Academic literature on the topic '1848 revolutions'

Punch's Mr. Dunupis indeed in an awful position. Having fled to France to escape his English creditors, he finds himself in the midst of the French Revolution of 1848. The question that he must answer – what is worse, revolution in France or bankruptcy in England? – is one that preoccupied Victorians at midcentury, when a wave of European revolutions coincided with the domestic financial crisis of 1845–48. In classic accounts of nineteenth-century Europe, 1848 is remembered as the year when a crucial contest was waged between political revolution, identified with the Continent, and capitalism, identified with Britain. According to Eric Hobsbawm, the failure of the 1848 revolutions to effect lasting political change ushered in “[t]he sudden, vast and apparently boundless expansion of the world capitalist economy”: “Political revolution retreated, industrial revolution advanced” (2). For mid-nineteenth-century Britons, however, the triumph of capitalism was by no means assured. In what follows, I look closely at how Victorian journalists and novelists imagined the British financial crisis of the 1840s after this event was given new meaning by the 1848 French Revolution. Much of this writing envisions political revolution and the capitalist economy in the same way as thePunchsatirist does – not as competing ideologies of social progress but as equivalent forms of social disruption. As we will see, at midcentury, the ongoing financial crisis was routinely represented as a quasi-revolutionary upheaval: it was a mass disturbance that struck terror into the middle classes precisely by suddenly and violently toppling the nation's leading men and social institutions.

Karl Marx (1818–1883) was born in Trèves in the Rhineland. He studied law in Bonn, philosophy and history in Berlin, and received a doctorate from the University of Jena for a thesis on Epicurus (341–270 BC). (Epicurus' philosophy was a reaction against the ‘other-worldliness’ of Plato's theory of Forms. Whereas for Plato knowledge was of intelligible Forms, and the criterion of the truth of a hypothesis about the definition of a Form was that it should survive a Socratic testing by question and answer, for Epicurus the criterion of truth was sensation, and employment of this criterion favoured the theory with which Plato explicitly contrasted the theory of Forms (Sophist 246a–d), namely, the materialism of the atomists, Leucippus and Democritus.) Marx was editor of the Rheinische Zeitung of Cologne, 1842–1843. The paper was suppressed and he moved to Paris, becoming co-editor of the Deutsch-französische Jahrbücher, the one and only issue of which contained two articles by Marx and two by his friend, Friedrich Engels (1829–1895). Together they wrote The German Ideology (1846) and their most influential work, The Communist Manifesto (1848). Marx had been expelled from France in 1845, and went to Brussels, from where he was expelled during the 1848 revolutions. He went to Cologne to start, with Engels and others, a paper with a revolutionary editorial policy, the Neue Rheinische Zeitung. Expelled once again, Marx finally settled in London, working in the British Museum on his great historical analysis of capitalism, Das Kapital. The first volume was published in 1867, the remaining two volumes, completed by Engels after Marx's death, in 1885 and 1895.

Abstract Why the Netherlands did not witness a revolution in 1848In 1848, a wave of democratic revolutions struck most of Europe, but not the Netherlands. Historians have provided only partial explanations from a range of perspectives, such as socio-economic, socio-political, and institutional. We argue that none of these are fully tenable or satisfactory by comparing the Dutch situation with countries that did experience revolutions in 1848. Also, we add a cultural perspective by studying the role of the Dutch consensus culture. After tracing its roots, we identify its key characteristics and use these as a prism to interpret several governmental sources, brochures, and newspaper articles. On this basis, we argue that it is likely that the consensus culture strongly contributed to the stability of Dutch society during the European revolutionary months of 1848. Without wanting to present this perspective as the definitive explanation, we claim that (political) culture as such deserves more attention in studies to the Netherlands during 1848.

