Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T13:39:49.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Genesis of Youthful Radicalism: Hesse-Nassau, 1806–19

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Karl H. Wegert
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The murder of the minor reactionary poet and alleged Russian spy August von Kotzebue in March 1819 by the Jena student Karl Ludwig Sand was a clarion calling the forces of conservatism in Germany to unite against dissidents and extremists in the universities and in the student reform movement, the Burschenschaft. Metternich, reacting to what appeared to be a groundswell of opposition, wrote Friedrich von Gentz in June that the political stability of Central Europe would not be threatened by academics and professors; rather, any threat would likely come from the more practical-minded Advocaten, or counselors at law. Mathias Edler von Rath, Austrian member from April 1820 until June 1824 on the Mainz Central Investigating Commission, formed in September 1819 by the Federal Assembly in Frankfurt on Main to investigate “revolutionary activities” in Germany since 1810, concluded that there were no more than eight key “facts” that deserved the Commission's attention: six of these had occurred in one specific area of the Southwest—the Grand Duchy of Hesse and the Duchy of Nassau.

Type
Articles
Information
Central European History , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , September 1977 , pp. 183 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Research for this article was made possible by a Doctoral Fellowship from the Canada Council.

1. Metternich to Gentz, June 17, 1819. Aus Metternichs Nachgelassenen Papieren, ed. Metternich-Winneberg, Richard, 8 vols. (Vienna, 1880–1884), 3: 251.Google Scholar

2. These were the disturbances in the Odenwald (Hesse) in 1819: the distribution of the pamphlet Frag- und Antwortbüchlein (written by a Hessian and circulated primarily in Hesse); the Hessian petitions of 1818/19; an anonymous criticism of the Nassauian estates (circulated in 1818); the revolutionary song “Teutsche Jugend an die teutsche Menge” (taken from verses of “Das Grosse Lied,” composed by Karl Follen); the murder of Kotzebue (which occurred in Mannheim); the attempt on the life of the Nassauian statesman Ibell; the Turnwesen, or gymnastic movement (which was pan-German). Petzold, A., “Die Zentral-Untersuchungs-Kommission in Mainz,” Quellen und Darstellungen zur Geschichte der Burschenschaft und der deutschen Einheitsbewegung, ed. Haupt, Herman and Wentzcke, Paul, 17 vols. (Heidelberg, 1910–1940), 5: 188 (hereafter cited Quellen u. Darstellungen).Google Scholar

3. The term “radical,” as used here, is not intended to refer to a fixed political disposition. By “radicals,” I mean those progressives who were politically active, though they may not necessarily have “looked to the people” in a democratic sense. Cf. Krieger, Leonard, The German Idea of Freedom (Chicago, 1957), pp. 261–62, 322–29,Google Scholar and Lowell, A. L., Public Opinion in War and Peace (Cambridge, Mass., 1923), p. 276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Treitschke, Heinrich von, in his History of Germany in the Nineteenth Century, trans. Eden, and Paul, Cedar, 7 vols. (London, 1915–1919), 3:68–71,Google Scholar thought he detected in Follen and his minions the evangels of nihilism. Some of the most controversial quirks of interpretation are found in surveys which try to place the first modern student movement into the context of various long-range processes: for example, Sell, Friedrich C., Die Tragödie des deutschen Liberalismus (Stuttgart, 1953), pp. 90–91;Google ScholarViereck, Peter, Metapolitics: The Roots of the Nazi Mind (New York, 1965), p. 85.Google Scholar East German analyses are much more favorable: for example, Schröder, Willi, “Politische Ansichten und Aktionen der ‘Unbedingten’ in der Burschenschaft,” Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Gesellschafts- und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe 15 (1966), no. 2, pp. 223–46,Google Scholar thought it a concern of the Marxist historian to provide a “positive” assessment of the Giessen “Unconditionals.” A similar view was that of Karl Griewank, “Die politische Bedeutung der Burschenschaft in den ersten Jahrzehnten ihres Bestehens,” published in the 1952/1953 volume of the same journal, pp. 27–35. Though solidly within the Geisteswissenschaften tradition, the best accounts of Follen and his Schwarzen are still: Haupt, Herman, “Karl Follen und die Giessener Schwarzen: Beiträge zur Geschichte der politischen Geheimbünde und der Verfassungs-Entwicklung der alten Burschenschaft in den Jahren 1815–1819,”Mitteilungen des Oberhessischen Geschichtsvereins, Neue Folge 15 (1907): 1–156;Google ScholarPregizer, Richard, Die politischen Ideen des Karl Follen: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Radikalismus in Deutschland (Tübingen, 1912);Google ScholarWüst, Julia, Karl Follen: Seine Ideenwelt und ihre Wirklichkeit (Ph.D. diss., University of Erlangen, 1934; Giessen, 1935).Google Scholar

