Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin

But it was simply not so. In the first six or seven decades of the 19 th century , the period
that is the object of my investigation, modernity in Europe was neither a single and constant
basic structure nor was a single process of modernization the ossified model. “Modernity”
referred, yes, to Europe, but by far not yet to the single (English) case. The ingredients
of potential modernization – in terms of institutions, social and economic phenomena and
cultural attitudes – were multiple (modernization theories would eventually reduce them
to five!) to be used, discarded and combined at will. “Rationalization” was an important
guiding principle of state bureaucracy, representative government and relations with the
non-modern regions of the world, as well as of industry, markets, transportation, agriculture
and economy in general. “Liberalism” was another one, applied to the economy, the
democratic polity, autonomous knowledge-producing institutions and systems of information
(such as the press). “Nation-state” was emerging as an organizing concept for politics
as was “the masses” as a political and economic force. Mass literacy was advocated. Cultural
attitudes inclined towards scientism, materialism, individualism, self-exploration, the authority
of reason, the belief in progress and in change. Basically any combination of at least
few of these ingredients would make “modern”, as none had triumphed yet, or certainly
not in full.
At the same time, modernization was crucially important. The educated classes of post-
Napoleonic Europe desired passionately to become modern, to improve and to lead their
countries to progress – and all this they saw as a process of modernization. These elites, as
Michel Foucault points out in his “What is Enlightenment?”, perceived reaching modernity
as the equivalent of reaching maturity, in cultural attitudes and in the capacity of assuming
responsibility. Through modernizations, they believed, theories and visions of the
European Enlightenment would assume mass corporeality in the progressive 19 th century.
In this paper, I am concerned with one of these possible combinations of the multiple
ingredients of modernity, namely a land-centered modernization project that, I argue, was
prevalent in Europe during the first half of the 19 th century. I examine it on two levels. In
the first place, I show the existence of the “project” by examining a coherent vision of, and
a set of practices aiming at, a land-based modernization, which defined itself self-consciously
as an alternative to the so-called “Manchester model” of industrial civilization. In
the second place, I argue that, while widespread in the whole Europe, this alternative
project played a special role in the European peripheries where it acquired a status of a
comprehensive “civilizational” solution capable of bringing about moral and national redemption
and become a master road to national and political sovereignty. The latter argu-
280 Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin jahrbuch 2006/2007