A few days after the 2021 free-response questions were released, I solved the 2021 DBQ within the one-hour time limit. I found that while the topic was not equally easy to argue from both sides, it was very easy to craft an argument against liberalism in British India while also making a counter-argument that liberalism was present in British India to an extent. Although this did not occur to me during the first pass, there is a way to create an argument for liberalism being the driving influence of British governance in India if one would take the critical newspaper articles and point out how they show a lack of censorship.
0 Comments
REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENTNapoleon ruled in the autocratic style of an absolute monarch. Although legislative bodies existed in France during Napoleon’s reign, they had little real power, having been stripped of it by the Constitution of Year XII (1804). If the principle of representative government was the cornerstone of the French Revolution, Napoleon definitely did not advance its values. POPULAR GOVERNMENTWhile Napoleon’s autocratic rule violated the principle of representative government, there is no doubt that Napoleon enjoyed the support of the majority of the French people and considered himself an agent acting on their behalf. The Constitution of Year XII, which elevated Napoleon from First Consul to Emperor, was ratified by the French people in a plebiscite, or national referendum, with over 99 percent of voters voting in favor of Napoleon becoming emperor and claiming the powers that came with it. Additionally, he claimed the title of “Emperor of the French,” rather than “Emperor of France,” in recognition that his power came from the French people rather than by divine right. Although the people were not directly involved in governing through elected representatives, Napoleon gave a nod to the principle of popular sovereignty under the social contract and used his power to deliver popular reforms, such as the Concordat of 1801, re-establishing the Catholic Church as the “majority religion” of the French people. EQUALITY UNDER THE LAWThe Napoleonic Code established a uniform system of laws that applied equally to everyone in the French nation. There were no aristocratic privileges (e.g., tax exemptions for an entire class of people) of the sort that had existed under the Old Regime. This new system of laws recognized the people of France as a nation rather than a collection of three estates. Some exceptions to equality under the law existed under the Napoleonic Code, such as it being more difficult for women to sue for divorce than men (she only had grounds if her husband brought his mistress into the family home, thereby embarrassing her) and the re-establishment of slavery in the French colonies. However, it should be noted that under the Old Regime, legal divorce did not exist in France, at all, and Britain did not have a similar law until 1857. EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITYUnder Napoleon’s leadership, France made great strides toward equality of opportunity. He expanded access to education, creating lycées that provided a free secondary education to students who could pass the entrance exams. This expanded access to education created unprecedented opportunities for young people from common backgrounds to enter the civil service, the officer corps of the military, or the Catholic hierarchy. Under Napoleon, promotions in the military and civil service were based on merit, rather than social status or noble birth. [CLASSICAL] LIBERALISMIf the French Revolution was chiefly about promoting liberal values of free speech, press, and religion, Napoleon would get mixed reviews. His government employed censors , who screened literature and newspapers for offensive content and criticism of the government. However, while the Concordat of 1801 re-established the Catholic Church as the “majority religion” of France, it stopped short of declaring it as the state religion. Napoleon allowed full religious toleration during his reign and even granted Protestant ministers similar subsidies as he gave to Catholic priests. Napoleon’s rule has often been compared to that of the Enlightened Absolutists, as several of his reforms can be seen as implementing liberalism from above. NATIONALISMThe Old Regime was made up of the three estates. The laws and the administration of justice varied from region to region. The people of France were bound together only as subjects loyal to the King of France. The Revolution sought to create a French nation that consistently French across regions and did not differentiate legally between members of social classes. Napoleon advanced the idea of French nationalism by creating a single law code for all of France that established equality under the law, his continued use of the revolutionary Tricolor flag, the restoration of the Catholic Church as the official “majority religion,” and proclaiming himself as the Emperor of the French (People). In the schools established by Napoleon, French was the only language of instruction. This spread the French language to parts of France where it had not been spoken or understood under the Old Regime. French was also established as the only language of the legal system. Napoleon also presided over the peak of France’s national greatness and military power. The French people loved him for this, eagerly rallying around the emperor of their own choosing after his escape from his first exile in Elba. During the Hundred Days, Napoleon re-established himself as the Emperor of the French until he was deposed again after being defeated at Waterloo by the foreign military forces of the Seventh Coalition. SOCIAL MOBILITYPerhaps, the greatest defense that Napoleon could make that he did not undermine the values of the French Revolution was that he personified these values with his own extraordinary life. Napoleon was born to a minor noble family in Corsica (an island off the coast of France that is technically French, but not “seen” as French).
