19.4, 19.5, 20.

1
 24 — The Age of Nationalism
1850—1914

The revolutions of 1848 closed one era and opened another — urban industrial society took a
strong hold on the continent and U.S.

The repressive peace and dip stability of Metternich was replaced by war and rapid change.

In thought and culture, romanticism have way to realism and in the Atlantic econ psot 1840s
were followed with good times and prosperity.

Western society progressively developed — a new organizing principle that coped with the
challenge of dual-revolution.

—That was nationalism.

The triumph of nationalism was significant but not predictable. It had been powerful since 1789
but failed to realize its goals.

—Didn’t only appeal to middle class liberals but also to masses of society.
 24.1 — Napoleon II in France
How did Napoleon III seek to reconcile popular and conservative forces in an authoritarian
nation state?

Early nationalism was liberal and idealistic and possibly democratic + radical.

In the 19th century the ideas of nationhood had a fearful rev threat to conservatives like
Metternich.

Nism had many different forms — narrowly liberal or democratic and radical—Giuseppe Mazzini
and Jules Michelet.

—Nationalism also flourished in dictatorial states—fascist, conservative, communist,

etc.

Nappy I’s France had combined national feeling with authoritarian rule.

—His nephew Louis Napoleon who revived this.

France’s Second Republic

Although L. Nappy. Bonaparte had played no part in politics before 1848 — male suffrage and
pop support gave him 3x more presidential votes in pres elec, December 1848.

1 — Had the great name of his uncle, romantics demonized it.

2 — as Marx said, middle class and peasant prop owners feared socialist challenge of urban
workers and wanted a tough ruler to provide protection.

3 — in the late 1848 L. N. had a program for France which had been circulated in pamhplets
before the election.

L. N. believed that the government should REPRESENT THE PEOPLE!

—Also should try to help them economically.

—Wasn’t done through parliament and political parties.

French politicians repped social interest groups—particularly middle-class ones.

The answer was a strong and sometimes authoritarian ruler like the first N who would serve all
the people — rich + poor.

—This leader would be linked to each citizen by direct democracy, uncorrupted by

politicians/legislative bodies.

—Meshed well with L. N.’s idea of national unity.

—The state had a duty to provide jobs/stim the econ.

L. N. political ideas were understood by large #s of French peasants and workers.

—To the common voter he looked strong and would forward their interests.

Elected to a 4 yr term by the MAJORity he had to share power with the conservative National
Assembly according to the constitution.

—Signed a bill to increase the role of the Cath Church in primary and secondary education.

—Approved law depriving poor people of the right to vote.

He took these conservative measures for two reasons.

1 — He wanted the NA to fund his personal debts.

2 — Change the constitution so he could run for a second term.

But in 1851 after the NA failed to cooperate L. N. began to conspire w/ army ppl.

—He dismissed the NA and seized power in a coup.

There was some resistance in Paris and widespread insurrection in the countryside in the south
of France.

—Protests were crushed by the army.

L. N. restored male suffrage and claimed to stand above the politicians—called on the French
ppl to legalize his actions.

—They did, 92% coted to make him POTFR for 10yrs.

—A yr later 97% in a plebiscite made him hereditary emperor.

Napoleon III’s Second Empire

L. N. who was now Emperor, Nappy the III :>

 —Had both successes and failures between 1852 and 1870.

The greatest success was the economy—particularly in the 1850s.

—Encouraged new investment in banks and massive railroad construction that were at
the heart of the IR.

Also fostered general econ expansion through a program of public works — included rebuilding
Paris to improve the urban environment.

—Profits of biz ppl soared and wages kept up w inflation + unemployment declined.

He hoped econ progress would reduce social and political tension — this was kinda realized.

—Until the 1960s there was support from France’s dissatisfied group, the urban
workers.

Nappy’s reg of pawnsgops and support for credit unions and better housing for the working
class were evidence for reform.

—In the 60s he granted workers the right to form unions and strike.

—Important econ rights denied by earlier governments.

At first political power remained in the hands of the emperor.

—He alone chose his ministers and had great freedom of action.

—Also restricted but didn’t abolish the NA.

—Members were elected by universal male suffrage every 6 yrs.

Tried to entice ppl who opposed the regime to stand as candidates to expand the base of
support.

—The government used officials to sprea the word that the election was the key to
roads, tax rebates, and other local concerns.

In 1857 and 87 his system was brilliant and produced lots of electoral victories.

