2. critical thinking activity the frankfurt assembly

Ch. 24 Post-Napoleonic Europe

The german revolutions of 1848, 24.4.3: the german revolutions of 1848.

Growing discontent with the political and social order imposed by the Congress of Vienna led to the outbreak in 1848 of the March Revolution in the German states.

Learning Objective

Connect the German Revolutions of 1848 to other revolutions happening throughout Europe

• News of the 1848 Revolution in Paris quickly reached discontented bourgeois liberals, republicans, and more radical working-men.
• The first revolutionary uprisings in Germany began in the state of Baden in March 1848 and within a few days, there were revolutionary uprisings in other states including Austria and Prussia.
• On March 15, 1848, the subjects of Friedrich Wilhelm IV of Prussia vented their long-repressed political aspirations in violent rioting in Berlin, while barricades were erected in the streets of Paris.
• Friedrich Wilhelm gave in to the popular fury and promised a constitution, a parliament, and support for German unification, safeguarding his own rule and regime.
• On May 18, the Frankfurt Assembly opened its first session with delegates from various German states, and after long and controversial debates, the assembly produced the so-called Frankfurt Constitution, which proclaimed a German Empire based on the principles of parliamentary democracy.
• In the end, the 1848 revolutions turned out to be unsuccessful: King Frederick William IV of Prussia refused the imperial crown, the Frankfurt parliament was dissolved, the ruling princes repressed the risings by military force, and the German Confederation was re-established by 1850.
• Many leaders went into exile, including a number who went to the United States and became a political force there.

The revolutions of 1848 in the German states, the opening phase of which was also called the March Revolution, were initially part of the Revolutions of 1848 that broke out in many European countries. They were a series of loosely coordinated protests and rebellions in the states of the German Confederation, including the Austrian Empire. The revolutions, which stressed pan-Germanism, demonstrated popular discontent with the traditional, largely autocratic political structure of the 39 independent states of the Confederation that inherited the German territory of the former Holy Roman Empire. They demonstrated the popular desire for the Zollverein movement.

The middle-class elements were committed to liberal principles while the working class sought radical improvements to their working and living conditions. As the middle class and working class components of the Revolution split, the conservative aristocracy defeated it. Liberals were forced into exile to escape political persecution, where they became known as Forty-Eighters. Many immigrated to the United States, settling from Wisconsin to Texas.

Unrest Spreads

The groundwork of the 1848 uprising in Germany was laid long beforehand. The Hambacher Fest of 1832, for instance, reflected growing unrest in the face of heavy taxation and political censorship. The Hambacher Fest is noteworthy for the republicans adopting the black-red-gold colors (used on today’s national flag of Germany) as a symbol of the republican movement and of unity among the German-speaking people.

Activism for liberal reform spread through many of the German states, each of which had distinct revolutions. They were also inspired by street demonstrations of workers and artisans in Paris, France, from February 22-24, 1848, which resulted in the abdication by King Louis Philippe of France and his exile in Britain. In France the revolution of 1848 became known as the February Revolution.

The revolutions spread across Europe; they erupted in Austria and Germany, beginning with the large demonstrations on March 13, 1848, in Vienna. This resulted in the resignation of Prince von Metternich as chief minister to Emperor Ferdinand I of Austria, and his exile in Britain. Because of the date of the Vienna demonstrations, the revolutions in Germany are usually called the March Revolution.

Fearing the fate of Louis-Philippe of France, some monarchs in Germany accepted some of the demands of the revolutionaries, at least temporarily. In the south and west, large popular assemblies and mass demonstrations took place. They demanded freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, written constitutions, arming of the people, and a parliament.

Uprisings: Austria and Prussia

In 1848, Austria was the predominant German state. It was considered the successor to the Holy Roman Empire, which had been dissolved by Napoleon in 1806, and was not resurrected by the Congress of Vienna in 1815. German Austrian chancellor Metternich had dominated Austrian politics from 1815 until 1848.

On March 13, 1848, university students mounted a large street demonstration in Vienna, and it was covered by the press across the German-speaking states. Following the important but relatively minor demonstrations against Lola Montez in Bavaria on February 9, 1848, the first major revolt of 1848 in German lands occurred in Vienna on March 13, 1848. The student demonstrators demanded a constitution and a constituent assembly elected by universal male suffrage.

Emperor Ferdinand and his chief adviser Metternich directed troops to crush the demonstration. When demonstrators moved to the streets near the palace, the troops fired on the students, killing several. The new working class of Vienna joined the student demonstrations, developing an armed insurrection. The Diet of Lower Austria demanded Metternich’s resignation. With no forces rallying to Metternich’s defense, Ferdinand reluctantly complied and dismissed him. The former chancellor went into exile in London.

