Timeline of World History TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 
 

TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 

Loading
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
     
     
 
1800 - 1899
 
 
1800-09 1810-19 1820-29 1830-39 1840-49 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99
1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890
1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891
1802 1812 1822 1832 1842 1852 1862 1872 1882 1892
1803 1813 1823 1833 1843 1853 1863 1873 1883 1893
1804 1814 1824 1834 1844 1854 1864 1874 1884 1894
1805 1815 1825 1835 1845 1855 1865 1875 1885 1895
1806 1816 1826 1836 1846 1856 1866 1876 1886 1896
1807 1817 1827 1837 1847 1857 1867 1877 1887 1897
1808 1818 1828 1838 1848 1858 1868 1878 1888 1898
1809 1819 1829 1839 1849 1859 1869 1879 1889 1899
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1847 Part II NEXT-1848 Part II    
 
 
     
1840 - 1849
YEAR BY YEAR:
1840-1849
History at a Glance
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1840 Part I
Bebel August
Maximilian of Mexico
Carlota
Convention of London
British North America Act
Francia Jose Gaspar
Macdonald Jacques
William I of the Netherlands
William II of the Netherlands
Retour des cendres
Lambton John George
Vaillant Edouard-Marie
Sampson William
Smith William Sidney
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1840 Part II
Ridpath John Clark
Sankey Ira David
James Fenimore Cooper: "The Pathfinder"
Blunt Wilfrid Scawen
Broughton Rhoda
Robert Browning: "Sordello"
Daudet Alphonse
Alphonse Daudet
"Tartarin de Tarascon"
Dobson Austin
Hardy Thomas
Thomas Hardy 
"Tess of the d'Urbervilles"
Lemercier  Nepomucene
Lermontov: "A Hero of Our Times"
Modjeska Helena
Symonds John Addington
Verga Giovanni
Zola Emile
Emile Zola
"
J'accuse" (I accuse)
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1840 Part III
Delacroix: "Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople"
Makart Hans
Hans Makart
Monet Claude
Claude Monet
Nasmyth Alexander
Alexander Nasmyth
Nast Thomas
Nelson's Column
Rodin Auguste
Auguste Rodin
Redon Odilon
Odilon Redon
Blechen Carl
Karl Blechen
Debain Alexandre-Francois
Donizetti: "La Fille du Regiment"
Haberl Franz Xaver
Tchaikovsky Peter Ilich
Tchaikovsky - The Seasons
Peter Ilich Tchaikovsky
Schneckenburger Max
Wilhelm Karl
"Die Wacht am Rhein"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1840 Part IV
Olbers Wilhelm
Blumenbach Johann Friedrich
Ball Robert
Kohlrausch Friedrich Wilhelm
Agassiz Louis
Basedow Carl Adolph
Graves disease
Maxim Hiram
Eyre Edward John
Brummell Beau
Father Damien
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
Washington Temperance Society
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1841 Part I
Second Battle of Chuenpee
Barere Bertrand
Fisher John Arbuthnot
British Hong Kong
Luzzatti Luigi
Merriman John
Harrison William Henry
Tyler John
Espartero Baldomero
Hirobumi Ito
Clemenceau Georges
Edward VII
Creole case
Laurier Wilfrid
New Zealand
Lamb William
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1841 Part II
Cheyne Thomas Kelly
Ludwig Feuerbach: "The Essence of Christianity"
Holmes Oliver Wendell
Holst Hermann Eduard
Jebb Richard Claverhouse
Ward Lester Frank
Black William
Robert Browning: "Pippa Passes"
Buchanan Robert
Fenimore Cooper: "The Deerslayer"
Coquelin Benoit
Dickens: "The Old Curiosity Shop"
Ewing Juliana Horatia
Sill Edward Rowland
Frederick Marryat: "Masterman Ready"
Mendes Catulle
Mounet-Sully Jean
"Punch, or The London Charivari"
Sealsfield Charles
Scott Clement William
White Joseph Blanco
Ruskin: "The King of the Golden River"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1841 Part III
Chantrey Francis
Morisot Berthe
Berthe Morisot
Renoir Pierre-Auguste
Pierre-Auguste Renoir
Wagner Otto
Wallot Paul
Olivier Ferdinand
Johann Heinrich Ferdinand Olivier
Bazille Frederic
Frederic Bazille
Zandomeneghi Federico
Federico Zandomeneghi
Guillaumin Armand
Armand Guillaumin
Chabrier Emmanuel
Chabrier - Espana
Emmanuel Chabrier
Dibdin Thomas John
Dvorak Anton
Antonin Dvorak: Rusalka
Antonin Dvorak
Pedrell Felipe
Felip Pedrell: Els Pirineus
Felipe Pedrell
Rossini: "Stabat Mater"
Sax Antoine-Joseph
Schumann: Symphony No. 1
Sgambati Giovanni
Sgambati - Piano Concerto in G minor
Giovanni Sgambati
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1841 Part IV
Cooper Astley
Braid James
Hypnosis
Candolle Austin
Aniline
Kocher Emil Theodor
Kolliker Rudolf Albert
Petzval Joseph
Hudson William Henry
Warming Eugenius
Whitworth Joseph
Barnum's American Museum
Bradshaw George
Cook Thomas
Hyer Tom
"The New York Tribune"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1842 Part I
Pozzo di Borgo Charles-Andre
Las Cases Emmanuel
Webster-Ashburton Treaty
Treaty of Nanking
General Strike of 1842
O’Higgins Bernardo
Giolitti Giovanni
Fiske John
Hartmann Eduard
Hyndman Henry Mayers
James William
Kropotkin Peter Alekseyevich
Anarchism
Anarchism
Lavisse Ernest
Robertson George Croom
Sorel Albert
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1842 Part II
Banim John
Sue Eugene
Eugene Sue: "The Mysteries of Paris"
Bierce Ambrose
Brandes Georg
Bulwer-Lytton: "Zanoni"
Graham Maria
Coppee Francois
Cunningham Allan
Espronceda Jose
Gogol: "Dead Souls"
Howard Bronson
Lanier Sidney
Lover Samuel
MacKaye Steele
Maginn William
Mallarme Stephane
May Karl
Рое: "The Masque of the Red Death"
Quental Antero Tarquinio
Woodworth Samuel
Macaulay: "Lays of Ancient Rome"
Tupper Martin Farquhar
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1842 Part III
Vereshchagin Vasily
Vasily Vereshchagin
Boldini Giovanni
Giovanni Boldini
Boito Arrigo
Arrigo Boito: Mefistofele Finale
Arrigo Boito
Glinka: "Russian and Ludmilla"
Hopkinson Joseph
"Hail, Columbia"
Lortzing: "Der Wildschiitz"
Massenet Jules
Massenet "Elegie"
Jules Massenet
Millocker Karl
Millocker: Gasparone
Karl Millocker
New York Philharmonic
Sullivan Arthur
Arthur Sullivan - The Mikado - Overture
Arthur Sullivan
Wagner: "Rienzi"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1842 Part IV
Dewar James
Doppler Christian Andreas
Flammarion Camille
Hansen Emile Christian
Long Crawford Williamson
Matthew Fontaine Maury
Charting the Ocean Depths
Mayer Julius Robert
Pelletier Pierre Joseph
Marshall Alfred
Strutt John William
Retzius Gustaf
Fremont John Charles
Darling Grace
Polka
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1843 Part I
McKinley William
Braga Teofilo
Wairau Affray
Dilke Charles
Avenarius Richard
Borrow George
Carlile Richard
Thomas Carlyle: "Past and Present"
Creighton Mandell
Liddell and Scott: "Greek-English Lexicon"
Liddell Henry
Scott Robert
Ward James
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1843 Part II
Bulwer-Lytton: "The Last of the Barons"
Elisabeth of Romania
Dickens: "Martin Chuzzlewit"
Doughty Charles Montagu
Dowden Edward
Emmett Daniel Decatur
Hood Thomas
Thomas Hood: "Song of the Shirt"
Horne Richard Hengist
James Henry
Rosegger Peter
Suttner Bertha
Harris George Washington
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1843 Part III
Allston Washington
Washington Allston
John Ruskin: "Modern Painters"
Trumbull John
John Trumbull
Werner Anton
Anton von Werner
Clairin Georges
Georges Clairin
Donizetti: "Don Pasquale"
Grieg Edward
Grieg - Solveig Song
Edward Grieg
Nilsson Christine
Patti Adelina
Richter Hans
Schumann: "Paradise and the Peri"
Wagner: "The Flying Dutchman"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1843 Part IV
British Archaeological Association
Chamberlin Thomas Chrowder
Ferrier David
Oliver Wendell Holmes: "The Contagiousness of Puerperal Fever"
Holmes Oliver Wendell
Joule James Prescott
Koch Robert
Erbium
Brunel Marc Isambard
Thames Tunnel
Dix Dorothea Lynde
Guy's, Kings and St. Thomas' Rugby Football Club
Sequoyah
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1844 Part I
Lowe Hudson
Drouet Jean-Baptiste
Oscar I of Sweden
Dole Sanford Ballard
Laffitte Jacques
Franco-Moroccan War
Polk James Knox
Herrera Jose Joaquin
Treaty of Wanghia
Breshkovsky Catherine
Comstock Anthony
Emerson: "Essays"
Grundtvig Nikolaj Frederik Severin
Hall Granville Stanley
Nietzsche Friedrich
Friedrich Nietzsche
Rice Edmund Ignatius
Riehl Alois
Stanley Arthur Penrhyn
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1844 Part II
Bernhardt Sarah
Sarah Bernhardt
Dumas, pere: "Le Comte de Monte Cristo"
Bridges Robert
Cable George Washington
Carte Richard
Cary Henry Francis
Disraeli: "Coningsby"
France Anatole
Hopkins Gerard Manley
Lang Andrew
Liliencron Detlev
O'Reilly John Boyle
O’Shaughnessy Arthur
Sterling John
William Thackeray: "Barry Lyndon"
Verlaine Paul
Paul Verlaine
"Poems"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1844 Part III
Eakins Thomas
Thomas Eakins
Ezekiel Moses Jacob
Moses Ezekiel
Luke Fildes Luke
Luke Fildes
Leibl Wilhelm
Wilhelm Leibl
Munkacsy Mihaly
Mihaly Munkacsy
Repin Ilya
Ilya Repin
Rousseau Henri
Henri Rousseau
Cassatt Mary
Mary Cassatt
Flotow: "Alessandro Stradella"
Mendelssohn: Violin Concerto in E minor
Rimsky-Korsakov Nikolay
The Best of Korsakov
Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov
Sarasate Pablo
Pablo de Sarasate - Zigeunerweisen
Pablo de Sarasate
Verdi: "Ernani"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1844 Part IV
Grassmann Hermann Gunther
Baily Francis
Boltzmann Ludwig Eduard
DeLong George Washington
Golgi Camillo
Kielmeyer Carl Friedrich
Kinglake Alexander William
Strasburger Eduard Adolf
Huc Evariste Regis
Gabet Joseph
Sturt Charles Napier
Leichhardt Friedrich
Beckford William
Rochdale Society of Equitable Pioneers
"Fliegende Blatter"
Hagenbeck Carl
Keller Friedrich Gottlob
Pasch Gustaf Erik
Young Men’s Christian Association
Williams George
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1845 Part I
Root Elihu
Texas
Florida
Flagstaff War
Ludwig II of Bavaria
First Anglo-Sikh War
Sonderbund
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1845 Part II
Friedrich Engels: "The Condition of the Working Class in England"
Stirner Max
Disraeli: "Sybil, or The Two Nations"
Hertz Henrik
Prosper Merimee: "Carmen"
Рое: "The Raven"
Spitteler Carl
Wergeland Henrik
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1845 Part III
Bode Wilhelm
Hill David Octavius
Ingres: The Comtesse d'Haussonville
Oberlander Adam Adolf
Crane Walter
Walter Crane
Faure Gabriel
Faure - Pavane
Gabriel Faure
Lortzing: "Undine"
Wagner: "Tannhauser"
Widor Charles-Marie
Widor - Piano Concerto No. 1
Charles Marie Widor
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1845 Part IV
Armstrong William George
Bigelow Erastus Brigham
Cayley Arthur
Cornell Ezra
Submarine communications cable
Heilmann Joshua
Humboldt: "Cosmos"
Kolbe Hermann
Laveran Alphonse
McNaught William
Metchnikoff Elie
Charting the Northwest
Layard Austen Henry
Cartwright Alexander
United States Naval Academy
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1846 Part I
Battle of Aliwal
Battle of Sobraon
Treaty of Lahore
Greater Poland Uprising
Krakow Uprising
Mexican-American War
Battle of Monterrey
First Battle of Tabasco
Iowa
Pasic Nikola
Evangelical Alliance
Eucken Rudolf Christoph
Pius IX
Whewell William
Young Brigham
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1846 Part II
Balzac: "La Cousine Bette"
De Amicis Edmondo
Dostoevsky: "Poor Folk"
Jokai Maurus
Lear Edward
Melville Herman
Herman Melville: "Typee"
Herman Melville
"Moby Dick or The Whale"
Sienkiewicz Henryk
George Watts: "Paolo and Francesca"
De Nittis Giuseppe
Giuseppe de Nittis
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1846 Part III
Berlioz: "Damnation de Faust"
Lortzing: "Der Waffenschmied"
Mendelssohn: "Elijah"
Deere John
Deere & Company
Henle Friedrich
Howe Elias
Waitz Theodor
Mohl Hugo
Green William Thomas
Sobrero Ascanio
Heaphy Charles
Brunner Thomas
Europeans in New Zealand
"The Daily News"
Horsley John Callcott
Smithsonian Institution
Zeiss Carl
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1847 Part I
Liberia
Second Battle of Tabasco
Battle of Churubusco
BATTLE OF MEXICO CITY
Hindenburg Paul
Sonderbund War
Beecher Henry Ward
Blanc Louis
Proudhon Pierre-Joseph
roudhon: "Philosophy of Poverty"P
Karl Marx: "The Poverty of Philosophy"
Salt Lake City
Charlotte Bronte: "Jane Eyre"
Bronte Emily
Marryat: "The Children of the New Forest"
Thackeray: "Vanity Fair"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1847 Part II
Hildebrand Adolf
Liebermann Max
Max Liebermann
Friedrich von Flotow: "Martha"
Verdi: "Macbeth"
Boole George
Edison Thomas Alva
Bell Alexander Graham
Semmelweis Ignaz Philipp
Colenso William
Factory Act of 1847
Fawcett Millicent
Siemens & Halske
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1848 Part I
Frederick VII
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo
Revolutions of 1848
French Revolution of 1848
June Days Uprising
Cavaignac Louis-Eugene
French Constitution of 1848
French Second Republic
Revolutions of 1848 in the Austrian Empire
Hungarian Revolution of 1848
Slovak Uprising 1848-1849
Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Europe, 1815-48 (part I)
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1848 Part II
First Italian War of Independence
Skirmish of Pastrengo
Battle of Goito
Battle of Custoza
Revolutions of 1848 in the Italian states
Revolutions of 1848 in the German states
Revolution of 1848 in Luxembourg
Greater Poland Uprising
Moldavian Revolution of 1848
Pan-Slav Congress of 1848
Pan-Slavism
Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Europe, 1815-48 (part II)
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1848 Part III
Second Anglo-Sikh War
Nasr-ed-Din
Ibrahim Pasha
Abbas I
Wisconsin
Balfour Arthur James
Seneca Falls Convention
Stanton Elizabeth Cady
Delbruck Hans
Macaulay: "History of England"
"The Communist Manifesto"
John Mill: "Principles of Political Economy"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1848 Part IV
Augier Emile
Chateaubriand: "Memoires d'Outre-Tombe"
Dumas fils: "La Dame aux Camelias"
Gaskell Elizabet
Elizabeth Gaskell: "Mary Barton"
Murger Louis-Henri
Henri Murger: "Scenes de la vie de Boheme"
Terry Ellen
Surikov Vasily
Vasily Surikov
Uhde Fritz
Fritz von Uhde
Gauguin Paul
Paul Gauguin
Caillebotte Gustave
Gustave Caillebotte
Millais: "Ophelia"
Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1848 Part V
Parry Hubert Hastings
Jerusalem by Hubert Parry
Hubert Parry
Duparc Henri
Duparc Henri: "L'invitation au voyage"
Henri Duparc
Bottger Rudolf Christian
Parsons William
Frege Gottlob
"New Prussian Newspaper"
"Neue Rheinische Zeitung"
Grace William Gilbert
Kneipp Sebastian
Lilienthal Otto
Starr Belle
California Gold Rush
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1849 Part I
Battle of Chillianwala
Battle of Gujrat
Roman Republic on February 9, 1849
Battle of Novara
Victor Emmanuel II
Virginia Oldoini, Countess of Castiglione
Virginia Oldoini, Countess of Castiglione
Peace of Milan
Taylor Zachary
Dresden Rebellion of 1849
Surrender at Vilagos
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1849 Part II
Kemble John Mitchell
Key Ellen
Arnold Matthew
Dickens: "David Copperfield"
Kingsley Charles
Scribe: "Adrienne Lecouvreur"
Strindberg August
Smith Horace
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1849 Part III
Waterhouse John William
John William Waterhouse
John Ruskin: "The Seven Lamps of Architecture"
Carriere Eugene
Eugene Carriere
Liszt: "Tasso"
Meyerbeer: "Le Prophete"
Otto Nicolai: "The Merry Wives of Windsor"
Schumann: "Manfred"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1849 Part IV
Fizeau Armand
Frankland Edward
Livingstone David
Explorations of David Livingstone
Baines Thomas
"Who's Who"
Bedford College
Bloomer Amelia
Bloomers (clothing)
Stead William Thomas
 
 
 

Lamartine in front of the Town Hall of Paris rejects the red flag on 25 February 1848
 
 
 
 
 HISTORY, RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY, ART, LITERATURE, MUSIC, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, DAILY LIFE
 
 
 
 
YEAR BY YEAR:  1800 - 1899
 
 
 
1848 Part I
 
 
 
1848
 
 
King Christian VIII of Denmark d.; succeeded by Frederick II
 
 
Frederick VII
 

Frederick VII, (born Oct. 6, 1808, Amalienborg Castle, Denmark—died Nov. 15, 1863, Glücksburg Castle), king of Denmark from 1848 who renounced absolute rule and adopted a representative government.

 

Frederick VII of Denmark
  The son of the future king Christian VIII and Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, Frederick in 1839 was appointed governor of the island of Fyn. As a crown prince, he had two unhappy marriages: first, in 1828, to his second cousin Wilhelmina Maria, a daughter of Frederick VI (dissolved in 1837); then, in 1841, to Caroline of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (dissolved in 1846).

On Jan. 20, 1848, Frederick succeeded his father. After the popular demonstrations of March 1848, he appointed a Liberal ministry and on June 5, 1849, he signed the Danish constitution, which provided for a bicameral legislature. The constitutional issue, however, was overshadowed by the Schleswig-Holstein question. Frederick rejected a proposal for partitioning Schleswig (1848) and ceding the southern portion to Prussia. Instead, he incorporated it into the Danish state. The Schleswig Germans then sought and received Prussian aid in a rebellion against Danish rule, which Denmark put down between 1848 and 1850.

Frederick’s third wife, Louise Christine Rasmussen, whom he married morganatically in 1850, sided with the Bondevenner (Friends of the Peasants Party). Frederick himself came increasingly into conflict with the National Liberals, who from 1854 held more Cabinet posts. The conflict centred on the succession to the throne (the childless King named Christian of Glücksburg as his successor) and around the constitutional problem of Frederick’s favouring a joint constitution for all the lands under the crown.

 
 
Just two days before Frederick died, a joint constitution for Denmark and the Duchy of Schleswig was ratified by the Rigsrĺd, a decision that precipitated war with the German powers in 1864.

Encyclopćdia Britannica

 
 
 
1848
 
 
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ends Mexican-U.S. war in Feb.; ratified in Oct.; U.S. gets Texas, New Mexico,
California, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, and parts of Colorado and Wyoming from Mexico in return for large
indemnity
 
 
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo
 
The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (Tratado de Guadalupe Hidalgo in Spanish), officially entitled the Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Limits and Settlement between the United States of America and the Mexican Republic, is the peace treaty signed on February 2, 1848, in the Villa de Guadalupe Hidalgo (now a neighborhood of Mexico City) between the United States and Mexico that ended the Mexican–American War (1846–48).
 
