3/7/2010

AP
HISTORY, A DISCOURSE ON HISTORY – A FIFTH ANALYSIS
DR.LEWIS

AP History, Dr.Lewis | Peter Castoldi

Table of Contents

Question 61 – The Main Ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels .............................................................. 3
Question 62 – “The Atlantic Migration” – A Description, Causes, and Consequences; In Accordance to
Palmer, Colton, and Kramer ......................................................................................................................... 5
Question 63 – A Description of the Failure of the French “July Monarch” ................................................. 7
Question 64 – The Importance of the Year 1848, With Respects to European History ............................... 9
Question 65 – The Accomplishments and Failures of Napoleon III ........................................................... 11
Question 66 – The Austrian Empire and Ethnic Nationalism ..................................................................... 13
Question 67 – How and Why Alexander II Changed Russia ...................................................................... 15
Question 68 – The Russo-Japanese War, the 1905 Bloody Sunday Massacre, and the Connection to the
Russian Revolution of 1905 ........................................................................................................................ 17
The Russo-Japanese War ........................................................................................................................ 17
The 1905 Bloody Sunday Massacre ....................................................................................................... 18
The Russo-Japanese War, “Bloody Sunday”, and Their Involvement with the Russian Revolution of
1905 ........................................................................................................................................................ 18
Question 69 – How the 19th Century Italian Nationalist Leaders Brought Unity to Italy ........................... 19
Question 70 – The Importance of Otto Von Bismarck ............................................................................... 22
Question 71 – The Change of the Intellectual, Scientific, and Artistic Europe During the Late 19th and 20th
Centuries ..................................................................................................................................................... 24
Question 72 – Threats to Organized Religion and the Response from Catholics and the Church, In
Accordance to Palmer, Colton, and Kramer ............................................................................................... 27
Question 73 – The Root Causes of 19th Century European Imperialism .................................................... 29
Cause 1: Social Darwinism ................................................................................................................ 29
Cause 2: Religion ............................................................................................................................... 29
Cause 3: Money.................................................................................................................................. 29
Cause 4: Security and Rivalry ............................................................................................................ 30
Question 74 – The Causes of World War One............................................................................................ 31
Cause 1: Irreconcilable Hatreds: Germany v. France, England, and Russia ...................................... 31
Cause 2: The Momentum of Events ................................................................................................... 32
Question 75 – Why World War One was a Deadly War ............................................................................ 34
Figures and References ............................................................................................................................... 36
Figure One .......................................................................................................................................... 36
Figure Two ......................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure Three ....................................................................................................................................... 38
 Question 61 – The Main Ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels

A Brief Background on the Two Men

Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx were two of the most important men responsible for what was
(and is) commonly called “Communism”. Communism is a social structure in which classes are
abolished and property is commonly controlled, as well as a political philosophy and social
movement that advocates and aims to create such a society1. Engels was born in Germany into a
prosperous family due to the fact that his father had owned a clothing company, and Engels
showed a great interest in the field of politics. The other man responsible for this movement –
Marx – was, too, born in Germany (however his birth occurred two years before that of Engel’s)
and had a loving family, whose father was a convert to Protestantism.

The Communist Manifesto – “Working men of all countries, unite!”

Starting the birth of communism and what was known to be called “Marxism”, came the
advancement of an infamous book titled The Communist Manifesto – which was a work
collectively written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels and son published on February 21st,
1848. The work paved the foundation for the purposes and the various programs of Communism,
where it presented an analytical approach to the ever-stretching class struggle between the people
that follow the system of capitalism. “A spectre is haunting Europe – the spectre of Communism.
All the powers of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Pope and
Tsar, Metternich and Guiznot, French Radicals and German police-spies.” This is the beginning
to one of the most influential political documents in history, and in this document they presented
an opportunity to present a few basic points as to what communism (and it’s practices) are about
– these are mentioned below:
Communism – Round 1
The first point that these two men make is that all of history amounts to one thing: a large class
struggle. This meant that there are always the rich and there are always the well-to-do and there
are always the poor in society – this amounts to the fact that history has always been about those
who are more well-off beating upon the poor.
Communism – Round 2
The second point mentioned within the Manifesto is the conditions of the working class. It states
that the conditions for the working class were overall less than desirable – the workers were
poor, hungry, abused, and were not happy with their daily routines. It is mentioned: “Not only
are they slaves of the bourgeoisie class, and of the bourgeoisie states; they are daily and hourly
enslaved by the machine, by the over-looker, and, above all, by the individuals bourgeoisie
manufacturer himself.” (Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto)2.

1
Information Paired From Wikipedia – http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
2
Excerpt of Original Text can be found here - http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html
Communism – Round 3
The third point raised within this work is that the Capitalist state is the “arm” or an “extension”
of the bourgeoisie. This statement essentially elaborates on one that has been aforementioned in
regards to the Capitalists states caring more for the well-off than for those in the society who are
poor.
Communism – Round 4
Marx and Engels mention that these members of society – including the members of the working
class – are putting themselves in harm’s way, and are making them readily available for combat.
Communism – Round 5
Marx and Engels wanted a world – including their solutions – where the government would be
dedicated in helping the workers and helping the poor; therefore making the government an
“arm” or an “extension” of the proletariat and not an arm of the bourgeoisie. Also stated were the
ideas that all private property would be eliminated and the workers would be the ones who and
the factories and controlled the production within these factories; looking ahead: the short-term
effects of these ideals would lead to failure, due to the evolutions of 1848.
Another idea drafted by Karl Marx was Das Kapital, which was an idea based off of surplus
value – meaning that the worker would not be paid in full (Example: A worker works
approximately ten hours and receives compensation for only six of these hours) and the employer
would then take the surplus of this payment for personal gain and enrichment. Following this,
Marx and Engels created the International Working Men’s Association (also titled the Socialist
First International).
 Question 62 – “The Atlantic Migration” – A Description, Causes, and
Consequences; In Accordance to Palmer, Colton, and Kramer

Migration from Europe: 1850-1940

During the same period in which cities were growing, almost 60 million people left Europe
altogether, of whom possibly a fifth sooner or later returned. The Atlantic Migration – aptly so
called, because all crossed the ocean except those who moved from European to Asian Russia –
towers above all others in magnitude, and possibly also in significance, for it was by this means
that earlier colonial off-shoots of Europe were transformed into new societies that carried the
very strong influence of European political, social, religious, and cultural traditions. Below is a
chart that depicts the migrations from Europe occurring within the time span of 1850-1940:

Emigration From Europe, 1850-19403

From: British Isles 18,300,000
Italy 10,200,000
Russia 9,000,000
Germany 5,000,000
Spain 4,500,000
Austria-Hungary 4,200,000
Portugal 2,500,000
Sweden 1,200,000
Norway 750,000
Denmark 470,000
Finland 390,000
France 390,000
Switzerland 340,000
Netherlands 210,000
Belgium 150,000

The table above does not represent the real data amount – where as the data mount is
approximated, since in the statistical sources the English, Scots, Welsh, and Irish are mixed, and
until the First World War, that is until 1914, the Poles, Czechs, and other Slavic peoples,
Hungarians, East European Jews, and others were not counted as such but were included among
emigrants from the Russia, Austro-Hungarian, and German empires. The British and the Irish
went to the British dominions and the United States. The Italians divided between the United
States and Latin America. “Spaniards settler overwhelmingly in the Spanish American republics,
and the Portuguese settled in Brazil. The Germans moved overwhelmingly to the United States,
though some went to Argentina and Brazil” states Palmer, Colton, and Kramer. The new
countries received the following amount of inhabitants:

3
A History of the Modern World, Page 570 – “EMIGRATION FROM EUROPE, 1850-1940”
 Immigration Into Various Countries, 1850-19404
To: United States 32,300,000
Asian Russia 7,000,000
Argentina 6,600,000
Brazil 4,700,000
Canada 4,300,000
Australia 2,900,000
New Zealand 650,000
Uruguay 600,000
Cuba 600,000
South Africa 250,000
Mexico 250,000

Causes of “The Atlantic Migration”

