Download Lucy Clarke GHXI Revision HT 2016 General XI revision HT 2016

Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
General XI revision HT 2016
General points about the era
-
-
RÉMOND claims that the French Revolution ‘inaugurated our era’
o French Revolution = shock to the system
o Also the ramifications of the Napoleonic era
 Reaction to it?
 Note Italians ripping up streetlights and parks
Modernisation?
o Does modernisation go hand in hand with democratisation?
 Note the issue of Germany for this
o Modernisation thesis is now largely discredited
 Entirely based on teleology
 Nations develop as they adopt more modern institutions, blah blah
blah
 Modern nations = wealthier, more powerful
 Modernisation = necessary due to need to update tech and stuff
 Idea that traditional cultural traits and religious beliefs become less important
as modernisation takes hold
 Also assumption that modernisation leads to governance dictated by abstract
principles!
o Linked to processes of urbanisation and industrialisation!
 And to rationalisation!
o Some argue that modernisation leads to democratisation!
 Massive problem with Germany
 Modernisation and economic development that results in mass political
participation?
o Problematic for Italy, say
 Tiny franchise
 Most of the nation was incredibly poor and backward
 Piedmont-Sardinia had the vast majority of railways for the entire peninsula
 Nation is formed by one very developed state taking over the others
 Unification arose from inequality!
 No national market, most trade foreign not internal
 South desperately poor
 V diff to Germany’s economic unity
 Hello Zollverein oh it’s like being back at IB all over again…
 It’s the need for communication and context-free communication
 BREUILLY notes that German unification occurred at the ‘high
water mark of economic liberalism in Europe’
o Increased trade with Britain
 Increased economic growth
o Germany =/= national economy but economic liberalsm was
a general policy
 I’ve asked whether weaker states bond to stronger
ones out of necessity?
o Note also economic development improved the means of
warfare
 Prussia
 Krupp steel works
 Those guns, what the fuck were those guns I
was always on about
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
Note the inevitability present in modernisation theory
 Was unification inevitable?
 Nope
 And that’s where we bring in contingency!
o Note that economic unification in England saw the decline of regional languages!
 It’s a question of practicality!
Note the delicate power balance of Europe post Vienna in 1815
o HUGHES calls the German Bund part of the ‘European safety system’
 Without a strong Germany, Russia and France both had an open road into
mitteleuropa
 Both cherished expansionist ideas
o What’s new tbh
o Different people played upon this (or, at least, I think that’s the dominant idea in
historiography of this period)
 Bismarck
 Cavour
o Note also the thing about multinational empires
 They had interests in keeping hold of them
 As did those empires that had external interests, like the Austrian interest in
Italy’s varying states!
 Definite external/internal dynamic for unification/ nationalism!
o Holy Alliance
 Prussia, Russia, Austria
 After the Vienna Treaty
 To restrain republicanism and secularism
 Potent defence against general wars between 1815 and 1914?
 METTERNICH made this his bastion of conservatism
 Against democracy, revolution and secularism
 You had to fight this off if you wanted to revolt as a subaltern nation or to
start a war to unify your states!
o Vormärz era = age of Metternich?
 Note Austrian and Prussian police states!
 Against liberalism
 Rising politicisation and radicalism in Germany during this period
 Burschenschaften!
 Note the 1819 Carlsbad Decrees!
o Impact of kotzebue’s murder
o The rulers left in charge of the states post Vienna were anti-liberal
 Note Italian princes ripping up Napoleonic streetlights and parks!
o
o
-
1830
-
-
Ollie, why did we do this and not 1848? Well, tbf to the man, we were going to do 1848 in the
last week before I lost my mind
o Lol
o
Who led these revolutions?
o France and Belgium: bourgeois concerns joined by the urban workers
Internal vs external dynamics
o Everyone follows!
Belgium
o Romantic revolution
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
o
-
-
 Led to actual change
Independence as crucial issue
 Flew their own flag
 influence of the 1789 Brabant Rev
Poland
o LESLIE: ‘last challenge of the Old Poland to the Russian hegemony in Eastern
Europe’
o Not a nation of equals
 Commonalty inferior to gentry at this point
France
o Note constitutional change comes out of it
o Lyon revolt of 1831
 Artisanal
 Their interests
 Workers take over
 Regionalism
o Note the disappearance of grain tariffs inside France over run up to 1830
 Only external barriers
 Angered the artisans
o Also mechanisation
 Risking local artisans
 Ruining equality of artisan and merchant
 The European market was selling labour, not skill
o More direct market between consumer and producer
o Bad for artisans
 Local issue, this one
 This is all to do with a new way of thinking about economics
o Classes
 Language of class and proletariat
 Revolutionary consciousness!
o Religion?
 Was there anticlericalism?
1848
-
-
‘springtime of the peoples’, said Ollie
o but how much was it about nation?
Began in Sicily and then spread across the continent
o Sicily’s was a nationalist one against Austrian rule, led by the King of Sardinia,
UNDER THE ITALIAN TRICOLORE
 Insurrectionary nationalism!
o But note that the republic was proclaimed in 1848 and only in Rome and Tuscany
Within the Habsburg empire you had ructions
o The subjected nationalities agitated for a national government
o Hungary organised itself on an autonomous basis
 Hungarians desperate for independence!
 Note their proud history!
 Formation of National Guard by young patriots (was 1848 always a
movement of young men?)
 Note poetry
o Sándor Petöfi
 WAR WITH AUSTRIA
 Hungarians had success!
o Battle of Pákozd (29th September 1848)
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
o Note leadership of Artúr Görgey
Austrians pled for Russian help
o In name of the HOLY ALLIANCE
o It’s all about power balances!
o Quelled the revolution, so suppressed the desired political
changes until 1867
 Wait, when did they make it Austria-Hungary?
 Not until 1867, that wasn’t
 Thanks Sisi!
International context = key
o In France, Provisional Government declares treaties of 1815 = no longer valid
 But they added that they accepted its territorial edicts!!
 Gave no support to any of the other revolutions!
All of them failed, except France
 In France you got the Second Republic and universal manhood suffrage
 But june 1848 saw a workers insurrection become the climax of the
disagreeements between the supporters of the république démocratique and
the république démocratique et sociale
o Followed by disillusionment among liberals?
 Demonstrated history was going to take a different course
 See the Roman Republic: no more Mazzinian ideas of an Italian
Republic!
 Someone else needed to lead?
o Like a monarch?
 See Victor Emmanuel!
o Or his men
 Cavour, Bismarck, etc
o New power systems instituted afterwards?
 See France
 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte etc etc
variegated kinds of revolution!
o In Belgium, Netherlands and Denmark you got peaceful reforms of existing
institutions
o But you had democratic insurrection breaking out in the capitals of three great
monarchies
 Berlin
 Paris
 Vienna
 Fear of revolution meant that the governments in these places failed to
defend themselves
 Note that you had German governments agreeing to the convocation of the
constituent assemblies of Berlin, Vienna and Frankfurt
 They all wanted to come up with democratic constitutions for
Prussia, Austria and Germany (note this last: a movement towards
unification on democratic principles)
o In the run up to the big deal you have to remember that the liberal third Germany had
had representative assemblies since 1815!
 Note ascendancy in Baden and Württemburg
 SIMMS: ‘the crisis of the ancien regime in Germany was thus primarily
fiscal-political, rather than socio-economic in nature’
 The absolutist governments had been subjected to blistering fiscal
and foreign policy critique in the public sphere!
o Already capitulated
 But there were still issues

-
-
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
o Socio economic crisis!
German Jacobins?
 Pan German cause
o Frankfurt vorparlament!
 But note the issue of divided revolutionaries
 And thus their strawfire funked and flared…
BREUILLY reckons that, in general, 1848 was not a nationalist event
o All the German states went different ways
o And some of the Italian ones too!
o No unified programme!
o Also he says that nationalism was just not a factor in Italy in 1848!

