THE REVOLUTIONS OF 1848

QUESTIONS –

 2005 – Discuss the causes of the general failure of the revolutions of

1848. What impact did it have on politics in Europe?
 2006 – What were the social and ideological factors behind the
recurrence of revolutions across Europe between 1820 and 1848? Why
did this tide ebb after 1850?
 2007 – What were the factors behind the general failure of the
revolutions of 1848? What impact did this upheaval have on the
attitudes of the rulers and the rebels in Europe?
 2009 – Do you think the Revolutions of 1848 can be considered as the
“spring times of people”? Comment. (Focus more on the failure and
reasons for failure)
 2010 – The revolutions of 1848 transformed the attitudes of the rulers
as well as the rebels. Discuss.

INTRODUCTION –

 The year 1848 saw Europe convulsed by a wave of revolutions which

shook the political and social order to its foundations. The Revolutions
of 1848 hold a very significant place as they were the largest, most
widespread and violent political movements in 19th century Europe.
 The revolutionary zone reached from France to the German
Confederation and the Austrian Empire into south-eastern Europe and
Italy. However Britain and the Tsarist Empire did not experience the
turbulence of the revolutions.
 The Revolutions of 1848 although occurring in widely differing areas
aimed at similar objectives – the establishment of a constitutional
democratic republic with equality before law and the end of privilege. In
Italy, Germany and parts of the Austrian Empire the desire for the
 creation of a national state and national unification were also powerful
factors.
 Roger Price observes that the various revolutionary movements were to
some extent interdependent and even passed through similar stages.
Eric Hobsbawm points to other common features. He argues that in each
state, the revolutions were successful in sweeping away the existing
governments in the initial months but lost initiative quite soon. The
defeat of the revolutionaries was quite comprehensive.
 Jonathan Sperber and Roger Price have endeavored to connect the
outbreak and the course of the revolution with the social, economic, and
cultural changes of the preceding decades of 1848. Thus it is seen that
the revolutions in 19th century Europe were an episode within a larger
historical phase- that of the transition towards industrialization and a
market-oriented agriculture.

INTERPRETATIONS/NATURE OF THE REVOLUTIONS –

Sperber offers three major interpretations of the Revolutions of 1848 -

1. Describes the revolution as the "romantic revolution". Attention was

focused on the heroic deeds of individual great figures, such as
Garibaldi, Kossuth and Daniel Manin.
2. The second interpretation, a darker one sees the revolution primarily as
a farce, in which the revolutionaries were "incompetent dilettantes" and
cowards who ran from the scene when things took a disadvantageous
turn.
3. Considered the most substantial by Sperber, this interpretation directs
attention to the failure of the revolution to establish new regimes owing
to the counter revolutions. It is seen that after a short period of time, the
authorities who were overthrown in the beginning of said revolution
had regained their power.

Some follow a Marxist analysis and emphasize differences in class formation

and class struggle, while others look to sociological modernization theory to
explain the failure of the revolution, while yet others point to differing
diplomatic configurations and military initiatives of insightful generals.

The new approach changed focus and moved away from the revolutionary
parliaments and the capital cities to the towns to the less emphasized
uprisings and civil wars of 1849 and 1851, while also looking at local activists
and peasants instead of the romantic national leaders. This new interpretation
inquires into the nature of political organization and agitation during the
revolution, as well as discussion of the forms and symbols of a political
activity, both peaceful and violent. Also in this interpretation is an attempt to
connect the outbreak and course of the revolution with the social, economic
and cultural changes of the preceding decades.

CAUSES –

Scholars have unanimously agreed that the revolutions of 1848 were a

culmination of a series of crisis- economic, social and political- which occurred
in the late 1840s. Price suggests that it is useful to maintain a balance between
the background factors—the preconditions and the actual precipitators of
revolution.