BUT in the 60s his system disintegrated. A nationalist, he wanted to reorganize Europe on the
principle of nationality and gain influence and territory for France in the process.

—Problems in Italy and Prussia led to criticism at home from Catholic and nationalist
supporters.

—Middle-class liberals who wanted a less authoritarian regime denounced his role.
He was sensitive to public mood — responded to critics by liberalizing his empire.

—Gave the NA greater powers and opposition candidates greater freedom—they used
perrty well.

In 69 the opps of republicans monarchists and liberals polled 45 percent of the vote.

—The next year sick L. N. got France a new constitution which combined parliament
with a hereditary emperor chief of state.

In a final plebiscite in the eve of Prussia’s war 7.5 million French men voted for a new
constitution and only 1.5 million opposed it.

N. L.’s attempt to reconcile a strong national state with male suffrage was evolving in a
democratic direction!

Plebiscite =

the direct vote of all the members of an electorate on an important public question such as a
change in the constitution.
 24.2 — Nation Building in Italy and Germany
How did the process of unification in Italy and Germany create conservative nation-states?

Italy to 1850

United under the Congress of Vienna.

Rich northern provinces of Lombardy and Venetia were taken by Metternich’s Austria.

Sardina and Piedmont were under the rule of Italian Monarchy and Tuscany — capital of
Florence.

Central Italy and Rome were ruled by the papacy—independent political existence.

Naples and Sicily were ruled by a branch of the Bourbons.

Three approaches—

1 — Radical program of idealistic patriot — Giuseppe Mazzini — preached a centralized

democratic republic based on male suffrage and the will of the people.

2 — The second was that of Vincenzo Gioberti — catholic priest who called for a federation of
existinf states under the presidency of a progressive pope.

3 — Program of those who looked for leadership to the autocratic kingdom of Sardinia-
Piedmont, like how Germany looked to Prussia.

Option three was the most strong — by the failures of 1848 when Austria smashed Mazzini’s
republic.

The new monarch Victor Emmanuel retained liberal constitution.

—Combined a strong monarchy with civil liberties—appealed to the mid class.

Mazzini’s band of democratic republicans seemed quicotic and too radical.

As for the papacy the cautious support for unification by Pious IX had given way to fear and
hostility after he was driven from Rome during 1848.

For while the papacy would stand resolved against national unification and modern trend.

In the Syllabus of Errors PIX denounced rationalism, socialism, separation of C and S.

Cavour and Garibaldi in Italy

Sardinia was led by statesmen Coutn Camillio Benso di Cavour — from noble fam — fortune
before ptx

Goals were limited and realistic.

Sought unity only for states of northn and maybe central Italy.

Worked to consolidate Sardinia as a liberal constitutional state – led north Italy in the 50s.

System of highwats and railroads of civil liberties increased support.

Realized that Sard couldn’t defeat Austria without help, secret alliance with Nappy III.

In 58 he got Austria to attack Sard and Nappy helped him then comvined Franco-Sard forces.

Then Nappy abandoned him to maintain PC with French Catholics.

Gained Lombardy, area around Milan from Austria.

The Growing Austro-Prussian Rivalry

In the aftermath of 1840 the German states were locked in a stalemate — after Austria and
Russia blocked Williams attempt to unify from above — tension gew.

—Austria and Prussia wanted to block each other within the German Confeeration.

Also economic forces were contributing to the Austrian-Prussian rivalry. Austria hadn’t been
included in the German customs union or Zollverein — founded in 34 to stimulate trade.

By 53 Austria was the only state that hadn’t joined and mid class biz groups were enriching
themselves—couldn’t access this.

Prussia had emerged from 1848 with a sorta parliament—in the hands of the wealthy liberal mid
class.

—Patriotic and longing for unification these mid class reps wanted to establish the
parliament-NOT the king-had ultimate political power.

The national uprising in Italy made a big impression on Prussia’s tough minded, William I.

Convinced big political change was possible (or maybe war with France or Prussia), Will pushed
to raise taxes and increase the defense budget.

The Prussian parliament reflected mid class desire for a less militaristic society, rejected the
budget and liberals triumphed in new elections.

William then called on Count Otto con Bismarck to head a new ministry and defy parliament!

Bismarck and the Austro-Prussian War

The most important figure in German history between Matin Luther and Hitler—Otto von
Bismarck had been the object of debate.
A great hero OR villain.

Bismarck was a master of politics — born into the Prussian landowning aristocracy,

He had a strong personality and desire for power. He was very flexible and catered to every1 in
Prussia.

