Term Paper

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1znnxue1cRperNxCxdqe-eKGmWi4xVo_tRcv0dbrBiKc/edit?hl=en_US

4/15 DBQ

In 1914, a chain reaction of events took place which plunged Europe into World War I, or the War to end all wars. The world had never seen anything like it before. Over 10 million people lost their lives from 1914-1918. The war started after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, but there was more that happened before this. Germany and Italy had just unified. Germany was looking to become a vast and expanding empire by expanding her army. There was a new sense of nationalism in newly established countries such as Serbia. Serbia believed that anything bad that happened to Austria-Hungary was great for them. Tensions were high. War was coming. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand was the spark to set it off. At the time, Europe was divided into two different alliances, the Triple Alliance and the Central Powers. The main reasons that brought about World War I were increasing Serbian nationalism, rising imperialistic Germany, and the Alliance systems in place at the time.
Some say that it was in fact Germany who started this Great War instead of Serbia. It was a Serbian who killed Archduke Ferdinand, however Germany acted on behalf of Austria- Hungary without thinking. The alliance system between to two required them to support the other should she go to war. This was the main reason why Wilhelm II supported Austria-Hungary's aggression against Serbia, without considering the risk. (Doc 1). The Triple Alliance that was formed obliged the others to join no alliance at that time against any one of the other members. Also, no matter what cause the one country has to attack another, the rest of the alliance is required to back them up (Doc 2).
Serbia was a newly unified country at the time of WWI. Serbians were very nationalistic, but the organization known as the Black Hand took it to a new level. The black hand was a secret underground organization of Serbian nationalists who plotted terrorist attacks against their enemies (Doc 6). They were oppressed for the longest time by Austria-Hungary, making Franz Ferdinand a prime target for an attack. This specific attack plunged Europe deep into WWI. After the assassination, Austria-Hungary sent Serbia a list of demands for the death of the Archduke. These demands were so unrealistic that it would have been an insult to give Austria-Hungary what it wanted. Austria-Hungary was looking for another excuse to go to war at the time, therefore, the unrealistic demands. Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia July 28, 1914 (Doc 7).
Recently united Germany was taking a more imperialistic stance on matters in the early 20th century. Kaiser Wilhelm II expanded the army. They believed that they had not interest in conquering others lands for the sake of expanding. They believed they were saving the weaker states from unstable governments, and wanted to maximize the potential of each new region under the kaiser's control (Doc 4). They wanted to model themselves after the British Empire (The sun never sets on the British Empire). When Austria-Hungary pleaded for German help before declaring war, Wilhelm supporter them before thinking of the consequences. He thought this would be a prime opportunity to expand his borders. By this time, Austria-Hungary was at war with Serbia, and an ally of Germany. Serbia pleaded with Russia for help. After Russia had started to mobilize its army, Czar Nicholas II pleaded with his cousin Wilhelm II to help him avoid the great war which he foresaw. In this later Willy and Nicky communication, Nicholas begs Germany to not go to war, and to prevent Austria-Hungary from going to war. However, Wilhelm cites his alliance with Austria-Hungary, saying he must support their wars. Nicholas does not wish it this way, but he is going to be forced into the Great War by both his own people, and the terms of his alliance (Doc 8). Shortly after, Germany declared war on Russia, and France so that they can attack before they mobilized their entire armies. Neither of these two emperors would have their position after the war. The war cost Nicholas his life, as well as the lives of his family, and Wilhelm was exiled in the Netherlands.
The events leading up to World War I brought about the "Great War" in Europe. The world hadn't seen a conflict that was so global before. There was never a war that claimed so many lives. There were many causes. Franz Ferdinand's assassination was the spark to set the war in motion, however, other international reasons were the main causes of the war.