Economic Crisis –

 The economic crisis of the years 1845-47 which was combined the
features of a pre-industrial subsistence crisis with the sort of
overpopulation-under consumption crisis.
 The impact of poor cereal harvests together with potato blight created
conditions of near starvation. There was a rise in food prices in most of
Europe, leading to strikes, demonstrations and ‘food riots’ in France and
Germany.
 Employment in urban and rural industries declined as factories
collapsed. There was an acute credit crisis and the poorer people were
forced to borrow money and incur huge debts.
 Population pressure on the resources of agriculture, the decline of rural
industry and the competitive character of early industrialization had
 created widespread misery for the poorer classes. It was in this
environment that the revolutions of 1848 had occurred.

Social Tensions –
 The first half of the 19th century saw a growing number of civil
servants, lawyers, doctors, journalists and businessmen who felt
alienated from the existing political order. Economically frustrated due
to the lack of job opportunities, these members of the educated
bourgeoisie demanded a greater role in the decision-making process.
 They reacted against the monopolization of power by the nobility and
the restriction of the franchise to the propertied and wealthy classes.
They agitated for the end of arbitrary government, a wider share of
political power through parliamentary governments along with the
guarantee of individual freedom and the rule of law.
 One also saw the radicalization of workers as well as a lower middle
class or petty bourgeoisie with democratic and socialist ideas gaining
popularity. The crises of 1845-48 saw a series of strikes,
demonstrations and food riots indicating the politicization and
mobilization of the working class.

State Aggravation –
 According to Sperber, the first half of the 19th century witnessed an
escalation in the demands of the state in terms of taxes, recruitment in
the army etc. The attempts of the state to pump more resources from a
population whose living standards were already declining only
aggravated political discontent.
 A combination of escalating demands, a lack of adequate means of
coercion and a decline in popular legitimacy brought about the
Revolutions of 1848.

Demands for National Unification –

 In the late 18th century, nationalistic sentiments had grown as a more
widespread movement against political domination. In Germany, the
threat of French domination helped to stimulate a national
 consciousness as moderate liberals petitioned the rulers of the German
principalities to create a larger pan-German union.
 The demand for a political order that recognized and promoted their
national identity fused with the campaign for greater representation
and deriving its momentum from the radicalized lower classes, there
was a general upsurge against the old order in 1848.

COURSE –

There were many large revolutions throughout Europe, of which almost all of
them failed. The revolutions began in capital cities and urban centers-the hub
of economic growth and political change and subsequently moved on to other
towns and rural areas.

France –The revolutions first started in France where the people wanted
universal suffrage. When Guizot, the premier banned a national campaign for
electoral reform to be held on 22 nd February in Paris, the radicals called for a
protest demonstration and sporadic violence occurred. The next day the
National Guard refused to disperse the demonstrators by force and thus made
their support for reform clear. The King, Louis-Phillipe dismissed Guizot and
that evening among continuing protests, troops fired on the crowd. This
enraged popular opinion leading to a mass insurrection. The king abdicated
and the revolution established the second republic. Thus the regime lost
confidence and a Provisional Government was set up. The February revolution
in France gave ideas to other countries in Europe which in turn started other
revolutions.

Germany- Discontent was widespread and the February revolution in France

spread rapidly into the German states. In Berlin, demonstrators agitated for
liberal political demands and in favour of German nationalism. After the
spread of protests the King, Frederick IV introduced a more liberal cabinet
and agreed to the establishment of a constitutional monarchy. However as in
Paris, the shooting of civilians by troops drove the situation out of control. The
revolution in the German states had not only shaken Berlin and other capital
cities but had reached the countryside as well.
Austria-A crisis built up within the Austrian empire as there was increased
Nationalism among the Czechs, Hungarians, and other groups. Encouraged by
the liberal reforms which had taken place in France, the Austrians wanted to
replace the Emperor’s present counselors and restore confidence between the
monarch and his people. They wanted constitutional reform, the complete
emancipation of the peasantry, greater efficiency in the administration and to
establish a United Diet in which both peasants and middle classes would be
represented. On 13th March a large crowd in the Imperial Habsburg capital of
Vienna began demonstrating and demanded reforms. After days of disorder,
the king felt obliged to accept the resignation of Metternich, the symbol of the
Old Order and to promise a liberal constitution. Soon after Emperor
Ferdinand I left Vienna fearing an attack from the revolutionary workers and
students.

