Elizabeth Schmahl who founded the French Union for Women’s Suffrage in 1909.

V - The Evolution of English Constitutional Monarchy

The Enlightenment had inspired Europeans to challenge traditional notions of sovereignty. Even before the Enlightenment, England had always seemed to have a strong sense of the rights of the individual and resistance to absolutism. The story of the evolution of the modern English Constitutional Monarchy is really a story of struggle for power between Parliament and the king. It begins before the Enlightenment, but takes strength from Enlightenment thinking and precipitates a revolution that will give England a limited or Constitutional Government.

When William the Conqueror invaded Britain in 1066 he set up a council called the Curia Regis that met with the king three times each year and whose purpose was to do the king’s will. This Council of the King would slowly develop into Parliament. William and his successors wanted to strengthen central control over their feudal kingdom, and so there developed – over time - English Common Law or law that was the same for all England, unlike individual Feudal laws.

We saw how Henry II used English Common Law to increase his authority; how he established Circuit Judges to take the law into all parts of England and how he used a Grand Jury System to determine which cases should be brought to trial. Out of the Grand Jury System would come the Trial Jury System in which twelve peers decide the guilt or innocence of a someone tried for a crime. We also saw how Henry quarreled with the Church which wanted to run its own courts for its clergy and how Henry suffered a setback in the murder of Thomas à Becket. It is important to understand that the spread of English Common Law cut both ways; it empowered the monarchy but at the same time encouraged the nobility to demand a share of the king’s power.

This led to a 500 year struggle that ended in the triumph of Parliament.

Round one of the struggle came in 1215, when the Barons of England demanded that Henry II’s son, King John, sign an agreement called Magna Carta that protected certain rights of the barons. Among Magna Carta’s provisions were (1) that the king could not collect new taxes without the consent of the council; (2) that rights guaranteed to the nobility applied to all English citizens; and (3) that the king had to obey the law.

Thus, the struggle for power between the king and the nobility became a struggle between the king and Parliament which also came to include the growing and prospering merchant and middle classes. If one wants a quick sketch of English Constitutional History, it is quite simple: between 1215 and the twentieth century, the power of Parliament increases as the power of the monarch decreases.

Edward I called the first true Parliament in 1295 because he needed money to fight his wars in France. Edward’s Parliament was a meeting of people from three levels in the society: the king himself, the lords (including the bishops and barons) and the commoners (the knights and representatives of the towns and shires). Eventually the House of Lords became known as the "upper house" because it was made up of the nobility. The House of Commons became known as the "lower house" because it represented the commons, or the shires and towns. At its meetings, its members spoke or parleyed (from the French parler to speak). Edward’s Parliament is important because it set up the first organized framework for the English legislative structure and so it is called the Model Parliament.

As time went by, Parliament continued to grow in influence. During the reign of Edward III, who also needed money to fight the French in the Hundred Years War, it was established that in addition to no new taxes, no new law could be made, without the consent of both Parliament and the king. What that meant was that by the mid fifteenth century, Parliament held the purse strings and the king had to satisfy Parliament before he could levy any new taxes.

The stress between king and parliament, however, was relaxed in the first half of the sixteenth century, when the prestige of the monarch reached its height under Henry VIII and Parliament was generally submissive (albeit Henry did know how to finesse Parliament). But Henry’s reign also corresponded to the Northern Renaissance, the Reformation and the rise of the middle class. The result was that Parliament began to be more independent so that Henry’s daughter, Elizabeth I had to be more skilled in her finessing of Parliament. But upon her death, the stage was set for a showdown.

Round two: the showdown came when Elizabeth died in 1603 and James VI of Scotland, her nephew, became James I of England and jointly ruled both kingdoms. James strongly believed in the Divine Right of Kings, and so his rather mild round two was an acrimonious and rocky relationship with an increasingly vociferous and demanding Parliament. It would be a mistake to think of Parliament as a democratic institution, or the voice of the common citizen. It was neither. Rather, it was a forum representing the interests of the nobility and the merchant classes. Their hostility to the king showed their determination to have a share in the government.

Round three: James died in 1625 and his son, Charles I, continued his father's acrimonious relationship with Parliament. Round three was precipitated when Charles tried to bypass the authority of Parliament and Parliament responded with the Petition of Right of 1628. It was the most dramatic assertion of the traditional rights of the English people since the Magna Carta. Its basic premise was that no taxes of any kind could be authorized without the permission of Parliament. So in 1629, Charles dissolved Parliament and ruled alone for eleven years. When a rebellion broke out in Scotland, Charles, who was desperate for money, was forced to call a new Parliament, called the Long Parliament, which sat until 1660. Parliament made increasing demands, which the king refused to meet.

Round Four: Neither side would give in and the English Civil War (1642-1646) broke out and polarized society largely along class lines. Parliament drew most of its support from the middle classes, while the nobility, the clergy, and the peasantry supported the king. Bottom line: Charles and his forces lost the war and Charles was tried for treason and beheaded in 1649. For eleven years, his opponent, Oliver Cromwell, dominated Parliament and ruled England. But after Cromwell’s death in 1658, Parliament had a change of heart and offered to restore the monarchy, if Charles II, the son of Charles I, would agree to concessions for religious toleration and a general amnesty. He did and, in 1660, returned to England amid great happiness. Charles was a passive king and did not quarrel with Parliament. But when Charles died in 1685, his brother, James II, succeeded him.