The Atlantic Migration otherwise described as an “exodus” by Palmer, Colton, and Kramer; had
many causes. The first cause was that before the year 1914, the new countries welcomes
immigration. Hands were wanted to farm the land, build houses, dig in the mines and etc. and
this was especially true of Australia and New Zealand, which preferred to limit themselves to
English-speaking settlers and which also pioneered as social democracies. In Europe there were
many conditions which were propelling emigrants outward. “Physically,” continued Palmer,
Colton, and Kramer, the steamship made it easier and cheaper to cross the sea, and the railroad
helped people to get to the ports as well as to distribute themselves after landing in the new
countries. Economically, people in the mass could for the first time afford a long journey. People
migrated to improve their material circumstances; but some high points in the wave of
emigration coincided with high points in the business cycle in Europe, when jobs in Europe were
plentiful and wages were at their highest.
Freedom of Movement
However, but perhaps the most basic in the whole European exodus was the underlying
liberalism of the age: Never before (nor since) had people been legally so free to move. Old laws
requiring skilled workmen to stay in their own countries were repealed, as in England in 1824 –
says Palmer, Colton, and Kramer. The old semi-communal agricultural villages, with collective
rights and obligations, holding individuals to their native groups, fell into disuse except in
Russia. The disappearance of serfdom allowed the peasants of Eastern Europe to change
residences without obtaining a Lord’s permission.
The mass migration of the late 19th century thus launched a worldwide movement of people that
continues to the present day, grows in importance, and remains one of the most characteristic
social patterns of the modern world.

4
A History of the Modern World, Page 571 – “IMMIGRATION INTO VARIOUS COUNTRIES, 1850-1940”
 Question 63 – A Description of the Failure of the French “July Monarch”

A Brief Overview of 19 th Century European Politics

In order to understand how the “July Monarch” came into power and was instated, one must first
learn the background information that was instated prior to the Monarch – and this is where 19th
Century European Politics enters the discussion. When you think of politics in the 19th century,
one must think of enormous change – starting with the Industrial Revolution. Another change
included was the slow decay of the Age of Kings across most of Europe – so, that by the year
1900, Europe had become a more Democratic nation and Kings had either been appointed for
ceremonial purposes, or their powers were greatly reduced (in most countries), and as a result,
more people were allowed to vote5. In 1815, the Napoleonic Wars came to an end and the
Congress of Vienna was led by Metternich – who, which was his goal for the Congress of
Vienna, was to restore the balance of power in Europe – including the restoration of the “old
ways” in France. In addition, Metternich sought to stem the tide of Liberalism6.

Entering the July Monarchy

The Revolution of 1830 led to a new regime, known as the July Monarchy because of the month
of its birth. It was headed by Louis Philippe of the house of Orléans, who ruled from 1830 to
1848. His supporters in the Orléanist Party were largely drawn from the notable class of wealthy
landowners and businessmen. The Orléanists were prepared to endorse the political heritage of
1789 to the extent that they broke with the idea of divine-right monarchy and waved the three-
color flag created in the early 1790s. But they did not endorse popular democracy.
The Orléanist regime was challenged on the left by radical republicans and on the right by
former ultraroyalists, but it was devoted to maintaining political and social stability. It did so
with brute force, as when it put down revolts of the Lyonnais weavers in 1831 and 1834.
Although not marked by great new initiatives, the July Monarchy did pass a law in 1833 laying
the foundation for a national system of primary schools. The sponsor of this measure, François
Guizot, a Protestant, became chief minister in 1840, lending a slight anticlerical cast to the
regime.

Problems Begin to Form 7

Under the July Monarchy, the social problems arising out of the Industrial Revolution became
matters of increasing debate. The regime itself, however, tended to a laissez-faire, or hands-off,
policy and did little to solve social problems. Félicité de Lamennais, a philosopher who later
became a priest, led an ultimately unsuccessful campaign to interest the pope in the cause of
social reform. The left developed a number of sweeping plans of reform to save humanity from
the perils of modern industrial society. Among the more grandiose were the plans of Charles
Fourier and those of the followers of Saint-Simon. Fourier wanted to replace modern cities with
utopian communities, and the Saint-Simonians advocated directing the economy by manipulating
credit. Although few of these programs had much support, they did expand the political and

5
By the end of World War One, in most Western European countries, men and women had the right to vote
6
Liberal beliefs revolve around civil liberties (Freedom of the Press, and etc.)
7
“France.” Microsoft Student 2007 [DVD]. Adams, William James, Jordan-Bychkov, Terry G., and Kaiser
social imagination of their contemporaries, including a German-born exile in Paris named Karl
Marx.
They also increased dissatisfaction with the bland policies of the July Monarchy, and in 1848 the
regime was overthrown. An economic recession in 1846 and 1847 had already spread discontent
in the population. Then in February 1848 opponents of the regime provoked it into ordering a
crackdown on dissent. The government failed to master the situation, and crowds in Paris drove
out the king. Louis Philippe abdicated on February 24. A new republic was declared, a
provisional government was organized, and the call went out for fresh elections. France was once
again in revolution.
 Question 64 – The Importance of the Year 1848, With Respects to
European History

1848: Starting with France

France: From the July Monarchy to 1848
In the 19th Century, the French political system was much like the systems of other European
nations – there was the instating of education, laws, pensions, and more and many of these
“luxuries” aroused from Britain. What differed France from Britain, however, was the manner in
which items on the agenda were achieved; this being that France experienced tremendous
violence. The events that occurred in 1848 were similar to those in 1789: There was the
overthrowing of the government, unrest, inauguration, and the taking of power from a sole,
strong power – in this case, this man was Napoleon Bonaparte. Louis-Philippe was removed
from power (due to the fact that it was believe he was not tending to the needs of the people) and
because the French people were beginning to call Louis’ monarchy the “Bourgeoisie Monarchy”,
since he was tending more towards the well-to-do instead of the lesser-well-off in the society.
Much like the events of the Storming of the Bastille, on February 22nd, 1848, protestors took to
the streets – radicals, socialists, liberals – demanding voting rights and civil liberties. In
response, Louis-Philippe took a familiar course of action that was [previously] taken by
Napoleon Bonaparte by firing into the crowds of protestors. Unlike the outcome of the actions of
Napoleon, in response more protestors took to the streets leaving Louis-Philippe with no option
but to flee the nation of France in fear for his personal safety. Following these events, the Second
French Republic was established who took decisive action by instating universal male suffrage
(meaning men had the right to vote8 and the abolishing of slavery.

An Empire on the “Brink” – Austria

Austria was a large empire in central Europe by the Hapsburg family that seemed powerful and
prosperous in the 19th century. It was the second most populous nation in Europe; it contained a
large and strong military force, and they were ruled by an (overall) steady family – the
Hapsburgs. Austria had control over much of Italy – specifically Lombardy and Venetia and they
had indirect control over the Papal States. The Austrian Empire was very diverse, as seen by the
following statistics:

 Germans (35%)9
 Magyars (23%)10
 The Slavs that existed in the nation were consisted of the Czechs, Croats, and the Serbs
Due to its diversity in culture and population, the reason that this nation was “held together”
(figuratively speaking) was due to its tradition of the German Middle Class and the existence of
Catholicism. In 1848 Austria began to take note of the situations in France and people in the
nation (and others part of the Empire) began to mimic the actions of the French by protesting in
the streets during the events that were known as the March Days – and all were demanding forms

8
However, exceptions still did exist to this rule
9
Denotes a 35% portion of the population
10
Denotes a 23% portion of the population
of change throughout the Empire. In Prague, Slavic people demanded independence from
Austria. In Hungary, Louis Kossuth11 advocated for independence and stated that the people
must “break free from Austrian rule.” Violence also occurred in Italy when Sardinia invaded
Lombardy and Venetia because the kingdom of Sardinia was the only Italian-ruled territory left
in Italy and the mindset of the invasion was to tactically invade while Austria was pre-occupied
with other quarrels. All of these events begin to slowly tear apart the Austrian Empire.
The year 1848 would turn out to be one filled with bloodshed, revolution, and unification of a
nation – or, in some cases – many nations.