In Prussia, in March 1848, crowds of people gathered in Berlin to present their demands in an “address to the king.” King Frederick William IV, taken by surprise, yielded verbally to all the demonstrators’ demands, including parliamentary elections, a constitution, and freedom of the press. He promised that “Prussia was to be merged forthwith into Germany.”

On March 13, the army charged people returning from a meeting in the Tiergarten; they left one person dead and many injured. On March 18, a large demonstration occurred; when two shots were fired, the people feared that some of the 20,000 soldiers would be used against them. They erected barricades, fighting started, and a battle took place until troops were ordered 13 hours later to retreat, leaving hundreds dead. Afterwards, Frederick William attempted to reassure the public that he would proceed with reorganizing his government. The king also approved arming the citizens.

Starting on May 18, 1848, the Frankfurt Assembly worked to find ways to unite the various German states and write a constitution. The Assembly was unable to pass resolutions and dissolved into endless debate. After long and controversial discussions, the assembly produced the so-called Frankfurt Constitution, which proclaimed a German Empire based on the principles of parliamentary democracy. This constitution fulfilled the main demands of the liberal and nationalist movements of the Vormärz and provided a foundation of basic rights, both of which stood in opposition to Metternich’s system of Restoration. The parliament also proposed a constitutional monarchy headed by a hereditary emperor ( Kaiser ).

King Frederick William IV of Prussia unilaterally imposed a monarchist constitution to undercut the democratic forces. This constitution took effect on December 5, 1848. On December 5, 1848, the revolutionary Assembly was dissolved and replaced with the bicameral legislature allowed under the monarchist Constitution. Otto von Bismarck was elected to the first congress elected under the new monarchical constitution.

Other uprising occurred in Baden, the Palatinate, Saxony, the Rhineland, and Bavaria.

Revolutions of 1848 Origin of the Flag of Germany: Cheering revolutionaries in Berlin, on March 19, 1848.

Failures of the Revolutions

By late 1848, the Prussian aristocrats including Otto von Bismarck and generals had regained power in Berlin. They were not defeated permanently during the incidents of March, but had only retreated temporarily. General von Wrangel led the troops who recaptured Berlin for the old powers, and King Frederick William IV of Prussia immediately rejoined the old forces. In November, the king dissolved the new Prussian parliament and put forth a constitution of his own based upon the work of the assembly, yet maintaining the ultimate authority of the king.

The achievements of the revolutionaries of March 1848 were reversed in all of the German states and by 1851, the Basic Rights from the Frankfurt Assembly had also been abolished nearly everywhere. In the end, the revolution fizzled because of the divisions between the various factions in Frankfurt, the calculating caution of the liberals, the failure of the left to marshal popular support and the overwhelming superiority of the monarchist forces.

The Revolution of 1848 failed in its attempt to unify the German-speaking states because the Frankfurt Assembly reflected the many different interests of the German ruling classes. Its members were unable to form coalitions and push for specific goals. The first conflict arose over the goals of the assembly. The moderate liberals wanted to draft a constitution to present to the monarchs, whereas the smaller group of radical members wanted the assembly to declare itself as a law-giving parliament. They were unable to overcome this fundamental division, and did not take any definitive action toward unification or the introduction of democratic rules. The assembly declined into debate. While the French revolution drew on an existing nation state, the democratic and liberal forces in Germany of 1848 were confronted with the need to build a nation state and a constitutional at the same time, which overtaxed them.

Attributions

• “Frankfurt Parliament.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_Parliament . Wikipedia CC BY-SA 3.0 .
• “German revolutions of 1848–49.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_revolutions_of_1848-49 . Wikipedia CC BY-SA 3.0 .
• “Maerz1848_berlin.jpg.” https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maerz1848_berlin.jpg . Wikimedia Commons Public domain .
• Boundless World History. Authored by : Boundless. Located at : https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-worldhistory/ . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

Privacy Policy

Experiencing Parliamentarism: The German National Assembly of 1848

• First Online: 01 December 2019

Cite this chapter

• Andreas Schulz 9 , 10  

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Political History ((PSPH))

187 Accesses

Schulz provides arguments why the experiment of parliamentarism of 1848 was neither forgotten nor lost, although the revolutionary parliament was liquidated by the German Powers in 1849. Basic convictions and practices of democracy were institutionalised and transformed into political culture, which shaped post-revolutionary Germany. The National Assembly had proven its determination to create a constitutional order based on parliamentary government. For the elected representatives, practising democracy in parliament meant giving up the ideal of an independent vote and getting accustomed to party discipline. The chapter further contends that such fundamental experiences of parliamentarism were communicated and transferred into transnational standards of representative democracy in Europe.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