This article investigates the policing measures of the Habsburg Empire against the exiled defeated revolutionaries in the Mediterranean after the 1848–1849 revolutions. The examination of this counter-revolutionary policy reveals the pioneering role Austria played in international policing. It shows, in particular, that Vienna invested more heavily in policing in the Mediterranean after 1848 than it did in other regions, such as Western Europe, due to the multitude of ‘Forty-Eighters’ settled there and the alleged inadequacy of the local polities (e.g., the Ottoman Empire, Greece) to satisfactorily deal with the refugee question themselves. The article explains that Austria made use of a wide array of both official and unofficial techniques to contain these allegedly dangerous political dissidents. These methods ranged from official police collaboration with Greece and the Ottoman Empire to more subtle regional information exchanges with Naples and Russia. However, they also included purely unilateral methods exercised by the Austrian consuls, Austrian Lloyd sailors and ship captains, and ad hoc recruited secret agents to monitor the émigrés at large. Overall, the article argues that Austrian policymakers in the aftermath of 1848 invented new policing formulas and reshaped different pre-existing institutions (e.g., consuls, Austrian Lloyd), channelling them against their opponents in exile. Therefore, apart from surveying early modes of international policing, this study also adds to the discussion about Austrian (and European) state-building and, furthermore, to the more specific discussion of how European states dealt with political dissidents abroad in the nineteenth century.

I will compare British and American literary responses to the European revolutions of 1848-51, focussing particularly on the 1848 French and 1849 Italian revolutions. Such a comparison has not previously been made, despite the fact that writers on both sides of the Atlantic were inspired to think about political and social issues through the lens of mid-nineteenth-century European events. Although they often thought differently about revolutionary history and key ideas such as democracy and republicanism, many writers from Britain and America supported the European revolutions through their works. Some, including Arthur Hugh Clough, Margaret Fuller, Robert Browning, and Elizabeth Barrett Browning (EBB), witnessed the revolutions firsthand, either as travellers or expatriates. Even those who did not, such as Wait Whitman and Matthew Arnold, were affected by them and drew analogies between events in Europe and in their own countries. I argue that the European revolutions were central to the formation of some of the best-known works of nineteenth-century poetry, including Arthur Hugh Clough's Amours de Voyage (1849), EBB's Casa Guidi Windows (1848-5 1), and Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass (1855). The political influences that shaped these works have often been overlooked in literary history and criticism, and yet the political landscape was not only influential but vital to the creativity of writers in the mid-nineteenth century. My introduction outlines the intersection of politics and literature that occurred during the revolutions. Chapters on Arnold and Clough, on Margaret Fuller, on Elizabeth Barrett Browning and Robert Browning, and on Whitman, make the case for a political reading of the literary works I discuss. Although the thesis is author-based, I emphasise throughout the links between writers and texts, direct and indirect, which set them in dialogue with each other.

Средином 19. века настављају сеевропски револуционарни процеси који сузахватили и просторе Хабзбуршкемонархије. У овим процесима нашао се исрпски народ који је, својом„густином“,заузимао јужни деоMонархије.Захваљујући привилегијамадобијеним од аустријског цара Леополда I, акоје је „заслужио“ српски патријарх АрсенијеIII Чарнојевић, Срби су се у политичкомсмислупоставиликао верски одређен народ.У периоду од 1690. до 1918. године српскацрквена хијерархија, српски политичкипрваци и други значајни представницисрпског народа трудили су се да очувајустатус и права српског становништва. Сасвоје стране, бечке власти су константнонастојале да српске привилегије сузе иоспоре, да би их пред крај Монархије ипотпуно укидале. Било је то питањеопстанка и очувања верског, националног икултурног идентитета српског народа,најпреу Хабзбуршкој монархији, а 60-их година 19.века у Аустроугарској. Надолазећи догађајикоји су 1848-1849. године усталасали средњуЕвропу, прелили су се и на аустријскуцаревину. Она није била националнокомпактна држава, већ је у свом саставуимала разне народе (Мађари, Чеси, Словаци,Срби, Румуни...), који су бројчанонадмашили немачко становништво. У овимдогађајима, који су у суштини деоисторијских токова,значајну, а неретко ипресудну улогу, имају личности које се у таквим околностима појављују наполитичкој сцени.