Imperial Russia, revolution and the establishment of the Soviet Union (1855–1924)

Italy from restoration to revolution, 1815–1849

Germany in the Vormärz era and the 1848 revolutions

The unification of Italy, 1849–1871

Prussia, Austria and the Zollverein, 1815–1866

Bismarck and the final unification of Germany

Bismarck’s Germany, 1871–1890

### The Vienna settlement and Austrian dominance

The Congress of Vienna did not create a united Italian state. Instead, it restored a group of monarchies intended to preserve conservative rule and prevent France from dominating Italy again:

- Austria directly controlled Lombardy–Venetia.
- Habsburg relatives ruled Tuscany, Modena and Parma.
- The Bourbon Ferdinand I ruled the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies.
- Pope Pius VII recovered the Papal States.
- Victor Emmanuel I regained Piedmont–Sardinia, enlarged by the addition of Genoa.

Austria therefore held both direct territorial power and indirect dynastic influence. Piedmont–Sardinia remained one of the substantial Italian states outside the Austrian political system.

Prince Klemens von Metternich saw constitutionalism and nationalism as threats to the Habsburg Empire. Austrian diplomacy, censorship, police cooperation and military intervention defended the Vienna settlement. Austria became the main obstacle facing Italian revolutionaries, although divisions among the Italians themselves mattered just as much.

### Nationalism and liberalism

Italian **nationalism** sought to give people considered part of an Italian nation greater political unity and independence from foreign rule. At first, it did not settle whether Italy should become a republic, a federation or a monarchy.

Italian **liberalism** called for constitutional government, civil rights and limits on absolute monarchy. Many liberals came from the educated middle classes. They wanted reform, but not a mass social revolution.

The Carbonari built secret networks, particularly in southern Italy. Secrecy helped them survive repression. However, their limited membership, unclear programmes and reliance on sympathetic soldiers made lasting popular support difficult to achieve.

### The revolutions of 1820–1821

In July 1820, military Carbonari led by Guglielmo Pepe forced Ferdinand I of the Two Sicilies to accept a constitution. Ferdinand then appealed to the conservative powers. In March 1821, an Austrian army defeated the constitutional forces at Rieti, and absolute rule returned.

A revolt broke out in Piedmont in March 1821. Victor Emmanuel I abdicated, and Charles Albert, acting temporarily as regent, accepted a constitution. Charles Felix rejected it when he returned. Royal and Austrian forces defeated the rebels at Novara in April.

These failures showed that conspiracies built around sections of the army could force temporary concessions, but could not resist Austrian intervention. The revolutionaries also failed to coordinate across the different Italian states.

### Revolts from 1831 to 1844

Revolution spread through Modena and the Papal Legations in 1831. Ciro Menotti hoped Francis IV of Modena would support a nationalist rising. Instead, Francis had him arrested and later executed. Rebels briefly created the United Italian Provinces around Bologna, but Papal and Austrian forces restored the old order.

Giuseppe Mazzini founded Young Italy in Marseille in 1831 in response to the Carbonari’s limitations. He advocated a united, independent and republican Italy, created through a popular national revolution. His attempted invasion of Savoy in 1834 failed. In 1844, the Bandiera brothers’ expedition into Calabria ended with their capture and execution.

Mazzini’s practical ventures failed, but his writing gave Italian nationalism a clearer moral and political purpose. Critics argue that his reliance on heroic insurrection underestimated regional loyalties, peasant concerns and Austria’s military power.

### Gioberti and the papacy

Vincenzo Gioberti presented a moderate alternative to Mazzini. In *On the Moral and Civil Primacy of the Italians* (1843), he proposed a federation of existing Italian states under papal leadership. This neo-Guelph programme appealed to Catholics who wanted national cooperation without a republican revolution.

The election of Pius IX in 1846 strengthened these hopes. His early measures, including an amnesty for political prisoners and limited administrative reforms, gave him a liberal reputation. Yet the papacy’s spiritual responsibilities and its control of the Papal States made leadership of a national war highly problematic.