Under the Old Regime, Napoleon would have risen only to the middling officer ranks but would never have been placed in command of an army. Napoleon’s journey from being born to minor provincial nobility to becoming the Emperor of France is, in and of itself, one of the great stories of the French Revolution and its upending of the Old Regime and its system of aristocratic privilege. When is the 2021 AP European History exam? This year, it's a complicated question, as the exam will be administered three times in early May, late May, and early June.
The first exam administration, which will occur on May 7 at 12 PM local time, will be in the traditional paper/pencil format. The second and third exam administrations, which will occur on May 19 and June 2, at 12 PM EDT, will be administered in a digital format. The digital exams will be administered both in proctored settings at schools and also at home in circumstances permitted by the College Board.  I will be hosting free live reviews each week for AP Euro students. Click here to sign up! Friday, May 7 @ 12 PM (Local) |
| Click the printer icon to download a printable version of these lecture notes. |  |
What is Chivalry? And is it Dead?
| Some people say that chivalry is dead, but most don’t even understand what chivalry is. When most people use the word today, they use it to describe someone who is nice. A chivalrous man holds doors for women, pays for dinner and a movie, and yields his seat for a lady. That is certainly part of chivalry, but the chivalrous man is not only someone who is a nice guy, in fact, there are some people to whom the chivalrous man is the opposite of nice! | |
 | A chivalrous man can sometimes be downright brutal, as when Rep. Preston Brooks beat Sen. Charles Sumner mercilessly with a cane in the United States Senate chamber in 1856 after Sumner had insulted his state and a member of his extended family. How is it that a chivalrous man can be so nice, and yet so brutal? The answer lies in chivalry’s medieval origins. |
The Warrior Code of the Middle Ages
As the Roman Empire was being torn apart by barbarians in the fifth century A.D., the barbarian culture began to merge with the culture of the Romans as these tribes began to adopt Christianity. As the unbridled barbarian ferocity began to be tempered with Christian teachings, the idea of knighthood began to develop. The term, chivalry, comes from the medieval French word, cheval, meaning “horse.” In the High Middle Ages, this Code of Chivalry was a guideline for knightly behavior both on and off of the battlefield.
The Values of Chivalry
Leon Gautier, a nineteenth century literary historian and scholar of chivalry, laid out ten “commandments” of chivalry to illustrate the values of a chivalrous knight:
|
Sir Bors' Dilemma
| The ideals of chivalry are well-illustrated in the story of Sir Bors, one of King Arthur’s legendary Knights of the Round Table. Sir Bors had to choose between saving his brother and saving a young lady who had been abducted. He chose to save the young lady (though he also said a prayer for his brother’s safety). |  |
Chivalry Today
Today, chivalry lives on not only in gentlemen who hold doors for women and pay for dinner, but also in popular entertainment. Batman is often referred to as the “Dark Knight.” While Batman does not have a reputation for being a nice guy, he commits himself to protecting the weak and when Batman does harm, it is to those who have done harm to those who are weak and defenseless.
| Click the printer icon to download a printable version of these lecture notes. |  |
An Invented Term
| Modern historians have coined the term, feudalism, to describe the political and social system of the Middle Ages – particularly in medieval Europe, but it can also be applied to medieval Japan. No one actually said “feudalism” or “feudal system” in the Middle Ages. It was just something that developed in the centuries following the Fall of Rome when centralized government had fallen apart. | |
The New Feudal Reality
The Roman Empire included a network of cities that were connected by well-maintained roads. As the power of Rome declined, people began to leave the decaying cities, which were increasingly filled with disorder and crime, and settled in rural areas. The network of well-maintained roads that made the Romans famous ceased to be maintained and trade collapsed. As a result, rural communities formed that had to be increasingly self-sufficient. A central authority, in the person of a king, united these communities under one leader, but that leader did not have a lot of power. Most people in medieval Europe never saw a king and lived their life in their own self-sufficient community, known as a manor, relying on the local lord to protect them, administer justice, and settle disputes between residents. Many medieval peasants lived on the manor as serfs who were legally tied to the land and not allowed to leave even if they wanted to do so.