‘Engländer, Niederländer, Spanier, Portugiesen, Italiener, Polen, Griechen, Amerikaner, ja Neger haben für die Freiheit der Franzosen, die ja die Freiheit aller Völker ist, gekämpft, nur die Deutschen nicht’: Ludwig Börne, Briefe aus Paris, Fünfter Brief, 17. September 1830, in Inge and Peter Rippmann (eds.), Sämtliche Schriften (Dreieich: Joseph Melzer Verlag, 1977) vol. 3, p. 23; cf. Klaus Ries (ed.), Europa im Vormärz. Eine transnationale Spurensuche (Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 2016).

‘[…] public attention to politics was completely absorbed by the National Assembly’: Reinhard Carl Eigenbrodt, Meine Erinnerungen aus den Jahren 1848, 1849 und 1850 , edited by Ludwig Bergsträsser (Darmstadt: Grossherzoglich Hessischer Staatsverlag, 1914) p. 96.

Jörg-Detlef Kühne, Die Reichsverfassung der Paulskirche. Vorbild und Verwirklichung im späteren deutschen Rechtsleben (Frankfurt am Main: Metzner, 1985); Dieter Hein, Die Revolution von 1848/49 (München: Verlag C.H. Beck, 1998); cf. Heinrich Best, ‘Strukturen parlamentarischer Repräsentation in den Revolutionen von 1848’ in D. Dowe, H.-G. Haupt and D. Langewiesche (eds.), Europa 1848. Revolution und Reform (Bonn: J.H.W. Dietz Nachf., 1998) p. 636 ff.

Wilhelm Bleek, ‘Die Politik-Professoren in der Paulskirche’ in J. Kocka et al. (eds.), Von der Arbeiterbewegung zum modernen Sozialstaat (München: K.G. Saur Verlag, 1994); Peter Wende, ‘Der “politische Professor”’ in Ulrich Muhlack (ed.), Historisierung und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2003); Hans-Christof Kraus, ‘Zur parlamentarischen Rhetorik politischer Professoren’ in J. Feuchter and J. Helmrath (eds.), Parlamentarische Kulturen vom Mittelalter bis in die Moderne (Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag, 2013).

Anna Gianna Manca, ‘Die Beamten in der französischen und deutschen verfassunggebenden Versammlung von 1848’ in M. Kirsch and P. Schiera (eds.), Verfassungswandel um 1848 im europäischen Vergleich (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2001) p. 126–127; F. Julien-Laferrière, Les députés fonctionnaires sous la Monarchie de Juillet (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1970).

[…] ‘widerliche und widersinnige Unterscheidung zwischen Volk und Bourgeoisie’: Manfed Botzenhart, Deutscher Parlamentarismus in der Revolutionszeit 1848–1850 (Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag, 1977) p. 81, quoting: Friedrich Daniel Bassermann, Denkwürdigkeiten von 1811–1855 (Frankfurt am Main, 1926) p. 25, and a speech in the Paulskirche on 16 February 1849.

For more on the importance of the liberal self-perception for its political concepts, see Lothar Gall, ‘Liberalismus und “bürgerliche Gesellschaft”’ (1975), and Lothar Gall, ‘“ich wünschte ein Bürger zu sein.” Zum Selbstverständnis des deutschen Bürgertums im 19. Jahrhundert’ (1987), reprinted in L. Gall, Bürgertum, liberale Bewegung und Nation (München: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1996) pp. 99–126 and 3–22.

For comparison with the British debate about enfranchising all ‘respectable’ Englishmen, see Eric J. Evans, Parliamentary Reform, c. 1770–1918 (London/New York: Longman, 2000) p. 41.

Botzenhart, Deutscher Parlamentarismus , p. 157.

Andreas Biefang and Andreas Schulz, ‘From Monarchical Constitutionalism to a Parliamentary Republic: Concepts of Parliamentarism in Germany since 1818’ in P. Ihalainen, C. Ilie and K. Palonen (eds.), Parliament and Parliamentarism. A Comparative History of a European Concept (New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2016) p. 62–81; Dirk Jörke and Marcus Llanque, ‘Parliamentarism and Democracy in German Political Theory since 1848’ in Ibid., p. 262–277.

Stenographischer Bericht über die Verhandlungen der deutschen constituirenden National-Versammlung zu Frankfurt am Main, edited by Franz Wigard, vol. 1 (Frankfurt am Main, 1848) [further on quoted: ‘Minutes of the National Assembly’] 18th session, 19 June 1848, p. 384.