### Causes and nature of the 1848–1849 revolutions

Several pressures combined to produce the revolutions:

- resentment of Austrian power and restored absolutism;
- demands for constitutions, civil liberties and representative institutions;
- Mazzinian republican nationalism and moderate federal nationalism;
- poor harvests, food shortages and economic distress in 1846–1847;
- the example of revolution in France in February 1848.

A revolt began in Palermo in January 1848. Ferdinand II granted a constitution in Naples. Rulers in Tuscany, Piedmont and the Papal States then made similar concessions. Charles Albert’s *Statuto* of March 1848 became especially significant because it survived the revolutionary defeat.

In March, the Five Days of Milan forced the Austrian commander Joseph Radetzky to withdraw temporarily. Venice proclaimed a republic under Daniele Manin. Charles Albert declared war on Austria and presented Piedmont as the leader of a national struggle.

The movement contained incompatible aims, however: a Piedmontese war of expansion, moderate constitutional reform, local separatism and Mazzinian republicanism. Pius IX weakened the national coalition when his allocution of April 1848 refused to support a war against Catholic Austria.

### Defeat and consequences

Radetzky defeated Piedmont at Custoza in July 1848. Charles Albert resumed the war in 1849, but suffered another decisive defeat at Novara in March. He then abdicated in favour of Victor Emmanuel II.

Radicals established a Roman Republic in February 1849, with Mazzini serving in its governing triumvirate. It introduced secular and democratic reforms, but French troops sent by Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte crushed it in order to restore Pius IX. Austrian forces defeated the remaining revolutions in central Italy, and Venice surrendered in August 1849.

The revolutions failed because Austria regained its military strength, the revolutionaries lacked unified command, and moderates and radicals distrusted each other. Rural populations were not mobilized consistently. Foreign powers also supported restoration rather than national revolution.

The defeat did not destroy nationalism. Piedmont kept the *Statuto* and emerged as the only constitutional Italian monarchy. The events also discredited the hope that the pope would lead unification. They showed that volunteers and uprisings alone could not defeat Austria. Mazzinians stressed the continuing strength of popular nationalism; monarchists concluded that unification required Piedmontese diplomacy, a regular army and foreign assistance.

### Germany after the Congress of Vienna

The Congress of Vienna replaced the dissolved Holy Roman Empire with the German Confederation, a loose association of 39 states. Its Federal Diet met in Frankfurt and operated under Austrian presidency. There was no elected national parliament, central executive or unified army under permanent national control.

Austria held the diplomatic upper hand in the Confederation. Prussia, however, controlled substantial territories in eastern Germany and the Rhineland. The settlement protected the independence of the German rulers, but frustrated nationalists who wanted a united constitutional state.

### Nationalism, liberalism and repression

The **Vormärz** refers to the period before the March 1848 revolutions in the German states. Conservative governments came into conflict with movements calling for national unity, constitutional rule and civil liberties.

Student associations helped spread German nationalism, especially at the Wartburg Festival of 1817. In 1819, the student Karl Sand murdered the conservative writer August von Kotzebue. Metternich then persuaded the German states to adopt the Carlsbad Decrees. They restricted student organizations, tightened press censorship and placed universities under closer supervision.

Opposition did not disappear. Thousands gathered at the Hambach Festival of 1832 to support national unity and political liberty. In 1837, the Göttingen Seven protested after the king of Hanover revoked the constitution. Episodes such as these kept liberal nationalism alive, although the movement remained strongest among students, professionals and sections of the middle class.

### Economic and social change

Population growth and early industrialization changed German society. Textile production expanded in Saxony, while coal, iron and engineering developed rapidly in the Prussian Rhineland and Westphalia. Railway construction speeded up economic integration and made it easier to move goods, soldiers and information.