11
A Hungarian Nationalist
 Question 65 – The Accomplishments and Failures of Napoleon III

Forward: Napoleon’s Final Years

Before the dawn of the new power in France – Napoleon III, there was still the existence of the
ruler Napoleon Bonaparte, who proved to be a powerful adversary to other European nations
well up until the time of his death. Even in exile, Bonaparte did not give up and escaped with the
help of a few contacts: With the help of only a few men, Napoleon managed to escape from exile
and returned to the coast of France and proceeded to organize a military in hopes of some form
of support – some accounts call for a number that approximates to around 350,000 men.
Subsequent to a standoff with the current king of France at the time, Louis XVIII, Napoleon was
again arrested and placed under exile on the island of St.Helena where he later died.

After Napoleon Bonaparte: Napoleon III

After the death of Napoleon Bonaparte, in 1851, his nephew Louis-Napoleon III would take
power and come the transfer of power came the central word for France: Change.
Once Louis Philippe was ousted in 1848, Louis Napoleon renewed his quest by offering himself
as a candidate for the presidency of the new French republic. To the astonishment of political
veterans, he won in a landslide. His triumph was diminished, however, by a Royalist victory in
the legislative elections in 1849 and by the constitution's limiting him to one four-year term. He
resolved that dilemma by a coup d'état on December 2, 1851, assuming dictatorial powers and
extending his term of office to ten years. Despite continued pockets of opposition, clear evidence
of widespread popular support encouraged him a year later to convert the Second Republic into
the Second Empire; because Napoleon I's son had been known to his followers as Napoleon II,
Louis Napoleon took the title Napoleon III. Historians divide his reign into two periods. The
dictatorship persisted until 1860. During the dictatorship, Napoleon limited the freedom of the
press and the freedom of intellectual thought; he censored newspapers and exiled many writers,
including Victor Hugo, banning their works. During this period, opposition began to mount and
Napoleon was forced to limit his powers. After 1860, Louis Napoleon began a series of liberal
reforms that culminated in a limited monarchy, the Liberal Empire, on January 2, 1870. This
liberalization was marked by labor legislation, a movement toward free trade, and a revival of
opposition parties. In 1868 he granted freedom of assembly and loosened restrictions on the
press. Napoleon also greatly extended the French railways and tried to improve the conditions of
poor people. Perhaps Napoleon III's most durable work was the reconstruction of Paris, overseen
by urban planner Baron Haussmann.

A Success Short-Lived 12
His successes, however, were overshadowed by a foreign policy that was too often idealistic,
blinding the emperor to real dangers to French security. From 1854 to 1856 France joined
England, the Ottoman Empire, and the kingdom of Sardinia in the Crimean War fighting against
Russian advancement. In 1859 France went to war again with the kingdom of Sardinia in order
to oust Austria from Italy. Although France received Nice and Savoy in 1860 because of its
efforts, French intervention created other problems. The war was a costly one, and Napoleon had
not foreseen the possibility that Italy would unite in 1861, creating another European power with
12
Excerpts Taken From: “Napoleon III.” Microsoft Student 2007 [DVD]. Williams, Roger L.
which France must contend. In 1863 Napoleon encouraged Maximilian, the archduke of Austria,
to become emperor of Mexico. Angered by French intervention, the United States demanded that
the French leave. However, Maximilian did not leave and was killed by the Mexican
government. The threat from Prussia, in particular, was perceived too late and caught the French
unprepared in every respect when war came in 1870. Swift defeat in the field led to Napoleon's
capture, and his regime was overthrown in Paris on September 4, 1870. He died in exile at
Chislehurst, England.
 Question 66 – The Austrian Empire and Ethnic Nationalism

The Age of Nationalism 13

Nationalism became more prevalent in Europe and around the world after 1848. The supremacy
of the nation-state was gaining ground in organizing the political, social, economic, and cultural
activities of a group. Ethnic identities were central to the development of nationalism, which
should not be confused with patriotism, or the level of support for a nation-state. Referring back
to previous discussions, Louis Napoleon was the nephew of Napoleon (Napoleon I) who despite
defeat, exile, and death, was considered by the French to be one of their greatest leaders. Louis
Napoleon was elected president of France by a landslide in 1848, largely because of his
illustrious name. Between 1852, when he had proclaimed a Second Empire, and 1870, after
France’s ignominious defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, he had restored the economy, laid the
foundations for democratic reforms, and renewed the national pride of the French people.

The Austrian Empire in 1848 14

The Austrian Empire of the Hapsburgs, with its capital of Vienna, was in 1848 the most
populous European state with the exception of Russia. Its inhabitants were of about a dozen
recognizably different nationalities or language groups – Germans, Czechs, Magyars, Poles,
Ruthenians, Slovaks, Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Dalmatians, Romanians, and Italians. In some
parts of Austria these nationalities lived in groups, however in many regions two or more of
these groups were together with many changes to languages in households.
Out of all of these language groups, the Germans were the most numerous and they occupied all
of Austria and many parts of Bohemia – they could also be found throughout parts of Hungary.
The Czechs occupied Bohemia and Moravia, and the Magyars resided in Hungary. The Czechs,
Poles, Ruthenians, Slovaks, Croats, Slovenes, and Dalmatians in the empire were all Slavic
people; with reason being that their languages were respectively related to some forms of
Russian.
These groups had all felt the effects of the Volksgeist, cultural nationalism; and the Germans,
Italians, Poles, and Hungarians there was a great deal of political agitation and reforms were
afoot. The problem that was faced was the unification of these groups to one governmental
system and the obstacles were the beliefs and the existence of such things as Liberalism,
Constitutionalism, Nationalism, and most importantly: democracy.
The March Days and the Fall of the Austrian System
In the brief span of the events commonly known as the “March Days” the political structure
based upon Vienna was now in pieces and the Austrian Empire had fallen into its main
components: Prussia had cautioned revolutionaries, Germany was preparing for unification, and
war manifested in Italy. There were demands of a liberal government and national freedom –
written constitutions, representative assemblies, responsible ministries, the extension of suffrage,
restrictions upon police action, jury trial, civil liberty, and freedom of the press and assembly15.
13
Excerpts Taken From “BARRON’S AP EUROPEAN HISTORY.” [2009]. Eder, James M; Roberts, Seth A
14
A History of the Modern World – pp. 490-492. Palmer, Colton, and Kramer
15
Stated in A History of the Modern World – pp. 492, ¶ 3. Palmer, Colton, and Kramer
Following the upheaval of nationalism n 1848, the Hapsburgs had reasserted their imperial
authority over Czech nationalists in Prague, Magyars in Hungary, Italian patriots in north Italy,
and liberal revolutionists in Vienna itself. Methods would be concluded by a discourse of the
liberation of Italy from Austrian influence by war between powers.
 Question 67 – How and Why Alexander II Changed Russia

Tsarist Russia in the 19 th Century

While other nations were ahead, in the 19th Century – Russia was behind in developments. It was
an autocratic nation who was ruled by tsars that ruled with (what seemed like) limitless power:
Reforms were non-existent; there was no parliament, no welfare state, or any other benefits that
other nations – such as Britain – had instated. Since 1825, Tsar Nicholas I instated a political
police force called the “Third Section” that would enforce Nicholas’ policy to oppose any
reforms, and with the enforcement of these harsh rules, there would soon come a pressure for a
much-needed wave of change.
Pressures for Reform
In Russia, there were pressures to reform the nation and to modernize it with the rest of Europe –
specifically, three pressured existed:

 Agriculture
 The Crimean War
 Intellectuals

Source 1: Russian Agriculture

Farms in Russia were extremely unproductive and the farmers that were tending to their land and
to their crops were using old tools and old techniques. With the remnants of old techniques –
especially in agriculture – this means that the nation (specifically Russia) will not get ahead.

Source 2: The Crimean War16

Fought from 1853-1856, the Crimean War was a battle fought between France and England
versus Russia. The cause of the war was the wanting of Russia to take over some principalities
that were located to the west of the Black Sea, and in addition, were looking to claim the straits
of Constantinople: if the Russians controlled these straits, this would mean you would have
access to the Mediterranean (and, therefore, better access to trade). Adding to the need for
warfare, the Russians were also unhappy with the treatment of the Orthodox clergy in Jerusalem
and felt that it was their duty to protect these groups. At the conclusion of the battle the outcome
was far from desired: Russia had been defeated and took alongside them 500,000 casualties17 and
a blockade was placed upon them – and the Black Sea (located directly near Russia) by the
British.

