German Unification (Paper 3)

4.1 The Congress of Vienna

May 2012: How successful was the Congress of Vienna in achieving the aims of the peacemakers?

Introduction
● Since 1789, European borders/empires had been constantly changing
● Congress of Vienna sought to stabilize borders, regimes and commerce in Europe
● The Congress of Vienna came right after the Napoleonic wars, in which France was defeated
○ Leaders didn’t want another Napoleon or revolution to destabilize Europe
● 4 Key principles of the congress:
○ Balance of power
■ Create a coalition for collective security
■ Fr should have its borders reduced
○ Conservatism
■ Suppression of radical ideas, ie. liberalism and nationalism
○ Legitimacy
■ Rulers/lands lost to Napoleonic expansion were restored
○ Buffer States between Fr + Europe
■ Eg: Piedmont-Sardinia, Belgium, Ned, German confed.
● No one ‘won’ the congres
○ UK emerged as greatest colonial power, Russia most influential in the West, Austria’s
Metternich had been the leader of the conference + was the dominant power in
central Europe
● This conservative order, aka ‘Metternich system’ would continue for the next 30 years

P1 - Austria (Prince Metternich)

● Wanted an equilibrium between states to preserve peace
● Wanted France + Russia to revert to ancient frontiers
○ Wanted security for Austria to prevent Russia’s westward ambitions
● Wanted Austria to be the strongest central European nation
● Metternich’s goal = stable European order … guided by Monarchs/aristocracies
○ Metternich was strongly opposed to Nationalism/Liberalism
○ Aristocratic order = mechanism for Metternich to control liberal ideas in Europe +
ensure that revolution wd/ never again threaten political stability
● Gains Austria achieved:
○ Regained Tyrol + Salzburg
○ Regained Lombardy + Venetia
○ Received part of Dalmatia
● A German confederation was created out of 39 states
○ Metternich was reluctant to accept Prussian wishes to gain German states
○ Metternich wanted to keep the German states divided, as this would make them
easier to control in the Diet (representative assembly) + it would mean that Austria
would dominate the Germany Confederation
● Congress of Vienna re-established conservative order
○ This aggravated German Nationalists
● National sentiment (inspired by French) continued after Vienna - esp. w/ students &
academics … eg: Burschenschaften, student orgs.

P2 - UK (Viscount Castlereagh)
● Castlereagh wanted to see a just equilibrium in Europe, as enduring peace = beneficial to
British commerce
● He had no territorial ambitions on continental Europe… received colonial compensation:
○ Retained cape colony, Tobago, Malta
○ Received Heligoland, Mauritius, Santa Lucia, Trinidad
● Was against Russia + France gaining too much land, advocated for France’s containment
● Wanted a STRONG central power (Austria) to resist the East + West (France + Russia)

P3 - Russia (Alexander I)
 ● Wanted to push forward Russian foreign policy, ie Westward expansion to Poland (in fact, he
wanted to completely absorb Poland, already had 600,000 men occupying)
● Received part of Duchy of Warsaw
● Retained Finland
● Received Bessarabia

P4 - France (Tallegrand)
● Wanted to convince allies that France was not a threat, wanted French interests recognized
● Wanted France to have ‘equal footing’ w/ other powers
● Opposed Russia’s claim to Poland
● Didn’t want Prussia to be strengthened on French borders
● Wanted rightful leaders to return to throne (principle of legitimacy)
● Results:
○ Reduced to 1789 continental borders
○ Received Guiana, Martinique, Guadeloupe
○ Paid war indemnity to allies

P5 - Prussia (Karl August von Hardenberg)

● Had lost to Napoleon, thus wanted to increase/restore its territory in Germany
● … but because King Frederick of Prussia was grateful to Tsar Alexander for liberating Prussia
from Napoleon, Hardenberg was forced to comply w/ Russia
● Still demanded saxony as compensation - they received it
● Received Rhineland, Westphalia, Danzig, Pomerania
○ Rhineland key for natural resources
4.2 The Rise of Prussia
May 2011: Why had Prussia emerged as the leading German state by 1862?
Nov 2014: “By 1862 the necessary conditions for German unification under Prussian leadership were
in place.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?
General: Why did Prussia come to dominate the Eastern Question?

Essay Outline: Why had Prussia emerged as the leading German state by
1862?
Introduction
● 1815 congress of Vienna → German Bund established w/ 39 sep states incl Austria + Prussia
● German question = how would Germany be unified? → persisted until 1871
● In 1815, Austria = dominant power + key player in congress of Vienna
● In 1815, Prussia, despite having gained some land, was the ‘weakest’ of the major powers
○ (Received Rhineland, Westphalia, Danzig… (Rhineland = key for natural resources))
● Through econ reform, political advantages, and military reform, Prussia rose to a dominant
position by mid century
○ Defeated Austria 1866, unifying Germany under Prussia by 1871

P1 - Economic Reasons
● After Vienna 1815, each state managed own econ
○ Resulted in econ. Stagnation, because internal tariffs/custom barriers restricted the
flow of trade/prevented growth
● 1818, Prussia abandoned its tariff system
○ Soon several other states joined Prussia in this customs free zone
● Success of this saw eventual creation of Zollverein in 1834, pioneered by Prussia
○ Zollverein = customs union which enabled trade flow … no tariffs or custom barriers
○ By 1836, 25 of German states included in this customs union… EXCLUDING
AUSTRIA
○ Austria against free trade, wanted to maintain protection over its own industries
● Result of Austrian exclusion = Austria isolated from econ. Growth being experienced by the
rest of Germany
● Austria eventually realized the threat which Zollverein posed after 1848 → Schwarzenberg
proposed ‘Zollunion’ between Zollverein & Austria
○ Idea never implemented… thus continuing to tie the other German states to Prussia
rather than Austria
● Zollverein = key unifying factor + enabled rapid econ. progress for Prussia but not Austria