First served as a diplomat in the Prussian government. When he took office as chief minister he
made a badish impression.

—His speeches were filled with scandal!

He lashed out against the middle-class opposition and was denounced for the view that Might
makes Right.

Bmac had the Prussian bureaucracy go collecting taxes even though parli refused to approve the
budget.

—He reorganized the army.

For four years 1862-66 the voters of Prussia expressed their opp by sending liberal majorities to
parli.

Opps at home spurred search for success abroad. The complicated question of Schleswig-
Holstein—provonces that belong to Denmark but were members of the German Confed.

When the Danish tried to get them for themselves Prussia joined Austria in a war against them.

—After his position was to force Austria out.

The Ausrtio-Prussian War of 1866 lasted only 7 weeks.

—Utilized railroads and the new breech-needle gun.

The existing German Confed. was dissolved and Austria agreed to withdraw from German
affairs.
Prussia also conquered and annexed small states north of the Main River.

The mainly Catholic states of the south remained independent while forming alliances with
Prussia.

Bismarck’s goal of Prussian expansion was being realized.

The Taming of the Parliament

Bmac had been convined that the old order he defended should make peace on its own terms
w/ the liberal middle class and the nationalist movement.

He realized that nationalism was not hostile to conservative / auth govnt.

—Believed that bc of the events of 1848 the German middle class could be led to prefer national
unity under conservative leadership rather than a long uncertain battle for truly liberal
institutions.

During the attack on Austria in 66 he increasingly identified Prussia’s fate with the National
Development of Germany.

In the aftermath of victory he made a federal constitution for the new North German Confed.

—Each state had its own local govnt but the king of Prussia became pressi. Bmac was
only responsible to the pressi.

The federal government William I and Bismarck controlled the army and diplomacy.

—Also legislation with members of the lower house elected by male/sfrg

Bmac opened the door to popular participation—going over the head of the mid class to the
people—much like nappy III.
Ultimate power still rested in the king and its army — in Prussia Bmac held out an olive branch
to the parliamentary opps.

—Asked to pass a bill to approive the spending and most liberals cooperated.

With German unity in sight the struggle was almost over and the mid class was accepting
respectfully the monarchical authority that Bmac had.

—Values of Bmacs replaced the mid class libs.

The Franco-Prussian War

The final act in the German unification followed quickly — Bismarck realized that a patriotic war
with France would drive the South German states into his arms.

—The French played their part.

The issue — whether a relative of Prussia’s William I might become King of Spain — diplomatic
pretext.

By 1870 the French leaders of the second empire goaded by Bismarck and alarmed by their new
neighbor on the Rhine decided a war on Prussia.

As soon as the war against France began in 1870 Bismarck had the support of the south German
states.

—other governments maintained their neutrality.

—Bmac generosity to ausrtia in 66 was paying off — german forces under Prussian
leadership defeated the main French army at Sedan.

L. N. was captured and three days later the French patriots in Paris proclaimed another French
republic and vowed to continue fighting.

After 5 months a starving Paris surrendered—accepted the Bacs harsh peace terms.

The south Germans had agreed to join a new German Empire.

The victorious William I was proclaimed emperor of Germany in the Hall of Mirrors in Versailles
—19th cent sun king.

As in the 1866 constitution the king of Prissia had ultimate power in the new German Empire.

—Lower house was elected by universal male suffrage.

Bmac and the GE imposed a big penalty on France — forced to pay 5 billion francs and cede
Alsace and Lorraine to Germany.

—French men and women viewed the seizure as a crime, couldn’t be forgiven.

—Relations sucked!

The Franco-Prussian war which Europeans saw as a test of nations saw a huge surge in patriotic
fellings in Germany.

Bmac’s genius, Prussian army, solidarty of the king and his ppl, etc.

The weakness of the Great Powers in 1862 (after Austria, Britain, France, and Russia), Prussia
had become most powerful state in Europe.

Most Germans were proud — semi-authoritarian nationalism and a new conservatism which
was based on the alliance of the propertied classes and sought support of the working classes
took over Germany.
 24.3 — Nation Building in the United States
In what ways did the United States experience nation building?

Section #1

Closely linked to the European developments the US also experienced the full drama of nation
building.

We were divided by slivery and as econ growth was happening the free and slave states went in
opposite directions.

Northerners extended family farms westward and began building English factories in the ne.

—An industrious North was building canals and railroads and attracting most of the
European immigrants.

This didn’t happen in the south and immigrants avoided the region.