As towns grew, new groups of factory workers appeared. Artisans, though, often feared competition from mechanized production. Many peasants still had traditional obligations, even though reforms had weakened serfdom in several states. Poor harvests and the potato disease of 1845–1847 pushed food prices higher and deepened unemployment and hardship.

Economic change also affected politics. Merchants and manufacturers wanted fewer internal customs barriers, common commercial rules and larger markets. These interests could support national unity, but economic integration did not automatically produce agreement on constitutional government.

### Causes and outbreak of revolution

The revolutions of 1848 had both long-term and immediate causes:

- liberal resentment of censorship and arbitrary government;
- nationalist dissatisfaction with the weakness of the Confederation;
- middle-class demands for constitutions and political participation;
- hardship among workers, artisans and peasants;
- the example provided by the February Revolution in France.

Revolutionary demonstrations began in the south-western states. In Berlin, fighting on 18–19 March forced Frederick William IV of Prussia to withdraw troops, honour those killed and promise constitutional change. At the same time, revolution in Vienna weakened Austrian authority.

### The Frankfurt Parliament

Elections created a German National Assembly, which met for the first time in Frankfurt’s St Paul’s Church on 18 May 1848. Its members were mainly lawyers, officials, academics and other middle-class professionals. They set out to establish both a liberal constitution and a united Germany.

The assembly had to resolve two central questions. The *Grossdeutsch* solution would include Austria. The *Kleindeutsch* solution would leave Austria out and put Prussia at the centre of Germany. Austria’s determination to preserve its multinational empire made inclusion increasingly impractical.

The parliament issued a declaration of fundamental rights and completed a federal constitution. On 28 March 1849, it voted to offer the hereditary imperial crown to Frederick William IV. A formal deputation presented the crown to him on 3 April. He refused it in April because he would not accept authority from a revolutionary assembly. Accepting it also risked conflict with Austria and other German rulers.

### Reasons for defeat

The revolutionaries had no army of their own and relied on the cooperation of existing governments. Lengthy constitutional debates gave Austria and Prussia time to recover. Liberals feared a radical social revolution, while workers and artisans often felt that middle-class constitutional reform did not meet their economic needs.

National disagreements weakened the movement as well. The dispute over Schleswig-Holstein showed how dependent the Frankfurt Parliament was on Prussia. Prussia accepted the Malmö armistice with Denmark in 1848; the parliament initially opposed it, but later accepted it under pressure. Disagreement over whether Austria should be included caused further delay.

After royal armies regained control, uprisings defending the Frankfurt Constitution in Dresden, the Palatinate and Baden were defeated during 1849. The remaining parliament was dispersed, and many revolutionaries fled abroad.

### Consequences

The old Confederation returned, along with Austrian influence. Prussia later tried to create an Erfurt Union without Austria, but the plan ended in the Punctation of Olmütz in 1850. Under pressure from Austria and Russia, Prussia abandoned the scheme.

Restoration was not complete, however. Constitutions survived in several states, and some remaining feudal obligations were abolished. The Frankfurt Parliament had openly debated civil rights and created a model for a German national constitution.

Liberal nationalists increasingly questioned whether speeches and assemblies could overcome the power of established states. One interpretation therefore sees 1848 as a decisive failure. Another stresses its longer legacy in constitutional practice, political organization and the eventual acceptance of a Prussian-led *Kleindeutsch* solution.

### Piedmont after 1849

After the defeat at Novara, Victor Emmanuel II kept the *Statuto*. That left Piedmont–Sardinia as the only major Italian state with a lasting constitutional government. Moderates who wanted national unity without a republican revolution were therefore drawn to it.

Count Camillo di Cavour became prime minister in 1852. He was a constitutional monarchist, not a democratic nationalist. His immediate goal was to strengthen Piedmont and extend its influence across northern Italy. He did not follow a fixed plan to create a completely united Italy.

Cavour encouraged railway construction, trade agreements, banking and agricultural development. He backed a more secular state and continued reducing clerical privileges, as the Siccardi Laws had begun to do. As Piedmont modernized, it gained resources and increasingly appeared to be the Italian state best placed to lead unification.