Weak Central Authority
Anyone who has played chess knows that the king is one of the weakest pieces on the board and is dependent on the support of other pieces on the board. These other pieces on the board symbolize the Church, the nobility, the knights, and the peasants. Medieval kings held some of their own lands, but the lands that they reigned over resembled more of a patchwork quilt than it did a modern nation the way we think of it today. Kings would enter lord-vassal contracts with nobles, who would swear an oath of loyalty, or vassalage, to the king and receive a land grant, known as a fief, in return. The loyalty sworn by the vassal was most commonly delivered in the form of military service. When medieval kings went to war, they required each of their vassals to send a certain number of knights, as kings did not have the means to maintain large personal armies.
| Those who entered into lord-vassal contracts directly with the king, known as great lords, would then enter into similar contracts with lesser lords, making themselves both lords and vassals. Each feudal lord was expected to maintain a certain number of non-noble knights, who also received land. Peasants who lived on the manor would receive the lord’s protection and would, in return, pay dues to their lord in the form of money, crops, or by doing manual labor on the manor for a certain number of days each year. | |
The Decline of Feudalism
In the Late Middle Ages, feudalism began to decline as kings began to grow more powerful (partly as a result of the Crusades), global trade increased, and more people started to move to towns, which were outside of the control of feudal lords. With the wealth that came into royal treasuries during the Age of Exploration, kings began financing their own armies and allowed nobles to pay money instead of raising their own men.
While feudalism began to decline significantly between 1400-1700, some elements of feudalism remained in Europe into the modern era. In 1789, the French National Assembly formally abolished the legal privileges of the nobility in the early stages of the French Revolution. Serfdom continued in Russia until a reforming tsar abolished it in the 1860s.
While feudalism began to decline significantly between 1400-1700, some elements of feudalism remained in Europe into the modern era. In 1789, the French National Assembly formally abolished the legal privileges of the nobility in the early stages of the French Revolution. Serfdom continued in Russia until a reforming tsar abolished it in the 1860s.
| In 2016, I recorded a video explaining how to set up an LEQ comparing the Italian Renaissance and the Northern Renaissance. The LEQ requires students to write an essay on a given topic focusing on one historical reasoning skill: comparison, continuity and change, or causation. The comparison format has been a favorite of the test makers and that is a good thing for students because it is fairly easy to do. | |
In order to provide further clarity, I have created a set of sample essays in response to an LEQ prompt comparing the Italian and the Northern Renaissance. Each sample essay includes a detailed explanation of how each point has been earned. Included in the packet are one essay that would receive a maximum score and three essays that would receive middling scores that would put a student on the path to passing an exam.
This set of sample responses is completely free, but please consider supporting my annual 8 Month Writing Clinic if you would like to see more sample essays like this. The 8 Month Writing Clinic is a subscription-based course that provides teachers and students with videos, sample essays, and other resources to help prepare for the writing sections of the AP US History, AP European History, and AP World History exams.
If you are a teacher who has participated in a recent AP Euro Reading, your feedback is always appreciated if you take issue with how I have awarded any of the points, please don't hesitate to contact me. Teachers with questions are more than welcome to contact me with questions, as well.
Click here to view and print these lecture notes in PDF format.
The year was 1527, and Pope Clement VII had made a big mistake. He had formed the League of Cognac, allying with France in hopes of driving Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, out of Northern Italy. His gamble had not paid off, and the troops of the Holy Roman Empire had scaled the walls of Rome. After a decisive victory over the French, the poorly-paid imperial troops had mutinied and demanded to march on Rome, where they could be paid in plunder. And plunder they did. Once inside the city, imperial troops abandoned all discipline and killed thousands. Many of those who survived fled the city and Clement only survived thanks to a heroic stand of his Swiss Guards. Rome, formerly a city of over 50,000 inhabitants, was reduced to 10,000 residents by the time imperial troops finally had their fill and abandoned the city eight month later.
The Sack of Rome taught Pope Clement a valuable lesson about the consequences of challenging the most powerful man in Europe, but a high price had been paid for his foolishness. The papacy would never regain command the glory and prestige that it once had. At the height of the Renaissance, Rome had been a center of cultural achievement. Not anymore. The year was 1527, and the High Renaissance was over.