-
Nationalism and the rise of the nation state
-
-
Change in the rules of the game
Note growing cosmopolitanism
o You had young noblemen and cadets of the big aristocratic families in Italy, and
educated middle class grads who were responsive to the new opportunities that
societal change brought!
 Attachment to liberty of association!
o Beginnings of end to regionalism!
There are different kinds of nationalism
o Note two processes at work here
 Political (bound up with the cultural point)
 And structural transformation in society
 We’re going from agrarian society to industrial
 Industrial societies require context-free communication and also a
united language
o All about the requirements of a new world!
 Goes along with modernisation then? Maybe? I’m
always so so wary of that word
 An unconscious nationalism, moving towards a united world
 Note increased mobility of people
o So like from North to South in Germany
 Status and life situation changed for these people
 Fall into nationalism by default
o It’s a new world view
 The categories of the world
are changed!
 Economic development requires unity!
o Note the Bund and Zollverein start reshaping the concepts of
politics and society
 Different tenets!
 ZIMMER notes the way that nationalism was a way to negotiate
one’s place in a new world
o Extreme processes of change
o He writes in Remaking the Rhythms of Life that nationalism
was a fostering of new solidarities in the wake of losing old
ones!
 Urbanisation means that more and more of the
people you meet will be strangers!
 Continual remaking of your world
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

o
o
o
o
o
Nationalism used by Burghers in Ulm,
Friedrichshafen am Rhein and Augsburg to negotiate
their place in this new social pecking order
What is home?
 Heimat is a crucial concept
 What do you call your home?
 Relational idea
 The nation becomes a concept of home in the nineteenth century
 Note link to roots: where do your people come from?
o Link to history in the romantic sense of things!
 Note ZIMMER on finding a place for oneself in towns
Tension between political ideologies tied to unification
 Note that Mazzini stood for ‘authentic nationalism’
 But they were republican
 And also limited appeal because they had no economic programme
o Limited the appeal to the middle classes!
 And no social reform programme
 Admittedly, BREUILLY notes that his voice was very important in
moments of crisis
o Rome 1848-9, Milan March-April 1848
BREUILLY also notes that there’s a difference between separatist nationalism and
unification nationalism!
 Separatist nationalism like Polish cause had a much more recent
historiographical legitimation!
 Unlike, say, Germano-Italian model, which looked much further
back into the past to find justification for nationalism!
 He reckons it was much more powerful and significant in Poland than in
Germany or Italy!
 Something more defined to fight against, I guess?
Is there a difference between nation and nationality
 Politics vs cultural practices?
Note PORTER on that way that enacted Polishness and the Polish nation!
 ‘clash of alternative worlds’
 the ethnonation was not part of the politicised concept of the Polish
nation!
o Nation as deed etc etc
 These two didn’t come together until the 1870s-1890s
 This all goes together with the idea that BREUILLY has about nationalism
being more a political ideology than actually about nationhood!
 Polish nationalism began as a political idea, not a socio-cultural
phenomenon!
o Difference between ANTI-RUSSIAN private talk and
nationalist discourse!
 PORTER claims that Polish nationalism was phrased so that it could control
the masses and sustain hierarchy
 Romantic nationalism in Poland was the defining discursive framework for
the first half of the nineteenth century
 Very small minority
o But had a radical edge at that point!
 Social change and egalitarianism!
o ‘a challenge to existing networks of power’
 early Polish nationalism was rooted in insurrection!
 Reaction to third partition of 1795
 Poland as rhetorical problem post partition
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

-
-
-
Which acted as a corollary to a total lack of
sovereignty!
 Sejm abolished
 Ruble replaced the zloty
 Army disbanded
o So the restoration of the nation state
was vital to Polish nationalism
o Intellectuals made a nation that transcended territorial
boundaries!
 But note PORTER: ‘few writers in the 1830s and 1840s felt a need to discuss
the cultural boundedness of Poland’
 Not a cultural thing as much as a political foundation
 PORTER: ‘the nation was an ideal, a principle that gave meaning to history’
 Similar to Hungary:
o LASZLO PÉTÉR: ‘a common vision of the future, based on
a shared past’
o Avita constitutio = legitimation
 ‘the historic right argument, as an interpretation of
the Hungarian past, explained and forcefully
legitimised a vision of national individuality and
independence concerning the future’
 ‘lud’ defined as people
 note lefties in the 1830s and 40s choosing ‘nation’ as a term because of the
link to democracy
 Poland conceptualised as liberty
o Romantic, v romantic
o In Hungary and Poland, there is a contestation of what it is to be Hungarian or
Polish!
 In general, this is a theme across Europe: attempts to set the boundaries of the
nation
 In Italy, more about geography?
 Language = massive deal here!
o See Magyar terms for science
 Setting the agenda for progress and change as a
national thing
Note the particular milieu from which nationalism came
o Impact of the French revolution and Napoleonic wars
o JENKINS: ‘the structures and attitudes of this incipient bourgeoisie cannot therefore
be explained in terms of shared economic interests, but rather in terms of a
convergence of economic, social and political aspirations, each enjoying relative
autonomy’
Nationalism = inherently political
o BREUILLY calls it a political ideology
 But he doesn’t think it derives from any particular feeling of nationhood!!!
o ‘the very success of the concept of the nation lies in the fact that it was a distinctly
‘political’ formula, capable of mobilising behind it a variety of contradictory social
and economic aspirations’
o does nationalism fill a gap between capitalism and socialism like JENKINS implies?
o ‘the word nation is used to provide a wider legitimacy for ideologies generated by
class antagonism’ JENKINS
 goes along with other interests
cultural nationalism?
o RIALL notes the two threads of Italian nationalism!
 Cultural/scientific
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

From the Risorgimento?
o Did the Risorgimento make Italian unification happen?
 BEALES AND BIAGINI reckon that it was the
Risorgimento that made the decision about Piedmont
unifying Italy!
o But I suppose the international
situation was the mechanism?
 Plombières!
 Italians made choices?
o Note central Italian elites April
1859-maRCH 1860 were ‘where the
Risorgimento comes into its own’
 Elites helming political
change!
 Liberal, bloodless
revolutions
 Eg Baron Ricasoli in
Florence (PATRIOT)
o Ah, the plebiscites
 Tuscany and Emilia
 Note the impact of members
of the National Society in
this
o Note that 20,000 volunteers rallied
to piedmont’s army against Austria
in 1859, from other parts of Italy
 BEHIND THE CAUSE
 But was it the cause of
getting the Austrians out or
the cause of Italy?
o New central governments run by exnational society members!
o Note that Mazzinians rallie support
for the Sicilian revolt
 Which was, of course,
instrumental to the process
of unifying Italy!
o Cavour left with no other option?
o People clearly saw that Pidemont
was the one to rally around!
 By 1851, dream of Papacy
leading process was dead
 Sad Gioberti
 People started ralluying
around
 Manin (leader of 1848-9
revolution in Milan) and
other Mazzinians turned to
Piedmont!
 Turin aristocrat Pallavicino
started funding newspapers
and organisations for the
Piedmont-led cause!
 Also convinced Gioberti of
this parth
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

o
o
 political
Note romanticism here!
All about shared culture
 Note Hungarian and German vogue for ethnography
 The idea of a nation
 Note the ‘philological revolution’ that Laszlo Peter notes was ALL ABOUT
FINDING THE MAGYAR TONGUE
o WHERE DO WE COME FROM AND WHAT ARE WE?
o NOTE HERDER: NATIONS MUST SPEAK IN THEIR
OWN TONGUE
 And was then appropriated by politics!
o Note issue of limited appeal here
 Newspapers largely read by a middle class population with vested interests in
nationalism
 Clubs in Germany = largely for the middle classes
 And for men
o Note questions of language and literature!
 Questione della lingua in Italy!
 Massive surge in Italian cultural production!
 HERDER was big on the idea of nations speaking themselves in their own
tongue!
nationalism’s link to liberalism
o
o
-
And led Manin TO STATE
THAT UNITY UNDER
THE KING OF SARDINIA
WAS THE MODER
LIKELY OUTCOME AND
AN ACCEPTABLE ONE
(in 1854)
 These chaps are the ones
behind the National Society!
 ‘the society afforded a sort
of link between Cavour and
Garibaldi’ BEALES AND
BIAGINI
Note massive surge in Italian cultural production
 Opera
 Writing
But note the problem of language
 How significant could it be if only 22% of the nation
spoke the national tongue (1861 stat, Christ)
 Multiple different dialects
 V different from one another
 ‘there was a clear cut divide between the nation, who
spoke the official language, and the people’
BEALES AND BIAGINI
 But note much higher proportion of people
who could understand the tongue!
 This is a question of subjection and the ability to
maintain hierarchy
 Homogeneity: tool of power!
 Linguistic homogeneity =/= prerequisite for the
nation state?
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
I suppose I need to differentiate between liberalism and radicalism. That’s probably
quite a good idea.
o this is a big deal throughout the period, particularly the first half of the nineteenth
century!
 I suppose there’s a link here to be drawn to the idea of progress!
 Cf. Herder and his idea of dialectic and teleology!
 But note as ZIMMER does (or did, in that tute) that liberals were threatened
by democratisation
 Liberals were not egalitarian (see women. I mean.)
 Is this an upshot from 1848?
o HUGHES notes that in most German states during the nineteenth century THERE
WERE NOT DEVELOPED POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS
 No way to articulate dissatisfaction!
 Voiceless masses and then the politically interested classes as separate from
that!
 So note that nationalist institutions were a way to articulate dissatisfaction
 Gymnastics societies and rifle clubs of the Vormärz were cultural in
origin but they had an edge of opposition
o Had a part in creating an all-German consciousness, and in
weakening localism
 That last bit is important, really it is, because it’s a
structural change!!
o ZIMMER notes the way that urban liberals used a nationalist moral code to alter the
rhythm of communal life
 Idea of for the nation
 These liberals at the forefront of reform
 Huge part in modernisation of culture and society!
 He notes that ‘many provincial towns acted as power brokers in the
process of nation-state formation’ – built from bottom up!
o NINA ATHANASSOGLOU notes that the French liberals won the election in late
1827 largely due to their support for the Greek war of independence
 Whole noble oppressed cultures thing, big deal in popular culture and public
sphere across Europe
 But culture =/= politics, of course
Nationalism in oppressed states
o So if your nation doesn’t exist in territory, at the very least you can create it as a
transcendent thing
 Ethnoscapes!
 Imagined communities are vital here
 A sense of belonging to something that isn’t the oppressive dominant
culture of the empire
o Used as a politics of opposition!
 See Poland and Hungary
 Idea of the nation as DEED
 Polish nation itself stood for liberty!
o Because it did not then exist, it had been suborned!
France as the model for the modern nation state?
o Already established by the point that everyone else starts going for it
o But not a nation in 1789 because no conception of popular sovereignty, JENKINS
posits
 Is that what this is all about? The people translated onto the government?
 Does that hold for Germany?
 Or is it about limited popular sovereignty ie. Not absolutism?
o
-
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

