The Frankfurt Connection: The 1848 Revolutions

Flickerings of Life in Athens: The New King of Greece, 1862-1864
While dramatic changes had occurred within Europe's central heartlands, the small and often forgotten Balkan region, provided further evidence of the great changes sweeping the continent. The Greeks, after three decades of inertia overthrew the Bavarian monarch Otto in the Christmas of 1862, with the possibility that his brother Luitpold succession to the throne vetoed by both the Greek parliament and the Great Powers, initiating a continent wide search for a monarch that would be acceptable to the Great Powers and Greeks. While the Greeks strongly desired the Duke of Edinburgh, Queen Victoria's second son such a possibility was vetoed by the British. Having been rejected by Prince Albert's brother [1] and rejecting both the suggestions of the French and Russians [2], the Great Powers decided upon the thirty-one year old Swedish Prince August, Duke of Dalarna as the most neutral candidate of the several proposed. [3] August, following a meeting with a deputation of Greek parliamentarians accepted the crown in early July 1863 and was crowned in October of that year as King Nicholas I of Greece. Unlike his predecessor he made an effort to learn Greek and committed himself to the model of constitutional government of that of his brother Charles XV of Sweden. The king also began negotiations with the British over the Ionian Islands. [4] It was during the period of negotiations that Nicholas met Princess Helena, the fifth child of Queen Victoria, and the two were married in April 1864. [5] The marriage was popular within Greece and with the British royal family, who viewed Nicholas as a calm and steady influence. The king, with the support of the Greek liberals also sought to resolve the vexed question of the country's consitutional order, settling on a system based on the constitutions of Belgium, Denmark and Sweden, with the monarch's role significantly reduced in contrast to the previous constitution. The consititution repealed the previous article which declared that ministers were solely appointed by and responsible to the king, and introduced an article which obliged the king to appoint the cabinet in conformity with the will of the parliament. [6]

August_of_Sweden_%26_Norway_c_1870.jpg

King Nicholas I of Greece

After thirty years of veering between absolution and constitutionalism, "crowned democracy" it seemed had finally taken hold in the Hellenic Kingdom, with the promulgation of one of the most liberal constitutions in continental Europe at the time.

BRIEF NOTES

[1] Ernst II of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha was originally the main candidate approached, but his desire to retain his duchies as well as the Greek throne was rejected by the Great Powers out of hand.
[2] Henri, Duke of Amicale and a Russian prince were rejected for the same reasons as the Duke of Edinburgh.
[3] The list was eventually narrowed to candidates from Sweden, Denmark, Germany and Italy, with the Swedish Prince August eventually chosen due to his age and willingness to accept the throne. (He had also won the most votes of the suggested candidates in the constitutional referedum with 17.) The other candidates had included Amadeus of Italy, William of Denmark and the Count of Flanders.
[4] The Ionian Islands had long desired union with Greece, but had been a British protectorate since the Napoleonic Wars. The islands were eventually gifted to the Greeks in 1864 as a gift to the king and his British bride.
[5] Despite the age gap between the two (Nicholas was fifteen years older than his bride), the two were well suited to each other, with international observers noting they're close public and private relationship.
[6] This provision also reformed the parliament's composition with the senate (previously seen as a conservative break upon the more liberal lower house) reformed. The new senate
was composed of 120 members elected for a nine-year term, but its synthesis was renewed every three years by 1/3. At least 9/12 of the senators were elected by the people, 1/12 by the Parliament and the Senate in a common session at the onset of each Parliamentary term, whereas the remaining 2/12 were appointed by the king on the basis of a principle of representation of the professions. In the event of disagreement between the two chambers in the voting of a law, the Constitution established the supremacy of the Parliament's vote.
 
Last edited:
Great TL which has received far too little feedback so far.Your Gagern is a genius!I am particularly curious as to Austria-hungary's alternative development.
 
Good history so far, you see the steps for the next European war. We will have nations achieve victory.

I'm glad you like it, though I haven't thought that far ahead yet! At the moment, the main aim is to demonstrate that an earlier, more liberal German unification is more possible than the implausible pipe dream it's often held to be, and to ensure that such a development remains firmly plausible (I don't want to get into full fledged Kaiserreich wank mode ;))
 
Great TL which has received far too little feedback so far.Your Gagern is a genius!I am particularly curious as to Austria-hungary's alternative development.

I should probably start shamelessly self-promoting my work more! Gagern is an interesting historical figure, since he emerged during the Frankfurt Parliament as one of the few politicians with a clear agenda for what the imperial constitution should look like, and what it's relationship with Austria should be. He was also a lawyer and Napoleonic Wars veteran, and IOTL later served as the Hessian envoy to the Austrian empire. One of those figures who I've always thought would be interesting to have in a timeline.

As for Austria, I will focus on the Habsburgs at some point, as well as the Russians and the Ottomans and their respective development following the Great Crimea Impasse (as it came to be known in sections of the British Press ITTL.) I'll also do some further posts on the differences within European colonisation, changes in the Americas, developments in Asia and the Pacific and the Great Dash for Africa.

