Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T14:05:24.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

East Prussia and the Revolution of 1848

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

William J. Orr Jr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Because German historiography long derided 1848 as “das tolle Jahr,” studies of the impact of this crucial period on Prussia's eastern provinces have been relatively scanty. Professional historians, as well as the amateurs and antiquarians who wrote local history, preferred to treat revered and glamorous epochs like the Reformation, the deeds of the most famous Hohenzollern kings, the Wars of Liberation, or the like rather than events which in retrospect were deplored as one of the more shameful episodes of national history. This neglect, to be sure, has been rectified somewhat since the Second World War after the democratization of West Germany and the socialization of the East lent new interest and respectability to the Revolution of 1848. Then too, the loss of much of the old Prussian heartland to Poland has resulted in a number of often valuable studies of this region by Polish scholars who, however, have for understandable reasons tended to focus rather heavily on nationality problems.

Type
Article
Information
Central European History , Volume 13 , Issue 4 , December 1980 , pp. 303 - 331
Copyright
Copyright © Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. The literature on the Revolution of 1848 in the heartland of Prussia, the central and eastern provinces, is still incomplete Turbulent Silesia has been the subject of extensive research, too voluminous to cite in toto here. An excellent summary, however, is provided by Sydor, Jerzy, “Wiosna Ludów [The Revolution of 1848],” in Michalkie-wicz, Stanislaw, ed., Historia Sląska [The History of Silesia], vol. 2, pt. 2: 1807–1850 (Wroclaw, Warsaw, and Cracow, 1970), pp. 486–546.Google Scholar On the other hand, to judge from Hans Joachim Schreckenbach's comprehensive Bibliographie zur Geschichte der Mark Brandenburg, 4 vols. (Weimar, 1970–1974)Google Scholar, the Revolution of 1848 in Brandenburg still awaits an investigator. With regard to the Saxon Province Volker Klemm has investigated the region of Lower Lusatia in his two articles: “Das Revolutionsjahr 1848 in den Städten der Nieder-lausitz,” Lětopis 15 (1968) 150–74Google Scholar; “Das Revolutionsjahr 1848 in den Dörfern der Nie-derlausitz,” Lětopis 16 (1969): 48–69.Google Scholar For Pomerania the only recent, accessible study is Wiśniewski, Jerzy, “Wiosna Ludów na Pomorzu zachodnim [The Revolution of 1848 in Farther Pomerania],” in Labuda, Gerard, ed., Szkice z dziejów Pomorza, 3 (Warsaw, 1961). 131–79.Google Scholar For West Prussia see Orr, William J. Jr,. “Westpreussen und die Revolution von 1848,” Beiträge zur Geschichte Westpreussens 6 (1980): 155–208.Google Scholar For the literature on East Prussia see the following note.

2. In addition to drawing upon contemporary newspapers and a number of local histories (many of which were obtained from the Johann-Gottfried-Herder-Institut in Marburg), the following study is heavily based on the old Staatsarchiv Königsberg (StAK), formerly located in the Staatliches Archivlager in Göttingen but recently transferred to the Geheimes Staatsarchiv in Berlin-Dahlem. The documents used belong to two categories- those from the Oberpräsidium (Rep. 2) of the Prussian Province, which between 1824 and 1878 governed both East and West Prussia, and those from the Königsberg Regierungsbezirk (Rep. 10). (A good many documents from the other East Prussian Regierung, Gumbinnen, have survived the war, but these have no information relevant to the Revolution of 1848.) These materials provided the basis of the author's earlier study, “Königsberg und die Revolution von 1848,” Zeitschrift für Ostforschung 26 (1977): 271–306.Google Scholar In addition, there are some other recent articles dealing with aspects of the revolution in the eastern and western fringe districts of East Prussia: Engels, Rolf, “Die preussische Regierung Gumbinnen im Sturmjahr 1848,” Jahrbuch der Albertus-Universität 24 (1974): 187–94Google Scholar; Rosenberg, Bernhard-Maria, ‘Beiträge zur Geschichte des politischen Lebens in Ermland während des Vormärz und der 1848er Revolution,” Zeitschrift für Geschichte Ermlands 31/32 (1967/1968): 239–319Google Scholar; Jasiński, Janusz, “Z zagadnień Wiosny Ludów na Warmii [Some Problems of the Revolution of 1848 in Ermland],” Komunikaty Mazursko-War-mińskie, 1970, no. 4, pp. 524–44.Google Scholar