P2 - Military Strength
● 1840s saw sharp rise in investment in Prussian iron, coal and railway industries
● As investments rose, industries thrived + opportunities for employment increased
○ This suited the rapidly growing population (growing pop = bigger workforce)
○ Prussian pop had grown 80% since 1816
● Econ growth in Prussia = result of large-scale capital investment, technical innovation,
and centralised production
● ^ these factors enabled Russia to experience econ. prosperity in 1850s, econ boom by 1860s
● W/ increased industry + modernization, Prussia’s military greatly strengthened
● Could now mass produce weapons
● Via extensive railway network, could mobilize troops/equipment effectively
● By mid-century, Prussian railway - 3x size of Austria
○ Prussia had greater opportunities for free trade + military success
○ Railway key for establishing cross-state trade links
● Moltke/Roon introduced successful reforms in the 1860s

P3 - Austria’s Weaknesses
● Austria had become politically weakened by its focus on Italy/Austrian suppression of Liberal/
Nationalist revolts 1815-1849
○ Eg: revolts in Naples 1820/21, 1848 revolutions, etc
● Austria = multi-ethnic empire, w/ Germans, Serbs, Magyars, Czechs
● Many ethnic groups had aspirations for independence or partial autonomy
○ ^ aspirations led to instability, eg: 1848 revolutions
● Protestants in North Germany, Catholics in South → Protestants drawn to Bismarck
● After Metternich left power 1848, Austria saw virtually no successful political progress
● Compared to Prussia, Austrian gov = inefficient + corrupt
○ Prussian gov spent large amounts of its revenue on econ progress/trade, Austria did
not
○ ^ Austria became industrial backwards compared to West
● Although Austria’s textile industry thrived… Austria still largely agricultural based (hence
industrial progress was slow)
● Serfdom not abolished until 1848 in many areas across Austrian empire
● Industrialization was localised… meaning vast amounts of land were unused
● Austrian railway system not as extensive → meant an inefficient military/slow trade flow
● For Prussia, growing econ coincided w. Growing military + greater expenditure towards
railway projects
○ For Austria, because their econ didn’t see ‘radical growth’, the latter two outcomes
didn’t occur
● Whereas Austria had commitments outside of Germany … Prussia could only look towards
Germany (aka, ‘Eastern mission’ / expanding towards Russia = non existent idea)
● Due to Austrian weaknesses, German states looked more towards Prussia due to their econ
strength, esp. after 1850s and 60s

The Zollverein Overview

● Prussia was given the Rhineland in 1815 at the Congress of Vienna
● Prussia abolished its internal custom barriers in 1818
● From 1921, several bilateral trade agreements w/ other states were concluded →
this led to the formal establishment of the Zollverein in 1834
● The creation of the Zollverein led to a dramatic rise in customs revenue: 14.4
million thalers (German silver coins) in 1834 to 27 million thalers in 1845
● Prussia had the right to negotiate on behalf of the Zollverein
● Austria was excluded from the Zollverein which was of major importance
● Ley: “Austria’s defeat in 1866 is less decisive than its exclusion from the
Zollverein”
● Many German states did not fully realise the political implications of the
Zollverein and the growing strength of Prussia
○ In Many cases, they had stronger links to Austria
○ Attempts by Brunswick, Hanover, Oldenburg and the Hansa towns to
stand aside collapsed, and they all joined
● There was a growing imbalance between Prussia + Austria
○ Prussia’s policy was free trade while the industry of Austria needed
protection
○ Her final exclusion in 1864 has sometimes been described as even more
important than the defeat in the war two years later
● Industrial leaders from the Ruhr and Rhineland were many times supporters of
liberalism
○ The growth of liberalism greatly affected Bismarck’s policies (it has even
been argued that Bismarck’s foreign policy - ie unification - was a means
to control domestic policy = to control liberal opposition)
● The economic strength of Prussia is also very important in explaining the military
strength of the state which finally led to the unification
● Keynes: “The German Empire was built more truly on coal and iron than on blood
and iron”
Essay Outline: “By 1862 the necessary conditions for German unification
under Prussian leadership were in place.” To what extent do you agree?
P1 - Arguments for Yes (See Outline for Prussia’s Rise)
● Prussia had made territorial gains at Congress of Vienna
○ Received Rhineland, Westphalia, Danzig… (Rhineland = key for natural resources)
● Austria had become politically weakened by its focus on Italy/Austrian suppression of Liberal/
Nationalist revolts 1815-1849
○ Eg: revolts in Naples 1820/21, 1848 revolutions, etc
● Metternich had been forced to resign after the 1848 revolutions
● Austria faced economic stagnation, while Prussia faced economic growth (Zollverein)

P2 - Arguments for No: Friedrich Wilhelm IV’s Conservatism

● Friedrich Wilhelm IV ruled Prussia from 1840-1861
● His conservative policies had helped spark the 1848 revolutions
○ In 1847… after a long delay… he didn’t call a popular representative assembly… but
instead the United Diet
■ This comprised of all the provincial estates
■ They had the right to grant taxes/loans
■ They REFUSED to propose a lone for the Berlin-Könisberg railway
● After 1848 revolutions… he was forced to convene a Prussian national assembly
● STILL… he appointed his uncle, Count of Brandenburg, the PM
○ By Nov, he removed the assembly from Berlin and dissolved
○ Dec, he imposed his own constitution, that RESTORED the leading role to the crown/
army/bureaucracy ← supported by the conservatives
● April 1849, Frederick REFUSED the imperial crown offered by the national assembly in
Frankfurt → as a true conservative, he wd/ only accept the crown from German princes
○ He destroyed the constitution drafted by the Frankfurt assembly
● By 1850… the hopes of 1848 revolutions had been crushed
○ 1850, gov = in hands of aristocratic elites + high army officials
○ Relatively democratic constitution of 1848 modified in ‘authoritarian direction’ by 1850
○ Upper House (Herrenhaus) dominated by old nobility … system was anti-democratic