I'm currently working on a map of Europe for the start of the 1860s at the moment.
 
A few thoughts with a clear Danish victory in the 1st Schleswig War, there's unlikely to be a second one, as a victory means that Schleswig gave been fully intragrated into the Danish state, while Holstein and Lauenburg stay duchies in union with Denmark. But as these duchies no longer are part of the German confederation , a future conflict are limited by several factors.

1: Schleswig now 100 % follow Danish succession.
2: If Holstein want independence it will get it, but Holstein want to stay in Union with Schleswig. So they will be forced to follow the Danish succession.
3:Without Holstein's membership of the German Confederation, there's no longer a casus belli for war with Denmark.

Beside that without the Danish defeat in the 2nd Schleswig War, we will see stronger pan-Scandinavism, so there's a good chance we see a Scandinavian Union.

Also I would suggest a small recon, historical Hamburg and the Mecklenburgs wasn't especially pan-German, so I would suggest these states plus Lübeck stay outside the united German state.
 
A few thoughts with a clear Danish victory in the 1st Schleswig War, there's unlikely to be a second one, as a victory means that Schleswig gave been fully intragrated into the Danish state, while Holstein and Lauenburg stay duchies in union with Denmark. But as these duchies no longer are part of the German confederation , a future conflict are limited by several factors.

1: Schleswig now 100 % follow Danish succession.
2: If Holstein want independence it will get it, but Holstein want to stay in Union with Schleswig. So they will be forced to follow the Danish succession.
3:Without Holstein's membership of the German Confederation, there's no longer a casus belli for war with Denmark.

Beside that without the Danish defeat in the 2nd Schleswig War, we will see stronger pan-Scandinavism, so there's a good chance we see a Scandinavian Union.

Also I would suggest a small recon, historical Hamburg and the Mecklenburgs wasn't especially pan-German, so I would suggest these states plus Lübeck stay outside the united German state.

Firstly thanks for the feedback, and I'll do my best to respond to your points.

The Danes win a clearer victory yes, but this was also the case in the OTL First War. The Treaty of London ITTL simply maintains the status quo: Denmark retains the duchies, but as they have a degree of autonomy there woul be resistance to attempts to integrate them into the Danish state.

Also, given the humiliation felt in Germany and the encouragement of a nationalist desire for revenge by the conservative government and elements of press, the desire for a second conflict with Denmark would esnure that relations would remain decidely tense. As the German Confederation doesn't exist the chances of war are less, but given the decidely ambivalent attitude towards the Danish state in the duchies an attempt to fully integrate them could spark conflict (though you're correct the chances are redeuced.) And in regards to the idea of a Scandinavian Union, it's a possibility but it's not something I've given much thought to.

With the Free Cities and Mecklenburg, I think they could exist in a looser form within the empire, but they would still be imperial states, since the empire offer's protection from being absorbed into Prussia. That and having a unified, relatively stable Germany would in my mind help overcome doubts towards the idea of a pan-German state.

Hopefully I've answered your points, though as I'm hoping to do some posts about the Habsburgs, Russians and the Ottomans in the near future, the Germans will take a back seat for the moment.
 
Austria should thank you for removing Franz Joseph. He like Tzar Nicholas II would have been more at home in the `18th century.
 
Austria should thank you for removing Franz Joseph. He like Tzar Nicholas II would have been more at home in the `18th century.
Comparing Franz Joseph to Nicholas? Really? FJ was a conservative, yes, but he also knew when to set aside his beliefs for the greater good. He never would have agreed to the compromise with Hungary, or worked to further integrate Poles into Galicia, otherwise. Plus, he got up every day from 3 in the morning to run his Empire, and heard petitions from commoners as to how to improve the Empire. He might have believed in divine right, but you could do much worse than Franz Joseph as an absolute monarch. To add to this this was his life since he was 18 years old, coming to power in the most unstable Empire in Europe right after a Revolution. He was selecting how to save his country when most of us were selecting fraternities. I think he worked harder at his job than any leader in history, and barring one big asterisk, (which was mostly Hotzendorf's fault) he did a great job. He was the opposite of Nicholas II, who inherited a rising Empire and ran it into the ground, who didn't want to be Tsar and took it out on his Empire.
 
Comparing Franz Joseph to Nicholas? Really? FJ was a conservative, yes, but he also knew when to set aside his beliefs for the greater good. He never would have agreed to the compromise with Hungary, or worked to further integrate Poles into Galicia, otherwise. Plus, he got up every day from 3 in the morning to run his Empire, and heard petitions from commoners as to how to improve the Empire. He might have believed in divine right, but you could do much worse than Franz Joseph as an absolute monarch. To add to this this was his life since he was 18 years old, coming to power in the most unstable Empire in Europe right after a Revolution. He was selecting how to save his country when most of us were selecting fraternities. I think he worked harder at his job than any leader in history, and barring one big asterisk, (which was mostly Hotzendorf's fault) he did a great job. He was the opposite of Nicholas II, who inherited a rising Empire and ran it into the ground, who didn't want to be Tsar and took it out on his Empire.
I appreciate your feedback. Perhaps I was a bit unfair in comparing Franz Joseph to Nicholas II. The terms of the 1867 ausgleich ceded too much power to the Magyar nobility. The Slovaks, Croats and non Magyar people of Transylvania were worse off under the rule of the Magyar elite. The compromise solved a iimmediate problem but caused long term problems.
 
