That 19th Century Prussian diplomat
Review of Bismarck: A Life by Jonathan Steinberg
Born in 1815, Bismarck came from Prussia's Junker aristocracy, which was notorious for its cheapness, conservatism, narrow views, and near-fanatical devotion to a semi-autocratic state. Hating industrialization and the free trade mentality of capitalism, Junkers tended to develop a virulent hatred of Jews, whom they regarded as the principal beneficiaries of their loss of feudal privilege to the rising bourgeoise. Bismarck grew up when the economic position of the Junkers was in precipitous decline, though they still held a strangle hold on top bureaucratic and military positions that depended for the most part on courtier maneuverings to ingratiate themselves with the King. For a long time, Bismarck lived as a country squire, getting in duels and the machinations you would expect of petty courtiers. Educated and evidently brilliant, he married a woman from his class who turned out to be dull, self-absorbed, and vindictive.
Then, at about 30, he suddenly decided to go into politics. Through family connections, he secured a position as Ambassador to the 40-something German states in the loose confederation that survived the Napoleonic upheavals. There, he got to know everyone of importance and knew that he had found his true vocation. When a new king, Wilhelm I, took over, he was appointed to what was roughly a Prime Minister (1862). While parliamentary institutions were growing in importance, his position depended entirely on his relationship to the king, whom he manipulated for nearly 30 years to stay at the pinnacle of power, though the queen despised what he stood for and distrusted him her entire life.
In that position, Bismarck was able to impose the domination of Prussia on all the German states, with the exception of Austria, creating the Reich. This was accomplished on occasion by force, but usually by guile and threat. From a small kingdom, Prussia became one of the greatest powers in Europe, indeed it became the Second Reich, or German Empire, in central Europe. This wiped away the balance of power system that Metternich had imposed after Napoleon's defeat, creating the conditions for World War I.
Internally, to consolidate the state and eliminate regional feudal differences and privilege, Bismarck involved himself in a web of political intrigue of an intimidating complexity. He fought the aristocracy, the liberals and socialists, the industrial class and Jews, and Catholics. The nub of this is minute detail, far too much of which was included in the book. Unfortunately, the larger political context was consistently neglected, so the meaning of these incidents and why they were important is rarely explained, and if it is, the author does not recapitulate it when needed. The same goes for international politics; at one point, he goes into the politics that went on during the Berlin Conference, but never mentions why the 3 Emperors were meeting and what their accord meant. Either he assumed readers would know all this, which I didn't, or it is just really bad writing. As such, it is most appropriate for graduate students in Germany history, not the general reader, and it reads like a much-labored-upon academic text.
An obscenely large portion of the book describes Bismarck's long periods of illness: he was a neurotic invalid much of the time. While it needs to be mentioned, I got very tired of the endless descriptions of his intestinal problems and the like. That being said, his narcissistic character is well covered. He was also paranoid, vengeful, and full of rage and personal hatreds in which he indulged even at the expense of state and family. He ruined the life of his own son, who fell for a woman whose family had been designated "enemies" by Bismarck, forcing him to cancel their engagement; the resulting dishonor (she had divorced an aristocrat to marry the boy) ruined the son's career, but also perhaps precipitated the alcoholism that eventually killed him at 50. Regarding the state, once fired, he leaked information in the hopes of creating an international crisis, which would demonstrate his indispensability.
The writer's style does not help the book. I found the number and length of quotes he inserts in the text increasingly irritating. Not only did they often support minor points however much flavor they lent, but they were full of allusions and nuance that were either oblique or too subtle for me. As a result, I had to slow down to read the quotes for fear that I would miss some important point. It was frustrating and boring.
Towards the end of his career, Bismarck had made so many secret alliances and political arrangements that no one but he knew them all, and his failing mental powers meant that he was losing the ability to juggle them successfully. When the erratic and ambitious Wilhelm II finally fired him (1890), it opened his Empire to mediocre intriguers and drift. If anything, Bismarck was a courtier and diplomat of genius, even though his legacy was to create the conditions for World War I to occur 25 years after his fall from power. Unfortunately, the epilogue does very little to tie all of this together, so I am left feeling an obligation (as opposed to a desire) to read more elsewhere to complete the picture.
To his credit, he was also the first leader in Europe to create a social safety net, even if for the purposes of strengthening the Prussian state. He also allowed the creation of a putative parliament, which slipped from his control when political conditions changed. But he remained the creature of autocratic control, never subject to the rule of law and utterly ruthless in his exercise of power. In the end, power was all that meant anything to him.
Academically competent, this is not the kind of biography that transports the reader to a different time and place, but an exercise that must be studied rather than read for pleasure. After reading the glowing New York Times review by Henry Kissinger, I knew I had to read this book. However, after carefully reading it myself, I now wonder if Kissinger actually did because, while essential to understanding the 19th century and German history, this is a perfectly awful reading experience: abstruse, rambling, lacking sufficient context, and stylistically leaden. I enjoyed what I was learning, but it was a chore, rarely a pleasure.
Related reviews:
