Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 20th, 2012, 02:28 AM   #11

srb7677's Avatar
Liberal Crusader
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Plymouth,UK
Posts: 2,262

World War 1 was devastating for European monarchies from the defeated nations. It effectively ended the monarchies of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Russia.

But it is worth bearing in mind that many other monarchies survived, and it was actually World War 2 that ended up finishing them. Both the Romanian and Serbian/Yugoslav monarchies were effectively ended by World War 2, and the Greek and Italian monarchies did not long survive the unpopularity wrought by the war.
srb7677 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old June 20th, 2012, 03:03 AM   #12

Cavanboy's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,710

Ww1 lead to ww2 which led to the muslimization of europe.
Cavanboy is offline  
Old June 20th, 2012, 03:10 AM   #13
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Bolton, UK
Posts: 1,750

Quote:
that led to the world war with a Kaiser who never wanted to fight his mother’s country.
Victoria was the Kaiser's grandmother.
Brunel is offline  
Old June 20th, 2012, 03:12 AM   #14
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Bolton, UK
Posts: 1,750

Ahhhh. I see what you mean now. You are referring to the Princess Royal.
Brunel is offline  
Old June 20th, 2012, 04:52 AM   #15

Ancientgeezer's Avatar
Revisionist
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Closer to Calais than to Birmingham
Posts: 3,449

Funny old thing--all of the European Monarchies in 1914 were Constitutional Monarchies. The Kaiser and the Tsar have been portrayed as absolute despots and while they had a bit more power than, say the King of England, they were still bound by law to the ultimate will of their parliaments. Even the Sultan was a constitutional monarch. After 1918 many people were happy to be ruled by absolutists from the right and the left.
Ancientgeezer is online now  
Old June 20th, 2012, 06:01 AM   #16

Moishe3rd's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Minnesota
Posts: 702

WWI effectively ended the monarchies because the various kings represented the extreme class divisions between the "nobility" and the "common people."
It seems that most people, even today, are unaware that a comparative handful of upper class nobility ruled over hundreds of millions of peasants with extreme disregard for the living conditions of the "lower classes."
By the end of WWI all of Europe was starving and destroyed while the ruling classes still lived in abundance.
Most are unaware that after the November 11th Armistice, Germany also had a Communist Revolution:
As of 4 November delegations of the sailors scattered out to all larger cities in the country. Already by 7 November the revolution had seized all larger coastal cities as well as Hanover, Brunswick, Frankfurt and Munich. In Munich a "Workers' and Soldiers' Council" forced the last King of Bavaria, Ludwig III, to abdicate. Bavaria was the first member state of the German Empire to be declared a Council Republic (German: Räterepublik), the Bavarian Soviet Republic by USPD-member Kurt Eisner. In the following days the royals of all the other German states abdicated, the last one on 23 November was Prince Günther Victor of Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt. The Workers' and Soldiers' Councils were almost entirely made up of SPD and USPD members. Their program was democracy, pacifism and anti-militarism.

England could have gone the same way but Liberal Party Prime Minister Lloyd George wanted to hold on to power and was closely allied with the Conservatives. As the German Empire was disintegrating, England could claim they won the war and they got to dictate the insane Treaty of Versailles which effectively proclaimed Lloyd George victorious and punished the now defunct German government.
(Plus the Easter Rising in Ireland had been brutally suppressed in 1916 and gave both the Nobility and the Common people a reason to be wary of both repression leading to revolution and revolution leading to the massacres of the peasants.)

However, England and France and the rest of Europe still all came close to the vast majority of "lower classes" rising up and seizing power.
The main reason they did not fall as Germany and Russia had was that they were immediately able to rebuild their economies and employ the "lower classes" in productive work.
This was tenuous bargain that was only finally saved from "revolution" by the massive destruction of WWII and the subsequent engine of Economic Freedom and Law of of the United States of America.

Yes, the monarchies were destroyed by WWI. Those that weren't became effectively powerless.
Moishe3rd is offline  
Old June 20th, 2012, 08:29 AM   #17
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,212

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientgeezer View Post
Funny old thing--all of the European Monarchies in 1914 were Constitutional Monarchies. The Kaiser and the Tsar have been portrayed as absolute despots and while they had a bit more power than, say the King of England, they were still bound by law to the ultimate will of their parliaments. Even the Sultan was a constitutional monarch. After 1918 many people were happy to be ruled by absolutists from the right and the left.
The Russian Duma was 10 years old, very undemocratically elected, and not very powerful.