The comparison of the two in the context of this timeline is something of a moot point given that Franz Joseph is dead and Nicholas II hasn't been born yet.

Seriously though, the assassination of Franz Joseph and the succession of the more liberal minded Maximilian doesn't suddenly transform the Habsburg state or it's foreign policy. History is littered with examples of well meaning liberal monarchs who were failures as monarchs: Friedrich III of Germany, Maximilian of Mexico, Louis-Philippe of France, Manuel II of Portugal... Franz Joseph was pragmatic enough to ensure the Habsburg state survived into the twentieth century despite the twin pressures of socialism and nationalism, but whether that makes him a great absolute monarch or not is up for debate.

Regardless it's all conjecture.
 
Also as I've mentioned that Bismarck is a newspaper editor in this timeline, and that Edgar Allan Poe both survives his mysterious illness and remains a novelist/newspaper writer who spends time in Munich in the 1860s and I'm thinking of doing some posts from both their viewpoints (i.e. a Bismarck editorial and a chapter extract from a fictional Poe memoir) about Germany in the 1860s.

Would people be interested?
 
I appreciate your feedback. Perhaps I was a bit unfair in comparing Franz Joseph to Nicholas II. The terms of the 1867 ausgleich ceded too much power to the Magyar nobility. The Slovaks, Croats and non Magyar people of Transylvania were worse off under the rule of the Magyar elite. The compromise solved a iimmediate problem but caused long term problems.
The compromise came in the wake of Austria being devastatingly defeated in the war with Prussia. Those immediate problems, if not solved, would have meant the end of the Empire more assuredly than any of the long term problems caused by the Compromise. I don't think that there could have been a better solution without civil war, and a civil war at pretty much any other time would have been more opportune for the Empire. But yeah, overall I think in terms of a ruler beliefs are only half the battle. People like Maximillian and Louis Phillipe were liberal but they simply weren't competant enough to make it work. Franz Joseph was competant in the diligent sense.
 
maybe german and french could ally in this case both regime were born in spring of nation and had many connection with germans, this rebellion is based on the French spring and Napoleon III was educate in germanic swiss, so maybe if they promise to let him buy Luxemburg he could hep them and he hate Austria so he would be happy to weaken them.
 

trajen777

Banned
Really a very good POD. It opens up some really interesting side notes:
1. Germans staying in Germany
In the United States census of 1990, 57 million people were fully or partly of German ancestry, forming the largest single ethnic group in the country. According to the United States Ancestry Census of 2009, there were 50,764,352 people of German descent.[1] People of German ancestry form an important minority group in several countries, including Canada (roughly 10% of the population), Brazil (roughly 3% of the population),[2] Australia (roughly 4.5% of the population),[3] Chile (roughly 3% of the population),[4] Namibia, and in central and eastern Europe—(Poland, Hungary, Romania, and Russia).
2. A significant number of these Germans left after the 1848 revolutions.
3. The Options for alliances -- Russia -- AH -- France (no war) -- Britain --
4. Colonies
 
Eisen und Blut: Observations of the Aftermath of a Liberal Victory in the German Elections of 1861
"The election of the Liberal Party and their cabal of economic interests is a sign that our great nation is headed for ruin. The Liberals are a mob of the democratic: they claim they wish to extend the promise of reform to those among our countrymen who live in filth and squalor among the endless black smokestacks of our cities, yet the condition of these wretches grows worse. They preach much about the spread of constitutional governance to the settlements in Africa, as if our place in the sun is worth the vast amount of expenditure wasted on it. Gagern, the great white priest of this nonsensical movement, may try to rein in these aspects of his movement but the charger has long since bolted. The failure to push through the military budget, that would provide our country with the means to wrest the duchies back to their rightful place within the German orbit. The position of Germany in Europe will not be determined by its liberalism but by its power. Germany must concentrate its strength and hold it for the favorable moment, which has already come and gone several times. Since the debacles of Vienna and London, our frontiers have been ill-designed for a healthy body politic. Not through speeches and majority decisions will the great questions of the day be decided—this is the great mistake of the Frankfurt Mob—but by iron and blood."

(Otto von Bismarck's editorial in Der Kürier, the leading conservative newspaper following the appointment of Heinrich von Gagern as Prime Minister for a third time in June 1861.)

"The return of Heinrich von Gagern was greeted with a sense of mild relief in the diplomatic circles that rippled and shaked in Frankfurt, if only because he offered a sense of the familiar. The tense compromise of the Catholics and the Junkers had dissipated into nothingness, the two sides circling each other like punch drunk sailors in a bar room brawl. I met with an American sailor who told me the mood in the northern port cities was ripe with tension: antagonism towards the Danes, anger towards the poor Polish migrants who strike out west in search of work. Said it reminded him of the rage that convulsed in Ohio in the 1850s. The Bavarians say that Gagern was persuaded to return to prevent the Liberals splitting into coffee house factions like the early days of the Frankfurt Parliament. In Munich, the attitude towards Frankfurt is one of decided hostility: they look to Vienna, it's squares and fountains offering hope of a return to the days of church, king and structured order rather than the constant wash of change which extends from the centre to the periphery. The country seems paralysed in a state of permanent tension, it's national tapestry becoming more moth eaten and thread bare."