Round Five: Charles II had been an Anglican, but under the influence of his French wife was baptized a Roman Catholic on his deathbed. That was, needless to say, deeply resented by the English, but what James was did, precipitated a revolution. James was staunchly Roman Catholic and made no secret of it. Moreover, he was headstrong and had no diplomatic skills. His blunders and illegalities proceeded to alienate virtually every politically and militarily significant segment of English society and government; especially his ill-advised attempts to make the army entirely Roman Catholic and to pack Parliament with his supporters. He employed the Dispensing Power - the royal prerogative of suspending various laws - and used the courts to punish his enemies and even imprisoned bishops (including the Archbishop of Canterbury) for failing to read a royal proclamation in religious services.

Two independent events brought the crisis to a head. First, James’s second wife, Mary of Modena, gave birth to a son, causing Parliament to fear a Roman Catholic succession. Then the trial of the bishops took place and to the joy of London, the bishops were exonerated. That defiance of the king was the spark of the revolution. Parliament invited Mary, James’ daughter by his 1st wife, and her husband, William of Orange, to assume the throne. William landed with an army in November 1688, promised to defend the liberty of England and the Protestant religion, and marched unopposed on London. England was overjoyed and supported William and Parliament, while James fled to France. Parliament then formally denounced James and offered the throne to William and Mary as joint sovereigns.

Then Parliament placed constitutional limitations on the monarchy by the Bill of Rights of 1689. (Its full title was An Act Declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subjects and Settling the Succession of the Crown). The Bill of Rights was not a bill of rights, in the sense of a statement of certain rights that citizens have (or ought to have), but rather addresses only the rights of Parliament in respect to the Monarch. On the other hand it does, like Magna Carta make provisions that have a wider application such the guarantee of freedom of speech, freedom of elections, parliamentary approval of taxation, and the right to petition. It further forbade cruel and unusual punishment, standing armies, suspension of due process of law and stated that no Catholic could succeed to throne of England. By its provisions and implications, it gave political supremacy to Parliament. The Glorious Revolution is often called the Bloodless Revolution, because it was the first revolution in World History in which the victors did not massacre the losers or at least a significant number of the losers. The result was the creation of the limited or Constitutional Monarchy that has governed England to this day.

VI - The American Revolution

In 1763, the French and Indian War (Seven Year’s War) ended. Great Britain was catapulted into world prominence and had control of almost all of North America. Yet, in less than 20 years, she would lose control of and fail to stop the 13 American colonies from winning their Independence. The problem began when the British government had trouble paying for the Seven Year’s War. So Parliament rightly expected that their North American colonies (who benefitted from the war) should pay their fair share.

But the colonists resented the imposition of new taxes without their consent: The Sugar Act of 1764 which taxed imported Molasses, The Stamp Act of 1765 which required expensive stamps to be placed on publications and legal documents, the Townsend Act of 1767 which taxed a number of imported goods and the Tea Act which taxed imported tea. The British, flush with their successes, were determined to show the colonists in North America who was in charge. They began to enforce some old navigation laws, some of which had not been enforced in decades. They also offended the colonists by the Quartering Act of 1765, which forced colonists to provide housing for British troops.

The colonists argued that they should be allowed to govern their own affairs. Moreover, as Englishmen, they DEMANDED that, if they were going to be taxed, they should be able to send representatives to sit in Parliament, just like any other Englishmen. Their slogan was “No Taxation with Representation!” So they began to resist. They boycotted British goods, physically attacked British officials and mounted protests such as the Boston Tea Party in 1773, when they dumped tons of tea into Boston harbor, rather than pay the tax.

In 1774, they organized a Continental Congress to coordinate the colonial resistance to British action. By 1775, tensions were so high that the inevitable clash between British troops and the colonists finally took place at the villages of Lexington and Concord, near Boston. The war had begun Early in 1776, Thomas Paine published a pamphlet called Common Sense, in which he openly challenged the authority of the British government and was the first to formally call for American Independence.

Later that year, on July 4, 1776 the Continental Congress approved the Declaration of Independence, which drew up Enlightenment thinking and from English Constitutional tradition. It asserted that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, which among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. It echoed John Locke’s contractual theory of government in arguing that individuals established governments to secure these rights and that government derives its power and authority from the consent of the governed. The declaration listed colonial grievances and declared that they had the right to be free and independent states.

The war was frustrating for both sides. On one hand, the British had overwhelmingly military superiority, but could not physically occupy a country so vast in size. They had the world’s strongest navy; a strong government, a good army and a sizable portion of the colonists called Loyalists (or Tories) made up about a third of the population. The rebels on the other hand, were fighting on their homeland for their homes, while the British had to cross the sea with supplies and reinforcements to fight in what was now a foreign land, even with Loyalist help. Moreover, Spain, France, the Netherlands and several German states eagerly helped the colonists because of the hatred for Britain. The rebels were frustrated because they were only a third of the population (Tories a second third and those who didn’t care the last third). Nevertheless, in spite of their small numbers, the rebels benefited greatly from strong political and military leadership. And the greatest of these leaders was George Washington, who, as commander in chief, used creative, daring, hit and run tactics learned from the Indians. His character molded the Continental Army together and effectively integrated local militias. Although the British held many major cities, including New York and Boston and defeated Washington several times, they could never get that elusive and decisive victory. 

As he gained experience, Washington began to win more victories and eventually, with foreign aid, was strong enough to lay trap in 1781 for the army of Lord Cornwallis in Yorktown, Virginia. With French naval help, he forced Cornwallis to surrender. This victory was a terrible blow to the British, who nevertheless still had overwhelming force. But the truth was that the British were tired because they weren’t able to destroy the American Army or hold much land. So in 1783 both sides met in Paris and in September the Treaty of Paris was signed. The British recognized American Independence.