Even though not all ppl in the south owned slaves a large amount did.

—“Cotton was king” — produced 5 million bales a yr to satisfy the textile mills in Europe.

The rise of cotton expanded slave ag and spurred exports — played a key role on US econ
growth, made ppl defend slavery.

—Developed a cultural identity of “we” in the South.

These antagonism came to a climax when Mexico ceded to the US.

—Debate over extension of slavery here caused attitudes to harden.

11 states left the union — formed the confederates .

When southern troops fired on a union Fort in SC Charleston harbor war began.

The civil war was the bloodiest conflict in US history – the south was decisively defeated.
Powerful corps emerged supported by the republican party — the homestead act of 1862 gave
western land to settlers and the 13th amendment which ended slavery.

—The success of Lincoln in the North in holding the Union together seemed to confirm
the Manifest Destiny.

New American nationalism grew out of the civil war.

 24.4 — The Modernization of Russia and the
Ottoman Empire
What steps did Russia and the Ottoman Turks take toward modernization, and how successful
were they?

The Russian and Ottoman Empires saw large political crisis in the mid 19 th cent.

Unlike those in Italy/Germ bc neither Ru or Ot wanted to build a single state out of a bunch of
different principalities.

Both were already big built on traditions of military conquest and absolutist rule.

In the early 19th cent the eleites in borh states were opposed to representative government and
national self-determination.

—Concentrated on absolutist rule and comp with the Great Powers.

Both’s relentless power politics led to trouble — the leasers had to embrace modernization —
the changes that enable a country to compete with leading ones.

This limited conception of modernization fits Russia after the Crimean war well and helps
explain devs in the Ottoman empire.

The “Great Reforms” in Russia

In the 1850s Russia was a poor agricultural society with a big population and indursty was little
developed.

—90% of the pop lived off the land.

Bound to lords on a hereditary basis – the serf was basically a slave and it became a big issue for
the govnt in the 40s.

The Crimean war of 1853-6 out of dispute with France who would protect Christian shrines in
the Ottoman Empire brought crisis.

Because fighting was concentrated on the BS and peninsula. Russia’s weak transporation failed
to supply dinstant armies — rivers and wagons.

France and GB aided by Sardinia and the Ottoman Empire inflicted defeat on Russia —
demonstrated that Russia had fallen begind industrial nations of Western Europe.

Russia needed at the least rail roads, armaments, and reorganizing of it’s army if it wanted to
compete.

The war caused hardship and raised specter of peasant rebellion.

—Reform of serfdom was impoeritive.

Militart disaster forced Tsar Alexander II and his ministers along social change and
modernization.

The FIRST and BIGGEST reforms was freeing of the serfs in 1861 — bondage was ablosjied
foreber and peasants received about half of the land.

—Had to pay high prices for it — bc the land was owned collectively.

—Each peasant village was jointly responsible for the payments.

Collective ownership made it hard for individuals to improve ag methods or leave their villages.

—old patterns of behavior dominated and reform effects were limited.les

Most of the later reforms were also half way — in 1864 the govnt established a new institution
of loval governance — the semstvo.

—elected by a three class system of towns, villages, and noble lands owners.
A zemstvo council dealt with local problems, Russian liberals hoped this reform would lead to an
elected national parli but were disappointed.

—The local zem remained subordinate to trad policy/nobility.

More successful was the reform of the legal system which established independent courts and
equality before the law.

—Education and policies towards Jews were also liberalized and censorship relaxed.

Until the 20th century Russia’s greatest strides toward modernization were economic rather than
political.

—transportation and industry, vital to the mil were transformed in two surges.

The first came after 1860 when the gov encouraged subsidized private railway comps.

—Enabled ag to export geain and earn money for more development.

In industrial siburbs around Moscow and St. Petersburg a class of modern factory workers began
to take shape.

—using IR stuff Russia’s military forces began seizing territory to the S and E

—ecited super patriots and nationalists.

In 81 Alexander II was assassinated by anarchist terrorists and reform came to an end — the
new tsar alexander III was a reactionary.

—economic modernization sped forward for the second time, achieved massive IR
surge.

The key leader was Sergei Witte.

—minister of fiancé, believed that the harsh reality of IR was threating Russia’s
greatness.

Under W leadership the govnt build state owned railroads, doubling the network to 35 thousand
miles.

Established tariffs to build the Russian IR and put the country on the gold standard.
His greatest innovations was to use Westerners to catch up to the West — encouraged
foreigners to build in Russia — the inflow of capital was good.