Source 3: Russian Intellectuals

Existing in Russia were many famous writers that, alongside them, compiled many famous
writings and books that were considered to be some of the best. All of the intellectuals had
different ideas, but, collectively, were critical of the power of tsars – specifically the power of
the Romanov family – and desired change. Despite one common interest, there were

16
One should note that the failure for Russia to succeed in battle is what, also, drove change
17
This number is approximated
disagreements amongst the intellectuals which divided them up into different groups: The
Slavophiles and the Westernizers. Slavophiles encouraged the Slav way and the Westernizers
were in favor of most western practices. Also existing was a group called the Nihilists;
specifically a man named Nikolay Chernyshevsky – Nihilists wanted to do away with the
Russian political system and believed that there were no need for Russian laws and government
(or anything that the Romanov family represented, for that matter).

Enter Tsar Alexander II

The ruler of Russia from 1855-1881, Tsar Alexander II realized that the time for change in
Russia had arrived. On April 5th, 1861; Alexander II abolished serfdom and freed 22,000,000
Russian peasants and he also created two political institutions called the Zemstvos and the
Dumas. The Zemstvos were local governments that were created for the rural areas and the
Dumas were focused more towards the urban or city areas. Zemstvos would elect delegates that
served on assemblies and the Dumas had limited the control over taxes. In addition, Alexander
sought to modernize the Russian army by supplying them with better equipment and more
refined training tactics and this Russian influence could be seen all throughout Siberia.
 Question 68 – The Russo-Japanese War, the 1905 Bloody Sunday
Massacre, and the Connection to the Russian Revolution of 190518

The Russo-Japanese War

Introduction
The Russo-Japanese War was an armed conflict between Russia and Japan in 1904 and 1905 that
was caused by the Russian expansion into Eastern Asia meanwhile Japan’s plans to gain a
foothold into the Asian mainland. In 1898 Russia leased Port Arthur (now Lüshun) from China,
with the intention of making it a great Asiatic port and the headquarters of Russian naval power
in the Pacific. Russia had poured troops into Manchuria during the Boxer Uprising in 1900 but,
faced with the Anglo-Japanese alliance of 1902, promised to leave Chinese territory. Following a
refusal of an agreement proposed on behalf of Japan, the Japanese launched a surprise attack on
Port Arthur and proceeded to blockade the damaged Russian fleet.

Early Battles
It was March of 1904 and the Japanese First Army landed at Chemulp’o (now Inch’ǒn) and at
Namp’o. By late April, they came face-to-face with the Russians and the Commander in Chief
(of the Russians, at the time) – Aleksey Nikolayevich Kuropatkin made the decision to hold a
defensive position on the Liaodong Peninsula until reinforcements had arrived to help him move
on the offensive towards the Japanese. Out-numbered four to one, the Japanese Commander
General Tamemoto Tamesada Kuroki pushed through Yalu on May 1st and cone consequences
were far less for the Japanese than that of the Russians, as shown: Japanese casualties amounted
to approximately 1,100 out of 40,000 men and the Russian losses – far greater when placed into
perspective of the overall unit count – 2,300 out of 7,000 men. Further battles resulted in
Wafangdian and amounted to another loss for the Russians, who, at the time of the current battle,
had approximately 25,000 men. Between August 25th and September 4th, the Battle of Liaoyang
was fought amounting to yet another win for the Japanese and a loss for the Russians (despite the
Japanese being outnumbered [130,000 troops versus the 180,000 Russian troops]).
Despite further efforts on both accounts, a final assault taking place on the river Sha He – lasting
from October 5th to October 17th, following another attack on January 26-27th in 1905 – led to a
stalemate, therefore, leading the war indecisive.

Results of the Russo-Japanese War

After Port Arthur and the defeats at Shenyang and Tsushima, mediation was offered by United
States President Theodore Roosevelt. The Japanese and the Russians agreed to negotiate and on
September 5th, 1905, the Treaty of Portsmouth was signed leaving Russia to surrender Liaoyang
and Port Arthur, and Korea was to be recognized as the “Japanese sphere of influence.”

18
Excerpts Taken From: “Russo-Japanese War.” Microsoft Student 2007 [DVD]
The 1905 Bloody Sunday Massacre19

Introduction 20
The “Bloody Sunday” was a massacre of peaceful demonstrators by members of the Russian
Imperial Guard in Saint Petersburg on January 9 (or January 22, in the Western, or Gregorian,
calendar), 1905, when some 200,000 workers gathered outside the Winter Palace, residence of
Russian emperor Nicholas II. They intended to appeal directly to the emperor for better pay and
conditions, following the failure of numerous organized strikes at the end of 1904. The
demonstrators carried religious icons and pictures of Nicholas to show their peaceful intent. They
were led by a priest, Georgy Apollonovich Gapon, who was also the leader of a workers’
organization.

Nicholas was absent at the time, but his uncle, Grand Duke Vladimir, commander of the Imperial
Guard, gave the order to fire on the crowd. More than 100 of the demonstrators were killed, and
many more were wounded. News of the massacre soon spread, provoking strikes in numerous
cities, peasant uprisings in the countryside, and mutinies in the armed forces. This became
known as the Russian Revolution of 1905.

In 1906 Nicholas attempted to appease the protesters by introducing Russia’s first elected
legislative assembly, the Duma. Mass opinion had, however, been radicalized by the massacre
and ensuing violence. Socialist parties, workers, and peasants continued to agitate against the
imperial regime, culminating in the overthrow of the monarchy in the Russian Revolution of
1917.

The Russo-Japanese War, “Bloody Sunday”, and Their Involvement with the
Russian Revolution of 1905

Faced with the growing unrest of the working class, Tsar Nicholas II commissioned a Russian
Orthodox priest, Father Gapon, to organize a conservative union to counteract the radical
Marxists. Horrified by the conditions in St.Petersburg, Gapon led a peaceful protest march of
tens of thousands of workers and their families on January 22nd, 1905. Following these events,
troops fired into the crowd of protestors – killing hundreds. “Bloody Sunday” in Russia
provoked strikes, peasant uprisings, and the formation of worker’s revolutionary councils – the
Soviets.

19
Excerpts Taken From: “Bloody Sunday (Russia).” Microsoft Student 2007 [DVD]
20
Compiled and Edited from Original Article: Los Angeles Times, January 23rd, 1905
 Question 69 – How the 19th Century Italian Nationalist Leaders Brought
Unity to Italy

The Triumph of Nationalism: Italy

The Kingdom of Sardinia was the most prosperous kingdom and it would soon become the
“center of operations”, figuratively speaking, for the Italian nation – however, unity was
blocking this achievement and many factors contributed to a non-unified Italy: a) There was no
history of unity21; b) Disagreements existed between the Northern and Southern parts of the
region – the Northern section was well-educated and well-industrious, and the South section was
less educated, more rural, and more agricultural); c) Venetia and Lombardy lied under Hapsburg
control; d) Drawbacks from the Catholic Church – specifically the Papal States; e) Conflict
between the Liberals and the Conservatives (Liberals favored change, while Conservatives
favored rule under the King, Queen, and the Church).

Leaders of Unification
Despite problems, some were determined to fix the non-existence of a unified Italy – these
leaders were as follows:

 Giuseppe Mazzini
 Camillo Di Cavour
 Giuseppe Garibaldi

Giuseppe Mazzini
Sometimes referred to as the “soul of Italian Nationalism”, Mazzini was a writer who published a
work titled Duties of Man in which he stated that the love of one’s country was equal to that of
one’s family, or for the love of God. He was the creator of the Young Italy Society22 and he
made many efforts to unify Italy in the 1830s and in the 1840s. However, his efforts were
defeated.
Camillo Di Cavour
A believer in the Realpolitik, Cavour was a “realistic nationalist” – essentially meaning that he
was a person who believed in accomplishing tasks and also encouraging others to do the same.
He also founded a newspaper titled il Risorgimento23 and all interested in Italian Nationalism
was a reader of this newspaper. After numerous revolutions in Italy occurring in 1848, Camillo
developed a plan for Italy – stating that the nation needed to learn from its mistakes. In 1852,
after being appointed the Prime Minster of Sardinia, Camillo developed a plan that would be
developed into multiple parts:

21
However, one could argue that Rome was evidence of the first “unified” Italy
22
A movement designed to encourage the youth (needed to be under the age of 40 to join)
23
Meaning “The Resurgence”
Part 1
The first “part” of Camillo’s plan, called for the construction of better schools, the building of
railroads (for the purpose of closing the distance gap between peoples and areas), and by
lowering tariffs – in efforts to centralize the Italian economy.