5. Considerable ambiguity surrounds the term “youth.” A good example of its elusiveness may be found in Moller, Herbert, “Youth as a Force in the Modern World,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 10 (1968): 237–60,CrossRefGoogle Scholar particularly the reference, p. 237, to the Reformation as a “youth movement.” Luther was 34 when he wrote his 95 Theses; his Wittenberg underlings ranged from 21 to 30 years of age. As an approximate chronological definition of youth, I have used the age range 18 to 26 which is coincident with the development of a “political-cultural consciousness.” See Lambert, T. Allen, “Generations and Change: Toward a Theory of Generations as a Force in Historical Process,” Youth and Society 4 (1972): 21–23;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Mannheim, Karl, “The Problem of Generations,” in Essays in the Sociology of Knowledge (London, 1959), pp. 300–301.Google Scholar The anchor year for this range is 1814, which marked a definite turning point in the development of political activism and political consciousness among individuals in the Southwest in particular and in Germany in general. Therefore, “youth” refers to men who were between the ages of 18 and 26 in 1814.

6. There are no separate studies of the Darmstadt Schwarzen, but good material is available in several works dealing with the genesis of the Hessian constitution of 1820, among which Müller, Adolf, Die Entstehung der hessischen Verfassung von 1820 (Darmstadt, 1931), is the most helpful.Google Scholar Also, Andres, Hans, Die Einführung des konstitutionellen Systems im Grossherzogtum Hessen (Berlin, 1908),Google Scholar and Büttner, Siegfried, Die Anfänge des Parlamentarismus in Hessen-Darmstadt und das du Thilsche System (Darmstadt, 1969).Google Scholar Two Mainz Investigating Commission reports (hereafter cited MZU) contain indispensable information: XVII, “Formloser Verein zu Darmstadt,” and XXIII, “Ueber die Verbreitung von Adressen zur Erwirkung landständischer Verfassung.” A complete file of the Mainz reports is located in the Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Wiesbaden.

7. Walker, Mack, German Home Towns: Community, State, and General Estate, 1648–1871 (Ithaca and London, 1971), p. 200.Google Scholar The political modernization (administrative centralization) of Hesse-Nassau is discussed in Karenberg, Dagobert, Die Entwicklung der Verwaltung in Hessen-Darmstadt unter Ludwig I (1790–1830) (Darmstadt, 1964),Google Scholar and Vix, Ernst, “Die Verwaltung des Herzogtums Nassau 1806–18” (Ph.D. diss., University of Mainz, 1950).Google Scholar

8. The best recent discussion of this question is Walker, German Home Towns, pp. 185–216.

9. Ibid., pp. 145–51; 151–85.

10. Cf. two recent attempts to develop a hypothetical link between modernization and youthful discontent: Gillis, John R., Youth and History: Tradition and Change in European Age Relations, 1770-Present (New York and London, 1974), pp. 37–93;CrossRefGoogle ScholarJarausch, Konrad H., “The Sources of German Student Unrest 1815–1848,” in Stone, Lawrence, ed., The University in Society, 2 vols. (Princeton, N.J., 1974), 2: 533–69.Google Scholar

11. Denkwürdigkeiten aus dem Dienstleben des Hessen-Darmstädtischen Staatsministers Freiherrn du Thil 1803–1848, ed. Ulmann, Heinrich (Osnabrück, 1967), pp. 121–22.Google Scholar