3/25 DBQ

In the late 19th century, Europe was a mess in terms of its social classes. The lower class contained most of the people, they made very little money, and there was often little hope of moving up. These poor people lived in cramped apartments with several other families. The upper class was made up of those few people who happened to be lucky enough to own the factories. Upper class people lived in big mansions far removed from the common people. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the differences of the classes. Figure 1 shows the poverty of the lower class on a train, and it also shows how tired they are after a hard day's work. Figure 2 shows the upper class waling around the center of town that has big buildings, and the people in the figure are dressed in their best clothes. Europe was looking dismal to the people in the lower class, but with the help of labor unions and the ideas of radicals such as Karl Marx, these people would soon be the ones running the political scene in Europe.
Socialism is the idea of equality in society. All of the wealth would equally be divided among the people. , and the political power would be the same for every party or group. If one has the right to vote, all votes carry the same weight. The people in figure 1, the factory workers, had no say in what happened at their work. If the boss didn't like something, he had it removed. The workers who became socialist believed in equal rights for everyone, no matter what social class he was. However, socialism would not always work. There would have to be some regulation on equality. The government would eventually have to resort to taking some of the people's rights away. Over time, a socialist country will turn into a dictatorship where nobody has any rights unless they have a powerful position. Socialism is a good idea on the surface, but when one looks into it, he finds that the long term effect can devastate a country.
Karl Marx was a radical writer and thinker of his time. One of his first works was the Communist Manifesto, saying that it was time that the Communists openly publish their long term goals for all to see. Karl Marx had his own idea about socialism. His idea was to have the people in figure 1 rebel against the factory owners, kill them/replace those in figure 2, and to run the show themselves. Another thing that Marx taught was financial equality. When the upper class was overthrown, the money was to be divided equally among the people and if anyone got too greedy, have another revolution and overthrow whoever got greedy. Marx's idea is radical, but he has some good ideas in his theories. Financial equality is good, but there is no way possible that there will not be someone who wants more. A Marxian society will have numerous revolutions, possible 1 a year.
The biggest help, long term and short term, to the people of figure 1 in their struggle against figure 2 was labor unions. Labor unions pushed for many of the benefits that the working class has today including: larger pay, workman's compensation, and a five day work week. Labor unions won the fight against working ridiculous hours. Before unions, people were working 14 hour shifts daily. With labor unions, people worked 12 hour shifts with a week end to recuperate. The higher pay helped to bolster the middle class. The strongest country is one with the strongest middle class, explaining why some countries fared better in WW1 than others.
Before these ideas came about, Europe was a terrible place to be. One was either really really rich, or he was really really poor. There was no changing one's status. The rich kept getting richer, and the poor got poorer. The conditions that the rich forced onto their workers would be considered unheard of today. People would be going back to work almost as soon as they got to the cramped apartment they considered home. The painters of figures 1 and 2 sided with Marx. Figure 1 showed what they were, and figure 2 showed what they can become if they follow his ideas. With the help of socialism, Marxism, and labor unions, Western Europe was able to gain rights, and obtain better working conditions, and pay for its workers. These new things made the middle class grow. The countries with strong middle classes were the wealthier countries, meaning that the factory workers determined the wealth of the entire nation.

FRQ 3/18

Contrast the political views, methods, successes, and failures of Cavour and Metternich.

Count Cavour, and Metternich were heroes of two fragmented nations. Cavour was instrumental in unifying Italy with an approach to make alliances with the strong, and to win by any means necessary. Metternich was a strong believer of equality, and realism making him a stereo-typical realpolitik. Realpolitiks based many of their ideas on the balance of power, and equality. Even though both men had reasonable policies, Count Cavour has to be seen as a better leader because of his unorthodox tactics, and the results that followed.

Count Cavour was appointed prime minister by Victor Immanuel. His job was to aid Victor in the unification of Italy. Before this, Italy was a fragmented nation that was controlled by the papacy. Italy had been divided by social barriers, the south being very poor, and the north being very wealthy. Victor Immanuel, the king of Piedmont had other ideas. He appointed Cavour to aid him in the unification. Cavour united most of the northern and middle states in Italy, but was encountered with other revolutionaries. He went to Austria for help, and Austria quelled the revolutionaries. However, Austria occupied Northern Italy. He appealed to France to fight Austria for them, and they won the northern provinces with the exception of Venitia. The southern territories were still shaky, so he brought back his former enemy, Garibaldi, to help him with southern Italy. Garibaldi united the south, and Sicily in the name of Victor Immanuel. Last, he ousted the French who had occupied Rome for years, and made Rome the capital.

Metternich preferred realism over ambition. Also, he based everything on equal rights. Metternich would not fight for a cause unless it involved equal rights for every citizen. Metternich's greatest success was the Congress of Vienna. He was a major diplomatic figure in the negotiations at the gathering. When he first started his career, the Napoleonic wars had just about ended. All that was left were the terms of defeat, which he negotiated. He was successful in ousting Napoleon from Europe, and quelling that threat from ever happening again, however he failed in preventing France from becoming that strong militarily again.

The political views of both men are similar, but different. Cavour wants the best for his people, however he still looks out for himself. Metternich's highest priority is equal rights and equal representation for his people. In the game of political advancement, Cavour played perfectly. He made alliances with strong countries in order to obtain that which he desired. He would stop at nothing, even appealing to his former enemies for help. Metternich had a realpolitik approach. He believed that republics and democracies were the best policies. He believed in a country run by representatives of the people, not a country with representatives for the people.

