The Congress of Vienna (1814–1815)
The Congress of Vienna reorganised the European continent in the wake of Napoleon’s defeat, attempting to restore stability through the principles of balance of power, legitimacy, and compensation — a settlement that secured decades of peace, but also drew lasting criticism for ignoring the rising forces of nationalism and democracy. This article covers the Congress’s composition, principles, territorial settlement, and its aftermath in the Holy Alliance and Concert of Europe — a key theme in the UPSC History Optional syllabus on 19th-century European diplomacy.
Congress of Vienna
- The Congress of Vienna was an assembly held in 1814–15 that reorganised Europe after the Napoleonic Wars and the defeat of Napoleon.
- The final Act of Congress was signed on 9 June 1815; France itself was dealt with separately, through the Second Treaty of Paris (1815).
- All European states, except Turkey, were represented.
- The Congress’s main business was transacted by the four Great Powers chiefly instrumental in Napoleon’s overthrow:
Austria
- Represented by Chancellor Metternich and King Francis I.
- Metternich served as president of the Congress; his influence and diplomatic ability secured a settlement that not only promoted Austria’s interests, but gave her a commanding position in Europe.
Prussia
- Represented by Frederick William III.
Russia
- Represented by Czar Alexander I, a liberal-minded ruler.
- He granted a constitution to Finland and Poland, and checked the vindictive zeal of those seeking to impose very severe terms on France; he also supported the abolition of slavery, as advocated by England.
- Yet he was ill-balanced, swayed by contradictory influences — he eventually fell under Metternich’s influence and was converted to his reactionary policy.
Great Britain
- Represented by foreign ministers Lord Castlereagh and the Duke of Wellington, who did much to harmonise the conflicting interests of the Allies.
France was represented by foreign minister Talleyrand.
Immediate Problems Facing the Vienna Congress
- To redraft the political map of Europe, which Napoleon had badly disfigured.
- To isolate France by establishing a ring of strong states around her.
- To dampen her explosive political theories.
- To restore, as far as possible, the traditional forces of order, amidst which alone her monarchical conquerors felt safe and comfortable.
- To re-establish the balance of political power on the continent, which France under Napoleon had so rudely destroyed.
The Congress of Vienna: Three Guiding Principles
1. Principle of Balance of Power (Security Against French Aggression)
- France was reduced to the boundaries she possessed before the outbreak of the French Revolution (1789).
- She was required to pay a heavy war indemnity, maintain an allied army of occupation for five years, and restore the art treasuries Napoleon had brought from other countries.
- France was also “ringed around” with strong states:
- Belgium, previously an Austrian province, was joined with Holland in the north.
- Prussia was given territories on the Rhine in the east.
- The kingdom of Sardinia-Piedmont was strengthened by the acquisition of Genoa.
2. Principle of Legitimacy
- Advanced by the French diplomat Talleyrand, in order to save France from territorial spoliation, and used with great skill to retrieve, through diplomacy, the position of influence France had lost on the battlefield.
- The principle held that the only valid title to sovereignty consists in long possession, with European recognition — thereby denying the validity of the changes Napoleon had made, and also the right of peoples to change their rulers.
- This exactly suited the demands of the reactionary sovereigns, and was accordingly supported by powers like Austria.
- According to this principle:
- The rule of the Bourbons was restored in France, Spain, and Naples.
- The rule of the House of Savoy was restored in Sardinia-Piedmont.
- The rule of the House of Orange was restored in Holland.
- The Pope was restored to his temporal possessions in central Italy.
- German princes were restored to territories that Napoleon had folded into the Confederation of the Rhine.
- The Swiss Confederation was restored, and the neutrality of Switzerland guaranteed by the Powers.
3. Principle of Compensation to the Victors
- In many cases, the principle of legitimacy was compromised in order to compensate victors at the expense of the defeated party.
- Norway was torn from Denmark (which had joined Napoleon) and given to Sweden (which had supported the Allies), by way of compensation for Sweden’s cession of Finland to Russia and Swedish Pomerania to Prussia.
- Saxony (which had supported Napoleon) surrendered a large portion of its territory to Prussia.
Gains of the Major Powers
- Russia: secured Poland, Finland (from Sweden), and part of Bessarabia (from the Turks).
- Prussia: obtained Swedish Pomerania and some Polish territory, 40% of Saxony, and part of the Rhine.
- Austria: received Venetia and Lombardy as compensation for the loss of Belgium, along with some area from Bavaria, the Illyrian provinces, and the Adriatic coast.
- These gains, combined with the fact that the restored rulers of Parma, Modena, and Tuscany belonged to the Habsburg dynasty, gave Austria a commanding position in Italy.
- England: obtained Malta and the Ionian Islands in Europe, Trinidad from Spain, and Ceylon and the Cape of Good Hope from Holland — thereby becoming a great colonial power.