12. The problem of the state debt is dealt with in Wilhelm, GeorgWagner, Justin, Statistisch-topographisch-historische Beschreibung des Grossherzogtums Hessen in staatswirtschaftlicher Hinsicht (Darmstadt, 1822), pp. 20, 30–31;Google ScholarMerker, A.,“Die Steuerreform im Herzogtum Nassau von 1806 bis 1814,” Annalen des Vereins für Nassauische Altertumskunde und Geschichtsforschung 37 (1907).Google Scholar

13. Frankfurter Ober-Postamts Zeitung, no. 113, July 11, 1816, and no. 200, July 18,1816; Rheinische Blätter, no. 52, Sept. 29, 1816; Sandkaulen, Wilhelm, Das Notjahr 1816/17 mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Verhältnisse am Niederrhein (Ph.D. diss., University of Minister; Düsseldorf, 1927), pp. 4–5.Google Scholar

14. Mainzer Zeitung, no. 131, Oct. 31, 1816.

15. Rheinische Blätter, no. 19, Aug. 3, 1816.

16. MZU XXIII, no. 6; Obrist Massenbach an alle Teutsche Männer (Heidelberg, 1817).Google Scholar

17. There is no appropriate English equivalent for the term “landständisch.” In general, it connoted the powers of the old provincial diets, or Landstände. See Keil, Helmut, Der Begriff der landständischen Verfassung nach Artikel XIII der deutschen Bundesakte (Ph.D. diss., Breslau, 1925),Google Scholar and Mager, Wolfgang, “Das Problem der landständischen Verfassung auf dem Wiener Kongress 1814/15,” Historische Zeitschrift 217 (1973): 296–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18. Müller, Entstehung d. hess. Verfassung, p. 11.

19. MZU XVII, nos. 2, 4; Schulz, Wilhelm, “Eines hessischen Demagogen Werdegang, Verurteilung und Flucht aus seiner Babenhäuser Festungshaft,” in Esselborn, Karl, ed., Aus Babenhausens Vergangenheit, (1932), 1: 10–11.Google Scholar

20. Hofmann was the son of an ecclesiastical official in Worms who, in 1803, accepted a bureaucratic post in Darmstadt. Hofmann enrolled at Giessen university in 1812, and the following year transferred to Heidelberg where he became an influential member among those students seeking to reform academic life, the Teutonen. He began his career as Advocat in Darmstadt late in 1815. Haupt, Herman, “Heinrich Karl Hofmann, ein süddeutscher Vorkämpfer des deutschen Einheitsgedankens,” Quellen u. Darstellungen, 3 (1912): 326–404;Google ScholarUnter der Dilthey Kastanie: Schulerinnerungen ehemaliger Darmstädter Gymnasiasten, ed. Esselborn, Karl (Darmstadt, 1929), pp. 46–55.Google Scholar

21. Rühl was the son of a state official from Rüsselsheim who was transferred to Darmstadt in 1807. He studied jurisprudence at Giessen from 1812 to 1815 and then returned to Darmstadt. Zentrales Staatsarchiv Merseburg, Historische Abteilung II. Rep. 77; Tit. XXI; Litt. R; no. 36; vol. I, 84V–85 (hereafter cited ZSTA Merseburg); Scriba, Heinrich Eduard, Biographisch-literärisches Lexikon der Schriftsteller des Grossherzogtums Hessen im ersten Viertel des 19. Jahrhunderts, 3 vols. (Darmstadt, 1831–1843), 1: 327–28.Google Scholar

22. Siegfrieden, son of a town official in Friedberg, studied jurisprudence at Heidelberg and Göttingen from 1813 to 1815. He began practicing in Darmstadt in the summer of 1816. Hessische Biographien, ed. Haupt, Herman, 3 vols. (Darmstadt, 1918), 2: 444–45.Google Scholar

23. Stahl, who studied at Giessen, was the son of an official from the village community of Spitzaltheim. Hessische Biographien, 3: 353–57.

24. Sartorius, son of a Lutheran pastor in the village of Gundenhausen near Darmstadt, enrolled in Giessen as a law student in the summer of 1814. He was largely responsible for founding the reformist union Germania there in the summer of 1815. Unter d. Dilthey Kastanie, pp. 56–66; Hessische Biographien, 3: 69–76.

25. “Ansichten über die Lage unsers Vaterlandes und über unsere Pflicht (Wersauer Uebereinkunft).” ZSTA Merseburg, Rep. 77; Tit. XVII; no. 11; vol. II, 317–20; MZU XXIII, no. 14.

