Certain European countries avoided revolutions following the French Revolution due to specific political structures
the verdict
INSUFFICIENT LEANING
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
2 sources for · 0 against
AS REPORTEDno primary record reached; this is what the reporting says
Historical reference texts partially touch on how specific political arrangements, such as the German Confederation's compound republic structure or economic factors, influenced stability or the outcome of revolutionary movements, but they do not fully establish a comprehensive causal link for all European countries.
This article argues that the German Confederation — deutscher Bund — (1815–66)was a form of rule built on early modern republican political theory. It was a ‘Compound Republic’ form of rule constructed to prevent the emergence of a system of sovereign German states as well as a single sovereign German state. Its purpose was maintaining peace and stability in Europe and safeguarding the autonomy of its member polities. Contemporary statesmen, intellectuals and scholars saw these purposes as complementary. A non-sovereign, polycentric and republican organization of the German lands was regarded as a natural and necessary component in a stable Europe free from war and revolutions. This article analyses the origins, institutions and policies of the German Confederation, with particular regard to how the means of organized violence were organized. It thereby demonstrates the implementation of republican ideas and purposes in the Bund. The article situates the Bund in 19th-century thinking about European stability and sovereignty, further demonstrating the prevalence of republican ideas on international order. Republican political theories and institutions differed sharply from modern theories and models of international relations. Consequently, the history of international politics, the European system of states and state-formation must be re-conceptualized more in line with historical realities.
Other forces making for political change were simultaneously at work. The peace secured by the concert of the powers had given free Economic progress; rise of the middle classes. play to the mechanical and industrial innovations that heralded the marvellous economic revolution of the coming age; wealth increased rapidly, and with it the influence and the ambition of the middle classes. The revolution of July 1830, which established the bourgeois monarchy in France, marked their first triumph. In countries less economically advanced, e.g. Germany and Italy, the attempt to follow French example ended in failure; but the revolt of the Belgians, for reasons partly economic and partly national, against the domination of the Dutch, Revolutions of 1830. resulted in the establishment of the independent kingdom of Belgium—the first actual breach in the territorial settlement of 1815. In Great Britain the agitation of the disfranchised middle classes, which seemed to threaten a violent revolution, ended in 1832 in the passing of the Reform Bill and their admission to political power.
 Average, 1891–1895 2.0 16.7  11.3 [ 52 ] 4.9 2.7 8.3 32.5 3.5  Average, 1896–1900 2.0 16.9  11.3 [ 52 ] 4.9 2.6 8.2 36.9 3.8  Average, 1901–1903 1.7 16.3  12.0 4.4 2.6 9.0 42.8 3.9 The following estimates of the forest areas of European countries are given in G.S. Boulger’s Wood :— Countries.  Thousands  of Acres.
A minor degree of international interest belongs to the ship-canal through the Isthmus of Corinth, opened on the 6th of August 1893. The following table gives a summary statement of the progress Railways. of railway construction in European countries down to the end of the 19th century:— Railways in European Countries. Date of  opening of  first line. Miles open. 1875. 1880. 1885. 1890. 1895. 1900.
The boundaries of European countries have of course been determined by history, and in some cases only historical events can be held to account for their general situation, the influence of geographical conditions being seen only on a minute examination of details. In most Political boundaries. cases, however, it is otherwise.
That principle did not allow of the recognition of the rights of nationalities, and till the wars of the French Revolution the interests of the various European states were usually subordinated to the dynastic aims of their rulers. During the ensuing centuries the balance of power in Europe was seriously threatened; during the first half of the 16th century by Charles V., during the latter half of the same century by Philip II., in the first half of the 17th century by the house of Habsburg, and in the latter half by Louis XIV.
The history of Europe may without exaggeration be said during the reign of Louis XIV. to centre round Versailles.   ​ During his reign France took the lead in European politics, and established her supremacy all the more easily, owing partly to the weakness of most of the European countries, partly to the aggressions of the Turks, whose invasions of eastern Europe occupied from 1683 to 1699 the The political condition of Europe, 1661–1688. attention of the Poles and of the Austrians. The weakness or neutrality of the various European states was due to various causes. England was prevented till 1689 from taking a part in opposing the ambitious schemes of Louis XIV.
Benevolent despotism found representatives not only in Frederick the Great and Maria Theresa, but also in Close of the Seven Years’ War to the French Revolution. Joseph II., Catherine II., Charles III. of Spain, and Leopold of Tuscany. Reforming ministers, too, flourished in the persons of Tanucci, Turgot, Squillaci, Florida Blanca, D’Aranda and many others. Instances, too, of the low state of political morality are to be found.
“States which have undergone a change of government due to revolution,” it declared, “the results of which threaten other states, ipso facto cease to be members of the European alliance, and remain excluded from it till their situation gives guarantees for legal order and stability.
1832 (see Greek Independence, War of ; Turkey : History ). Its actual outcome, so far as the political structure of Europe was concerned, was but to add an insignificant kingdom to the European states system. But its moral effect was immense. The sacrosanctity of the status quo had been violated, and violated with the active aid of three of the powers of the continental alliance: Russia, France and Great Britain.
play to the mechanical and industrial innovations that heralded the marvellous economic revolution of the coming age; wealth increased rapidly, and with it the influence and the ambition of the middle classes. The revolution of July 1830, which established the
by the grant of a constitution in Piedmont; but flaming up as it were in the revolutionary centre of Europe, it acted as the beacon signal for the simultaneous outbreak of movements which, though long prepared, might but for this have been detached and spasmodic. It was this simultaneity which gave to the revolutions of 1848 their European character and their formidable force. They were the outcome of various, dissimilar and sometimes contradictory impulses—political, social, racial.
At the outset, indeed, it was his policy to pose as its custodian. To conciliate the French clericals he supported the pope against the Italian Liberals; but otherwise he proclaimed aloud his devotion to the arts of peace. A period of rapid material expansion succeeded the unrest of the revolutionary years; engineers and men of science were quickly producing a change in all the material conditions of life, greater than could have been effected by any political revolution; especially the face of Europe was gradually being covered with a network of railways, which it was hoped would draw the European nations not only materially but morally closer together.
Everything we examined (2)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.