The Transformation of European Politics 1763-1848

Oxford History of Modern Europe

by Paul W. Schroeder

This landmark study of European international politics is a worthy complement to A.J.P. Taylor's classic The Struggle for Mastery in Europe 1848-1918 . Paul Schroeder's comprehensive and authoritative addition to the Oxford History of Modern Europe charts the course of international history over the turbulent era of 1763-1848 in which the map of Europe and much of the world was redrawn time and again. Schroeder examines the wars, political crises, and intricate diplomatic transactions of the age, many of which, especially the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, and the Congress of Vienna and its aftermath, had far-reaching consequences for modern Europe.
Schroeder also provides a new sharply revisionist account of the course of international politics over these years and a major reinterpretation of the structure and operation of the international system. He shows how the practice of international politics was transformed in revolutionary ways with extensive and beneficial effects. The Vienna Settlement established peace, he demonstrates, by abandoning, not restoring, the competitive balance-of-power politics of the eighteenth century, and devising a new political equilibrium in its stead. A European consensus on a new political balance was developed, with new rules to maintain it, ushering in a uniquely peaceful, progressive period in European international politics. This wide-ranging and penetrating study will be of great interest to historians, political scientists, and students of international relations.

Genres: History, European History, Nonfiction, Politics, International Relations, 19th Century, 18th Century

916 pages, Hardcover

First published June 30, 1994

About the author

A specialist in modern European and international diplomatic history, Paul W. Schroeder was professor emeritus of history at the University of Illinois. Initially ordained as a Lutheran pastor, Schroeder left the ministry in 1954 to attend graduate school, receiving his Ph.D in history from the University of Texas at Austin in 1958.

Among Schroeder's awards was a Fulbright (1956–57), a National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship (1973), and designation as University of Illinois Jubilee Professor of Liberal Arts and Sciences (1992). He was a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (1983–84), a visiting research fellow at Merton College, Oxford (1984), and a visiting scholar at the Mershon Center for International Security at Ohio State University (1998).

Reviews

[Kevin Moynihan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really enjoyed the book. Incredibly dense and slow going but appears to cover everything. Gives you background to read more about the areas that pique your interest. Author willing to disagree with generally accepted views on a number of topics which was interesting.

Favorably noted in The Napoleonic Wars by Alexander Mikaberidze, 2020, p.xiv

[Stephen Lockett · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is not so much about what happened but more about why, viewed in terms of power politics. If you have some basic historical knowledge of the period 1762 – 1848 especially the Napoleonic era this book provides fascinating insights into how the key political actors were working behind the scenes to maintain or re-establish some workable balance of power political system.

[JR Roach · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a masterpiece - completely lives up to its reputation and more.

[Balazs · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoughtful, erudite, informative. The pinnacle of scholarship.

[Simon Mee · Rating 5 out of 5]

First up – this is a brilliant book written by a brilliant mind.

Thus Russia, which for five years had worked with France to defeat Britain and subjugate Spain, succeeding only in ruining its own economy in the process, now, facing a life-and-death threat from France, announced that it would graciously accept peace and an alliance from the hands of Britain and Spain, if they paid Russia enough for it.

Any “complaints” I have below should be read as coming from a far less enlightened mind. Schroeder is extremely clear with his language while discussing complicated matters. The first chapters and the conclusion, setting out the “before” and “after” both support and are supported by the main text.

One has to admire the panache with which Russia, concealing its actual peril and panic, played the role of the courted party; there would be no comparable performance until Stalin’s after 1941, and then the Russians could at least claim legitimately that they were bearing by far the greatest burden in the war.

The description Three Polish partitions are a particular highlight of balance-of-power politics and the discussion of events as a whole shows the hollowness of such policies.

A big book

The Transformation of European Politics is long. And you do have to think about that, because it’s a narrative history of diplomacy that runs for 85 odd years, which means that not only is it long, it is also relatively narrow in scope.

My feel is that Schroeder is demonstrating the consistency of the transformation of diplomacy throughout the period – almost turning it into a law of gravity (albeit a “transforming” law from balance-of-power to rules-based). Such a law must always apply, so we delve into every Iberian turbulence of the 1820s to demonstrate Schroeder’s (undeniable) brilliance.

From an academic perspective, I accept that this approach is fair enough. However, in a dream world where every writer catered for my attention span, I would settle for a 400 page book that focused primarily on case studies of the period, with footnotes alluding to the more minor incidents, such as the latest Russo-Turkish contretemps. But, as mentioned, the length is justifiable.

Against the Tide

The common verdict that the partition paved the way for Poland’s extinction later is certainly true, but not exactly in the ways one might suppose.

Schroeder is very (very) keen on correcting the reader on the apparently-popular-yet-incorrect understanding is of multiple events.

Those who argue that Alexander was bent on increasing Russian influence and hegemony in Europe ignore how many things he did in 1815 which worked in the other direction.

And, sure, it seems like Schroeder can perceive the true meaning behind events. However, the fact that he does it so often leaves me with suspicions that the The Transformation of European Politics is more revisionist that it lets on – warping events to better buttress Schroeder’s overarching thesis.

I lack the academic or intellectual capabilities to fully test whether Schroeder is taking poorly supported interpretations of events. That the book still stands as high-regarded as it is suggests he was not totally making things up (he disliked citing, but did include a reasonable amount of footnotes). Maybe he just liked to brag about how he had the ability to discern causal, and caused-by, factors – he was certainly entitled to.

I should point out that the book continues to feel searingly relevant, despite its particularity – truly written by a transcendent mind:

The light that thus began to shine in international politics in 1815 was brief, fitful, and wintry. It would be followed by a long twilight and an even longer, bitterly cold night. Let there be no mistake, however: 1815 was not a false dawn. It marked a new day, and it helps make other new days thinkable.

[William · Rating 1 out of 5]

Wordy; outdated and riddled with neocon' Bias. This huge Frankstein reeks of WASP teleology.