Таква личност у српском народу био јеи Ђорђе Стратимировић. Потицао је иззначајне српске породице Стратимировић,која своје порекло води из Херцеговине.Родоначелници ове породице били су ПетарСтратимировић и његов син ВучкоПетровић-Стратимировић. Вучков син био јеБогић Вучковић - Стратимировић.Окончањем првог аустро-турског ратаПожаревачким миром 1718. године,порастао је углед Аустрије међу Србима уХерцеговини, тако да у следећем аустро-турском рату 1737-1739. године, Срби нудесвоје услуге и узимају учешће у рату. БогићСтратимировић је,1737. године,заповедникугрофу Херберштајну понудио 30.000 војниказа рат против Турака. Ипак, цео пројекат сеније остварио због мира који је 1739. годинесклопљен између Аустрије и Турске. Наконтога, у периоду од 1743-1745. године, Богићи његов брат Никола преговарају у Бечу онасељавању Стратимировића у Аустрији.Најпре им је додељена пустара Сириг уБачкој, а када је тај посед предат бачкомвладики, Богић и његова три брата (Јован,Тома и Никола) у замену су добили поседКулпин. Када је царица Марија Терезијаотпочела са интензивнијим издавањемплемићких диплома знаменитијим српскимпородицама, са циљем да их придобијезасвоје војне и друге планове, племство јестекла и породица Стратимировић.Из овепородице је знаменити и утицајникарловачки митрополит СтефанСтратимировић, стриц ЂорђаСтратимировића, што је, како сеиспоставило, било итекако важно за будућусудбину и улогу Ђорђа у наступајућимисторијским догађајима.Ђорђе пл. Стратимировић рођен је 19.фебруара 1822. године у Новом Саду, у кућисвог деде по мајци Јована Петровића. Његовотац Василије био је „миран и озбиљанчовек“, кулпински велепоседник уз то иобразован. Слободно време проводио јечитајући научну литературу. Радио је и каофишкал (адвокат) фрушкогорскихманастира. Мати му је рано преминула 1841. године.Школовао се у Кулпину, уз надзорлутеранског свештеника Словака Рохоњија икућног пријатеља познатог српског писцаМилована Видаковића. Снажне утиске намладог Ђорђа остављале су приче охеројским подвизима из јуначког родаСтратимировића и живо сећање, на истинаретке, али упечатљиве доласке митрополитаСтратимировића у Кулпин. И поредпротивљења родитеља определио се завојнички позив који је тада између осталогнудио прилику за брзо напредовање,посебно Србина племенитог рода. Похађао јенижу Евангелистичку гимназију у НовомВрбасу. Након изненадне смрти оца,поредпопустљиве мајке,испунила му се жеља дапостане војник. Похађање академије уТителу, на кадетском курсу (тзв.математика), омогућило му је да буде одмахпримљен у други разред инжењеријскеакадемије у Бечу. Тамо је провео следећихпет година, од 1837. до 1841.,где је каоузоран ученик стекао многобројнепријатеље. Један од најбољих другова биому је Фердинанд Бауер, који је каснијепостао барон и министар рата. Из академијеје изашао у чину потпоручника дакле постаоје официр. Био је распоређен на службу урегименту у Милану, где је био омиљенмеђу својим колегама. Истицао се као частани храбар човек. Ускоро је стицајем пре свегаприватних разлога 1843. године напустиовојну службу.Већ почетком бурних догађаја 1848.године Стратимировић је узео активноучешће у њима. Образован, родољубив, млади пун енергије а при томе разумевајућиполитичку и друштвену ситуацију и стање укоме се нашао српски народ пре свега уодносу на Мађаре био је одмах измеђуосталог и захваљујући свом пореклуприхваћен од српских првака и српскогнарода. Након састанка српске делегацијечији је био члан са Лајошем Кошутом иМађарима у Пешти 1848. године,стекао јевелике симпатије и поверење народа. Његововојничко умеће, храброст, способност инеоспорна харизма показали су се већ упрвом значајнијем сукобу Срба и Мађара,приликом напада генерала Храбовског на Сремске Карловце 12. јуна 1848. године.Тада је, захваљујући енергичној командиЂорђа Стратимировића, овај напад јеодбијен, а Мађари су претрпели свој првипораз. То је Стратимировићу у народудонело велики углед и титулу „вожда“.Доказао се Стратимировић и у многимбудућим биткама и догађајима,али је овапопуларност,са друге, стране навукла иомразу, пре свега духовног поглавара Срба умонархији патријарха Јосифа Рајачића ињеговог утицајног окружења. У том сукобуса конзервативним делом српског друштва,Стратимировић није имао успеха као набојном пољу, на челу српске војске.У суштини, Ђорђе Стратимировић се,обзиром на своје младе године, веома доброносио са проблемима у овим тешкимисудбоносним догађајима. Показао се каоуспешан стратег и командант. Добро сеснашао и у замршеним политичким играма ипри томе је дао велики допринос стварањуСрпске Војводине и поред свих потешкоћакојима је био изложен српски народ напросторима Јужне Угарске.У раду су коришћени постојећа литература,објављена и необјављена, а пре свега богатаархивска грађавезана за револуционарнедогађаје 1848. и 1849. године и активностиЂорђа Стратимировића у њима, затимуспомене савременика, посебно ЂорђаСтратимировића, домаћа и странапериодика, посебно немачка, српска имађарска, архивска грађа. Рад је организованпо тематско-хронолошком принципу узоцену кључних односа ЂорђаСтратимировића са патријархом Рајачићем иСтеваном Книћанином.