From 1783 to 1789, America was a confederation (The Articles of Confederation period) with a strong states and a weak federal government. However, leaders like Hamilton, Washington and Jefferson, convinced Americans that they needed a strong federal state. So, by 1789, they created the government and constitution we know today and called George Washington to be its first president.
The thirteen former colonies did however retain a great deal of autonomy over local affairs, but the federal government on was based national popular sovereignty, and agreed to follow a written constitution that guaranteed freedom of speech and religion.

The new nation did have flaws such as not granting political and legal equality to all inhabitants, but only to men of property. Landless men, women, slaves and indigenous people would have to wait. Nevertheless, the American constitution was a remarkable document that ushered in a political system that has been able for over 200 years to meet internal and challenges, which attest to its enduring qualities. It is important to understand that – from a global perspective - the young United States inspired the hatred of the nobility and hope of the oppressed with the establishment of what to that point in history was the most liberal government created by men.

VII - The French Revolution

French revolutionaries drew inspiration from Enlightenment political thought, but the French revolution was very different, for it was an internal and a much more radical and violent affair. The Americans had sought to win political freedom from a mother country across the ocean, and after they had won their freedom, they still retained British law and much of their British social and cultural heritage. The French Revolution, on the other hand, repudiated the existing social order, called the ancien regime, and sought to replace it with new political, social and cultural structures. And the price in human blood and suffering would make the Glorious and American Revolutions seem like squabbles among gentlemen.

In 1789, France was rich country, but the French government was heavily in debt, mostly from previous monarchs, especially the wars of Louis XIV and pleasures of Louis XV. The expenses of these monarchs and the money spent to help the Americans caused years of deficit spending (when a government spends more than it takes in) and brought France close to bankruptcy. Louis XVI (r. 1774-1793) appointed a brilliant financial minister, Jacques Necker, to make reforms and increase income. But when Necker proposed to tax the French nobility (which had long been exempt from many taxes) and remove some of the financial burden off the backs of the already overburdened peasants and city workers, the aristocrats protested and forced Louis to summon the Estates General.

The Estates General was an assembly that represented the entire French population through groups known as estates. The First Estate consisted of about 100,000 Roman Catholic clergy; the Second Estate consisted of about 400,000 nobility; and the Third Estate the rest of the population or about 24 million people. It is important to understand that the Third Estate was extremely diverse. Its most important members were the Bourgeoisie or middle class professionals such as bankers, merchants, manufacturers, lawyers, doctors and professors. The vast majority were the peasants who were impoverished, bound to the land, still owing the aristocracy medieval fees and services, such as the Corvée or unpaid labor to repair roads and bridges. The poorest members of the Third Estate were city workers who worked in industries such as printing, cloth-making and baking or even more menial jobs such as servants, construction workers or street sellers.

Most members of the Third estate that came to the Estates General, however, were not the impoverished peasants or poor city workers, but the capitalist oriented Bourgeoisie who were determined to make changes.

Phase One, the National Assembly
When the Estates General met at Versailles, every party had an agenda. The king hoped that it would authorize new taxes. Many nobility wanted a type of Glorious Revolution which would place limitations on the king’s power. The Bourgeoisie wanted more representation in government. The king lost control almost immediately and never got it back. The Third Estate demanded sweeping political and social reform. Although some members of the lower clergy supported them, the first and second estates blocked every move for reform. On June 17, 1789, after six weeks of fruitless debate, representatives of the third estate took the dramatic step of seceding from the Estates General. They met at an indoor tennis court, invited the other estates to join them, declared themselves the National Assembly and swore the famous Tennis Court Oath that they would not disband until they had provided France with a written constitution.

The formation of the National Assembly caused a popular uprising in Paris. On July 14, 1789, a Parisian crowd stormed the Bastille, a royal arsenal and jail, in search of weapons and ammunition. The military garrison surrendered but only after killing a few of the attackers. The crowd became a mob, and to vent their rage, they hacked the soldiers to death. One assailant used his pocketknife to sever the garrison commander’s head, which was mounted on a pike and paraded around the streets of Paris. This angry turn of events spread quickly throughout France and frightened the members of the National Assembly. Paris was divided into many competing dissenting factions. One was the National Guard headed by Marquis de Lafayette who supported the National Assembly and first use the tri-color flag.

But there were other more violent factions and so the National Assembly took charge. They began to restructure France with a broad program of political and social reform. On August 27, they adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. Their cry was “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”. They proclaimed the equality of all men, the sovereignty of the people, and individual rights to liberty, property and security. They abolished the Feudal System and freed the peasants from their taxes and obligations to the nobility.

They confiscated the property of the Catholic Church, abolished the first estate and made clergy ordinary citizens. They promulgated the Constitution of 1791 and made the king a constitutional monarch over a government run by men of property who alone had the right to vote. The Constitution of 1791 was the Enlightenment put into practice again, but it also caused many aristocrats to leave France and try to set up counter revolutionary operations. However, unlike the British and American experiences, the French Revolution soon took a terrible and radical turn.