Part 2
Part two encouraged secularization – which taxed the church and reduced the number of holdays.
This reduced the church’s influence on the state, since, in the mind of Camillo, the church was
the “enemy.” Despite angering Catholics, Camillo sought this sacrifice to be essential.

Part 324
The third part in the “program” called for the modernization of Piedmont-Sardinia’s army, to the
breech-loaded rifle. The breech-loaded rife achieved the opposite effect as the muzzle-loading
rifle, by instead of loading the cartridge through the front of the barrel; loading it through the
rear of the barrel. The advantage to such technology is a reduction in loading time, and when
reloading the weapon, soldiers are not exposed to enemy fire (when this technology was used in
howitzers), nor did it require the soldier to reposition the piece.
Breech-loading weapons were developed as far back as the late 14th century in Burgundy;
however, they were successful when perfected through precision engineering and machining in
the late 19th century.

Part 4
The Crimean War: fighting against Russian advancement. In 1859 France went to war again with
the kingdom of Sardinia in order to oust Austria from Italy. Although France received Nice and
Savoy in 1860 because of its efforts, French intervention created other problems. The war was a
costly one, and Napoleon had not foreseen the possibility that Italy would unite in 1861, creating
another European power with which France must contend. In 1863 Napoleon encouraged
Maximilian, the archduke of Austria, to become emperor of Mexico.

Part 5
The Italian alliance with France against Austria, called the 1859 Plombieres Agreement.

Part 6
When Italy and France go to war with Austria (France was involved for the aide of Italy).

Part 7
Following the defeat of the Austrians, the 1860 Treaty of Turin proclaimed that Piedmont-
Sardinia gained the Lombardy, Tuscany, Modena, Parma, and Bologna.

24
References From: “Breech-Loading Weapon”, Wikipedia – the Free Encyclopedia
Giuseppe Garibaldi
Garibaldi was a soldier during the time of the Italian unification efforts. Leading a group known
as the “Red Shirts”25 – he led 1,000 Red Shirts and managed to take Sicily. As a result of the
taking of Sicily, the Papal States realized that the momentum was now favoring the side of
Italian unification, and decided to join in the effort. Following these events; in 1861 Italy
proclaimed Victor Emmanuel II as the King of Italy (he was formerly the King of Sardinia) and
by this time [1861] most of Northern Italy – with the exception of Venetia, most of Southern
Italy, and the Papal States, were united. The addition of Venetia would not come until 1861,
when Austria was at war with Prussia: While Prussia was “distracted” when fighting Austria; the
Italians took Venetia in 1866. In 1870, the French – who were protecting the Pope in Rome –
were called off to help fight against the Prussians. When the French moved in, some Italians
moved out to go and take Rome – after taking Rome in 1870, Italy was completely unified26.

25
Called the “Red Shirts” due to their wearing of red shirts
26
The Vatican was an exception, since the Pope opposed Nationalism (for a short period of time, however)
 Question 70 – The Importance of Otto Von Bismarck

Germany’s Iron Chancellor

A new chapter began for Germany begins with the successor to Fredrick William – King
William I. After being appointed King, William I appointed a man named Otto Von Bismarck as
the Prussian Prime Minister. Overall, Bismarck had four main accomplishments:
1. Strong Military
2. Defeated Austria
3. Destroyed France
4. Unified Germany
A Lutheran, Bismarck was a follower of realpolitik (the belief in practical politics, rather than in
ideological politics) and he was known to make sacrifices in order to get things accomplished –
and, believed in also fighting to getting things accomplished. Bismarck had his own “program”,
so-to-speak, for German unification:
Step 1
The first “step” was focused primarily on building up the Prussia army, by doing the
following: instituting the universal draft; require elementary education; create military academies
and by using things such as war plans; creating railroads and using the electric telegraph;
instating the breech-loading rifle and the Prussian “needle gunners”; and instating the
commander of the military to be General Helmuth von Moltke.
Step 2
The second “step” was to obtain two territories south of Denmark and north of Prussia, by going
to war with Denmark and Austria. In 1864, Bismarck achieved victory over Denmark with the
help of Austria and after obtaining these two territories – Schleswig and Holstein – there were
immediate debates between Germany and Austria as to who gets control over the two territories.
To solve the dispute, in 1866 they went to war – starting what was known as the Seven Week’s
War, in which the Prussians emerged as the victor, being the next German power.
Step 3
Third, was the creation of the North German Federation – and, after signing the Treaty of
Prague in 1866, Austria was removed from the German Confederation. Following these events,
the German Confederation created two houses: The Upper House (The Bundesrat) and the Lower
House (The Reichstag).
Step 4
The forth step was to go to war with France. Bismarck wanted German unity and he wanted
Prussia to be a leader of the Confederation and he needs people to recognize Prussia as the
master of Germany. He decided that the final piece to accomplishing such a feat was the victory
over France in order for Germany to have a sense of pride within the nation. Bismarck needed
probable cause to go to war with the French, and it came to him when the Spanish throne in the
late 1860s was left without a king and the Spanish decided that their empire was declining and
they asked a member of the Prussian Royal Family to become a king of Spain, since it was of
rising power. Bismarck saw an opportunity in this offer, and since he is the Prime Minister of
Prussia he had a cousin whose name was Leopold, which is whom the Spanish offered the throne
to. He declined and this was because the French said they would be upset if they took the offer –
they protested, and they cared because they wanted a balance of power (France and Germany
don’t get along). More protests went on – three times this went on - and three times the Prussians
didn’t wish to anger the French in the spirit of diplomacy, and Bismarck was enraged because he
knew if they went to war, he could create a large German nation and he needed a plan. He
convinced the Prussian royal family to ask one more time, and they did – this time the royal
family accepted the offer of the throne for France. Once again, the French were protesting and
they decided that they were going to send an ambassador to meet with the Prussian king to have
a private talk and the ambassador was named Vincent Benedetti to see William I at a resort. The
French told William that they needed to turn down the offer and he then said that he would turn
down his offer, and the French ambassador said that you are not only going to turn this down, but
you won’t accept any offer from the Spanish. With these remarks, Bismarck sent a telegram
called the “Ems Telegram” and he broadcasted French demands, and this will get the Prussians
enraged since the French were “telling the Prussians what to do”.
They went to war and it began in July of 1870, which was quickly solved and Prussia named, and
the French were forced to sign the 1871 Treaty of Frankfurt and Germany took Alsace and
Lorraine and the French were forced to pay 5 billion gold francs. The German princes agreed to
recognize King William I of Prussia as Emperor William I of Germany – of a united Germany.
 Question 71 – The Change of the Intellectual, Scientific, and Artistic
Europe During the Late 19th and 20th Centuries

The European Intellectual and Artistic World

Generally speaking, 19th century European art and thought distanced itself from the
Enlightenment (which represented reason, logic, and tolerance). After experiences from World
War One (WWI), Europeans began to question the value of reason, logic, and those that they had
such held dear.
European Art
The birth of modern art was thought to stem from Europe, since these artistic styles went against
normal artistic traditions by the creation of new tools, and techniques. Impressionism – which
was the practice of capturing a moment of ordinary an everyday scenes that were not religious,
was featured here and used light and many styles and different dabs of paint to convey
movement. Expressionism – also can be thought of as “distorted reality” – uses dramatic color
mixes to express deep emotions. Good examples of European art during the 19th and 20th
centuries come from the following artists and their paintings (please note, these are only a few
examples of some of the many artists during the 19th and 20th century):