(Extract from the diary of Edgar Allan Poe, an American journalist, author and critic who had relocated to Germany in the 1850s.)
 
Last edited:
"The return of Heinrich von Gagern was greeted with a sense of mild relief in the diplomatic circles that rippled and shaked in Frankfurt, if only because he offered a sense of the familiar. The tense compromise of the Catholics and the Junkers had dissipated into nothingness, the two sides circling each other like punch drunk sailors in a bar room brawl. I met with an American sailor who told me the mood in the northern port cities was ripe with tension: antagonism towards the Danes, anger towards the poor Polish migrants who strike out west in search of work. Said it reminded him of the rage that convulsed in Ohio in the 1850s. The Bavarians say that Gagern was persuaded to return to prevent the Liberals splitting into coffee house factions like the early days of the Frankfurt Parliament. In Munich, the attitude towards Frankfurt is one of decided hostility: they look to Vienna, it's squares and fountains offering hope of a return to the days of church, king and structured order rather than the constant wash of change which extends from the centre to the periphery. The country seems paralysed in a state of permanent tension, it's national tapestry becoming more moth eaten and thread bare."
On the upside, at least their anger is mostly directed towards Denmark, and not say, Russia.
 
The Midcentury Malaise: The Pessimistic Cultural Revolution in Europe and the New World
The political revolutions which had forged new nations, and forced a recognition of reformist agendas in the old European autocracies, also helped to create a new artistic culture, primarily centred in Europe, but whose effects were felt across the Atlantic and the frontier states of the New World. [1] This new culture was inherently political, and surprisingly pessimistic in tone though this of course varied from nation to nation. New political theories, such as those of Karl Marx and his associates in the Cologne School [2] focused on economics and produced numerous critiques of the Classical Model posited by thinkers such as Adam Smith.

While the Cologne School was breaking with economic orthodoxy, the artistic movements that began to emerge in 1848 offerred a revival of techniques and styles located in the Middle Ages. The Antiacademians [3], centred in London explicitly rejected the classical art style of the Royal Academy of Arts and its founder Joshua Reynolds, preferring instead to focus on medieval settings combined with the Romantic movement's focus on nature. The group caused controversy with their style, particularly their focus on realism in Biblical scenes which led many to accuse them of blasphemy. [4] The group, which had originally been seven expanded in this period as the American born artist Walter Deverell joined the group in 1850. With the support of noted critic John Ruskin, their influence would be felt across the United Kingdom with several artists combining their medieval romanticism with realism.

Literature also appeared to be changing, though in Britain the figure of Charles Dickens continued to dominate popular sales. The abolition of censorship in Germany and Sardinia, saw the emergence of a sharp edged satirism, as authors and humourists took advantage of the new liberties. The newspaper and periodical boom that emerged as a result of the liberalising of press laws in Germany gave a prominent platform to authors, though Goethian fiction still dominated culturally with Adele Schopenhauser's A Danish Story (serialised in Die Welt) becoming something of a cultural phenomenon in the infancy of the empire. [5] The new cultural freedom also encouraged a certain degree of experimentation particularly in music, as composers such as Franz Liszt [6] began to experiment with atonality (in Liszt's case with organ music.) Liszt's shift into unconventional piano compositions was perhaps exemplified with the music he created for the centenary of Mozart's birth in 1856.

The new air of freedom emerging from the post-revoutionary ether in Central Europe encouraged artistic emigration, particularly from the Anglosphere with the most famous, American journalist, author and critic Edgar Allan Poe moving to Frankfurt to take up a post with the American Consulate. [7] Other writers such as Mary Ann Evans (who became better known under her pen name Marian Pearson) established literary reviews in Geneva, which developed a flourishing literary scene as a result. [8] The shifting away from romance themes to realism became more prominent in the newly developing Geneva Circle, as writers and artists disillusioned with Britain's cultural convervatism began to move to the continent. [9] This trend of artistic emigration was not limited to Britain however: Harriet Beecher Stowe's Life Among the Lowly was first published in Britain to acclaim, which saw it serialised in several abolitionist magazines in the States. Herman Melville's The Whale, found a similar path to success, and indeed the trend became encapsulated by the establishment of a writing retreat in the Yorkshire Moors which became home to several American writers during the decade. [10] The trend of artistic emigration was not solely confined to the Anglosphere. Victor Hugo, French author, poet and dramatist went into exile in Brussels following the coup of Napoleon III, while Nikolai Gogol retreated from Russia and eventually settled in Copenhagen where he finished the manuscript of Dead Souls. [11] The decade would not be without tragedies however: the German composer Robert Schumann committed suicide in 1854, while the young Russian novelist Tolstoy was killed while serving in the Crimean War. [12]