P3 - Arguments for No: Prussia’s Ongoing Subservience to Austria

● Despite declining the crown… Frederick still determined to increase the power of his state
● He took advantage of Disturbances in Italy (which weakened Austria) to announce the Erfurt
Union in 1850
○ This was a union of German leaders (many coerced to join), who Frederick proposed
would have their foreign policy/military matters controlled by Prussia
● Union broke down when it became clear that many German princes wanted to supp. Austria
● Rebellion in Hesse-Cassel, saw the end of Prussian domination over Ger. states
○ Debate over whether the Austrians should send aid, or allow Prussia to help.
● The problem over what to do in Hesse-Cassel almost brought Austria and Prussia to war.
○ However, it was clear to the Prussians that they were not strong enough to compete
with Austrian military might (remember, econ boom was in the late 50s/60s)
○ Austrian + Prussian delegates met at Olmutz Nov, 1850, and agreed (humiliatingly)
■ Erfurt Union wd/ be abolished
■ the Confederation was officially re-established
■ Prussia was not to challenge Austrian leadership
○ Prussia had been brought under control. Austria continued to oppose unification of
the German states.
P4 - Arguments for No: Austria’s loss vs. Italy in 1859… Prussia STILL not prepared
● Wilhelm succeeded Frederick when he died in Jan 1961
○ He had little respect for ‘conservative clique’ which had run affairs in 1850s
○ 1958 election results showed liberal majority in Landtag
○ William glad to bring moderates into his gov.
● Austria had won the first Italian war for independence 1848/49
● Second Italian war of Independence (Kingdom of Sardinia + France vs. Austria) 1859
○ Some (incld. Bismarck) wanted to take advantage of Austria’s weakness
○ Most thought Prussia shd/ supp. Austria … (defend status quo/contain French threat)
■ But… if they followed this opinion, Prussia would want Austria to pay a price
for their support: Prussian command over German federal forces
○ At first, Austria didn’t want to pay the price for Prussian support… but they lost to It.
■ Prussia ‘raised the price for cooperation’ even higher
■ Austria tried to agree to a peace w/ France
■ Austria had lost … but Prussia had gained nothing
○ Dualist policy at risk … but no other policy had emerged in Prussia
○ Prussia Still not ready to challenged Austrian pre-eminence

Conclusion
● Prussia soon realized that the only way to re-establish her position wd/ be by excluding
Austria from Germany by force
● Not until 1866 did Bismarck/Moltke truly feel confident enough to defeat Austria
4.3 The Decline of Austria
Nov 2012: Explain the reasons for the decline of Austria in European affairs by 1870.
Nov 2013: “Economic weakness was the main reason for Austria’s decline in the years 1815–1866.”
To what extent do you agree with this statement?
May 2016: “The Austrian Empire maintained the dominant position among the German states
between 1815 and 1848.” Discuss.

Essay Outline: Austria’s Strengths/Weaknesses

Introduction
● Austria emerged from the Congress of Vienna in 1815 as a LEADING European power
● Vienna was seen as the CENTER of power in Europe … was the head of the German confed.
● The German Confederation (Bund) was an association of 39 states set up by the Congress of
Vienna. It included Austria and Prussia as well as an array of medium and small states
○ (the Confederation’s Assembly sat in Frankfurt).
● By 1948… by no means was Prussian dominance inevitable
● Yet by 1866… Austria’s position in Europe was very weak

P1 - STRENGTH: Austria suppressed Liberal/Nationalist movements in the early 1800s

● Congress of Vienna left many states in tact, eg: Baden, Bavaria, etc. → Metternich didn’t want
more unity, as it would diminish Austrian power. Princes/royalty of these states also didn’t
want to lose their power … so it was easy for Metternich to gain supp. for Karlsbad Decrees
● Wartburg festival, October 1817
○ Wartburg castle = symbol of German nationalism
○ 500 students/professors gathered, and they protested vs. reactionary policies
○ They wanted a constitution + national unity
● Nationalist/Liberal movements sparked the signing of the Karlsbad Decrees 1818
○ Extra powers for police
○ Increased censorship + restrictions on freedom of movement
○ Instigated by Metternich
● Early 18th century… Austria controlled states of the Italian peninsula
● Naples revolts 1820
○ Revolts in Sicily/Naples against King Ferdinand I … sparked carbonari in Northern
Italy to revolt too, but Austria suppressed these revolts … maintained status quo

P2 - STRENGTH: The Final act of the Congress of Vienna

● The Final Act of the Congress of Vienna, devised by Metternich between 1819 and 1820, was
the constitution that the German Confederation adopted in May 1820.
○ severely restricted the powers of the Confederation, leaving de facto power with
Vienna.
○ Those who argued for a stronger and more liberal German state were arrested.
● Attempts at revolution between 1830 and 1831 in German states were generally
unsuccessful (although a constitution did come into effect in Saxony in September 1831)

P3 - WEAKNESS:
● Austria only maintained a dominant position up to about 1830… by 1866, lost dominance in
German confederation
● German nationalism continued to grow, eg: Hambach Festival 1832:
○ Encouraged by 1830 revolution in France, radical and democratic leaders organized
a series of demonstrations… which culminated at the Hambach festival, attended by
30,000 people
○ In response to demonstrators demands for a Republican gov, German monarchs
tightened restrictions on political activities
● Prussia was becoming dominant economically, w/ the creation of Zollverein 1934
○ Austria’s economy stagnated
● There were problems within the empire caused by nationalism, for example, in Hungary:
○ People discontent w/ ‘Metternich’ system
○ April Laws 1848 = coalition of laws w/ aim of modernizing the Kingdom of Hungary
into a nation state, passed by the Hungarian Diet.
○ Hungary didn’t receive autonomy until 1867
● There was poor political leadership after the departure of metternich
● After the Crimean war, Austria was diplomatically isolated
● Austria’s military weaknesses had been demonstrated during 1859 conflict w/ Italy
● Losses in Italy, eg: venetia after the 1866 Austro-Prussian war
4.4 The Unification of Germany
Specimen: “Bismarck was the sole architect of German unification, 1862 to 1871.” Do you agree?
May 2015: Examine the factors that contributed to Bismarck’s achievement of German unification
between 1862 and 1871.
Nov 2011: Why was Germany unified under Prussia in 1871?
Nov 2013: “Bismarck was first and foremost a Prussian nationalist.” Do you agree?

Who was Bismarck?