 Pierre-Auguste Renoir – Renoir’s Luncheon of the Boating Party27

 Claude Monet – Water Lilies28
 Manet – Luncheon on the Grass29

European Thought
Two men in particular were known for European thought and intellect – and they represented the
main ideals passed around during this time: Friedrich Nietzsche and Sigmund Freud. Friedrich
Nietzsche was a Prussian critic of the Enlightenment and he was an Atheist that believed in the
need for a “heroic superman.” He believed that Europeans of the 19th century were enslaved to
the values of Christianity and to the Enlightenment and also believed that these values were
those of the weak. Selected quotes from Friedrich are presented herein: “Not mankind, but
superman is the goal”; “What is good, to be brave is good … What is bad? All that comes from
weakness.”; “Everything in woman is a riddle, and everything in woman hath one answer: its
name is child rearing … Man is for woman a means; the end is always the child.” Nietzsche said
if a man was in love he should not be able to decide if the wife or girlfriend has a child or not,
and this is because it may make the man too attached and he is afraid that they will develop
weaknesses; and he is not fond of weakness. Nietzsche wanted the strong to stay with the strong
and the intelligent to stay with their respective type!
Living in Vienna, Sigmund Freud specialized in studying the unconscious mind through the
means of psychoanalysis (the study of dreams) and in the year 1900, Freud published a work

27
Refer to Figure 1
28
Refer to Figure 2
29
Refer to Figure 3
titled The Interpretation of Dreams. Like Nietzsche, Freud wanted to move beyond the
Enlightenment and he believed that if you wanted to understand people, you must understand
what goes on in their unconscious mind – the illogical. He stated that there were three parts to
the human psyche:

 Id – The inborn sexual/aggressive side. Freud argued that when you dream, your “id” is
portrayed
 Ego – Your Conscious mind/reason
 Superego – This, he stated, permitted your ego to control your id – this was “the wisdom
of the ages”

The European Scientific World

When discussing science, one needs to keep in mind the name Charles Darwin. Born in
Shrewsbury, England; and chastised by his father for his hobbies, Darwin would go on to lead a
seemingly unproductive life until the creation of his few works in a span of a few years. Darwin
developed his ideas after reading an essay titled Essay on the Principle of Population (1798)
which raised a key question of who would survive when the population became to immense and
there were just not enough resources to go around for every person. After reading Malthus,
Darwin developed his central idea known as the Theory of Evolution30 in which he stated that in
the state of nature there was an ongoing war in which some will survive, and some will not.
Those who would die, Darwin argued, were the weak and the strong (those who survived) would
pass their traits to their children: This became known as Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection.
Following this, Darwin wrote a 240 page essay in 1844 and then ceased writings for
approximately 15 years, for the fact that Darwin feared chastisement from the people in his
community (for his ideals). In fact, he spent years writing about barnacles and – after pursuing
this subject for about 8 years – was known to have said: “I hate barnacles as no man ever did
before.” It was not until 1859 when Darwin began his “normal” course of writings when he
wrote On the Origins of Species by Means of Natural Selection – otherwise known as The
Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Following these writings, Darwin
received criticism from the editor of a newspaper called “The Quarterly Review”, suggesting that
Darwin instead write a book about pigeons. In 1871 Darwin wrote Descent of Man and in 1881
he wrote The Formation of Vegetable Mould through the Actions of Worms. He later died in
1882, where he was buried in Westminster Abbey next to Isaac Newton.
Albert Einstein
A towering figure of science in the 19th and 20th century, Albert Einstein was a German scientist
that left Germany in the 1930s due to the Holocaust and the anti-Semitism from the Nazi party.
During his youth, Einstein was not a stellar student and spent many years working at a Swiss
patent office, after being rejected for positions at a high school and a college. Well before the
1900s, people’s view on the atom was that it made up matter and that they were hard, static
substances. However, in the late 1800s and early 1900s, a group of scientists would begin to
revolutionize how people thought of matter and the atom. These scientists included Maria Curie,

30
Darwin did not use the term “Evolution” until the 6th edition of his work
Ernest Rutherford, and Niels Bohr: all made significant contributions to the study of the atom.
General conclusions about the atom stated that the atom was in fact not a hard substance and it
was in fact a changing substance (and not static, as otherwise believed) and they could emit
enormous amounts of energy.
Referring back to Albert Einstein, he published two important papers: The first was in 1905 titled
Special Theory of Relativity, in which he coined his famous formula E=MC2; and the second
were in 1917 titled General Theory of Relativity in which Einstein stated that space and time are
relative, particularly to things that approach the speed of light.
Edwin Hubble
Another notable inventor was named Edward Hubble, who invented the famous Hubble
Telescope that has the capability of photographing deep space. From his experiments and views,
Hubble concluded that the universe is expanding rapidly and that the Milky Way Galaxy is just
one out of billions.
Other notable figures in the European scientific world are Louis Pasteur (Who founded the
Germ Theory and Pasteurization); Joseph Lister (Discovered the disinfecting qualities of
carbolic acid); Wilhelm Rontgen (Founded the X-Ray); and Robert Kotch (Discovered the
Tuberculosis Germ)
All of these case studies, experiments, inventions, and other things of the sort; were to disturb the
foundation of European society. Scientists like Albert Einstein and Charles Darwin had no
intention of misleading, or confusing, the public – however, their ideals had (unintentionally)
done just that, and it placed doubt into the minds of Europeans.
 Question 72 – Threats to Organized Religion and the Response from
Catholics and the Church, In Accordance to Palmer, Colton, and Kramer

The Churches and the Modern Age 31

Religion was more threatened after 1860 or 1870 than ever before in the past, because never
before had science, or philosophies drawing upon science, addressed themselves so directly to
the nature of life and of human existence. Never before had so many of the fundamental
premises of traditional religion been questioned or denied. Darwin’s theories of Evolution
challenged the value of Christian ethics as well as the traditional picture of Creation, and
anthropologists questioned the uniqueness of the most sacred Christian tenants. A form of
critical, textual analysis, going back at least to the seventeenth century, now took on significant
proportions and was applied both to the Old Testament and the New Testament. The German
theologian David Friedrich Strauss, one such critical scholar, was the author of a widely
discussed Life of Jesus, in which many miraculous and supernatural episodes were reverently but
firmly explained away as myth. The sensitive French historian and man of letters Ernest Renan
in a somewhat similar vein wrote on Jesus and the origins of Christianity and on the life of
ancient Israel, giving secular explanations for the oldest religious stories and beliefs.

Challenges to Protestantism
“The Protestant churches were less successful than the Catholic in protecting their membership
from the disintegrating effects of the age,” says Palmer, Colton, and Kramer. Church attendance
among Protestants became increasingly casual, and the doctrines set forth in sermons seemed
increasingly remote. Protestants traditionally trusted their own private judgment and regarded
their clergy as their own agents, not as authoritative teachers placed above them. Protestants had
always set special emphasis on the Bible as the source of religious belief; and as doubts
accumulated on the literal truth of Biblical narratives there seemed no other authoritative source
on which to rely.
Protestants tended to divide between modernists and fundamentalists. The fundamentalists, as
they were called in the United States, in an effort to defend the literal word of Scripture, were
often obligated to deny the most un-arguable findings of science. The modernists were willing
enough to accept science and to interpret much of the Bible as allegory, but only with difficulty
could they recapture a strong sense of spirituality or urgent feeling of Christian truth. Most
Protestant churches were slow to face the social problems and injustices produced by the
economic system, through a group of “Christian socialists” who had emerged in some Protestant
denominations. To the regret of many of the followers, Protestantism became increasingly a
customary observance by people whose minds were set elsewhere – not until after WWI did a
strong Protestant revival begin to take shape.

