History 341 F05

Prof. K. Addison

Take-Home Midterm Exam

INSTRUCTIONS:  You will write two questions, one from each section, below.  Your answers should be typed, with standard formatting (1" margins, double spaced, black ink, Chicago Manual of Style footnotes).  Your sources must be annotated/cited appropriately, and may NOT include internet sources other than primary sources (i.e., Malthus, Marx, Bentham) or articles from refereed journals that one might find online through a library database.  You may also be required to run your essay through an anti-plagiarism database at my request.  You should photocopy the cover of a bluebook with regards to the academic honesty clause and sign and staple that to your essay as acknowledgement of the university-required standards. 

Your essay should be no more than five pages per question, no less than 2.5.  The sources you use are up to you but must be appropriately identified.

Section I (choose 1)

1. One of your favorite history teachers has argued that the intellectual developments of the 19^th century occurred in large part because of the factors of 1) the evolutionary and revolutionary changes of Europe in this time period; and 2) the failure of the ideas of the enlightenment philosophes to be adequately reconciled or integrated into post-revolutionary European society. How did these primarily intellectual developments manifest themselves in society across the social, political and cultural spectrum? What critical factors were at play that caused the 19^th century to be one of such tremendous change in Europe at this time? How did these changes show themselves? Who was discussing them? Who was being effected most/least, and in what ways?

2. In an organized and detailed, well-outlined process, explain the emergence of the State (capital S) in 19^th century Europe terms by contrasting it with Ancien Regime structures. What changed? What allowed these changes? What were the respective "spheres" of responsibility? Was there any overlap (and if so, how was this different)? Keep in mind the difference between civil and "personal" jurisdictions/"spheres" and what this meant to each of the participants.

3. How does the Revolution of 1848 find mass appeal, as well as invoking fear from "above" in political orders?  Does this effectively end the Age of Diplomacy or was that pre-destined given the inherent problems of modernization and the effects of Liberalism?  Use case studies from three different locales (one of which should be France) to discuss this. 

Section II

1. Wrigley's arguments on the Industrial Revolution tie together the shift in demographics with respect to populations, as well as to urbanization and income level.  How does the importance of Industrialization weigh relative to the agricultural changes and transformation of cities?  What effects does this have on lifestyles across the classes?  What responses does this invoke?   Use as your points of discussion England, Germany and France. 

2. In historical discussions about the effects of “modernity” there is a split in argument over how the mark of progress can be measured among humankind.  One school of thought argues that the most significant factor in creating the modern world (and post-modern) is the development of industrialization and technology, with its resultant effects on humanity.  The other school argues that it is not industrial/tech, but intellectual and political revolutions that have catapulted us forward, for good or bad.  Discuss the merits of these arguments by applying them to specific events.  Is progress a good thing in these terms?  (warning: this is a broadly-based question that is framed in theoretics, but in order to answer it effectively, you must apply concrete evidence and analysis by placing these abstracts into specific historical situations).

3. The growth of trade unionism is a factor of major influence in the second half of the 19th century, with perceptions (particularly post 1848) that "progress" must be made in alleviating social inequities, if for no other reason than self-preservation.  Discuss the embedded tensions in the battles between Socialism and Communism.  Why is there appeal to each, who espouses these arguments, and to whom do they appeal? How does Nationalism provide at least nascent solutions; and are these solutions workable in the long-run?