However, I agree that these multiethnic monachical empires all seemed to be destroyed by the war, Austria, Russia, and Turkey. Agree also that what came into the void was Communism and Fascism, more absolutist, more repressive, and not ruled by traditional royalty and aristocracy.

Also, perhaps the beginning of the destruction of empires in general, followed by decolonization in the second half of the 20th century and the fall of the Soviet Union.
betgo is offline  
Old June 20th, 2012, 09:22 AM   #18

Kotromanic's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Central USA
Posts: 463

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brunel View Post
Victoria was the Kaiser's grandmother.
If I recall correctly the mother and grandmother were both named Victoria.
Kotromanic is offline  
Old June 21st, 2012, 10:33 AM   #19
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 275

Quote:
Originally Posted by mofli87 View Post
russia was very prosperous in an economical/military sense...the "tzarist industrialisation" would have been much more effective than the communist by the 30's. It's very likely that the german military leaders talked about '14 as the perfect time of a war because a prosperous russia would have changed the balace of powers.


"Despite scholarly controversy concerning the consequences of active government intervention in economy, the late tsarist era after 1880 is characterized by the significant acceleration of the output growth rate. Between the 1860s and 1880s the average annual rate of growth of net national product was 1.8 percent, while for the period thereafter, up to the 1909 - 1913 period, the rate of economic growth was 3.3 percent. At the same time, Russia experienced significant population growth, which put the Russian empire in the group of poorer West European countries in per capita terms. Russian economic growth was largely the consequence of the relatively rapid rate of growth of population (1.6% from 1885 to 1913) and labor force (1.7% from 1885 to 1913), pointing to the extensive character of the growth. Less reliable data on the tsarist capital stock suggests that roughly two - thirds of the growth of Russian output was accounted for by the growth of conventional labor and capital inputs. With respect to structural change, the decline in the shares of agriculture (from 58% in 1885 to 51% in 1913) and expansion of industry, construction, and transportation (from 23% in 1885 to 32% in 1913) suggests that the Russian economy had indeed embarked on a path of modern economic growth."

Read more: Imperial Economic Growth: Information from Answers.com
Don't forget, that the real-economy of Austria-Hungary surpassed not only Italian but French too. AH-Monarchy had 5M Tonne annual steel output, while Russia had only 3M Tonne France had only 4M Tonne and Italy had only 2M Tonnes annual. A-H monarhy also had the 4th largest heavy industry. The A-H coal production and consumption also was the 4th on the world.

Russians hadn't serious factories, its only weaapon manufacture was the Putilov ,which was financed and established by France. WW1 Russia needed mostly western weapons and ernomous foreign supports to keep in war. Remember, due to the lack of technology, most parts of their dreadnought-class battleships had to imported! While Austria-Hungary was perhabs the only country what have never used such weapons which were produced on foreign solil. The total production of Austro-Hungarian machine building ( focused on automotive industry power plants ecelctric industry railways ) was the forth largest of the world, Only the American German and British machine building industries were larger.

Last edited by Opinion; June 21st, 2012 at 10:54 AM.
Opinion is offline  
Old June 21st, 2012, 11:10 AM   #20
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 275

Quote:
Originally Posted by arras View Post
WWI was fatal for European monarchies. Reason was that conflict was huge strain on national morale and resources. Much larger than anybody predicted at the beginning of war. At the end governments have to resort to nationalism in order to rally nation to endure and continue fighting. Monarchies however were on disadvantage because while nationalism helped to win war it also helped to destroy monarchies. Especially multinational monarchies like Russia and Austro-Hungary.

So yes WWI was graveyard of European monarchism and beginning of new era of national states.
Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia as nation states? It is very strange due to their ethnic combination. They were silmilar "nation states" as the United Kingdom. (which caused the British symphaty towards the other hybrid states of Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia)
Opinion is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
european, monarchy, point, turning, ww1


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My two cents on the turning point WW2 sylla1 War and Military History 0 July 2nd, 2010 04:33 PM
The True Turning Point Isoroku295 War and Military History 136 June 3rd, 2010 05:47 AM
Bigger turning point, Civil War TrenchWarFare215 War and Military History 2 May 19th, 2010 10:37 AM
Biggest Turning Point For The World? PCWebAdvice General History 77 April 14th, 2009 06:37 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.