With the defeat of its army and the fall of its capital, Mexico entered into negotiations to end the war. The treaty called for the US to pay $15 million to Mexico and to pay off the claims of American citizens against Mexico up to $3.25 million. It gave the United States the Rio Grande as a boundary for Texas, and gave the US ownership of California and a large area comprising New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Wyoming and Colorado. Mexicans in those annexed areas had the choice of relocating to within Mexico's new boundaries or receiving American citizenship with full civil rights. Over 90% chose to become US citizens.

The US Senate ratified the treaty by a vote of 38–14. The opponents of this treaty were led by the Whigs, who had opposed the war and rejected Manifest Destiny in general, and rejected this expansion in particular.

 
 

"Mapa de los Estados Unidos de Méjico. The Distrunell map used during the negotiations.
 
 
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, (Feb. 2, 1848), treaty between the United States and Mexico that ended the Mexican War. It was signed at Villa de Guadalupe Hidalgo, which is a northern neighbourhood of Mexico City. The treaty drew the boundary between the United States and Mexico at the Rio Grande and the Gila River; for a payment of $15,000,000 the United States received more than 525,000 square miles (1,360,000 square km) of land (now Arizona, California, western Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah) from Mexico and in return agreed to settle the more than $3,000,000 in claims made by U.S. citizens against Mexico. With this annexation, the continental expansion of the United States was completed except for the land added in the Gadsden Purchase (1853).
 
 

Map of Mexico. S. Augustus Mitchell, Philadelphia, 1847.
Alta California shown including Nevada, Utah, Arizona.
 
 
The treaty helped precipitate civil war in both Mexico and the United States. In Mexico it left many citizens unsure of their country’s future as an independent state; political extremism followed, and civil war broke out at the end of 1857. The expansion of slavery in the United States had been settled by the Missouri Compromise (1820), but addition of the vast Mexican tract as new U.S. territory reopened the question. Attempts to settle it led to the uneasy Compromise of 1850 and the Kansas–Nebraska Act (1854).

Encyclopćdia Britannica 

 
 
 
1848
 
 
Revolutions of 1848
 

Revolutions of 1848, series of republican revolts against European monarchies, beginning in Sicily, and spreading to France, Germany, Italy, and the Austrian Empire. They all ended in failure and repression, and were followed by widespread disillusionment among liberals.

 
The revolutionary movement began in Italy with a local revolution in Sicily in January 1848; and, after the revolution of February 24 in France, the movement extended throughout the whole of Europe with the exception of Russia, Spain, and the Scandinavian countries. In Great Britain it amounted to little more than a Chartist demonstration and a republican agitation in Ireland. In Belgium, the Netherlands, and Denmark it manifested itself in peaceful reforms of existing institutions; but democratic insurrections broke out in the capitals of the three great monarchies, Paris, Vienna, and Berlin, where the governments, rendered powerless by their fear of “the revolution,” did little to defend themselves. The revolution was successful in France alone; the Second Republic and universal manhood suffrage were established, but the quarrel between the supporters of the république démocratique and the partisans of république démocratique et sociale culminated in a workers’ insurrection in June 1848.

In Austria, where the new ministers promised to grant constitutions, the monarchy withstood the storm; and in Prussia King Frederick William IV, who led the movement for the unification of Germany, hoisted the black, red, and gold flag that had become the symbol of German unity. The German governments agreed to the convocation of three constituent assemblies at Berlin, Vienna, and Frankfurt by which democratic constitutions were to be drafted for Prussia, Austria, and Germany.

  In Italy, at first, the revolution only took the form of a nationalist rising against Austria led by the king of Sardinia under the Italian tricolour, the “white, red and green.” The republic was proclaimed in 1849, and then only in Rome and Tuscany. Within the Austrian empire the nationalities subjected to the German Government of Vienna agitated for a national government, and Hungary succeeded in organizing itself on an autonomous basis.

This upheaval seemed to indicate a redistribution of the territories of Europe. In the name of the Provisional Government in France, Alphonse de Lamartine declared that the treaties of 1815 were no longer valid in the eyes of the French Republic, but he added that he accepted the territorial delimitations effected by those treaties. France did not lend its support to the revolutionaries in Europe.

The restoration had commenced even before the revolution was over, and it was accomplished by the armies that had remained faithful to their respective governments.

Military repression was first employed in Paris by Louis-Eugčne Cavaignac against the insurgents in June, and by Alfred, prince von Windischgrätz, on June 17 against the Czechs in Prague, and later by the Austrian Army in Lombardy and in Vienna; then in Berlin in December, and in 1849 by the Prussian Army in Saxony and Baden. Order was restored in Rome only by French intervention, and in Hungary with the help of the Russian Army.
 
 
The king of Prussia, having refused the title of emperor offered to him by the Frankfurt Assembly, sought to achieve the unity of Germany by a union between the German princes. Austria and Russia, however, compelled him to abandon his design by the Convention of Olmütz in 1850. The immediate result of the reaction became manifest in the withdrawal of liberal democratic or nationalist concessions which had been made during the revolution: universal manhood suffrage, liberty of the press and of assembly. Absolute monarchy was reestablished in Germany, Austria, and Italy; and the governments, in alliance with the middle classes and the clergy, who were terrified by the Socialist proposals, strengthened the police forces and organized a persecution of the popular press and associations that paralyzed political life. In France the reaction led to the coup d’etat against the assembly on the part of Prince Louis-Napoléon on Dec. 2, 1851, and the reestablishment of the hereditary empire under Napoleon III in 1852.

The restoration, however, was not complete, for universal manhood suffrage was not abolished in France; in Prussia, the Constitution of January 1850, which established an elective assembly, and, in Sardinia, the Constitution of March 1848 were retained; the signorial rights were not restored in Austria.

Encyclopćdia Britannica
 
 
 
1848
 
 
French Revolution of 1848
 

The 1848 Revolution in France, sometimes known as the February Revolution (révolution de Février), was one of a wave of revolutions in 1848 in Europe. In France the revolutionary events ended the Orleans monarchy (1830–48) and led to the creation of the French Second Republic.

 
Following the overthrow of Louis Philippe in February, the elected government of the Second Republic ruled France. In the months that followed, this government steered a course that became more conservative. On 23 June 1848, the people of Paris rose in insurrection, which became known as June Days Uprising - a bloody but unsuccessful rebellion by the Paris workers against a conservative turn in the Republic's course. On 2 December 1848, Louis Napoleon was elected President of the Second Republic, largely on peasant support. Exactly four years later he suspended the elected assembly, establishing the Second French Empire, which lasted until 1871.

The February revolution established the principle of the "right to work" (droit au travail), and its newly established government created "National Workshops" for the unemployed. At the same time a sort of industrial parliament was established at the Luxembourg Palace, under the presidency of Louis Blanc, with the object of preparing a scheme for the organization of labour. These tensions between liberal Orleanist and Radical Republicans and Socialists led to the June Days Uprising.

 
 
Background
Under the Charter of 1814, Louis XVIII ruled France as the head of a constitutional monarchy. Upon Louis XVIII's death, his brother, the Count of Artois, ascended to the throne in 1825, as Charles X. Supported by the ultra-royalists, Charles X was an extremely unpopular reactionary monarch whose aspirations were far more grand than those of his deceased brother. He had no desire to rule as a constitutional monarch, taking various steps to strengthen his own authority as monarch and weaken that of the lower house.

In 1830, Charles X of France, presumably instigated by one of his chief advisors Jules, Prince de Polignac, issued the Four Ordinances of St. Cloud. These ordinances abolished freedom of the press, reduced the electorate by 75%, and dissolved the lower house. This action provoked an immediate reaction from the citizenry, who revolted against the monarchy during the Three Glorious Days of 26–29 July 1830. Charles was forced to abdicate the throne and to flee Paris for the United Kingdom. As a result, Louis-Philippe, of the Orleanist branch, rose to power, replacing the old Charter by the Charter of 1830, and his rule became known as the July Monarchy. Nicknamed the "Bourgeois Monarch", Louis Philippe sat at the head of a moderately liberal state controlled mainly by educated elites. Supported by the Orleanists, he was opposed on his right by the Legitimists (former ultra-royalists) and on his left by the Republicans and Socialists. Louis Philippe was an expert businessman and, by means of his businesses, he had become one of the richest men in France.

 
Louis-Philippe, King of the French (1830–1848)
 
 
Still Louis Philippe saw himself as the successful embodiment of a "small businessman (petite bourgeoisie). Consequently, he and his government did not look with favour on the big business (bourgeoisie), especially, the industrial section of the French bourgeoisie. Louis Philippe did, however, support the bankers, large and small. Indeed, at the beginning of his reign in 1830, Jaques Laffitte, a banker and liberal politician who supported Louis Philippe's rise to the throne, said "From now on, the bankers will rule." Accordingly, during the reign of Louis Philippe, the privileged "financial aristocracy," i.e. bankers, stock exchange magnates, railroad barons, owners of coal mines, iron ore mines, and forests and all landowners associated with them tended to support Louis Philippe, while the "industrial section of the bourgeoisie which may have owned the land their factories sat on but nothing much more, were disfavoured by Louis Philippe and actually tended to side with the middle class and laboring class in opposition to Louis Philippe in the Chamber of Deputies.
 
 
Naturally, landownership was favoured, and this elitism resulted in the disenfranchisement of much of the middle and working classes. By 1848 only about one percent of the population held the franchise.

Even though France had a free press and trial by jury, only landholders were permitted to vote, which alienated the petty bourgeoisie and even the industrial bourgeoisie from the government. Louis Philippe was viewed as generally indifferent to the needs of society, especially to those members of the middle class who were excluded from the political arena.

Early in 1848, some Orleanist liberals, such as Adolphe Thiers, had turned against him, disappointed by Louis Philippe's opposition to parliamentarism. A Reform Movement developed in France which urged the government to expand the electoral franchise, just as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland had done in 1832.
  The more radical democrats of the Reform Movement coalesced around the newspaper, La Réforme. However, the more moderate republicans and the liberal opposition rallied around the Le National newspaper Starting in July 1847 the Reformists of all shades began to hold "banquets" at which toasts were drunk to "République française" (the French Republic), "Liberté" (Liberty), "Egalité" (Equality) and "Fraternité," (Brotherhood) etc. However, Louis Philippe turned a deaf ear to the Reform Movement and discontent among wide sections of the French people continued to grow. Social and political discontent sparked revolutions in France in 1830 and 1848 which in turn inspired revolts in other parts of Europe. Workers lost their jobs, bread prices rose, people accused the government of corruption. The French revolted and set up a republic. French successes led to other revolts including those who wanted relief from the suffering caused by the Industrial Revolution and nationalism sprang up hoping for independence from foreign rulers.
 
 
Alexis de Tocqueville had observed, "We are sleeping together in a volcano. ... A wind of revolution blows, the storm is on the horizon." Lacking the property qualifications to vote, the lower classes were about to erupt in revolt.

Economic and international influences

The French middle class watched changes in Britain with interest. When Britain's Reform Act of 1832 extended enfranchisement to any person paying Ł10 or more per year (previously the vote was restricted to landholders), France's free press took interest.

Meanwhile, economically, the working class may perhaps have been slightly better off than Britain's working class. Still, unemployment in France threw skilled workers down to the level of the proletariat.

The only nominally social law of the July Monarchy was passed in 1841. This law prohibited the use of child labor of those children under eight years of age, and the employment of children less than 13 years old for night time work. This law, however, was routinely flouted.

The year 1846 saw a financial crisis and bad harvests, and the following year saw an economic depression.

A poor railroad system hindered aid efforts, and the Peasant rebellions that resulted were forcefully crushed. Perhaps a third of Paris was on the dole.

"Dangerous" writers proliferated such as Louis Blanc ("The right to work") and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon ("Property is theft!").

 
Louis Blanc, one of the two workers' representatives in the Assembly of the Second Republic
 
 
The events of February
Because political gatherings and demonstrations were outlawed in France, activists of the largely middle class opposition to the government began to hold a series of fund-raising banquets. This campaign of banquets (Campagne des banquets), was intended to circumvent the governmental restriction on political meetings and provide a legal outlet for popular criticism of the regime. The campaign began in July 1847. Friedrich Engels was in Paris dating from October 1847 and was able to observe and attend some of these banquets. He wrote a series of articles on these banquets, including "The Reform Movement in France" which was published in the La Rčforme on 20 November 1847; "Split in the Camp—the Rčforme and the National—March of Democracy published in the The Northern Star on 4 December 1847; "Reform Banquet at Lille—Speech of LeDru-Rollin" published in The Northern Star on 16 December 1847; "Reform Movement in France—Banquet of Dijon" published in The Northern Star on 18 December 1847; "The Réforme and the National" published in the Deutsche-Brüsseler-Zeitung on 30 December 1847; and "Louis Blanc's Speech at the Dijon Banquet" published in the Deutsche-Brusseler-Zeitung on 30 December 1847. The banquet campaign lasted until all political banquets were outlawed by the French government in February 1848. As a result, the people revolted, helping to unite the efforts of the popular Republicans and the liberal Orleanists, who turned their back on Louis-Philippe.
 
 

Lamartine in front of the Town Hall of Paris rejects the red flag on 25 February 1848 by Henri Felix Emmanuel Philippoteaux
 
 
Anger over the outlawing of the political banquets brought crowds of Parisians flooding out into the streets at noon on 22 February 1848. The crowds directed their anger against the Citizen King Louis Philippe and his chief minister for foreign and domestic policy--François Pierre Guillaume Guizot. Shouting "Down with Guizot" and "Long Live the Reform" the crowds marched past Guizot's residence. The crowds erected barricades in the streets of Paris, and fighting broke out between the citizens and the Parisian municipal guards.

At 2pm the next day, 23 February, Prime Minister Guizot resigned. Upon hearing the news of Guizot's resignation, a large crowd gathered outside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. An officer ordered the crowd not to pass, but people in the front of the crowd were being pushed by the rear. The officer ordered his men to fix bayonets, probably wishing to avoid shooting. However, in what is widely regarded as an accident, a soldier discharged his musket, which resulted in the rest of the soldiers firing into the crowd. Fifty-two people were killed.

Paris was soon a barricaded city. Omnibuses were turned into barricades, and thousands of trees were felled. Fires were set, and angry citizens began converging to the royal palace.

King Louis Philippe abdicated and fled to the UK.

 
 
The Second Republic
On 26 February 1848, the liberal opposition came together to organize a provisional government, called the Second Republic. The poet Alphonse de Lamartine was appointed president of the provisional government. Lamartine served as a virtual dictator of France for the next three months. Elections for a Constituent Assembly were scheduled for 23 April 1848. The Constituent Assembly was to establish a new republican government for France. In preparation for these elections, two major goals of the provisional government were universal suffrage and unemployment relief. Universal male suffrage was enacted on 2 March 1848, giving France nine million new voters. As in all other European nations, women did not have the right to vote. However, during this time a proliferation of political clubs emerged, including women's organizations. Relief for the unemployed was achieved, by the provisional government by enactment of the National Workshops, which guaranteed French citizens' "right to work". The "right" of a citizen to work and indeed the National Workshops themselves had been the idea of Jean Joseph Louis Blanc.

By May 1848 the National Workshops were employing 100,000 workers and paying out daily wages of 70,000 livres. Full employment proved far from workable, as peak unemployment may have peaked at around 800,000 people, with much under-employment on top of that. On May 31, 15,000 jobless French rioted as rising xenophobia persecuted Belgian workers in the north. In 1848, 479 newspapers were founded alongside a 54% decline in the number of businesses in Paris, as most wealth had evacuated the city. There was a corresponding decline in the luxury trade and credit became expensive.
 
"Messieurs Victor Hugo and Emile de Girardin try to raise Prince Louis upon a shield [in the heroic Roman fashion]: not too steady!" Honoré Daumier's satirical lithograph published in Charivari, 11 December 1848.
 
 
The rise of conservatism within the Second Republic
Naturally, the provisional government was disorganized as it attempted to deal with France's economic problems. The conservative elements of French society were wasting no time in organizing against the provisional government. After roughly a month, conservatives began to openly oppose the new government, using the rallying cry "order", which the new republic lacked.

Additionally, there was a major split between the citizens of Paris and those citizens of the more rural areas of France. The provisional government set out to establish deeper government control of the economy and guarantee a more equal distribution of resources. As noted above, to deal with the unemployment problem, the provisional government established National Workshops. The unemployed were given jobs building roads and planting trees without regard for the demand for these tasks. The population of Paris ballooned as job seekers from all over France came to Paris to work in the newly formed National Workshops. To pay for these the new National Workshops and the other social programs, the provisional government placed new taxes on land. These taxes alienated the "landed classes"—especially the small farmers and the peasantry of the rural areas of France—from the provisional government. Hardworking rural farmers were resistant to paying for the unemployed city people and their new "Right to Work" National Workshops. The taxes were widely disobeyed in the rural areas and, thus, the government remained very financially strapped for cash. Popular uncertainty about the liberal foundations of the provisional government became apparent in the 23 April 1848 elections. Despite the agitation from the left, voters elected a constituent assembly which was primarily moderate and conservative. In May, Jacques-Charles Dupont de l'Eure, chairman of the provisional government, made way for the Executive Commission, a body of state acting as Head of State with five co-presidents.

 
 
The results of the 23 April 1848 election were a disappointment to the radicals in Paris except for the election of one candidate popular among urban workers--François-Vincent Raspail. Many radicals felt the elections were a sign of the slowing down of the revolutionary movement. These radicals in Paris pressured the government to head an international "crusade" for democracy. Independence of other European states, such as Poland was urged by the Paris radicals.

In 1848, Poland as a national state, did not exist. The nation of Poland had been gradually "partitioned" or divided between foreign powers of Prussia, Russia, and Austria in 1773, 1793. Finally in 1795, all of the Polish nation was swallowed up by the three powers. However, it was an opportune time to raise the issue of Polish independence as Poles were also undergoing their own period of revolt in 1848 starting with the uprising in Poznań on 20 March 1848.

However, the government of the National Constituent Assembly continued to resist the radicals. The radicals began to protest against the National Constituent Assembly government. On 15 May 1848, Parisian workmen feeling their democratic and social republic was slipping away, invaded the Assembly en masse and proclaimed a new Provisional Government. This attempted revolution on the part of the working classes was quickly suppressed by the National Guard. The leaders of this revolt—Louis Auguste Blanqui, Armand Barbčs, François Vincent Raspail and others—were arrested. The trial of these leaders was held in Bourges, France, from March 7 to April 3, 1849.

The conservative classes of society were becoming increasingly fearful of the power of the working classes in Paris. They felt a strong need for organization and organized themselves around the need for "order"—the so-called "Party of Order." For the Party of Order the term "order" meant a roll back of society to days of Louis Philippe. The Party of Order was now the dominant member of the government. As the main force of reaction against revolution, the Party of Order forced the closure of the hated Right to Work National Workshops on 21 June 1848.

On 23 June 1848, the working class of Paris rose in protest over the closure of the National Workshops. On that day 170,000 citizens of Paris came out into the streets to erect barricades. To meet this challenge, the government appointed General Louis Eugčne Cavaignac to lead the military forces suppressing the uprising of the working classes.

  General Cavaignac had been serving in the Army in Algeria. Cavaignac had returned from Algeria and in the elections of 23 April 1848, he was elected to the National Constituent Assembly. Cavaignac arrived in Paris only on 17 May 1848 to take his seat in the National Assembly.

Between 23 June and 26 June 1848, this battle between the working class and Cavaignac came to be known as the "June Days Uprising." Cavaignac's forces started out on 23 June 1848 with an army composed of from 20,000 to 30,000 soldiers of the Paris garrison of the French Army. Cavaignac began a systematic assault against the revolutionary Parisian citizenry, targeting the blockaded areas of the city. However, he was not able to break the stiff opposition put up by the armed workers on the barricades on 23 June 1848. Accordingly, Cavaignac's forces were reinforced with another 20,000–25,000 soldiers from the mobile guard, some additional 60,000 to 80,000 from the national guard.[27] Even with this force of 120,000 to 125,000 soldiers, Cavaignac still required two days to complete the suppression of the working-class uprising.

