The Peculiarities of German History: Bourgeois Society and Politics in Nineteenth-Century Germany

The Peculiarities of German History: Bourgeois Society and Politics in Nineteenth-Century Germany

The Peculiarities of German History: Bourgeois Society and Politics in Nineteenth-Century Germany

The Peculiarities of German History: Bourgeois Society and Politics in Nineteenth-Century Germany

Synopsis

"A well-written, stimulating...piece of scholarship." --German Studies Review.

In a major re-evaluation of the cultural, political, and sociologicalassumptions about the "peculiar" course of modern German history, the authorschallenge the widely held belief that Germany did not have a Western-stylebourgeois revolution. Contending that it did indeed experience one, but thatthis had little to do with the mythical rising of the middle class, the authorsprovide a new context for viewing the tensions and instability of 19th-and early20th-century Germany.

Excerpt

This book began as two independent papers which were presented before a number of audiences in Britain and Germany in the years after 1974. As we compared notes it became clearer that we were working in a similar direction. The idea of putting the two papers together took shape, and Dieter Groh suggested that we publish them in a new social history series he was then editing in the Federal Republic of Germany. The original German edition appeared in 1980 and was followed in 1983 by a Japanese edition. For the much revised and expanded English edition we have tried to take account of the intervening discussion. The Introduction (which is entirely new) and the revised versions of our two essays were written during 1982-3. The essays were separately authored and are intended to stand in their own right. The attentive reader will notice that there are differences between our two approaches, not only in style and substance, but also in content. Our common ground should nevertheless be equally obvious, and our close working relationship over many years has meant that it is sometimes difficult to remember with whom a particular idea originated. Despite differences of emphasis, we therefore hope that our two essays will be read as complementary. The Introduction was an exercise in transatlantic co-operation, drafted by one of us, redrafted by the other, and agreed by us both.

Works of this kind necessarily owe much to the previous labours of others. Our general intellectual debts are indicated in both text and footnotes. We are happy to acknowledge a more immediate debt to the many seminar audiences in Britain, the USA, and the Federal Republic of Germany which helped us to develop our ideas. Over the years we have also profited greatly from the suggestions and criticisms of colleagues and friends, amongst whom Richard Bessel, David Bien, Jane Caplan, David Crew, Dick Geary, Raymond Grew, Dieter Groh, Gareth Stedman Jones, Keith Nield, Hartmut Pogge von Strandmann, and Roman Szporluk deserve particular mention. Dieter Groh made an important . . .

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.