The great demographic changes that had resulted from the rapid industrialisation saw new approaches to urban planning developed within Europe, some of which would later be exported to the New World. In Paris, the "Dictators of Architecture" began the process of greatly expanding the city centre through the demolition of the old medieval centre and it's replacement with a neo-Baroque style which saw the enlargement of public parks and the development of wide, spacious boulevards. [13] Napoleon III's plans for the renovation of Paris began to be studied in other European cities, as the influx of population placed strain on the traditional systems. The appalling industrial conditions inspired a general pessimistic trend in literature as the newly dominant realist approach saw the conditions of industrial workers and the urban poor described in great detail in the "social novels" of writers such as Dickens and Gaskell in Britain and Ludwig Feuerbach in Germany, who was one of the leading figures in the Cologne School. [14]

The increase in artistic experimentalism during the period was surprisingly reflected at the Universal Exhibition of Paris with "realist" artists such as Gustave Courbet having their work exhibited within, though public reaction was decidely mixed. [15] The period also saw an increased experimentation in the field of children's literature with Edgar Cuthwellis's novel The Adventures of Alice Under Ground introducing surrealistic elements into what had previously been a didactic genre. [16] Poe's work in detective fiction saw him create a new character in the form of Prefect Hoffmann of Mainz, as he further developed the genre he had created with the character of Dupin. Other writers in detective fiction included Wilkie Collins, who created the popular character of Anne Rodway, who became the first prominent female detective character in popular fiction. [17] However, while realism was emerging as the dominant literary trend of the period, it's unflinching attention to detail saw it prove controversial. Flaubert's novel Madame Bovary was banned in France for obscenity, with Flaubert moving to Switzerland as a result: the novel was eventually serialised in The Geneva Review [18]

The period was also noted for the further development of photography as a medium, particularly in the context of newspaper reporting, with photographs becoming a notable feature of wartime reporting, particularly in the American Civil War and the Russo-Turkish War of 1853-1854. Several art exhibitions of the period began to include photography as a medium, and the lapse of the patent on calotypes in 1854 saw the process become more economical, with photography increasingly becoming used as a medium of art. [19] Indeed photography aided several naturalists such as Darwin and Russell, whose theories of evolution proved highly controversial upon publication in the late 1850s, though it would prove to be hugely influential in fields of philosophy. [20]

BRIEF NOTES

[1] Particularly in "the settler states" of Australia, Canada and New Zealand where looser restrictions on censorship allowed for a flourishing cultural scene. The British territories in South Africa, received more mixed influences from the local Afrikaner community, producing what has been termed an "Anglo-Dutch" cultural movement.

[2] "The Cologne School" was a broad grouping of writers, philosphers and economists who centred on the figure of Karl Marx, who had returned to Germany in 1851 and established a small publishing house in Cologne. The school was famed for their critiques of traditional economics and industrial society, positing radical theories that linked them to the burgeoning socialist movement. The Marxians as they were known had strong links to the Hegelian school of thinking, with members of the Young Hegelians such as Arnold Ruge becoming prominent members of the group.

[3] The term "Antiacademian" was coined as a description of the group in a review by John Ruskin, and while they referred to themselves as the "Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood" the name stuck.

[4] The blasphemy controversy would seriously hinder the group with numerous galleries refusing to exhibit their works. Their championing by Ruskin eventually allowed them to overcome the controversy.

[5] Schopenhauser's success allowed her to recover from the financial problems which had plagued her since a banking collapse in 1819. The novel's success also marked a certain stylistic change as she adapted Goethian influences into tale of contemporary realism.

[6] Liszt's experimentalism made him a divisive figure, though his influence would be heard in the next generation of German composers through his influence as a music teacher in Weimar.

[7] Poe would continue to write while working in the diplomatic circles of Frankfurt, which would colour his later writings.

[8] So much so that some critics started to ostensibly refer to a broad "Swiss Guard" of writers, though in reality the literary group who made Geneva their home were fairly disparate in their styles.

[9] This cultural conservatism saw Samuel Roberts, a contemporary of Wordsworth and Coleridge named Poet Laureate in 1849 following Wordsworth's death.

[10] The small retreat near the spa town of Harrogate was owned by Nathaniel Hawthorne, and hosted several writers during the English Summer.

[11] Dead Souls and it's pointed satire of the Russian government made Gogol persona non grata with the Romanovs resulting in his soujourn in Copenhagen turning into permanent exile.

[12] Tolstoy's collection of essays about his experiences in the war, and his novel Boyhood were published posthumously.

[13] The architectural group were led by Haussman, and concentrated on modernising the city centre to alleviate the poverty and poor living conditions that blighted the French capital.

[14] Feuerbach's explicit rejection of religion and promotion of atheism made him a controversial member of the group, though his views meshed with those of Marx.

[15] Courbet's pieces were viewed with disdain by the crowds, and when he tried to establish an open air exhibition he was roundly booed.

[16] Cuthwellis, real name Charles Dodgson, was a mathemitician and photographer who associated with the Antiacademians. His depiction of a surreal world under ground world, and rejection of an explicit moral lesson made him something of a pioneer in children's literature.