In February 1848, the workers and petite bourgeoisie had fought together, but now, in June 1848, the lines were drawn differently. The working classes had been abandoned by the bourgeois politicians who founded the provisional government. This would prove fatal to the Second Republic, which, without the support of the working classes, could not continue. Although the governmental regime of the Second Republic continued to survive until December 1852, the generous, idealistic Republic to which the February Days had given birth, ended with the suppression of the "June Days."

The "Party of Order" moved quickly to consolidate the forces of reaction in the government and on 28 June 1848, the government appointed Louis Eugčne Cavaignac as the head of the French state. On 10 December 1848 a presidential election was held between four candidates. Cavaignac, was the candidate of the Party of Order. Alexandre Auguste Ledru-Rollin was also a candidate in that presidential election. Ledru-Rollin was the editor of the La Réforme newspaper and as such was the leader of the radical democrats among the petty bourgeoisie. François-Vincent Raspail was the candidate of the revolutionary working classes. Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte was the fourth presidential candidate. Napoleon III won the presidential election of 10 December 1848 with 5,587,759 votes as opposed to 1,474,687 votes for Cavaignac and 370,000 votes for Ledru-Rollin. Raspail ended up a distant fourth in the balloting.

 
 
Class struggles within the revolution
Karl Marx saw the "June Days" uprising as strong evidence of class conflict. Marx saw the revolution as being directed by the desires of the middle-class. While the bourgeoisie agitated for "proper participation", the workers themselves had other concerns. Many of the participants in the 1848 Revolution were of the so-called petite bourgeoisie (the owners of small properties, merchants, shopkeepers, etc.). Indeed the "petite" or petty bourgeoisie outnumbered the working classes (unskilled laborers working in mines, factories and stores, paid for their ability to perform manual labor and other work rather than their expertise) by about two to one in 1848. However, the financial position of the petty bourgeoisie was extremely tenuous. Because of the economic recession of 1846–47, the petty bourgeoisie had developed a great burden of debt as they attempted to stay in business. By 1848, in Paris alone 21,000,000 francs of this debt was "overdue." In the provinces another 11,000,000 francs of commercial paper (business loans) were overdue. During the February Revolution a united front had been presented by all classes of society who were in opposition to Louis Philippe. Both the industrial bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie had joined with the working classes in the February Revolution in order to obtain "proper participation" in the government for all sections and classes in society. However, as the working classes became more dissatisfied with the small share of this participation they actually received, they revolted and sought to have their demands heard in the streets. All the "propertied classes of the February Revolution," i.e. the finance bourgeoisie, the industrial bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie, became fearful of the workers revolt. Thus, the industrial bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie turned on their former allies in the February Revolution and moved to repress the working-class uprising during the June Days.
 
 
No class worked harder to suppress the workers revolt than did the petty bourgeoisie. However, since February, because slow sales and economic dislocations of the Revolution, the financial condition of the small merchants and shopkeepers of the petty bourgeoisie had deteriorated even further. As of June 1848, over 7,000 shopkeepers and merchants in Paris had not paid their rent since February. During the June Days, the creditors holding all the commercial paper for those loans and the landlords to whom the back rent was owed (i.e. the finance bourgeoisie), forestalled most attempts to enforce judgment to collect on those debts and back rent owed by the petty bourgeoisie. Once the worker revolt was put down, however, the creditors and landlords began to assert their claims for back rent and overdue debts in court. Bankruptcies and foreclosures rose dramatically following June 1848. It was as if the petty bourgeoisie returned home after their heroic fight against the working class on behalf of the propertied classes only to find that their allies in that fight (i.e. the finance bourgeoisie) had turned against them and turned them out of their businesses and homes. The petty bourgeoisie gathered in a large demonstration at the National Assembly to force the government to inquire into the problem of foreclosures and requiring an extension of debt for all those businessmen who could prove that their insolvency was caused by the Revolution itself. Although a plan containing this proposal was introduced in the National Assembly, the plan was rejected in the end. Thus, the petty bourgeoisie was betrayed and left to its own resources. The result was the pauperization of the petty bourgeoisie. Eventually, individual shopkeepers and merchants left their own failed businesses and sought wage labor and thus became part of the laboring class themselves.

Accordingly, the provisional government, which had been created to address the concerns of the all classes of French society, did not have enough of a foothold in the working classes to be successful in this effort. Therefore, in the end, the provisional government tended to address only the concerns of the liberal bourgeoisie and forgot the concerns of the working class and the concerns of the petty bourgeoisie. Support for the provisional government was especially weak in the countryside, where a vast amount of France's population was agricultural and traditionally less revolutionary. Though the peasantry countryside did have their own concerns, such as food shortages as a result of bad harvests, the concerns of the bourgeoisie were still too far-off from those of the lower classes.

  Also, the memory of the French Revolution was still fresh in the minds of the French.

The "Thermidorian reaction" and the ascent of Napoleon III to the throne are evidence that the people preferred the safety of an able dictatorship to the uncertainty of revolution. Louis Napoleon portrayed himself as "rising above politics. Each class saw Louis Napoleon as a re-enactment of the "great days" of Napoleon Bonaparte. The various classes of France each had different visions of what a return to the days of Napoleon Bonaparte would mean and they supported Louis Napoleon for different reasons. This phenomenon was what Karl Marx meant when he said "History repeats itself: the first time as a tragedy, the second time as a farce." The various classes and political groupings in France each had different reasons for supporting Louis Napoleon in the election of December 10, 1848. Louis Napoleon, himself encouraged this by "being all things to all people." Both the Legitimists (Bourbons) and the Orleans (Citizen King Louis-Philippe) monarchists saw Louis Napoleon as the beginnings of a royalist restoration in France.

The army voted for Napoleon (against the Mobile Guard which supported Cavaignac in same election) because they saw Napoleon as a supporter of an active foreign policy—war instead of peace. The big industrial bourgeoisie supported Louis Napoleon as a means of breaking with the proletariat and the other revolutionary forces. They felt that Louis Napoleon would suppress all further revolutionary activity.
Even sections of the proletariat supported Louis Napoleon (over the petty bourgeoisie socialist Alexandre Ledru-Rollin who was also in the electoral race) because they saw Louis Napoleon as a means of getting rid of the hated Cavaignac and the hated bourgeoisie republicanism of the National Assembly which had betrayed the proletarian interests in the recent June Days. The petty bourgeoisie saw Louis Napoleon as the rule of the debtor over the creditor, as their savior against the large finance capitalists, who had denied them any kind of relief from their crushing debts despite the loyal support the petty bourgeoisie had provided the propertied interests in the June Days suppression of the revolution.

Then there was the peasantry, which overwhelmingly supported Louis Napoleon. The support of the peasantry for Louis Napoleon was so strong that the election of Louis Napoleon has been seen as a coup d'état or an insurrection of the peasantry. Thus, one might argue, without the support of these large lower classes, the revolution of 1848 would not carry through, despite the hopes of the liberal bourgeoisie.

 
 
The end of the Revolution in France
Following the repression of the June Days, the French Revolution of 1848 was basically over. Politics in France continued to tilt to the right, as the era of revolution in France came to an end. However the Party of Order and the Cavaignac dictatorship were still fearful of another popular uprising in the streets. Accordingly, on 2 September 1848, the government continued the state of siege that had been in place since the June Days. Also on 2 September 1848, the National Constituent Assembly vowed not to dissolve itself until they had written a new constitution and enacted all the organic laws necessary to implement that new constitution. Although the National Constituent Assembly had attempted to write a constitution before the June Days, only a "first draft" of that constitution had been written before the repression in June 1848. This first draft, however, still contained the phrase "Right to Work" and contained several provisions dealing with the demands of the working classes. In the eyes of the Party of Order, these provisions were now entirely unacceptable, especially in the new conservative political environment after the June Days. Accordingly, on 4 September 1848, the National Constituent Assembly, now controlled by the Party of Order, set about writing a new constitution. " The new constitution was finished on 23 October 1848 and presidential elections were scheduled for 10 December 1848. As noted above Louis Napoleon won the presidential election by a wide margin over the current dictator Louis Cavaignac and the petty bourgeoisie socialist Alexandre Ledru-Rollin.
 
Louis Napoléon (Napoleon III) captured 74,2 percent of votes cast the first French direct presidential elections in 1848
 
 
Louis Napoleon's family name of Napoleon rallied support to his cause. Elected with Louis Napoleon was a National Assembly which was filled with monarchists—of either the Legitimist (Bourbon) variety or the Orleanist (Louis-Philippe) variety. As noted above the Bourbons tended to support the landed aristocracy while the Orleanist tended to support the banking and finance bourgeoisie. One of those elected to the National Assembly was Adolphe Thiers who was the leader of the Orleanist party. As such, Thiers became the chief spokesman of the finance bourgeoisie, however as time went by he was tending to speak for the whole bourgeoisie, including the rising industrial bourgeoisie. After sweeping the elections, Louis Napoleon tried to return France to the old order. Although, Napoleon purged republicans and returning the "vile multitude" (including Adolphe Thiers) to its former place, Napoleon III was unable to totally turn the clock back. Indeed the presidency of Louis Napoleon, followed by the Second Empire, would be a time of great industrialization and great economic expansion of railroads and banking. By the time of the December 2, 1851 coup, Louis Napoleon had dissolved the National Assembly without having the constitutional right to do so, and became the sole ruler of France. Cells of resistance surfaced, but were put down, and the Second Republic was officially over. He re-established universal suffrage, feared by the Republicans at the time who correctly expected the countryside to vote against the Republic, Louis Napoleon took the title Emperor Napoleon III, and the Second Empire began.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1848
 
 
June Days Uprising
 
The June Days Uprising (French: les journées de Juin) was an uprising staged by the workers of France from 23 June to 26 June 1848. It was in response to plans to close the National Workshops, created by the Second Republic in order to provide work and a source of income for the unemployed; however, only low pay, dead-end jobs were provided, which barely provided enough money to survive. The National Guard, led by General Louis Eugčne Cavaignac, was called out to quell the protests. Things did not go peacefully and over 10,000 people were either killed or injured, while 4,000 insurgents were deported to Algeria. This marked the end of the hopes of a "Democratic and Social Republic" (République démocratique et sociale) and the victory of the liberals over the Radical Republicans.
 

Painting of a barricade on Rue Soufflot (with the Panthéon behind), Paris, June 1848. By Horace Vernet.
 
 
Background
During this time, France was in a period of internal turmoil and had gone through many revolutions, such as the 1830 revolution, and the 1848 Revolution. At the time, a provisional government, called the Second Republic, was declared after the abdication of Louis Philippe earlier that year.

This was a democratic republic and immediately democratic reforms were being enacted, including universal male suffrage. To combat unemployment, the National Workshops were created which provided jobs and wages.

These Workshops were a tremendous success attracting many unemployed persons, however, to fund these Workshops new taxes were applied to lands. This alienated land owners, among them peasants, from the provisional government as they did not like the idea of paying money so that the unemployed could have the "right to work". As a result, these land taxes were not adhered to, causing a financial problem for the Second Republic.

On April 23, the French people elected a mainly, moderate and conservative constituent assembly, this angered radicals in Paris, who saw this as contrary to their vision. The radicals invaded the assembly, as they believed that their democratic republic was being eroded away. This action was quickly thwarted; however, this sparked fear in conservatives, who were becoming a parliamentary majority. Soon, this conservative majority closed down the National Workshops, which sparked three days of bloody unrest.

  Uprising
On 23 June, the Comte de Falloux's committee issued a decree stating the Workshops would be closed in three days and that the options were that young men could join the army, provincials could return home or they could simply be dismissed. The anger surrounding the closing of the Workshops increased, and shortly after the June Days (officially 24–26 June 1848) began. In sections of the city hundreds of barricades were thrown up which blocked communication and reduced the mobility of persons. The National Guard was called out to halt rioting; this sparked fighting once the guard and protesters clashed.

The labourers had now become insurgents and were breaking stones to use as barricades. The numbers of military members were estimated to be over 40,000; however, the number of insurgents was estimated to be higher and was growing as they traveled from house to house recruiting other citizens to join them, threatening them with death if they refused. The insurgents also seized many armories to gather weapons, regardless they were still running low on ammunition. However, the revolutionaries would rather die than to return to their lives of poverty.

Large amounts of blood were shed on the streets as the National Guard fired on the barricades, but the National Guard's men were not the only ones firing. The insurgents also inflicted heavy casualties to the Guard, who lost many of their men. By 26 June, the revolution was over and more than 10,000 people were either killed or injured, while, over 4,000 insurgents were deported to Algeria. After the insurgents were crushed, all ideas of a revolution were abandoned.

 
 
Aftermath
The French Constitution of 1848 was put in place stating that executive power should be wielded by the President of the Republic and that the people should elect this president every four years. Once a president was elected he would have the power to appoint Ministers and other high-ranking officials. The constitution provided provision for an Assembly of 750 legislators who were to be elected by the people every three years. After the constitution was enacted, elections were held and Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte was elected. After four years in power, Bonaparte staged a coup d'état, thereby becoming the Emperor of the Second French Empire.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1848
 
 
Cavaignac Louis-Eugene
 
Louis-Eugčne Cavaignac, (born Oct. 15, 1802, Paris—died Oct. 28, 1857, Sarthe, Fr.), French general and chief executive during the Revolution of 1848, known for his harsh reprisals against rebelling Parisian workers in June of that year.
 

Louis-Eugčne Cavaignac
  Cavaignac’s father, Jean-Baptiste, was a Jacobin member of the Committee of General Security during the French Revolution (1789– 92), and Louis retained his father’s strong republican beliefs. His uncle, Jacques-Marie, served the Bourbons and the July Monarchy, which ruled France in 1830–48, and helped Cavaignac regain his appointment in the army, from which he had been dismissed in 1831 because of his republicanism. Nevertheless, he was sent to the relative isolation of Algeria.

Cavaignac performed with distinction during the French conquest of Algeria in the 1840s, and in 1848 he was appointed governor general. Amid the revolutionary activity of that year, he was elected to the legislature in France and appointed minister of war by the provisional government of the newly formed Second Republic. That June there was a large workers’ revolt in Paris to protest the expulsion of Socialist leaders from the National Assembly and the closing of the national workshops (government-sponsored employment centres). Cavaignac directed the suppression of the revolt, for which he became known as “the butcher of June.” On June 28 the National Assembly named him chief executive of France, but he lost the presidential election to Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte (later Emperor Napoleon III) that December. Cavaignac remained a leader of the opposition to Bonaparte. He was arrested in 1851, but the next year he was elected to the Corps Législatif. He refused, however, to take an oath of allegiance to the new emperor and thus was denied his seat in the legislature both then and again in 1857.

In 1899 the memoirs and correspondence of Cavaignac and his uncle were published as Les Deux Généraux Cavaignac. Souvenirs et correspondance (1808–1848).

Encyclopćdia Britannica

 
 
 
1848
 
 
French Constitution of 1848
 

The Constitution of 1848 is the constitution passed in France on November 4, 1848 by the National Assembly, the constituent body of the Second French Republic.

 
It was repealed on January 14, 1852 by the constitution of 1852 which profoundly changed the face of the Second Republic and served as the basis for the Second French Empire.

Debates
16 delegates were chosen to debate the structure of the new constitution.

Present among them, was Alexis de Tocqueville author of Democracy in America.

Legislature
The delegates debated two types of legislature power, unicameral and bicameral legislatures.

Most arguments were given in support of a single legislative body.

These included the belief that an additional house would only benefit an aristocracy in France.

Also, many delegates believed that two houses would slow the pace of political progress happening in France.

Tocqueville believed that two houses were necessary to prevent abuses by the executive power as well as prevent political passions from being exerted on the laws.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
French Constitution of 1848
 
 
 
1848
 
 
French Second Republic
 

The French Second Republic was the republican government of France between the 1848 Revolution and the 1851 coup by Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte which initiated the Second Empire. It officially adopted the motto Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité. The Second Republic witnessed the tension between the "Social and Democratic Republic" (French: la République démocratique et sociale) and a liberal form of Republic, which exploded during the June Days Uprising of 1848.

 
History
Revolution of 1848

The industrial population of the faubourgs was welcomed by the National Guard on their way towards the centre of Paris. Barricades were raised after the shooting of protestors outside the Guizot manor by soldiers.

On 23 February 1848 Guizot's cabinet resigned, abandoned by the petite bourgeoisie, on whose support they thought they could depend. The heads of the Left Centre and the dynastic Left, Molé and Thiers, declined the offered leadership. Odilon Barrot accepted it, and Bugeaud, commander-in-chief of the first military division, who had begun to attack the barricades, was recalled. In the face of the insurrection which had now taken possession of the whole capital, Louis-Philippe decided to abdicate in favour of his grandson, Philippe, comte de Paris.

 
 
Formation
The Republic was then proclaimed by Alphonse de Lamartine in the name of the provisional government elected by the Chamber under the pressure of the mob.

This provisional government with Dupont de l'Eure as its president, consisted of Lamartine for foreign affairs, Crémieux for justice, Ledru-Rollin for the interior, Carnot for public instruction, Goudchaux for finance, Arago for the navy, and Burdeau for war. Garnier-Pagčs was mayor of Paris.

But, as in 1830, the republican-socialist party had set up a rival government at the Hôtel de Ville (city hall), including Louis Blanc, Armand Marrast, Ferdinand Flocon, and Alexandre Martin, known as Albert L'Ouvrier ("Albert the Worker"), which bid fair to involve discord and civil war. But this time the Palais Bourbon was not victorious over the Hôtel de Ville. It had to consent to a fusion of the two bodies, in which, however, the predominating elements were the moderate republicans. It was uncertain what the policy of the new government would be.

One party seeing that in spite of the changes in the last sixty years of all political institutions the position of the people had not been improved, demanded a reform of society itself, the abolition of the privileged position of property, the only obstacle to equality, and as an emblem hoisted the red flag (the 1791 red flag was, however, the symbol not merely of the French Revolution, but rather of martial law and of order). The other party wished to maintain society on the basis of its ancient institutions, and rallied round the tricolore. As a concession made by Lamartine to popular aspirations, and in exchange of the maintaining of the tricolor flag, he conceded the Republican triptych of Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, written on the flag, on which a red rosette was also to be added.

The first collision took place as to the form which the 1848 Revolution was to take. Were they to remain faithful to their original principles, as Lamartine wished, and accept the decision of the country as supreme, or were they, as the revolutionaries under Ledru-Rollin claimed, to declare the republic of Paris superior to the universal manhood suffrage of an insufficiently educated people? On 5 March the government, under the pressure of the Parisian clubs, decided in favour of an immediate reference to the people, and direct universal suffrage, and adjourned it till 26 April. In this fateful and unexpected decision, which instead of adding to the electorate the educated classes, refused by Guizot, admitted to it the unqualified masses, originated the Constituent Assembly of 4 May 1848. The provisional government having resigned, the republican and anti-socialist majority on the 9 May entrusted the supreme power to an Executive Commission consisting of five members: Arago, Pierre Marie de Saint-Georges, Garnier-Pagčs, Lamartine and Ledru-Rollin. But the spell was already broken. This revolution which had been peacefully effected with the most generous aspirations, in the hope of abolishing poverty by organizing industry on other bases than those of competition and capitalism, and which had at once aroused the fraternal sympathy of the nations, was doomed to be abortive. The result of the general election, the return of a constituent assembly predominantly moderate if not monarchical, dashed the hopes of those who had looked for the establishment, by a peaceful revolution, of their ideal socialist state; but they were not prepared to yield without a struggle, and in Paris itself they commanded a formidable force.

  In spite of the preponderance of the "tri-colour" party in the provisional government, so long as the voice of France had not spoken, the socialists, supported by the Parisian proletariat, had exercised an influence on policy out of all proportion to their relative numbers or personal weight. By the decree of 24 February, the provisional government had solemnly accepted the principle of the "right to work," and decided to establish "National Workshops" for the unemployed; at the same time a sort of industrial parliament was established at the Luxembourg Palace, under the presidency of Louis Blanc, with the object of preparing a scheme for the organization of labor; and, lastly, by the decree of 8 March, the property qualification for enrollment in the National Guard had been abolished and the workmen were supplied with arms. The socialists thus formed, in some sort, a state within the state, with a government, an organization and an armed force.