Sredinom 19. veka nastavljaju seevropski revolucionarni procesi koji suzahvatili i prostore Habzburškemonarhije. U ovim procesima našao se isrpski narod koji je, svojom„gustinom“,zauzimao južni deoMonarhije.Zahvaljujući privilegijamadobijenim od austrijskog cara Leopolda I, akoje je „zaslužio“ srpski patrijarh ArsenijeIII Čarnojević, Srbi su se u političkomsmislupostavilikao verski određen narod.U periodu od 1690. do 1918. godine srpskacrkvena hijerarhija, srpski političkiprvaci i drugi značajni predstavnicisrpskog naroda trudili su se da očuvajustatus i prava srpskog stanovništva. Sasvoje strane, bečke vlasti su konstantnonastojale da srpske privilegije suze iospore, da bi ih pred kraj Monarhije ipotpuno ukidale. Bilo je to pitanjeopstanka i očuvanja verskog, nacionalnog ikulturnog identiteta srpskog naroda,najpreu Habzburškoj monarhiji, a 60-ih godina 19.veka u Austrougarskoj. Nadolazeći događajikoji su 1848-1849. godine ustalasali srednjuEvropu, prelili su se i na austrijskucarevinu. Ona nije bila nacionalnokompaktna država, već je u svom sastavuimala razne narode (Mađari, Česi, Slovaci,Srbi, Rumuni...), koji su brojčanonadmašili nemačko stanovništvo. U ovimdogađajima, koji su u suštini deoistorijskih tokova,značajnu, a neretko ipresudnu ulogu, imaju ličnosti koje se u takvim okolnostima pojavljuju napolitičkoj sceni.Takva ličnost u srpskom narodu bio jei Đorđe Stratimirović. Poticao je izznačajne srpske porodice Stratimirović,koja svoje poreklo vodi iz Hercegovine.Rodonačelnici ove porodice bili su PetarStratimirović i njegov sin VučkoPetrović-Stratimirović. Vučkov sin bio jeBogić Vučković - Stratimirović.Okončanjem prvog austro-turskog rataPožarevačkim mirom 1718. godine,porastao je ugled Austrije među Srbima uHercegovini, tako da u sledećem austro-turskom ratu 1737-1739. godine, Srbi nudesvoje usluge i uzimaju učešće u ratu. BogićStratimirović je,1737. godine,zapovednikugrofu Herberštajnu ponudio 30.000 vojnikaza rat protiv Turaka. Ipak, ceo projekat senije ostvario zbog mira koji je 1739. godinesklopljen između Austrije i Turske. Nakontoga, u periodu od 1743-1745. godine, Bogići njegov brat Nikola pregovaraju u Beču onaseljavanju Stratimirovića u Austriji.Najpre im je dodeljena pustara Sirig uBačkoj, a kada je taj posed predat bačkomvladiki, Bogić i njegova tri brata (Jovan,Toma i Nikola) u zamenu su dobili posedKulpin. Kada je carica Marija Terezijaotpočela sa intenzivnijim izdavanjemplemićkih diploma znamenitijim srpskimporodicama, sa ciljem da ih pridobijezasvoje vojne i druge planove, plemstvo jestekla i porodica Stratimirović.Iz oveporodice je znameniti i uticajnikarlovački mitropolit StefanStratimirović, stric ĐorđaStratimirovića, što je, kako seispostavilo, bilo itekako važno za budućusudbinu i ulogu Đorđa u nastupajućimistorijskim događajima.Đorđe pl. Stratimirović rođen je 19.februara 1822. godine u Novom Sadu, u kućisvog dede po majci Jovana Petrovića. NJegovotac Vasilije bio je „miran i ozbiljančovek“, kulpinski veleposednik uz to iobrazovan. Slobodno vreme provodio ječitajući naučnu literaturu. Radio je i kaofiškal (advokat) fruškogorskihmanastira. Mati mu je rano preminula 1841. godine.