26. ZSTA Merseburg, Rep. 77; Tit. XVII; no. 11; vol. I, 105–106V, 127–127V; MZU XXIII, no. 17.

27. MZU XXIII, no. 38.

28. Sartorius' testimony. ZSTA Merseburg, Rep. 77; Tit. XVII; no. 11; vol. I, 138V–139; Massenbach's testimony. ZSTA Merseburg, Rep. 77; Tit. XXI; Lift. F; no. 2; vol. I, 205V.

29. Mainzer Zeitung, no. 144, Dec. 2, 1817.

30. Müller, Entstehung d. hess. Verfassung, pp. 15–16; MZU XXIII, nos. 55, 62, 67.

31. August Ludwig Adolf Follen had been the moving spirit behind the founding of the German Reading Society, a student reformist union with vague political aims, in Giessen in 1814. He was censured by the university authorities for his involvement in student politics, and transferred to Heidelberg where he joined the Teutonen. Haupt, “Karl Follen u.d. Giessener Schwarzen,” pp. 8–9; Scriba, Schriftsteller Lexikon, 1: 106–7.

32. MZU XXIII, nos. 78, 85.

33. Sauer, W., Das Grossherzogtum Nassau in den jahren 1813–1820: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Gleichzeitigen Politischen Bewegungen in Deutschland (Wiesbaden, 1893),Google Scholar in Annalen des Vereins für Nassauische Altertumskunde und Geschichtsforschung, 25: 26–27.Google Scholar

34. A decade earlier, as a student in Giessen, he had led a group of Nassauian students in opposing the demeaning antics of the Landsmannschaften, the traditional student fraternities. Snell had also tried to influence the Giessen students in 1815 by urging a reformist cell, the Germanen under the leadership of Sartorius, to develop a closer liaison with Follen, Karl. “Karl Christian Sartorius: Sein Leben und sein Wirken,” ed. Sartorius, Florentin (MS Bundesarchiv Frankfurt/Main), pp. 22, 24–25, 27–29;Google ScholarHaupt, Herman, “Wilhelm Snell und sein Deutscher (sog. Hoffmannscher) Bund von 1814/15 und dessen Einwirkung auf die Urburschenschaft,” Quellen u. Darstellungen, 13 (1932): 179–80.Google Scholar

35. Frankfurter Staats-Ristretto, no. 91, Apr. 1, 1818; cf. Sauer, Das Herzogtum Nassau, pp. 56–59.

36. Frankfurter Staats-Ristretto, no. 92, Apr. 2, 1818.

37. Ibid., no. 93, Apr. 3, 1818.

38. Rheinische Blätter, no. 57, Apr. 9, 1818.

39. Frankfurter Staats-Ristretto, no. 126, May 6, 1818; also, nos. 124, 125, and 127.

40. MZU XVI, 193V–194.

41. Reprinted in Sauer, Das Herzogtum Nassau, pp. 63–65; also MZUX.VU, no. 19t.

42. As Haupt, “Wilhelm Snell,” pp. 178–80, has indicated, Snell's action of introducing Karl Follen to the Germanen in 1815 corresponded with Snell's plan of founding a Studentenorden (student society) as part of a more ambitious German political society. Follen may also have belonged to the Hoffmannsche Society, a loose organization of 1814/15 dedicated to the aim of German unity under Prussian hegemony, behind which stood Snell and a judicial official from Rödelheim (Hesse), Karl Hoffmann. See Meinecke, Friedrich, Die Deutschen Gesellschaften und der Hoffmannsche Bund: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der politischen Bewegungen in Deutschland im Zeitalter der Befreiungskriege (Stuttgart, 1891), passim.Google Scholar

43. In 1820 both Karl Follen and Wilhelm Snell settled in Chur. Also, in the autumn of that year, Snell wrote to Samuel Liesching, a Stuttgart art dealer and sometime acquaintance of Follen, informing him that he was together with Follen and that their project (Pflanzung) was progressing satisfactorily. The letter is reprinted in Blesch, J., Studienüber Johannes Wit, genannt v. Doerring und seine Denkwürdigkeiten nebst einem Exkurs über die liberalen Strömungen von 1818–1819 (Berlin, Leipzig, 1917), pp. 71–72.Google Scholar