The delegate of the Grand Duchy of Hesse at the National Assembly noticed that a transfer of power was taking place: ‘Embodying the nation the German National Assembly claims the exclusive right to found the federal constitution of the German State without previous consent of the German Princes or the Provisional Government’; Eigenbrodt, Erinnerungen , p. 100.

‘Dieses System nimmt keine Rücksicht auf die Rechte der deutschen Regierungen. Wird es angenommen, so hat die Nationalversammlung die Regierung über Deutschland angetreten’; Minutes of the National Assembly, 18th Session, 19 June 1848, p. 356.

Minutes of the National Assembly, 18th Session, 19 June 1848, p. 368; for more about the parliamentarian Left, see Christian Jansen, Einheit, Macht und Freiheit. Die Paulskirchenlinke und die deutsche Politik in der nachrevolutionären Epoche 1849–1867 (Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag, 2000).

‘[…] oben ein Präsident, unten 30 Fürstenthümer’: Max Duncker, Zur Geschichte der deutschen Reichsversammlung in Frankfurt (Berlin: Duncker und Humblot, 1849) p. 51. For more on liberal and democratic concepts of a unitarian republic or a parliamentary monarchy, see Jansen, Einheit , p. 234.

Hans-Werner Hahn and Helmut Berding, Reformen, Restauration und Revolution 1806–1848/49 (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta Verlag, 2010), p. 570.

Eigenbrodt, Erinnerungen , p. 100 ff., quoting the delegate of the Free City of Bremen.

Hein, Revolution , p. 49.

Markus Lotzenburger, Die Grundrechte in den deutschen Verfassungen des 19. Jahrhunderts (Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag, 2015), p. 125.

Ernst Rudolf Huber, Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte , vol. 2 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1988), p. 774–776.

The significance of a fundamental change of political language has been emphasized by Willibald Steinmetz, ‘“Sprechen ist eine Tat bei euch.” Die Wörter und das Handeln in der Revolution von 1848’ in Dowe et al. (eds.), Europa 1848 , p. 1089–1139. See also Armin Burkhardt, ‘German Parliamentary Discourse since 1848 from a Linguistic Point of View’ in Ihalainen et al. (eds.), Parliament and Parliamentarism , p. 176–192.

The delegate of Hessen-Darmstadt, although a close friend of Heinrich von Gagern, felt like a ‘mere spectator’ and complained about a ‘complete isolation’ which separated the German governments from the National Assembly in Frankfurt; Eigenbrodt, Erinnerungen , pp. 304 and 271.

King Frederick Wilhelm’s refusal to accept the crown of the German Reich which the delegation offered him in the name of the National Assembly on 3 April 1849 might not have been so predictable as historians later assumed because the signals which the Prussian monarch communicated regarding his German mission during the winter months were anything but clear; David E. Barclay, Anarchie und guter Wille. Friedrich Wilhelm IV. und die preußische Monarchie (Berlin: Siedler Verlag, 1995) p. 282–283; Botzenhart, Parlamentarismus , p. 695–696.

Paul Wentzcke and Wolfgang Klötzer (eds.), Deutscher Liberalismus im Vormärz. Heinrich von Gagern: Briefe und Reden 1815–1848 (Göttingen: Musterschmidt, 1959); cf. Philipp Erbentraut, Theorie und Soziologie der politischen Parteien im deutschen Vormärz 1815–1848 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016), p. 165.

‘We had to create a constitution by gaining moral support for our work since we lacked the bayonets to impose it by force’: Duncker, Reichsversammlung , p. 83 ff.

Ludwig Bamberger, Erinnerungen , edited by Paul Nathan (Berlin 1899), p. 58–59.

Eigenbrodt, Erinnerungen , p. 251.

Veit Valentin was one of the first historians who pointed out the importance of the National Assembly of 1848 for ‘experiencing’ parliamentarism: V. Valentin, Geschichte der deutschen Revolution von 1848–1849 , 2 vols. (first published Berlin 1930/31; reprint Cologne 1977) vol. 2, p. 13. ‘Experience’ and the ‘ideas of 1848’ were terms that the former ‘1848ers’ repeatedly made reference to in their political correspondence, giving them a generational political identity: Jansen, Einheit , p. 25.

The historian Friedrich von Raumer, delegate of Berlin, described himself speaking in parliament as a ‘dog barking at the moon’, since political clubs decided how to vote in parliament, which made deliberations useless: Botzenhart, Parlamentarismus , p. 436.

Kraus, Rhetorik , p. 209.

Minutes of the National Assembly, vol. 1, p. 385.

The transformation of the ‘wild’ beginnings of parliamentarism into orchestrated proceedings and functional working structures is documented in the minutes which the National Assembly produced and published in 1848/49; the standing orders of the House were drafted by Robert von Mohl, who was an expert on British parliamentarism. Cf. Robert von Mohl, Vorschläge zu einer Geschäftsordnung des verfassunggebenden Reichstags (Heidelberg: Academische Verlagshandlung C.F. Winter, 1848) and ‘Über die verschiedene Auffassung des repräsentativen Systems in England, Frankreich und Deutschland’ in Zeitschrift für die gesammte Staatswissenschaft 3 (1846), p. 451–495.

Thomas Nipperdey, Deutsche Geschichte (München: C.H. Beck Verlag, 1984; 2nd ed.), p. 659.

Dieter Hein, ‘Die deutsche Nation in Europa 1848/49’ in K. Ries (ed.), Europa im Vormärz (Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 2016), p. 169; Günter Wollstein, Das ‘Großdeutschland’ der Paulskirche. Nationale Ziele in der bürgerlichen Revolution 1848/49 (Dusseldorf: Droste Verlag, 1977).

In the 1850s, the term ‘Realpolitik’ served as a code word which signalled that the former revolutionaries were ready to accept the failure of their political concepts and to turn to cooperation with the Prussian monarchy to realize German nation-building in an authoritarian way; Steinmetz, ‘Sprechen ist eine Tat bei euch’, p. 1113–1115; Jansen, Einheit , pp. 30–31 and 255–265.

Dieter Langewiesche, Reich–Nation–Föderation. Deutschland und Europa (München: C.H. Beck Verlag, 2008), p. 259–277.

Minutes of the National Assembly, vol. 1, p. 377.

Conservatives as well as the Left in the Berlin National Assembly confessed loyalty to the history and tradition of the Prussian state; ‘Pomeranians, Prussians, inhabitants of the Kurmark and the Altmark, Magdeburgher, a majority of the Silesians and Westphalians and also Rhinelanders want to stay citizens of Prussia’, the Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper observed in 1848: Manfred Botzenhart, ‘Das preußische Parlament und die deutsche Nationalversammlung im Jahre 1848’ in Gerhard A. Ritter (ed.), Regierung, Bürokratie und Parlament in Preußen und Deutschland von 1848 bis zur Gegenwart (Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag, 1983) p. 22.

Hans-Christof Kraus, ‘Die deutsche Rezeption und Darstellung der englischen Verfassung im neunzehnten Jahrhundert’ in R. Muhs, J. Paulmann and W. Steinmetz (eds.), Aneignung und Abwehr. Interkultureller Transfer zwischen Deutschland und Großbritannien im 19. Jahrhundert (Bodenheim: Philo Verlagsgesellschaft, 1998), p. 89–126.

Cf. Friedrich Daniel Bassermann and Joseph Maria von Radowitz: Minutes of the National Assembly, 18th Session, 19 June 1848, pp. 381 and 376.

Heinrich von Gagern related the way of confrontational speaking directly to British parliamentarism: ‘I did it in the same way in which it is daily practised by political opponents in English Parliament’: Eigenbrodt, Erinnerungen , p. 251, note in the margin by Heinrich von Gagern.

Andreas Schulz and Andreas Wirsching (eds.), Das Parlament als Kommunikationsraum (Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag, 2012); Heinz-Gerhard Haupt and Dieter Langewiesche, ‘Die Revolution in Europa 1848’ in Dowe et al. (eds.), Europa 1848 , p. 13.

Jonathan Sperber, The European Revolutions, 1848–1851 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005; 2nd ed.), p. 265.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

J. W. Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

Andreas Schulz

KGParl (Kommission für Geschichte des Parlamentarismus und der Politischen Parteien), Berlin, Germany

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Schulz .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Faculty of Humanities, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Remieg Aerts

Center for Parliamentary History, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Carla van Baalen

Institute for History, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

Henk te Velde

Netherlands Research School Political History, Huygens Institute for the History of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Margit van der Steen

Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Hessen, Germany

Marie-Luise Recker

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Schulz, A. (2019). Experiencing Parliamentarism: The German National Assembly of 1848. In: Aerts, R., van Baalen, C., te Velde, H., van der Steen, M., Recker, ML. (eds) The Ideal of Parliament in Europe since 1800. Palgrave Studies in Political History. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27705-5_6

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27705-5_6

Published : 01 December 2019

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-27704-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-27705-5

eBook Packages : History History (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research