-
Like you have plebiscites in Italy in Emilia and Tuscany in the late
1860s but it’s a limited franchise (of course)
 ‘the French did not become a ‘nation’ in the seventeenth century.. they did so
when events turned them into political actors in their own right, and when the
democratic movement against autocracy and privilege invoked the principle
of the sovereignty of the the people over their territory’ JENKINS
 god it’s my thesis all over again
 was the revolution all about the nation, then?
 Note that Bonaparte claimed the sovereignty of the people for legitimacy’s
sake
o What about Britain, is what I want to ask here
Traditional attachment of ‘modern’ to ‘nationalism’
o Does that hold?
o But it is worth noting the impact of Napoleon!
 JOACHIM WHALEY notes that Napoleon’s reorganisation of Germany, and
the effects of 1815, meant that the German states post-Vienna were
fundamentally different to those of the Habsburg Empire!
 They had modernised, unlike the Austrian empire
 Prussia had more in common with the German states than Austria did!
 Also, side point perhaps, but note that the german states were not
nearly as cohesively held together from above as the Austrian
Empire!
 The Bund was vital here
 HUGHES reckons that the Bund collapses because of the strength of
member states, not its flawed constitution!
o Need to be careful about the teleologism of ‘Vormärz’ as a
term!
o But he also points out that it was unable to cope with
change!
 Political and social effects of economic
modernisation!
 HUGHES: ‘immobilism seemed to be built into its
structure’
 See KARLSBAD DECREES OF 1819
o Devotion of the Bund to repression!
 HUGHES suggests that this
was the only uniting factors
from then on
o Metternich was terrified of clubs and
intellectuals lol
o In the Treaty of Paris, the ‘federative bond’ was emphasised!
 Not a national one
 That was French revolutionary talk!
 Widespread desire for a return to the Heiliges
Romisches Reich
 Bayern bans nationalist propaganda!
 Note that it maintained the sovereignty of each state
 Not the same as the HRR
 HUGHES indicates it was more of a German
thing
 But less of a state than the HRR
o No common law,citizenship,
currency or anything
o No common administrative ogans
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
o
HUGHES: Bund begins as extension of Austrian foreign policy
Did the Bund increase the variegation of Germany?
o Regionalism increased by development of clear states
o Power of conservatism – see 1819 Gentz’ call for tightening
up of article 13 of act of association
o South german states were reactionary-dominated
 V regional in their ideas
 V conservative
o But the bureaucracies were liberal
 Like Baden!
 HUGHES: pre-unification Germany = ‘odd spectacle’
o Administratively progressive
o Politically conservative
Does nationalism have to exclude others?
o PORTER argues no
 It does require boundaries, though
 See ethnography!
 You’re creating transcendent location
o See ZIMMER on the meaningful places we construct for
ourselves!
o Towns as Certeau-esque well ordered places?
Was nationalism a mass movement?
o Political ideology particular to certain groups (when practiced in certain ways)
 Politicised middle classes in Italy and Germany
o Protected their interests?
 Nationalism = bigger markets for free trade
 Economic benefits for the capitalist classes!
 In Italy, RIALL notes, this gained support
from some middle class young men who
were ‘often more interested in economics
than politics’
 Individualism
 Massive tenet of liberal nationalism!
o Attractive to those young men
who’d been educated in the
individualist principles of the
Aufklärung
o And who read novels
 Note romanticism was big
on the individual as well,
but in a different way!
 Thanks, Young Werther! All
about the unique self and its
sorrows
 Also good for the socially mobile!
 Elite in Hungary and Poland
o BREUILLY notes that the nationalist movement was
strongest among those polish groups that had the strongest
ties to the Old Poland
 Szlachta were a ‘very large and diverse element in
Polish society’ BREUILLY


-
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016


‘among the middling ranks of the nobility were
people with the capacity and inclination to seek a
restoration of historic Poland’ BREUILLY
 Szlachta were not interested in courting popular
support
 No reform programme!
 BREUILLY: ‘what was unique about restoration
nationalism in Poland was its close and concrete
links with what it sought to restore. This, as well as
the szlachta leadership, gave it its political
significance’
 Note that the political autonomy of Congress Poland
meant that the leaders of the szlachta could
challenge occupying power
 They did bring in some others, some radicals in exile
and in Warsaw, but largely the Polish national
movement remained limited to social grouping!
o Note the Magyar Nemzet in Hungary!
 Note the idea of the language being crucial
 Erroneous division drawn between the
supposedly Magyar-speaking elite and those
commoners that supposedly spoke the
languages of the rest of the empire… side
eye
 Politics of defence
o But less powerful than the Poles
 RJW EVANS notes this is
because of greater confusion
about who the Hungarians
actually were (as opposed to
the Austrians)
 But note that the cultural movement about language
became wedded to the political agenda of the elites
 Tied to social reform
o Wanted a civil society based on
legal equality
 PETER: ‘the critical factors that fortified
Hungarian nationalism were its openness to
newcomers and its ability to combine
successfully the philological revolution with
liberal social reform’
Politics of opposition?
 Framing narrative for progress
 Note that cultural associations like Burschenschaften provided a
basis for political mobilisation!
o Leaders of workers education societies and citizens’
associations (both of which preached all-German curricula
and popular sovereignty) were often leaders of political
parties in 1848!
 Gymnastic societies were very useful
support for 1848 apparently
 But did 1848 change anything is a crucial question,
tbh
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