[17] Rodway's character would become popular enough that Collins began to write a series of stories with her as protagonist making her an early pioneer for female characters in detective fiction.

[18] The Geneva Review was edited by Mary Ann Evans, who helped promote realist fiction which fell foul of the authorities in countries such as France and Britain which had strict anti-obscenity laws.

[19] Photography began to be used by established artists as well as newspaper's, and by the mid 1860s was firmly esablished a medium.

[20] Darwin and Russell's theories of evolution were swiftly adopted by anti-clerical and atheistic thinkers, as well as the exitentialists such as Kierkegaard and the Cologne School thinkers such as Feuerbach.
 
Splendid Isolation: The United Kingdom, Empire and Europe (1855-1866)
Lord_Palmerston_1855.jpg

Lord Palmerston (Henry John Temple), the dominant statesman of the period
The British had cautiously welcomed the liberal revolutions which had established new nations within Europe, which provided a useful counterbalance to any expansionism which could disrupt the European balance of power. [1] Following the collapse of the Graham government in 1855, Palmerston succeeded to the premiership heading a Whig government. [2] The new government found itself drawn into conflict in China, with resentment against the imposition of the "unequal treaties" resulting in a British boat being impounded and it's crew arrested in Canton, with the incident sparking a brief war which later involved French troops, as well as small forces from Russia and the United States. [3] The British bombarded the city of Canton and eventually entered after destroying the four forts that guarded entrance to the city. The conflict remained localised however, as both China and Britain found themselves facing large rebellions against their rule. [4] The conflict with China would end in 1858, following the occupation of Canton and the signing of the Treaty of Tientsin. [5]

Palmerston faced a more significant crisis in India, where long standing tensions and resentment towards East India Comapny rule exploded into open rebellion in the first months of 1857. The company's expansionist policies and probitions of Indian religious customs caused significant disquiet, particularly the openly preferential treatment given to Christian societies and converts, with many fearing that the British wished to forcibly Christianise the entire region. [6] The Company's taxation policies, particularly in regards to land, with many having their land forcibly seized and auctioned off, which caused deep anger and hostility towards the British in northern India, where the policy was most practiced. The Company, under the command of men who had nothing but distaste for India and the Indian people, had also alienated the troops under their command by reducing the powers of commanding officers and abandoning the adoption of local practices to foster morale. [7] British troops were stationed in India, though they were small in number, and several had been redeployed to the occupation of islands in the Persian Gulf following the Tehran incident and China to occupy Canton. [8] The resentment within the British Indian armies, was exacerbated by the abolition of the "foreign service" renumeration and their deployment to Burma, as well as the slow promotion process within the army, which had began to increase it's number of European officers to the detriment of local troops. This disquiet increased upon the introduction of new rifles, whose paper cartridges were rumoured to be greased with pig and cow fat, offensive to both Muslims and Hindus.

The rebellion began in Calcutta after an altercation between Mangal Pandey and his British officers over his refusal to follow an order turned into a mutiny, as a contingent of sepoys based Barrackpore fired upon their British officers. The British eventually re-established order, and hung the mutineer before disbanding and stripping the offending regiment of it's uniform, though this punishment of "shame and disgrace" was viewed as unduly harsh within the Bengal Army and further exacerbated the situation. The 3rd Cavalry, ordered to parade, refused to accept the cartridges and were sentenced to ten years hard labour as a result. Their successful escape from prison in Meerut and advance on Dehli, began the Bengal Army's rebellion.

The proclamation of Bahadur Shah II as Emperor of India, though whether he willingly accepted the offer of the crown or was coerced into it is still a matter of debate. Regardless, the uprising pushed the British back with significant outbreaks of unrest, and the killings of European civilians creating a storm of panic within the British press and parliament. Palmerston's slow reaction to the rebellion, and handling of the war in China saw him censured in parliament, to which he responded by calling a general election, which the Whigs went on to comfortably win. [9] Pamerston was able to force through several acts of parliament before the deterioating situation in India forced an opposition vote of censure supported by rebellious Whigs forced him to resign, whereupon he was succeeded by the short-lived ministry of Edward Smith-Stanley, the Earl of Derby. [10]

The war in India had now denigrated into widespread atrocities by both sides, as the Indian rebels and the British forces indiscrimately massacred civilians and destroyed settlements. While the British would eventually regain the upper hand, the bloodiness of the conflict left an indelible mark upon the British imperial psyche. The brutal reprisals committed by the British in response to reports of civilian massacres and mass rape European women, were decried in some elements of the British press and parliament and celebrated in others. [11] In the aftermath, the East India Company was abolished with the governance of India transferred to the British Crown. As a a result a new Indian Office was created, along with a Governor-Generalcy. The new office, under the direction of the British government aimed to resolve the tensions which had led to the outbreak of rebellion. [12]

Second_Earl_Granville.jpg

Lord Granville, first Liberal Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