● Bismarck came from East Prussia, came from a junker family (aristocratic
landowners)
○ 1851 - Bismarck appointed to ambassador to German Diet at Frankfurt
○ 1859 - Bismarck sent as ambassador to St. Petersburg
○ 1862 - Bismarck became ambassador to France
○ 1862 - Bismarck became Minister President of Prussia
● Bismarck wd/ soon epitomize the idea of ‘realpolitik’
○ Principles mattered less than outcomes
○ Ideology mattered less than exercising power
○ Alliances = tools of policy → once they had served a purpose, could be
abandoned
● Bismarck was a conservative, ‘but he was no mere reactionary’
○ He could play the role of German nationalist, or reforming
parliamentarian… even though he wasn’t really either of these things
● He had a strong sense of duty towards the Prussian state + was a clever
statesman

Introduction
● Bismarck appointed in 1862
● Status quo had reasserted itself by end of 1850s… but it would not survive the following
decade + the promotion of Otto von Bismarck to the position of Prussian Minister President
● Parliamentary democracy = tool for Bismarck/could be used flexibly
● War = tool to be used in the interest of broader goals (but a ‘clumsy tool’)
● By 1866, Austria in slow decline, and Prussia in ascendancy
○ War not inevitable… but the fact that their overall goals were the same (dominance of
Germany), made war likely

P1 - Long term causes: Zollverein (See Prussia’s Rise Outline)

● Prussia abolished its internal custom barriers in 1818
● From 1921, several bilateral trade agreements w/ other states were concluded → this led to
the formal establishment of the Zollverein in 1834
● Enabled Prussia to grow economically + militarily
○ Economically, Prussia’s mines/factories consistently increasing production
○ In comparison, Austria’s economy stagnated … they were excluded from Zollverein
● Keynes: “The German Empire was built more truly on coal and iron than on blood and iron”

P2 - The Decline of Austria (See Austria’s Decline Outline)

● Austria had been fighting growing nationalism within its borders since 1815
● By 1860s, Austria had seen its stature rocked by the first Crimean war, and then the chiseling
away of its Italian holdings… eg: Venetia in 1866
● Austria faced economic stagnation

P3 - Military Reform
● If Prussia wanted to dominate the confed. at expense of Austria, it wd/ have to be militarily
● Prussia’s inability to play a large role in the Crimean war showed that Prussian army = weak
● Army was rectified w/ the app. of Helmut von Moltke as army chief staff 1857
○ Moltke instituted a series of military reforms in early 60s, that transformed Prussia’s
army into a modern one
● Paul Kennedy: “The Prussian army was far from perfect in practice. Doctrines were ignored
and the railway system did not always operate w/ the efficiency of war plans. Military
advantage is seldom absolute, but rather relative to one’s potential enemies. In this sense,
the Prussian army reforms of the 1860s had created the pre-eminent military force of its day”
 ● Roon also helped w/ military reforms: minister of war in 1859/minister of the navy in 1861.
○ As War minister, he reorganized the Prussian army → this largely contributed to
victories of 1866 and 1871
○ Roon got his plan accepted: he wanted to have universal three year service +
permanent reserve to defend the country when the army was actively engaged
○ Roon also helped rectify the Prussian army after several weaknesses had been
exposed in 1866
● Liberals opposed need for strong military… they had become a strong force in Landestag
○ Complained about price + fact that military wd/ be under the King’s command
● Assembly (Landestag) wd/ not grant money required for military reforms
○ Result = parliamentary deadlock for 2 years
○ Deadlock brough Bismarck to position of Minister President 1862
● Bismarck gave a speech Sep 1862 to Prussian Landtag, called ‘Blood and Iron’
○ In his speech, Bismarck stressed the need for military preparedness
○ “Not through speeches and majority decisions will the great questions of the day be
decided—that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849—but by iron and blood”
● Landestag refused… Bismarck’s solution → ignored assembly + constitution, and instead
passed budgets, collected taxes and spent the money w/out consulting assembly
○ Predicted that most Prussians saw the King + Bismarck as more legitimate than the
assembly… he was right → funds were raised and Prussia conducted military reforms
○ (did lead to ongoing battle between Bismarck + Assembly for two years)

P4 - Bismark & the The Danish War 1864

● Danish war grew out of dynastic crisis → King of Denmark died w/out heir to throne 1863
● New King, Christian IX came to throne 1863, absorbed Schleswig into Denmark
○ In the past, Duchies of Schleswig-Holstein overseen by King, but given autonomy
■ ^ this had been confirmed by London Protocols in 1850s
● Danish nationalists supported this, German nationalists = outraged
● German force occupied Holstein
○ Bismarck cared little for nationalist sentiments, but didn’t want small states acting
alone, as this would UNDERMINE Prussian authority in the confed
● Austria could not let Prussia act autonomously… + shared Bismarck’s dislike for nationalists
● Prussia + Austria therefore jointly fought Denmark, insisting that treaties of 1850s be upheld
● Danes gave up after 8 months of fighting (King Christian IX had no French/British aid)
● Treaty of Gastein: Duchies were ceded to joint Austrian/Prussian control
○ German confed had been excluded from the settlement ← Bismarck’s goal √
○ Schleswig = Prussian, Holstein = Austrian
● By appearing to act in the interests of “Germany”... Bismarck begun to reform his image
amongst German liberal nationalists … who still saw him as a dangerous conservative