3. See particularly Stein, Robert, Die Umwandlung der Agrarverfassung Ostpreussens durch die Reform des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, vol. 3 (Königsberg, 1934).Google Scholar See also Böhme, Karl, Gutsherrlich-bäuerliche Verhältnisse in Ostpreussen während der Reformzeit von 1770 bis 1830 (Leipzig, 1902).Google Scholar A more recent account also detailing the negative aspects of the reforms is Engels, Rolf, Die preussische Verwaltung von Kammer und Regierung Gumbinnen (1724–1870) (Cologne and Berlin, 1974), pp. 116ff.Google Scholar

4. Simon, Walter, The Failure of the Prussian Reform Movement (Ithaca, N.Y., 1955), pp. 98ff.Google Scholar

5. Mayer, Eduard Wilhelm, Das Retablissement Ost- und Westpreussens unter der Mitwirkung und Leitung Theodor von Schöns (Jena, 1916), p. 95Google Scholar; Stein, , Umwandlung der Agrarverfassung Ostpreussens, 3: 386–90.Google Scholar

6. Stein, , Umwandlung der Agrarverfassung Ostpreussens, 3: 332–33, 336ff.Google Scholar

7. Schubert, F. W., “Statistische Darstellung und Vergleichung einiger früheren Zu-stände mit der Gegenwart für die Provinz Preussen mit besonderer Berücksichtigung des jetzigen Nothstandes dieser Provinz,” Zeitschrift des Vereins für Deutsche Statistik 1 (1847):Google Scholar

8. See, for example: Dieckmann, F. M., “Zur Uebersicht des Volksschulwesens im Regierungsbezirk Königsberg …,” Neue Preussische Provinzialblätter 5 (1848): 192–209Google Scholar, Grygier, Tadeusz, “Z dziejów szkolnictwa wiejskiego na Mazurach i Warmii w pierwszej połowie XIX wieku [The History of Country Schools in Masuria and Ermland during the First Half of the Nineteenth Century],” Komunikaty Mazursko-Warmińskie, 1961, no. 2, pp. 220–53.Google Scholar

9. The only exception to this pattern had been the district of Ermland where powerful bishops both during the era of the Teutonic Order and under Polish rule had succeeded in encouraging the growth of independent peasant holdings and in checking the expansion of the aristocracy. It was this area too that best adapted to the agrarian transformation of East Prussia during the nineteenth century. See Poschmann, Adolf, “Das Ermland, ein Bauernland im deutschen Osten,” in Herrmann, Franz-Josef, ed., Das ermländ-ische Bauernvolk (Cologne, 1962), pp. 11–80.Google Scholar

10. von Haxthausen, August, Die ländliche Verfassung in den Provinzen Ost- und Westpreussen (Königsberg, 1839), p. 107.Google Scholar According to Stein (Umwandlung der Agrarverfassung Ostpreussens, March 417), between 1805 and 1867 the percentage of independent peasants as part of the rural population had dropped from 38.3% to 25.1% while the number of cottagers (Eigenkätner) and rural laborers increased from 5.2% to 10% and 28.7% to 40%, respectively.

11. von Lengerke, Alexander, Die lāndliche Arbeiterfrage (Berlin, 1849), pp. 29–126.Google Scholar

12. Müller, Ernst Ferdinand, “Zur Wirtschaftsgeschichte des Preussenlandes von der Herzogszeit bis zum Weltkriege,” in Deutsche Staatenbildung und deutsche Kultur im Preussenlande, ed. der Provinz Ostpreussen, Landeshauptmann (Königsberg, 1931), pp. 512ffGoogle Scholar.; Pape, Richard, Die Entwicklung des allgemeinen Wohlstandes in Ostpreussen seit dem Anfange des 19.Jahrhunderts (Königsberg, 1909), pp. 37ff.Google Scholar

13. Dillenburger, , “Beitrag zur Geschichte des Handels von Königsberg,” Zeitschrift des Königlich-Preussischen Statistischen Bureaus 9 (1869): 53–66, 273–304Google Scholar; Faber, Karl, Die Haupt- und Residenzstadt Königsberg in Preussen (Königsberg, 1840), pp. 309–20.Google Scholar

14. Sembritzki, Johannes, Geschichte der königlich-preussischen See- und Handelstadt Metnel, 2 vols. (Memel, 1900–1902), 2: 26–28.Google Scholar

15. Gause, Fritz, Geschichte des Amtes und der Stadt Soldau (Marburg, 1959), p. 229Google Scholar; Hein, Max, Geschichte der Stadt Bartenstein 1332–1932 (Bartenstein, 1932), pp. 146–48Google Scholar; Helwig, Robert, Die Geschichte der Stadt Preussisch-Holland (Marburg, 1960), pp. 239ff., 275Google Scholar; Töppen, Max, Geschichte Masurens (Danzig, 1870), pp. 447–48.Google Scholar