Phase Two, the Convention
In late 1791, the king and queen tried to flee and were brought back to Paris with their safety far from secure. The rulers of Prussia and Austria, alarmed by the disintegration of the king’s authority and goaded by émigrés (the aristocrats from the first two Estates who had fled), threatened - in the Declaration of Pilnitz - to invade France and restore the ancien regime and the king. The Revolutionary leaders immediately (and angrily) responded by forcing the National Assembly to dissolve and re-form as the Convention, which was a new legislative body elected by universal male suffrage and immediately abolished the monarchy and proclaimed France a republic. The Convention then rallied the French population by instituting the levee en masse (mass levy) or universal conscription that drafted people and resources for use in the war against the invaders. And to the amazement of Europe, they did just that. They declared war first on Austria and Prussia and, in spite of many battlefield reverses, still managed to hold the Austrians and Prussians at bay.

The pain of the battlefield goaded the Convention to root out enemies at home. On August 10th 1792, a Parisian mob attacked the Tuleries Palace and slaughtered the king’s guard. Then a month later, in the infamous September Massacres, the mob butchered thousands of people: not only common criminals but also clergy and nobility accused of crimes. Among its first victims were the King Louis XVI and his queen Marie Antoinette. The famous 1789 painting by Jacques Louis David of Lictors returning to Brutus the bodies of his Sons illustrated the attitude of the Convention. Brutus’ sons had tried to overthrow the Roman Republic so Brutus – putting the good of the state above his own feelings – ordered the execution of his sons.

Part Three, the Reign of Terror
By the end of 1793 – with internal violence and foreign invasion, food shortages and rising prices - the Convention created the Committee of Public Safety, led by Maximilian Robespierre (1758-1794) and his Jacobin Party, who were members of a radical-revolutionary club and mostly middle class lawyers and intellectuals. Under the Committee the chaos and bloodshed reached its peak in 1794 in what has come to be called the Reign of Terror. Robespierre and the Jacobins believed passionately that France needed complete restructuring, and so they unleashed a campaign of terror and bloodshed to promote their revolutionary agenda. The committee was strongly supported by the Sans-Culottes, working class men and women who strongly supported the revolution. Sans-Culottes means “without breeches” because they wore long trousers instead of the knee breeches worn by the nobility and upper middle class.

They made extensive use of quick trials followed by execution on the guillotine. Between 1793 and 1794 they executed about forty thousand people and imprisoned another 300,000 suspected of being enemies of the revolution. (Olympe de Gouges was herself a victim of the Jacobins, who did not appreciate her efforts to extend the right of freedom and equality to women.)

The Jacobins also sought to eliminate the influence of the Church in French society, so they closed churches, forced some priests to marry, massacred others, outlawed the worship of God, and promoted the “Cult of Reason” as a replacement for religion. They reorganized the calendar, keeping months of 30 days, but with 10-day weeks that recognized no day of religious observance. Their calendar began with the year one and meant to encourage a new era with the beginning of the French republic in 1792. At the encouragement of the Sans-Culottes, the entire populace was pressured to wear working men’s clothes increased rights were given to women, even permitting them to inherit property and divorce their husbands, but not the vote. As the bloodshed increased, many victims of the terror were fellow radicals who fell out of favor with Robespierre and the Jacobins.

Phase Four, the Directory
the instability that resulted undermined confidence in the Jacobins and in July 1794, it was Robespierre’s turn (with many of his allies) to face trial for treason and the quick blade of the guillotine. This brought about a Thermidorian Reaction, and the downfall of the Jacobins. (Thermidor was the French name for a summer month; Thermidorian Reaction describes a swing back to center after excess to left or right) It began with a general amnesty for political prisoners and, under a new Constitution (1795), men of property elected a bi-cameral legislature which appointed an executive committee called the Directory which ruled France until 1799. They sought a middle way between the ancien regime and radical revolution. They were unable to solve many economic and military problems, especially food shortages. But they staggered on until the advent of a young Corsican general, Napoleon Bonaparte.

 

VIII - The Reign of Napoleon Bonaparte

 

Born in 1769 to a minor noble family on the island of Corsica, Napoleon Bonaparte studied at French military schools and became an officer in the army of Louis XVI. He was a brilliant and charismatic leader who became a general at the age of 24. He was a fervent supporter of the revolution and defended the Directory against a popular uprising in 1795. He made his reputation secure during a brilliant campaign in 1796, when he drove the Austrian army out of Northern Italy and established French rule.

In 1798 he mounted an invasion of Egypt to gain access to the Red sea and threaten British shipping routes. The British drove him out of Egypt, but one of his soldiers found the famous Rosetta Stone. Not deterred by this defeat, he returned to France and joined the Directory. When Austria, Russia and Britain formed a coalition to attack France and end the revolution, he defeated the invaders, overthrew the Directory and named himself First Consul with almost absolute power. In 1802 he became Consul for Life, and two years later crowned himself Emperor. He would rule France until 1815.

Napoleon was an instant hero to the French. His military victories were legendary and have been studied to our modern day. He brought political and social stability to an exhausted France. He made peace with the Roman Catholic Church in the Concordat of 1801, in which the state kept the lands taken from the Church, but in return paid the salaries of the clergy, recognized the Roman Catholic Church as the preferred religion of France, and extended religious freedom to Protestants and Jews. The bottom line was that people were tired of the godless “Cult of Reason” and strongly backed Napoleon.

In 1804 Napoleon issued a revised Body of Civil Law, called the Code Napoleon, which also brought stabilization to France. The Code undid some of the reforms of the revolution, but it re-affirmed the political and legal equality of all adult men, protected private property and established a merit-based society in which qualification and talent replaced birth and social standing for employment.

Napoleon wisely allowed the aristocrats to return and reclaim some of their lost land. Thus he won their support for new regime as well. And lastly, although the moderate policies of the Revolution were affirmed, women lost ground as the Code Napoleon reaffirmed patriarchal family structure, which made women and children subservient to male heads of households.