P5 - The Austro-Prussian War 1866

● Convention of Gastein = short-term solution, gave Bismarck time to prepare for his next move
● Bismarck + Moltke knew Prussia wd/ win vs. Austria alone… unless foreign powers came
● Bismarck needed to make diplomatic preparations before war w/ Austria:
○ France = most serious threat
■ divided Germany = key component of French foreign policy
■ Bismarck + Napoleon conducted a series of meetings in 1865. Bismarck
convinced that the French wd/ not intervene (source of conviction unclear)
■ Napoleon played a ‘dangerous diplomatic game’, also came to agreement w/
Austria May 1866, agreed to stay neutral in return for concessions in Rhine
■ Regardless, France wd/ stay out of war
○ Bismarck then concluded a short-term military alliance w/ new Kingdom of Italy
■ Pledged to support each other in case of war w/ Austria
■ Italy wd/ be compensated w/ Venetia in the event of an Austrian defeat
○ Russia’s non participation was secured due to ongoing domestic concerns
■ Still weak from loss in Crimean war
■ Russia also was neutral as Bismarck had supported Russia in the 1863
Polish Uprising
● Tensions over administration of Schleswig-Holstein grew throughout 1866
○ Both Austria + Prussia accused the other of violating convention of Gastein
○ Austria rallied smaller German states to her side (frightened of Prussian domination)
 ○ Italy declared war on Austria mid-June 1866 → Stage for war was set
● Prussia’s mobilized effectively, were very coordinated, made wide use of the ‘needle gun’,
had effective troop movement + tactile advantages
○ Prussia defeat Austrians at Sadowa 3 July 1866
○ 3 weeks later → armistice concluded that ended fighting
● w/ treaty of Prague → Prussia annexed Hannover, Schleswig-Holstein, Hessen-Kassel,
Nassau, and Frankfurt (German position now DOMINANT)
● German confederation dissolved + replaced by North German Confed
○ This consisted of of an expanded Prussia + 21 other Northern German states
○ Austria, Bavaria, Baden, Württemberg were untouched
● Austria gave up Venetia to Italy
● Now Germany = enlarged Prussia, reduced Austria, and the Southern States

P6 - Bismarck and the North German Confederation

● Bismarck, once despised by liberals, was applauded as nationalist visionary/political genius
● Constitution of North confederation made it one of the most democratic states in Europe: had
freedom of speech, upper house based on representation by state, lower house represented
by universal male suffrage
○ (However… Bismarck as Chancellor was responsible to the crown, not the assembly.
Gov. had access to revenue, mostly tariffs - the assembly had no control. Elected
representatives could not introduce legislation)
● Bismarck was adept at balancing various forces within Germany, eg: socialists/conservatives

P7 - Franco + N. German relations → Bismarck’s OPPORTUNISM

● Treaty of Prague left Southern Germany unstable
○ States were militarily allied to Prussia + economically part of Zollverein, but
politically independent
● Public opinion in South generally was against unifying w/ the North
● Bismarck saw these states as potential allies vs. France or Austria
● On broader European stage…
○ Napoleon III faced semi-united Germany, something Fr had avoided for two centuries
○ Napoleon III was receiving criticism at home due to his Mexican adventures + rise of
Italy on france’s South-east border
○ France would HAVE TO OPPOSE ANY FURTHER GERMAN UNIFICATION
● First signs of tension over Grand Duchy of Luxemburg
○ Napoleon III wanted it to be given to France in return for neutrality in the Austro-
Prussian war … This would anger German nationalists… so at a conf. Bismarck
decided that Luxembourg wd/ remain neutral (tensions rose)
● Spark for war came from succession crisis in Spain
○ Queen Isabella deposed by a revolution in 1868 → replacement needed
○ One possibility = Prussian King’s cousin; Leopold of Hohenzollern
○ agreement caused outrage in France → this would make Hohenzollerns surround Fr.
○ French demanded that candidature be removed… King Wilhelm obliged
■ French even sought assurances that no Hohenzollern wd/ ever take the
Spanish throne again … Wilhelm refused
■ Wilhelm informed Bismarck of this refusal in a telegram sent from Ems
○ w/ the Ems telegram, Bismarck saw an opportunity:
■ Bismarck edited the telegram to give the impression that German honour had
been affronted and that Fr proposals bluntly dismissed
■ The Ems Dispatch was released to German/French press on July 13 1870
● Public opinion in both now in favour for war
● By July 19th 1870, FRANCE DECLARED WAR ON PRUSSIA (Bismarck hadn’t planned
this, but it gave him an opportunity to unify Southern German states into a union w/ North)

P8 - The Franco-Prussian War, 1870-81

● After news of French mobilization in July 1870 → Moltke’s ‘military machine’ took action
● France had to fight alone (NON INTERVENTION from Br + Russia)
○ Br angry at French position on the candidacy + Napoleon III’s Mexican escapades
○ Russia’s black sea ambitions would benefit from a French defeat
○ Italy saw the war as an opportunity to remove French troops from Rome
○ Austria still recovering from Austro-Prussian war + busy w/ domestic reform
 ● Prussian army now experienced…
○ could quickly mobilize millions of soldiers
○ had remedied its weaknesses in artillery since the Austro-Prussian war
○ Had better planning/coordination
● Prussia defeated France Jan 1871 → Treaty of Frankfurt was in May
○ France had to pay war indemnity of 5 billion francs to Germans
○ Units of the Prussian army wd/ occupy France until amount^ paid
○ Alsace Lorraine Annexed into the German Empire

P9 - Growing Nationalism
● Another KEY factor in the unification of Germany is the general growth of nationalism
● Congress of Vienna had re-established conservative order
○ This aggravated German Nationalists
● National sentiment (inspired by French) continued after Vienna - esp. w/ students &
academics
● Burschenschaften = student organizations that looked to Romantic view of United Germany
… filled w/ culture, literature, common language, etc.
● Aristocratic order = mechanism for Metternich to control liberal ideas in Europe + ensure that
revolution wd/ never again threaten political stability
● Liberalists + Nationalists were against this ‘Metternich System’
○ Metternich System emerged out of Congress of Vienna
● Growing Nationalism:
○ 1832 Hambach Festival
○ 1848 revolutions
○ When Bismarck was appointed in 1862… a resurgence of liberalism (liberalism now
turning into a new German nationalism)

Was Bismarck an opportunist or Strategist?