As Rome was being sacked, an artistic movement was already developing that challenged the conventions of Renaissance art with its insistence on perfect symmetry, proportion, grace, and stability. The masters of the High Renaissance had produced works that so thoroughly perfected this ideal that there was nothing left that anyone could do to rival their achievements while playing by the same rules. Even Michelangelo, the only great master of the High Renaissance who was still alive after the Sack of Rome, took his later work in a different direction. While not altogether different from the art of the High Renaissance, a new “manner” is noticeable enough in these works to give the works of the “Silver Age” of Late Renaissance art its own name. Art historians have chosen to call it Mannerism.
| Mannerism was the dominant art form for the latter part of the sixteenth century, beginning in the 1520s and lasting until the Baroque style became dominant in the early seventeenth century. In contrast to the idealized nature of High Renaissance art, Mannerist painters augmented the natural world with elongated figures in asymmetrical compositions that projected tension and instability. Having been bitterly reminded that the world was far from perfect, Mannerists no longer viewed the portrayal of ideal beauty as the primary goal of art. The Mannerist style can be seen clearly through Michelangelo’s late work and in the work of the next generation of artists, which included Parmigianino and El Greco. | E-Lecture Available on YouTube |
Michelangelo’s work had always portrayed a sense of awe and grandeur, a quality that contemporary Italian observers referred to as terribilità (terror), but the works he produced at the peak of his career balanced this with a sense of grace. His later work brought this terribilità quality to the forefront, as is seen in The Last Judgment. One does not look at this painting and think first that it is beautiful, but awe-inspiring and disturbing. Immediately, the painting was criticized for the over-muscled figures, the predominance of nudity beyond what was considered tasteful (especially for a church altar), and the incorporation of pagan themes. The suffering of the damned is portrayed with vivid emotion beyond the acceptable conventions of Renaissance art. The massive work appeared to exhaust the artist, as he chose to portray himself in the painting as the flayed St. Bartholomew.
Michelangelo’s final paintings, The Conversion of Saul and The Crucifixion of St. Peter throw grace and symmetry out the window in order to fully capture vividly emotional and intense scenes from Christian history. His portrayal of Jesus in The Conversion of Saul appears in force like a modern video game character on the attack, confronting Saul with wrath in a scene of pure chaos. These final works did not gain a lot of praise at the time and rarely come up today in a discussion of Michelangelo’s work. Michelangelo is remembered first and foremost for the works he produced in his younger years as a master of the High Renaissance.
As Michelangelo, in his later years, was rejecting the constraints of Renaissance conventions, younger artists were also choosing to experiment with new techniques rather than try to compete with the likes of Raphael and da Vinci. One of these younger artists, Girolamo Francesco Maria Mazzola, better known as Parmigianino (the Little One from Parma), showed an early interest in using art to portray an augmented reality. Even before the Sack of Rome, he was experimenting with new approaches. As a young man, he painted at Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror, an outside the box idea at a time when artists were obsessed with idealized realistic proportions. Parmigianino’s Conversion of St. Paul, completed over a decade before Michelangelo’s painting of the same subject, shows Paul unbalanced and in a state of fearful awe. In The Vision of St. Jerome, the central figure of John the Baptist shows a striking contrast to da Vinci’s. While da Vinci’s John the Baptist is idealized, with smooth skin and a straight finger, Parmigianino presents the Baptist as elongated, with blemishes on his skin and an elongated, crooked finger pointing to the Christ Child.
Parmigianino’s Madonna with the Long Neck is, perhaps, the most iconic Mannerist painting, presenting several challenges to traditional Renaissance conventions while not abandoning the style, altogether. The Madonna’s neck is elongated to give her a swanlike elegance, while the Christ-child, also elongated, rests precariously on her lap as if He could fall at any moment. Not only is the Christ-child imbalanced, but all of the admiring angels stand on the same side of the Madonna in a rejection of Renaissance symmetry. The Madonna’s foot is perched awkwardly on a cushion and projects outward, seemingly jutting out of the canvas. In this series of subtle challenges to the strict artistic standards of the Renaissance, Parmigianino and other Mannerist painters established themselves as “the first ‘modern’ artists” in the words of E.H. Gombrich, author of The Story of Art.