44. The Works of Charles Follen with a Memoir of his Life, 5 vols. (Boston, 1842), 1: 61–62;Google ScholarHohmann, Carl, Ueber die Gemeindeschulden-Tilgungsanstalt im Grossherzogtum Hessen, in erläuternden Bemerkungen zur Verordnung vom 25. Juny (n.p., 1818).Google Scholar

45. Unterthänigste Bittschrift um huldreichste Wiederaufhebung der angeordneten Schuldentilgungs-Anstalt und gnädigste Belassung ihrer eigenthüimlichen Verwaltung, erlassen an Se. K. H. den Grossherzog von Hessen und bey Rhein, von Seiten mehrer hundert Gemeinden der Provinz Hessen unterm 17. Sept. 1818 (n.p., 1818). The pamphlet appeared anonymously. Büttner, D. Anfänge d. Parlamentarismus in Hessen-Darmstadt, p. 246, cited as the probable author a Giessen Advocat, Georg Christian Welcker. However, as Follen remembered the incident, according to his widow in her biography, the Advocat to whom the deputation from Oberhessen had first appealed withdrew his support. A letter from the mayors of Laubach and Welfersheim to Follen, dated Aug. 30, 1818, and an English translation of the title of the pamphlet are provided in The Works of Charles Follen, 1: 62, 63–64.

46. Unterthänigste Bittschrift, pp. 6–8.

47. Bopp, son of a Darmstadt harness-maker, studied jurisprudence at Giessen. In the 1820s and 30s he became a Rechtswissenschaftler of some repute. Scriba, , Schriftsteller Lexikon, 2: 72–79.Google Scholar

48. Weidig, son of a forestry official from Butzbach, had tried to influence student reform in Giessen in 1815. Meinecke, Friedrich, “Zur Gründungsgeschichte der Giessener Burschenschaft: Briefe Ernst Welckers an seinen Bruder Karl Theodor,” Burschenschaftliche Blätter 7, no. 3 (1893): 59.Google Scholar In 1832/33 he became the principal organizer in Oberhessen of the attempted putsch, planned by the liberal-national Vaterlandsverein, of Apr. 3, 1833, in Frankfurt. Actenmässige Darstellung der im Grossherzogtum Hessen in den Jahren 1832 bis 1835 stattgehabten hochverrätherischen und sonstigen damit in Verbindung stehenden verbrecherischen Unternehmungen (Darmstadt, 1839), pp. 8, 14–15, 17–18, 23–25.Google Scholar

49. MZU XVI, 251–251V; Carl Dürring's testimony. ZSTA Merseburg, Rep. 77; Tit. XX; no. 2; vol. I, 41–42.

50. MZU XVI, 252–53; Ernst Welcker's testimony. ZSTA Merseburg, Rep. 77; Tit. XVII; no. 11; vol. II, 133.

51. MZU XVI, 253V–254. For further information on the above students, see Wentzcke, Paul, ed., Burschenschafterlisten: Geschichte und Mitgliedverzeichnisse der burschenschaftlichen Verbindungen im grossdeutschen Raum 1815 bis 1936 (Görlitz, 1942), 2: 43–51.Google Scholar

52. Mainzer Zeitung, no. 110, Sept. 12, 1818.

53. Ibid.; cf. Müller, Entstehung d. hess. Verfassung, p.28.

54. Hessen-Darmstädtische Aktenstücke, die Einführung einer ächten landständischen Verfassung betr.: Gedruckt als Abschrift für die Beteiligten (Darmstadt, 1819), no. 1, p. 39.Google Scholar

55. Ibid., pp. 40–44. Emphasis added.

56. Ibid., p. 44.

57. “Vorstellung der Stadt Butzbach (die Verbesserung ihrer Gemeindeverfassung betreffend),” reprinted in Müller, Adolf, “Die Entwicklung der städtischen Verfassung in Darmstadt u. die Gemeindeordnung von 1821,” Hessische Gemeindebeamtenzeitung 29 (1931), no. 1: 13–14.Google Scholar

58. Ibid., p. 14.

59. Andres, Einführung d. konstitutionellen Systems im Grossherzogtum Hessen, pp. 129–30; Müller, Entstehung d. hess. Verfassung, p. 34.