Strategist Opportunist
 ● He had NO GRAND SCHEME for
unification, but responded to
opportunities to strengthen Prussia
● Bismarck did NOT PLAN for the
Franco-Prussian war… he saw war
as a clumsy/unpredictable tool of
diplomacy
○ Yet… a war might frighten
South German states into a
union w/ the North
● The Ems dispatch had given him an
OPPORTUNITY to encourage the
French to act

“Bismarck was first and foremost a Prussian nationalist.” To what

extent do you agree with this statement?
● Before Bismarck became minister President of Prussia in 1862, He was against
the liberal nationalists of 1848/1849 but, during the 1850s, became a firm
supporter of Kleindeutschland and the reduction of Austrian influence in the
German states.
● April 1856, Bismarck said: “Germany is clearly too small for us both; as long as
an honourable arrangement concerning the influence of each cannot be
concluded and carried out, we will both plough the same disputed acre… In the
not too distant future we shall have to fight for our existence against Austria … it
is not within our power to avoid that, since the course of events in Germany has
no other solution”
○ ^ HERE Bismarck changes his view to a Klein Deutschland view

Essay Outline: “The German empire was built more truly on coal and iron than
on blood and iron.”
P1 - In Favour of ‘Coal and Iron’
● The Rhineland was a part of Prussia in the Vienna Settlement → many natural resources
 ● The creation of the Zollverein, 1821-34 → lead to growth of econ, industrialisation, railway
building
● Prussia controlled the Zollverein and Austria was excluded from it in 1834
○ Ley: “Austria’s defeat in 1866 is less decisive than its exclusion from the Zollverein”
● Successful state intervention in economic life: education, banking, roads, taxes

P2 - In Favour of ‘Blood and Iron’

● Von Roon was responsible for army reforms
○ He was War minister from 1859, created 53 regiments → without the strength of the
army, Austria and France could not have been defeated
● Chief of Staff Helmut von Moltke reorganised the army organisation + technique
● 3 dif. wars were important in…
○ Creating a national mood for unification
○ Excluding Austria from the Unified Germany
○ Strengthening Bismarck's image
● Bismarck supported the importance of military strength in his famous speech from 1862:
○ “The Greatest questions of the day will not be decided by speeches and the
resolutions of majorities - that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849 - but by iron
and blood”
○ To Bismarck, REAL POWER = MILITARY/POLITICAL POWER

Other factors that could be discussed = the idea of nationalism + the importance of Bismarck’s
personality/his role in politics.
Essay Outline: “Was diplomacy more important than wars in the process of
German unification between 1862 and 1871?
P1 - Diplomacy
● Prussia’s support for Russia during the Polish revolt in 1863. This would later partly lead to
Russian neutrality in the Austro-Prussian war of 1866
● It was an act of diplomacy by Bismarck to make Prussia and Austria, and not the
Confederation, attack Denmark in the war of 1863-64
● Bismarck met Napoleon in 1865 at Biarritz, and was promised French neutrality in the event
of an Austro-Prussian war. Very important move
● In December the same year, Prussia signed an alliance w/ Italy where Italy promised to fight
w/ Prussia in a war against Austria, making it a two front war
● Russia remained neutral in the war in 1866 in alleged support for Bismarck’s support during
the rising in Poland in 1863
● By deliberately not humiliating Austria after the victory in 1866, Bismarck prevented a
campaign of revenge later
● Negotiations/bribes/secret treaties made the Southern German states support the North
German confederation in the war against France in 1870 and a unification under Prussian
leadership
● Bismarck stood behind the Hohenzollern candidature in Spain and the Ems telegram which
finally led to the war against France

P2 - Wars were Important

● The War against Denmark led to Bismarck gaining lots of support in Prussia which made it
easier to attack Austria later… “Overnight Bismarck’s cult was born”
● The Austro-Prussian war finally excluded Austria from the German states, created the North
German Confederation when Prussia annexed Hanover, Hesse-Cassel, Nassau, Frankfurt
and Schleswig-Holstein. In Prussia , critics declared: “I bow before the genius of Bismarck”
● The war of 1870 finally led the Southern German states, and the King of Prussia, to fully
accept a unification of Germany.

Other factors that could be discussed = the idea of nationalism, the growth of the Prussian economy,
and the importance of Bismarck’s personality/his role in politics.
4.5 Germany’s Foreign Policy 1871-1910
Nov 2012: Assess the successes and failures of Bismarck’s foreign policy in the years 1871–1890.

Essay Outline: Bismarck’s Foreign Policy

Introduction
● When Germany created in 1871 → they were in a position of latent hegemony … had the
potential to dominate Europe (strong econ, strong army, etc)
● Pre 1871, Bismarck’s foreign policy had been guided by his seizing of opportunities
○ He used war (3 wars!) + alliances as short-term tools through which he could
advance his agenda of securing German unity
● Now … his Foreign policy shifted:
○ He feared a two front war, as this wd/ successfully exploit Germany’s vulnerable
political geography
○ Main objectives now were:
■ Isolate France/avoid war of revenge/FIND ALLIES got security
■ Maintain the new European order he had created/maintain peace
■ Preserve the German Empire + Germany’s central role in European affairs

P1 - Isolating France + “War in Sight” Crisis

● Bismarck aware of French desire to redeem its reputation + Alsace-Lorraine
○ Bismarck’s aim = isolate France
○ Leaving France w/ no continental allies wd/ help in achieving this goal
● Dreikaiserbund (Three Emperors League) 1873, engineered by Bismarck
○ Consisted of Tsar Alexander II, Emperor Franz Joseph I of Austria, Kaiser Wilhelm I
○ Was a vague agreement to cooperate in preserving general European peace
○ Three emperors united in their mutually conservative outlooks
○ Bismarck hoped this league would also prevent conflict between AH/Russia
○ Bismarck believed that the ambiguity of the treaty preserved a range of diplomatic
maneuvers
● By 1975, French gov had very much recovered economically/militarily from the 1871 war
○ Moltke was alarmed by their quick recovery … passed on their concern to the
Chancellor (Bismarck)
○ Bismarck was AGAINST the idea of a preventative war … but wanted to put France
back it its place
■ Used threat + overblown rhetoric → many newspapers published articles on
the potential of another war w/ France
■ Tsar = angry → traveled to Germany to prevent Wilhelm I from starting a war
■ Result = Bismarck had to back down from Bullying France
○ ^ demonstrated that ambiguity of treaty could also be used to thwart Bismarck
○ Russia’s firm line over “war in sight” crisis showed that Fr. not truly isolated