In the circumstances, a conflict was inevitable; and on 15 May, an armed mob, headed by Raspail, Blanqui and Barbčs, and assisted by the proletariat Guard, attempted to overwhelm the Assembly. They were defeated by the bourgeois battalions of the National Guard; but the situation nonetheless remained highly critical. The national workshops were producing the results that might have been foreseen.

It was impossible to provide remunerative work even for the genuine unemployed, and of the thousands who applied the greater number were employed in perfectly useless digging and refilling; soon even this expedient failed, and those for whom work could not be invented were given a half wage of 1 franc a day.

Even this pitiful dole, with no obligation to work, proved attractive, and all over France workmen threw up their jobs and streamed to Paris, where they swelled the ranks of the army under the red flag. It was soon clear that the continuance of this experiment would mean financial ruin; it had been proved by the émeute of 15 May, that it constituted a perpetual menace to the state; and the government decided to end it. The method chosen was scarcely a happy one.

On 21 June, Alfred de Falloux decided in the name of the parliamentary commission on labour that the workmen should be discharged within three days and those who were able-bodied should be forced to enlist.

The June Days Uprising broke out at once, during 24—26 June, when the eastern industrial quarter of Paris, led by Pujol, fought the western quarter, led by Cavaignac, who had been appointed dictator. The socialist party was vanquished by fighting and afterwards by deportation, but they dragged down the Republic in their ruin. It had already become unpopular with the peasants, exasperated by the new land tax of 45 centimes imposed in order to fill the empty treasury, and with the bourgeois, in terror of the power of the revolutionary clubs and hard hit by the stagnation of business.

By the "massacres" of the June Days the working classes were also alienated from it; and abiding fear of the "Reds" did the rest. The Duke of Wellington wrote at this time, "France needs a Napoleon! I cannot yet see him..."

The granting of universal suffrage to a society with Imperialist sympathies, and unfitted to reconcile the principles of order with the consequences of liberty, was indeed bound, now that the political balance in France was so radically changed, to prove a formidable instrument of reaction; and this was proved by the election of the president of the Republic.
 
 
Constitution
The new constitution, proclaiming a democratic republic, direct universal suffrage and the separation of powers, was promulgated on 4 November. Under the new constitution, there was to be a single permanent Assembly of 750 members elected for a term of three years by the scrutin de liste. The Assembly would elect members of a Council of State to serve for six years. Laws would be proposed by the Council of State, to be voted on by the Assembly. The executive power was delegated to the President, who was elected for four years by direct universal suffrage, i.e. on a broader basis than that of the Assembly, and was not eligible for re-election.
 
 
He was to choose his ministers, who, like him, would be responsible to the Assembly. Finally, revision of the constitution was made practically impossible: it involved obtaining three times in succession a majority of three-quarters of the deputies in a special assembly. It was in vain that Jules Grévy, in the name of those who perceived the obvious and inevitable risk of creating, under the name of a president, a monarch and more than a king, proposed that the head of the state should be no more than a removable president of the ministerial council. Lamartine, thinking that he was sure to be the choice of the electors under universal suffrage, won over the support of the Chamber, which did not even take the precaution of rendering ineligible the members of families which had reigned over France. It made the presidency an office dependent upon popular acclamation.

The election was keenly contested; the democratic republicans adopted as their candidate Ledru-Rollin, the "pure republicans" Cavaignac, and the recently reorganized Imperialist party Prince Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte. Unknown in 1835, and forgotten or despised since 1840, Louis Napoleon had in the last eight years advanced sufficiently in the public estimation to be elected to the Constituent Assembly in 1848 by five departments. He owed this rapid increase of popularity partly to blunders of the government of July, which had unwisely aroused the memory of the country, filled as it was with recollections of the Empire, and partly to Louis Napoléon's campaign carried on from his prison at Ham by means of pamphlets of socialistic tendencies. Moreover, the monarchists, led by Thiers and the committee of the Rue de Poitiers, were no longer content even with the safe dictatorship of the upright Cavaignac, and joined forces with the Bonapartists. On 10 December the peasants gave over 5,000,000 votes to a name: Napoléon, which stood for order at all costs, against 1,400,000 for Cavaignac.
  For three years, there was an indecisive struggle between the heterogeneous Assembly and the President, who was silently awaiting his opportunity. He chose as his ministers men with little inclined towards republicanism, with a preference for Orléanists, the chief of whom was Odilon Barrot. In order to strengthen his position, he endeavored to conciliate the reactionary parties, without committing himself to any of them. The chief instance of this was the expedition to Rome voted by the Catholics, to restore the temporal authority of the Pope Pius IX, who had fled Rome in fear of the nationalists and republicans. (Garibaldi and Mazzini had been elected to a Constitutional Assembly.) The Pope called for international intervention to restore him in his temporal power. The French President moved to establish the power and prestige of France against that of Austria, as beginning the work of European renovation and reconstruction which he already looked upon as his mission. French troops under Oudinot marched into Rome. This provoked a foolish insurrection in Paris in favor of the Roman Republic, that of the Château d'Eau, which was crushed on 13 June 1849. On the other hand, when the Pope, though only just restored, began to yield to the general movement of reaction, the President demanded that he should set up a Liberal government. The Pope's dilatory reply having been accepted by the French ministry, the President replaced it on 1 November, by the Fould-Rouher cabinet. This looked like a declaration of war against the Catholic and monarchist majority in the Legislative Assembly, which had been elected on 28 May in a moment of panic. But the President again pretended to be playing the game of the Orléanists, as he had done in the case of the Constituent Assembly. The complementary elections of March and April 1850 resulted in an unexpected victory for the republicans which alarmed the conservative leaders, Thiers, Berryer and Montalembert. The President and the Assembly co-operated in the passage of the Loi Falloux of 15 March 1850, which again placed university instruction under the direction of the Church.
 
 
A conservative electoral law was passed on 31 May. It required each voter to prove three years residence at his current address, by entries in the record of direct taxes. This effectively repealed universal suffrage: factory workers, who moved fairly often, were thus disenfranchised. The law of 16 July aggravated the severity of the press restrictions by re-establishing the "caution money" (cautionnement) deposited by proprietors and editors of papers with the government as a guarantee of good behavior. Finally, a skillful interpretation of the law on clubs and political societies suppressed about this time all the republican societies. It was now their turn to be crushed like the socialists.
 
 
Coup
However, the president had only joined in Montalembert's cry of "Down with the Republicans!" in the hope of effecting a revision of the constitution without having recourse to a coup d'état. His concessions only increased the boldness of the monarchists, while they had only accepted Louis-Napoléon as president in opposition to the Republic and as a step in the direction of the monarchy. A conflict was now inevitable between his personal policy and the majority of the Chamber, who were moreover divided into legitimists and Orléanists, in spite of the death of Louis-Philippe in August 1850.

Louis-Napoléon exploited their projects for a restoration of the monarchy, which he knew to be unpopular in the country, and which gave him the opportunity of furthering his own personal ambitions. From 8 August to 12 November 1850 he went about France stating the case for a revision of the constitution in speeches which he varied according to each place; he held reviews, at which cries of "Vive Napoléon!" showed that the army was with him; he superseded General Changarnier, on whose arms the parliament relied for the projected monarchical coup d'état; he replaced his Orléanist ministry by obscure men devoted to his own cause, such as Morny, Fleury and Persigny, and gathered round him officers of the African army, broken men like General Saint-Arnaud; in fact he practically declared open war.

His reply to the votes of censure passed by the Assembly, and their refusal to increase his civil list was to hint at a vast communistic plot in order to scare the bourgeoisie, and to denounce the electoral law of 31 May 1850, in order to gain the support of the mass of the people.

  The Assembly retaliated by throwing out the proposal for a partial reform of that article of the constitution which prohibited the re-election of the president and the re-establishment of universal suffrage (July). All hope of a peaceful issue was at an end. When the questors called upon the Chamber to have posted up in all barracks the decree of 6 May 1848 concerning the right of the Assembly to demand the support of the troops if attacked, the Mountain, dreading a restoration of the monarchy, voted with the Bonapartists against the measure, thus disarming the legislative power.

Louis-Napoléon saw his opportunity, and organised the French coup of 1851. On the night of 1/2 December 1851, the anniversary of the coronation of his illustrious uncle Napoléon I, he dissolved the Chamber, re-established universal suffrage, had all the party leaders arrested, and summoned a new assembly to prolong his term of office for ten years.

The deputies who had met under Berryer at the Mairie of the 10th arrondissement to defend the constitution and proclaim the deposition of Louis Napoleon were scattered by the troops at Mazas and Mont Valérien. The resistance organized by the republicans within Paris under Victor Hugo was soon subdued by the intoxicated soldiers.

The more serious resistance in the départements was crushed by declaring a state of siege and by the "mixed commissions." The plebiscite of 20 December, ratified by a huge majority the coup d'état in favour of the prince-president, who alone reaped the benefit of the excesses of the Republicans and the reactionary passions of the monarchists.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1848
 
 
Revolution in Vienna; Metternich resigns
 
 
Revolutions of 1848 in the Austrian Empire
 

From March 1848 through November 1849, the Habsburg Austrian Empire was threatened by revolutionary movements. Much of the revolutionary activity was of a nationalist character: the empire, ruled from Vienna, included Austrian Germans, Hungarians, Slovenes, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Ruthenians (Ukrainians), Romanians, Croats, Italians, and Serbs, all of whom attempted in the course of the revolution to either achieve autonomy, independence, or even hegemony over other nationalities. The nationalist picture was further complicated by the simultaneous events in the German states, which moved toward greater German national unity.

Besides these nationalisms, liberal and even socialist currents resisted the empire's longstanding conservatism.

Ultimately, the revolutions failed, in part because the various revolutionaries had conflicting goals.

 
The early rumblings
The events of 1848 were the product of mounting social and political tensions after the Congress of Vienna of 1815. During the "pre-March" period, the already conservative Austrian Empire moved further away from ideas of the Age of Enlightenment, restricted freedom of the press, limited many university activities, and banning fraternities.
 
 
Social and political conflict
Conflicts between debtors and creditors in agricultural production as well as over land use rights in parts of Hungary (as in France) led to conflicts that occasionally erupted into violence. Conflict over organized religion was pervasive in pre-1848 Europe. Tension came both from within Catholicism and between members of different confessions. These conflicts were often mixed with conflict with the state. Important for the revolutionaries were state conflicts including the armed forces and collection of taxes. As 1848 approached, the revolutions the Empire crushed to maintain longstanding conservative minister Klemens Wenzel von Metternich's Concert of Europe left the empire nearly bankrupt and in continual need of soldiers. Draft commissions led to brawls between soldiers and civilians. All of this further agitated the peasantry, who resented their remaining feudal obligations.
 
Metternich in the 1840s
 
 
Despite lack of freedom of the press and association, there was a flourishing liberal German culture among students and those educated either in Josephine schools or German universities. They published pamphlets and newspapers discussing education and language; a need for basic liberal reforms was assumed. These middle class liberals largely understood and accepted that forced labor is not efficient, and that the Empire should adopt a wage labor system. The question was of how to institute such reforms.

Notable liberal clubs of the time in Vienna included the Legal-Political Reading Club (established 1842) and Concordia Society (1840). They, like the Lower Austrian Manufacturers' Association (1840) were part of a culture that criticized Metternich's government from the city's coffeehouses, salons, and even stages, but prior to 1848 their demands had not even extended to constitutionalism or freedom of assembly, let alone republicanism. They had merely advocated relaxed censorship, freedom of religion, economic freedoms, and, above all, a more competent administration. They were outright opposed to popular sovereignty and the universal franchise.

To their left was a radicalized, impoverished intelligentsia. Educational opportunities in 1840s Austria had far outstripped employment opportunities for the educated.

 
 
Direct cause of the outbreak of violence
In 1846 there had been an uprising of Polish nobility in Austrian Galicia, which was only countered when peasants, in turn, rose up against the nobles. The economic crisis of 1845-47 was marked by recession and food shortages throughout the continent. At the end of February 1848, demonstrations broke out in Paris. Louis-Philippe of France abdicated the throne, prompting similar revolts throughout the continent.
 
 
Revolution in the Austrian lands
An early victory leads to tension
After news broke of the February victories in Paris, uprisings occurred throughout Europe, including in Vienna, where the Diet (parliament) of Lower Austria in March demanded the resignation of Prince Metternich, the conservative State Chancellor and Foreign Minister. With no forces rallying to Metternich's defense, nor word from Ferdinand I of Austria to the contrary, he resigned on 13 March. Metternich fled to London, and Ferdinand appointed new, nominally liberal, ministers. By November, the Austrian Empire saw several short-lived liberal governments under five successive Ministers-President of Austria: Count Kolowrat (17 March–4 April), Count Ficquelmont (4 April–3 May), Baron Pillersdorf (3 May–8 July), Baron Doblhoff-Dier (8 July–18 July) and Baron Wessenberg (19 July–20 November).

The established order collapsed rapidly because of the weakness of the Austrian armies. Field Marshal Joseph Radetzky was unable to keep his soldiers fighting Milanese insurgents in Northern Italy, and had to, instead, order the remaining troops to evacuate.

 
The Viennese students Academic Legion played a key role in toppling Metternich's government and precipitating his retirement on 13 March 1848.
 
 
Social and political conflict as well as inter and intra confessional hostility momentarily subsided as much of the continent rejoiced in the liberal victories. Mass political organizations and public participation in government became widespread.

However, liberal ministers were unable to establish central authority. Provisional governments in Venice and Milan quickly expressed desire to be part of a united Italian state, a new Hungarian government in Pest announced its intentions to break away from the Empire and elect Ferdinand its King, and a Polish National Committee announced the same for the province of Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria.

Social and political tensions after the "Springtime of Peoples"
The victory of the party of movement was looked at as an opportunity for lower classes to renew old conflicts with greater anger and energy. Several tax boycotts and attempted murders of tax collectors occurred in Vienna. Assaults against soldiers were common, including against Radetzky's troops retreating from Milan. The archbishop of Vienna was forced to flee, and in Graz, the convent of the Jesuits was destroyed.

 
 
The demands of nationalism and its contradictions became apparent as new national governments began declaring power and unity. Charles Albert of Sardinia, King of Piedmont-Savoy, initiated a nationalist war on March 23 in the Austrian held northern Italian provinces that would consume the attention of the entire peninsula.

The German nationalist movement faced the question of whether or not Austria should be included in the united German state, a quandary that divided the Frankfurt National Assembly. The liberal ministers in Vienna were willing to allow elections for the German National Assembly in some of the Habsburg lands, but it was undetermined which Habsburg territories would participate.

Hungary and Galicia were clearly not German; German nationalists (who dominated the Bohemian Diet) felt the old crown lands rightfully belonged to a united German state, despite the fact that the majority of the people of Bohemia and Moravia spoke Czech — a Slavic language. Czech nationalists viewed the language as far more significant, calling for a boycott of the Frankfurt Parliament elections in Bohemia, Moravia, and neighboring Austrian Silesia (also partly Czech-speaking). Tensions in Prague between German and Czech nationalists grew quickly between April and May.
 
A young Emperor Franz Joseph I (
Francis Joseph I)
 
 
By early summer, conservative regimes had been overthrown, new freedoms (including freedom of the press and freedom of association) had been introduced, and multiple nationalist claims had been exerted. New parliaments quickly held elections with broad franchise to create constituent assemblies, which would write new constitutions. The elections that were held produced unexpected results. The new voters, naďve and confused by their new political power, typically elected conservative or moderately liberal representatives. The radicals, the ones who supported the broadest franchise, lost under the system they advocated because they were not the locally influential and affluent men. The mixed results led to confrontations similar to the "June Days" uprising in Paris. Additionally, these constituent assemblies were charged with the impossible task of managing both the needs of the people of the state and determining what that state physically is at the same time. The Austrian Constituent Assembly was divided into a Czech faction, a German faction, and a Polish faction, and within each faction was the political left-right spectrum. Outside the Assembly, petitions, newspapers, mass demonstrations, and political clubs put pressure on their new governments and often expressed violently many of the debates that were occurring within the assembly itself.

The Czechs held a Pan-Slavic congress in Prague, primarily composed of Austroslavs who wanted greater freedom within the Empire, but their status as peasants and proletarians surrounded by a German middle class doomed their autonomy. They also disliked the prospect of annexation of Bohemia to a German Empire.

 
 

Prague barricades
 
 
Counterrevolution
Insurgents quickly lost in street fighting to King Ferdinand's troops led by General Radetzky, prompting several liberal government ministers to resign in protest. Ferdinand, now restored to power in Vienna, appointed conservatives in their places. These actions were a considerable blow to the revolutionaries, and by August most of northern Italy was under Radetzky's control.

In Bohemia, the leaders of both the German and Czech nationalist movements were both constitutional monarchists, loyal to the Habsburg Emperor. Only a few days after the Emperor reconquered northern Italy, Alfred I, Prince of Windisch-Grätz took provocative measures in Prague to prompt street fighting. Once the barricades went up, he led Habsburg troops to crush the insurgents. After having taken back the city, he imposed martial law, ordered the Prague National Committee dissolved, and sent delegates to the "Pan-Slavic" Congress home. These events were applauded by German nationalists, who failed to understand that the Habsburg military would crush their own national movement as well.

  Attention then turned to Hungary. War in Hungary again threatened imperial rule and prompted Emperor Ferdinand and his court to once more flee Vienna.

Viennese radicals welcomed the arrival of Hungarian troops as the only force able to stand up against the court and ministry. The radicals took control of the city for only a short period of time.
Windisch-Grätz led soldiers from Prussia to quickly defeat the insurgents. Windisch-Grätz restored imperial authority to the city.

The reconquering of Vienna was seen as a defeat over German nationalism. At this point, Ferdinand I named the noble Prince Felix zu Schwarzenberg head of government. Schwarzenberg, a consummate statesman, persuaded the feeble-minded Ferdinand to abdicate the throne to his 18-year old nephew, Franz Joseph. Parliamentarians continued to debate, but had no authority on state policy.

Both the Czech and Italian revolutions were defeated by the Habsburgs. Prague was the first victory of counter-revolution in the Austrian Empire.

 
 

The recitation of the National Song at the National Museum
 
 
Revolution in the Kingdom of Hungary
The Hungarian Diet was reconvened in 1825 to handle financial needs. A liberal party emerged in the Diet. The party focused on providing for the peasantry in mostly symbolic ways because of their inability to understand the needs of the laborers. Lajos Kossuth emerged as the leader of the lower gentry in the Diet.

In 1848, news of the outbreak of revolution in Paris arrived as a new national cabinet took power under Kossuth, and the Diet approved a sweeping reform package, referred to as the "April laws" (also "March laws"), that changed almost every aspect of Hungary's economic, social, and political life:

-they gave the Magyar nobility and lower gentry in the parliament control over its own military, its budget, and foreign policy
-essentially created an autonomous national kingdom of Hungary with the Habsburg Emperor as its king
-demanded that the Hungarian government receive and expend all taxes raised in Hungary and have authority over Hungarian regiments in the Habsburg army
-ended the special status of Transylvania and Croatia-Slavonia.

These demands were not easy for the imperial court to accept, however, its weak position provided little choice. One of the first tasks of the Diet was abolishing serfdom, which they did rather quickly.

The Hungarian government set limits on the political activity of both the Croatian and Romanian national movements. Croats and Romanians had their own desires for self-rule and saw no benefit in replacing one central government for another. Armed clashes between the Hungarians and the Croats, Romanians, Serbs, along one border and Slovaks on the other ensued. In some cases, this was a continuation and an escalation of previous tensions, such as the 1845 July victims in Croatia.

The Habsburg Kingdom of Croatia and the Kingdom of Slavonia severed relations with the new Hungarian government in Pest and devoted itself to the imperial cause. Conservative Josip Jelačić, who was appointed the new ban of Croatia-Slavonia in March by the imperial court, was removed from his position by the constitutional monarchist Hungarian government. He refused to give up his authority in the name of the monarch. Thus, there were two governments in Hungary issuing contradictory orders in the name of Ferdinand von Habsburg.

Aware that they were on the path to civil war in mid-1848, the Hungarian government ministers attempted to gain Habsburg support against Jelačić by offering to send troops to northern Italy.

  Additionally, they attempted to come to terms with Jelačić himself, but he insisted on the recentralization of Habsburg authority as a pre-condition to any talks. By the end of August, the imperial government in Vienna officially ordered the Hungarian government in Pest to end plans for a Hungarian army. Jelačić then took military action against the Hungarian government without any official order.