Late Mannerism is most apparent in the paintings of Doménikos Theotokópoulos, better known as El Greco (the Greek). El Greco was born on Crete and distinguished himself as a painter in Western Europe, first in Rome and then in Spain, where he produced his best-known works. Like Parmigianino, he preferred elongated figures, as can be seen in his painting of St. Andrew and St. Francis, but his works show even more independence from the traditional Renaissance style. His painting of Laocoön, with its elongated and vulnerable figures fearfully succumbing to snakes sent by the gods, contrasts powerfully with a Greco-Roman sculpture of the same event, which features more powerful and idealized forms. El Greco’s most famous painting, The Burial of the Count of Orgaz, provides something of a foreshadowing of the Baroque style, projecting the grandeur of the Catholic Faith in his portrayal of the legendary account of the Count of Orgaz being buried personally by St. Stephen and St. Augustine. Unlike Michelangelo’s Last Judgment, the painting is faithful to Catholic doctrine and is devoid of pagan elements. The painting also shows Byzantine influences that were present in El Greco’s works, showing both a heavenly and earthly plane, similar to traditional Byzantine icons of the Dormition of the Mother of God.
El Greco’s works are widely praised for their originality as being ahead of their time. His later works, such as View of Toledo and The Opening of the Fifth Seal, could easily be mistaken for twentieth century art by a casual observer. His work is believed to have had a powerful influence on several modern artists. The Mannerists, in their willingness to challenge prevailing artistic conventions, will forever live as examples to anyone seeking to produce something new and original.
Mannerism is mentioned in AP European History Key Concept 1.1, which states, "Mannerist and Baroque artists employed distortion, drama, and illusion in their work. Monarchies, city-states, and the church commissioned these works as a means of promoting their own stature and power." El Greco is mentioned as an illustrative example, but students may use examples from Michelangelo, Parmigianino, and other Mannerist painters when presenting original evidence for free response items.
At the turn of the seventeenth century, European monarchs began to consolidate power, undermining old feudal institutions, such as representative bodies and the nobility, in order to establish absolute rule. This radical centralization of government power required a philosophical foundation to justify it. Jacques Bossuet, a Catholic bishop who was Louis XIV’s court preacher, provided this foundation in Politics Derived from Sacred Scripture, in which he laid out the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings. Bossuet used Scripture to justify royal authority without checks and balances, claiming that God has placed kings on their throne and it is the responsibility of the people to obey divinely appointed authorities without question. Rebellion against the king is rebellion against God.
 | The Divine Right of Kings represents a “Top Down” approach to government, in contrast with the “Bottom Up” approach of social contract theory, which claims that the people create governments for their own protection and that those governments serve the people who created them. |
James I of England (and VI of Scotland) was an advocate of the Divine Right of Kings and published some of his own texts about the subject, which he shared with his son, Charles I. According to James, while a king could not be limited in his authority by the people, a king would be called upon to account for his actions at the Last Judgment. With this in mind, Christian kings were expected to conduct themselves with the fear of God, acting as “God’s lieutenants” on earth. Louis XIV of France was another advocate of the Divine Right of Kings. His decision to rescind the Edict of Nantes, which had granted limited toleration to French Protestants, was partly an attempt to fulfill his obligations as a divine right monarch. He did not want to hear from Jesus, “Louis, why did you allow your people to practice a false religion?”
| Although advocates of the Divine Right of Kings used the Bible to justify their theories, it should be noted that the Bible is far from one-sided when it comes to monarchy. After the Glorious Revolution, John Locke published his Two Treatises of Government, in which he argued against the theory of the Divine Right of Kings and advocated the social contract as a basis for creating governments. | |
A great deal of the evidence that Locke used was from the Bible, arguing that people had the right to form governments by virtue of their common descent from Adam. Thomas Paine, in an effort to encourage American colonists to sever ties with the British monarchy, referenced anti-monarchy passages from the Bible in Common Sense.
Both Locke and Paine used ideas from Enlightenment philosophy in order to argue against divine right monarchy. Enlightenment philosophers valued rational thinking and did not place the same weight on sacred texts, such as the Bible, as a foundation for arguments. Of course, both still used the Bible in their works – Locke because he was a Christian writing in the seventeenth century, and Paine because he knew that references to the Bible would be seen as credible by his audience.
In Western Europe, divine right absolutism did not survive the Enlightenment era. In England and Scotland, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 obliged the monarch to share power with Parliament. The French Revolution saw the abolition of the French monarchy, although it returned in various forms in the nineteenth century. In Central and Eastern Europe, “enlightened absolutists” continued to wield absolute power but attempted to do so according to Enlightened ideals.
This content aligns with Key Concept 2.1 in the AP European History Course Description.
