Q.1. How did the French territory undergo changes due to the Treaty of Vienna in 1815?
Ans. Representatives of European powers, i.e. Austria, Britain, Russia and Prussia, met at Vienna in 1815 after having defeated Napoleon. The Austrian Chancellor Duke Metternich was the head of the Congress. Here the Treaty of Vienna of 1815 was drawn to undo the changes after the Napoleonic wars.
Thus the Bourbon dynasty, deposed during the French Revolution, was put back in power even as France lost the territories it had annexed under Napoleon. To prevent every future expansion of France, many states were set up on France’s boundaries. So the kingdom of Netherlands including Belgium came up in the north, while Genoa came together with Piedmont in the south.
Prussia received some important new territories on its western frontiers. Austria gained control of northern Italy. The 39 states in the German Confederation as setting up by Napoleon underwent no changes. In the east, Russia received a part of Poland and Prussia received a part of Saxony.
The objective was to restore the monarchies overthrown by Napoleon and create a new conservative order in Europe.
Fig: Rise of nationalism in Europe
Q.2. Discuss the lives of the aristocrats and the new middle class in the 19th century Europe.
Ans. In the 19th century Europe, the landed aristocracy dominated all social and political spheres. They were united by a common lifestyle. They owned huge estates in the countryside and some had large townhouses too. Their spoken language was French, both in high society and in diplomatic circles. Most of the aristocratic families were connected by marriage. The aristocrats formed a small group but held a lot of power.
Peasantry comprised the larger group of the population. To the west, most of the land was farmed by small owners and tenants. In eastern and central Europe, the pattern of landholding was characterized by vast estates cultivated by the serfs. In the western and some parts of central Europe industrial production and trade was on the rise and with them towns grew and the commercial classes emerged.
Their existence was based on the production for the market. Industrialization took birth in England in the 1850s but France and Germany experienced it only during the 19th century. This caused the emergence of new social groups — working class and middle class.
The latter comprised industrialists, businessmen and professionals. These groups were not many in central and eastern Europe. So it was the liberal, educated middle-class which encouraged national unity after aristocratic privileges were abolished.
Q.3. What views did the conservatives hold?
Ans. Napoleon was defeated in 1815 and soon European governments adopted the idea of conservatism. The conservatives held the belief that established traditional institutions of state and society like monarchy, church, social hierarchies, property and family must be protected and preserved.
They never proposed a pre-revolutionary period to return to but they knew that as Napoleon had carried out changes, modernization would in fact contribute to a strong monarchy. They believed that it would strengthen the power of the state and make it much more effective.
For them it was a firm belief that aristocratic monarchies of Europe would gain much from a modern army, an efficient bureaucracy, a dynamic economy, the abolition of feudalism and serfdom.
Q.4. Friedrich List, Professor of Economics at the University of Tubingen in Germany, wrote in 1834.
“The aim of the Zollverein is to bind the Germans economically into a nation. It will strengthen the nation materially as much by protecting its interests externally as by stimulating its internal productivity. It ought to awaken and raise national sentiment through a fusion of individual and provincial interests. The German people have realized that a free economic system is the only means to engender national feelings.”
Read the statement by Professor List and discuss what political ends he hoped, would be achieved by economic measures.
Ans. Professor List was sure that economic measures could result in certain political ends
(a) A national economy binds the nation together. For example, Zollverein abolished tariff barriers. It also reduced the currencies from thirty to two. This economic union was joined by most of the German states and brought them together and created a national feeling.
(b) It also promoted internal productivity, for example, to help trade growth, a network of railways was needed for increased mobility. This also brought people together.
(c) Economic measures like the Zollverein also protected nation’s external interests (the use of common currency and abolishing of tariffs). This fusion of individual and provincial interests aroused national sentiments in people.
Q.5. The French philosopher Ernst Renan (1823-92) outlined his understanding of a nation in the following way:
“A nation is the result of a long past of endeavors, sacrifice and devotion. A heroic past, great men, glory, that is the social capital upon which one bases a national idea. To have common glories in the past, to have a common will in the present, to have performed great deeds together, to wish to perform still more, these are the essential conditions of being a people. A nation is, therefore, large-scale solidarity … Its existence is a daily plebiscite … A province is its inhabitants; if anyone has the right to be consulted, it is the inhabitants. A nation never has any real interest in annexing or holding on to a country against its will. The existence of nations is a good thing, a necessity even. Their existence is a guarantee of liberty, which would be lost if the world had only one law and only one master.”
(a) What, according to Renan, are the attributes of a nation?