—Successful in southern Russia.

—In Ukraine foreigners built a giant steel and coal industry.

In 1900 peasants still constituted the great majority of the population but Russia was
industrializing.

The Russian Revolution in 1905

Catching up mean territorial expansion—this was the age of Western imperialism — by 03

Russia had a SOI in Chinese Manchuria and was eyeing northern Korea.

—When protests of imperialistic Japan were ignored Jap launched a attack in 1904

—Russia was forced to concede.

Military disaster brought political upheaval — biz classes wanted a liberal rep govnt.

—Factory workers had all the grievances of early IR and organized in a radical and illegal
labor movement.

Peasants got little from reform and were suffering — nationalist sentiment was emerging among
the minorities like the Poles, Ukrainians, Latvians, calling for self rule.

With the army down in Manchiria these currents of discontent converged in the revolution of
1905.

A massive crows of workers converged on the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg to present a
petition to the tsar.

—Troops opened fire and killed hundreds.

The Bloody Sunday massacre turned workers against the tsar and prdocude general indignation.
Outlawed political parties came out into the open and more strikes, uprisings, and revolts
among minorities happened.

The rev surge culminated in 1905 in a strike that forced the govnt to capitulate. The tsar issued
the October Manifesto — granted full civil rights and promised a Duma – parliament — with real
legislative power.

—It split the opps.

Middle class leaders helped the govnt repress the uprising and survive as a constitutional
monarchy.

In the first duma the govnt issued the new constitution — the Fundamental Laws. The star
retained powers and the Duma elected by male suffrage and a appointitive upper house could
debate laws but the tsar had absolute veto.

As in Bismarck’s Germany the tsar appointed ministers who didn’t need to command a majority.

The diapointed mid class libs — the largest class saw the F/Ls as a step back.

—Efforts to coop with ministers broke down and after deadlock, the tsar dismissed the
Duma.

After that his reactionary advisers rewrote the electoral law to increase weight of propertied
clases.

—The tsar could count a loyal majority

Pushed ag reforms to break down collective village ownerships.

Peasant based but industrializing economy.

Decline in Reform in the Ottoman Empire

The OE had reached its high point of dev under Sileiman the Magnificent in the 16 th cent—by the
18th it was falling behind western science, skill, and military tech.

Russia’s powerful army was able to occupy OE provinces along the Danube River.

—The danger that the powers of Europe would conquer the OE and divide it was real.

Caught up in the Nappy wars and losing land to Russia the OE was forced to grant Serbia local
autonomy in 1816.

The Greeks won their independence while the French armies began their conquest of the Arabic
province of Algeria.

Another threat came from within — Muhammad Ali — OE governor in Egypt — his French-
trained forces occupied the OE in Syria and IRaw and appeared ready to depose the Ottoman
emporer—Mahumud II.

The sultan survived but only bc European powers fired MA to withdraw.

The European powers minus frances preferred a weak OE leader than a strong Ali.

Realizing their bad position the liveral Ottoman statesmen launched an era of reforms—made a
new constitution and short lived parliament.

—Known as the Tanzimat-regulation or orders

—Used to model Western European modes of power.

The high point of reform came with Sultan Abdul Mejid’s Imperial Rescript of 1857—called for
equality before the law, modernized admin and military and religious freedom.

As part of its new policy of tolerance, new commercial laws allowed free importation of foreign
goods and merchants to operate in the empire.
 —Growing #s among elite embraced Western education and accepted secular values.

Intended to bring rev modern the Tanzimat permitted recovery but fell short of its goals.

1 — The reforms failed to halt nationalism among Christian subjects in the Balkans-unchecked
protest.

2 — The ottoman initiatives didn’t curtail Western imperialism which secured a hold on the OE’s
economy.

Equality before the law increased religious disputes.

—Excasterbated by interference of the European powers.

Embitted relations between communitities and distracted the govnt from reform and split
Muslism into secularists and conservatives.

Conservative Muslims detested reforms — departure from Islamic tradition — most dependable
support of Sultan Abdulhamid.

—Abandoned the model of European liberalism in his repressive reign.

Both declining international power and conservative tyranny led to resurgence of modernizing
impulse among Turkish exiles in Europe.

—Young Turks who were fervent patriots seized power in 1908.

—Forced the sultan to implement reforms.

—failed to stop the rising tide of anti-OE nationalism in the Balkans.

—Helped prepare the way for modern secular turkey.