Both men had approaches that were acceptable for their situations. Cavour was the man responsible for the unification of Italy, stopping at nothing in order to do so. Metternich was a key figure in ending the reign of Napoleon Bonaparte, but failed to see that France would never rise to their previous military strength again. In the end, Cavour's policies were better. He achieved every goal he had if he had not exceeded them. He united Italy, and made some important alliances. Metternich made key alliances, but failed to see his goals fulfilled. The alliances made by both of these men would be very influential in World War I, as these alliances determined which side the future combatants would fight for.

Third Outline

Thesis: Napoleon Bonaparte was the first modern general using a combination of assaults from cavalry and infantry on weak points in the enemy's army rather than traditional maneuvering and frontal assaults.

Definitions: To be named later

1. Fundamentals of his tactics (Primary Sourcebook, Napoleonic Series)
1. Before Napoleon became a general on the battle field, leaders were chosen by birthright instead of on merit
1. These generals outmaneuvered each other until one was pinned down and merely surrendered
2. Battles were never broken down, and thought out. They were all out frontal assaults
2. The infantry was the most important factor in his military strategies
1. The infantry was the larger part of his army, and fought in the thick of all of the action
2. They were kept together by non-commissioned officers who lead from the front
1. They kept a sabre to direct the battle

Ii. They were also responsible for keeping the units together

3. If the battle was going ill, most soldiers to would be looking towards their own safety
1. To prevent this, the men fought shoulder to shoulder two or three ranks deep
2. Also there was a cavalry picket line stationed to the rear to "encourage" fleeing soldiers to return to the battle

3. Napoleon determined his own battlefields to his advantage (Napoleonic Series)
1. He fought in roofs, and city streets, areas where war had not been at the time
2. He tended to avoid unfavorable terrain such as swamp and woods
3. "In a fortnight you have won six victories, taken twenty-one standards, fifty-five pieces

plains in the world. Rich provinces, great of artillery, several strong positions, and conquered the richest part of Piedmont [a region in northern Italy]; you have captured 15,000 prisoners and killed or wounded more than 10,000 men. . . ." (The History Guide)

4. On the battlefield, cavalry and infantry played important roles, but the battle was won with infantry
1. Napoleon employed constant drills to keep them ready for battle at any time
2. They marched in a long, narrow column that could potentially stretch for miles.
1. If ambushed, it was wide open for gun or canon fire.
2. One of his most important drills was changing from a column to a line of battle and vice versa
1. It was very difficult to change from column to a battle line
2. Whenever the move was preformed, they were under fire
3. Any disruption was deadly
1. If there was a natural barrier, the entire line was stopped
2. Infantry was weak against a cavalry charge because their guns were only effective for 50 yards.
4. They had different formations depending on whether they faced cavalry, or infantry

5. Another revolutionary tactic of Napoleon was the use of skirmishers
1. These men would harass the enemy endlessly
1. They would cut, dash, and run
2. Then report what they found to their commander
2. These men would usually be equipped with muskets and bayonets, or they would be grenadiers

6. The cavalry played a lesser role than in earlier times, although it was still important
1. Cavalry was not longer used for heavy engagements
2. They were more of a scouting force
3. If cavalry engaged at all
1. They engaged other cavalry to neutralize it
2. they did a quick charge to pin their enemy in one place
3. Or they were engaged in hopes of a quick victory

2. Napoleonic Wars
1. War of the Third Coalition (internal situation of France)
1. France aimed at invading Briton , but their navy was destroyed
2. France attacked Briton's allies Russia, and Austria
1. Briton's ally Austria surrendered with the treaty of Pressburg, ending the war
2. However Russia had not committed their entire military force
2. War of the Fourth Coalition
1. Russia and Prussia declared war against France
2. Prussia was wiped out before Russia could mobilize its soldiers
3. Russia was defeated trying to retake the Prussian capital
3. War of the Fifth Coalition (Strategy in Peninsular War)
1. A series of naval hit and run battles at the same time as the War of 1812, and the Peninsular war
2. Austria attacked Napoleon as soon as he conquered Spain
1. France defeated Austria at the Battle of Wagram
2. Austria signed the treaty of Schonbrunn, ending the war
3. Upon the end of the war, the French empire was at its height
4. Defeats
1. Invasion of Russia
1. Russia is huge
2. Scorched Earth tactics used by Russians
1. Russia cut off French supplies
2. Napoleon retreated
3. Other effects as to why they lost
2. War of the sixth Coalition
1. Battle of Lepzieg
1. Biggest battle in modern history, not counting both World Wars
2. Over 600,000 combatants
2. Exile (Farewell to Old Guard)
3. "Soldiers of my Old Guard: I bid you farewell. For twenty years I have constantly accompanied you on the road to honor and glory. In these latter times, as in the days of our prosperity, you have invariably been models of courage and fidelity. With men such as you our cause could not be lost; but the war would have been interminable; it would have been civil war, and that would have entailed deeper misfortunes on France. " (Farewell to Old Guard)
3. War of the Seventh Coalition/ Hundred Days
1. Escape from exile
2. About 100 days of continuous fighting
3. Finally defeat at Waterloo by the Duke of Wellington
4. Exiled at St. Helena