- Germany was made into a loose confederation of 39 states, since Metternich did not want a united Germany, and the German princes, out of selfishness and mutual jealousy, were unwilling to surrender their independence and merge their states into a united Germany.
Criticism of the Vienna Settlement
The Vienna Congress Ignored the Forces of the Time
- The diplomats at Vienna ignored popular sentiment, producing a settlement that did not stand the test of time — there was little that proved permanent, and much that was temporary.
- It is often pointed out that the history of the 19th century is mainly concerned with the undoing of the Vienna Congress’s work.
- The real charge against the monarchs of Vienna is that they ignored the challenge of the French Revolution.
- They wilfully shut their eyes to the new forces of democracy and nationalism the French Revolution had unleashed across Europe, calmly setting aside all national considerations to secure the balance of power and dynastic interests.
- True to the traditions of the Old Regime, they thought in terms of dynasties and states, treating the European peoples once more as pawns in the game of dynastic aggrandisement.
- That is why the aspirations of the German people were ignored, and the princes left all-powerful there.
- That is why the Italian states were handed over to Austrian domination.
- That is why Belgium was yoked to an uncongenial partner (Holland), and Norway joined to Sweden.
- In each case, newly awakened national aspirations were ignored.
- Thus, the autocrats of Vienna set themselves against the new forces of the age — their failure to gauge the potential strength of these forces betrayed a lack of insight, and constituted the chief defect in their work.
Other Criticisms
- The diplomats ignored popular sentiment and disregarded the sentiment of nationalism.
- The principle of legitimacy was not applied to all.
- Disrespect was paid to the views of smaller states.
The Criticism Has Also Been Called Unduly Harsh
- The Congress’s work has been strongly criticised, often with undue harshness — but, as Ketelby remarks, “it is given to few Congress to legislate for a century.”
- The diplomats of Vienna were not prophets, and could not be expected to provide against remote contingencies; their settlement secured peace for at least forty years.
- Besides, the diplomats were handicapped by previous pledges and treaties by which they had already agreed to restore many rulers and compensate others — hence their adoption of the principles of legitimacy and compensation.
- It was, however, hypocritical not to extend the doctrine of legitimacy to republics like Venice and Genoa.
- Both had enjoyed a longer and more glorious life of independence than many monarchies, yet both were extinguished, in the supposed interest of securing North Italy against French aggression.
Holy Alliance and Concert of Europe
- The Congress of Vienna had sealed the triumph of reaction, restoring pre-revolutionary conditions as far as possible.
- The Vienna treaties were entrusted to the collective guarantee of the Powers, but past experience had convinced them of the necessity of some machinery for closer international co-operation, in the interest of European peace. Two schemes were put forward.
The Holy Alliance
- Sponsored by Czar Alexander of Russia, who, under the impulse of a generous nature, wanted to spiritualise politics by calling on his brother monarchs to act on Christian principles.
- Its objects were to promote peace and goodwill by bringing Christianity into public life.
- All the potentates of Europe, except the Pope and the Sultan, were invited to sign the document, and all did so except the Prince Regent of England — though nobody but the Czar took it seriously.
- It has been called a “piece of sublime mysticism and nonsense”; Metternich called it a “loud sounding nothing.”
- The Holy Alliance remained attached to the European system between 1815 and 1825, but its basic conceptions were never applied to contemporary politics.
- Significance: The Holy Alliance was open to all countries, great or small, and amounted, in a vague way, to a true league of European nations.
- In future, it bore riper fruit in the great international peace movement that began with the Hague Conference of 1899.
- The Holy Alliance was, essentially, the hobby of Czar Alexander I, and came to an end with his death in 1825 — it was not a treaty, but rather a pious wish inspired by Alexander’s dreamy idealism.
The Quadruple Alliance
- A more positive and practical policy was necessary to safeguard the Vienna settlement with the collective guarantee of the Powers.
- The Quadruple Alliance was accordingly signed in November 1815, by the “Big Four” Powers — Russia, Prussia, Austria, and Britain.
- Its objects were:
- Maintenance of treaties with France.
- Preservation of the political stability of Europe.
- Friendly relations among the four sovereigns, for the welfare of the world.
- It was also agreed that the signatory Powers should meet periodically in diplomatic congresses to discuss any problems that arose — this proposal for periodic meetings constituted the Concert of Europe, or Congress System. The years that followed came to be known as the “Age of Congresses.”
- Under Metternich’s guidance, the Quadruple Alliance virtually established a dictatorship of the Great Powers, suppressing liberalism, and thereby coming into conflict with the new forces of nationality and democracy.
The Concert of Europe (Congress System)
- The Concert of Europe, formed after the Congress of Vienna in the post-Napoleonic era, was a system of dispute resolution adopted by the major conservative powers of Europe to:
- Maintain their power.
- Oppose revolutionary movements.
- Weaken the forces of nationalism.
- Uphold the balance of power.