### Cavour and foreign diplomacy

Cavour knew that Piedmont could not defeat Austria by itself. In 1855, he sent troops to the Crimean War alongside Britain and France. Piedmont gained little on the battlefield, but Cavour attended the Congress of Paris in 1856. There, he brought international attention to Austrian influence and political instability in Italy.

Cavour and Napoleon III met secretly at Plombières in July 1858. France agreed to support Piedmont if Austria could be made to look like the aggressor. France expected Nice and Savoy in return. The proposed settlement would enlarge Piedmont in northern Italy, though it would not necessarily create one Italian kingdom.

In April 1859, Austria issued an ultimatum demanding that Piedmont demobilize. Its later declaration of war gave Napoleon III a reason to intervene. French and Piedmontese forces won costly victories at Magenta and Solferino.

Napoleon III then unexpectedly agreed to the armistice of Villafranca in July. Piedmont gained Lombardy, while Austria kept Venetia. French concern over casualties, Prussian mobilization and the risks of a long war restricted what Cavour could accomplish.

### Central Italy and the plebiscites

During the war, revolutions drove the rulers out of Tuscany, Parma and Modena. Their provisional governments asked to unite with Piedmont. Plebiscites held in 1860 approved annexation, although Piedmontese authorities controlled the political conditions and the voting fell short of modern democratic standards.

Napoleon III accepted the annexations in exchange for Nice and Savoy. Their transfer to France angered Giuseppe Garibaldi, who had been born in Nice. It did, however, secure French recognition of Piedmont’s enlarged kingdom.

### Garibaldi and the south

Garibaldi represented the popular and military side of unification. He had once been a Mazzinian, and he remained personally committed to national unity. His role in the Roman Republic and his later campaigns had also given him considerable prestige.

In May 1860, Garibaldi and the Expedition of the Thousand sailed from Quarto to Sicily. Local opponents of Bourbon rule supported them, and volunteers added to their numbers. They won at Calatafimi, captured Palermo and defeated Bourbon forces at Milazzo. Garibaldi then crossed to the mainland and entered Naples in September.

His success gave Cavour both an opportunity and a problem. Garibaldi could attack papal Rome and provoke French intervention, or set up a radical regime in the south. Piedmontese troops consequently entered the Papal States, defeated papal forces at Castelfidardo and occupied the Marche and Umbria.

Garibaldi defeated the main Bourbon counter-attack at the Volturno. At Teano in October 1860, he recognized Victor Emmanuel II as king. Plebiscites approved the annexation of the south, the Marche and Umbria. The Kingdom of Italy was proclaimed on 17 March 1861.

Cavour brought diplomacy, state resources and international legitimacy. Garibaldi brought initiative, volunteers and the conquest of the south. Their methods and aims were different, but unification needed both. It also relied on the collapse of Bourbon authority and on local participation in Sicily and Naples.

### Venetia and Rome

Italy was still incomplete in 1861. Austria held Venetia, while a French garrison protected Rome. Italian troops stopped Garibaldi’s unauthorized attempt to reach Rome at Aspromonte in 1862. In 1867, another attempt ended with his defeat by French and papal forces at Mentana.

In 1866, Italy allied with Prussia against Austria. Italian forces lost at Custoza and Lissa, but Prussia’s victory forced Austria to surrender Venetia. France transferred the territory to Italy. Once again, foreign victories played a major part in Italian territorial gains.

During the Franco-Prussian War, Napoleon III withdrew his troops from Rome. Italian forces entered the city through the Porta Pia in September 1870. A plebiscite approved annexation. Rome became the seat of the Italian government in 1871, although Parliament had declared it the capital in 1861. Pius IX rejected the loss of temporal power, creating an ongoing conflict between the papacy and the Italian state.