Derby's minority government collapsed in early 1859, and was succeeded by Lord Granville as the first Liberal Prime Minister. [13] The new government covertly supported the Sardinian led invasion of Southern Italy, though officially they remained neutral following the French intervention. [14] Granville's ministry was frequently plgued by the conflict between Palmerstone and Gladstone who clashed over almost every issue. Palmerston's staunch support for a massive plan of coastal defence batteries was rejected by Gladstone as being too expensive, arguing instead that it would be a better idea to invest stongly in the navy. The long debate over the matter eventually led to a compromise, the Fortifications and Naval Defence (Provisions of Expenses) Act proposing to raise £9,000,000 in taxes to fund the construction of several coastal forts and investment in new naval technology and constructions. [15] Palmerston's foreign policy was primarily centred on forming a strong relationship with Frace, though the strong familial connections between the British and German royal families allowed for the development of cordial relations with the Germans. [16] Palmerston was a strong supporter of the expansion of British influence in Europe through the royal family, andd supported the foreign marriages of the Queen's children. Indeed, the period saw the first of several marriages between Victoria's children and foreign royalty. Victoria, Princess Royal married Prince Frederick of Germany [17] following seven years of courtship in 1858. This was followed by Princess Alice's marriage to William, Prince of Orange in 1862 [18] and the Prince of Wales marriage to Anna of Hesse and by Rhine in 1863. [19]

Granville's government passed several important legislative acts, including a reform and codification of criminal law in 1861 and companies law in 1862. Foreign policy in the period was dominated by debates over the tensions between the Danes and Germans over the question of Schleswig-Holstein and the American Civil War, with the British refusing to support the French plan to recognise the Confederacy or the French intervention in Mexico. [20] The tensions between the Danes and Germans finally came to a head in 1863 following the passing of a new constitution which formally annexed the territories to Denmark, outraging the local German population and the German government which declared it a violation of the Treaty of London and began massing it's forces on the Danish border, before invading in Spring 1864. The war and it's outbreak brought severe difficulties for Granville's cabinet, as the United Kingdom enjoyed favourable relations with both Copenhagen and Frankfurt. The government eventually decided to hold a conference to resolve the conflict between the two countries, wth themselves, the Austrians, French and Russians as mediators. The ceasefire, negotiated in June after the German army had rapidly advanced through the duchies, held for a month as the British brokered conference eventually reached a resolution. Schleswig would be partitioned between the Danes and the Germans with the territory north of Flensburg remaining in Danish hands, while the rest including Holstein and Lauenberg were integrated into Germany. [21] The resolution was a success for the British government, which had pushed hard for the partition plan, and as a result the Liberals increased their majority in both votes and seats. The government's response to the outbreak of Fenian violence in Canada and Ireland which saw the deployment of troops and shipments of arms to the Ontario government in Bytown [22]and plans to temporarily suspend habeus corpus in Ireland (strongly resisted by Home Secretary Lord Russell) were viewed in sections of the liberal press as overly draconian. [23] The government's cautious reform bill, introduced in 1866 proposed to enfranchise "respectable" working men, excluding unskilled workers and what was known as the "residuum", those seen by MPs as the "feckless and criminal" poor. This was ensured by a £7 householder qualification, which had been calculated to require an income of 26 shillings a week. This entailed two "fancy franchises," emulating measures of 1854, a £10 lodger qualification for the boroughs, and a £50 savings qualification in the counties. The bill was eventually passed, expanding the franchise, though it's cautious provisions drew opposition from more radical elements. [24] Plans to expand the franchise further, brought down the government as the party split, allowing the Conservatives to form a ministry in 1866.

Nevertheless, British party politics was to be forever changed.

(Extract from Radical Reform: The Liberal Governments of the Nineteenth Century, by R.H. Mumby)