(b) Why does he think nations are important?
(c) How is his idea different from others? Do you agree with him?
(a) According to Renan, a nation must have people who have shared “a glorious past,” and have a desire, a will to perform deeds together for the glory of the country in the present and in the future also. There is solidarity. They belong to the nation and have to be consulted on any issue, they exercise their rights daily. A nation does not want to grab territories, it does not want to conquer any country or dominate it against the will of the people.
(b) A nation is necessary because it guarantees the freedom to every citizen. This liberty (individual) would be lost, if there was a uniform law for everyone and only one ruler.
(c) He differs from others as he does not believe that a nation speaks the same language, follow the same religion, belongs to the same race and occupies the same territory. I agree with him. India is a nation made of different races, different religions, we speak different languages, follow different cultures. Yet, we have unity in diversity as we have a common past and a desire to live together.
Q.6. What is the significance of the symbols given in this picture?
Ans. Each symbol has meaning and significance.
(a) The broken chains represent freedom, freedom from slavery.
(b) The breastplate with an eagle on it represents the German Empire and its strength (the eagle is a strong bird).
(c) The tricolour — black, red and gold — was the flag of liberal nationalists in 1848. It was banned by Dukes of the German states. A flag always unites people and arouses national feelings.
(d) The sword symbolises a readiness to fight. The German nation was ever ready to fight for its honour.
(e) The crown of oak leaves stands for courage, bravery and heroism.
(f) The olive branches around the sword show that Germans are as eager for peace as they are eager to fight.
(g) The rays of the rising sun symbolizes the beginning of a new era as a united German nation.
Q.7. Read the two opinions about the role of women in society:
1. Carl Welcker: A liberal politician member of the Frankfurt Parliament:
‘Nature has created men and women to cany out different functions ... Man, the stronger, the bolder and peer of the two, has been designated as protector of the family, its provider, meant for public tasks in the domain of law, production, defence. Woman, the weaker, dependent and timid, requires the protection of man. Her sphere is the home, the care of the children, the nurturing of the family ... Do we require any father proof that given such differences, equality’ between the sexes would only endanger harmony and destroy the dignity of the family?’
2. Louise Otto Peters, a political activist, wrote in a journal (21 April, JS4Q): ‘Let us ask how many men, possessed by thoughts of Iriing and dying for the sake of Liberty, would be prepared to fight for the freedom of the entire people, of all human beings? When asked this question, they would all too easily respond with a “Yes”, though their untiring efforts are intended for the benefit of only one half of humanity— men. But Liberty is mdnisible' Free men therefore must not tolerate to be surrounded by the unfree.
(a) What according to Carl Welcker is a woman’s function? Does he think women should be given equality and liberty?
(b) Louise Otto Peters asks a question in his article. What is the significance of his question? How does he define liberty?
(a) A woman, according to Carl Welcker, is weak, timid and needs the protection of the strong, bold, free man. He confines the woman to the kitchen, home and children. He does not support equality and liberty for women. A woman must remain subservient to a man.
(b) Louise Otto Peters is certainly a feminist. Does he want to know whether men are prepared to fight for “freedom of the entire people, all human beings”? His question is significant because though the men will unanimously answer “yes” but they are not ready to grant this freedom to women, who constitute half the population of the world.
For him Liberty is indivisible, it cannot be given to some and not to others. He certainly holds a totally different view from Carl Welcker, who is a male chauvinist!
Q.8. How was the history of nationalism in Britain unlike the rest of Europe?
How was the formation of the nation-state the result of a long drawn-out process in Britain? Explain.
Ans. In Britain, the formation of the nation-state was not the result of a sudden upheaval or revolution. It was the result of a long-drawn-out process. There was no British nation prior to the eighteenth century. All the ethnic groups had their own cultural and political traditions.
But as the English nation steadily grew in wealth, importance and power, it extended influence over other nations of the island. The English parliament, which had seized power from the monarchy in 1688 at the end of a protracted conflict, was the instrument through which a nation-state, with England at its centre, came to be forged.
The Act of Union (1707) between England and Scotland that resulted in the formation of the ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain’ meant, in effect, that England was able to impose its influence on Scotland. The British parliament was henceforth dominated by its English members.
The growth of a British identity meant that Scotland’s distinctive culture and political institutions were systematically suppressed. Ireland suffered a similar fate. It was a country deeply divided between Catholics and Protestants. The English helped the Protestants of Ireland to establish their dominance over a largely Catholic country. Catholic revolts against the British dominance were suppressed.