Školovao se u Kulpinu, uz nadzorluteranskog sveštenika Slovaka Rohonjija ikućnog prijatelja poznatog srpskog piscaMilovana Vidakovića. Snažne utiske namladog Đorđa ostavljale su priče oherojskim podvizima iz junačkog rodaStratimirovića i živo sećanje, na istinaretke, ali upečatljive dolaske mitropolitaStratimirovića u Kulpin. I poredprotivljenja roditelja opredelio se zavojnički poziv koji je tada između ostalognudio priliku za brzo napredovanje,posebno Srbina plemenitog roda. Pohađao jenižu Evangelističku gimnaziju u NovomVrbasu. Nakon iznenadne smrti oca,poredpopustljive majke,ispunila mu se želja dapostane vojnik. Pohađanje akademije uTitelu, na kadetskom kursu (tzv.matematika), omogućilo mu je da bude odmahprimljen u drugi razred inženjerijskeakademije u Beču. Tamo je proveo sledećihpet godina, od 1837. do 1841.,gde je kaouzoran učenik stekao mnogobrojneprijatelje. Jedan od najboljih drugova biomu je Ferdinand Bauer, koji je kasnijepostao baron i ministar rata. Iz akademijeje izašao u činu potporučnika dakle postaoje oficir. Bio je raspoređen na službu uregimentu u Milanu, gde je bio omiljenmeđu svojim kolegama. Isticao se kao častani hrabar čovek. Uskoro je sticajem pre svegaprivatnih razloga 1843. godine napustiovojnu službu.Već početkom burnih događaja 1848.godine Stratimirović je uzeo aktivnoučešće u njima. Obrazovan, rodoljubiv, mladi pun energije a pri tome razumevajućipolitičku i društvenu situaciju i stanje ukome se našao srpski narod pre svega uodnosu na Mađare bio je odmah izmeđuostalog i zahvaljujući svom porekluprihvaćen od srpskih prvaka i srpskognaroda. Nakon sastanka srpske delegaciječiji je bio član sa Lajošem Košutom iMađarima u Pešti 1848. godine,stekao jevelike simpatije i poverenje naroda. NJegovovojničko umeće, hrabrost, sposobnost ineosporna harizma pokazali su se već uprvom značajnijem sukobu Srba i Mađara,prilikom napada generala Hrabovskog na Sremske Karlovce 12. juna 1848. godine.Tada je, zahvaljujući energičnoj komandiĐorđa Stratimirovića, ovaj napad jeodbijen, a Mađari su pretrpeli svoj prviporaz. To je Stratimiroviću u narodudonelo veliki ugled i titulu „vožda“.Dokazao se Stratimirović i u mnogimbudućim bitkama i događajima,ali je ovapopularnost,sa druge, strane navukla iomrazu, pre svega duhovnog poglavara Srba umonarhiji patrijarha Josifa Rajačića injegovog uticajnog okruženja. U tom sukobusa konzervativnim delom srpskog društva,Stratimirović nije imao uspeha kao nabojnom polju, na čelu srpske vojske.U suštini, Đorđe Stratimirović se,obzirom na svoje mlade godine, veoma dobronosio sa problemima u ovim teškimisudbonosnim događajima. Pokazao se kaouspešan strateg i komandant. Dobro sesnašao i u zamršenim političkim igrama ipri tome je dao veliki doprinos stvaranjuSrpske Vojvodine i pored svih poteškoćakojima je bio izložen srpski narod naprostorima Južne Ugarske.U radu su korišćeni postojeća literatura,objavljena i neobjavljena, a pre svega bogataarhivska građavezana za revolucionarnedogađaje 1848. i 1849. godine i aktivnostiĐorđa Stratimirovića u njima, zatimuspomene savremenika, posebno ĐorđaStratimirovića, domaća i stranaperiodika, posebno nemačka, srpska imađarska, arhivska građa. Rad je organizovanpo tematsko-hronološkom principu uzocenu ključnih odnosa ĐorđaStratimirovića sa patrijarhom Rajačićem iStevanom Knićaninom.