A Resistance from Catholicism

The Roman Catholic Church proved more resistant to the trends of the age (Palmer, Colton,
Kramer; 620). In 1864, in the Syllabus of Errors, Pope Pius IX denounced as erroneous a long

31
Excerpts and Information Taken From: A History of the Modern World – pp. 619-622, Palmer, Colton, and
Kramer
list of widely current ideas, including the faith in rationalism and science, and he vigorously
denied that the head of the church “should reconcile and align himself with progress, liberalism,
and modern civilization.” The Syllabus was a warning to Catholics to believe. Pius IX also
convened a general Council of Trent some 300 years before. The Vatican Council, and the
acceptance of papal infallibility by Catholics, was the climax of centuries of development within
the church. As the word became more national – Catholicism became more international. By
1870 the net effect was to throw Catholics into the Holy See and while the 600 prelates of the
Vatican Council were sitting, the new Italian state unceremoniously entered and annexed the city
of Rome, thus removing the Pope’s temporal power.
Rerum Novarum
Pius IX’s successor – Leo XIII – carried on the counteroffensive against irreligion and instituted
a revival of medieval philosophy as represented by Thomas Aquinas. Leo XIII is mainly
remembered for formulating Catholic social doctrine, especially in the encyclical32 Rerum
Novarum (meaning “of modern things”) of 1891, to which subsequent pontiffs have adhered, and
from which various movements of Catholic socialism are derived. Rerum Novarum upheld
private property as a natural right, within the limits of justice; but if found fault with capitalism
for the poverty, insecurity, and even degradation in which many of the laboring classes were left.
It declared that much in socialism was Christian in principle; but criticized such things like
Marxism. The pope also recommended that Catholics, if they wished, form socialist parties of
their own, and that, Catholic workers, from labor unions under Catholic auspices.
Jewish Emancipation
As for Judaism, the Jews were a small minority and in the nineteenth century the basic trend was
moving toward emancipation and assimilation. Science and secularism had the same dissolving
effect upon Orthodox Judaism as upon traditional Christianity. Reform Judaism grew up as the
Jewish counterpart to modernism in other faiths. Secular Jews altogether moved away from
worship.
The Rise of Anti-Semitism
Toward the end of the century tow important and new tendencies began to challenge of counter
earlier trends that were leading to the assimilation of Jewish communities and individuals. Once,
a cultural and political nationalism, originated with Jews themselves, some of whom feared the
assimilation would lead to a loss of Jewish identity and perhaps even the disappearance of
Judaism itself. The other counter-tendency, or barrier to assimilation, was the rise of a virulent
new anti-Semitism, noticeable in many quarters by 1900 (Palmer, Colton, Kramer; 621). Racist
theories, dislike for Jewish competitors in business and the professions, socialist scorn for Jewish
capitalists like Rothschilds, upper-class fears of Jewish revolutionists and Marxists, together with
a growth of ethnic nationalism, which held that France should be purely French and Latin,
Germany purely German and Nordic, or Russia purely Russian and Slav, all combined to raise an
anti-Semitic hue and cry. In Russia there were fierce massacres of Jews, and in France the
Dreyfus case.

32
Roman Catholic Papal Document
 Question 73 – The Root Causes of 19th Century European Imperialism

The Causes of Imperialism

Cause 1: Social Darwinism

What would Charles Darwin have to do with the European Imperialism? Well, this was because
he said that species adapt different from others and Europeans abused Darwin’s ideas and they
adopted – or constructed – a term called social Darwinism. There was a man who was a
proponent of Social Darwinism, meaning to basically say that some humans were better than
others and those that were better were the white Europeans … they were superior to the black
man – this man was Herbert Spencer who was a British philosopher. A British poet named
Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem called White Man’s Burden in which he says: “Take up the White
Man’s Burden and reap his old reward The blame of those ye better The hate of those ye guard.”
– meaning that it is the white man’s burden to have the ones that they protect hate them. The
white man would go to the “savage man” and they would tell them what to do – and if they did
not listen, they would be beaten or killed. The British, Germans, French … they went off of these
nations with a Bible and a gun. Another example was in 1903 – the German soldiers massacred
55,000 Southwestern Africans, since they would not listen to the Germans. “The Germans took
no prisoners. They killed thousands of women and children along the roadsides. They bayoneted
them and hit them to death with the butt ends of their guns … They were lying exhausted and
harmless along the roads, and as the soldiers passed they simply slaughtered them in cold blood.
Mothers holding babies at their breasts, little boys and little girls; old people too old to fight and
old grandmothers, none received mercy; they were killed, all of them, and left to rot … for the
vultures and wild animals to eat …” (Written by Jan Kubas, who accompanies the German
soldiers).

Cause 2: Religion

The religious aspect also motivated the Europeans to do some good things, as well – good things
came as a result of the Imperialism, and they were largely inspired by Christian values. The
people fought hard to abolish slavery in the Empire, and they eventually did abolish slavery in
Britain (as opposed to the United States, who did not abolish slavery until about 30 years after).
The religion also motivated the British to abolish practices that were … brutal … in Africa, Asia,
and India: they wanted to eliminate cannibalism. They also sought to clamp down in an Indian
practice called suttee, which was the burning the practice of a wife who had lost her husband –
and the British spent a lot of time building schools, railroads, hospitals, and etc.…

Cause 3: Money

Europeans were motivated to travel to nations such as Africa and Asia in search of natural
resources, as depicted by the table presented below:
 African / Asian Nation Raw Material Imperial Nation
Congo Ivory and Rubber Belgium
Nigeria Palm Oil England
Senegal Peanuts French
South Africa Gold and Diamonds England
Indochina Rubber France
India Cotton England

J.A. Hobson was a British Socialist that argued that there is no other reason why the Europeans
did what they did was the desire for markets – and there was a lot of truth in this statement. V.I
Lenin – one of the towering figures of European history; the creator of Soviet Communism; and
he was famous for arguing that money motivated Europeans and he said that Imperialism was the
highest state of Capitalism. And he said that Capitalism nations that have private control of
enterprise and control of private land, they need constant growing markets … and eventually
they are going to fight each other (there was also some truth to the market theory, as well). one
of the famous examples of the large desire for money from the Europeans was the The Boer War
– where the Europeans fought the Boer people in Africa and they were descendent from the
Dutch people who and settled in South Africa in the 17th century. The British wanted control of
South Africa, since they wanted the diamonds and the gold and the British sent 300,000 men and
resources and they established concentration camps where they rounded up men, women, and
children where thousands had died – according to some studies, 20,000 people died in these
concentration camps. The British had won the war and the Dutch agreed to pledge their loyalty
to the British empire and the British then merged the territory that the Boars held, including the
republic of Transversal and the Orange Free State to form the British Union of South Africa. The
Boers established a system of racial segregation called apartheid and the white people
discriminated against the South Africans by denying them of jobs, government positions, and
providing them with some of the worst schools.

Cause 4: Security and Rivalry

If the desire was initially economic, it became something else a bit later on – one good example
was India: The British went there for economic gain and then in 1885 they took Burma and in
1890 the British took Afghanistan – and the reason why they took these territories because they
wanted to protect India and form a “ring” around India.
All of these items presented above were chief causes of 19th Century European Imperialism.
 Question 74 – The Causes of World War One

A War Unlike the Rest: World War I (WWI) - [Introduction]

Beneath the surface of all of the change taking place in Europe, there were many troubling issues
and in 1914 this feeling of optimism would fade. All of these feelings would eventually lead to
World War I. Europe would fall into a period considerably known as the Age of Death. Europe.
This was a war that would last for four year and it would destroy the civilized values of Europe,
and it would leave 35,000,000 dead and 10,000,000+ more were injured both physically and
psychologically. There were two sides: Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the
Ottoman Empire) versus the Allied Powers (Great Britain, France, Russia, Serbia,
Belgium, and more than 25 other nations). The war would see an introduction of new weapons
– machine guns, airplanes (as fighting instruments), Tanks, Flamethrowers, Chemical Weapons,
Submarines. This was also a war that saw a collapse of four empires: The Austro-Hungarian
Hapsburg Empire, Romanovs, Hohenzollern German Empire, and Turkish Ottoman Empire.
WWI was the cause of WWII as well. WWI increased, vastly, the power of European nations –
wage and price controls, and vast campaigns.