60. Hessen-Darmstädtische Aktenstücke, no. 2, pp. 79–80.

61. Ibid., pp. 78–79, 81–82.

62. Ibid., p. 86.

63. Schulz, son of a Darmstadt archivist, remained aloof to student politics while enrolled in Giessen after 1815. Sartorius' testimony. ZSTA Merseburg, Rep. 77; Tit. XXI; Litt. S; no. 1; vol. II, 226. Schulz identified himself with the Darmstadt Schwarzen. “Eines hess. Demagogen Werdegang,” pp. 8–19. In later life he became something of an economic nationalist and a critic of the social effects of early industrialization. Karl Marx used some of Schulz's work in his own analysis of alienated labor. See McLellan, David, Marx before Marxism (New York, 1970), p. 166.Google Scholar

64. Rühl, Georg, Warum müssen wir Landstände haben und wozu nützen sie? Wie muss dabei eine landständische Verfassung beschaffen sein, wenn durch sie das Wohl und Gläck des Volkes wahrhaft gedeihen soil? (n.p., 1819), pp. 4–5.Google Scholar

65. Schulz, Wilhelm, Frag- und Antwortbüchlein über Allerlei was im deutschen Vaterland besonders Noth thut: Für den deutschen Bürgers- und Bauersmann (n.p., 1819), pp. 3–4, 15.Google Scholar

66. Follen, A. L. to Dr. [Karl] Seebold, Mar. 2,1819. MZU XXIII, no. 117.Google Scholar

67. Follen's, A. L. testimony. MZU XVI, 353–353V.Google Scholar

68. Follen, Karl to Leopold von Henning in Giessen, Mar. 24,1819, and Karl Follen to Karl Jung, early 1819. MZU XVI, 355–355V, 276V.Google Scholar

69. Follen, A. L. to Seebold, Karl, Mar. 2, 1819.Google Scholar

70. Müller, Entstehung d. hess. Verfassung, pp. 42–43.

71. During the course of the summer Karl Follen was arrested in Weimar, and again in Jena, and finally taken to Mannheim for a direct confrontation with his presumed disciple. Nothing of any consequence came from this encounter and Follen was released on Sept. 21. Haupt, “Karl Follen u.d. Giessener Schwarzen,” pp. 142–44. The results of the Mainz Commission investigation are found in Report XXX, “Carl Ludwig Sand.” The whole debate over complicity was given new life in the late nineteenth century with the publication of the memoirs of two former Burschenschaftler: Münch, Friedrich, Erinnerungen aus Deutschlands trübster Zeit (St. Louis, Neustadt a.d. Haardt, 1873),Google Scholar and Leo, Heinrich, Meine Jugendzeit (Gotha, 1880).Google Scholar Both were hostile to the Schwarzen and both implicated Karl Follen. But both are only marginally reliable as sources. See Hausenstein, Wilhelm, “Karl Ludwig Sand,” Süddeutsche Monatshefte 3, no. 8 (1906): 178–201,Google Scholar and Wüst, Karl Follen, pp. 54–62. Treitschke used the Münch and Leo accounts, as have many historians since: for example, Lutz, R. R., “The German Revolutionary Student Movement, 1819–1833,” Central European History 4 (1971): 223–23.Google Scholar

72. An intensive investigation which lasted a year, and which was undertaken by a government-appointed body, did not uncover sufficient evidence to support the view that Löning, who was well known to Hofmann and other radicals, had been an agent of the Schwarzen. The Mainz Commission, Report XXXI, reached a similar conclusion. See Schneider, Hans, “Das Attentat des Apothekers Karl Löning auf den Präsidenten Ibell (1819),” Quellen u. Darstellungen, 5 (1920): 160–62, 164, 168.Google Scholar Sauer's conclusion “that there was actually a plot by the Giessen Schwarzen against the life of Ibell and that Karl Löning was the principal agent…” is simply not supported by the evidence which he himself cites. See Sauer, Das Herzogtum Nassau, pp. 101–33.

