Download - German Historical Institute London

Re-Imagining Democracy 1750–1850
session. Karl Härter (MPI Rechtsgeschichte, Frankfurt) gave an over -
view of German bureaucrats’ obsession with the good order of society,
whose theoretical foundation was provided by Policey wis sen -
schaft, the guiding principle of much of what the German states
enacted in the course of the early modern period. Although as recent
research has shown, this included some degree of negotiation
between subjects and authorities, it did not mean political participation
in the modern sense. By contrast, Reinhard Blänkner (Frankfurt/
Oder) suggested the modern concept of the ‘neuständische Ge sell -
schaft’ as a methodological tool to describe a stratum of society that
is not adequately described as either a class-based society or a society
based on an estate order in the traditional sense. Both commentators,
Gareth Stedman Jones (Cambridge) and Richard Bourke
(QMUL), stressed the difficulties involved in applying terminology
to the phenomena under discussion and assessing the historical
value of self-descriptions of certain social groups.
In the ultimate session entitled ‘Social Status and Belonging’
Andreas Gestrich (GHIL) outlined two examples of social rights, the
right of the poor to claim subsistence and the rights of women. Both
discourses, which he traced from the early modern period to the
nineteenth century, developed alongside ideas of democracy and at a
certain point in time became intertwined. In their comments Malcolm
Chase (Leeds) and Kathryn Gleadle (Oxford) widened the perspective
by introducing the British example and asking for similar developments
to phenomena such as the public–private divide, the role of
guilds, and so on in the German case. The comparative dimension of
the topic also resurfaced in the final discussion, which examined the
question of continuity between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries
and identified some of the gaps which had not been addressed
during the workshop, such as, among others, the crucial role of the
1830s and 1840s, the democratization of churches, and anti-democratic
discourses.
A full account of the proceedings by Joanna Innes and Mark Philp
can be found on: .
MICHAEL SCHAICH (GHIL)
155