Although Napoleon was a child of the Enlightenment, he was, like Catherine the Great of Russia, no champion of intellectual freedom or representative government. He limited free speech, censored newspapers, used secret police and spies to protect his power, and made systematic use of propaganda. And when he crowned himself emperor, he intended to found a dynasty.

Outside France, Napoleon sought to build a French empire. In the decade and a half that he dominated Europe, he accomplished what Louis XIV had failed to attain. He conquered the Iberian and Italian peninsulas, occupied the Netherlands and routed Russian, Prussian and Austrian armies. Perhaps his greatest military victory was his defeat of the Russians and Austrians at Austerlitz in 1805.

He sent his brothers to rule as the kings of Spain and the Netherlands. He forced Austria and Prussia to be his unwilling allies. He abolished the Holy Roman Empire and created the 38-member Confederation of the Rhine under French supervision. In North America he forced Spain to cede Louisiana back to France, but then almost immediately, when he needed cash, sold it in the famous Louisiana Purchase to Thomas Jefferson in 1801, thus doubling the size of the new American Republic.

 

There was one enemy, however, whom he could not subdue and that was Great Britain which was protected by the English Channel and her awesome navy. Nevertheless, in 1805 Napoleon prepared to invade Great Britain, but the French-Spanish Navy (which was to lead the invasion) was smashed at the Battle of Trafalgar by the English admiral Lord Horatio Nelson. Napoleon then tried break Great Britain by stranglehold and tried to blockade all of Europe’s ports to English merchants.

During this protracted struggle to strangle Great Britain economically, which Napoleon called the Continental System, both France and Britain seized the neutral ships of many nations, including the United States. American anger at the British seizures of both her ships and her sailors (impressment) led to the fruitless War of 1812 in which neither Great Britain or the United States could claim victory. Nevertheless, in the end, Napoleon failed to effectively damage British trading might.

Then, in 1812 Napoleon overstepped himself and invaded Russia. His million man Grande Armee defeated Russian armies, pushed deep into Russia and even occupied Moscow. But the Russians adopted a unique strategy (which they would use again in World War II) which was to burn all the land in front of Napoleon’s forces (scorched earth policy). As a result, Napoleon was caught without supplies as the Russian winter set in. In the terrible retreat that followed, he lost most of his Grande Armee.

The next year in 1813 he was defeated at the Battle of Leipzig (sometimes called the Battle of the Nations) and was forced to abdicate. In 1814, he was exiled to Elba, an island in the Mediterranean. He quickly escaped and rallied his armies, but was defeated (just barely) at The Battle of Waterloo in 1815. This time the European victors banished him to a tiny island in the South Atlantic, St. Helena, where he had personal freedom and died of cancer in 1821 (although there are many poisoning theories, one as recently as 2005).

IX - The Haitian Revolution

The only successful slave revolt in history took place on the Caribbean island of Hispaniola in the aftermath of the French Revolution. In the 18th century Hispaniola was divided into a Spanish colony of Santo Domingo and a French colony, Saint-Dominique. The island was one of the richest colonies in all the Caribbean: its sugar, coffee and cotton and accounted for almost one third of France’s foreign trade. In 1789 Saint- Dominique it was inhabited by 40,000 white settlers, 30,000 gens de couleur (free people of color who usually toiled their own small farms, sometimes with a few slaves) and some 500,000 black slaves who worked under brutal conditions on white run plantations. In marginal areas, there were also large numbers of maroons.

During the American War for Independence, the French sent about 800 gens de couleur to fight in North America. When they returned they brought back Enlightenment ideas such as equality and contractual government. When the French Revolution broke out, the whites wanted independence from France and the gens de couleur wanted political equality. So, the white settlers began to govern themselves but refused to include the gens de couleur. By 1791, civil war broke out between the two groups.

The conflict took an unexpected and violent turn of events when a Voodoo priest, Boukman, organized a slave revolt. In August 1791, he led some 12,000 slaves on a rampage killing white settlers, burning their homes and destroying their plantations. Within weeks the slave army grew to 100,000 and maroons joined the fighting. French, British and Spanish troops tried to restore order. Boukman was killed, but the slaves eventually overcame the whites, the gens de couleur and the foreign armies; and their successes were due to the leadership of Toussaint Louverture (1744-1803).

Toussaint Louverture was the son of slaves who learned to read and write from a Catholic priest. Because of his education he became a domestic servant and rose to the position of a livestock manger on a plantation. When the slave revolt broke out he helped his masters escape, then he joined the rebels. A skilled organizer, he built a strong, disciplined army. He fought well and played politics with the Europeans well. By 1797 he controlled most of Saint-Domingue. Then Napoleon sent 20,000 soldiers to quell the rebellion. Louverture was captured in died of maltreatment in a French jail. Back in Saint-Dominique, yellow fever broke out and ravaged the French Army so that Louverture’s lieutenants were able to drive the French off the island. In 1803 the former slaves declared independence and 1804 became the Republic of Haiti. After the United States, Haiti was the second republic in the Americas.

X - Independence in Latin America
We have seen different kinds of revolution in this chapter. We have seen revolutions of the mind, Enlightenment, Liberalism, Conservatism .We have seen women struggle for sexual equality. We have seen political revolution in Great Britain and the British North American colonies as the middle class demanded a larger share of government. We have seen the revolutions of social restructuring in the bloody French and Haitian Revolutions. Now in Latin America we will study another kind of revolution, a revolution of the creoles by creoles for the creoles.

