OCR Specification focus:
‘The Frankfurt Parliament’s achievements and failures shaped subsequent nationalism (1848/1849).’
The Frankfurt Parliament of 1848–1849 represented the first major attempt to unify Germany through constitutional means. Its outcomes profoundly influenced later nationalist movements and political developments.
The Frankfurt Parliament in Context
The 1848 Revolutions and German Nationalism
The Revolutions of 1848 swept across Europe, fuelled by demands for liberal reform, national self-determination, and constitutional government. In the German Confederation, decades of conservative dominance under Metternich’s system faced unprecedented challenges. Nationalists sought to overcome the fragmented 39 states created by the Congress of Vienna (1815), aiming for a united German nation-state.
Intellectuals, students, and the liberal middle classes championed political representation and civil rights.
Social unrest, economic hardship, and demands for reform created revolutionary pressure.
Monarchies, initially taken by surprise, conceded reforms and allowed political assemblies to form.
Formation and Ambitions of the Frankfurt Parliament
Convening the Assembly
In May 1848, representatives from across the German Confederation met in the Paulskirche in Frankfurt.
Session of the Frankfurt National Assembly in the Paulskirche, 1848. The image conveys the semicircular seating, speaker’s platform, and the charged atmosphere of constitutional debate. It aligns with the Parliament’s goal of drafting a liberal national constitution. Source
This became the Frankfurt Parliament, the first freely elected all-German assembly. Its central aim was to design a liberal constitution and achieve German unification under a constitutional framework.
Delegates: predominantly liberal professionals, academics, and lawyers.
Representation: over 800 deputies from various German states.
Goals: establish civil liberties, rule of law, and a national constitution.
Frankfurt Parliament: The all-German constitutional assembly convened in 1848–1849 in Frankfurt am Main, tasked with drafting a liberal constitution and uniting the German states.
The Parliament symbolised a new stage of German nationalism, shifting the focus from intellectual debate to practical political action.
Achievements of the Frankfurt Parliament
Constitutional Innovation
The Parliament’s most significant accomplishment was drafting the Paulskirche Constitution (March 1849), a landmark in German constitutional history.
Diagram of the 1849 Frankfurt Constitution’s proposed system: a constitutional emperor (Kaiser) with a bicameral legislature and guaranteed civil rights. Labels summarise powers and relationships at a glance. The layout is simplified for clarity and closely matches the concepts discussed in the notes. Source
Proposed a constitutional monarchy with a hereditary emperor (Kaiser).
Established a bicameral legislature with a popularly elected lower house.
Guaranteed civil rights such as freedom of speech, equality before the law, and protection of property.
Asserted the principle of national sovereignty, challenging the old order of princely absolutism.
The constitution became a foundational reference for later German political developments, including the Weimar Constitution (1919) and aspects of the Basic Law (1949).
Development of National Identity
The Frankfurt experience deepened German political consciousness:
Introduced national symbols such as the black-red-gold flag, later adopted by the German states.
Fostered a shared political discourse on liberalism, citizenship, and nationhood.
Brought the idea of a unified Germany into mainstream political debate.
The Parliament helped articulate the competing visions of unity — Kleindeutschland (a Germany without Austria) and Grossdeutschland (including Austria) — debates that shaped nationalist politics for decades.
Failures and Limitations
Lack of Authority and Support
Despite its ideals, the Parliament faced major structural weaknesses:
It lacked an executive branch or military force to enforce its decisions.
Deputies were divided by ideology, regional interests, and social class.
Many German princes reasserted control once revolutionary momentum faded.
The Parliament’s reliance on voluntary cooperation from monarchs limited its power, and conservative forces exploited divisions to undermine its influence.
The Imperial Crown Rejected
The Parliament offered the German imperial crown to King Frederick William IV of Prussia in April 1849, but he refused, famously dismissing it as a “crown from the gutter.”
Kaiserdeputation (Berlin, 1849): President Eduard von Simson and deputies present the imperial crown to Frederick William IV, who declines the offer. The scene encapsulates the Parliament’s dependence on monarchical acceptance and the collapse of constitutional unification by consent. The image mirrors the political stakes discussed in the notes. Source
His rejection exposed the Parliament’s weakness and dependence on monarchical approval.
Without Prussian leadership, the constitution had no prospect of implementation.
Other states, emboldened by the failure, withdrew support or suppressed revolutionary activity.
Social Limitations and Exclusion
The Parliament failed to engage the working classes and peasantry, many of whom felt excluded from its liberal, middle-class agenda.
Radical democratic uprisings in cities like Dresden and Baden were suppressed, widening the gap between liberals and radicals.
The social base for constitutional nationalism remained narrow, limiting the movement’s resilience.
Consequences for German Nationalism
Short-Term Outcomes
The Parliament dissolved in June 1849, marking the collapse of the 1848–1849 revolutionary wave. Its immediate outcomes appeared modest:
The constitution was never implemented.
Many deputies fled, were imprisoned, or returned to private life.
Reactionary regimes reasserted control across the German Confederation.
Yet even in failure, the Frankfurt Parliament left an enduring legacy.