-
-
Dissatisfaction with the conservative and unrepresentative
governments of Italy and Germany saw appeals to sovereignty of the
people
o With liberals being the ones to reform places (cf ZIMMER)
 Note Italian nationalism being bound up with a civilising mission
o ‘democratic gospel’ of Mazzini!
 Insurrectionary nationalism of the Poles! Very important
Was nationalism influential in terms of real change?
o Foundation for political movements
 Note the cultural vision of nationhood across Europe
 Arts celebrating belonging to a united culture!
 Popular with middle classes in Germany and Italy
o Note that unification into nation states wasn’t the only path that could have happened
o Pragmatism
 Cavour turning over to it – smart move
 Mental horizons had been narrowed to those of nationalism!
 Note Rochau’s realpolitik: in order to succeed, regimes needed to ally
themselves with progress or else fall from power!
 HUGHES notes that by 1848 liberal nationalism had become the only
available alternative to the prevailing system of bureaucratic absolutism’
 Also, BREUILLY notes that the opposition of the states to both
liberal and nationalist ideas meant that people saw them as being
fundamentally linked
o Strengthened the constellation of ideas
o Nationalism in German unification?
 Was the national movement as a whole opposed to the shape of unification?
 Note that the Reich was illiberal
o THANKS BISMARCK
 Also, was the national movement in Germany unrepresentative of
german feeling?
BREUILLY notes that there was a tension between contingency and necessity in formation of
nation states during the period!
o Note internal and external forces in the process of state building
 BREUILLY argues that the changes in the german lands could only have
occurred in a particular European context
 But what is that particular context, I have to ask
o I suppose it’s at least partially about the ramifications of the
Vienna settlement!
o And the balance of power that resulted!
o Also, I suppose, the general atmosphere that resulted from
the Napoleonic era
 BREUILLY notes that emphasising the kleindeutsch version of events (and
putting the role of Prussia above all else is a grafting of nationalism onto the
Hohenzollern tradition
 There were in reality many other options than the Reich of 1871
o Note the Mitteleuropa idea
 Whole Habsburg empire to join the Zollverein and
Bund
o Note also ‘the third Germany’
 Plenty of other states than just Prussia and Austria
 Grossdeutsch schools see the Austro-German war of 1866 as
excluding Austria from where she should be
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
But past Clarko has noted, Austria was also excluded from
the Zollverein, so I guess the question is, crucially, how big a
deal was the economic unity of Germany?
o Grossdeutsch is all about whole German
 Language problem!
 BREUILLY also asks if the Bund needed Prussia for the development of
strong economy and security against outside states
 Necessity of nation?
 Note the use of war in the unification of Italy
 Cavour used it very deftly (I wonder what the significance of his
status and his class are in this; the fact that he was able to take/use
power is significant)
 Plombières was incredibly potent
o Cavour playing the power balance of Europe for his own
ends!
 However, BEALES AND BIAGINI note that it was not the war of 1859
(against Austria, with the help of the French) that finally chose the shape of
the new Italy, but the choice of the Italian people
 Because of the plebiscites in the central states?
o The wider European system is a major player in all of this
 Everything is linked together
 Desire for peace?
 Note the issue of multi-national empires like the Habsburg and the Russian
(and, I guess, the Ottoman)
Were the figures of unification nationalist heroes?
o Probably not, despite their enshrinement as such
o I think garibaldi is probably the big exception to this!
Impact of 1848?
o Blunt nationalism?
 Or did it just change its shape?
 Note in France the state had changed completely!
 V clear that Italian unification wasn’t going to be republican in bent
o Bye bye Mazzini
The rise of Prussia
o Note the Great Elector Frederick was the one who completely transformed Prussia
into a kingdom in 1701, with a modern army
o Prussia didn’t go to war until 1806
 Couldn’t keep up?
 And then collapsed at Jena-Auerstedt
 Reduced to a rump state at Tilsit by Napoleon!
 ‘but it came away determined to reform itself in order to regain its
place as a great power in the European system’ DWYER
o at Vienna (thanks for defeating France) IT GOT BACK ITS
FORMER BOUNDARIES AND NEW TERRITORIES
o DWYER says this meant it was better prepared to deal with
the modern world
 Man, war shapes the world
o New territories: Upper Silesia coalfields
o Factors in its rise
 ‘organising and military genius’ of its rulers (the Hohenzollerns, I assume)
DWYER
 efficiency of Junker-officered army
 note that 90% of Prussian nobility = officers
 decline of imperial influence in Germany
o
-
-
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
-
 reforms
 sheer good luck?
 CENTRALISATION OF THE STATE
o Note political lethargy in Prussia!
o Frederick William I wanted independence and self sufficiency
o Okay, note that Prussia’s involvement in all wars in 1800s was as aggressor, for
specific territorial gains!
 But note, as DWYER does, that expansionism was not peculiar to Prussia
 ‘not only did Europe’s statesmen generally consider it necessary to
expand in order to survive, territories were considered just
compensation for the cost of war outlaid by the winning power’
 expansion as key part of Prussian state policy
o Prussian reformers in Napoleonic era = enlightened nationalists?
 Note abolition of feudalism
German unification
o Note the 1840 Rhine Crisis: demonstrated the primacy of foreign policy? SIMMS
 Appeal of the ‘third Germany’ to Prussia fro help against the expanding
French!
 Metternich wouldn’t help
o Wanted to avoid provoking france
 Delicate system of interrelated states
 ‘only Prussia, once again, showed any signs of military preparedness
to defend the settlement of 1815 in the west’ SIMMS
 but note the massive surge in nationalist feeling
 because facing possibility of another French subjection!
 See Niklas Becker’s ‘sie sollen ihn nicht haben, den freien deutschen
Rhein’
o Set to music 200 times!
 War didn’t break out, but it transformed the german political scene?
 ‘accelerated the emergence of a liberal bourgeois nationalist public
sphere in Germany generally, and most significantly in Prussia’
 note LIBERAL GEOPOLITICS
o like that of David Hansemann
 ‘the german empire must be mighty and strong if it is
to uphold Prussian and German independence; for
we have dangerous neighbours in east and west’
 noted the internal cohesion of France
 made it dangerous!
 Also noted the lack of the Polish buffer since 1795!
 Third partition yo
 Liberal nationalists scorned the Bund (while Metternich saw it as the
solution to the issue
o Diversity meant weakness
o Can you link this to the economic disparities?
 This entire situation exposed how weak the western defences were!
 And in general the paralysis of the Bund’s member
states in the south, and the Austrians were ‘cursed
with a cantankerous Hungarian Diet and crippled
with a massive debt’ – couldn’t act! (SIMMS)
o Focussed wrath on the Bund! And on METTERNICH!
 THE BUND COULD NOT DEFEND ITSELF
 Only Prussia had demonstrated itself able to
do so!
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
‘the writing was thus on the wall’
SIMMS
o need for greater confederacy when it
came to military defence!
o ‘started a process of convergence
which was not even complete by
1866, still less 1850’
 emerging liberal nationalist public sphere
increasingly recognised Prussia alone could
guarantee political integrity of Germany
against external threats!
o One deputy, incredibly given he was
a southern liberal, of the
Württembergian Landtag conceded
that only Prussian military system
had saved the day in the Rhine
Crisis!
Also, Habsburgs no longer seen as the guardians of the Bund
 Both unwilling to help and unable to
 Austrian military expenditure = too high for
her fiscal political structure!
o Problem of Hungary
 Opposing change and stuff
 Metternich unwilling to risk
getting political unrest
o Multinational empires, man
o Decreasing influence from there
Restarted the rapprochement between the national movement and
Prussia!
o Recognition that this was the only way forward?
o Also not that this meant there were increasing liberalising
pressures on Prussia!
 ALONG WITH THE PRESSURE OF NEEDING
TO FUND THE ARMY BETTER
 ‘fiscal-political deadlock’ had to be broken!
SIMMS
 insertion of a liberal wedge!
o Demanded change to state-society
relations!
o
o


Religion
-
-
Alright key question: what is religion?
o #NINIANSMART
o but seriously
 what is the relationship between religion and the state
 what are the practices that make up a religion
 what is the relationship between religion and society
 RENÉ RÉMOND notes the relationship between civil society and
religion!
o Different to political class (note WEBER on this sort of
thing)
BLACKBOURN: ‘what is striking about that century is the sheer persistence of the church’
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
Increasing use of the concordat
 BLACKBOURN sees this as an increase in papal and clerical power
Was Europe the only continent to be wholly Christianised, as RÉMOND claims?
o ancien regime = alliance of throne and altar?
o States = confessional
 thanks to cuius region, eius religio
o but French revolution = breach in this
 ‘for the first time in a European society, belonging to a denomination would
no longer be a measure of individual rights or a condition of citizenship’
RÉMOND
 Declaration of rights reduced religion to just another opinion and gave
toleration
 Destruction of link between Catholicism and political society!
 Citizenship no longer dependent on religion!
o All citizens are equal
 So the Catholic church in France could no longer claim to be
representative of the French nation
 MCLEOD notes that the main victim of the concordat was the constitutional
church
HUGH MCLEOD notes that Christendom was where there were close ties between church
and state power!
o Laws of land = based on Christianity?
o Every member of society assumed by default to be Christian
however, during the nineteenth century there was lots of debate over church and state
o because of political changes
 rise of liberalism
MCLEOD sees Christendom’s decline happening in three stages
o 1. Toleration of variety of Christianities
 growth of liberty of conscience!
 Note that German Catholicism had multiple strands!
 I’ve noted BLACKBOURN pointing out that 1837 in Cologne was a
turning point, but I’ve got no fucking clue what I was on about there
o New forms of piety
 1844 mass pilgrimage to Holy Shroud in Trier!
 Typical high Catholicism
 Attempts to bring in children increased
 Decreased average age of confirmation
 Pre-1850, church wasn’t really controlled by the
state
 But after, church seen as the state’s enemy
stability (at least, I think that’s what my
writing says)
o New generation of ultramontanes in
Mainz and Eichstätt
 Note that Jesuits and similar orders were allowed to hold large
missions on German soil post 1850 (please check this again for more
detail)
o ‘the resurgence of popular piety therefore went hand in hand
with the revival of clerical organisation and ambition’ in
Germany BLACKBOURN
 popular piety in Germany in the period = variegated!
o Note that SPERBER claims that the German Catholic
Church was in dire straits in the 1820s!
o 1850 = beginning of German economic boom
o
-
-
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