P2 - Decline of the Ottoman empire

● Russia wanted to capitalize on a recent Slav revolt vs. Turks
● Russia declared war on the Ottoman empire 1877
● British had no interest in increased Russian influence in this region (due to their Suez Canal
that was central to their foreign policy/imperial trade)
○ Russia’s army was rapidly defeating the Turks… this brought UK/RU to brink of war
● Treaty of San Stefano ended fighting between Turks + Russians in 1878
○ Independent Bulgaria, Serbia, Romania created (RU client states)
○ Russia’s influence in the Balkans now was greatly increased
■ Britain couldn’t stand this … war loomed
● AH also alarmed by Russian expansion in the Balkans
○ Balkans = only avenue for growth (blocked in North after Austro-Prussian war 1866)
● If Franz-Joseph joined Britain in resisting Russian encroachment in the Balkans … general
European war seemed likely ← WAR ALARMED BISMARCK
● Germany had no interests in Balkans … but if Russia + AH went to war vs. each other, this
would ruin the vague balance created w/ the Dreikaiserbund
● Bismarck knew he wd/ have more control on a negotiation table than on a battlefield
○ Invited powers to Congress of Berlin 1878
 ■ Believed Balkan crisis could be solved via diplomacy
■ Settlement at Berlin was successful because it prevented war
■ But IT DIDN’T SOLVE THE EASTERN QUESTION
■ Pan-Slavic Advocates disappointed when Montenegro + Serbia became
independent
■ Russia received some territorial concessions from Turks on the Black Sea +
right to build a fleet there
■ … still, Tsar saw his Balkan ambitions as thwarted
● He blamed Bismarck
■ Bismarck had alienated Russia at the Congress… rendering the
Dreikaiserbund obsolete

P3 - Web of Alliances
● As Russia drifted away, Bismarck turned his attention to Austria-Hungary
○ National kinship made an alliance w/ AH more favorable at home
○ (Secret) Dual-Alliance between Austria-Hungary + Germany concluded in 1879 …
designed to ensure that Germany wd/ not be isolated in case of war/defense alliance
● Alliance frightened Russia into closer relations w/ Germany → Tsar renewed the Three
Emperors League in 1881
● Dual alliance expanded into the Triple Alliance in 1882 w/ Italy joining (further security
against France)
● The Renewed Three Emperors League collapsed by 1886, because AH couldn't handle
Russia’s ‘meddling in Balkan affairs’
● To replace this… Bismarck concluded a secret Reinsurance Treaty w/ Russia in 1887
○ Both pledged neutrality in case of war w/ third party
○ Germany claimed to support Russian interests in the Balkans
○ This treaty enhanced German security … but it’s secrecy destabilized European
relations
○ Maintaining the Reinsurance treaty in light of growing AH/Ru suspicion wd/ be difficult
… esp after Bismarck’s departure in 1890
● (The alliance system he had made was INHERENTLY WEAK)

P4 - Colonies
● Bismarck had NEVER BEEN INTERESTED IN COLONIES … UNTIL 1884
○ Soon, Germany made moves to lay claims to Southwest Africa … later made claims
to Eastern African territories + some pacific islands
○ Scramble for Africa had gripped other European nations … so inevitably German
industrial interests demanded that Germany take part
○ Colonies = source of raw materials + potential markets for raw materials
○ Bismarck also wanted to Challenge Br + Fr in Africa → keen on maintaining a central
role within european affairs
○ When it seemed like fights over African colonies wd/ lead to conflict … Bismarck set
up another conference → Congress of Berlin 1884 (Scramble for Africa)

Conclusion
● Mention the weaknesses of his Foreign policy …
○ It’s complexity/ambiguity of alliances = ‘double edged sword’
○ The fact that it relied on him personally for success… once he was removed from
office in 1890, the the system he created began to unravel.
May 2011: Analyse the impact of the new German Empire on European affairs in the years 1871–
1910.
Nov 2010: In what ways/with what results, did German foreign + colonial policies change after 1890?
May 2014: Analyse the main objectives of German foreign policy between 1890 and 1914.

1871-1890 1890-1914
Bismarck set up a series of Kruger Telegram
alliances – Dreikaiserbund,
Dual Alliance, Reinsurance
Treaty – in order to avoid
Germany’s isolation, and
he did not encourage
colonialism because this
would bring Germany into
conflict with France and/or
Britain. The Berlin
Conference could be used Weltpolitik - ‘World Policy’
as an illustration of his
diplomatic abilities.
Wilhelm’s policies
contributed to German
isolation (except for
Austria) whereas
Bismarck’s policies kept
Germany on reasonable
terms with the other
powers except France.
The Kaiser sacked
Bismarck and weakened
the alliance with Russia
and encouraged German
intervention in Africa First Moroccan Crisis: Tangier Crisis 1905
● Messages sent by Kaiser Wilhelm to Stephanus
Johannes Paulus Kruger, (Pres of Transvaal Rep.)
in 1896
● Congratulated him on Repelling the British
Jameson Raid
○ Aid intended to trigger anti-gov uprisings…
failed
● Telegram made UK FURIOUS … led to tensions
● Bismarck had little colonial interest… Kaiser
Wilhelm II did
● Kaiser II jealous of Br/French overseas empires…
believed Germany needed a colonial empire if it
wanted to be considered a ‘great power’ (a place in
the sun)
● Wilhelm launched Weltpolitik in 1897, committing
Germany to acquiring colonies/building
powerful navy
● Architects of Weltpolitik = Foreign min, Klaus von
Bulow + Naval minister, Alfred von Tirpitz
● Aim = use Weltpolitik to rally support for Imperial
gov, promote patriotism, weaken Socialism
○ Socialists concerned w/ increased
armaments
● Kaiser went to Tangier to announce Germany’s
commitment to Moroccan independence
○ (signal to France that they couldn’t increase
their influence in Morocco)
● German hoped Br. would not supp. France… but
they DID
● Germany’s attempt to bully France
STRENGTHENED the Entente Cordiale (1904)
● At the Algeciras Conf. 1906, Fr + Br stood together
+ forced Germany to back down

Second Moroccan Crisis: Agadir Crisis 1911

● German gov. sent gunboat PANTHER to Agadir port
in protest of France’s decision to send more troops
(They were suppressing a revolt) - Gunboat
diplomacy
● Br. didn’t want Germany to acquire naval base in
Med.
● Lloyd George made a ‘thinly veiled threat of war’
during Mansion House Speech
● Fr + Ger agreed to increase French influence in
Morocco in return for France giving Ger. limited
territory in Congo
● Br + Fr suspicions about German intentions
strengthened
● 1912, Br + Fr signed naval agreement

Results:
● France’s drew closer to Britain, leading to an
Entente + arms build up mostly because of colonial
matters…
● Russia’s joining the Entente;
● Russia’s increasing concern about events in the
Balkans as Germany encouraged its ally, Austria.
14.6 Bismarck’s Domestic Policy
Nov 2010: Analyse the successes and failures of Bismarck’s domestic policies after 1871.
May 2013: How successful were Bismarck’s domestic policies in the years 1871–1890?
May 2014: Assess the extent of continuity and change in Bismarck’s domestic policy in the years
1871–1890.