Long-Term Legacy and Lessons
The Parliament’s experience profoundly shaped the trajectory of German nationalism:
It demonstrated that liberal nationalism alone was insufficient to achieve unification without military power and state authority.
The Kleindeutsch model (Prussia-led unification) gained ascendancy, influencing Bismarck’s policies in the 1860s.
Future nationalist leaders learned to integrate realpolitik — pragmatic statecraft and power politics — with nationalist aims.
Realpolitik: A system of politics based on practical and strategic considerations rather than ideological or moral principles, associated with figures like Otto von Bismarck.
Moreover, the civil rights clauses and constitutional principles debated at Frankfurt laid intellectual groundwork for later German constitutions, while the symbolism of unity fostered by the Parliament became part of the nationalist tradition.
Broader Historical Significance
A Turning Point in Nationalist Thought
The Frankfurt Parliament marked the transition from romantic and intellectual nationalism to political nationalism. Although it failed to unify Germany, it revealed the tensions between liberalism and conservatism, idealism and pragmatism, and parliamentary authority and monarchical power that would define German politics in the nineteenth century.
Its failures highlighted the resilience of the Metternich system and the entrenched power of the princes.
Its successes showed the enduring appeal of constitutionalism and national unity, which would eventually triumph in 1871.
The legacy of 1848–1849 thus persisted, influencing the strategies of later nationalists and shaping the political landscape of the German lands well into the twentieth century.
FAQ
Smaller German states were often enthusiastic supporters of the Frankfurt Parliament, seeing it as a chance to increase their influence within a unified Germany. Many sent liberal deputies eager for constitutional reform and national unity.
However, their limited military and political power meant they could not enforce the Parliament’s decisions. When larger states like Prussia and Austria withdrew support, smaller states quickly followed, contributing to the Parliament’s collapse. Their early participation nonetheless showed that nationalist sentiment extended beyond the dominant powers.
The Kleindeutsch solution proposed a Germany without Austria, led by Prussia, while the Grossdeutsch model included Austria and its German-speaking territories.
These competing visions consumed much of the Parliament’s time and caused deep divisions among deputies.
Supporters of Kleindeutsch argued it was more realistic and politically feasible.
Advocates of Grossdeutsch believed true unity required Austria’s inclusion.
The failure to resolve this dispute decisively weakened the Parliament and foreshadowed the eventual Prussian-led unification in 1871.
Although the Parliament failed to unify Germany, many liberals saw it as a milestone because it demonstrated that a national assembly and a written constitution were possible.
It also established enduring political principles — civil rights, popular representation, and constitutional monarchy — that influenced later German constitutions.
The experience helped build political networks and trained a generation of liberal politicians who shaped later reform movements. For many, it was a symbolic first step on the path to eventual national unification.
European powers closely watched the 1848 revolutions, and their attitudes shaped the Parliament’s prospects. Austria and Russia, in particular, were determined to maintain the existing balance of power and suppress revolutionary movements.
Austria’s military recovery under Prince Schwarzenberg allowed it to reassert dominance by 1849.
Russian support for conservative order deterred Prussia from acting independently.
This hostile international environment left the Parliament diplomatically isolated and contributed to its inability to enforce its constitution or secure broader recognition.
The Parliament left a strong legacy in German political culture despite its immediate failure. It introduced the idea of parliamentary debate, constitutional governance, and public political engagement to a wider audience.
Political clubs, newspapers, and associations flourished, sustaining liberal and nationalist ideas even during the reactionary 1850s.
Moreover, many constitutional demands first articulated in 1848 — such as freedom of the press and equality before the law — reappeared in later reforms, proving the Parliament’s long-term influence on German political development.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
Identify two significant achievements of the Frankfurt Parliament of 1848–1849.
Mark Scheme (2 marks total)
Award 1 mark for each correct achievement identified. Examples include:
Drafting the Paulskirche Constitution (March 1849). (1)
Establishing principles of civil rights and rule of law. (1)
Promoting a sense of German national identity and unity. (1)
Debating and defining the Kleindeutsch and Grossdeutsch visions of unification. (1)
Maximum 2 marks.
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain how the failures of the Frankfurt Parliament influenced the future course of German nationalism.
Mark Scheme (6 marks total)
Award marks for the following points, up to a maximum of 6:
(1) The Parliament’s lack of executive power or military force showed that liberal nationalism alone could not achieve unification.
(1) The rejection of the imperial crown by Frederick William IV highlighted the need for monarchical support and strong leadership.
(1) The collapse of the Parliament shifted momentum towards a Prussian-led (Kleindeutsch) solution, influencing later unification under Bismarck.
(1) The experience led future nationalists to prioritise realpolitik and state power over purely liberal ideals.
(1) Despite failure, the Parliament’s ideas on constitutionalism and civil rights laid groundwork for future political structures.
(1) The failure demonstrated the limits of revolutionary action without wider social support, influencing future nationalist strategies.
Award:
1–2 marks: Limited knowledge with simple statements.
3–4 marks: Some explanation and linkage to consequences for nationalism.
5–6 marks: Well-developed explanation with clear links between the Parliament’s failures and subsequent nationalist developments.