-
rural to urban migration brought in a bunch of
Catholics to cities
 self conscious CATHOLIC WORKING
CLASS!
o 2. Open publication of anti-Christian ideals
 see Shelley
 also note the French revolution’s anticlericalism!
o 3. Separation of Church and state
o 4. Loosening of ties between church and society (Society =/= the state)
 what is the Kulturkampf?
 The struggle of civilisations
 Out of the period, but significant to remember nonetheless
 Note the popular movement against it
 And also BLACKBOURN: ‘what was clearly at stake was a way of
life’
 Priest = defender of the disenfranchised against the privations of the
new order?
 BLACKBOURN notes that the Kulturkampf demonstrated the unity
of liberalism and state was the enemy of Catholicism
note the impact of social change on religion
o social change edits people’s minds and the socio-cultural structures that make up their
worlds
 hello individualism on the increase
o religion is part of identity
 SPERBER notes that catholic Germans have always been distinct from
protestant Germans
 North West Germany = mixed religiously and economically
o Largely similar though, in that it as socio-economically
advanced
 By 1880 the Catholic Church in the region was
established under an ultramontane framework with
an ‘unprecedented degree of popular support’
SPERBER
o note religion can be a cultural defence, as BRUCE does
o STEVE BRUCE notes the movement from community to society during the period
 Note that the first is religiously homogenous, while society connotes the
religiously multiple nation state!
o increased social cleavage during the nineteenth century!
 Note Engels’ Condition of the working Class in England (1844)
 Social cleavage in Germany
 Industrialisation = patchy
 Social tensions between agrarian and artisan groups (SPERBER
notes in Nordrhein Westphalia)
o ‘unruly social atmosphere’ SPERBER
 Repeated shafting of the working classes and the poor
 Note that priests were doing this as well
o Expectation of priests speaking out on their behalf, but ‘the
official clergy identified with the possessors’ MCLEOD
o In England, the clergy had been the chief beneficiaries of
land reform!
 They were getting increasingly richer while the poor
were getting poorer
 Also association of priest with increasingly harsh
laws because priests were often magistrates!
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
In France, MCLEOD notes that the church was not
indifferent to the struggle of the poor, but refused to see
radicalism as the answer to it!
industrialisation has an effect on religion in England, I remember writing about this!
And urbanisation!
 BRUCE notes that ‘the people of the towns and cities were more thoroughly
divided into the godly and the ungodly, with class emerging as an important
issue. With the exception of the catholic church, which in England and
Scotland retained the affections of the poor, religion was more appealing the
higher one’s social status’
Note patterns across Europe of dechristianisation among the working classes
 Alienated from the church
But at the same time, increased middle and upper class support for the church!
BLACKBOURN: ‘it may be worth noting that in countries and regions in which
catholics felt themselves part of a beleagured group in social, denominational,
cultural or linguistic terms, the church was often able to put itself forward
successfully as a popular force’
 Ireland
 Poland
o I suppose they were fighting off Russian orthodoxy and
Prussian Protestantism?
 Industrial areas in
o Nordrhein Westphalia
o Belgium
o Luxembourg
o Eastern France
 Dynamics of struggle and oppression
 All linked with the multiconfessional nature of Europe at the time!
I mean, it’s always the question of how significant is religion to society and society’s
mores
 And its structures!
 Go back to approaches notes, seriously
 Okay, so DAVID HEMPTON argues that the rise of pluralistic religious
society in the nineteenth century saw a short term increase in the social
significance of religion (goes along with the evangelical thing at the time, I
guess) but that ‘ironically, the rise of a more voluntaristic and competitive
religious environment in England helped erode some of the conditions that
had nurtured its own development’
 He argues that England was markedly different
 Note also the need for administrative restructuring!
 Decrease in coercive power of the church
 Increase in propertied interests?
 Note that in Ireland, folk Catholicism was largely outside the influence of the
clergy
 Based in the home and around pilgrimages
 PETER VAN ROODEN notes that there was a change in the character of
Dutch Christendom
 Church in the early seventeenth century had been a public one, tied
to state and society
 But growing religious heterogeneity
o Post 1815 the central Netherlands government attempted to
make the roman Cathoic Church of former Austrian
Netherlands an institution devoted to nation building
 Hello hello Belgian Revolt of 1830
o
o
o
o
o
o
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

-
Post 1830 split, North Netherlands = largely
Protestant
 Note that Catholicism was one of the associations that saw a rise in number
in Germany in the nineteenth century
 A way for the laity to organise itself
o Bolstering of the priest’s pastoral function!
Impact of political change?
o Is religion allied with a particular political credo?
 Note SHERIDAN GILLEY ON Irish Catholicism
 Ireland’s Catholicism ‘forged in the fire of suffering’
 Catholicism and nationalism in Ireland were bound together
o 1823 saw Catholic Association form
o first mass democratic movement in modern world?
 Called for mass catholic emancipation throughout
the British Isles
 Claim that ‘Irish Catholic anticlericalism was the dog that did not
bark’
 Irish and Catholic = the same thing?
o This linkage was one that came together over the nineteenth
century?
 Great Famine = watershed (BUT WHICH FAMINE
DID SHE MEAN, I DIDN’T WRITE IT DOWN.
1798 OR 1845? FECK.)
 INCREASE IN REGULAR MASS CHURCH
ATTENDANCE
 Despite stereotypes about Ireland and
religion, this hadn’t been a thing before,
apparently
 Famine also increased the proportion of priests to
population
 Note the reforms of Paul ‘the prudent’ Cullen
o Major figure in post-Famine move
away from Gaelic traditions
 Imposed Roman discipline on the Irish
church
 ANTI-RADICAL POLITICS
 Larkin’s devotional revolution
 Took on the roman model
 Religion under direct clerical control
o GILLEY sees this as the counterpart
to ultramontanism
 Emphasis on papal authority
 Destruction of the Gallican tradition in the
Irish church (bye bye French influence!)
 GILLEY: ‘the devotional revolution was a
very modern thing in the conspicuous
consumption of the mass produced religious
artifacts through which it found expression’
o Like the obligatory Sunday best!
 Note that MILLER sees the movement towards piety
as ultramontanism (which transformed the Irish
church, but was ineffective in France???)
 KEENAN sees a Tridentine Evolution, not a
devotional revolution
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016