### Interpreting unification

A Piedmont-centred interpretation highlights Cavour’s modernization, diplomacy and controlled use of war. A popular-national interpretation places more emphasis on Mazzini’s ideas, Garibaldi’s volunteers and local revolts. Other accounts point to France creating the opportunity in 1859, Prussia indirectly delivering Venetia in 1866, and France’s defeat opening the way into Rome in 1870.

Unification did not follow one person’s plan. It grew out of state policy, revolutionary nationalism, military action and international circumstances working together. It also largely extended Piedmontese institutions across the peninsula instead of creating an entirely new political system.

### The balance established in 1815

Austria entered this period as the leading German power. It presided over the German Confederation, carried considerable diplomatic influence and stood for the conservative order defended by Metternich. Its prestige came from the size of the Habsburg Empire, rather than from leading a German nation-state.

Prussian territory was split between an eastern core and important western provinces in the Rhineland and Westphalia. This created a weakness, but it also offered an opportunity. The western provinces had valuable coal, iron and manufacturing centres, and they placed Prussia near major European markets.

Prussia also drew on reforms introduced after its defeat by Napoleon. A professional bureaucracy, expanding education and reorganized military institutions gave the state considerable administrative capacity. The landed Junker elite still held strong influence, particularly in the officer corps and the eastern countryside.

### The Zollverein

The **Zollverein** was a Prussian-led customs union. It removed internal tariffs among participating German states and introduced a common external tariff. Trade became more integrated, while the member states remained politically independent.

Prussia abolished many internal customs barriers and introduced a unified tariff in 1818. Regional customs unions then reached further agreements, and the Zollverein formally began in 1834. Most German states gradually joined, although Austria stayed outside.

The union enlarged markets and simplified trade. It also supported railway construction. Prussian officials gained experience coordinating economic policy, while Austria’s exclusion made it harder for the empire to influence German commercial development.

The Zollverein’s political importance should not be overstated. It did not make war or Prussian leadership inevitable, and several member governments opposed political unification. Its main importance was that it strengthened material links centred on Prussia and exposed Austria’s growing economic disadvantage.

### Austria’s structural problems

Austria ruled a multinational empire that included Germans, Magyars, Czechs, Italians and several Slav peoples. German nationalism therefore created a dilemma. Austria could not easily join a German nation-state without either including its non-German territories or dividing the Habsburg Empire.

The empire also faced uneven industrial development, complicated internal tariff arrangements and repeated financial pressures. Centralizing rule after 1849 restored authority for a time, but it did not settle conflicts among the empire’s national groups.

Austria remained a formidable power. It recovered from the 1848 revolutions and, with Russian support, pressured Prussia to abandon the Erfurt Union at Olmütz in 1850. This marked the high point of restored Austrian dominance in Germany. It did not show that a Prussian victory was already certain.

### Prussia’s economic and military advance

During the 1850s and 1860s, Prussian coal, iron, steel, engineering and railway networks grew rapidly. Industrial expansion raised tax revenue and supplied the transport and weapons needed by a modern army. The western provinces became increasingly important to Prussian power.

William I became king in 1861 and backed army reform. Albrecht von Roon proposed increasing the number of regular regiments, extending active service and reducing reliance on the *Landwehr*. Helmuth von Moltke strengthened the General Staff’s planning and made effective use of railways, telegraphs and rapid mobilization.

The liberal-dominated Prussian lower house rejected the military budget. William appointed Otto von Bismarck minister-president in September 1862, after which the government collected taxes without an approved budget. The constitutional conflict showed that Prussian modernization existed alongside authoritarian monarchy.

### Austria’s diplomatic decline

Austria damaged its international position during the Crimean War. It pressured Russia to withdraw from the Danubian principalities without joining Britain and France as a full ally. As a result, it alienated Russia but gained no dependable western partner.

Defeat by France and Piedmont in 1859 cost Austria Lombardy and weakened its prestige. Political and financial pressures continued through the 1860s. Austria was still a great power, but it faced Prussia while diplomatically isolated and burdened by commitments across a multinational empire.