16. Adam, Reinhard, “Wesen und Entwicklung des ostpreussischen Liberalismus im 19. Jahrhundert,” Mitteilungen des Vereins für die Geschichte von Ost- und Westpreussen 8 (1934):57–58Google Scholar; Herre, Paul, Von Preussens Befreiungs- und Verfassungskampf: Aus den Pa- pieren des Oberburggrafen Magnus von Brünneck (Berlin, 1914)Google Scholar; Rothfels, Hans, Theodor von Schön, Friedrich Wilhelm IV. und die Revolution von 1848 (Halle, 1937).Google Scholar

17. Silberner, Edmund, Johann jacoby (Bonn, 1976), pp. 79ff.Google Scholar; Falkson, Ferdinand, Die liberale Bewegung in Königsberg 1840–1848 (Breslau, 1888).Google Scholar

18. von Groll, Hans Erich, Ostpreussens Anteil an der politischen Bewegung im Vormārz 1840–1847 (Ph.D. diss., Tübingen, 1935), pp. 14ff.Google Scholar

19. Böckh, Richard, Der Deutschen Volkszahl und Sprachgebiet in den europäischen Staaten (Berlin, 1869), pp. 234–35.Google Scholar These figures are based on 1849 tabulations. Unfortunately, the closely related Masurians and Poles were not distinguished.

20. Forstreuter, Kurt, “Die Anfänge der Sprachstatistik in Preussen und ihre Ergebnisse zur Litauerfrage,” Zeitschrift für Ostforschung 2 (1953): 329–52Google Scholar; Piwarski, Kazimierz, Dzieje Prus wschodnich [History of East Prussia] (Gdańsk, 1946), p. 300.Google Scholar

21. Chojnacki, Władysław, ed., Mazury i Warmia 1800–1870: Wybór źródeł [Masuria and Ermland 1800–1870: A Source Book] (Wrocław, 1959), pp. viii ff.Google Scholar; Einilia Suker- towa-Biedrawina, Działcze Mazur i Warmii epoki Mickiewicza [Partisans of Masuria and Ermland in the Epoch of Mickiewicz] (Olsztyn, 1956)Google Scholar; Pietrzak-Pawlowska, Irena, “Lata przełomu na Mazurach 1840–1848 [Years of Transition in Masuria …],” in Gąsiorowska, Natalja, ed., W stulecie Wiosny Ludów, 5 vols. (Warsaw, 1948–1953), 1: 169–212Google Scholar; Piwarski, Dzieje Prus wschodnich, p. 291.

22. Sukertowa-Biedrawina, Emilia, “Walka o mowe polską w szkolnictwie na Ma zurach w XIX i pocątkach XX wieku [The Struggle for the Polish Language in the School System of Masuria in the Nineteenth and the Beginning of the Twentieth Centuries],” in Konferencja pomorska 1954 (Warsaw, 1956), pp. 388ff.Google Scholar; Tadeusz Grygier, “Walka o język polski w szkołach warmińskich w XIX i XX wieku [The Struggle for the Polish Language in the Ermland Schools in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries],” ibid., pp. 407ff.

23. For a short treatment of his life and career see Cieślak, Tadeusz, Sylwetki mazurskie i kaszubskie [Masurian and Cassubian Silhouettes] (Warsaw, 1967), pp. 41–60.Google Scholar

24. His articles, as well as other relevant documents, were published in his Die polnische Sprachfrage in Preussen (Leipzig, 1845)Google Scholar, a valuable resource for studies of nationality problems in nineteenth-century Prussia.

25. Cieślak, Tadeusz, “‘Przyjaciel Ludu Łecki’ w latach 1842–1845 [PLŁ in the Years 1842–1845],” Rocznik białostocki 3 (1962): 61–72Google Scholar; Jasiński, Janusz, “Zagadnienie narodowe ‘Przyjaciela Ludu Łeckiego’ i jego współpracników [The National Question in PLŁ and Its Collaborators],” Komunikaty Mazursko-Warmińskie, 1962, no. 3, pp. 581–96.Google Scholar

26. Jasiński, Janusz, “Dziaiałność konspiracyjna na Mazurach i Warmii w latach 1845–1846 [Conspiratorial Activity in Masuria and Ermland 1845–1846],” in Wiek XIX: Prace of arowane Stefanowi Kieniewiczowi w 60 rocznie urodzin (n.p., 1967), pp. 251–62Google Scholar; Tyrowicz, Marian, “Polski ośrodek rewolucyjny w Królewcu 1845–1846 [The Polish Revolutionary Circle in Königsberg 1845–1846],” in Instytut Mazurski w Olsztynie: Komunikat Działu Informacji Naukowej, 1948, no. 5, pp. 83–97.Google Scholar