In the mid-19th century, the ongoing Europeanrevolutionary processes spread out to the area ofthe Habsburg Monarchy. The Serbian nationfound itself amidst these processes, beingdensely populated in the southern region of theMonarchy. Thanks to the privileges granted bythe Austrian Emperor Leopold I, and whichwere “deserved” by the Serbian patriarchArsenije III Čarnojević, the Serbs imposedthemselves in a political sense as a religiouslydetermined nation. In the period between 1690and 1918, the Serbian church hierarchy, theSerbian political leaders and other significantrepresentatives of the Serbian nation strived tokeep the status and rights of the Serbianpopulation. The Viennese authorities, however,on their side made every effort to cut and denyprivileges, and finally abolished themcompletely before the fall of the Monarchy. Itwas a question of survival and preservation ofthe religious, national and cultural identity ofthe Serbian nation, first in the HabsburgMonarchy, and later in the 1860s in Austro-Hungary. The ensuing events which in 1848-1849 shook Central Europe affected theAustrian Empire too. It was not a nationallyhomogenous country but it consisted of severalnations (Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Serbs,Romanians…) that outnumbered the Germanpopulation. In these events, which wereessentially parts of historical processes,important roles, and often decisive ones, wereheld by people who in such circumstancesappear on the political scene.Among the Serbs, such a remarkablepersonality was Djordje Stratimirović. He camefrom the prosperous Serbian Stratimirovicfamily originating from Herzegovina. Hisforefathers were Petar Stratimirović and his sonVučko Petrović-Stratimirović. Vučko’s son wasBogić Vučković-Stratimirović. With the end ofthe Austrian-Turkish war and signing thePožarevac peace treaty in 1718, Austria’spopulation increased among the Serbs inHerzegovina, so in the next Austrian-Turkishwar in 137-1739, the Serbs rendered theirservices and participated in the war. In 1737,Bogić Stratimirović offered 30,000 soldiers toCommander Count Herberstein for the waragainst the Turks. Nevertheless, the wholeproject failed due to the peace agreement signedby Austria and Turkey in 1739. Afterwards, inthe period between 1743-1745, Bogić and hisbrother Nikola negotiated in Vienna on settlingthe Stratimirović family in Austria. First thefamily received a piece of dry land Sirig inBačka, but when that property was given to theBishop of Bačka, Bogić and his three brothers(Jovan, Toma and Nikola) got property inKulpin in exchange. When Empress MaryTherese commenced a widespread grant ofnobility charters to prosperous Serbian families,with the aim of gaining their services formilitary and other purposes, the Stratimirovićfamily was also granted nobility. The eminentand influential Metropolitan of SremskiKarlovci Stefan Stratimirović, uncle to DjordjeStratimirović, was also from this family, whichwas – as it turned out – particularly importantfor Djordje’s the future role in the upcominghistorical events.Djordje Stratimirović was born on 19thFebruary 1822 in Novi Sad, in his the house ofhis grandfather on his mother’s side, JovanPetrović. His father Vasilije was a “timid andserious man,” a landowner from Kulpin, and aneducated one. He spent his leisure time readingscientific literature. He worked as a lawyer ofthe monasteries in Fruška Gora. His mother diedvery early, in 1841. He was educated in Kulpinunder the guidance of a Slovak Lutheran priestRohonji, a family friend of the famous Serbianpoet Milovan Vidaković. The young Djordjewas deeply impressed by the stories of theheroic deeds of the Stratimirović ancestors, aswell as by the vivid memories of the rare butnoteworthy visits of Metropolitan Stratimirovićto Kulpin. Against his parents’ wish, he optedfor military service, which at the time, amongothers, offered an opportunity of fast prosperity,especially for a Serb of noble origin. Heattended the lower Evangelist Gymnasium inNovi Vrbas. After his father’s sudden death,thanks to his mother’s conciliatory nature, hefulfilled his wish to become a soldier. Attendingthe cadet course (the so-called “matematika”) atthe military academy in Titel, enabled himdirect admittance to the second grade ofengineering academy in Vienna. He spent thefollowing five years there, from 1837 to 1841,where as an outstanding student he madenumerous friends. One of his best friends wasFerdinand Bauer, who later became a baron andWar Minister. He left the academy with the rankof lieutenant, in other words he became amilitary officer. He was assigned to the serviceof the regiment in Milan, where he was highlyrespected by his fellow officers. He excelled asan honorable and courageous man. Soon, as aresult of personal reasons, he