### The decision of 1866

Prussia and Austria cooperated against Denmark in 1864, then quarrelled over the administration of Schleswig and Holstein. Bismarck secured Italian support and worked to keep France and Russia neutral. Prussian troops entered Holstein in June 1866, and Austria appealed to the Federal Diet.

The resulting Austro-Prussian War was decided quickly. Moltke’s armies used railways to concentrate separate forces in Bohemia, then defeated Austria at Königgrätz on 3 July 1866. Prussia also defeated Austria’s German allies.

The Peace of Prague dissolved the German Confederation and excluded Austria from German affairs. Prussia annexed Hanover, Hesse-Kassel, Nassau, Frankfurt and Schleswig-Holstein. Prussia’s rise resulted from economic and military strength, favourable diplomacy and effective leadership. Austria’s decline came from diplomatic isolation, strategic overextension and unresolved imperial weaknesses. No single factor was sufficient by itself.

### Bismarck’s objectives and methods

Otto von Bismarck became Prussian minister-president in September 1862, during the dispute over army reform. His aims were to preserve the Prussian monarchy and strengthen Prussia within Germany. German unification offered a way to place German nationalism under conservative Prussian leadership.

Bismarck used limited war alongside diplomacy. He tried to isolate each opponent, prevent a coalition from forming against Prussia and end conflicts once Prussia had achieved its immediate aims. His success rested on the institutions and resources built up by the Prussian state, not on diplomacy by itself.

### Economic and military reorganization

Prussia’s industrial economy provided weapons, railways and tax revenue. The Zollverein strengthened Prussia’s economic influence and kept Austria outside it. Growing commercial links also made political cooperation among the northern states more practical.

Roon’s reforms expanded and reorganized the regular army. Moltke’s General Staff prepared mobilization plans and used the railways to move troops quickly. The breech-loading Dreyse needle gun increased infantry firepower, though organization, command and the concentration of force mattered at least as much as the weapon itself.

Bismarck governed without an approved budget from 1862 to 1866, so the reforms could continue. After Prussia defeated Austria, the Indemnity Act of 1866 retrospectively approved the government’s expenditure. Many National Liberals accepted this compromise because Prussian success seemed to be advancing national unity.

### Diplomatic preparation

Bismarck kept Russian goodwill by supporting Russia during the Polish uprising of 1863. He took advantage of Napoleon III’s expectation that France might receive compensation for remaining neutral and secured an alliance with Italy in 1866. Austria was therefore left without dependable great-power support against Prussia.

This diplomacy created favourable circumstances, but it was risky. Bismarck could not control every development. In 1862, neither the exact sequence of wars nor the final empire existed as a complete plan.

### The Danish War, 1864

The Danish king’s attempt to incorporate Schleswig more closely into Denmark caused a German constitutional dispute. Prussia and Austria defeated Denmark jointly in 1864. Under the Treaty of Vienna, Denmark surrendered Schleswig, Holstein and Lauenburg.

The Convention of Gastein in 1865 put Schleswig under Prussian administration and Holstein under Austrian administration. This gave Bismarck an issue that he could use to challenge Austria while claiming that Prussia was defending German interests.

### The Austro-Prussian War, 1866

Bismarck secured Italian participation and encouraged French neutrality before provoking a dispute over Holstein. When Austria referred the issue to the Federal Diet, Prussia declared that the Convention of Gastein had been broken.

The Seven Weeks’ War ended with Prussia’s victory at Königgrätz on 3 July 1866. Bismarck rejected demands for a march on Vienna. The moderate Peace of Prague excluded Austria from Germany while preserving the Habsburg monarchy as a possible future partner.

Prussia annexed several northern states and established the North German Confederation in 1867. Its constitution placed the Prussian king at its head and made Bismarck federal chancellor. The southern German states remained independent, but they signed military agreements with Prussia.

