How important were the German princes in creating the atmosphere within which Lutheranism was successful? The German princes were essential for creating the atmosphere in which Lutheranism was successful between 1521 and 1555 because they maintained Luther’s teachings, making it a reality. Also they obtained military authority over Charles V who at this time, was a new, inexperienced emperor and also had major influence over Charles power due to the fact they were the ones who elected him. This proved useful at the Diet of Worms in 1521 when instead of Luther being issued full excommunication, instead he was offered a full hearing and this was all down to princely support. By 1531 the Schmalkaldic League was set up as a united defence alliance by protestant princes in response to Charles’s threat of eradicating Lutheranism.
Rise of German Nationalism Essay Nationalism: the idea that people sharing the same language and culture should be ruled by their own government. This is largely a concept which developed in Europe during the nineteenth-century. National consciousness grew throughout Europe, particularly in the 'German states', as people were united together in a common feeling of resentment against the French. The Napoleonic Wars and the French Revolution encouraged new political ideas such as Liberalism, which unwittingly promoted nationalism. This was because the new middle class that had emerged in the 'German states', from industrialisation, wanted political representation, and felt that it could only be achieved in a united Germany.
The aim of this foreign policy was to spread German influence throughout the world, the meaning of which is interpreted differently by different people. ‘Weltpolitik’ meant colonial expansion to the armed forces, and ‘Lebensraum’ (living space) throughout Europe to the Pan-German League. These promises made by ‘weltpolitik’ can easily be interpreted as aggressive, and this view is supported by Corrigan who says ‘At least as early as 1906, Germany had in place a plan for an
Some historians such as Lipson and Passant have argued that the Zollverein became an integral tool in the coming of German unification, and the part it played in breaking down the traditional state boundaries which in turn led to unification. Lipson indicates that the Zollverein built the foundations for a united Germany, and writes; “Economic unity paved the way for political unity, and community of material interests stimulated the growth of national feeling and fostered national consciousness.’1 Lipson argues that the Zollverein acted as a tool that would unite Germany economically at first, but in time it led to political and eventually total unification. When the Zollverein came into establishment on the 1st January 1834 it brought together 18 states with a population of 26 million people, all unified under the terms of free trade; tariffs were to be the same across all frontiers. We can see how the Zollverein began to unify Germany because by 1837 all of the southern states were sharing the same currency, the florin, and that by 1844, almost all of Germany, bar Austria and three other states, were unified. Bowring can be seen supporting Lipson’s argument by writing in 1840, “In fact the Zollverein has brought the sentiment of German nationality out of the regions of hope and fancy into those of positive and material interests.2” Here Bowring agrees with Lipson’s statement that the creation of the Zollverein brought about the first form of German unification by breaking down the stately barriers that had previously hindered unification.
To what degree of success and failure self-determination had shaped the Middle East in the 20th century all depends on the definition of ‘self-determination’. Self-determination, as I will use it in this essay is the vigor with which nations of the Middle East, or the former Ottoman Empire, attempted to preserve age-old traditions, languages and practices while all the while modernizing their society to match that of Europe and the United States. With the context of ‘self-determination’ established, it’s safe to say the Middle East was overall successful at keeping it’s traditions intact but was ultimately unable to move their civilization forward and in the end, was smothered by foreign influences. The Ottoman Empire originated in 1451 and was at the peak of political and economic power during the century that followed the reign of Mehmed II. New conquests extended its domain well into central Europe and throughout the Arab portion of the old Islamic caliphate, and a new amalgam of political, religious, social, and economic organizations and traditions was institutionalized and developed into a living, working whole.
Yet on the other hand he helped to promote the modernization of Germany and was responsible for a social welfare system, which gave working people some limited stake in the survival of the Empire. The year 1871 marked a significant change of direction for Bismarck. Bismarck 'the Disturber of the Peace' became Bismarck 'the Sober, Moderate and Conservative Statesman'. In his own words, 'Germany is a satiated power'. Hereafter he was primarily concerned with consolidating the newly unified Germany.
Contrasting this bleak view of the middle class is Joseph Stella’s The Bridge (Doc. B). By illustrating the Brooklyn Bridge similar to a stain-glass window, Stella emphasizes his quasi-religious love for the technological developments of the middle class of the era. The Brooklyn Bridge was built in the late nineteenth century and was widely regarded as a marvel. Religion also provided a stage for new and old ideas to collide.
What exactly does ‘the age of technological reproducibility’ mean to art? Benjamin goes through these questions referring to a constellation of concepts like ‘aura’, ‘authenticity’ which eventually drives to the area of mass and politics. Although Benjamin’s intention might be throw a new conception of art under the new age, the writing has more confound meaning of what new technology especially the technology of reproducibility has brought changes to other aspects of society. In the end, Benjamin gives a discussion of Fascism Aesthetic and war and it seems strange that he jumped from art to war. But taking the whole background into consideration, it makes good sense that Benjamin ends his essay in this way.
Title: Zollverein and German Unification: To what extent did the Zollverein promote a sense of national unity within the German Confederation prior to German Unification in 1871? Author: Elias Kühn von Burgsdorff Date: November 2011 Institution name/journal where submitted: McGill University The use of this database indicates agreement to the terms and conditions Academia is a database that promotes the free exchange of exceptional ideas and scholarly work, setting a platform on which to foment and improve student discourse Introduction The formation of a unified German state in January, 1871, out of a once divided agglomeration of various political entities, marked an end to the post-Napoleonic era by finally out-and-out abolishing the statusquo ante. This re-definition of the ‘Concert of Europe’ in 1871 had followed a phase in which its prior definition, drafted at the Congress of Vienna in 1815, had become blurred. And it was in the context of this disillusionment the European Great Powers now felt with the earlier system that certain aspirations which would significantly alter the European balance of power, such as aspirations for German nationhood, could realistically be materialized. The achievement of creating a unified German state in 1871 was the outcome of numerous forces: social, economic and political; both domestic and foreign.
e) Out of the Volkish Movement came the Thule Society, a Volkish movement that dotted German Landscape. This became useful to the early founders of NSDAP. f) Thus instead of NSDAP being a direct reaction to being betrayed or to the Treaty of Versailles. The NSDAP may be traced to the attempt by German Military and Industrial leadership to manipulate labor in support of the war effort. 2) 1915: Hugenberg established the Petitions of The Six Associations and of the Intellectuals who represent the war