The Causes of WWI

Cause 1: Irreconcilable Hatreds: Germany v. France, England, and Russia

This was a hatred that had grown out of the Franco-Prussian war, the Germans kicked out the
French and seized territories, and France therefore wanted revenge against the Germans. After
this war, the Germans were a nation for the first time – not only territories – but a nation, and
now the German people were determined to become a power … they will not listen to any other
nation and they want to have “their place in the sun”, as they referred to it. Over the course of the
1880s and the 1890s, their economy grows and so does their military, and they are determined to
assert themselves. In 1888 Kaiser William II (related to Queen Victoria) took over the rule of the
Germans and in 1879 they built an alliance with Austria (the Dual Alliance) and in 1882 they
added Italy, and therefore called it the Triple Alliance. William II was going to be one of the key
figures to the start of WWI, and he hated democracy and he wanted to assert German power and
he wanted to crush anyone in his way. William begins to do things that will aggravate the French
and the British. In 1896, William said that he would help support the Boers in South Africa and
in 1898 William announced to the world that they would build a strong navy, which is a direct
challenge to the British, whose navy is unbeatable, of course. The Germans are rising – they
were powerful.
In response, the British and the French responded by forming an alliance with each other and
they signed what was called the Entente Cordiale in 1904 and both Britain and France are
worried that Germany is becoming too big. The French said that if the British said that if they
helped them out, they could have Egypt – and the British said that the French could take
Morocco. Also, the British responded to the Germany by - in 1906 – by building the most
massive battleship in the history of the world, and it was the Dreadnought which was equipped
with 10 massive guns. In 1907, the Russians joined France and Britain and they singed what was
called the Triple Entente.
The Second Irreconcilable Hatred

The second hatred that will be a major cause of WWI was the hatred that developed between
Austria and Russia, and this situation was developed from the Balkans and the good number of
the people in the Balkans are Slavs, and so are the Russian people. The Serbians were Slavs and
they had a kingdom called the Kingdom of Serbia and it was taken over by Austria in 1878. The
Serbs would like to get their kingdom back, and not only do they want to do this, they also want
to bring all the Slavic people from the Balkans together under one nation (that is not Austria). To
appeal for help, they will go to Russia for help, since they are Slavs. The Austrians want the
Slavs to “sit down and shut up”. The Russians were willing to help, however they wanted
something in return and the Russians are interested in two important pieces of land: a) Bosporus
and the b) Dardanelles Strait.

Cause 2: The Momentum of Events

Event 1: The First Moroccan Crisis (1905)

In 1905 Germany decided that they were going to try to get a piece of Morocco (and the French
stated that Morocco was theirs) and in 1905 William II sailed into Tangier and he told them that
they should be free and should not be ruled by the French, and he also mentioned that they
should have equal trading rights and he was trying to incite the French. The French, in response,
said that they could not do that and eventually the Germans backed down on their attempts to do
something like this.

Event 2: The Bosnian Crisis

In 1908, Austria invaded and took over Bosnia and Herzegovina and the kingdom of Serbia, due
to the annexation of Bosnia and the other nation; they (the Serbs) wanted all of the Slavs together
under one rule. The Serbians begin to mobilize a military force and – before fighting the
Austrians, they consulted the help of the Russians because they know that they could win if they
got the support. The Germans responded by telling the Russians to essentially “back off” and
they told the Austrians were their allies, and if the Russians were to start something, they would
be finished off. Again … the French and the Russians back off from each other.

Event 3: The Second Moroccan Crisis

In 1911 the Kaiser, William II, goes to Morocco and he goes there with a gunship and he said
that they should give him Morocco or else he will take the French Congo and the French object,
yet again by calling the actions unjust and protested the action. They eventually agreed to give
them 100,000 square miles of the Congo. This small effort on behalf of the Germans worked out.

Event 4: Two Balkan Wars (1912-1913)

Meanwhile, in the Balkans, in 19112 and in 1913 there were two wars fought in the Balkans and
the result of these wars would be that the Serbians would arise very powerful. In 1912 the First
Balkan war was fought – and all of the Slavic people in the Balkans – formed a league called
The Balkan League and they said that before they took out the Germans, they went to war
against the Turks and they easily won (the Ottomans by this time were in decline) and they took
Albania and Macedonia.
Once they kicked out the Ottomans the Serbians and the Bulgarians fought over who got to
control the territory – in which the Serbians won this war, and the result of this war was that the
Serbians were strong. Their next target: Austria.
 Question 75 – Why World War One was a Deadly War

Theaters of War 33
Land Warfare
Most of the decisive land campaigns of World War I occurred on the continent of Europe. The
two chief centers of operations were the western front and the eastern front. On the western front,
German armies confronted those of the British Empire, France, Belgium, and, later, the United
States. Most of the fighting on this front took place in northeastern France. The trenches of the
western front ran from the North Sea to the border of Switzerland. On the eastern front, where
German and Austro-Hungarian armies faced the Russians, the fighting began

World War I saw advances in the area of battlefield weapons. At the start of the war, the
principal infantry weapon was the bolt-action magazine rifle, which was capable of firing 6 to 10
aimed shots per minute. The machine gun, which had been developed in the 1880s, was just
gaining acceptance by the major European armies as the war began. It could fire rifle
ammunition automatically at a rate of 200 to 250 shots per minute. It was an excellent defensive
weapon, capable of devastating waves of cavalry and infantry. Other important weapons
developed during the war were the flamethrower, the hand grenade, poison gas, and the tank. All
these weapons were designed to restore mobility to the troops huddled in the trenches avoiding
machine gun and heavy artillery fire.

Naval Warfare

Naval operations were carried out primarily in the North Atlantic Ocean and in the North Sea. At
the start of the war, Britain had decisive superiority in heavy battleships, which were the
cornerstone of sea power at that time. But Germany eventually challenged British dominance of
the seas with its submarine, or U-Boat, campaign.
The war at sea was mainly important economically. The Allies were concerned with keeping
open the vital sea lanes by which ships transported supplies, war materials, and troops to Europe
from the United States and other overseas sources.

Aerial Warfare

Airplanes were first used in large numbers for military purposes during World War I. At the start
of the war, airplanes and other aircraft were generally used for reconnaissance and for observing
and adjusting artillery fire. Both the Allies and the Central Powers made extensive use of small
tethered balloons for observing stationary battlefronts, of dirigible balloons for scouting at sea,
and of airplanes for scouting coastal waters. Later, airplanes specially equipped for combat came
into wide use on the western front. Both sides also employed airplanes carrying machine guns
and light bombs to attack enemy ground forces. Shore-based naval aircraft capable of landing on
water proved useful in antisubmarine warfare. The Germans launched the first air raids in 1914.
During 1915 and 1916 a German dirigible known as the Zeppelin raided eastern England and

33
Excerpts Taken From: “World War I” – Microsoft Student 2007 [DVD]. Keylor, William R.
London more than 50 times. From mid-1915 aerial combat between planes or groups of planes
was common. The Germans initially had superiority in the air on the western front, but the
British gained the advantage in mid-1916. The Allied advantage in the air gradually increased
thereafter and became overwhelming when the United States entered the war in 1917.

Conclusion
World War One (WWI) became such a deadly war with the advancement, and the introduction,
of weaponry. From the introduction to the armored tank and long-range artillery to aerial warfare
combat methods, casualties were more than commonplace on the battlefield with many dangers –
from the land, from the air, and from the sea.
 Figures and References

Figure One

Renoir’s Luncheon of the Boating Party

The painting Luncheon of the Boating Party (1881), by French artist Pierre Auguste Renoir, depicts a group of
friends enjoying a meal at a cafe along the River Seine, outside Paris. Train travel had recently made it possible for
working-class city dwellers to enjoy the countryside on weekends. The painting is in the Phillips Collection in
Washington, D.C.
Francis G. Mayer/Corbis
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007. © 1993-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Figure Two

Monet’s Water Lilies

From about 1895 on, French painter Claude Monet frequently painted the lily pond in his garden at Giverny, a
village near Paris. The canvases are large in size, and the lilies are painted at close range and seem to dissolve into
the shimmering water surrounding them. Several panels of Les Nymphéas (The Water Lilies), including the painting
shown here, line the walls of the Orangerie, a museum in Paris.
© 2006 Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / ADAGP, Paris/Art Resource, NY
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007. © 1993-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Figure Three

Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe

Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe (Luncheon on the Grass) by Édouard Manet was painted in 1863. When it was first
displayed, the rough brushwork and undefined areas of color were as distressing to the public as the nude woman
who was neither a classical goddess nor a symbol in an allegory. Manet claimed that the real subject of the painting
was light, and it was that philosophy that gave birth to impressionism.
Bridgeman Art Library, London/New York
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007. © 1993-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.