### The Franco-Prussian War, 1870–1871

France was alarmed by the candidacy of Prince Leopold of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen for the Spanish throne. Leopold withdrew, but France demanded a permanent assurance that the candidacy would never be renewed. William I sent Bismarck a report from Ems describing his polite rejection of this demand.

Bismarck edited the Ems Dispatch so that its publication made the encounter seem insulting to both sides. France declared war on Prussia on 19 July 1870. Since France appeared to be the aggressor, the southern German states honoured their military agreements with Prussia.

German forces mobilized quickly and encircled a French army at Sedan. Napoleon III surrendered on 2 September 1870, although the new French Republic continued the war. Paris capitulated in January 1871. The Treaty of Frankfurt transferred Alsace and part of Lorraine to Germany and imposed a large indemnity on France.

The victory encouraged the southern rulers to join the new state. William I was proclaimed German Emperor at Versailles on 18 January 1871. The setting symbolized military victory and Prussian leadership. Negotiations with the southern states and a strong wave of national enthusiasm also played an important part.

### The 1871 Constitution

The German Empire was a federal state dominated by Prussia.

| Institution | Position and powers |
|---|---|
| Emperor | The king of Prussia held the imperial title, commanded the armed forces and appointed the chancellor. |
| Chancellor | Bismarck was responsible to the emperor rather than to the Reichstag and directed imperial policy. |
| Bundesrat | Representatives of the state governments participated in legislation; Prussia possessed the largest delegation and enough votes to block constitutional change. |
| Reichstag | Elected by universal male suffrage, it debated and approved legislation and budgets but could not appoint or dismiss the government. |
| Federal states | Retained governments and powers in areas such as education and local administration, although imperial authority expanded in national affairs. |

The constitution brought modern electoral politics together with monarchical executive power. It met demands for national unity without creating parliamentary government. Prussia’s territory, population, army and control of the imperial office ensured that federalism did not produce an equal partnership among the states.

### Explaining unification

Interpretations that focus on Bismarck stress his diplomatic flexibility, calculated isolation of opponents and readiness to use limited war. Structural interpretations place more weight on Prussian industry, the Zollverein, army reform and Austria’s multinational difficulties. Nationalist pressure mattered as well: it helped Bismarck attract liberal support and gain cooperation from other German states.

The best explanation brings these factors together. Prussia had the resources required for unification, and Bismarck used them effectively. Nationalism provided support, while victory ensured that the resulting Germany was monarchical, federal and dominated by Prussia.

### Consolidating the empire

The empire created in 1871 brought together states with different dynasties, religious traditions and political cultures. Bismarck wanted to build loyalty to the imperial state without giving up monarchical authority or Prussian dominance.

Prussia held most of the empire’s territory and population. Its king automatically became German Emperor, and Prussia’s influence in the Bundesrat could block unwanted constitutional amendments. Prussian ministers often occupied imperial offices as well. The Prussian army provided the core of the imperial military system.

Common institutions and laws helped political integration. The mark became a single currency. The Imperial Bank was established under the 1875 Bank Act and began operations in 1876. Judicial reforms made courts and legal procedures more uniform. Railways, postal services and commercial growth also brought the states closer together.

Federalism did not disappear. Bavaria and other states kept their own governments, monarchs and powers in areas such as education and religion. Germany was consolidated through central institutions, but regional identities survived.

### Political alliances and economic policy

At first, Bismarck worked with the National Liberals. They supported legal and economic integration, free trade and several measures aimed at reducing Catholic political influence. Their alliance with Bismarck also connected much of liberal nationalism to the existing empire.

The economic crash that began in 1873 reduced confidence in liberal economic policies. Agricultural landowners struggled against imported grain, while industrialists wanted protection from foreign manufactures. In 1879, Bismarck introduced protective tariffs and moved towards cooperation with the Conservatives and the Catholic Centre Party.

This change brought parts of heavy industry and the Prussian landed elite behind the government. Economic historians focus on the interests these groups shared. Political interpretations instead stress Bismarck’s need for reliable Reichstag majorities and new revenue.