People often ask me what review book I recommend or what I think of this review book or that review book. There are so many review books out there that I don't have time to look through all of them, but that's okay because I have found a great one and don't see the need to look any further.
Chris Freiler's AP Achiever text for AP European History is full of concise content summaries, exam strategies, and practice items. Students using this text have the benefit of using a review book written by someone who was part of the team that redesigned the AP European History exam a few years ago. In addition to that, Chris has participated in the AP European History Reading for several years - many of those years in the capacity of Assistant Chief Reader and Question Leader.
Chris Freiler's AP Achiever text for AP European History is full of concise content summaries, exam strategies, and practice items. Students using this text have the benefit of using a review book written by someone who was part of the team that redesigned the AP European History exam a few years ago. In addition to that, Chris has participated in the AP European History Reading for several years - many of those years in the capacity of Assistant Chief Reader and Question Leader.
| I recently had the pleasure of chatting with Chris Freiler on a Live Hangout on my YouTube channel. I am sharing the Live Hangout footage here for convenience. Chris has also provided me with a sample chapter as well as a supplement that outlines the most recent changes to the exam since the most recent version of the text was published (the AP Euro exam has been changed three times in four years - it is difficult for publishers to keep up with this). | Live Hangout with Chris FreilerI recently had the privilege of chatting with Chris Freiler about all things AP Euro. Take a look if you'd like to get to know the author of this review text! |
| The Thirty Years’ War was a European continental war that took place from 1618-1648 (thirty years!). Most of the fighting took place in the Holy Roman Empire, although the war grew to include European powers outside of the Empire. What began as a local, religious conflict became more and more continental and political with each expanding phase of the war. |  |
Background
Martin Luther’s Reformation sharply divided German princes within the Holy Roman Empire, leading to conflict between the Catholic Hapsburg emperors and the princes (primarily in the northern part of the Empire) who adopted Lutheran Protestantism. This led to several conflicts that ended with the Peace of Augsburg (1555), which established the principle of cuius regio, eius religio (whoever reigns, his religion) within the Holy Roman Empire. According to the terms of the Peace of Augsburg, the Holy Roman Emperor renounced the right to enforce a single religion throughout the “Empire” and each prince could choose between establishing Catholicism or Lutheranism in the lands under his own control.
| Calvinism, which was not established as a legal religion in the Empire by the Peace of Augsburg, spread throughout the Empire in spite of its prohibition, as Calvinists did not care whether their religion was legal or not. The spread of Calvinism threatened the tranquility of the Empire, as did places like Bohemia (modern-day Czech Republic), where the ruler’s religion was different from that of the majority of the population. |  |
The Thirty Years’ War began as a local religious conflict between the Catholic Holy Roman Emperor and his Protestant subjects in Bohemia, but grew into a continent-wide political conflict over the Balance of Power in Europe.
The Four Phases
| The Thirty Years’ War is divided into FOUR PHASES: Bohemian, Danish, Swedish, and French. The Bohemian Phase was purely a local, religious conflict. With each successive phase, the war became more continental in scope, bloodier, and more focused on political power than religion. |  |
The Bohemian Phase
 | Although ruled directly by the Catholic Hapsburgs, Bohemian Protestants enjoyed a generous level of religious toleration (by the standards of the time). A Hapsburg ruler had issued a Letter of Majesty to the Bohemian Protestants guaranteeing their freedom to practice their religion. This letter was revoked by Ferdinand II, a Jesuit-educated Hapsburg who had no interest in tolerating Protestantism in any form. |
| The conflict started with the Defenestration of Prague, in which two emissaries of the Holy Roman Emperor were thrown out of a window. The emissaries somehow survived the 70 foot drop - how they did depends on who you ask (Catholics maintained that they were saved by the Virgin Mary and angels, while Protestants later wrote that they fell into a massive dung heap.). Ferdinand took swift action against the rebels, defeating them decisively in the Battle of White Mountain (1620). The first phase of the Thirty Years’ War concluded with the Catholics squarely on top. |  de·fen·es·trate /dēˈfenəˌstrāt/ - to throw someone out of a window. |
The Danish Phase
 | The King of Denmark - a Lutheran state immediately north of the Holy Roman Empire - responded by invading in order to help the Lutheran princes against the Emperor. This ended up being a colossal failure, as his expected allies didn’t give him aid they had promised and he had underestimated the strength of the Imperial armies. The Danish king retreated back into his own country with an army of Imperial mercenaries at his heels. |
The Danish Phase concluded with the Catholics again firmly in the lead. In 1629, Ferdinand issued the Edict of Restitution, which ordered the return of Catholic lands that had been taken over by Protestants since the Peace of Augsburg.