Citations

Strategy in Peninsular War 200. Peninsular War. Retrieved March 4, 2011, from http://peninsularwar200.org/strategy.html

(1995). The Napoleon Series. Retrieved March 2, 2011, from http://www.napoleon-series.org/home/c_home.html

Napoleon's Proclamation to His Troops in Italy (March-April 1796). The History Guide. Retrieved March 5, 2011, from http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/nap1796.htm

The "Code Napoleon". The History Guide. Retrieved March 5, 2011, from http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/code_nap.html

Napoleon's Account of the Internal Situation of France in 1804. Hanover Historical Text Projects. Retrieved March 2, 2011, from http://history.hanover.edu/texts/NAPOLEON.html

Napoleon Bonaparte: Farewell to the Old Guard, April 29, 1814. Modern History Sourcebook. Retrieved March 1, 2011, from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1814napoleon.html

History of the Modern World. Primary Sourcebook. Retrieved March 3, 2011, from

http://glencoe.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/3333366666/student_view0/chapter10/primary_sources__maps_and_images.html

p 172 review

1. c

2. B
   

3. d

4. A
   
5. d
6. a
7. d
8. b
9. e
10. c
11. d
12. a
13. c
14. d
    
15. C
    

18. b
19. c

20. D
    

13/20

3/14 FRQ

Please answer the following in a five paragraph academic free response: To what extent did Romanticism challenge Enlightenment views of human beings and the natural world and how did this challenge illustrate changes between the Enlightenment and Romantic views of the relationship between God and the individual?

Romanticism was a way of living that was more emotional, and focused on the individual than anything that the world had ever seen before. It existed in everything, including; art, music, and poetry. In music, everything was predictable before romanticism. One would be able to expect everything that was played. Romanticism got away from that with different emotions that were felt at different times in no particular order. The new views of the Romantics brought about an even greater change than the Enlightenment did when it came to religion, and also challenged Enlightenment ideals towards the human being, and the natural world at the same time.

Before the Enlightenment, the human body was thought of only as a gateway into heaven. Should this body lead a good life, the soul would be granted access into heaven. The Enlightenment was focused on science, and was determined to figure out how it worked through a series of tests, ans dissections. The Romantics did away with both of those ideas. They believed that the body was a beautiful gift from nature, and that it can be anything that one wants it to be, and not some tool for scientists or a possession of God. Romantic poet George Keats witnessed a surgery undergone without anesthesia for the one being operated on. He was so horrified by this experience he dropped out of medical school and became a student of nature.

The natural world was thought of as God's gift to humanity for the longest time until the Enlightenment questioned the Churches teaching. Enlightenment thinkers viewed the natural world in terms of science, believing it is their practicing ground. Romantics had a more emotional approach. They were the type of people to sit back and admire their surroundings. Poet George Keats experienced much tragedy in his life, but still lied down in his garden to simply admire the beauty of the world around him. Romantics viewed it as a beautiful thing, not a gift from God, or man's proving ground

The belief in God was brought into question throughout the age of Romanticism. An anonymous pamphlet was sent out in Oxford university entitled The Necessity of Atheism. This called to question why one should believe in a supernatural being without any proof of him existing. Why should he lead on a good life without any reward when he dies. When he dies... that is the end. If there was nothing after death, man should do what he wants during his life. The author of this pamphlet was a Romantic poet by the name of Percy Bysshe Shelly. Shelly brought many modern things that happen today. He is the reason why there are some who question God. He was the first person of note to leave his wife for another, a practice that is unfortunately popular today. Shelly was the first celebrity to live a life that was entirely public. Shelly did many things against the Church's idea of God. He openly rejected him and encouraged others to follow suit. He left his wife for another, and made love to her while he was still married to another.

The Romantics called everything into question. Ideas that were accepted, were now rejected because of these radical thinkers. The ideas of the Enlightenment were no different. The Romantics discouraged people from donating their bodies to science, as they were a beautiful thing, not at the disposal of other men. The natural world was something to be admired, not destroyed. This outpouring of emotion from the Romantics lead to many things that are happening today. Without Beethoven, there is none of the music today. Without Shelly, there is no divorce, and everyone widely accepts some form of God. Franz Liszt influenced almost any piano player after him with his new style of playing.