The unification of Germany, c1840–71 - 3 Austro- Prussian rivalry,…

The idea

After 1848, Prussia experienced reaction under Manteuffel, whose reforms strengthened royal authority and the bureaucracy while limiting liberal gains. Liberal-nationalism persisted through associations such as the Nationalverein, which campaigned for German unification under Prussian leadership. In 1858, William became regent and then king in 1861, bringing a more liberal ministry but also a determination to strengthen the army. His army reforms, including longer service and increased taxation, met resistance in the Landtag, triggering a constitutional crisis from 1860 to 1862 over the budget and military control. Bismarck’s appointment as minister-president in 1862 resolved the crisis by governing without parliamentary approval, enabling the reforms and setting the stage for unification.

What earns the marks

• Manteuffel’s reforms: after 1848, he strengthened the monarchy and conservative bureaucracy, reduced liberal influence, and maintained an authoritarian system that limited parliamentary power.
• Liberal-nationalism and the Nationalverein: founded in 1859, it promoted a Kleindeutsch solution under Prussian leadership, reflecting continued middle-class nationalism despite political repression.
• Regency and accession of William I: William became regent in 1858 and king in 1861; his reign saw a shift towards a more liberal ministry initially, but he was committed to military reform.
• Reform of the army: William and Roon proposed increasing the army’s size, extending service to three years, and reducing the Landwehr’s role, aiming to create a more professional and loyal force.
• Constitutional crisis, 1860–62: the Landtag refused to approve the military budget, leading to a deadlock over whether the king or parliament controlled the army and finances.

Common mistakes and how to put them right

• Confusing Manteuffel’s reforms with those of Bismarck.

  Put it right: Manteuffel’s reforms were conservative and aimed at reversing 1848 gains, while Bismarck’s later policies were more pragmatic and focused on unification.

• Assuming the Nationalverein was a mass political party.

  Put it right: It was a liberal-nationalist association that sought to influence public opinion and pressure governments, not a party with a mass membership.

• Believing the constitutional crisis was solely about the military budget.

  Put it right: It was also about the balance of power between the crown and parliament, and the principle of parliamentary control over the army.

Exam tips

• When discussing the constitutional crisis, explain how the deadlock arose from conflicting interpretations of the constitution, not just financial disagreement.
• Use specific dates and names (e.g., 1858 regency, 1860–62 crisis, 1862 Bismarck) to demonstrate precise knowledge.
• Link each development to the broader theme of Austro-Prussian rivalry by showing how Prussia’s internal strengthening enabled it to challenge Austria.