The national assembly of the Serbs in Austrian Empire was held between 1 and 3 May 1848 in Sremski Karlovci, during which the Serbs proclaimed autonomous Habsburg crownland of Serbian Vojvodina. The war started, leading to clashes as such in Srbobran, where on July 14, 1848, the first siege of the town by Hungarian forces began under Baron Fülöp Berchtold. The army was forced to retreat due to a strong Serbian defense. With war raging on three fronts (against Romanians and Serbs in Banat and Bačka, and Romanians in Transylvania), Hungarian radicals in Pest saw this as an opportunity. Parliament made concessions to the radicals in September rather than let the events erupt into violent confrontations. Shortly thereafter, the final break between Vienna and Pest occurred when Field Marshal Count Franz Philipp von Lamberg was given control of all armies in Hungary (including Jelačić's). In response to Lamberg being attacked on arrival in Hungary a few days later, the imperial court ordered the Hungarian parliament and government dissolved. Jelačić was appointed to take Lamberg's place. War between Austria and Hungary had officially begun.

The war led to the October Crisis in Vienna, when insurgents attacked a garrison on its way to Hungary to support Croatian forces under Jelačić. After Vienna was recaptured by imperial forces, General Windischgrätz and 70,000 troops were sent to Hungary to crush the Hungarian revolution and as they advanced the Hungarian government evacuated Pest. However the Austrian army had to retreat after heavy defeats in the Spring Campaign of the Hungarian Army from March to May 1849. Instead of pursuing the Austrian army, the Hungarians stopped to retake the Fort of Buda and prepared defenses.

In June 1849 Russian and Austrian troops entered Hungary heavily outnumbering the Hungarian army. Kossuth abdicated on August 11, 1849 in favour of Artúr Görgey, who he thought was the only general who was capable of saving the nation. However, in May 1849, Czar Nicholas I pledged to redouble his efforts against the Hungarian Government. He and Emperor Franz Joseph started to regather and rearm an army to be commanded by Anton Vogl, the Austrian lieutenant-field-marshal. The Czar was also preparing to send 30,000 Russian soldiers back over the Eastern Carpathian Mountains from Poland. On August 13, after several bitter defeats in a hopeless situation Görgey, signed a surrender at Világos (now Şiria, Romania) to the Russians, who handed the army over to the Austrians.

 
 

Slovak Volunteer Corps.
 
 
Slovak Uprising
Slovak Uprising was an uprising of Slovaks against Magyar (i.e. ethnic Hungarian) domination in Upper Hungary (present-day Slovakia), within the 1848/49 revolution in the Habsburg Monarchy. It lasted from September 1848 to November 1849. During this period Slovaks patriots established Slovak National Council as their political representation and military units known as the Slovak Volunteer Corps. The political, social and national requirements of the Slovak movement were declared in the document entitled “Demands of the Slovak Nation” from April 1848.
 
 
The Second Wave of Revolutions
Revolutionary movements of 1849 faced an additional challenge: to work together to defeat a common enemy. Previously, national identity allowed Habsburg forces to conquer revolutionary governments by playing them off one another. New democratic initiatives in Italy in the spring of 1848 led to a renewed conflict with Austrian forces in the provinces of Lombardy and Venetia. At the very first anniversary of the first barricades in Vienna, German and Czech democrats in Bohemia agreed to put mutual hostilities aside and work together on revolutionary planning. Hungarians faced the greatest challenge of overcoming the divisions of the previous year, as the fighting there had been the most bitter. Despite this, the Hungarian government hired a new commander and attempted to unite with Romanian democrat Avram Iancu, who was known as Crăişorul Munţilor ("The Prince of the Mountains"). However, division and mistrust were too severe.

Three days after the start of hostilities in Italy, Carlo Alberto abdicated the throne, essentially ending the Piedmontese return to war. Renewed military conflicts cost the Empire the little that remained of its finances. Another challenge to Habsburg authority came from Germany and the question of either "big Germany" (united Germany led by Austria) or "little Germany" (united Germany led by Prussia).

  The Frankfurt National Assembly proposed a constitution with Friedrich Wilhelhm of Prussia as monarch of a united federal Germany composed of only 'German' lands.
This would have led to the relationship between Austria and Hungary (as a 'non-German' area) being reduced to a personal union under the Habsburgs, rather than a united state, an unacceptable arrangement for both the Habsburgs and Austro-German liberals in Austria. In the end, Friedrich Wilhelm refused to accept the constitution written by the Assembly. Schwarzenberg dissolved the Hungarian Parliament in 1849, imposing his own constitution that conceded nothing to the liberal movement. Appointing Alexander Bach head of internal affairs, he oversaw the creation of the Bach system, which rooted out political dissent and contained liberals within Austria and quickly returned the status quo. After the deportation of Lajos Kossuth, a nationalist Hungarian leader, Schwarzenberg faced uprisings by Hungarians. Playing on the long-standing Russian tradition of conservativism, he convinced tsar Nicholas I to send Russian forces in. The Russian army quickly destroyed the rebellion, forcing the Hungarians back under Austrian control. In less than three years, Schwarzenberg had returned stability and control to Austria. However, Schwarzenberg had a stroke in 1852, and his successors failed to uphold the control Schwarzenberg had so successfully maintained.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1848
 
 
Hungarian Revolution of 1848
 

The Hungarian Revolution of 1848 was one of the many European Revolutions of 1848 and closely linked to other revolutions of 1848 in the Habsburg areas. The revolution in the Kingdom of Hungary grew into a war for independence from the Austrian Empire, ruled by the Habsburg monarchy.

Its leaders were Lajos Kossuth, István Széchenyi, Sándor Petőfi and Józef Bem. The anniversary of the Revolution's outbreak, 15 March, is one of Hungary's three national holidays.

 
Status of Kingdom of Hungary before the revolution
The Kingdom of Hungary was only formally part of the Empire of Austria. It was regnum independens, a separate Monarchy as Article X of the Diet of 1790 stipulated. According to the Constitutional law and public law, the Empire of Austria had never lawfully included the Kingdom of Hungary. After the cessation of the Holy Roman Empire (Kingdom of Hungary was not part of it) the new title of the Habsburg rulers (Emperor of Austria) did not in any sense affect the laws and the constitution of Hungary according to the Hungarian Diet and the proclamation of Francis I in a rescript, thus the country was part of the other Lands of the empire largely through the common monarch.

The administration and government of the Kingdom of Hungary were not united with the common administrative and governmental structure of the Austrian Empire. The central governmental structures remained well separated from the imperial government, and they were linked largely by the person of the common monarch. The country was governed by the Council of Lieutenancy of Hungary (the Gubernium) - located in Pressburg and later in Pest - and by the Hungarian Royal Court Chancellery in Vienna.

The Empire of Austria and Kingdom of Hungary had always maintained separate parliaments. Legally, except for the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713, common laws never existed in the Empire of Austria and the Kingdom of Hungary.

From 1527 (the creation of the monarchic personal union) to 1851 the Kingdom of Hungary maintained its own customs borders which separated it from the other parts of the Habsburg-ruled territories.

  Ideological forerunners of extra-parliamentary radical youths: The Hungarian Jacobin Club
After the death of Joseph II, the Holy Roman Emperor, the enlightened reforms in the country ceased, which outraged many reform-oriented francophone intellectuals, who were followers of new radical ideas based on French philosophy and enlightenment. Ignác Martinovics worked as a secret agent for the new Austrian Emperor Leopold II until 1792. In his Oratio pro Leopoldo II, he explicitly declares that only authority derived from a social contract should be recognized; he saw the aristocracy as the enemy of mankind, because they prevented people from becoming educated. In another of his works, Catechism of People and Citizens, he argued that citizens tend to oppose any repression and that sovereignty resides with the people. He also became a Freemason, and was in favour of the adoption of a federal republic in Hungary. As a member of the Hungarian Jacobins, he was considered an idealistic forerunner of revolutionary thought by some, and an unscrupulous adventurer by others. He was in charge of stirring up a revolt against the nobility among the Hungarian serfs. For these subversive acts, Francis II, the Holy Roman Emperor, dismissed Martinovics and his boss, Ferenc Gotthardi, the former chief of the secret police. He was executed, together with six other prominent Jacobins, in May 1795. More than 42 members of the republican secret society were arrested, including the poet János Batsányi and linguist Ferenc Kazinczy

Though the Hungarian Jacobin movement did not affect the policy of the Hungarian Parliament and the parliamentary parties, it had strong ideological ties with the extra-parliamentary forces: the radical youths and students like the poet Sándor Petőfi, the philosopher and historian Pál Vasvári and the novel-writer Mór Jókai, who sparked the revolution in the Pilvax coffee house on 15 March 1848.

 
 
Origins of Revolution
The Diet of Hungary had not convened since 1811.

The frequent diets held in the earlier part of the reign occupied themselves with little else but war subsidies; after 1811 they ceased to be summoned. In the latter years of Francis I. the dark shadow of Metternich's policy of " stability " fell across the kingdom, and the forces of reactionary absolutism were everywhere supreme. But beneath the surface a strong popular current was beginning to run in a contrary direction. Hungarian society, not unaffected by western Liberalism, but without any direct help from abroad, was preparing for the future emancipation. Writers, savants, poets, artists, noble and plebeian, layman and cleric, without any previous concert, or obvious connection, were working towards that ideal of political liberty which was to unite all the Magyars. Mihály Vörösmarty, Ferenc Kölcsey, Ferencz Kazinczy and his associates, to mention but a few of many great names, were, consciously or unconsciously, as the representatives of the renascent national literature, accomplishing a political mission, and their pens proved no less efficacious than the swords of their ancestors.

In 1825, Emperor Francis II convened the Diet in response to growing concerns amongst the Hungarian nobility about taxes and the diminishing economy, after the Napoleonic wars. This – and the reaction to the reforms of Joseph II – started what is known as the Reform Period. But the Nobles still retained their privileges of paying no taxes and not giving the vote to the masses. It was in this time that Hungarian became an official language instead of Latin as had been used formally before.

The influential Hungarian politician Count István Széchenyi recognized the need to bring the country the advances of the more developed West European countries, such as England.

It was a direct attack upon the constitution which, to use the words of István Széchenyi, first "startled the nation out of its sickly drowsiness." In 1823, when the reactionary powers were considering joint action to suppress the revolution in Spain, the government, without consulting the diet, imposed a war-tax and called out the recruits. The county assemblies instantly protested against this illegal act, and Francis I was obliged, at the diet of 1823, to repudiate the action of his ministers. But the estates felt that the maintenance of their liberties demanded more substantial guarantees than the dead letter of ancient laws. Széchenyi, who had resided abroad and studied Western institutions, was the recognized leader of all those who wished to create a new Hungary out of the old. For years he and his friends educated public opinion by issuing innumerable pamphlets in which the new Liberalism was eloquently expounded. In particular Széchenyi insisted that the people must not look exclusively to the government, or even to the diet, for the necessary reforms. Society itself must take the initiative by breaking down the barriers of class exclusiveness and reviving a healthy public spirit. The effect of this teaching was manifest at the diet of 1832, when the Liberals in the Lower Chamber had a large majority, prominent among whom were Ferenc Deák and Ödön Beothy. In the Upper House, however, the magnates united with the government to form a conservative party obstinately opposed to any project of reform, which frustrated all the efforts of the Liberals.

  The alarm of the government at the power and popularity of the Liberal party induced it, soon after the accession of the new king, the emperor Ferdinand I (1835-1848), to attempt to crush the reform movement by arresting and imprisoning the most active agitators among them, Louis Kossuth and Miklos Wesselenyi. But the nation was no longer to be cowed.

The diet of 1839 refused to proceed to business till the political prisoners had been released, and, while in the Lower Chamber the reforming majority was larger than ever, a Liberal party was now also formed in the Upper House under the leadership of Count Louis Batthyány and Baron Joseph Eotvos. Two progressive measures of the highest importance were passed by this diet, one making Magyar the official language of Hungary, the other freeing the peasants' holdings from all feudal obligations.

The results of the diet of 1839 did not satisfy the advanced Liberals, while the opposition of the government and of the Upper House still further embittered the general discontent. The chief exponent of this temper was the Pesti Hirlap, Hungary's first political newspaper, founded in 1841 by Kossuth, whose articles, advocating armed reprisals if necessary, inflamed the extremists but alienated Széchenyi, who openly attacked Kossuth's opinions.

The polemic on both sides was violent; but, as usual, the extreme views prevailed, and on the assembling of the diet of 1843 Kossuth was more popular than ever, while the influence of Széchenyi had sensibly declined. The tone of this diet was passionate, and the government was fiercely attacked for interfering with the elections. Fresh triumphs were won by the Liberals. Magyar was now declared to be the language of the schools and the law-courts as well as of the legislature; mixed marriages were legalized; and official positions were thrown open to non-nobles.

The interval between the diet of 1843 and that of 1847 saw a complete disintegration and transformation of the various political parties. Széchenyi openly joined the government, while the moderate Liberals separated from the extremists and formed a new party, the Centralists. Immediately before the elections, however, Deák succeeded in reuniting all the Liberals on the common platform of " The Ten Points "

(1) Responsible ministries,
(2) Freedom of the Press
(3) Popular representation (by parliamentary elections),
(4) The reincorporation of Transylvania,
(5) Right of public meeting, (Freedom of assembly and freedom of association)
(6) Absolute religious liberty, the abolition of the (Catholic) State Religion,
(7) Universal equality before the law,
(8) Universal and equal taxation, (abolition of the tax exemption of the aristocracy)
(9) The abolition of the Aviticum, an obsolete and anomalous land-tenure,
(10) The abolition of serfdom and bondservices, with state financed compensation to the landlords.

The ensuing parliamentary elections resulted in a complete victory of the Progressives. All efforts to bring about an understanding between the government and the opposition were fruitless. Kossuth demanded not merely the redress of actual grievances, but a liberal reform which would make grievances impossible in the future.
 
 
In the highest circles a dissolution of the diet now seemed to be the sole remedy; but, before it could be carried out, tidings of the February revolution in Paris reached Pressburg on the 1st of March, and on the 3rd of March Kossuth's motion for the appointment of an independent, responsible ministry was accepted by the Lower House. The moderates, alarmed not so much by the motion itself as by its tone, again tried to intervene; but on the 13th of March the Vienna revolution broke out, and the Emperor, yielding to pressure or panic, appointed Count Louis Batthyány premier of the first Hungarian responsible ministry, which included Kossuth, Széchenyi and Deák. The Ten Points, or the March Laws as they were now called, were then adopted by the legislature and received royal assent on the 10th of April 10. Hungary had, to all intents and purposes, become an independent state bound to Austria only by the Austrian Archduke as Palatine.
 
 
The "long debate" of reformers in the press
Count Széchenyi judged the reform system of Lajos Kossuth in the pamphlet of Kelet Népe from 1841. According to Széchenyi: the economic, political and social reforms had to be installed slowly and very carefully so that Hungary avoided the violent interference of the Habsburg dynasty, which interference could lead to a tragic end.

Széchenyi was listening to the spread of the expansion of Kossuth’s ideas in the Hungarian society, which did not consider the good relation to the Habsburg dynasty. Kossuth ignored the role of aristocracy, and he intruded any kinds of social stratus. In contrast, Kossuth believed that the society could not be forced into a passive role by any reasons through the social changing. According to Kossuth the wider social movements can’t be continually excluded from the political life. Therefore, he supported democracy and he did not believe in almighty elites and government. In 1885, Kossuth named Széchenyi as a liberal elitist aristocrat, while he considered himself to be a democrat.

Széchenyi was an isolationist politician, while according to Kossuth strong relations and collaboration with international liberal and progressive movements were essential for the success of liberty.

Széchenyi's economic policy was based on Anglo-Saxon free-market principles, while Kossuth supported protective tariffs due to the weaker Hungarian industrial sector. Kossuth wanted to build a rapidly industrialized country in his vision, while Széchenyi wanted to preserve the traditionally strong agricultural sector as the main character of the economy.

 
Artist Mihály Zichy's painting of Sándor Petőfi reciting the National Poem to a crowd on March 15, 1848
 
 
The bloodless revolution in Pest
The crisis came from abroad - as Kossuth expected - and he used it to the full. On 3 March 1848, shortly after the news of the revolution in Paris had arrived, in a speech of surpassing power he demanded parliamentary government for Hungary and constitutional government for the rest of Austria. He appealed to the hope of the Habsburgs, "our beloved Archduke Franz Joseph" (then seventeen years old), to perpetuate the ancient glory of the dynasty by meeting half-way the aspirations of a free people. He at once became the leader of the European revolution; his speech was read aloud in the streets of Vienna to the mob by which Metternich was overthrown (13 March), and when a deputation from the Diet visited Vienna to receive the assent of Emperor Ferdinand to their petition it was Kossuth who received the chief ovation. The arrival of the news of the revolution in Paris, and Kossuth's German speech about freedom and human rights had whipped up the passions of Austrian crowd in Vienna on March 13. While Viennese masses celebrated Kossuth as their hero, revolution broke out in Buda on 15 March; Kossuth traveled home immediately.
 
 

The entrance room of the Pilvax coffee palace at Pest in the 1840s
 
 
The revolution started in the Pilvax coffee palace at Pest, which was a favourite meeting point of the young extra-parliamentary radical liberal intellectuals in the 1840s. On the morning of March 15, 1848, revolutionaries marched around the city of Pest, reading Sándor Petőfi's Nemzeti dal (National Song) and the 12 points (the twelve demands of theirs) to the crowd (which swelled to thousands). Declaring an end to all forms of censorship, they visited the printing presses of Landerer and Heckenast and printed Petőfi's poem together with the demands. A mass demonstration was held in front of the newly built National Museum, after which the group left for the Buda Chancellery (the Office of the Governor-General) on the other bank of the Danube.

The bloodless mass demonstrations in Pest and Buda forced the Imperial governor to accept all twelve of their demands.

Austria had its own problems with the revolution in Vienna that year, and it initially acknowledged Hungary's government. Therefore the Governor-General's officers, acting in the name of the King appointed Hungary's new parliament with Lajos Batthyány as its first Prime Minister. The Austrian monarchy also made other concessions to subdue the Vienna masses: on 13 March 1848, Prince Klemens von Metternich was made to resign his position as the Austrian Government's Chancellor. He then fled to London for his own safety.

 
 
Parliamentary monarchy, the Batthyány government
On 17 March 1848 the Emperor assented and Batthyány created the first Hungarian Diet. On 23 March 1848, as head of state, Batthyány commended his government to the Diet.

The first responsible government was formed:

Prime Minister: Lajos Batthyány
Minister of the Interior: Bertalan Szemere,
Finance minister: Lajos Kossuth,
Minister of Justice: Ferenc Deák,
Minister of defense: Lázár Mészáros,
Minister of Agriculture, Industry and Trade: Gábor Klauzál,
Minister of Labour, Infrastructure and Transport: István Széchenyi,
Minister of Education, Science and Culture: József Eötvös,
Minister besides the King (roughly Foreign Minister): Pál Antal Esterházy

The new government approved a sweeping reform package, referred to as the "April laws", which created a democratic political system. The newly established government also demanded that the Habsburg Empire spend all taxes they received from Hungary in Hungary itself, and that the Parliament should have authority over the Hungarian regiments of the Habsburg Army.

 
 

Members of the Batthyány government
 
 
At that time the internal affairs and foreign policy of Hungary were not stable, and Batthyány faced many problems. His first and most important act was to organise the armed forces and the local governments. He insisted that the Austrian army, when in Hungary, would come under Hungarian law, and this was conceded by the Austrian Empire.

He tried to repatriate conscript soldiers from Hungary. He established the Organisation of Militiamen, whose job was to ensure internal security of the country.

The first general parliamentary elections were held in June, which were based on popular representation instead of former feudal parliamentary delegates (Estates General), where the reform oriented political forces won the elections. The electoral system and franchise were similar to the contemporary British system.

Batthyány was a very capable leader, but he was stuck in the middle of a clash between the Austrian monarchy and the Hungarian separatists. He was devoted to the constitutional monarchy and aimed to keep the constitution, but the Emperor was dissatisfied with his work. On 29 August, with the assent of parliament, he went with Ferenc Deák to the Emperor to ask him to order the Serbs to capitulate and stop Jelačić, who was going to attack Hungary.