In 1800, there were three broad classes of people in the Iberian colonies: first, there were about 30,000 Peninsulares (colonial officials born in Spain or Portugal); second, there were about 3.5 million Criollos or Creoles, (Europeans born in the New World, who were resentful of their second class status but were growing in wealth and power); and finally there were about ten million of the less privileged classes: slaves, indigenous peoples, mestizos and mulattos.

It was the Creoles who had benefited the most during the eighteenth century, as they established plantations and haciendas even though, it should be remembered ,that the mestizos were growing in numbers and influence – and wealth. And like the British colonists in North America, the Creoles resented their inability to share in the governing of the colonies. They too were affected by Enlightenment thinking, more along American lines rather than French. They wanted to displace the Peninsulares but unlike the Americans, had no intention of sharing new freedoms with lesser classes. So between 1810 and 1825, it was the Creoles who led movements that brought independence to the Iberian colonies and established themselves as Euro-American Elites or the dominant people in their societies. (In other words, they merely replaced the Peninsulares with themselves)

When Napoleon occupied Spain and Portugal, royal power was weakened in the Iberian colonies. By 1810, revolts had broken out in Argentina, Venezuela, and Mexico. The first and most serious revolt was not led by the Creoles. It was a Mexican peasant-parish priest, Miguel de Hidalgo (1753-1811), who rallied indigenous peoples and mestizos against the Spanish. He also terrified the Creoles when he called for a revolutionary-government, which would redistribute wealth, give equality to the peasants, and return of land stolen from the indigenous peoples. Creole forces soon captured and executed Hidalgo in 1811 but the rebellion to three more years to put down.

Colonial rule did come to an end in Mexico in 1821, when a Creole general, Augustin de Iturbide, (1783-1824) seized power in Mexico, pushed out the Spanish and proclaimed himself emperor of Mexico. He was a poor administrator, however, and was deposed in 1824 by his fellow creoles, who proclaimed a Mexican Republic. Two years later, the southern regions of Mexico declared their own independence and formed a Central American Federation which lasted until 1838, when it split into the independent countries of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica.

In South America the leader of the Creole revolutionaries was Simon Bolivar (1783-1830). Bolivar was born in Caracas in modern Venezuela and was a fervent republican steeped in the Enlightenment. Inspired by George Washington, he began the rebellion against Spain in 1811. Like Washington’s campaigns, the early days of the rebellion were difficult with many setbacks. But in 1819 he assembled an army that surprised and crushed the Spanish army in Colombia and quickly freed what is today Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. He then coordinated his efforts with the Creole leaders Jose de San Martin (1778-1850) in Argentina and Bernardo O’Higgins (1778-1842) in Chile. By 1824, Creole armies had rid South America of Spanish forces. Bolivar’s goal was to create a confederation like the United States and in the 1820s Venezuela, Colombia and Ecuador formed a federation called Gran Colombia, but it soon began to unravel. Bolivar was disgusted and declared South America ungovernable. He sadly died of Tuberculosis on his way to self-imposed exile in Europe.

Independence came to Brazil at the same time but in a different manner. When Napoleon occupied Portugal, the royal court fled to Brazil and ruled there. When they were able to return to Portugal in 1821, the king left his son Pedro to rule in Brazil. The next year Pedro heeded the demands of the creoles for independence and agreed to their demands. He refused his father’s command to return to Portugal and became Emperor Pedro I of Brazil (reigned 1822-1834).

It is crucial to remember that, in spite of Independence, the Creole elites did nothing to grant political rights to their social inferiors. As the Peninsulares returned to Europe, Latin American society remained as rigid and stratified as ever. However, one new class did arise, the Caudillos, which were military strongmen, who allied with the creoles and to whom (in return) the creoles gave military authority which they used to keep order. The new Creole states were essentially conservative: they did not abolish slavery; they supported the Roman Catholic Church and they took privilege for themselves at the expense of the lower classes.

XI - Nationalism and Nation Building

 

The last kind of revolution we shall study in this chapter is the revolution of Nationalism which became one of the most influential concepts of modern political thought. It is important to understand that the revolutions we have discussed (Glorious, American, French, Haitian and Hispanic) all helped to spread not only Enlightenment ideals but also the establishment of National States.  The word nation refers to a type of community that became especially prominent (or perhaps better said “self aware”) in the nineteenth century. At various times and places in history, individuals have associated themselves primarily with families, clans, cities, regions and religions. During the nineteenth century, however, European peoples began to identify with communities called nations. Members of a nation considered themselves a distinctive people, born into a unique community that spoke a common language, observed common customs, inherited common traditions, held common values and shared common historical experience. Often they honored common religious beliefs, but many times overlooked minor difference in religious belief (i.e. Roman Catholics and Lutherans in Germany) in order to unite as a political, social, cultural nation.

Nationalism is the political ideology (system of thought or belief) which holds that a nation is the fundamental unit of human social life. Advocates of nationalism insist that a nation must be the focus of political loyalty and nationalist leaders in the nineteenth century maintained that the members of their national communities had a common destiny that could best be advanced by organizing independent national states and pursuing shared national interests. The ideal was to have the boundary of each state include all people united to a nation, but as that was not always possible, especially in fading empires like the Austrian or Ottoman, in which conflicts in the name of national unity became more and more common.

Sometimes the unity of a nation transcended (cut across) cultural lines, as in the United States, Canada and some Latin American States. But most of the time nationalism focused on an appreciation for the experiences of a certain people and their pride in their roots (history) and their common cultural accomplishments.