Italy- The revolutions of the Italian states brought insurrections against

Austrian rule in Lombardy and Venetia and against conservative regimes in
the other states, notably the Papal States. 18th March, a revolt against Austrian
rule began in Milan and a crowd of 10000 people presented a petition calling
for liberal reforms and five days of bitter street fighting followed. The pporly
armed people drove away the army of the Austrian commander Joseph
Radatzky who withdrew his troops and retreated to a fortified belt. These
revolts forced the leaders to establish the constitutions of the revolutionaries.

‘SPRINGTIME OF THE PEOPLES’

 In ‘The Age of Capital’, Hobsbawm refers to the events of 1848 as the

‘springtime of the peoples’.
 According to Roger Price, by 1848 the material for an explosion across
central and Western Europe was ready – the slightest event could have
triggered the fall of any of the governments of the ‘revolutionary zone’.
The triggering event, as it happened, was the repression in Paris in
February 1848 to demand greater political representation.
 The following months were a time of great hope and optimistic
confusion. While the revolutions were largely concentrated in the cities,
the most remarkable thing was the extent of popular participation.
  Despite his Marxist inclinations, Hobsbawm rightly describes the events
of 1848 as the creation of the workers, petty bourgeoisie and the
labouring poor. Despite popular support (or perhaps because of it) the
revolutions of 1848 were remarkably short-lived and were defeated
everywhere by September 1848. The revolutions were all too brief
and failed to achieve much.
 Thus the initial victories of the 1848 revolution were very short lived.
To say that these revolutions were the ‘spring times of the people’
would therefore not be an entirely valid point. The revolutionaries were
unsuccessful in creating new regimes; and the old authorities returned
to power within a year or two. European states had become even
stronger after the Revolutions of 1848.