In the summer of 1848, Hungarian Government ministers, seeing the civil war ahead, tried to get the Habsburgs' support against the conservative Josip Jelačić. They offered to send troops to northern Italy. By the end of August 1848, the Imperial Government in Vienna officially ordered the Hungarian Government in Pest not to form an Army. Jelačić, being a Count in Croatia and Dalmatia, which were at that time part of Hungary, had a different view. He invaded Hungary to dissolve the Hungarian Government, without any order by the Austrian throne.

Though the Emperor formally relieved Jelačić of his duties, Jelačić and his army invaded Southern Transdanubian parts of Hungary on 11 September 1848.

After the Austrian revolution in Vienna was defeated, the kamarilla orchestrated Franz Joseph I of Austria to replace his uncle Ferdinand I of Austria, who was not of sound mind. The new young monarch Franz Joseph didn't recognise Batthyány's second premiere on 25 September. In the end, the final break between Vienna and Pest occurred when Field-Marshal Count Franz Philipp von Lamberg was given control of every army in Hungary (including Jelačić's).

  He went to Hungary where he was mobbed and viciously murdered; following his murder the Imperial court dissolved the Hungarian Diet and appointed Jelačić as Regent.

Meanwhile, Batthyány travelled again to Vienna to seek a compromise with the new Emperor, however his efforts remained unsuccessful, because Francis Joseph refused to accept the reform laws. This was an unconstitutional deed, because the laws were already signed by his uncle, and the monarch had no right to revoke laws, which were already signed.

Hungarian liberals in Pest saw this as an opportunity. In September 1848, the Diet made concessions to the Pest Uprising, so as not to break up the Austro-Hungarian Union. But the counter-revolutionary forces were gathering. After many local victories, the combined Bohemian and Croatian armies entered Pest on 5 January 1849 to put down the revolt.

So Batthyány and his government resigned, except for Kossuth, Szemere and Mészáros. Later, on Palatine Stephen's request, Batthyány became Prime Minister again. On 13 September Batthyány announced a rebellion and requested that the Palatine lead them. However the Palatine, under the Emperor's orders, resigned and left Hungary.

Hungary now had war raging on three fronts: Jelačić's Croatian troops to the South, Romanians in Banat and in Transylvania to the East, and Austria to the West.

The Hungarian government was in serious military crisis due to the lack of soldiers, therefore they sent Kossuth (a brilliant orator) to recruit volunteers for the new Hungarian army. While Croatian ban Josip Jelačić was marching on Pest, Kossuth went from town to town rousing the people to the defense of the country, and the popular force of the Honvéd was his creation.

With the help of Kossuth's recruiting speech, Batthyány was successful in his hurried effort to arrange the Hungarian Revolutionary Army: the new Hungarian army defeated the Croatians on 29 September at the Battle of Pákozd.

The battle became an icon for the Hungarian army because of it is influence on politics and morale. Kossuth's second letter for the Austrian people and this battle were the causes of the second revolution in Vienna on 6 October.

Batthyány realised that he could not compromise with the Emperor, so on 2 October he resigned and simultaneously resigned his seat in parliament.

 
 

A parliamentary election campaign of a candidate
 
 
The Hungarian Republic, Regent-President Louis Kossuth (Kossuth Lajos)
When Batthyány resigned he was appointed with Szemere to carry on the government provisionally, and at the end of September he was made President of the Committee of National Defense.

From this time he had increased amounts of power. The direction of the whole government was in his hands. Without military experience, he had to control and direct the movements of armies; he was unable to keep control over the generals or to establish that military co-operation so essential to success. Arthur Görgey in particular, whose abilities Kossuth was the first to recognize, refused obedience; the two men were very different personalities. Twice Kossuth deposed him from the command; twice he had to restore him. It would have been well if Kossuth had had something more of Görgey's calculated ruthlessness, for, as has been truly said, the revolutionary power he had seized could only be held by revolutionary means; but he was by nature soft-hearted and always merciful; though often audacious, he lacked decision in dealing with men.

It has been said that he showed a want of personal courage; this is not improbable, the excess of feeling which made him so great an orator could hardly be combined with the coolness in danger required of a soldier; but no one was able, as he was, to infuse courage into others.

During all the terrible winter which followed, his energy and spirit never failed him. It was he who overcame the reluctance of the army to march to the relief of Vienna; after the defeat at the Battle of Schwechat, at which he was present, he sent Józef Bem to carry on the war in Transylvania.

  At the end of the year, when the Austrians were approaching Pest, he asked for the mediation of Mr Stiles, the American envoy.

Alfred I, Prince of Windisch-Grätz, however, refused all terms, and the Diet and government fled to Debrecen, Kossuth taking with him the Crown of St Stephen, the sacred emblem of the Hungarian nation. In November 1848, Emperor Ferdinand abdicated in favour of Franz Joseph. The new Emperor revoked all the concessions granted in March and outlawed Kossuth and the Hungarian government – set up lawfully on the basis of the April laws. In April 1849, when the Hungarians had won many successes, after sounding the army, he issued the celebrated Hungarian Declaration of Independence, in which he declared that "the house of Habsburg-Lorraine, perjured in the sight of God and man, had forfeited the Hungarian throne." It was a step characteristic of his love for extreme and dramatic action, but it added to the dissensions between him and those who wished only for autonomy under the old dynasty, and his enemies did not scruple to accuse him of aiming for Kingship. The dethronement also made any compromise with the Habsburgs practically impossible.

For the time the future form of government was left undecided, and Kossuth was appointed regent-president (to satisfy both royalists and republicans). Kossuth played a key role in tying down the Hungarian army for weeks for the siege and recapture of Buda castle, finally successful on 4 May 1849. The hopes of ultimate success were, however, frustrated by the intervention of Russia; all appeals to the western powers were vain, and on 11 August Kossuth abdicated in favor of Görgey, on the ground that in the last extremity the general alone could save the nation. Görgey capitulated to the Russians at Világos (now Şiria, Romania), who handed over the army to the Austrians.

 
 

5 July 1848: The opening ceremony of the first parliament, which based on popular representation. The members of first responsible government are on the balcony.
 
 
War of Independence
In 1848 and 1849, the Hungarian people or Magyars, who wanted independence, formed a majority only in about a third of the total country known as "Hungary and Transylvania," since Transylvania had many Romanian people in it and the Magyars were surrounded by other nationalities.

In the north, from Nagyszombat (now Trnava, Slovakia) to the Nitra and the Prešov were almost two million Slovaks and Ruthenians; Croats and Slovenes lived in the south, between the Danube, the Sava and the Drava. To the east, there was a Serb community numbering over a million. These Slavic areas – the Slovenes and the Serbs – were adjacent to the Romanians and the Saxons of Transylvania.

In 1848–49, the Austrian monarchy and those advising them manipulated the Croatians, Serbians and Romanians, making promises to the Magyars one day and making conflicting promises to the Serbs and other groups the next. Some of these groups were led to fight against the Hungarian Government by their leaders who were striving for their own independence; this triggered numerous brutal incidents between the Magyars and Romanians among others.

In 1848 and 1849, however, the Hungarians were supported by most Slovaks, Germans, Rusyns and Hungarian Slovenes, the Hungarian Jews, and many Polish, Austrian and Italian volunteers. On 28 July 1849, the Hungarian Revolutionary Parliament proclaimed and enacted laws on ethnic and minority rights, but these were overturned after the Russian and Austrian armies crushed the Hungarian Revolution. Occasionally, the Austrian throne would overplay their hand in their tactics of divide and conquer in Hungary – with some quite unintended results. This happened in the case of the Slovaks who had begun the war as at least indifferent if not positively anti-Magyar, but came to support the Hungarian Government against the Dynasty. But in another case, the Austrians' double-dealing brought some even more surprising new allies to the Hungarian cause during the war in 1849.

 
 

Jelačić’s attacks in the last quarter of 1848
 
 
Serbs
Between the Tisza river and Transylvania, north of the Danube lies the former region of Hungary called the "Banat". After the Battle of Mohács during the subsequent Ottoman rule the area north of the Danube saw an influx of Southern Slavs along with the invading Ottoman army. In 1804 the semi-independent Principality of Serbia had formed south of the Danube with Belgrade as its capital. So in 1849, the Danube divided Serbia from the Kingdom of Hungary. The Hungarian district on the northern side of the river was called "Vojvodina", and by that that time it was home to almost half a million Serbian inhabitants. According to the census of 1840 in Vojvodina Serbs comprised 49% of the total population. The Serbs of Vojvodina had long sought their independence or attachment with the Principality of Serbia on the other side of the Danube. In face of the emerging Hungarian independence movement leading up to the 1848 Revolution the Austrian monarchy had promised an independent status for the Serbs of Vojvodina within the Austrian Empire.

Toward this end, Josif Rajačić was appointed Patriarch of Vojvodina in February 1849. Rajačić was a supporter of the Serbian national movement, although somewhat conservative with pro-Austrian leanings. At a crucial point during the war against the Hungarian Government, in late March 1849 when the Austrians needed more Serbian soldiers to fight the war, the Austrian General Georg Rukavina Baron von Vidovgrad, who commanded the Austrian troops in Hungary, officially re-stated this promise of independence for Vojvodina and conceded to all the demands of the Patriarch regarding Serbian nationhood. Acquiescence to the demands of the Patriarch should have meant a relaxation of the strict military administration of Vojvodina. Under this military administration in the border areas, any male between the ages of 16 years and 60 years of age could be conscripted into the army.

The Serbs of Vojvodina were expecting their requirement for Austrian military conscription to be the first measure to be relaxed.

  But the new Emperor Franz Joseph had other ideas and this promise was broken not more than two weeks after it had been made to the people of Vojvodina. This caused a split in the population of the Vojvodina and at least part of the Serbs in that province began to support the elected Hungarian Government against the Austrians.

Some Serbs sought to ingratiate the Serb nation with the Austrian Empire to promote the independence of Vojvodina. Followers of the idea of a "Greater Serbia" hoped that an independent Vojvodina would sooner or later attach itself to the Serbian nation. Believers in Greater Serbia already looked forward to acquiring Bosnia (37.1% Serb), Herzegovina (37.9% Serb), and Montenegro (mainly populated by Serbs).

But some supporters of Greater Serbia also threw in acquisition of the northern part of Albania (less than 1% Serb) as another desirable goal for Serbian acquisition, not so much because of any ethnic link, but rather so that the Greater Serbia would have "access to the sea".

With war on three fronts the Hungarian Government should have been squashed immediatelyshould have been squashed immediately[according to whom?] upon the start of hostilities. However, events early in the war worked in favour of the Government. The unity of the Serbs on the southern front was ruined by Austrian perfidy over the legal status of Vojvodina.

Some right-wing participants in the Serbian national movement felt that a "revolution" in Hungary more threatened the prerogatives of landowners, and the nobles in Serbian Vojvodina, than the occupying Austrians.

At the start of the war, the Hungarian Defence Forces (Honvédség) won some battles against the Austrians, for example at the Battle of Pákozd in September 1848 and at the Isaszeg in April 1849, at which time they even stated the Hungarian Declaration of Independence from the Habsburg Empire. The same month, Artúr Görgey became the new Commander-in-Chief of all the Hungarian Republic's armies.

 
 

Battle of Pákozd was a draw that pushed the loyalist Croatian forces towards Vienna and away from Pest.
 
 
Slovaks
The Slovak Uprising was a reactionary movement to the Hungarian Revolution. The Slovak nation and people had been poorly defined up to this point, as the Slovak people lacked a definitive border or national identity. However, in the years leading up to the revolution, the Hungarians had taken steps to Magyarize the Slovak region under Hungarian control. The aim of this was to bring the varied ethnic groups around Hungary into a common culture. At the outbreak of the Hungarian Revolution this process was seen as more imminent and threatening to ethnic groups, especially the Slovaks.
 
 
The Slovaks made demands that their culture be spared Magyarization and that they be given certain liberties and rights. These demands soon broke out into demonstrations clamouring for the rights of ethnic minorities in Hungary. Arrests were made that further enraged the demonstrators and eventually a Pan-Slavic Congress was held in Vienna. A document was drafted at this congress and sent to the Hungarian government demanding the rights of the Slovak people. The Hungarians responded by imposing martial law on the Slovak region.

The Imperial government recognized that all across the Empire, ethnic minorities were seeking more autonomy, but it was only Hungary that desired a complete break. They used this by supporting the ethnic national movements against the Hungarian government. Slovak volunteer units were commissioned in Vienna to join campaigns against the Hungarians across the theatre.

A Slovak regiment then marched to Miava where a Slovak council openly seceded from Hungary. Tensions rose as the Hungarian army executed a number of Slovak leaders for treason and the fighting became more bloody.

However, the Slovak uprising also wanted its independence from the Empire as well and tensions with the Austrians soon began to rise. Lacking support and with increased Hungarian efforts, the Slovak volunteer corps had little impact for the rest of the war until the Russians marched in. It was used in 'mopping up' resistance in the wake of the Russian advance and then soon after was disbanded, ending Slovak involvement in the Revolution. The conclusion of the uprising is unclear, as the Slovaks fell back under Imperial authority and lacked any autonomy for some time.

  Transylvania
On 29 May 1848, at Cluj, the Transylvanian Diet (formed of 116 Hungarians, 114 Székelys and 35 Saxons) ratified the union with Hungary. Romanians and Germans disagreed with the decision.

On 10 June 1848 the newspaper Wiener Zeitung wrote: In any case, the union of Transylvania, proclaimed against all human rights, is not valid, and the courts of law in the entire world must admit the justness of the Romanian people's protest

Romanians
On 25 February 1849 the representatives of the Romanian population sent to the Habsburg Emperor The Memorandum of the Romanian nation from the Great Principality of Transylvania, Banat, from neighbouring territories to Hungary and Bukovina where they demanded the union of Bukovina, Transylvania and Banat under a government (...) the union of all Romanians in the Austrian state into one single independent nation under the rule of Austria as completing part of the Monarchy.

Transylvanian Saxons
In the first days of October 1848, Stephan Ludwig Roth considered that there were two options for the Saxons: The first is to side with the Hungarians, and thus turn against the Romanians and the empire; the second is to side with the Romanians, and thus support the empire against the Hungarians. In this choice, the Romanians and Hungarians are incidental factors. The most important principle is that of a united empire, for it guarantees the extension of Austria's proclaimed constitution.

The Transylvanian Saxons rejected the incorporation of Transylvania into Hungary.

 
 
Russians
Because of the success of revolutionary resistance, Franz Joseph had to ask for help from the "gendarme of Europe" Czar Nicholas I of Russia in March 1849. A Russian army, composed of about 8,000 soldiers, invaded Transylvania on 8 April 1849. But as they crossed the Southern Carpathian mountain passes (along the border of Transylvania and Wallachia), they were met by a large Hungarian revolutionary army led by Józef Bem, a Polish-born General.

Bem had been a participant in the Polish insurrection of 1830 – 1831, had been involved in the uprising in Vienna in 1848 and, finally, became one of the top army commanders for the Hungarian Republic from 1848 – 1849. When he encountered the Russians, Bem defeated them and forced them back out of the towns of Hermannstadt (now Sibiu, Romania) and Kronstadt (now Brașov) in Transylvania, back over the Southern Carpathian Mountains through the Roterturm Pass into Wallachia. Only 2,000 Russian soldiers made it out of Transylvania back into Wallachia, the other 6,000 troops being killed or captured by the Hungarian Army. After securing all of Transylvania, Bem moved his 30,000–40,000-man Hungarian army against Austrian forces in the northern Banat capturing the city of Temesvár (now Timişoara, Romania).

 
 

Battle at Tápióbicske (4 April 1849) by Mór Than
 
 
Austrians
Laval Nugent von Westmeath was the Austrian Master of Ordnance, but was serving as the general in the field attempting to marshall all the Serbs still loyal to the Austrian throne, for another offensive against the Hungarian Government. Here, even on the southern front the Hungarian Armies were proving successful, initially.

This combat led to the Vienna Uprising of October 1848, when insurgents attacked a garrison on its way to Hungary to support forces. However, the Austrian army was able to quell the rebellion. At the same time, at Schwechat, the Austrians defeated a Hungarian attempt to capture Vienna. After this victory, General Windischgrätz and 70,000 troops were sent to Hungary to crush the Hungarian revolution. the Austrians followed the Danube down from Vienna and crossed over into Hungary to envelope Komorn (now Komárom, Hungary and Komárno, Slovakia). They continued down the Danube to Pest, the capital of the Hungarian Kingdom. After some fierce fighting, the Austrians, led by Alfred I, Prince of Windisch-Grätz, captured Buda and Pest. (The town was known in German as Ofen and later Buda and Pest were united into Budapest).

In April 1849, after these defeats, the Hungarian Government recovered and scored several victories on this western front. They stopped the Austrian advance and retook Buda and Pest . Then, the Hungarian Army relieved the siege of Komárom . The spring offensive hence proved to be a great success for the revolution.

Thus, the Hungarian Government was equally successful on its eastern front (Transylvania) against the Russians, and on its western front against the Austrians. But there was a third front – the southern front in the Banat, fighting the troops of the Serbian national movement and the Croatian troops of Jelačić within the province of Vojvodina itself. Mór Perczel, the General of the Hungarian forces in the Banat, was initially successful in battles along the southern front.

  In April 1849, Ludwig Baron von Welden replaced Windischgrätz as the new supreme commander of Austrian forces in Hungary. Instead of pursuing the Austrian army, the Hungarians stopped to retake the Fort of Buda and prepared defenses. At the same time, however, victory in Italy had freed many Austrian troops which had hitherto been fighting on this front.

In June 1849 Russian and Austrian troops entered Hungary heavily outnumbering the Hungarian army. After all appeals to other European states failed, Kossuth abdicated on August 11, 1849 in favour of Artúr Görgey, who he thought was the only general who was capable of saving the nation.

However, in May 1849, Czar Nicholas I pledged to redouble his efforts against the Hungarian Government. He and Emperor Franz Joseph started to regather and rearm an army to be commanded by Anton Vogl, the Austrian lieutenant-field-marshal who had actively participated in the suppression of the national liberation movement in Galicia in 1848.

But even at this stage Vogl was occupied trying to stop another revolutionary uprising in Galicia. The Czar was also preparing to send 30,000 Russian soldiers back over the Eastern Carpathian Mountains from Poland. Austria held Galicia and moved into Hungary, independent of Vogl's forces. At the same time, the able Haynau led an army of 60,000 Austrians from the West and retook the ground lost throughout the spring. On July 18, he finally captured Buda and Pest. The Russians were also successful in the east and the situation of the Hungarians became increasingly desperate.

On August 13, after several bitter defeats, especially the battle of Segesvár against the Russians and the battles of Szöreg and Temesvár against the Austrian army, it was clear that Hungary had lost. in a hopeless situation, Görgey signed a surrender at Világos (now Şiria, Romania) to the Russians ( so that the war would be considered a Russian victory and because the rebels considered the Russians more lenient), who handed the army over to the Austrians.

 
 

Capitulation of Hungarian Army at Világos, 1849
 
 
Aftermath
Julius Jacob von Haynau, the leader of the Austrian army, was appointed plenipotentiary to restore order in Hungary after the conflict. He ordered the execution of the The 13 Martyrs of Arad (now Arad, Romania) and Prime Minister Batthyány was executed the same day in Pest.

After the failed revolution, in 1849 there was nationwide "passive resistance". In 1851 Archduke Albrecht, Duke of Teschen was appointed as Regent, which lasted until 1860, during which time he implemented a process of Germanisation.

Kossuth went into exile after the revolution. In the US he was warmly received by the general public as well as the then US Secretary of State, Daniel Webster, which made relations between the US and Austria somewhat strained for the following twenty years. Kossuth County, Iowa was named for him. He then also travelled through Constantinople, the Ottoman Empire and to Turin, at the time the capital of Piedmont-Sardinia.

Kossuth thought his biggest mistake was to confront the Hungarian minorities. He set forth the dream of a multi-ethnic confederation of republics along the Danube, which might have prevented the escalation of hostile feelings between the ethnic groups in these areas.