left militaryservice in 1843.At the very beginning of the turbulentevents of 1848, Stratimirović took an active rolein them. Educated, patriotic, young and full ofenergy, he well understood the political and social circumstances and the situation in whichthe Serbian nation was primarily in relation tothe Hungarians, he was immediately acceptedamong the Serbian leaders and nation owing tohis family background, among other reasons. Asa member of the Serbian delegation, he metwith Lajos Kossuth and the Hungarians in Pestin 1848, and deserved approval and confidenceof his own nation. His military skills, courage,abilities and undeniable charismatic personalitybecame prominent in the first battle between theSerbs and Hungarians, on the occasion ofGeneral Hrabovsky’s attack on SremskiKarlovci on 12th June 1848. Owing to DjordjeStratimirović’s energetic command, this attackwas resisted and the Hungarians suffered theirfirst defeat. This brought Stratimirović immensereputation and the title of Supreme Leader.Stratimirović approved himself in manysuccessive battles and events, but thispopularity, on the other hand, brought alongcertain enmity, primarily of the spiritual leaderof Serbs in the Monarchy, Patriarch JosifRajačić and his influential circle. In this conflictwith the conservative fraction of Serbiansociety, Stratimirović did not win as he did inthe battlefield as the leader of the Serbian army.Essentially, regarding his young age,Djordje Stratimirović dealt with problemsskillfully in those difficult and ominous times.He proved a successful strategist andcommander. He handled the intricate politicalgames well, and at the same time contributedgreatly to the creation of Serbian Vojvodina,despite all the hardships the Serbian nation wasfacing in the region of Southern Hungary.For the purpose of this study variousexisting literature has been used, both publishedand not published, but predominantly archivalmaterials in connection with the Revolution of1848 and 1849, and regarding the activities ofDjordje Stratimirović in it. Other sourcesincluded the memories of his contemporaries,and especially those of Djordje Stratimirović;Serbian and foreign periodicals; archivalsources, predominantly German, Serbian andHungarian. The paper is organized and based ona thematic-chronological principle, with theassessment of the relationship between DjordjeStratimirović with Patriarch Rajačić and Stevan Knićanin.

From 1838 until the end of the European Revolutions in 1852, the French Revolution provided Chartists with a repertoire of symbolism that Chartists would deploy in their activism, histories, and literature to foster a sense of collective consciousness, define a democratic world-view, and encourage internationalist sentiment. Challenging conservative notions of the revolution as a bloody and anarchic affair, Chartists constructed histories of 1789 that posed the era as a romantic struggle for freedom and nationhood analogous to their own, and one that was deeply entwined with British history and national identity. During the 1830s, Chartist opposition to the New Poor Law drew from the gothic repertoire of the Bastille to frame inequality in Britain. The workhouse 'bastile' was not viewed simply as an illegitimate imposition upon Britain, but came to symbolise the character of class rule. Meanwhile, Chartist newspapers also printed fictions based on the French Revolution, inserting Chartist concerns into the narratives, and their histories of 1789 stressed the similarity between France on the eve of revolution and Britain on the eve of the Charter. During the 1840s Chartist internationalism was contextualised by a framework of thinking about international politics constructed around the Revolutions of 1789 and 1830, while the convulsions of Continental Europe during 1848 were interpreted as both a confirmation of Chartist historical discourse and as the opening of a new era of international struggle. In the Democratic Review (1849-1850), the Red Republican (1850), and The Friend of the People (1850-1852), Chartists like George Julian Harney, Helen Macfarlane, William James Linton, and Gerald Massey, along with leading figures of the radical émigrés of 1848, characterised 'democracy' as a spirit of action and a system of belief. For them, the democratic heritage was populated by a diverse array of figures, including the Apostles of Jesus, Martin Luther, the romantic poets, and the Jacobins of 1793. The 'Red Republicanism' that flourished during 1848-1852 was sustained by the historical viewpoints arrived at during the Chartist period generally. Attempts to define a 'science' of socialism was as much about correcting the misadventures of past ages as it was a means to realise the promise announced by the 'Springtime of the Peoples'.