CAUSES OF THE FAILURE –

 The immediate aftermath of the revolution entailed the problem of

establishing the membership and authority of the new
governments and to define constitutional settlements. In France the
provincial government which had emerged was divided socially,
politically and personally. The men lacked governmental experience and
opposed the monarchy because they wanted to bring forth social reform
measures. However they did not want to alter the existing social system
significantly. The situations were similar in Austria and the German
states.
 While analyzing the reasons for the subsequent failure of the
revolutions of 1848, historians have often posed a crucial question as
to why the revolutions of 1848 had a different outcome from those of
1789 or 1917. The answer given by the historians for the failures of the
revolutions of 1848 is that the revolutionaries weren’t revolutionary
enough. They lacked the enthusiasm displayed by their Jacobin
predecessors and Bolshevik successors.
 Sometimes it is also attributed to personal failures of revolutionary
leaders who made tall claims but weren’t daring enough to carry out
required actions and/or bloodshed.
 In Marxist understanding, the failure of Revolutions 1848 is attributed
to specific social and economic developments. The revolution led to
renewed economic crisis. In each of the states affected by the
revolution, there was a move towards avoidance of violence. There was
political factionalism where prominent families sought to take
advantage of a fluid political situation in order to secure administrative
office to increase their influence. There was widespread disorder and
protest by peasants and workers alike. This was even more than the
chaos during the revolution. As a result, the new liberal administrations
frequently were forced to employ the existing state apparatus to restore
order.
 According to them, the revolutionaries of 1848 weren’t successful in
mobilizing popular support. The middle class revolutionaries were
scared of the extent to which the masses might have gone. As a result,
the middle class revolutionaries only made half-hearted efforts and
were willing to make compromises with the pre-1848 authorities.
 However Sperber points out that there weren’t really great points of
differences between the situations that prevailed during the
revolutions of 1789 and 1848 respectively. He also argues that the rise
of a working class doesn’t adequately explain the failure on the part of
revolutionaries to mobilize masses. He elaborates this argument further
by pointing out that in mid 19th century southern and eastern Europe
there was no industrialization or labour force; even central and western
Europe, it wasn’t the labour force but largely the craftsmen who had led
the rebellions.
 In comparison to the powerful and loyal military support that the rulers
possessed, the revolutionaries were rendered weak by the
deficiencies seen in tactical leadership. The counter revolution was
thus successful in suppressing the revolutions of 1848.
 The development of politics of nationalism in 1848 had its own
implications. Sperber throws light on the fact that these revolutionary
nationalisms clashed with each other. And rather than radicalizing the
revolution, it weakened them.
  The high hopes of the revolutionaries of 1848 were shattered because of
the different aims and a split between liberals and radicals. The
conservatives and Moderates stressed the need to restore social order.
But the Radicals insisted that the state should intervene in the economy
and that it should recognize the right to work.
 Thus there was a lack of consensus amongst the revolutionaries.
This enabled the success of the counter revolution in the Habsburg
monarchy, the German and the Italian States. Less skilled workers
generally lacked a strong sense of commitment and showed little
interest in the democratic or socialist ideas. For them, what mattered
the most was economic security. And it was the programme of radicals
that appealed the most to the workers and lower middle class. But
overall, it was the conservatives who garnered the support of the
majority of population. The conservative propaganda presented the
radicals as engaging in nothing but murder and looting and plotting to
destroy the society. The conservatives and the established elites were
advocating the need for peace and social order-the prerequisites to
economic recovery. This appealed to the middle class; they were
frightened by the radicalist propaganda which they saw as a threat to
their property.
 Price suggests that it was the combination of this increase in the
influence of the conservatives along with the existence of the strong
military support that the counter revolutionaries had that led to their
success. And this translated to the ultimate defeat of the revolutionaries.

COUNTER REVOLUTION/ IMPACT OF REVOLUTIONS ON THE POLITICS OF

EUROPE –

The old social elites in Europe had soon recovered from the disasters of the
Revolutions of 1848. The revolutions generated resistance almost
immediately from the political and social forces. The counter-revolutions
carried out by the rulers with the aid of the nobles left parliaments and
assemblies with little or no effective powers. The demands that were made
included universal male suffrage, freedom of press, constitutional
governments and larger participation of the public in administrative affairs.
Even though some of them were fulfilled, most of these concessions were
withdrawn sooner or later.

One has to bear in mind that the accomplishment of the revolutionaries in

terms of setting up constitutional governments didn’t last long. While the
kingdoms of Prussia and Piedmont-Savoy retained their constitutional form of
government, the Two Sicilies, the Papal States and the Austrian Empire had
gone back to absolutist rule. More or less, the ultimate success of the counter
revolution throughout Europe was aided by the mixed aims of the
revolutionaries.

France – In France, the political crisis intensified as the provisional

government faced competing demands. On 15 th May, an attempt by the
political clubs to dissolve the Assembly and declare a social republic of the
people failed. After days of tension, the Assembly finally declared on June 23 rd
that the National Workshops would be closed in three days. Workers aged 17-
25 were given the option of enlisting in the army, and others were promised
public works in the provinces. The workers associations protested vigorously
and rose up in rebellion. For three days the June Days raged in the workers’
quarters of central and eastern Paris. General Louis Cavaignac put down the
uprising with brutality. Thus the process of counter revolution began with
repression of the June insurrection after which the Assembly immediately
passed legislation to curb popular political movements. The new republican
constitution instituted elections in November 1848. Louis Napoleon
Bonaparte, nephew of the great Napoleon Bonaparte became the President of
the second republic.