Many of Kossuth's comrades-in-exile joined him in the United States, including the sons of one of his sisters. These "Forty-Eighters" fought on the Union side in the US Civil War. Hungarian lawyer George Lichtenstein, who served as Kossuth's private secretary, fled to Königsberg after the revolution and eventually settled in Edinburgh where he became noted as a musician.

After the Hungarian Army's surrender at Világos in 1849, their revolutionary banners were taken to Russia by the Tsarist troops, and were kept there both under the Tsarist and Communist systems. In 1940 the Soviet Union offered the banners to the Horthy government in exchange for the release of the imprisoned Hungarian Communist leader Mátyás Rákosi – the Horthy government accepted the offer.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1848
 
 
Slovak Uprising 1848-1849
 

The Slovak Uprising (of 1848/49) (Slovak: Slovenské povstanie) or Slovak Volunteer Campaigns (Slovak: Slovenské dobrovoľnícke výpravy) was an uprising of Slovaks against the Hungarian rule in Upper Hungary (now Slovakia), within the 1848-49 revolutions in the Habsburg Monarchy. It lasted from September 1848 to November 1849.

 
Background
The year 1848 is well-noted in history as a peaking moment in nationalist sentiment among European nationalities. The Slovak nation, though not fully conscious of ethnicity in 1848, were certainly an important part of the general revolts occurring in the lands of the Habsburg Monarchy. After the revolutionary fervor left Paris in 1848 it traveled to Vienna where a popular uprising ousted the reactionary government of Prince Klemens von Metternich on 13 March 1848. This revolutionary fervor soon spread to the Hungarian lands of the Empire. On 15 March, mass protests in Buda and Pest along with a proclamation of the Hungarian Diet, under direction of Lajos Kossuth, saw the Hungarian Kingdom declare itself independent of Habsburg domination.
 
 
Slovaks before 1848
Slovaks were not prominently placed in this first wave of revolution to reach Hungarian controlled lands. On 26–28 August 1844, a meeting between both Catholic and Protestant confessions of Slovaks met along with other factions in Liptószentmiklós (today: Liptovský Mikuláš). This town in the Žilina Region was the base of Slovak nationalist Michal Miloslav Hodža, uncle of future Czechoslovak politician Milan Hodza. The meeting, though with fewer than wished Catholic participation, formed a non-sectarian association called the Tatrin in order to unite all Slovak groups in one national bloc. Catholics later became more involved in 1847 with their acceptance of Ľudovít Štúr's standardization of the Slovak language.

In addition to the uniting of Slovaks in one national bloc, there were other factors leading to the rise in Slovak consciousness before 1848. In 1845, governmental authorities permitted the printing of Slovak language newspapers for the first time. The first one was Ľudovít Štúr's The Slovak National News which printed its first issue on 1 August 1845. This was quickly followed by Jozef Miloslav Hurban's Slovak Views on the Sciences, Arts and Literature which did not have as much success as Stur's paper. Beyond the printed word, representatives of the Slovak National Movement worked among average Slovaks promoting education, Sunday schools, libraries, amateur theatre, temperance societies and other social functions. In agriculture, Samuel Jurkovic founded a credit cooperative in the village of Sobotiste, called the Farmer's Association, which was the first of its kind in Europe.
  In November 1847 Ľudovít Štúr, the member of the Hungarian Diet for Zvolen, spoke before his colleagues in Bratislava. In his speech to the Diet, Štúr summed up his six-point platform involving problematic political and economic issues.

His points were:

-To proclaim through the Diet the legal, universal and permanent abolishment of serfdom, achieved through a buy-out of feudal contracts with state funds at minimum expense to commoners.
-To abolish the patrimonial court and free commoners from noble control.
-To allow commoners to represent their own interests via membership in County government and the Diet.
-To free privileged towns from county jurisdiction and reorganize the administration of royally chartered towns on the principal of representation by strengthening their voting rights in the Diet.
-To abolish the privilege of nobility and make all persons equal before the courts, abolish tax exemption for nobility and inheritance, ensure commoners the right to serve in public office and ensure freedom of the press.
-To reorganize the education system in a way to best serve the needs of the people and to ensure a better livelihood for teachers.

Along with these points, of which several even met the praise of Kossuth, Štúr raised the issues about the use of the Slovak language in government and the enforcement of Magyar interference in many parts of Slovak life, including religion.

 
 
Events of 1848-1849
The events of the years 1848-1849 caused the buildup outbreak of the Slovak Uprising.
 
 
Build up to the revolt
After the declaration of Hungary's independence in mid-March 1848, the threat of forcible Magyarization grew ever more present. In Hont County, some of this tension came to a boiling point where two Slovaks, named Janko Kral and Jan Rotarides made demands for the liquidation of serfdom and recognition of the Slovak language in schools and the government. These demands soon landed the pair in jail. On 28 March 1848 a vast assembly of former serfs convened by Liptó County and held in Hodza's base of Liptovský Mikuláš was used as a proving ground for systematic recognition of new rights and extended rights to national minorities. This was met well and soon the word was spreading about possible new freedoms that would reach Slovaks, prompting some miners in Central Slovakia to demonstrate rowdily before being quieted by a special commissioner from Budapest.

In April 1848 Štúr and Hurban left Slovakia in order to attend a preliminary Slavic meeting in Vienna, which would later provide the basis for the first Pan-Slavic Congress to be held in Prague. In the meantime, back in Liptovský Mikuláš, Hodža along with twenty delegates created a document entitled "Demands of the Slovak Nationality" which listed 14 points setting national and social goals for the Slovak nation. Naturally this document was received coldly by Budapest, which subsequently imposed martial law on Upper Hungary and issued warrants for Štúr, Hurban and Hodža on 12 May 1848. At the same time, uprisings among Serbs, Croats and Slovenes in the southern part of Hungary diverted Magyar attention to the south, as these conflicts were more armed uprisings than the Slovak one. Hurban attended a session of the Croatian Diet on 5 July, speaking to the Croats on the plight of the Slovaks. Hurban spoke so well a joint Croat-Slovak declaration was issued shortly thereafter which only inflamed Magyar opinion. When the full Pan-Slavic Congress met on 2 June 1848, Štúr, Hurban, Hodža and many other prominent Slovaks attended, along with hundreds of other Slavic delegates. This congress was held with the aim of developing a cohesive strategy for all Slavic peoples living in Austro-Hungarian territories. Unfortunately, the congress was cut short when an armed uprising in Prague on 12 June prompted a hurried end to the affair. However, one critical item came out of the short congress for the Slovak cause. In the congress, the Slovaks secured the help of two Czech military officers, Bedřich Bloudek and František Zach, in case the Slovaks came to armed blows with the Hungarians.

Though many calls for autonomy came from nearly every corner of the Empire, Vienna noted that at neither the Pan-Slavic conference nor other Slavic uprisings was the thought of the breakup of the Empire considered, only this was so in Hungary. Seeing the situation as malleable, the Emperor along with his closest advisors authorized armed action against the Hungarian uprising. This first manifested itself in the form of the leader of the Croatians, Ban (governor) Josip Jelačić, a friend of the Slovaks, who was authorized to march against the Hungarians in August 1848 after the Hungarians had defied a direct imperial order. Despite this, Vienna’s response to the Hungarian uprising had stayed largely quiet and mixed. While allowing Jelacic to march against the Magyars, they had also given the Hungarian Army several units in order to help preserve internal order.

At the same time, Slovaks started working with Jelacic's Croatians by creating a Slovak volunteer corps. This corps was put together and gathered in Vienna from August to September 1848. In order to lead this burgeoning revolt, a Slovak National Council was organized in Vienna, where a marker stands today commemorating the spot. The council was made up of Štúr, Hurban and Hodža—the "big three" of the Slovak nationalist groups—with the Czech František Zach as commander-in-chief.

  Revolt
Initially, the strategy for the volunteer corps was not clear. However, on 16 September a decision was made that the 600 men of the corps would march from Vienna, up the Vág River valley and into Turóc County and Liptó County Counties via the southern Moravian town of Břeclav. When the corps arrived at the Slovak border on the 18th, they were met with 500 more volunteers from Brno and Prague. Once convened, the volunteers received arms and swore an oath on the Slovak flag. Despite nudging Viennese cooperation, when the volunteers encountered Imperial troops on the road to Miava they were regarded coolly by the troops.

Once the volunteers arrived in Miava, an assembly of Slovaks with Hurban presiding took the step of seceding from Hungary on 19 September 1848. Imperial troops soon ordered the Slovaks volunteers to leave Myjava, though this order was rejected and instead the corps attacked an Imperial detachment and confiscated its supplies. Despite this inauspicious act, Imperial troops ordered both sides to halt the fighting. After several more days of indecisive armed action, the volunteers retreated back into Moravia.

Not long after, the new commander of Imperial forces sent to restore order in the Kingdom of Hungary, Count von Lamberg, was hacked and mangled by an irate mob in central Budapest only three days after arrival. This halted attempts at negations between Kossuth and the Imperial party. The Viennese response was to formally order the disbandment the Hungarian Diet and the appointment of Ban Josip Jelačić as newest commander over Hungary. However, effective response to this latest development was also halted by another popular, pan-Germanic uprising in Vienna at the time which resulted in the death of war minister Count Latour on 6 October 1848.

In this midst of the turmoil in Vienna, which saw the Emperor and the Imperial Diet flee to Olomouc in Moravia, Magyars stepped up measures against Slovaks, stripping the leaders of the Slovak National Council of their Hungarian citizenship and executing a handful of prisoners. This move caused the Slovak faction to appeal more to the Imperial court and despite initial concerns of the commander-in-chief Prince Windisch-Grätz, another Slovak volunteer unit was allowed to be created. Initial recruitment problems delayed this second campaign of the volunteer units until 4 December 1848.

Throughout December and January, the Slovak volunteers under Bloudek worked with Imperial troops to reoccupy Túrócszentmárton. On 13 January 1849 a mass rally in Túrócszentmárton was followed by the signing up of new volunteers. Acting with Imperial support, Bloudek moved east and, picking up another few thousand volunteers, occupied Prešov (Eperjes) on 26 February and Košice (Kassa) on 2 March. Meanwhile, another detachment of Slovaks was defeated after running into Magyar forces near Muráň (Murányalja) in Banská Bystrica. To make matters worse, dissension between Czech and Slovak officers in the volunteer corps began to erupt.

After leading activist rallies in Eperjes and Túrócszentmárton, Štúr and Hurban led a delegation of twenty-four men to meet the new Emperor Franz Jozef with a proposal to make Slovakia an autonomous grand duchy directly under Viennese oversight with representation in the Imperial Diet. The delegates also requested a Slovak provincial diet, with further demands for Slovak schools and institutions. Despite a formal audience with the Emperor, little real progress resulted and the Slovaks were sent packing hoping for more productive results in the future.

After several victorious battles in Spring of 1849, Kossuth and the Hungarian Diet declared the Habsburgs deposed and formed a republic in Hungary on 14 April 1849.

 
 
Around the same time, the Slovak volunteer corps, largely stationed in Árva County, was dealing with internal struggles of its own. Conflicts between Czech and Slovak officers soon brought about the effectual dissolving of the corps. After Russian intervention by Tsar Nicholas I brought about the gradual fall of Kossuth and Hungarian independence. During this period, the corps was revived one final time to 'mop-up' isolated Magyar units until the eventual capitulation of Magyar forces at Világos (what is now Şiria in Romania) on 13 August 1849. On 9 October 1849, the Imperial army transferred the Slovak corps from the central territories of Upper Hungary to Pozsony, where it was formally disbanded on 21 November 1849. This marked the end of Slovak participation in the Revolutions of 1848-1849 that swept the continent of Europe.
 
 

Aftermath
Slovak Perspective

Historians Anton Špiesz and Dušan Čaplovič sum up the impacts of the uprising and the era the following way:

Many Magyar historians have presented a positive evaluation of Kossuth and the Magyar revolution. On the other hand, they have branded the activities of Štúr and the Slovak volunteers and their cooperation with the Viennese Court and Imperial army as counter-revolutionary. In truth, Štúr and the Slovak leaders, by their conduct during the revolution of 1848-49, demonstrated that they well understood the [...] nature of Magyar nationalism, which refused to even acknowledge Slovak existence. [...Kossuth's] contention that the Viennese Court was oppressing Hungary economically and politically cannot be accepted without major reservations. After all, Hungary had enjoyed a permanent credit balance in trade with the nations of Cisleithania; more money had flown into the Hungarian treasury from those nations than vice versa. Indeed, even the measure of political freedom enjoyed by Hungary had been greater than that of the Czech Kingdom, or even of Austria 'proper' and the other ethnic groups of Cisleithania. It is possible, however, to sympathize with Kossuth and the Magyar leaders in their fear of various political combinations under active contemplation in Central Europe at the time; for instance, German unification, embracing the entirety of the Habsburg realm, or a complete restructuring of the Austrian Empire on an ethnic basis. In either of these constructs, the Magyars would have found themselves in the minority. [...] These various consideration may help clarify, but they certainly do not justify, the total suppression of non-Magyar nationalities in Hungary.

—Anton Špiesz and Dušan Čaplovič, 2006.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
 
 
Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Europe, 1815-48 (part I)
 

 
 

ITALY: DIVERGENT ROADS TO FREEDOM, 1820-47

But the Russians, Spaniards, Americans, how far have they not flown in a few years, not to say in a few months? Italy! Would you ever dare believe yourself worthy of taking a seat - I will not say alongside Russia, Spain, the great peoples of America - but merely alongside the nation of Haiti? Oh, most unhappy Italy! The Russian, the Spaniard can with reason call you superstitious, ignorant, savage and base ... Yes, yes; they, they have the right to call you the last nation of Europe.

The central Italian broadsheet The Romagnol Collector, 30 March 1820, lamenting the backwardness of Italy, even as compared with the black Caribbean republic of Haiti. The reference to the progress of Russia is mystifying.

****

Property boundaries shall be erased, all possessions shall be reduced to communal wealth, and the one and only patria, most gentle of mothers, shall furnish food, education and work to the whole body of her beloved and free children. This is the redemption invoked by the wise. This is the true recreation of Jerusalem. This is the manifest and inevitable decision of the Supreme Being.

Oath sworn by members of the highest grade of the Carbonari sect as organized by Filippo Buonarotti, 1818; A. Saitta Filippo Buonarotti (1950) Vol.1, pp.91-2. Buonarotti was a disciple of the French revolutionary Gracchus Babeuf, executed in 1797, and was the pre-eminent figure in Italian nationalist circles in the 1820s.

****

Italy is strong enough to free herself without external help ... Nationality ... can never be created by any revolution, however triumphant, if achieved by foreign arms ... The one thing wanting to twenty millions of Italians, desirous of emancipating themselves, is not power, but faith.

Giuseppe Mazzini, the declaration of Young Italy, 1831; The Life and Writings of Giuseppe Mazzini (1891 edn) Vol.1, pp.96-113. Mazzini took over from Buonarotti as the leader of extreme nationalism in the 1830s.

****

Oh my country so fair and wretched!
Oh remembrance of joy and of woe!
Golden harps of the Prophets, oh tell me!
Why so silent ye hang from the willow?
Once again sing the songs of our homeland.
Sing again of the days that are past.
We have drunk from the cup of affliction,
And have shed bitter tears of repentance.
Oh inspire us Jehovah with courage
So that we may endure to the last.

Temistocle Serala, librettist to Giuseppe Verdi; the Hebrew slaves' chorus from Act 3 of the opera Nabucco (Nebuchadnezzar), which was performed for the first time at La Scala, Milan, in 1842. The sufferings of the Jews in the Babylonian captivity were clearly understood by Italian audiences as a metaphor for the tribulations of Italy under foreign occupation, particularly by the Austrians in the north and the Spanish Bourbons in the south.

****

Rest assured that when the opportunity arises, my life, my children's lives, my arms, my treasure, my army, all shall he given in the cause of Italy.

Count Massimo d'Azeglio reporting the pledge of King Charles Albert of the northern kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia, given to him in Oct. 1845; Things I Remember (1966 edn) pp.338-42. In 1821, as Regent of Piedmont, Charles Albert had crushed a nationalist revolt; hence d'Azeglio's comment: These are his words: God alone knows his inner thoughts.' In 1848 the king did support the nationalist movement but was forced into abdication after military defeat by Austria, the power in control of neighbouring Lombardy and Venetia, and retired to a monastery in Portugal.

****

The papacy is supremely ours and our nation's because it created the nation and has been rooted here for eighteen centuries ... That the pope is naturally and should be effectively, the civil head of Italy is a truth forecast in the nature of things ... Nor, to achieve this confederation, is there any need for the pope to receive or take over any new power, but only to revive an ancient and inalienable right that has merely been interrupted ... namely, that of bringing the Italian states together in union.

Vincenzo Gioberti On the Moral and Civil Primacy of the Italians (1843). Gioberti's faith in the pope was misplaced: both as a secular ruler across the central belt of the peninsula and as a dedicated opponent of the liberalism that accompanied the nationalist urge, the Pontifex Maximus was no friend of such a proposal.

****

Why should not a new Rome, the Rome of the Italian people ... arise to create a third and still
vaster Unity: to link together and harmonize earth and heaven, right and duty, and utter, not to individuals, but to peoples, the great word association - to make known to free men and equal their mission here below?

Giuseppe Mazzini, thoughts conceived in prison in Savona after a failed rising in 1830, a vision radically different from Gioberti's; Life and Writings of Joseph Mazzini (1864 edn) Vol. I, pp. I-40.

****

Communications, which promote the movement of people in every direction, and which will force people into contact with those they do not know, should be a powerful assistance in destroying petty municipal passions born of ignorance and of prejudice ... The building of the railways will help to consolidate mutual confidence between governments and people, and this is the basis of our hopes for the future.

Count Camillo Cavour, La Revue Nouvelle, I May 1846. The Piedmontese Cavour, who became the first prime minister of a united Italy, was a pragmatist and a gradualist in his nationalism.

****

The word 'Italy' is a geographical expression, a description which is useful shorthand, but has none of the political significance the efforts of the revolutionary ideologues try to put on it, and which is full of dangers for the very existence of the states which make up the peninsula.

Prince Clemens Metternich to the Austrian ambassador in France, 12 April 1847; Richard Metternich-Winneburg (ed.) From Metternich's Surviving Papers (1883) Vol.7, p.388.
 
 
THE PAPACY: CHURCH INTRANSIGENT, 1814-46
 
There is no public morality or national character without religion, no European religion without Christianity, no Christianity without Catholicism, no Catholicism without the pope, no pope without his supremacy.

Count Joseph de Maistre to Count de Blacas, 1814; Fernand Baldensperger The Movement of Ideas in the French Emigration, 1789-1815 (1924) Vol.2, p.244.

****

His role, his mission is to prepare and hasten the final convulsions which must precede the regeneration of society; that is why God has delivered him into the hands of the basest kind of men; ambitious, greedy, corrupt, frenzied idiots who call upon the Tatars to re-establish in Europe what they call order, and who adore the saviour of the church in the Nero of Poland, in the crowned Robespierre who is carrying through, at this very moment, his imperial '93.

Felicite de Lamennais to Countess de Senfft, 10 Feb. 1832; Emile Forgues Correspondence de Lamennais (1863) Vol.2, p.235. Father Lamennais was the high priest of Liberal Catholicism; he here condemns the deeply illiberal papacy. The Tatars' are the Russians, 'the Nero of Poland' and 'the crowned Robespierre' Tsar Nicholas I. 'His imperial '93' was the equivalent of the Terror in the French Revolution, as Russia ruthlessly put down the Polish rising.

****

Everything which disturbs the tranquillity of a state she firmly forbids to the ministers of God, who is the author of peace and who came to bring peace to the earth. Bishops should, therefore, with Saint Paul, preach obedience and submission, and above all be on their guard against conduct which would be unseemly in the holy ministry and make it odious.

Pope Gregory XVI to the bishops of Poland, 9 June 1832; E.E.Y. Hales Revolution and Papacy (I960) p.267. The pope here admonishes those Polish bishops who supported the revolt of 1830—3 I against Russia. 'She' is Mother Church.

****

When the sacred bonds of religion are once contemptuously cast aside ... all legitimate power is menaced by an ever-approaching abyss of bottomless miseries ... in which heresies and sects have so to speak vomited as into a sewer all that their bosom holds of license, sacrilege and blasphemy.