BRIEF NOTES

[1] This pragmatic foreign policy which was committed to limiting expansion of any one great power within Europe, was adhered to by both Liberal and Conservative governments.
[2] The queen initially asked the Earl of Derby to form a government, but after he failed to garner enough support, Lord Lansdowne was asked but declined due to his advanced age. Due to her deep mistrust of Palmerston she turned to Russell who, like Derby as unable to form a ministry. It was then that Palmerston was invited to form a government.
[3] Following the execution of a French priest, and the threatening of Russian and American trade interests the Four Powers agreed to form a joint expeditionary force to protect their interests in China, following an agreement signed in Hong Kong. The majority of the force's troops were Anglo-French, though the U.S. provided three naval vessels and the Russians sent a small force of around five hundred men.
[4] The outbreak of rebellion in India diverted British resources to India, while the Qing were struggling to contain the Taiping rebellion.
[5] The treaty specified the opening of further Chinese ports to foreign trade, and the establishment of legations for the four powers in Peking, a city which had prevously closed to foreigners. Previous travel restrictions on foreigners were lifted, as were freedom of worship restrictions on Christian within the country.
[6] Whether the East India Company were planning to Christianise India is debatable, though the policy of overt preference towards Christian groups and the general air of religious intolerance encouraged by the company in it's attitude towards local practices certainly flamed the tensions within the region.
[7] The gradual hardening of rules around the fraternisation of native troops and British officers, and the decline in use of officers who spoke local languages further exacerbated tensions between the sepoys and their superiors.
[8] The Tehran Incident had seen British troops deployed to the Gulf following the diplomatic insult of the British ambassador to Persia, who had been accused of having improper relations with the sister of the Shah's principal wife. In response the British deployed two British regiments from India, occupying two islands in the Gulf until the matter was cleared with an official apology from the Shah.
[9] Palmerston's popularity with the wider public was generally held to have won the election for the Whigs.
[10] Derby's government, despite it's difficulty in governing was successful in forcing through necessary administrative reforms in India which abolished the East India Company and transferred administrative control to the British crown.
[11] Periodicals and the popular press frequently depiced the rebels as nothing more than barbarians, while isolated voices in both the press and parliament criticised the British reprisals as equally barbaric.
[12] The new Indian Office, established by the government to replace the East India Company, was given the power to set policy to be implemented by the Viceroy of India. Higher castes and rulers of the princely states were integrated into the government structure, while the civil service was opened to Indians. Relgious tolerance was reinstituted as was the general policy of decentralised government. The decision to open the universities to Indians further set a crucial precedent with Indians encouraged to participate in colonial government.
[13] Granville's cabinet contained what the conservative press would later nickname "The Four Horseman": Granville as Prime Minister, Gladstone as Chancellor, Palmerston as Foreign Secretary and Russell as Home Secretary. The factionalism amongst the government led many to describe the various factions as the "Her Majesty's Disloyal Opposition" with numerous governmental plans scuppered by cabinet infighting. Granville, despite this did managed to weld together a working ministry, though plans for suffrage reform were defeated by Palmerston's opposition.
[14] The emergence of a unified Italy in the Mediterranean was viewed favourably in London, for providing a useful counterbalance to potential expansion by Russia, France or Austria in the area.
[15] The report, sparked by a French invasion scare called for the establishment of forts and floating batteries around the coast. Enthusiastically supported by Palmerston, it was opposed by Gladstone on grounds of cost, and by the Admiralty who believed it would be more expedient to invest the money in improving the country's naval capacity. Eventually, Granville hammered out a compromise wherein half of the money would be spent expanding the naval bases at Portsmouth and Plymouth, while the remainder would be spent on investing in coastal defences. The act passed parliament, and the construction of "Granville's Gargoyles" began.
[16] Prince Albert's influence was strong in the cultivation of ties between the two nations, while the marriage of the Princess Royal and Prince Frederick of Germany in 1858 further cememted ties.
[17] The wedding was attended by the majority of both families, excluding the emperor who was incapacitated by his stroke as well as delegates from both government's. The match was popular in both countries, with photographic prints and other memorabilia of the wedding selling well in the UK.
[18] The marriage had largely been arranged by the Prince Consort and the Anglophilic Queen Sophie of the Netherlands, who wished to develop close ties with the British. The marriage also fell into the established policy of marriages within Protestant royalty.
[19] The marriage of the Prince of Wales had been the most difficult to decide. Alexandra of Denmark had been considered but was rejected by Queen Victoria. Anna of Hesse was favoured by Queen Victoria, despite the reservations of the Princess Royal. The two eventually met and developed a fondness for each other, with the Prince of Wales describing her as a "very amicable woman." The marriage partnered the somewhat wayward Bertie with the strongwilled Anna, much to the queen's satisfaction.
[20] The debate over the civil war split the cabinet with some favouring recognising the Confederacy, though Granville's cautiousness and Prince Albert's fierce oppositon to any recognition of the Confederacy ensured the British retained neutrality. The French expedition in Mexico was swiftly ended following the defeat at Puebla and the refusal of any elegible European prince to accept the proposed Mexican imperial crown, swiftly truncated French plans in the Americas, though Napoleon III maintained interests in the Empire of Haiti supporting he imperial government against an attempted coup in 1859.
[21] The long simmering tensions along the border between the Danes and Germans erupted following the annexation of the duchies under the new Danish constitution of 1863 which abolished the parliaments of the duchies and placed them firmly under the Danish sphere much to the anger of the Germans, who following an appeal from the duchies mobilised a force of some 40,000 men. Though these troops massed on the border, the conflict remained devoid of fighting. The troops finally crossed in February and were engaged in heavy fighting around the frontier between Schleswig and Holstein. The reforms introduced after the fiasco of the first war were clearly effective, with the federal army advancing into Schleswig by April. The British government brokered the Treaty of London, which partitioned the duchies with southern Schleswig, Holstein ad Lauenberg annexed to the empire. The Daes, wary that the Germans would invade and occupy Jutland, agreed to the British brokered terms with the border set north of the city of Flensburg.
[22] OTL Ottawa
[23] The proposal to suspend habeas corpus was rejected by the cabinet as an object which would unecessarily enflame pro-Fenian sentiment. The collapse of the Fenian brotherhood due to lack of popular support eventually rendered the proposal moot.
[24] The reform, despite being comfortably passed in parliament was attacked by Tories as too radical and by radicals as insufficiently radical, though it introduced the secret ballot and adjusted seat boundaries, as well as adding an extra million men to the voter roll.
 
Top