Why did the Revolutions of 1848 did not lead to a united Germany?

Authors Avatar

Why did the Revolutions of 1848 did not lead to a united Germany?

        1848 is the year categorised by many historians as the year of Revolutions in Europe and it understandable to see why, so how could the massive amount of social and political change involved in a revolution not lead to a united Germany that many nationalists wanted? This does not happen not just due to one factor but a number of deciding factors.

        Germany, if I can call her that, did not exist as a ‘Bundesrepublik’ in 1848 that we see her today. She was a collection of 39 independent states or principalities some states ruled by foreign powers e.g Hanover ruled by Britain but also two states that were considered Great Powers of the day, Prussia and Austria. These states were commonly linked by the fact that they all spoke German and were part of the Federal Diet at Frankfurt. The Diet convened to decide international decisions and internal policy which all of the German states would follow. The Diet was always traditionally led by Habsburg Austria. This was the status quo and many rulers of the German speaking states were traditionalists and were not keen to see the status quo to change and therefore Austria kept its influence and dominance. Even King Fredrick William IV of Prussia was a traditionalist and respected Habsburg authority, all his predecessors had and so he had no reason to break with tradition.

        Although the Princes, King and Electors did not want the status quo to change because they would lose power, but in 1848 a new force of change entered the forum of German Politics and that was the desire of the educated middle classes, many of these were liberals and a fair few of them were nationalists, furthermore in  the late 18th to 19th century the middle classes had the ear of the working classes e.g destruction of the Ancien Regime in France, this was caused by middle class ideas being put into action by a forceful working class mob, like France, the German middle classes could stir the peasants and ‘Handwerker’ into action, this is what the autocrat rulers feared most.  To avoid the worst case scenario, being overthrown by a mob, the Princes attempted to appease the middle classes to avoid mob rule. The educated middle classes had been excluded from German politics by the aristocracy and their activities censored by bodies set up by Metternich, but after Louis Philippe was overthrown in France it was a cataclysmic event that caused the middle classes to emerge at the forefront of German politics (Frankfurt Parliament).

        By its name ‘Liberalism’ it is clear to see what Liberals wanted, they wanted more personal freedom for themselves and the German speaking peoples. This directly conflicted with Metternich’s actions, he censored newspapers and closed down political societies, one would have to yield in this case it is Metternich when the popular uprisings become to much for Austria and they use Metternich as a scapegoat.  Liberals wanted universal male suffrage for the election of a national assembly, this is not necessarily a united German assembly but just some kind of representative body in their state government. Again, conflict arises with this political aim because creating an assembly would destroy the autocratic powers of princes.

Join now!

        Looking back at history we can see that there was no united Germany by 1849 and the Bund was re-established in 1851, one view is that the revolutions had accomplished nothing, this is not necessarily true, yes it did no produce a united Germany but that was not truly the aim of the 1848 revolutions it was liberalism which was the driving force and also rulers became aware of the immense power of the educated middle classes.

        Like I have briefly mentioned the Revolutions technically began when Louis Philippe  was forced to abdicate by a revolutionary mob. This was ...

This is a preview of the whole essay