During the late 18th century, for example, Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803) sang the praises of the German Volk(“people”) and their powerful and expressive language. Herder actually turned away from the Enlightenment idea of a universal understanding of the world and focused on individual communities and their uniqueness. This Cultural Nationalism emphasized historical scholarship, the study of literature and the spirit or essence of a particular people or community. For this reason the German brothers Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm collected popular poetry, stories, songs and folk-tales as expressions of the German Volk.

As the nineteenth century developed, Cultural Nationalism often became more strident and demanding. Its advocates demanded loyalty and solidarity from its members. (This was and is true among immigrants in states like Canada and the United States.) In lands where they were minorities or where they lived under foreign rule, they sought to establish independent states to protect and advance their growing national aspirations. A good example was in Northern Italy, which was Austrian control. Giuseppe Mazzini (1805-1872) formed a group called Young Italy, which agitated for independence from Austria in the north, and Spain in the south. Mazzini likened a nation to a family and a nation’s territory to the family home. Although he spent much of his life in exile, Mazzini inspired the development of nationalist movements in Ireland, Switzerland and Hungary.

The rise of nationalism also explains the rise of Zionism. Unlike Italians or Irishmen, the Jews did not occupy a defined physical area, but were scattered in communities all over Europe. As nationalism grew, so did suspicion of the Jews who didn’t fit into the ideal of many nationalist leaders. This fueled anti Semitic persecution in many European countries. In Russia and Poland Cossacks and army units led Pogroms against Jewish communities. (Pogrom is a Russian word which means devastation and pogroms were organized massacres or attacks on any minority group) During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, millions of Jews migrated to other European lands or to North America to escape pogrom violence.

Even in France (which might be called the mother of Enlightenment thinking), the Dreyfus Affair underscored these widespread anti-Semitic feelings. Alfred Dreyfus, a French army officer who was Jewish, was convicted by a military court in 1894 for spying for Germany. Although he was innocent and the case was overturned, Dreyfus was the focus of bitter debates about the trustworthiness of Jews in society. Among the reporters at the Dreyfus trial was Theodor Herzl (1860-1904) who was shocked at the anti-Semitic prejudice in the French court. Herzl became convinced that Jews could not live securely in Europe, so in 1897 he launched the Zionist Movement to establish a Jewish state in Palestine. As a result, Jews began to migrate to Palestine, but not until 1948 was a national Jewish state established.

 

XII - The Struggles to create National States

The Congress of Vienna
After the fall of Napoleon, conservative political leaders feared both revolution and nationalism - and were determined to prevent both. Meeting at the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815), the representatives of the “great powers” – Britain, Austria, Prussia and Russia – attempted to restore the pre-revolutionary world order, the ancien regime.

The guiding spirit of the Congress was Clemens von Metternich, the Austrian foreign minister, who led the congress in dismantling Napoleon’s empire, redrawing Europe’s national boundaries and returning sovereignty to Europe’s royal families. The overarching goal was to create a diplomatic order based on The Balance of Power first developed after the Thirty Years War that would hopefully prevent any one state from dominating the others.

In other words, Metternich and other European leaders tried to return Europe to the status quo (the existing state of affairs) as they were before 1789. A central goal was to suppress rising national consciousness in minority groups in the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. In spite of minor wars, this Balance of Power lasted until the dreadful slaughter of World War I, and was a key component of the 19th century governmental thinking in Europe, as conservative rulers used secret police, censorship and propaganda to prevent minority populations from rebellion.

The Greek War for Independence
The first major uprising was in 1821 when the Greek people rose in rebellion against the Ottoman Turks, who had been their masters since the mid fifteenth century. The Turks retaliated with horrible brutality (genocidal fury) which helped to win sympathy in European countries for the Greek cause. The English poet, Lord Byron, even joined the rebel army and died of fever in 1824 while fighting in Greece. With the aid of Britain, France and Russia, the rebels overcame the Ottomans by 1827 and became a nation in 1830.

The Revolutions of 1830
The Congress of Vienna had also restored the monarchy to France in the person of Louis XVIII, brother of Louis XVI, (the dead son of Louis XVI was counted XVII). Louis steered a middle course, creating a two-house legislature, limited suffrage and limited freedom of the press. But no one group was happy. The Ultra-Royalists wanted a return to the ancien regime; the Liberals wanted more rights for the middle class; the Radicals wanted a return to the republic; and the poor just wanted a job with decent living conditions. When Louis died in 1824, his brother Charles X, followed a more autocratic pattern. When he tried, in 1830, to resume an autocratic monarchy, the liberals and radicals revolted and Charles fled France. This time bloodshed was averted and the Lower House elected Louis Philippe, a cousin of Charles X and a supporter of the 1789 revolution, to be king.

It is very important to understand that what happened in France began uprising almost everywhere else in Europe and these rebellions soon followed in Spain, Portugal and some of the German states. These revolutionaries called for constitutional governments based on popular sovereignty. One the other hand, Belgium, Italy and Poland were wracked by nationalist uprisings which demanded independence and the formation of national states. By the mid-1830s all but one of these rebellions had been put down, but Europe’s aristocracy still didn’t get it. They did not realize that the day of royalty was ending.

