Chapter I

PART I:

Kaiser Wilhelm – He was the King of Prussia after his brother Fredrich Wilhelm IV died. Kaiser Wilhelm was important because he provided his country with a stronger military; he knew it would be crucial so that the country could defend them.

Zollverein – This was the name given for the union of Bavaria and Württemberg. Zollverein was important because without it would not have made a crucial point for German nationalism

Crimean War – It was a war which was between Russia, and France allied with Britain. This war was fighting over who would control certain lands in Europe.

Otto von Bismarck – He was a Prussian who had a lot of roles in his life, from being Deputy in the Prussian United Diet, to ambassadors in major countries of Europe at the time. He played a significant role trying to exclude Austria from German affairs.

The Seven Weeks War – Was a war between Austria & German allies against, Prussian & Italy & German allies. Its is important because the result of this made Prussian a stronger country and gave it more control in Europe after winning the war.

Schleswig and Holstein – This was one of the areas that Prussia captured because it had supported the Austrians in the war.

Franco Prussian War – This was a war between France & Prussia, Prussian won the war and was allied Northern Germany. This war was important because at the end of it brought the final unification of Germany.

The Ems Telegram – This was the final straw for the French, and then Napoleon declared war on Germany. The outcome of the war crushed France, and victory went to the German.

Alsace and Lorraine – This was a territory which belonged to France but then was captured by the Germans. Because of this a rivalry between the two countries stared till the French got revenge.



PART II:
1) What was Europe like in the early to mid-1800s?

Europe was a good in the mid of the 1800, but I would say because of all these was and the leaders having a lot of greed they made the live of the people in the Europe very hard always going to wars losing millions of lives just to try and make the empire bigger. But there was always one country in Europe that was doing good because always one country won the war.

2) Which factor seems to be most disruptive to European passivity, economics, politics or nationalism/ethnicity? Give evidence.

Politics would me the most disruptive because it was the politics which started the wars all across Europe, for example the Franco- Prussian War was politics, Ems Telegram was politics the leader of the French got mad started a war lost and made his people suffer, everything political in those days disrupted life in those days, even if it did not start a war the politics would create a problem which would start a civil war, or make the citizens unhappy and rebel.

3) What was successful and unsuccessful about the Zollverein? About other attempts at political structure in the mid-1800s?

The Zollverein became a focal point for Nationalism, and this spread throughout Europe. Why it was not successful I would say because the Zolleverin was not a very strong union


4) Who was to blame for, and what were the outcomes of the Franco-Prussian War?

France was to blame for the beginning of the Franco- Prussian, and the outcome of the war was Prussia won and took land from France and kept it till WWI after that it was given back to France.



5) In terms of the German Unification, rank the following factors in order of importance and provide a brief description of AND directly quoted evidence in support for your chosen order: Economy, Military build up, Bismarck’s leadership, Nationalism, and the provocation of other countries.

From least importance to greats
1) Provocation of other countries: did not help to bring the unification of Germany countries by themselves attacked
2) Economy: It was always good so the leaders did not have to worry about the countries economy
3) Nationalism: The citizens loved their country
4) Bismarck’s Leadership: Leadership brought empire very far without him country would have had
5) Military build up: The build up of the military help German unification because without this the country would not have won all those wars and let the empire grow.



6) After you finish the chapter, return to the sources on pages 16, 17, 24, and 25. Using direct evidence from these sources and your own knowledge, write a three paragraph essay which agrees or disagrees with the following statement. “the unification of Germany was inevitable regardless of Bismarck’s role.”
Be sure to provide a clear thesis statement and quotes from the sources. You may site the sources by number or letter (i.e. Source A) in parenthesis after the sentence.
When you are finished with this essay, type it up and post it to your blog (yes, the one you created and sent to me already!)

There were a number of motives which helped to unify Germany one of them was the leadership of Bismarck. But because of the time period that Germany was unified it was in the interest in many other countries and leaders of the Europe allowed unify this country, (Pg 16, Source 10) because with certain countries support there was no way to stop the unification. Bismarck would have foreseen this if it went to plan (Pg 17, Source 11). Because Bismarck new with this plan war would be the last result (Pg 17, Source 12). So if you look into detail I would not say that it was because of this man, brought the unification of Germany, however he did give his part to bring the country united.
Bismarck ideas made sense and helped, but the power came from the alliance of certain countries without this alliance Germany would have no chance to be united. Without doubt after the unification of Germany the alliance became stronger. Bismarck knew that after the country would be united a lot of wars were to come his way possibly even France (Pg 24, Source A). He didn’t want any war to break out for the land to be united (Pg 25, Source D).
Overall I can say that I agree that it was because of this man which made the unification of Germany. I recognize what I am saying is very politically detailed and not focusing the overall answers to this question, but there is not a clear answer to this question, but many possible ones. Without Bismarck the actual idea of unification would have still have been a dream. Even without unification Bismarck did a lot of things to benefit the country immensely.