Prussia’s victory over Austria posed a threat to France, whose emperor feared that Prussia would upset the balance of power in Europe. After the events in Biarritz, the Austro-Prussian war and the failures in Luxemburg and Belgium, the French felt that their position as one of the major powers of Europe was in danger. Bismarck supported Leopold of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen as a candidate for the Spanish throne, however the French opposed the candidacy and demanded that no member from the house of Hohenzollern should become King of Spain. Bismarck published the Ems telegram in France – an account of a conversation between the French ambassador in Prussia and King Wilhem - in order to provoke the France into declaring war. Bismarck’s “red rag to the French bull” was a success, and was was declared five days later. Prussia won battle after battle, and finally France was asked to surrender the Alsace part of Lorraine to the Prussian empire. The southern French states, fuelled by nationalism, realized that their only change of lasting security was by joining Prussia – and thus gave up their independence and joined the northern states, completing the process of unification.
Although the wars had a great influence of the turn of events, their occurrence is not enough to explain how German unification took place. In his memoirs, Bismark claimed that the wars on Austria and France were part of his “master plan” of Germany unification. This view was accepted by historians before the 1950s who based their studies on Bismarck’s memoirs. However, more controversial historians such as LCB Seaman and AJP Taylor claim that Bismarck’s brilliant diplomacy lay not in manipulating Europe’s powers and in his “master plan”; but in “going with the events so as to seem to master them” (AJP Taylor). Hence, Bismarck should be considered a great diplomat rather than a great nationalist who had a dream of German unity and achieved it through war.
It can be argued that it was Bismarck’s luck and diplomacy – rather than the wars themselves – were what contributed to unification. Bismarck’s successes in the Polish revolt and Austrian war were due to Russia apathy due to the Crimean war and Britain’s isolationist policy rather than being meticulously planned – as in fact Bismarck had no real way of predicting the chain of event that would lead to his victories in the war against France. According to AJP Taylor, “Bismark owed his success to the disunion and lack of will of his opponents. A coalition, or even a prolonged war, would have ruined him”. His brilliance lies in managing to “minister his own vanity as an individual and to the cause of his indispensability as a politician”, according to LCB Seaman, who claims that Bismarck had no “master plan”, but had an obvious gift for public speaking and historical writing. Chance and diplomacy – and not the wars themselves – were crucial in the process of unification.
The end of peaceful dualism and the creation of the union of the German states – the Erfurt union – were important factors which contributed to unification. It can be argued that the end of peaceful dualism was planned by Bismark to begin with, with the creation of the Treaty of Gastein. The Austro-Prussian war was the diplomatic end by which this alliance between Prussia and Austria was broken. Thus, although it can be argued that the war was essential to break Austrian dominance on Prussia, it wasn’t the war itself which contributed to unification, and rather the act of ending the alliance. The Erfurt Union was a short-lived union of German states under a federation, proposed by the Kingdom of Prussia at Erfurt, for which the Erfurt Union Parliament was opened. The union never came into effect, but the intention and the ideas of unifying the German states should be merited as a step towards unification.
The economic changes in Prussia and Austria are seen by economists such as Keynes as the main factor which contributed to unification – claming that “Germany was united by coal and iron rather than by blood and iron”, in reference to the industrialization. In 1815, the 39 German states managed their own economies and used tariff barriers to protect their economies from the other states; and as a result many suffered from stagnation. In 1818 Prussia abolished its internal tariff system and formed the Prussian customs union. This encouraged other states to adhere, and in 1834 the Zollverein (German customs union) was formed. Within the unions all internal custom barriers disappeared and a common system of protective duties applied around its boundary. The Zollverein was important to unification as economic links were developed between the states – thus being one step forward towards a united Germany. Austria did not join the Zollverein, and this decision led to its economy being stagnated. Thus, the German states looked up to Prussia for economic leadership and not to Austria. Additionally, it was the first step in the exclusion of Austria from a united Germany. This economical cooperation between the states let many to believe that a national unity was not only desirable but also possible. The middle class businessmen were particularly attracted to the idea. According to the historian A Stiles, “The Zollverein was a force for unity in the 1840s and therefore a focal point for nationalist sentiments”.
Prussia’s economic success in the 1850s and 60s outshone that of Austria and France. The economic and financial strength of Prussia gave her the military resources she needed to successfully challenge first Austria and then France. It can be argued that the wars themselves had a background of economical reasons for their successes, as industrialists such as Alfred Krupp in Prussia produced high-quality armaments in iron foundries which were used in war. Hence, it cannot be said that the process of unification was solely influenced by the military successes – as the wars owe part of their success to Prussia’s economic and industrial achievements. Without them, Prussia would never have been able to outstrip Austria nor France in the battlefield.
After 1815, the hatred of France and an exaggerated view on Germany’s great yet unfulfilled role in Europe led to a dramatic growth of nationalism. Many Germans who considered themselves Prussians, Bavarians or members of other states felt that Germany lacked the power to manifest itself with a single, strong voice. In 1840, it seemed likely that Napoleon’s France would invade Germany along the Rhine – and this incident led to a nationalistic boom in Germany. There was an increased the awareness of German culture, music, literature and history; and it was amongst this nationalistic upsurge that Germany’s national anthem was created. German philosophers seeded the idea that in order to protect German culture and language, the German states needed to unite – and thus there was a growing belief among nationalists and liberals that unification would happen. Another factor which influenced the development of nationalism was the growth of the railways – which made Germans more mobile and broke down local and regional barriers. Additionally, the railway helped spread news and ideas – binding Germany together. The Germans felt as if the fatherland was constantly being attacked by international forces – such as the king of Denmark’s decision in 1846 to incorporate Schleswig-Hostein into Denmark – and this gave birth to a feeling that Germany’s role in Europe was unfulfilled and undermined. The people realized the need to be bound together as a stronger nation – and thus the nationalistic upsurge greatly contributed to unification.
According to Bismarck, Germany was unified through war and through his master plan of unification. Keynes, however, states that Germany was united due to Prussia’s strong economic growth and power. The historian AJP Taylor claims that Bismark’s ability to appear to master events – that is, his diplomacy – was the main factor which contributed to unification. International apathy from Russia and Britain, as well as German nationalism, also contributed to unification as Europe’s greatest powers did not stop Bismarck’s actions. As mentioned in the paragraphs above, it becomes evident that the German unification required considerably more than wars in order to happen. The wars inarguably had a great impact on the process of unification, but it is incorrect to claim that “it was war and nothing more and nothing less” which contributed to German national unity.