The Swedish Phase
| The Protestant cause got a needed break when Gustavus Adolphus, the Lutheran King of Sweden, invaded the Holy Roman Empire at the head of a powerful army. Gustavus Adolphus has been called the “father of modern warfare,” being one of the first military commanders to make use of mobile artillery on the battlefield. He scored a decisive victory at the Battle of Breitenfield (1631), strengthening the Protestant cause. |  |
The Swedes were helped by financial support from the French, who decided to support the Protestant faction in spite of France being a Catholic country. Cardinal Richelieu, the First Minister of France, was a politique in the vein of Henry IV, caring more about weakening the Hapsburgs than about what religion people professed in the Holy Roman Empire.
 | The Balance of PowerIn the 17th century, the Habsburgs were the most powerful family in Europe, controlling Austria, the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, the Netherlands, and various other territories strewn throughout Europe. France found itself surrounded by Hapsburg power and sought to change this by allying themselves with the Protestants (a deal with the devil?). |
The French Phase
Gustavus Adolphus was killed in battle in 1632, ending Sweden’s active leadership in the Protestant cause. In the last phase of the Thirty Years’ War, the most dominant player on the Protestant side was Catholic France. Granted, the French had a bit of help from the Swedes, who had switched roles from fighter to financier. Here’s a device for remembering the roles of the Swedes and the French during the later phases of the Thirty Years’ War:
Swedish PhaseSWEDISH SWORDS FRENCH FUNDS | French PhaseSWEDISH STACKS FRENCH FISTS |
The Peace of Westphalia (1648)
The last phase of the Thirty Years’ War was the bloodiest and failed to produce a decisive result. After thirty years, people were weary of war and had lost track of why they were even fighting. The warring parties gathered at Westphalia to hammer out a rational peace to end a long war that had begun as a local religious conflict.
| By and large, the provisions of the Peace of Westphalia (1648) weakened the Holy Roman Emperor and established France as the dominant power in Western Europe. The Dutch Netherlands and Switzerland became independent and outside of Hapsburg influence, while France gained Alsace and Brandenburg - an ascendant Protestant kingdom in the Holy Roman Empire - gained territory, as well. |  |
Calvinism was accepted as a third option for princes in the Holy Roman Empire to choose as an official religion and the freedom of private worship for religious minorities within the principalities of the Empire was guaranteed. The goal here was to avoid future religious conflict.
The Thirty Years’ War was the last major religious war in Europe and put an end to the violence accompanying the Protestant Reformation.
The Thirty Years’ War was the last major religious war in Europe and put an end to the violence accompanying the Protestant Reformation.
Tom Richey
I am a history teacher who creates YouTube videos and instructional materials. I use this blog to publish lecture notes, book reviews, and personal reflections inspired by history, politics, and literature.
Archives
August 2021
June 2021
April 2021
March 2021
December 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
January 2020
September 2019
May 2019
April 2019
December 2018
September 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
October 2017
June 2017
April 2017
March 2017
January 2017
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
June 2016
May 2016
October 2015
April 2015
Categories
All
2016 Election
8 Month Writing Clinic
Adolf Hitler
Antebellum Politics
Ap Euro Dbq
AP Euro Notes
AP European History
AP European History Exam
AP Euro Quiz
AP Government
APUSH
APUSH American Revolution
APUSH DBQ
AP US History
APUSH Multiple Choice Practice
APUSH Native American History
APUSH Native American Review
APUSH Notes
APUSH Period 1
APUSH Period 3
Apush Period 5
APUSH Period 7
APUSH Review
APUSH War Of 1812
Art History
Authoritarianism
Book Reviews
Compromise Of 1850
Donald Trump
European History
French Revolution
French Revolution Quiz
Gustavus Adolphus
Jefferson's Embargo
Marco Learning
Middle Ages
Napoleon
Nazi Germany
Politics
Protestant Reformation
Road To Civil War
Salvatore Babones
Supreme Court
Thirty Years' War
Totalitarianism
War Of 1812
World History
RSS Feed