73. Hessen-Darmstädtische Aktenstücke, no. 3, pp. 38–44.

74. Ibid., no. 4, pp. 90–91.

75. Ibid., no. 5, pp. 8–11.

76. The student [Friedrich] Küchler to the student [Georg?] Baur in Giessen, undated letter. MZU XXIII, no. 19.

77. A fairly detailed account of these disturbances was published in the Allgemeine Zeitung, no. 292, Oct. 19, 1819; cf. Müller, Entstehung d. hess. Verfassung, pp. 51–67.

78. “Sartorius. Sein Leben u. Wirken,” p. 44.

79. Earlier, in Oct. 1818, Weidig had apparently ordered the printing of six thousand copies of part of “Das Grosse Lied.” Haupt, “Karl Follen u.d. Giessener Schwarzen,” p. 133. Werner, Hans-Georg, “Die politische Lyrik der Giessener ‘Schwarzen,’ “ Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universität Halle, Gesellschafts und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe 15 (1966): 571.Google Scholar

80. The Mainz investigator who prepared the report on the Giessen Schwarzen stated that this opinion was contained in a Karl Follen letter to Karl Jung. MZU XVI, 260V.

81. As Wüst, Karl Follen, p. 53, suggests.

82. Early in 1816, for example, Snell turned to a study of the French Revolution and dismissed Arndt as passé. Snell to Mühlenfels, Feb. 24, 1816. Meinecke, D. Deutschen Gesellschaften u.d. Hoffmannsche Bund, p. 64.

83. On premodern authority relations, see Brunner, Otto, Neue Wege der Verfassungsund Sozialgeschichte (Göttingen, 1968), pp. 68–69 and passim.Google Scholar

84. The debate over the sources of youthful dissent is a continuing one. It would, I think, be redundant to argue for the recognition of certain universal traditions of youth which sometimes bring young people together–as in the Burschenschaften. Value conflicts between generations exist and are intensified by educational differences. The point is that youthful radicalism is the product of the interaction between traditions and environment. Concentrating on the traditions while avoiding analysis of the social and political context can result in the misleading conclusions found in, for example,Feuer, Lewis S., The Conflict of Generations: The Character and Significance of Student Movements (New York, London, 1969), pp. 7, 54–68.Google Scholar Cf. O'Boyle, Lenore, “Klassische Bildung und Soziale Struktur in Deutschland Zwischen 1800 und 1848,” Historische Zeitschrift 207 (1968): 584–608;Google ScholarSpitzer, Alan B., “The Historical Problem of Generations,” American Historical Review 78 (1973): 1353–85; and, Gillis, Youth and History, pp. ix–xii, 85–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

85. Wentzcke, Burschenschafterlisten, pp. 43–51, identified 41 Giessen students as Schwarzen. Using the fixed age range of 18 to 26, with 1814 as the anchor year, it is possible to classify 23 of these as “older” students. All of the leadership in student politics at Giessen came from within this group. Apart from the Follen brothers and Sartorius, other leaders were Christian von Buri (1796–1850) and Georg Thudichum (1794–1873), both of whom were involved in the founding of the Reading Society. Seebold, Karl (1794–1867) succeeded Karl Follen as leader after Follen's departure in late 1818.Google Scholar

86. Müller, Entstehung d. hess. Verfassung, p. 29.

87. Though Wentzcke, Paul, Geschkhte der Deutschen Burschenschqft, vol. 1: Vor- und Frühzeit bis zu den Karlsbader Beschlüssen, pp. 138, 304 (Quellen u. Darstellungen, vol. 6), referred to the economic and social deprivation of 1816, and to the participation of Karl Follen and his Schwarzen in the Adressenbewegung, he clearly placed the Giessen radicals within a larger tradition of student politics, for the development of which the Enlightenment (Aufklärung) and the struggle against Napoleon were sine qua non. See pp. 1–22, esp. 11–12; also 64–65,67,114. References to the influence of Snell and Weidig are found on p. 137.Google ScholarEyck, F. Gunther, “The Political Theories and Activities of the German Academic Youth between 1815 and 1819” (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1952), pp. 53, 139, attributed the radicalism of the Giessen students to the ideas of Karl Follen, to the more humble social origins of many students, and to the influence of “such men as…Snell, H. C. Hofmann, … as well as pastor A. F. L. Weidig.”Google Scholar