Pope Gregory XVI, MirariVos (encyclical), 15 Aug. 1832; Anne Fremantle (ed.) The Papal Encyclicals in their Historical Context (1963) p. 128. A condemnation of Lamennais' doctrine, following Lamennais' audience with Gregory in Rome.

****

A priest who abuses the sacred books in order to corrupt the world, who pretends to be inspired and who dispenses what he himself must know to be poison, is an abject being ... The practice of burning heretics and their works has been abandoned: that is a matter for regret in the present instance.

Prince Clemens Metternich to the Austrian envoy in Rome, 16 May 1834, on the subject of Lamennais; Charles Boutard Lamennais (1913) Vol.3, p.76. Metternich is believed to have inspired the encyclical Singulari Vos, an outright anathema on Lamennais, which followed on 24 June.

****

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed being, the essence of a heartless world, just as it is the embodiment of social conditions from which the intellect is banned. It is the opium of the people.

Karl Marx Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Law (1843-44) Introduction.

****

God is stupidity and cowardice; God is hypocrisy and falsehood; God is tyranny and poverty; God is evil. For as long as men bow before altars, mankind will remain damned, the slave of kings and priests.

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon Economic Contradictions (1846) Vol. I, p.384. Proudhon the anarchist saw any form of authority as baneful, and for Proudhon the atheist God was at the root of the cancer.

****

The execrable doctrine called communism ... is wholly contrary to natural law itself; nor could it establish itself without turning upside-down all rights, all interests, the essence of property, and society itself.

Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus (encyclical), 9 Nov. 1846; Claudia Carlen (ed.) The Papal Encyclicals 1740-18 78 (1981) pp.277 ff. The first pronouncement on communism by Rome. The word 'communism' first entered the European political vocabulary in 1840, according to Le Petit Robert (1993; p.417).
 
 
 
GERMANY: ROMANTIC REVOLT, 1817-47
 
At seven the students, some six hundred of them, each with a torch, marched up the hill to the triumphal bonfire ... On the hill-top songs were sung, and another speech delivered by a student. Afterwards trial by fire was held over the following articles, which were first displayed high in the air on a pitch-fork to the assembled multitude, and then with curses hurled into the flames. The articles burnt were these: a bagwig, a guardsman's cuirass, a corporal's cane.

Lorenz Oken, an eyewitness of the student festival on the Wartburg Mountain, 19 Oct. 1817; J.G. Legge Rhyme and Revolution in Germany (1918) pp.22-5. The festival was held to celebrate the tercentenary of the Lutheran Reformation and the fourth anniversary of Napoleon's defeat at the Battle of Leipzig. The items thrown on to the fire symbolized the oppression of the ancien regime in Germany, that is, the obsolete authoritarianism of the monarchies back in place after the collapse of Napoleonic France.

****

The Gallic cock has crowed a second time, and the dawn is rising in Germany too.

The German poet Heinrich Heine, writing from Paris soon after the July 1830 Revolution in France.

****

The day will come ... when sublime Germania shall stand on the bronze pedestal of liberty and justice, bearing in one hand the torch of enlightenment, which shall throw the beam of civilization into the remotest corners of the earth, and in the other the scales of justice. People will beg her to settle their disputes; those very people who now force us to believe that might is right, and stamp on us with scornful contempt.

The journalist Siebenpfeiffer, one of the organizers of the nationalist Hambach Festival, 27 May 1832; Legge (1918) p. 107. Germania, the female embodiment of the nation, like Britannia, Columbia and Marianne for the United Kingdom, the United States and France, respectively.

****

Just go to Darmstadt and see how the high and mighty make merry at your expense, and then tell your hungry wives and children that their bread has been snatched from them to fill the bellies of lordly strangers; tell the wearers of fine clothes they are dyed by the sweat of the poor, and tell the ladies with their fancy ribbons they are cut out by their calloused hands; tell those who live in grand houses they are built on the bones of the people. Then crawl into your smoky hovels and bend over your stony fields so that one day your children may trudge over them too.

Georg Buchner The Hessian Country Courier (1834). Buchner, the author of Dantons Tod, wrote this pamphlet to provoke the peasantry to rebellion; most handed their copies to the police.

****

When once that restraining talisman, the cross, is broken, then the smouldering ferocity of those ancient warriors will blaze up again; then again will be heard the deadly clang of that frantic Berserker wrath of which the Norse poets say and sing so much ... A drama will be enacted in Germany in comparison with which the French Revolution will seem a harmless episode ... You have more to fear from a liberated Germany than from the entire Holy Alliance, with all its Croats and Cossacks.

Heinrich Heine History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany (1834) Conclusion. A warning to France from a German Francophile of the consequences likely to follow the unleashing of German nationalism in the wake of a breakdown of Christian standards of behaviour.

****

Germany needs a war of her own to feel her power: she needs a feud with Frenchdom to develop her national life in all its fullness. This occasion will not fail to come.

Ludwigjahn, veteran Francophobe nationalist of the Napoleonic era; Carl Euler Father Ludwigjahn (1881) pp.440-41.

****

Deutschland, Deutschland, uberAlles, UberAlles in der Welt.
(Germany, Germany, above everything,/Above everything in the World.)

A.H. Hoffmann von Fallensleben German Hymn (1841), set to music by Haydn, the same tune as for the hymn 'Glorious things of thee are spoken'.

****

Let us put our trust in the eternal spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unsearchable and eternally creative source of all life. The passion for destruction is also a creative passion.

Mikhail Bakunin 'Reaction in Germany' in German Yearbook, Oct. 1842. Having fled to Germany, the Russian anarchist Bakunin hoped that the Germans would take up his version of revolution where the Russians had failed. He was also to say of the Germans, however: They will never rise. They would sooner die than rebel ... perhaps even a German, when he has been driven to absolute despair, will cease to argue, but it needs a colossal amount of unspeakable oppression, insult, injustice and suffering to reduce him to that state.'

****

The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.

Karl Marx Theses on Feuerbach (1845).

****

The old year ended in scarcity, the new one with starvation. Misery, spiritual and physical, traverses Europe in ghastly shapes - the one without God, the other without bread. Woe if they join hands!

Count Galen, 20 Jan. 1847; LB. Namier /848: The Revolution of the Intellectuals (1944) p.5.
 
 
 
RUSSIA: IMPERIAL GENDARME, 1822-47
 
There is evidently nothing in Europe capable of making head against such a power as this. Not all Europe combined in opposition will be able to resist its progress, wherever this vast machinery is seriously brought to bear upon the independence of other nations by an able and ambitious emperor ... we may see at last the two-headed eagle extend his wings and unfurl his charts triumphantly over the Tower of London itself.

A.H. Everett Europe: or a General Survey of the Present Situation of the Principal Powers (1822) pp.319-20, 360. The double-headed eagle was the symbol of Imperial Russia.

****

The people have conceived a sacred truth - that they do not exist for governments, but that government must be organized for them. This is the cause of struggle in all countries; peoples, after tasting the sweetness of enlightenment and freedom, strive toward them; and governments, surrounded by millions of bayonets, make efforts to repel these peoples back into the darkness of ignorance ... We are unable to live like our ancestors, like barbarians or slaves.

The Decembrist Peter Kakhovsky to General Levashev, 8 March 1826. On 26 Dec. 1825, less than a month after the death of Tsar Alexander I, Russia experienced a short-lived liberal rebellion by aristocratic army officers. It was soon suppressed and five of its leaders executed, including Kakhovsky.

****

Persecuted six years in a row, stained by expulsion from the service, exiled to an out-of-the-way village for two lines in an intercepted letter, I of course could not bear good will towards the late tsar, although I gave full justice to his true merits. But I never preached rebellion or revolution.

The poet Alexander Pushkin to Vasily Zhukovsky, late Jan. 1826; The Letters of Alexander Pushkin (1967) p.303. In the spring of 1824 Pushkin had been dismissed as a civil servant and exiled to his mother's estate after his letter fell into the hands of the tsarist authorities. Here, he is clearly in fear of his life as a suspected accomplice to the Decembrist coup.

****

If we ask what will become of Europe as a result of the unleashing of thirty million serfs and an army of 300,000 men, the revolutionaries ask themselves the same question, and they see in the prospect life and triumph of their cause, whereas we, and all the enlightened leaders of Europe, can only see death.

Prince Clemens Metternich on the Decembrists, 27 Jan. 1826; Bertier de Sauvigny (1962) p.201.

****

It is Our duty to think of our security. When I say Ours, I mean the tranquillity of Europe.

Tsar Nicholas I to his brother, 18 Aug. 1830; W. Bruce Lincoln Nicholas/(1978) p. 132.

****

We can only pity the Poles. We are too powerful to hate them; the war which is about to begin will be a war of extermination - or at least so it ought to be.

Alexander Pushkin to Elizaveta Khitovo, 9 Dec. 1830; The Letters of Alexander Pushkin (1967) p.447. A full-scale insurrection in Poland against Russian domination had begun in late Nov. 1830.

****

The suburbs are destroyed, burned ... Moscow rules the world! О God, do You exist? You're there and You don't avenge it. How many more Russian crimes do You want - or - are You a Russian too!!? ... Sometimes I can only groan, and suffer, and pour out my despair at the piano! God, shake the earth, let it swallow up the men of this age, let the heaviest punishment fall on France, that would not come to help us.

The Polish composer Frederic Chopin, Sept. 1831; Ates Orga Chopin (1976) pp.52-3. Chopin is writing in torment about the Russian suppression of Warsaw at the close of the Polish rising.

****

Warsaw is surrounded, it is under fire; Warsaw surrenders ... and now, it is said, order reigns in Warsaw.

Deputy Mauguin in the French Chamber of Deputies, 19 Sept. 1831, commenting on the statement on 16 Sept. by the foreign minister, Sebastiani, that 'tranquillity reigns in Warsaw' after the city's capitulation to Russian forces on 8 Sept.

****

All revolutionary objects, such as the sword and sash of Kosciuszko, should be confiscated and sent here to the Cathedral of the Transfiguration ... In a word, gradually remove everything that has historical or national value, and deliver it here.

Tsar Nicholas I, instructions after the suppression of the Polish rising; Norman Davies God's Playground: A History of Poland (1981) Vol.2, p.332. The Polish patriot Tadeusz Kosciuszko led an unsuccessful insurrection against Russia in 1794.

****

Hail, О Christ, Thou Lord of Men! Poland, in Thy footsteps treading, Like Thee suffers, at Thy bidding; Like Thee too, shall rise again!

Kasimierz Brodzinski, 1831; Davies (1981) p.9.

****

Poland will arise and free nations of Europe from bondage. Ibipatria, ubi male; wherever in Europe liberty is suppressed and is fought for, there is the battle for your country.

Adam Mickiewicz The books of the Polish Nation and of the Polish Pilgrims (1832) p.8l. Mickiewicz (1798-1855), the great Romantic poet, became the leader of the Poles in exile, dedicated to fight for nationalism throughout Europe as legionaries against the Holy Alliance.

****

That sad inheritance of triumphant wrong.

The British foreign secretary, Lord Palmerston, on Poland, attrib. A fine phrase, but Britain was incapable of righting the wrong by military intervention, either then or in 1939, when Hitler and Stalin divided Poland between them. As Palmerston said to the exiled head of the insurrectionary regime, Prince Adam Czartoryski: 'We cannot send an army to Poland, and the burning of the Russian fleet would be about as effectual as the burning of Moscow' (Czartoryski's Memoirs (1888) Vol.2, p.329).

****

Our common duty is to see to it that, in accordance with the supreme intention of our August Monarch, the education of the people is carried out in the united spirit of Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality.

S.S. Uvarov, Russian minister of education, 21 March 1833; Lincoln (1978) p.241. Uvarov's watchwords became the Holy Trinity of Russian traditionalists in the 19th century.

****

I had made up my mind to collect all the evil things I knew, and then to make fun of them - this is the origin of'The Inspector General'. This was the first work I planned in order to produce a good influence on society.

Nikolai Gogol to the poet V.A. Zhukovsky on his ribald satire on tsarist bureaucracy, given its premiere on I May 1836 in the presence of the tsar, who enjoyed it enormously.

****

Isolated in the world, we have given nothing to the world and we have learned nothing from the world. We have not added a single idea to the totality of human thought. We have contributed nothing to the progress of the human spirit, and everything transmitted to us from that progress we have disfigured.

Peter Chaadeyev 'A Philosophical Letter' in the review Teleskop, 1836. Chaadeyev, a passionate believer in the need for Russia to adopt Western models of thought and practice, was declared insane by the tsar; compare the treatment of dissidents in Brezhnev's Soviet Union in the 1970s.

****

I am your master, and my master is the emperor. The emperor can issue his commands to me and I must obey him; but he issues no commands to you. I am the emperor on my estate; I am your God in this world and I have to answer for you to the God above.

A Russian landlord to his serfs in the 1840s; Baron von Haxthausen-Abbenberg The Russian Empire (1856) Vol.1, p.335.

****

Stern and severe - with fixed principles of duty which nothing on earth will make him change; very clever I do not think him, and his mind is an uncivilized one.

Queen Victoria on Tsar Nicholas I, I I June 1844; Letters of Queen Victoria Vol.2 (1911) p.223.

****

A State without an absolute monarch is an orchestra without its conductor ... The more deeply one looks into the workings of our administration, the more one admires the wisdom of its founders; one feels that God Himself, unseen by us, built it through the hands of the sovereigns. Everything is perfect, everything is sufficient unto itself. I cannot conceive what use could be found for even one more official.

Nikolai Gogol Selected Passages from My Correspondence with My Friends (1847) Chs 10, 28. A decade on from The Inspector General, the satirist of the tsarist regime had become its panegyrist.

****

Russia sees her salvation not in mysticism, nor asceticism, nor pietism, but in the progress of civilization, enlightenment and human values. What she needs is not sermons (she has had enough of them!) or prayers (she has mouthed them too often!) but the awakening of human dignity, which for so many centuries has been buried in mud and filth.

Vissarion Belinsky, 15 July 1847, in reply to Gogol's declaration of faith in the tsarist system.
 
 
 
FRANCE: BOURGEOIS MONARCHY, 1830-48
 
I want to secure the political preponderance of the middle classes in France, the final and complete organization of the great victory that the middle classes have won over privilege and absolute power from 1789 to 1830.

Francois Guizot, the politician at the centre of the July Monarchy; Pierre Rosanvallon Le Moment Guizot (1985) p. 171.

****

We seek to hold to the juste milieu [golden mean], equally distant from the excesses of popular power and the abuses of royal authority.

King Louis-Philippe, speech from the throne, Jan. 183 I. The July Monarchy aimed to steer a central course between radicalism and reaction.

****

Each manufacturer lives in his factory like the colonial planters surrounded by slaves, one against a hundred, and the sedition at Lyons is a kind of rising at Santo Domingo ... The middle class should realize its position: it has beneath it a population of proletarians who agitate and tremble without knowing where they are going ... From there can emerge the Barbarians which will destroy it.

The deputy Saint-Marc Girardin, 1831; Jean-Paul Sartre Les Temps Modernes (1966) pp. 1924-5. The subject was the violent upsurge of the silk weavers of Lyons, ruthlessly suppressed by the government, and seen as a token of the volcanic forces lying beneath the complacent surface of the new regime, comparable to the tensions generated by slavery in the French and Spanish West Indies.

****

In our Charter there are rights ... there are no tax exemptions, anyone is eligible for government posts, we have free labour, religious toleration, freedom of the press, individual liberty! ... Given all these things, what need would there be to bring in this absurd political equality, this blind application of political rights to everyone?

Francois Guizot in the Chamber of Deputies, 1837; Memoires Vol.4, pp.270-71.

****

Enrichissez-vous! (Enrich yourselves!)

Guizot to the Chamber, I March 1843. The full version reads: 'Support your government, consolidate your institutions, enlighten yourselves, enrich yourselves, improve the moral and material condition of our France.' Later the same year he urged his constituents in Lisieux to 'enrich yourselves by work, thrift and integrity'. The phrase enrichessez-vous is usually taken as an exhortation to make money as an end in itself and was interpreted by the regime's enemies as a token of its gross materialism.

****

Like a crow perched on a spindly cypress,
Hunched night and day with his beak in his chest,
On a barren tree he calls his doctrine.

The poet Alfred de Vigny on Guizot; journal (1867) p.90.

****

Master of everything as no aristocracy had ever been or perhaps will never be, the middle class, which one has to call the governing class, having entrenched itself in power and soon afterwards in its self-interest, seemed like a private industry. Each of its members scarcely gave a thought to public affairs except to make them function to profit his own private business, and had no difficulty in forgetting the lower orders in his little cocoon of affluence. Posterity ... will possibly never realize how far the government of the day had in the end taken on the appearance of an industrial company, where all operations are carried out with a view to the benefit the shareholders can draw from them.

Alexis de Tocqueville on the Guizot administration of the 1840s; Recollections p.31.

****

These people are walking coffins which contain a Frenchman of another age; he sometimes gives a start and thumps on the walls of his capsule, but ambition holds him down and he lets himself be suffocated.

The novelist Honore de Balzac La Cousine Bette (1846), on the bon bourgeois of the July Monarchy.

****

Gross, fat and stupid,
His hand turns into a spade,
His head turns into a pear,
His belly into a barrel.

Altaroche, editor of Le Charivari, on Louis-Philippe; H.A.C. Collingham The July Monarchy (1988) pp. 139-40. The caricature of the king's head as an evolving pear was a favourite of the satirists of the Paris press.

****

The French love the dead Napoleon more than the living Lafayette. To the French Napoleon is a magic word that electrifies and dazzles them. A thousand cannon sleep within that name as they do in the Vendome Column, and the Tuileries will tremble if one day those cannon awake.

Heinrich Heine, 1832. Lafayette helped manage the transition from one version of monarchy to another in July 1830, avoiding both a republic and a Bonapartist revival. The Column, topped by a statue of the emperor, stood in the Place Vendome in Paris as a towering reminder of the Napoleonic achievement. The Tuileries Palace, not far away on the Rue de Rivoli (named after Napoleon's victory over Austria in 1797) was the residence of the king.

****

I wish my ashes to rest on the banks of the Seine, in the midst of the French people I have loved so well.

Napoleon, codicil to his will, 16 April 1821, unconsciously expressing his sense of distance from France. Corsica, his birthplace, had become French territory only a year before he was born in 1769. In an effort to draw on the emperor's enduring prestige, the July Monarchy had Napoleon's remains brought back from St Helena and interred in the Hotel des Invalides on IS Dec. 1840. Louis-Philippe also sought to borrow lustre from Louis XIV through his refurbishment of the Palace of Versailles, reopened on 10 June 1837, and prominently inscribed with the motto 'TO ALL THE GLORIES OF FRANCE'.

****

La France s'ennuie. (France is bored.)

The Romantic poet and politician Alphonse de Lamartine in the Chamber, 10 Jan. 1839, and to his Macon constituents on 18 July 1847. A famous phrase, hitting at the complacency of the regime of Louis-Philippe. The full version of the 1839 speech reads: The generations coming of age after us are not tired: they want to act before they grow tired in their turn. What proof of action have you given them? France is a nation that is bored! And beware: the boredom of peoples easily leads to upheaval and ruin.'

****

If I had to reply to the following question: What is slavery? and in only one word I would reply: It is murder, my thinking would immediately be understood. I would not need to make a long argument to show that the power to take away from a man thought, will, personality, is a power of life and death, and that to enslave a man is to kill him. Why then to this other question: What is property? may I not answer equally: It is theft!

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon What is Property? (1840). This tract made the anarchist socialist Proudhon one of the key betes noires of the administration, threatening as it did everything it stood for.

****

We had been accustomed to connect the word 'Paris' with memories of the great events, the great
masses, the great men of 1789 and 1793, memories of a colossal struggle for an idea, for rights, for human dignity ... The name of Paris was closely bound up with all the noblest enthusiasms of contemporary humanity. I entered it with reverence, as men used to enter Jerusalem and Rome.

The Russian liberal revolutionary, Alexander Herzen, on reaching Paris from Russia in March 1847; E.H. Carr The Romantic Exiles (1933) Ch.2. Herzen evokes the enduring aura of Paris as the hub of progressive politics, something the July Monarchy had done its best to make France and Europe forget, but which was now once again beginning to exert its power and produce a further revolution.
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1847 Part II NEXT-1848 Part II