The subject of this contribution is the European reception of the Berlin Royal Opera House and Orchestra from 1842 to 1849 based on German, French, Italian, English, Spanish, Belgian and Dutch music journals. The institution of regular symphony concerts, a tradition continuing to the present, was initiated in 1842. Giacomo Meyerbeer and Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy were hired as general music directors respectively conductors for the symphony concerts in the same year. The death of the conductor Otto Nicolai on 11th May 1849, two months after the premiere of his opera Die lustigen Weiber von Windsor, coincides with the end of the analysed period, especially since the revolutions of 1848 in Europe represent a turning point in the history of the continent. The lively music activities of these three conductors and composers are carefully studied, as well as the guest performances of foreign virtuosos and singers, and the differences between the Berliner Hofoper and the Königstädtisches Theater.

The “invisible fortress”: the Chappe optical telegraph in the Napoleonic FranceEven in the defensive and fortifying processes, two aspects can be found: the material component and the immaterial one. If all the constructive, material and structural procedures are the first, for example, all that concerns remote communications (maximum optics) belongs to the second, an indispensable tool to complete an optimal strategy for offensive and/or defensive operations. Remote optical transmissions are closely connected to the management of defensive systems: this is also what happens with the optical telegraph of Claude Chappe, conceived during the French Revolution and adopted by Napoleon for the potential inherent in the strategic and territorial logic, as for the organization, structuring and sending of encrypted messages (which since the sixteenth century had also seen the interest of Leon Battista Alberti. The densest part of the network spreads to France, from Paris to the borders of the nation. In Europe, you will see achievements in Spain, up to Russia. The Lyon-Paris-Venice line also led to the construction of a Lombard-Piedmontese section. The present contribution stems from a conspicuous research, founded on the twenty-year collaboration of Marotta with the FNARH (Fédération Nationale des Associations de Recherche Historique sur la Poste et les Télécommunications). The system included the installation in high positions (hills, towers or bell towers) of a mechanical device, which could be reached at a distance of kilometers. On top of a fixed pole of about 5 m, the apparatus consisted of a central axis (ordinateur) at the ends of which two mobile arms (indicateurs) were fixed which allowed (in the variation of the reciprocal positions and inclinations) to realize multiple signals, at the base of an entire encrypted visual alphabet, arrived in 1841 up to 61000 messages. Multiple types of models made. The contribution will return the chronological developments of the system, in time and space of territories involved, with the relative comparisons of types, models and languages, also through 3D modeling.

Since the 1700s, natural philosophers understood that heat exchange between two bodies was not precisely linearly dependent on the temperature difference, and that at high temperatures the discrepancy became greater. Over the years, many models were developed with varying degrees of success. The lack of success was due to the difficulty obtaining accurate experimental data, and a lack of knowledge of the fundamental mechanisms underlying radiation heat exchange. Josef Stefan, of the University of Vienna, compiled data taken by a number of researchers who used various methods to obtain their data, and in 1879 proposed a unique relation to model the dependence of radiative heat exchange on the temperature: the T4 law. Stefan’s model was met with some skepticism and was not widely accepted by his colleagues. His former student, Ludwig Boltzmann, who by then had taken a position at the University of Graz in Austria, felt that there was some truth to the empirical model proposed by his mentor. Boltzmann proceeded to show in 1884, treating electromagnetic radiation as the working fluid in a Carnot cycle, that in fact the T4 law was correct. By the time that Boltzmann published his thermodynamic derivation of the radiation law, physicists became interested in the fundamental nature of electromagnetic radiation and its relation to energy, specifically determining the frequency distribution of blackbody radiation. Among this group of investigators was Wilhelm Wien, working at Physikalisch-Technische Reichsanstalt in Charlottenburg, Berlin. He proposed a relation stating that the wavelength at which the maximum amount of radiation was emitted occurred when the product of the wavelength and the temperature was equal to a constant. This became known as Wien’s Displacement Law, which he deduced this by imagining an expanding and contracting cavity, filled with radiation. Later, he combined his Displacement Law with the T4 law to give a blackbody spectrum which was accurate over some ranges, but diverged in the far infrared. Max Planck, at the University of Berlin, built on Wien’s model but, as Planck himself stated, “the energy of radiation is distributed in a completely irregular manner among the individual partial vibrations...” This “irregular” or discrete treatment of the radiation became the basis for quantum mechanics and a revolution in physics. This paper will present brief biographies of the four pillars of the T4 radiation law, Stefan, Boltzmann, Wien and Planck, and outline the methodologies used to obtain their results.