Essay Outline: How successful were Bismarck’s domestic policies in the years
1871–1890?
Introduction
● Germany unified in 1971 after they defeated France in Franco-Prussian war
● French war reparations went to infrastructure projects that stimulated the econ
○ Economic/Nationalistic enthusiasm loosened capital markets → credit flowed freely
■ led to funding for several over-ambitious projects in Germany
● By 1873, investment scandals in the railway industry triggered a crisis in investor confidence
● These internal factors led to economic depression in the 1870s
○ World depression began 1873… made things worse
● Much of Bismarck’s domestic policies revolved around solving this crisis … and later on,
revolved around suppressing the Catholic centre + Socialists

P1 - Bismarck’s Domestic Policy w/ the Liberals and Political Right

● During time of econ. crisis → political opinion becomes polarized:
○ some advocated to continue liberal trade policies of 1860s
○ some saw protectionism as a cure for depression
● Bismarck didn’t drift into liberal or conservative camp right away…
○ relied on support of National liberal party until 1878 (strongest party in the Reichstag)
○ Bismarck also knew that capitalist enterprise flourished when there were no
regulations (liberal econ)
● Thus… initially, Bismarck + Liberals cooperated throughout the 1870s
○ They both wanted a more centralized/unified state
○ For liberals, centralization = prerequisite for modern industrial society
● If a united Germany = stronger Germany, then the econ/legal/political particularism that had
characterized the German empire in 1871 HAD TO BE ABOLISHED
● German liberals + Bismarck agreed on many measures… (furthered both their agendas)
○ Establishment of national bank + Adoption of single currency
● Liberals + Bismarck also had disagreements, esp: w/ liberalization of the state:
○ Bismarck believed that authority of state should remain w/ crown, chancellor, cabinet
○ Liberals wanted the Reichstag strengthened
● By 1878… Bismarck turned against liberals, & turned to the political right
● Due to worldwide depression…. US/Br goods began flooding German markets
○ Led to pro-protectionism sentiments (esp. amongst industrialists/Junkers)
○ Centre party also strongly in favour of protectionism
● By advocating for protectionism, Bismarck cd/ forge parliamentary alliance w/ Centre + Right
○ This would counter the dominance of the liberals
○ Tariffs would also bring money to Germany → help make Germany self-sufficient
■ By 1879, new tariffs introduced… Bismarck had broken away from Liberals

P2 - Domestic Policy w/ the Catholic Church

● Measures of State centralization in early 1870s, suited liberals, but alienated Catholic Church
○ New German empire had a significant catholic pop. (mostly in centre party)
○ Liberals were also generally anti-clerical
● Once again… liberals + Bismarck agreed more on ‘means than the ends’:
○ Liberals opposed Church involvement in state affairs, as it infringed their natural
individual rights… Bismarck agreed, not cuz of individual rights, but be cuz he
believed Catholics in the Reich owed their allegiance to the Crown… not the pope
● In 1870, Pope Pius IX introduced doctrine of Papal Infallibility (Bismarck AGAINST this)
○ Bismarck saw this as challenging the authority of the German state
○ Response = declared legislative/cultural war vs. Catholic Church (Kulturkamp)
■ Kulturkampf = laws restricting ability of catholic church to operate in Germany
● Schools brought under State authority, Civil marriage encouraged
(non-religious marriage ceremonies), Gov appointed Church official s
 ■ Vatican response = forbade Catholics from abiding to these laws
■ German gov response = exiled those who chose authority of Pope over
Reich
● Despite this, Centre Catholic party increased representation in Reichstag via Kulturkampf
● Kulturkampf also endangered Germany’s relations w/ catholic foreign powers, eg: Austria
● As Bismarck severed ties w/ liberals in late 1870s… his anti-clerical stance = unimportant
○ Bismarck began questioning the Kulturkampf … began as means to strengthen
authority, but ended up destabilizing unity achieved in 1871
○ Kulturkamp called off 1878

P3 - Bismarck’s Domestic Policy w/ the Socialists

● Liberals were not the only ideological position left of Bismarck: Socialism had been rising
throughout the century
○ Socialists had relatively small presence in Reichstag/small support
● Yet… Bismarck still saw socialists as a threat to Germany
● After Kulturkampf ended 1878 + peace w/ German catholics restored … Bismarck focused on
repressing state socialists
● 2 failed attempts to assassinate Wilhelm motivated Bismarck to introduce anti-socialist laws:
○ Socialists newspapers banned, Socialist meetings outlawed, etc
○ Anti-socialist laws renewed regularly until 1890
● Bismarck passed series laws designed to provide social safety net for German workers, to
replace the appeal of socialism (eg: state pension plan + medical care)
● Nonetheless… Socialists didn’t fade… actually gained seats in Reichstag by 1890

Conclusion
● Although Bismarck united Germany in one sense, he had failed to create an internally unified
people.
● In domestic affairs—as in foreign policy—he sought to maintain the status quo after 1871.
● His empire was designed to be conservative.
○ Thus, he opposed the Catholic Centre in the 1870s and the socialists in the 1880s
because both constituted unforeseen threats to his authoritarian creation.
● He also introduced a vicious rhetoric into German politics that forestalled a sense of common
destiny.
● While German industry developed rapidly during his decades in power, he would allow no
evolution in the political system toward greater participation.