an age of democracy and progress,1815-1914?

Answer 1

Yes...and no. Politically, 1815 marked the end of the Napoleonic Wars in Europe. French dictator Napoleon Bonaparte was finally defeated at the battle of Waterloo in 1815. In the years that followed, there was a time of relative peace throughout Europe. Most major European powers- Great Britain, France, Russia, Germany (in several incarnations), Austria-Hungary and Italy maintained a system of careful alliances that worked to largely diminish conflict. This does not mean that there were no conflicts during this time (in fact, to some degree all major powers were at war with each other at some point in this time period, but the wars were of relatively short duration and were usually over small parcels of territory). Politically, this era saw the consolidation of territory and the creation of nations that looked largely like they do today- including Germany and Italy, among others.

One may argue, however, that the relative peace of this time period is shallow, in the sense that the problematic alliances, and the still present question regarding national sovereignty and nationality, would eventually reach a boiling point with World War I in 1914. For example, the unified German republic under Bismarck included only part of the German Diaspora, which was spread throughout many nations (western France, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Austria-Hungary). Furthermore, it was not uncommon for one's national identity to be defined more by one's region or community than one's country. For example, Prussians, living in an Eastern region of greater Germany, still felt more like "Prussians" than Germans. A lack of a clear understanding of national identity and geographic boundaries would create problems down the line, eventualy leading to the Second World War.

This time period also marked the peak in colonial expansion. Most major European powers had colonies throughout the so-called Third World, including colonies in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. To some limited degree, there were also holdout colonies in Latin America and the Caribbean, although these would win independence much sooner than colonies in Africa, the Middle East and Asia. Some historians regard the colonial period as the pinnacle of European predominance, especially British: after World War I, most European nations would steadily lose their colonies. But considering the fact that colonies were, by definition, not democracies, the post-colonial era following the World Wars is regarded as the "true" period of democratization by many alternative scholars.

For example, while most European nations dismantled the old monarchic systems of previous eras, establishing Parliamentary rule and direct election of representatives, many groups of people (including blacks, minorties, and even women) lacked the franchise (right to vote) and also lacked social and political protection (they were, in modern parlance, "second class citizens"). Even poor white citizens could be imprisoned for not paying off debts. Children had few or no protections (children were often employed by factories because their small hands could fit inside narrow spaces in machinery). "Sweat shop" labor was very commonplace; in fact, the Industrial Revolution which was started in this era created horrible types of working conditions for workers. Workers frequently labored in unhealthy environments and had little pay, often working seven days a week. While there was some degree of reform- health conditions began to improve after newspapers and books began to highlight the appaling working conditions, and courts finally started to affirm the right of workers to unionize and protest- in large part the lower and middle classes, as well as minoroties, had few economic or political rights. In Russia, serfdom- a de facto agrarian-based slavery much like that in America- was still present even up to 1917. As you can tell, democracy didn't impact everyone equally, and it was still the upper classes that held most economic and political rights. (Some argue they still do).

Technolgically, this era defines the Industrial Revolution. Beginning in the late 18th century in Britain and culminating with Germany's "iron and blood" (steel and war materials) industrialization during the late 19th century, the Industrial Revolution saw major advances in such technologies as communication (the telephone was invented during this time; an enormous trans-Atlantic telephone cable was laid beneath the ocean to allow trans-continental telephone communication); in transport (the development of steam and coal-powered trains, ships, and later, automobiles run on batteries, gasoline or diesel made travel much faster); in manufacturing (more and more factories became automated, Henry Ford perfected the factory line that helped mass-produce automobiles); in energy (direct and then alternating current brought power to homes, Edison invented the light bulb, appliances made home life easier; Kodak invented the personal camera), among others. Scientists finally began to unravel the complicated reams of physics and chemistry (some of our greatest scientific minds- including Einstein and Edison- rose to prominence in this period). With the exception of perhaps the modern computer, the Internet, and pharmaceuticals (Aspirin being an exception- it was invented by a German chemist named Bayer during this time), almost all modern technologies can trace their origins to this time period.

All in all, this era represents a period of remarkable growth in technologies as well as the emergence of nation-states. One can argue that many colonies, and still even some European powers, were not true democracies at this time. However, even Russia, the last major power to undergo a people's revolutuion of sorts, saw some democratization with the Duma (a kind of House of Representatives, although it was reserved for rich white noblemen). Many nations had established Parliaments by 1917, with monarchy remaining only a force nominally in most countries. The two exceptions here are Germany and Russia: Germany had continued to seek political leadership from the "Kaiser", a title that is similar to king. Chancellors of the German Parliament, for example, would have to directly answer to Kaiser Wilhelm II during the late 19th and early 20th century, and the Chancellor could be removed from office at his pleasure. In Russia, the czar (actually czar is just Russian for kaiser), also had these powers, but in many ways his power was more reminiscent of classical monarchic rule: the czar was king both in name and in function, even having to commit himself to such mundane tasks as approving marriages. Yet, most lower and middle class people had few economic and political rights, even in America. So real progress in democratization reveals, at best, a mixed record during this time.

(Note: Unfortunately the 1917 "People's" Revolution brought about not a democracy but communism. Russia has yet to see a fully functioning democracy).

Answer 2

Hardly so, Monarchies were trying desperately to hang on and or reinvent themselves but the French Revolution helped knock that down and bring and end to the age of Privilege by birth.

Answer 3

More like an age of imperialism (for European countries) and isolationism (for the US).

Admittedly, though, imperialism did eventually expedite democratic governments in places like India, some African nations, and South American nations.

Answer 4

no