 Success in Belgium.
The Congress of Vienna had reunited the Netherlands (Burgundy) with Belgium (strongly Catholic) under Dutch (strongly Protestant) control. When rebellion broke out in Brussels (the capital of Belgium), the Dutch king could not control the outbreak. He asked for help from his fellow monarchs, but they were far too busy with rebellions in their own lands to help. So in 1831 Belgium became a free state with a liberal constitution. It is important to note that all the major powers pledged guarantee Belgium’s neutrality. In 1914, this agreement would become a huge issue when German troops violated Belgian neutrality in the opening moves the First World War. [That violation would lead Great Britain to join France and Russia against Germany and the Austrian Empire]

Great Britain
The Revolutions of 1830 also frightened the British government. Even though Great Britain was a Constitutional Monarchy in the early 1800s, it must be remembered that only men with substantial property could vote (about 5% of the population). The unrest on the continent led to demands for a wider extension of suffrage. The Reform Bill of 1832 allowed well to do men of the middle class to vote. But still only a small percentage of males could vote. This led to the Chartist Movement which demanded regular elections, secret ballots and suffrage for all men. Although the Chartist Movement failed in the short term, workers continued to agitate for suffrage so that by the 1880s most adult males in Britain had the right to vote.

The Revolutions of 1848
In France, Louis Philippe tried to steer a middle course. Again, few were happy as many of the Bourgeoisie got richer and the poor got poorer. (Victor Hugo, in his preface to his novel, Les Miserables, sums this up by noting: So long as there shall exist, by reason of law and custom, a social condemnation, which, in the face of civilization, artificially creates hells on earth, and complicates a destiny that is divine with human fatality; so long as the three problems of the age—the degradation of man by poverty, the ruin of women by starvation, and the dwarfing of childhood by physical and spiritual night—are not solved…so long as ignorance and misery remain on earth, books like this cannot be useless.). In the late 1840s, a combination of economic slowdown, widespread unemployment, poor harvests and government corruption brought about the Revolution of 1848 which forced the abdication of Louis Philippe. When the government could not satisfy the various factions, fighting broke out with about 1,500 people dying in the bloodshed.

Finally, at the end of the year, the Second Republic was proclaimed with a new constitution granting many reforms. When elections were held, Louis Napoleon, the nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte, was elected president. He was able to appeal to the poor by convincing them that he championed social issues; and to the middle and upper classes in that his very name was linked with order, authority and the greatness of France. He guided France through a long period of prosperity and economic growth and would even go on to great power, eventually becoming Emperor Napoleon III, before he fell from power in 1870, after the short Franco-Prussian War.

The English lower middle classes had been satisfied by the Reform Bill of 1832, but it is important to understand that the violence begun in France spread across Europe. Mostly, it threatened the Austrian Empire where subject peoples clamored for constitutions and independence. Metternich was driven from Vienna. Uprisings also rocked cities in Italy, Prussia and German states in the Rhineland, Hungary, Poland and even Brazil. It is interesting to note that Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto was published in February 1848, just as the French rebellion began. By the summer of 1849, the veteran armies of conservative rulers had put down the last of the rebellions. Metternich returned to Vienna, but advocates of national independence remained active and would return to the scene in subsequent years. Many migrated to the United States.

XIII - The Unification of Italy and Germany

Since the fall of the Roman Empire Italy and Germany had been disunited lands. A variety of regional kingdoms, city states and ecclesiastical states ruled the Italian peninsula for more than 1,000 years and princes divided Germany into man than 300 semiautonomous jurisdictions. The Holy Roman Empire claimed authority over Germany and much of Italy, but the emperors had no power to enforce their claims. The Revolution of 1848 was felt strongly in Italy, when workers demanded radical change and nationalists campaigned for a united, independent Italy.

Italy
The unification of Italy came about when practical political leaders like Camillo di Cavour (1810-1861), Prime Minister to King Victor Emmanuel of Piedmont and Sardinia combined with nationalist advocates of independence. In alliance with France, he expelled Austria from most of Northern Italy. Then he benefited from the work of Giuseppe Garibaldi (1807-1882), a dashing soldier of fortune, who, with an army of about a thousand men outfitted in distinctive red shirts, who helped Sicily and Southern Italy throw off the non-Italian masters.

Garibaldi was only interested in uniting Italy, so in 1860 he met with King Victor Emmanuel near Naples and turned his conquests over to the king, which effectively crated the modern Italian State. During the next decade that last independent small states were absorbed culminating in 1870 with the Papal States. Italy was finally united.

Germany
Germany was hit hard by the 1848 revolutions with students demanding liberal reforms, a potato famine causing unrest among the peasants, and workers angry over losing jobs because of improvements due to the industrial revolution. Prussia was even forced, temporarily, to adopt a constitution. In late 1848, German delegates met in Frankfort to try to unite Germany. After much debate, the Frankfurt Assembly offered the crown of a united Germany to Frederick William IV of Prussia. To the dismay of all, Frederick turned down the crown because it came not from the princes of Germany, but from “the gutter.” Then he used the Prussian Army to force the Assembly to disperse.

In less than twenty years, however Prussia would unite Germany under the leadership of Otto von Bismarck. In 1862, this wealthy landowner was appointed Prime Minister of Prussian by King Wilhelm I. Bismarck was master of Realpolitik (the politics of reality). His great quote in his first speech as prime minister, “The great questions of the day will not be settled by speeches or majority votes – that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849 – but by blood and iron.”

Bismarck first expanded the Prussian army. Between 1864 and 1870 he intentionally provoked three wars – with Denmark, Austria and France – and whipped up German sentiment against the enemies. In all three conflicts Prussian forces shattered their opponent, swelling German pride. After the defeat of Austria, Bismarck gave generous terms to Austria to prevent her permanent enmity. In 1871, after the Franco-Prussian War, the Prussian king proclaimed himself emperor of the Second Reich, following the Holy Roman Empire (or First Reich), which embraced almost all-German speaking peoples except in the Austrian Empire.