- It was mainly devised by the “Big Four” — Austria, Russia, Prussia, and England — and inaugurated a system of diplomacy by conference, as distinguished from the old system of individual diplomacy; it was a genuinely new experiment in internationalism.
- It assumed for the great powers the responsibility, and the right, to intervene and impose their collective will on states threatened by internal rebellion.
- The Congress recognised Austria’s predominant interest in Italy, and therefore authorised her to suppress the revolt in Naples (1820).
- In Spain, it authorised France to suppress the revolt (1822), since both Spain and France were ruled by the Bourbon family.
- Hence, the Powers suppressed uprisings in Italy (1820) and Spain (1822), but later condoned Belgium’s rebellion and proclamation of independence (1830).
Causes of the Failure of the Concert of Europe
- The Concert of Europe, as an agency for international co-operation, broke up mainly on two rocks: a divergence of principles, and the mutual jealousy of the Powers.
Divergence of Principles
- From the very beginning, England set her face against the principle of intervention in the internal affairs of other states to suppress revolutions — a principle adopted by the Congress of Troppau (1820), under Metternich’s influence.
- When she could not prevent France from intervening in Spain, England withdrew from the Congress, subsequently held at Verona. This withdrawal dealt a deathblow to the Concert.
- England, with her parliamentary institutions, could not be expected to work in harmony with the three autocratic Powers who had converted the European Concert into a “league to bind Europe in chains.”
- England’s stance was thus a stand against the dictatorship of the Great Powers, which the Concert had established under Metternich’s guidance.
- The Concert, formed for the preservation of peace and order, soon degenerated into a clique for the preservation of autocracy.
- Metternich’s principle of the status quo became closely identified with tyranny, stagnation, and reaction — and his system of diplomacy by congresses became thoroughly discredited.
Mutual Jealousy of the Powers
- As the outlook of the Powers differed, so too did their interests — giving rise to jealousies that proved impossible to overcome.
- A “Concert” implies a common bond of union and a community of interest, without which it is sure to break apart — yet in no sphere, political, commercial, or constitutional, was any true community of purpose to be found. Each power guarded its own sphere of interest with extreme jealousy, tolerating no joint action within it.
- In brow-beating weaker states, members of the European Concert did act in harmony — for example, checkmating the territorial ambitions of Bavaria, or lecturing the ruler of Monaco on the better government of his principality.
- But when questions touched their own conflicting interests, it proved impossible to overcome mutual jealousies and take concerted action.
- England would not consent to joint action suppressing the Barbary pirates, for fear of admitting Russian ships into the Mediterranean.
- England also would not allow European intervention to bring the rebellious South American colonies of Spain back under Spanish allegiance, lest her own commercial interests in the region be jeopardised.
- The other Powers, in turn, refused to give England authority to search the seas for the suppression of the slave trade, for fear she would use the position to steal a march on them.
- When the Greeks revolted against Turkey, the Czar viewed the Turkish question as falling naturally within Russia’s sphere, demanding isolated action there, much as Metternich had done in Italy.
- But since Austria was Russia’s rival in the Balkans, Metternich was determined to prevent Russian interference in Greek affairs — supported in this by Great Britain, ever-watchful of Russia in the Near East. Metternich thus succeeded in checking Russian action and shelving the Greek question.
- England strongly opposed any intervention in Spain, and when France obtained a mandate from the other Powers to suppress the Spanish revolt — the appeal of Spain’s King Ferdinand VII to the French king looking uncomfortably like a revival of the old Bourbon Family Compact — England withdrew from the Congress, and the European Concert broke up.
- England now took an independent line, having watched with great jealousy the extension of French influence in Spain, and fearing France might help Spain recover her rebellious South American colonies, closing off a lucrative trade to Britain.
- Britain was determined that if France was to dominate Spain, it must be a Spain without colonies. She therefore recognised the independence of Spain’s colonies in America, with the British Prime Minister boasting he had called a “New World” into existence to redress the balance of the old.
- Britain found a valuable ally in President Monroe of the USA.
The Monroe Doctrine
- Monroe feared that any attempt to extend the dictatorship of the Powers to the New World would endanger American social and political institutions.
- He therefore issued a declaration in 1823, warning European powers against interfering in American affairs or acquiring further territory in the Americas — stating that further efforts by European nations to control any independent state in North or South America would be viewed as “the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States.”
- This came to be known as the Monroe Doctrine, which became U.S. policy in opposing European colonialism in the Americas.
- It dealt a death blow to the Concert of Europe, clearly warning European powers against intervening in the affairs of Spain’s American colonies, which soon slipped from Spain’s grasp.
Lack of Democracy
- The Concert of Europe was dominated by a few selected powers.
- The Concert was largely a by-product of the Napoleonic Wars — the fruit of a common uprising against a common enemy. Once this common enemy was overcome, it lost its unity and cohesion, and the nations returned to their individual diplomacy, on the principles of the Balance of Power.