 Whatever the fuck that is
 Basically, Ireland became more religious across the nineteenth
century
o Irish clergy = local agents for nationwide movements
 Like catholic emancipation in the 1820s
 And the repeal of the Union in the 1840s!
 One Fenian described parish priests as ‘the
embodiment of hostility to England’
 Note that Paul Cullen was concerned with the plight of the poor
 He was also pro-separation of church and state
 In same camp as Pio Nono bc supported calls to disestablish the
protestant Church of Ireland
Note Catholicism in much of Europe became committed to the restoration of
the old order
 And hence liberal, radical and socialist movements acquired a sharp
anticlerical edge!
 Religion or lack thereof got tied to other causes!
o Right-left divide
 Due to workers inheriting anti clericalism!!!
o Education = major staging ground for conflict
 Note that in Germany and the Netherlands the Catholic minority
(Against the verzuilig or mobilisation of masses, and therefore
MULTIPLE SUBCULTURES) was regionally concentrated and
cohesive
o While protestants remained politically divided!
o So there’s a definite question here about modernisation and
social change and their effect on religion!!
 German Catholics and socialists had shared religion and a
Weltanschaaung among themselves
o From whence their definitions came!
Does religion ally itself with nation?
 Note failure of Netherlands to make the Catholic church a national
one – hence 1830 Belgian Revolt
 Note that Declaration of Rights in France meant that CATHOLICS
HAD TO CHOOSE BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE,
BETWEEN FRANCE AND ROME
o Note the forcing of clergy to take oaths of loyalty to the
constitution!
 Even the Concordat didn’t restore the position of the
church
 RÉMOND: ‘reestablishing relations does not
mean restoring them’
 The coronation of the Duc d’Orleans =
secular ceremony
 NOTE THAT ULTRAMONTANISM WAS ASSOCIATED WITH
ANTI-LIBERALISM
o ‘if the state shirked its religious duties, it deserved neither
trust nor obedience; the state that did not proclaim its
religion loud and long was an atheist one’ RÉMOND
 religion as driving focus for politics, due to the way
that these men saw religion as the foundation of
society!
 RÉMOND: ‘peoples of catholic tradition whom the vicissitudes of
history had subjected to the foreign domination of schismastic or
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
-
heretical beliefs saw loyalty to Peter’s See as a means of preserving
their national identity’
o POLAND
o IRELAND
o Also note Italians dreaming of the Pope leading their
unification
 Idea of the holy nation =/= a thing in this period
o Symbiosis of nation and religion
o Note the opposition of German liberals to ‘backwardness’ of Catholicism
 Traditional, though, is a ‘weasel word’, notes
o Note also that Germans distrusted Catholic loyalty to the nation state
 Because of the other loyalties they had
 Catholic religion = threat to nationhood?
 Clash between liberal nationalism and its progress (because the
nation state = progress forward!)
 And the backwardness of Catholicism
o Specifically ultramontanism I imagine
 Feeling also that Catholicism was the religion of the uneducated!
 Also belief that the position of women in holy order was seen as the ‘perfect
symbol of backwardness and irrationality’
 Women drawn into Catholic display
 Were women given a space in it that nationalism lacked?
o I’d be tempted to agree with myself here
 Liberal tendency to characterise Catholic crowds as female
o Note that Pio Nono said catholic liberalism was ‘that fatal system that dreams of
reconciling two irreconcilables – church and revolution’
 I guess this demonstrates the apparent entanglement of liberalism with the
revolution, but I wonder if this was just in minds? Hmmmm, history of ideas,
mate
o Liberal anti-clericalism = particular view of the world
 Note that German liberals wanted to break the power of the priest
 In education, for one thing
 Create a model labour force?
 Liberalism is a social project, remember
o But is Ultramontanism the counter to it, directly?
 Belief in progress = what united the middle and upper classes in Germany,
says BLACKBOURN
 But, as a side point, does nationalism exist without the idea of
progress? Something to think about
o Essentially, as MCLEOD notes, ‘in the polarised societies of the nineteenth century
and the first half of the twentieth, sectarianism provided for large numbers of people
the strongest basis for their social identity’
 ‘this was the age of the self-built ideological ghettos’ MCLEOD
Who does religion appeal to?
o Note in Ireland, protestants attempted to get the poor onside
 ‘soupers’ who handed out free soup!
 GILLEY: ‘the Irish Church Missions can be interpreted as a last valiant
attempt by Protestant clergy to become the instruments of modernisation’
o But MCLEOD notes that the Devotional Revolution gave piety a popular edge in the
1850s-1870s
 Cult of Sacred Heart etc
o BLACKBOURN notes that Catholic communities in Germany were resentful and
peripheral in 1871
 Largely rural!
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
Note also that Ultramontanes sided politically with the peasant in Germany
Note secularising currents in Germany were mainly among the bourgeoisie
 Working classes remained religious in their terminology!
Relationship between modernisation and religion?
o GILLEY notes that modernisation in Ireland occurred due to ultramontanism
 Because increase in popular education
 And separation of church from state
o Does modernisation necessarily result in differentiation and greater individualism
 Probably
 So what does that do for religion?
 Take NW Germany: mixed economically and religiously!
o But largely similar in that it was socio-economically
advanced!
o But by 1880 the Catholic Church in the region was
established under an ultramontane framework with ‘an
unprecedented degree of popular support’ SPERBER
Impact of the French revolution?
o RÉMOND: ‘on the eve of the Revolution all European societies were still
confessional; everywhere religion was intimately interwoven with the life of society,
allied with the ruling power and legitimising it, a presence in all collective activities,
governing social existence as well as private conduct’
 But after you have laïcité which excluded churches from the exercise of
political and administrative power
 Did this extend across the Empire?
Ultramontanism?
o MCLEOD sees it as resistant to the modern world
 Dedicated to the faith of the common people?
 Hmm, how far is this true?
o Post 1830, French clergy turned beyond the mountains
 Original movement of lower clergy (who were increasingly drawn from the
peasantry)
 But by 1850 lots of bishops were in on the party too
 Determination to protect Catholic group from forces of Protestantism and
rationalism!
 Big on the supernatural?
 Revival of religious orders
 The structures of faith and belief!
o Expression of belief in state religion and in church’s independence from state
authority
 Anti-liberalism?
 Note feeling that ‘the revolutionaries unpardonable sin being to have
wanted to break with tradition’ in France RÉMOND
 RÉMOND: ‘the Revolution’s religious policy had thrown the
catholic Church into the camp of the counter revolution’
o Pope Pius VI condemned the Declaration of rights
 Note that the concordat was Napoleon’s typical chicanery
o The restoration
 Feeling (in France?) that the first step to reviving society was religion
 Because for these Catholics, religion was tied to society!
 In Italy return of the princely dynasties meant return of the Church’s secular
powers
o Piedmont-Sardinia
o Naples
o Papal states
o
o
-
-
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
With stronger reasons because fall of Napoleon
meant the restoration of the Pope’s temporal power
 ‘as there was a total merging of his spiritual
authority and his temporal sovereignty’
RÉMOND
 for the Habsburgs, Catholicism = federating element for the associated
peoples of the empire, and the basis of legitimacy for the emperor!
 Principle of legitimacy across Europe = DIVINE AUTHORITY
o Note the pact of the Holy Alliance at the Congress of Vienna
 Holiness = strong idea
 Attempts in 1817 for a new concordat fail
 Because the tie had been cut, says RÉMOND!
o FAILURE OF A TOTAL RESTORATION AFFECTED
OPINIONS OF THOSE WHO’D WANTED IT
o Turned intransigent
 Eg. La Mennais
 And Görres
o These men were traditionalists!
These traditionalists turned a different way politically
 ‘if the state shirked its religious duties, it deserved neither trust nor
obedience; the state that did not proclaim its religion loud and long was an
atheist one’ RÉMOND
ultramontanes repudiated Josephism (Austrian catholic tradition) and Gallicanism
 Gallicanism had banned the interference of Vatican in France’s politics
 Both believed in autonomy of national churches
Ultramontane = beyond the mountain
Was ultramontanism a complete and coherent system of Catholicism? (RÉMOND
says yes)
Note that liberalism to ultramontanes = enemy
 Free enquiry = destroyer of faith
 Hence all modern philosophical systems were embodiment of liberalism
 Pope = manifestation of principle of authority and antithesis to free enquiry
Ultramontanism = all about truth?
Note the ‘cult of the sovereign pontiff’
 Impact of unfortunate popes during the nineteenth century
 Also long lived ones
 Pius IX and Leo XIII
o Both had a plicy of increasing links between centre and the
churches of the whole world
 A policy aided by modernisation
 Railways, communications etc
Determination to emulate roman practices!
 Eg Veuillot’s ‘Parfums de Rome’
But note that this wasn’t just an intellectual thing, it had a popular dimension
 RÉMOND: ‘ultramontanism spoke as much to the heart as to the intellect’
Ultramontanism = view of society as a whole
 Anti-1789’s achievements/results
 Anarchy, individualism
 UM called for a return to the mediaeval institutions which had structured the
state and supposedly kept people happy
 All of this is built upon the idea of religion being central to society as a
whole!!
 Form of integralism, reckons RÉMOND
Very reactionary
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016


