Scan barcode
A review by heathward
German Hist 1770-1866 by James J. Sheehan
5.0
This is a masterful account of the period in question, exhaustive in scope and with a very readable narrative. Sheehan argues against the idea that the history of this period was a mere prelude to unification, and that it was instead pregnant with a number of differing opportunities for development. His best writing comes in his easy synthesis of culture with politics and society- in particular as he tracks the emergence of bourgeois society following the political defeat of 1848.
However, it should be said that it is heard to pick out one cohesive argument with which to define Sheehan's work, given its impressive scope. Perhaps its central takeaway would be that the liberal influence on the formation of German history has been overstated by historians, and that appreciation of the underlying societal developments of the time has been understated.
Interesting Quotes:
1. The HRE was the “last expression of a long, universalist tradition in European public life.”
“Its goal was not to clarify and dominate, but rather to order and balance.” (14)
2. “When the nature and purpose of political power [in the 18th century] changed, so did its distribution and location: away from the Reich and towards the territorial states, away from local institutions and towards the central administration… away from the fragmented lands of the West and towards the major states of the north and east.” (41)
3. In 18th Century Prussia: “The new laws sought to create a new kind of man, a citizen… who would exist outside the particularist confines of family, caste, or community. The state promised these citizens freedoms from the restraints imposed by intermediate institutions, but in return demanded that they obey its laws, pay its taxes, and serve in its armed forces. As we have seen, no pre-revolutionary state was able to fulfil these promises of emancipation or to realize their desires for control.” (71)
4. “The historical myth of liberation tended to obscure the essential significance of the revolutionary era for German history… the revolutionary era’s most important product was not the mobilization of the Volk but rather the reform and reorganization of the states. By 1815, Prussia, Austria, and the various middle-sized states had emerged as the dominant forces in German public life. They had clearly- if not completely- triumphed over the competing sovereignties of Reich and Herrschaft.” (387-88)
5. “During the first three decades of the nineteenth century bureaucratic and constitutional developments were not antithetical; both were means to consolidate the sovereign power and political cohesion of states, to limit the arbitrary will of the rule, and to contain the residual privileges traditional elites and institutions.”
“The emergence of constitutional government and the consolidation of bureaucratic authority were part of the same historical process, frequently advocated for by the same people, opposed by the same enemies, and seeking to advance the same goals.” (426)
6. “As they planned for the next round in the struggle against revolution, the men of the fifties proved to be more flexible and broad-minded than the generation that had tried to recreate the old order after Waterloo. Schwarzenberg and Brandenburg, like Louis Napoleon and Cavour, realized that a successful defense of the old order required new ideas and institutions, some of which might have to come from the arsenals of their enemies. The hallmark of post-revolutionary conservatism, therefore, was its growing association with the most powerful forces of the age: bureaucratization, constitutionalism, nationalism, and economic development.” (710-11)
7. “Our account of German history from the end of the eighteenth century to 1866 has been dominated by three themes. First, we saw how the development of bureaucratic and participatory institutions changed the character and capacities of governments throughout German Europe. Second, we followed the economic expansion in which the productivity of both agriculture and manufacturing increased, commercial activity intensified, and urban growth was encouraged. Finally, we examined the rising culture of print, which sustained new developments in literature, philosophy and scholarship and also helped transform the rules and procedures of everyday life. Of course, these three themes were inseparable; each depended on and reinforced the other.”
“While it is clear that these political, economic, and cultural changes combined to destroy the old regime, it was not inevitable that they would produce a unified German nation. In some ways, they may even have made political unification more difficult.” (912)
However, it should be said that it is heard to pick out one cohesive argument with which to define Sheehan's work, given its impressive scope. Perhaps its central takeaway would be that the liberal influence on the formation of German history has been overstated by historians, and that appreciation of the underlying societal developments of the time has been understated.
Interesting Quotes:
1. The HRE was the “last expression of a long, universalist tradition in European public life.”
“Its goal was not to clarify and dominate, but rather to order and balance.” (14)
2. “When the nature and purpose of political power [in the 18th century] changed, so did its distribution and location: away from the Reich and towards the territorial states, away from local institutions and towards the central administration… away from the fragmented lands of the West and towards the major states of the north and east.” (41)
3. In 18th Century Prussia: “The new laws sought to create a new kind of man, a citizen… who would exist outside the particularist confines of family, caste, or community. The state promised these citizens freedoms from the restraints imposed by intermediate institutions, but in return demanded that they obey its laws, pay its taxes, and serve in its armed forces. As we have seen, no pre-revolutionary state was able to fulfil these promises of emancipation or to realize their desires for control.” (71)
4. “The historical myth of liberation tended to obscure the essential significance of the revolutionary era for German history… the revolutionary era’s most important product was not the mobilization of the Volk but rather the reform and reorganization of the states. By 1815, Prussia, Austria, and the various middle-sized states had emerged as the dominant forces in German public life. They had clearly- if not completely- triumphed over the competing sovereignties of Reich and Herrschaft.” (387-88)
5. “During the first three decades of the nineteenth century bureaucratic and constitutional developments were not antithetical; both were means to consolidate the sovereign power and political cohesion of states, to limit the arbitrary will of the rule, and to contain the residual privileges traditional elites and institutions.”
“The emergence of constitutional government and the consolidation of bureaucratic authority were part of the same historical process, frequently advocated for by the same people, opposed by the same enemies, and seeking to advance the same goals.” (426)
6. “As they planned for the next round in the struggle against revolution, the men of the fifties proved to be more flexible and broad-minded than the generation that had tried to recreate the old order after Waterloo. Schwarzenberg and Brandenburg, like Louis Napoleon and Cavour, realized that a successful defense of the old order required new ideas and institutions, some of which might have to come from the arsenals of their enemies. The hallmark of post-revolutionary conservatism, therefore, was its growing association with the most powerful forces of the age: bureaucratization, constitutionalism, nationalism, and economic development.” (710-11)
7. “Our account of German history from the end of the eighteenth century to 1866 has been dominated by three themes. First, we saw how the development of bureaucratic and participatory institutions changed the character and capacities of governments throughout German Europe. Second, we followed the economic expansion in which the productivity of both agriculture and manufacturing increased, commercial activity intensified, and urban growth was encouraged. Finally, we examined the rising culture of print, which sustained new developments in literature, philosophy and scholarship and also helped transform the rules and procedures of everyday life. Of course, these three themes were inseparable; each depended on and reinforced the other.”
“While it is clear that these political, economic, and cultural changes combined to destroy the old regime, it was not inevitable that they would produce a unified German nation. In some ways, they may even have made political unification more difficult.” (912)