Germany – In the German states, liberals and radicals gradually split as

conservative forces gathered momentum. The spread of democratic clubs and
workers’ associations was evidence of widespread politicization and
mobilization of support for the left. Frederick Wilhelm’s refusal to recognize
the Imperial Constitution prepared by the Frankfurt assembly led to
widespread protests organized by popular political societies. The only chance
for the constitution to survive was to convince the King of Prussia to become
king of a unified Germany. Before the Prussian parliament could approve the
constitution, the king dissolved it and declared a state of emergency. The
Frankfurt parliament which embodied the hopes of German liberals and
nationalists ended in abject failure.

Austria –The confusion of competing national claims and rivalries within the
monarchy eased the task of counter revolution within the Austrian Empire.
The aristocratic army commanders like Windischgratz, Schwarzenberg,
Radetzky and Jelacic played a crucial role in the restoration of the imperial
authority. When workers rose up in arms to protest against the shutting down
of the national workshops (which had been established to provide work to
unemployed), Ferdinand sent the bourgeois National Guard to crush the
uprising. The establishment of the ‘Bach system’- a system of bureaucratic
surveillance, spying and repression- helped in rooting out the political
opposition.

As far as the impact of these revolutions on the politics of Europe is

concerned, as J. Merriman points out, European states had become even
stronger after the Revolutions of 1848. Counter revolutions carried out by the
various states had succeeded in crushing the rebellions. However, even
though the state machinery of repression was kept well oiled, certain
concessions were made as well.

SIGNIFICANCE/LEGACY OF THE REVOLUTIONS OF 1848 – Although the

Revolutions 1848 ultimately failed, they left crucial political legacies.

 It has been pointed out by scholars that these revolutions inaugurated

the trend of mass politics. While most of the goals of the revolutionaries
were centered around the demands of the middle class or the
bourgeoisie, popular demands for universal male suffrage and rights for
women were made as well.
 This period witnessed the formation of different political groups -
the moderates, radicals and the conservatives. The counter-revolution
had ensured the suppression of committed republicans, nationalists and
socialists. Most of them were exiled to different places. Thousands of
 Frenchmen were exiled to Algeria, while German and Italian political
exiles emigrated to America.
 The revolutions of 1848 marked the first time workers put forward
organized demands for political rights.
 There was a substantial growth in tension between the various ethnic
groups inhabiting Central and Eastern Europe. There was an increased
hostility towards the Austrians in Italy and greater Austro-Prussian
rivalry for influence in Germany. In this context, it can be said that the
revolutions of 1848 form the backdrop against which the sentiments of
Nationalism had emerged. Thus, Nationalism, although far less intense
during the course of the revolutions of 1848, was a development which
gained growing importance in the German and Italian States.
 Roger Price asserts that the wars of the second half of the 19 th century
were themselves a legacy of 1848.
 The most significant legacy of the revolutions of 1848 was the end of the
ancien regime. The abolition of serfdom, feudal system and other
seigneurial institutions relieved the peasantry from their obligations
towards lords.
 Lastly, as an outcome of these revolutions, there was a stimulation of
the political awareness of the general masses. More number of people
were now beginning to see the relevance of politics to their daily lives.
There was an explosion of political participation and different ways of
organization- elections, petitions, demonstrations, public meetings and
newspapers- all played a very significant role in the due course of the
revolutions. In these respects, the diverse institutions and policies
which the modern state follows in varying combinations too is a legacy
left behind by the revolutions of 1848.

In conclusion, it can be said that even though the victories of the revolutions
of 1848 were short lived (since they were suppressed by the state-led
counter-revolutions), they were significant accomplishments in their own
right. The revolutions of 1848 opened up a new chapter in the history of
modern Europe. It marked the beginning of mass politics and it was during
this period that the nationalist politics that shaped the events of Europe in the
subsequent years took birth.