-
-
Anti democracy, as democracy countered divine authority
Pro hierarchy as that was the will of God
 Equality wasn’t what he wanted. Christ.
o Note their claims of a mediaeval golden age
Women and religion
o Note the domestic thing in England at the time
 Mother responsible for the socialisation of children etc
o BLACKBOURN notes that revival of religious congregations was female dominated
in Europe as awhole
o Note women finding a space in German ultramontanism
o Women tended to show greater devotion to Catholicism than men, across Europe
 WEAPON OF THE WEAK, notes BLACKBOURN
 Possibility of self-affirmation in male dominated world
o Increasing number of nuns across the century, interestingly
o Note Michelet’s criticism of religion’s influence on women!
 But despite his vitriol, they often took part in religion without official
sanction (or against it!)
o MCLEOD notes that women were more active in religion than men
o In france, 54% of girls (against 22% of boys) were taught in schools run by religious
orders!
o Church = place for women to meet friends!
Note Friedrich Wilhelm III of Prussia attempted to unite the Lutheran and Calvinist crhuches
o Similar unions in Baden, Palatinate and other states
o But the Prussian one was unique
 Imposed from above
 By the monarch
o I’ve written ‘all sounds like a bit of a snafu, tbh’
o Prussia wasn’t united
Romanticism
-
Massive change?
o ‘the great romantic revolution that shook European culture to its foundations in the
late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries’ BLANNING
classic characteristics =
o emotionalism
 emotional authenticism
 apprehension, horror, terror, awe – ones experience in confronting
the new aesthetic categories of the sublimity and beauty of nature
o introspection
o sacralisation
o cult of genius
 Romanticism assigned a high value to heroic individuals!
 Note the tension there between the ‘new’ view of French romantics
and also the idolisation of Napoleon
o See David
o Also, tbh, see the Beethoven debacle over the titling of the
Eroica!
 Individual imagination as critical authority free of classical notions of art
o originality
o self expression
 SPECTOR notes that personal expression is very clear in Delacroix!
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
Kierkegaard: ‘I must first protest against the notion that romanticism can be enclosed
within a concept; for romantic means precisely that which oversteps all bounds’
introspection
o Rousseau: ‘it is the history of my soul’
 Vital depth
 Looking within
 V much the opposite to Descartes
 Reaction to the new philosophical tradition of the Aufklärung
o Movement away from ‘cold’ reason!
o The classicism of the Enlightenment
o Hegel: ‘absolute inwardness’
Passion
o Music felt to be the path to emotion
 BLANNING: ‘what was new was the greater emphasis placed on sound and
originality at the expense of form and tradition’
 New expressive (NOT MIMETIC) aesthetic
 Had to come from inside the composer’s heart
o Note Schiller felt that humans were impervious to rational argument
 Could only be affected through feelings
 Reason cannot explain everything!
o See visual art
 Delacroix’s Death of Sardanapalus
 SPECTOR: ‘the painting represents a consummate example of
romanticism, an extraordinary moment even within the passionate art
of Delacroix’
 Inspired by Byron
o Note he was a total egotist
Genius as new ideal
o Highest type of human
o Ideal of self tuition!
o Note the sacralisation of creativity
 BLANNING: ‘one final ingredient was needed before the musical superman
could emerge. This was sacralisation, the process by which culture lost its
representational and recreational foundation and became an activity to be
worshipped in its own right’
 Christ, this is where Tom gets his ideas, clearly
 Art = the deity itself
 Beauty as substitute for god!
o Popular with dissatisfied intellectuals
 Schiller: ‘only through Beauty that man makes his way to freedom’
 Liszt was big on the redemptive power of music
o He also thought that art was a predestined vocation
o Beethoven was the archetypal tortured genius
 BLANNING: he ‘personified and advanced romanticism’
 ‘cri de coeur’ of his will in 1802
 against his hearing loss
 all he wanted was his art
 note the Eroica
 vitally new in terms of form
o long, difficult
o caused consternation
 note that it was originally called Bonaparte but when Napoleon
declared himself emperor Beethoven scratched it out
 Liszt saw Beethoven as the great original
o
-
-
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
 ‘fire which guided the Israelites through the desert’
sacralisation of music peaked at Wagner
musicians/composers = ‘high priests of this secularised religion’ BLANNING
 press reported on them
 we know way too much about Wagner
 festival theatre at Bayreuth = temple to music
Rejection of the modern world?
o Anti-convention and rules
 Sexual transgression?
o Rousseau, the plain clothed, anti convention rejecter of the court = model for future
bohemians?
 Note that BLANNING claims that ‘nowhere did Rousseau have a bigger
impact than in the German speaking world’
 Paved the way for the Sturm und Drang of the 1770s!
o Hello Young Werther
o Note that taking on mediaeval forms and ideas was a way to escape urban sprawl,
industrialisation and change
Moral dimension
o 1782 Rousseau vituperated the Paris Opera as the seat of vice
o but note the whole thing about being above morals
 problematic when you consider the whole August von Kotzebue
thing
 those who came up with a new world
 Byronic Sardanapalus was detached from morality and very selfinterested
o In line with young men of the time who considered
themselves the aristocrats of art
o Dandyism
 Evolution from early ‘superior and distant excesses’
SPECTOR
o Byron scorned the ‘common herd’
 ‘this attitude of proud isolation’ SPECTOR
 distaste for the common people
o
o
-
-
-
-
form vs world view
o note massive change to form!!
o New world
 Fruhromantiks in Germany wanted a new way, a new sacred narrative
 Programmatic?
o Note that Delacroix’s Death of Sardanapalus has an interesting composition, but
more than that I simply cannot tell you
 But I think Ollie said something about the mode of painting changing, and
becoming more realistic? More attuned to imperfections? I mean look at
liberty leading the people!
o Byron as rebel
 Distaste for his own government
 Note fighting with Greeks during the war of Independence!
 Revolt against the establishment
 Model for French youth in the 1820s!
o Note that absolutism dominated at the time
o Art for art’s sake?
 Rejection of materialist society!
o SPECTOR posits individualistic romanticism til 1829, and social romanticism after
Art
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
Note Delacroix’s Death of Sardanapalus
 Nietzsche: ‘the picture of decadence of the period, the chaos and confusion,
literature in painting, painting in literature, prose in verse, verse in prose, the
passions, nerves, weaknesses of our time, the modern torment’
 Passion!
 A smorgasbord of chaos, I’ve written and I really hope it was my
original thought!
 SPECTOR notes the detachment of mental from physical!
 An absolute deluge
 Orgy!
 Also the isolation of the genius
Myth and history
o The Aufklärung had denigrated the mediaeval period as Dark Ages of ignorance and
irrationality
 But the romantics idealised the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual depth and
adventure
 Note the Gothic revival in architecture in the 1830s!
 Mediaeval period as a workhorse for nationalist romanticism
o Popular and epic poetry!
o Note Catalans reclaiming Catalanism from before the
Hispanicisation of the Catholic monarchs in the 15th Century
o Irish going back to Celtic linguistic substrates before
Latinisation
o Just in general, art as a whole looked back to the past
 Shit, aren’t there all those French romantics in the National Gallery that
painted pictures of Dido building Carthage and shit?
 Glorification of the past!
 Rise of hero worship?
o See Thomas Carlyle in England
 Uncritical praise on strong leaders like Cromwell,
Frederick the Great and Napoleon
o Note that nations began to produce their own versions of history
 Romantic histories were much more fixated on continuity
 And racial coherence, the whole antiquity of the peoples thing
 National mysticism coming out of this fixation on continuity between past
and present?
 Wait, how does that square with the idea of Vorzeit
 I suppose the idea of rupture with the past doesn’t have to exclude
the idea that there is continuity with parts of it?
o Importance of local customs and traditions
o Note the importance of geography
 Herder was big on the idea of geography forming the natural economy of a
people
 See all the Teutoberg forest stuff, your national boundaries are very
important!
o Mann identified the mythic basis to German nationality in 1940
 ‘a concept of myth as a distinctive fusion of poetry and religion that
expressed the essential spirit of a nation’
o note Herder coming up with the idea of Volksgeist!
 Intellectual basis to natinalism
o In Germany the Fruhromantiks SET OUT TO CREATE A NEW MYTHOLOGY
 Like the Nibelungenlied
 Note calling upon idea of Walhalla!
 Heroes
o
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
o
o
o
 But note that this German mythos had disagreements within it!
Note the idea of Sehnsucht
 Longing for the object for which one is insufficient
 Nostalgia, longing, exile = common features of European culture in post war
decades
 WILLIAMSON: ‘as writers sensed the profound distance that
divided them from the world of their childhood and, by extension,
from the seemingly unified and tradition-bound societies of the
distant past’
o In Germany this fed into myth
 ‘a means of expressing just what had been lost in the
transition to modernity’ and a vision for the future
o note that myth’s relation to romanticism in Germany
changed and developed over time
 Herder =/= Nietzsche
 WILLIAMSON: ‘it was the post-revolutionary experience of historical
rupture and religious crisis, interpreted in the light of neohumanist Bildung,
that led the early Romantics to call for a “new mythology”’
 Note the romantic scenery of Heidelberg
o The castle has been ruined by Napoleon
 I mean, in general, there was rubble everywhere by this stage
 WILLIAMSON: ‘the Jena romantics would develop a vision of mythology
that was at once more political, more religious and more ambitious than
anything seen in the Aufklärung’
 Earliest phase of German romanticism = the most politically radical,
reckons WILLIAMSON
 Is myth a response to the ‘legitimation crisis’ and to do with individualism?
 WILLIAMSON: ‘such a mythology offered a non-biblical source of sacred
symbolism and narrative, which had the potential to rejuvenate aesthetic and
religious life and overcome the divisions of modern society’
Idea of Vorzeit
 Pre modernity – antiquity to the Reformation
 Existed outside of the process of historical change!
Germans wanted their own poetic tradition
 Note Schiller’s spirit of Volk in his plays
 Because of Napoleon secularising Chruch property, there was a sudden influx
of texts to use
 Schlegel’s use of knightly tales from the Middle Ages
 ‘For AW Schlegel, the revival of medieaval Christian mythology
formed part of a programme of “European patriotism” which would
displace the harmful legacy of the French Revolutionary War and
eventually unite the Continent’ WILLIAMSON
 Görres presented Christian middle ages as pinnacle of German art
 Note Jacob Grimm’s view of national mythology
 Bit later than Schlegel and Görres
 He saw myth as ‘poetic embodiment of a revelation to God to all
peoples’
o Religiose!
o Or, at the least, spiritual!
 Myth as a living phenomenon
 Specific to a nation
o To its language and culture
 Emerging discipline of Germanistik
 A Protestant scholarly discipline
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
o What makes up nation? What is it that we identify with?
Note that WILLIAMSON calls the Nibelungenlied the German version of the
Homer question!
 Nibelungenlied was very popular in salons during the French
occupation!
o Response
o NATIONALISM phrased in poetry!
o National question phrased in time of oppression!!
 Note Fouque’s adaptation of the Nibelungenlied in 1807
o Use of the Norns
 Three stages of time
 Past, present, future
 Determined to create a Christian epic
o But the Norns are from Nordic mythology
 Nibelungen fad peaked by 1816
o Because no more stimulation of nationalism!
 And I’ve asked myself, is that why German
nationalism peaked later than France’s?
 Increase of national mythology
 By th 1830s it’s well established
o Bam Heinrich Heine!
 WILLIAMSON: ‘an epic literary tradition had been uncovered’
 Note the link between mythology and the geography of Germany
o Teutoberg forest
o Rhein
o North Sea\
 Herder was very clear that national character must be authentic
 Nation is a projection of individual onto the nation
 And national character is what nation is all about
 Nationalism gets institutionalised
 Self evident by the mid nineteenth century
 1848 = springtime of the peoples!
Back to nature movement
o In France and Britain
o Note response to Industrial Revolution and the scientific movement which was
recategorising nature on rational terms
Religion and romanticism?
o Weirdly enough, Romanticism flourished best in Protestant countries… interestingly
enough
o Development within Christianity in German romanticism?
o Note the disenchantment with the Church/the bible
o Note that the Jena romantics shifted towards religious conservatism by 1804
o Note Hegel’s claim that ‘Christianity has emptied Walhalla’
o Idea of natural religion in Germany
 Use of Prose Edda
 A Nordic Past
o Note Heine’s Elementargeister
 Revolutionary view
 Germany = pantheistic!
o Is romanticism a religion in itself?
Romanticism and politics
o Disenchantment with public sphere
o Momentum of the French Revolution
 Very particular climate that this all came out of