### The Kulturkampf

The **Kulturkampf** was the conflict between Bismarck’s government and the Catholic Church during the 1870s. It concerned the authority of the state, clerical influence and Catholic political organization.

The declaration of papal infallibility in 1870 and the growth of the Centre Party made Bismarck suspect that Catholics might put loyalty to the pope before loyalty to the empire. Catholics formed a large minority, concentrated in regions such as the Rhineland, Bavaria and Polish-inhabited Prussian territories.

Government measures included the Pulpit Law of 1871, the expulsion of the Jesuits in 1872 and the Prussian May Laws of 1873. These laws placed clerical education and appointments under state supervision. Civil marriage became compulsory in 1875. The state could also withhold financial support from clergy who resisted.

The campaign failed to destroy political Catholicism. Clergy refused to comply, bishops were imprisoned or removed, parishes were left without priests, and Catholic voters rallied behind the Centre Party. Bismarck gradually withdrew after 1878 and reached accommodations with Pope Leo XIII during the 1880s.

Practical politics drove this reversal. Bismarck needed Centre Party support, while socialism had become a more urgent threat. The Kulturkampf strengthened a separate Catholic political identity rather than eliminating it.

### The anti-socialist campaign

Industrialization expanded the urban working class. The Social Democratic Workers’ Party and the General German Workers’ Association united at Gotha in 1875, creating the movement that became the Social Democratic Party.

Two attempts to assassinate William I in 1878 were not carried out by the socialists. Bismarck nevertheless used the atmosphere of fear to secure the Anti-Socialist Law. Renewed until 1890, it banned socialist organizations, meetings and publications. Socialist candidates could still contest Reichstag elections as individuals.

Repression disrupted party organization but did not remove socialist support. Underground networks and publications continued, while the socialist vote grew. The policy restricted activity without addressing the social and economic conditions that produced working-class politics.

### Social legislation

Bismarck combined repression with state welfare. His government introduced sickness insurance in 1883, accident insurance in 1884, and old-age and disability insurance in 1889. Under these schemes, employers, workers and the state paid different shares of the costs.

The legislation gave real assistance and established an important state role in social protection. It was also politically conservative. Bismarck hoped to tie workers to the empire and reduce support for socialism. The continued rise of the socialist vote shows that welfare did not achieve this political aim.

### Minorities and national cohesion

Imperial unity did not erase cultural divisions. Germanization policies put pressure on Polish speakers in Prussia, especially through education and official language requirements. Alsace-Lorraine, annexed from France, was governed as imperial territory and retained strong regional and French attachments.

Catholics, Poles, socialists and regional particularists were, at different times, portrayed as insufficiently loyal. These campaigns could rally support for the state, but they also deepened the identities they were meant to weaken.

### The balance of success and failure

Bismarck consolidated the empire through legal integration, economic institutions, cooperation with changing parliamentary blocs, and the prestige of the Prussian monarchy and army. He protected executive government from demands for full parliamentary responsibility.

His domestic campaigns were less effective when they tried to suppress mass political identities. The Centre Party survived the Kulturkampf, while socialism expanded despite repression. Bismarck often changed policy once confrontation stopped serving his immediate interests. This showed tactical flexibility, but also the lack of a stable parliamentary base.

William II became emperor in 1888. Disagreements over renewing the Anti-Socialist Law, social policy and control of government helped bring about Bismarck’s dismissal in March 1890. By then, the German state was firmly established, but its constitution still combined mass male suffrage with an executive accountable to the emperor rather than the elected Reichstag.

Society, politics and economy in Britain and Ireland (1815–1914)

History

IB History develops students' understanding of significant historical events, themes, and interpretations across different periods and regions.Students learn to analyze historical sources critically, understand complex historical narratives, and develop sophisticated historical thinking skills.

HL4.11 Italy (1815–1871) and Germany (1815–1890)

Question 1

[15]

Question 2

[15]

Question 3

[15]

Question 4

[15]