On the 24th of February,1848, the Belgian ambassador in London informed the English Foreign Minister Palmerston of the Belgian stance regarding the new developments in France. The ambassador told...Show moreOn the 24th of February,1848, the Belgian ambassador in London informed the English Foreign Minister Palmerston of the Belgian stance regarding the new developments in France. The ambassador told Palmerston that “a republican France was an aggressive and conquering France.” The memories of the French Revolutionary Wars and the subsequent Napoleonic Wars were still fresh in Europe. Had it not been a French Republic that had threatened the European Balance of Power, subduing the existing states and creating puppet states across the continent? A French Republic that had turned on its rightful king and deposed him before trying to subjugate the lawful order in Europe? The same Republic that had turned into an imperial power under the guidance of Napoleon the likes of which had not been seen since the days of Rome? The parallels to the events of 1789 had to have been frightening to the crowned heads of Europe and their governments. On the 24th, Frederick William IV of Prussia informed Victoria of Britain that he looked at France in fear of a new European war. In the newly formed nation of Belgium, the news of the new French Revolution was met with dread in governmental circles. In the Netherlands, the messages from the French capital of Paris were met with anticipation and uneasiness. When Tsar Nicholas heard of the news he reacted calmly, but immediately stated that Russia would march to war if any infractions were made on existing treaties. He also put a million more rubles at the disposal of the war ministry. Additionally, he wrote a letter to Victoria that a Russo-British union as discussed in 1844 may be needed to ensure stability in Europe. The general consensus at the time among the leaders of European nations was that war was inevitable. France was militarily, by virtue of its population, still one of the most powerful nations on the continent and if it would lead to war, it would mean untold destruction in a display that would appear to be a replica of the events that had happened a little over three decades ago. In the Low Countries, the subject of this thesis, the consequences of the Belgian Revolution of 1830 were still felt strongly. The Belgian Revolution had broken out after the July Revolution in Paris, that had seen the Orleanist take-over of France. It seemed likely that this new French Revolution, a Republican Revolution this time, would also move beyond the borders of France into the Low Countries and bring about another time of violence and war in Belgium and the Netherlands. Except history does not move in predictable patterns. Knowledge of the past does not make one a seer and although a war may have seemed inevitable, it was avoided nonetheless. The diplomatic crisis surrounding this new French Revolution however, is often downplayed in historical works, which have mostly focused on the spread of Revolution across the continent when discussing 1848. Yet, revolution and war were intrinsically linked at the time, especially if that revolution occurred in France. A Revolutionary France would mean a threat to European peace and the balance of power, but it was also a beacon for revolutionaries across the continent who felt supported by a Republican France that might come to their aid, militarily if need be. It may ultimately have been the case that no war in Europe erupted in 1848, but this does not mean that war had not loomed large over the governments of the Low Countries and Europe in general. A manifesto by the French Foreign minister of the Provisional Government Lamartine was sent to all the other courts of Europe one week after the initial Revolution in Paris. It had the intent of unlinking war and revolution (in France), because they were so intrinsically linked in the mind of the 19th century governments. The main objective of the manifesto was legitimising the rule of the Provisional Government and to make sure the reactionary powers would not see the new French Republic as an existential threat. The traumas of the French Revolutionary Wars were specifically addressed. If we consider Lamartine’s manifesto and the Belgian ambassador’s words, this parallel of revolution in France and war was very much on the minds of the contemporary players of the international game of diplomacy.Show less