-
-
-
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016

o
o
o
o
o
But surely it’s complex, because of the after effects of the revolution
itself
o Half Europe got smashed up by it
 Note response to French cultural domination during the Napoleonic Wars!
 Struggle against Napoleon in general
 No longer the inspiration but the object of struggle
o Fichte felt that spiritual renewal was a means to engage in
this struggle
 Volkstum – nationality – coined in response to new
conquering emperor!
 Note fichte arguing that language and nation were a
unity (see “To the German Nation” in 1806)
 His idea of the peculiar quality of each
people
o Which individuals needed to
develop in accordance with their
own peculiar quality!
 ‘then, and then only, does
the manifestation of divinity
appear in its true mirror as it
ought to be’
o ooh, you had the grimms rejecting folktales which they
thought were too close to those of Charles Perrault!
 Therefore not truly German
o I mean, I have to wonder about this whole movement of
taking folk stories and peasant traditions… was there no
prejudice in there? It feels vaguely white saviour-y
Note that the Poles used romanticism in their national revival!
 Because it helped to distinguish their indigenous culture from that of the
dominant nation!
 Note Adam Mickiewicz: idea of Poland as Messiah of nations!
 Predestine to suffer as Jesus had…
 Note however that the Poles were reliant on Catholicism
Note that you had a bunch of German romantics turning their backs on liberalism in
the 1820s
 So they got wedded to Catholicism in that decade
 See Schlegel and Görres
Whole new world idea
 Faguet: ‘the basis of romanticism is a horror of reality and a desire to escape
from it’
 Through imagination and personal feeling!
Okay note that Hegel’s philosophy was all about the development of the state as part
of a teleology
 Built into the idea of dialectical tension!
 Argued for a German national dialectic that would result in synthesis
into a state!
 Hegel’s work increased the emphasis on historical studies!
 Boom for German history writing!
 Note also idea of Germany acting as a counterbalance to France!
 So this is why Germans began to feel that liberalism was not
appropriate in Germany??
Note French romanticism’s love of other national causes!
 Leonidas at Thermopylae
 GREEK WAR OF INDEPENDENCE!
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
-
-
music
o BLANNING says that it was only in 1800 that musicians began to play a real part in
the romantic movement!
 Problem of patronage
 And also of a lack of self reflexivity of their art as a whole
o Note bifurcation between musicians composing for the public and those for
themselves
 Plays into the current idea of philistinism
 Heine: ‘in general the inhabitants of Göttingen can be divided into
students, professors, philistines and cattle’
 Growing message that the masses were culturally retarded
o Note composers such as Berlioz and Wagner turning to
journalism
Decline?
o Post 1848 in France
Ottoman Empire
-
Tanzimat reforms
o Literally the reorganisation of the Ottoman Empire
 1839-1876
 reigns of Abdülmecid I and Abdülaziz
o ‘Noble Edict of the Rose Chamber’
 guaranteed security of life, property and honour to all subjects of the empire
regardless of religion or race
 promises of equality for non muslims not always carried out!
 standardised tax system
 no more abuses
 fairer military systems
 for both conscription and training
o most reforms implemented under Grand Viziership of Mustafa Resid Pasa (SIX
TERMS)
 new secular school system
 reorganisation of army around Prussian conscript model
 provincial representative assemblies created
 new codes of criminal and commercial law
 largely modelled after France
 see the code Napoleon!
o Tanzimat centralised everything in the hands of the sultan!
 That meant that Abdülaziz could go revisionary and reactionary at the end of
his reign!!!
o ‘the oppressive weight of circumstances, which inhibited the freedom of realistic
policy makers who sought to innovate’ (brief history of the late ottoman empire guy)
o Remodelling of state-society relations
o Why?
 Economic change
 Increased commerce with western Europe
 Overhaul of the tax system
 Political change
 Increasing empowerment of the different social groups in the nonstate arena
 A challenge to empire
 Or, to the premise of empire and what that means!
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
‘state control through segmentation and vertical integration’
BARKEY
new forms of centralisation come in
o response to Balkan threats
o other internal threats
o changing patterns of social organisation
BARKEY: ‘Ottomans, therefore, in their new understanding of
reform and centralisation, embarked in the direction of non-empire,
suspending negotiated forms of rule and the diversity of bargaining
between state and society’
o Move towards hegemony and set patterns of power
 Different kind of legitimacy
 New understanding of diversity
 Both of these increase the path to
nationhood?
Note that the use of modern tech to centralise power went at the same
time as national movements and different local rulers going the other
way
o Nationalism as ideological framework for the mobilisaiton of
the masses
 But related to the older struggle of cenre vs
periphery
o



-
-
-
-
The reforms themselves
o Totally new?
 Note that it applied to all Ottoman subjects, regardless of religion
o How effective?
 Declaratory value > legal significance
 Aimed at European ears?
o Note that Resid Pasha wanted Ottoman Empire to be pat of
European concert!
o Allusions to the French Declaration of rights of Man and
Citizen
 Note also though its allusions to 1775 Virginia bill of rights
o No tjust about Europe
External forces?
o Tanzimat reforms not driven by an ideology of modernisation??
o Note that the Congress of Vienna brought Ottoman Empire into the struggle for
power in Europe!
 New international order what brought about the death of the ottoman empire?
o Reforms of Mustafa III, Abdülhamid I and Selim III = in response to decreasing
ability of the empire to compete militarily and economically with the continent!
Westernisation or not?
o Pure importation?

o Or selective adoption and adaptation as Brief History guy notes
 Conception of government as based in part on imported ideas!
 ‘thus, the edict was directed both inwards andoutward, at once a
serious commitment to reform out of self-interest and an appeasing
gesture directed at Europe’ brief history chap
note Western opinion
o idea of the sick man of Europe!
o But note desire of some English bureaucrats wanted a supportive alignment between
England and this ‘decadent agricultural empire camped on the south east corner of
europe’ CUNNINGHAM
Lucy Clarke
GHXI Revision HT 2016
o
o
o
o
But Cunningham notes that pre 1829, much Western opinion was quite tolerant of the
Ottoman regime than of the wider Islamic context
Surprise at the actual functioning of the empire with all its disorder and disarray
 Lord Aberdeen spoke of an ‘occult force’ keeping the Ottomans alive
Post 1840 you get a doomsday attitude
 Rise of sectarianism among Victorians
 Hope that the sultan would fall
 Distress at failure of English govt to intervene in the rise of Balkan
nationalisms
 Also anti-islamic feeling crystallising into anti-Ottoman feeling
Cultural construction of the unchanging East!
 While, in reality, most of Europe was as rural as the Ottoman provinces!