27. The details of the agricultural crisis can be followed in the bimonthly Zeitungsberichte of the East Prussian Regierungen: StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 40, Nr. 2, vol. 18, passim. See also Engels, Regierung Gumbinnen, pp. 108ff.; Belke, Hans-Jürgen, Die preussische Regierung zu Königsberg 1808–1850 (Cologne and Berlin, 1976), pp. 152–61Google Scholar; Hartmann, Ernst, Geschichte der Stadt Hohenstein (Würzburg, 1959), p. 93.Google Scholar

28. Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 282–84.

29. On March 15 a group of liberal citizens had urged their city government to petition for a constitution, national representation, and broader civil liberties. But, in a kind of prelude to the reactionary chicanery which became so characteristic of East Prussian politics later that year, drunken workers, evidently incited by well-dressed individuals, threatened disruption. When the municipal authorities met five days later, they proved sufficiently alarmed by the divisive mood in their city to shelve the petition, with the lame justification that the king's promise to summon the United Diet would resolve Prussia's political problems. See Thimm, Rudolf, Aus Tilsits Vergangenheit, 5 vols. (Tilsit, 1888–1892), 3: 11–16.Google Scholar

30. Orr, “Königsberg,” p. 284; Chojnacki, Mazury i Warmia, pp. 192–93; Toews, A., Kurze Chronik der Stadt Insterburg (Insterburg, 1883), pp. 82–83Google Scholar; Ostsee-Zeitung (Stettin), no. 25, 3rd supp., 03 27, 1848Google Scholar; National-Zeitung, no. 15, Apr. 15, 1848.

31. Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 283–84; StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 1, fol. 49, 74, 133–37, 166; Vossische Zeitung, no. 80, Apr. 4, 1848.

32. Ostsee-Zeitung, no. 31, Apr. 7, 1848; Rogge, Adolf, Geschichte des Kreises Darkehmen (Darkehmen, 1873), p. 251Google Scholar; Müller, Johannes, Osterode in Ostpreussen (Osterode, 1905), pp. 149–50.Google Scholar

33. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 1, fol. 73–74.

34. Ibid., fol. 76, 104, 159, 161–62, 188–90, 229–31, 284–85; Sembritzki, Johannes, Geschichte des Kreises Memel (Memel, 1918), pp. 273–74Google Scholar; Sembritzki, Johannes and Bittens, Artur, Geschichte des Kreises Heydekrug (Memel, 1920), pp. 221–22.Google Scholar

35. Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 285–86.

36. Elbinger Zeitung, no. 44, Apr. 10, 1848; Chojnacki, Mazury i Warmia, pp. 193–94. In the case of Lyck the assault was provoked by the peasants' belief that the Landrat had misappropriated for himself the duties they had paid during years of bad harvests.

37. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 1, fol. 408–9; Chojnacki, Mazury i Warmia, p. 201; Sahm, Wilhelm, Geschichte der Stadt Friedland (Königsberg, 1913), pp. 156–58.Google Scholar

38. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 2, fol. 257–58; Chojnacki, Mazury i Warmia, pp. 199–200.

39. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 2, fol. 45–46,137–40, 279, 309; Rothfels, Theodor von Schön, pp. 266–67; Mittheilungen aus dem Leben des Feldmarschalls Grafen Friedrich zu Dohna (Berlin, 1873), p. 134Google Scholar; Parisius, Ludolf, Leopold Freiherr von Hoverbeck, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1897–98), 1: 90Google Scholar; Rosenberg, Bernhard-Maria, Die ostpreussischen Abgeordneten in Frankfurt 1848/49 (Cologne and Berlin, 1970), p. 24.Google Scholar

40. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 2, fol. 43; Ostsee-Zeitung, no. 50, May 8, 1848; Herre, Brünneck, pp. 433f. The results of the May elections in East Prussia would then tend to confirm the conclusions of Mattheisen, Donald J., “Voters and Parliaments in the German Revolution of 1848: An Analysis of the Prussian Constituent Assembly,” Central European History 5 (1972): 11–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar, who argues that the rural districts of the monarchy tended to elect more radical deputies than urban ones.

41. See Stein, , Umwandlung der Agrarverfassung Ostpreussens, 3: 309–10.Google Scholar That the Gum- binnen Regierungsbezirk was less prone to violence is evident from Engels, “Regierung Gumbinnen,” pp. 189–90.

42. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 2, fol. 80–81, 94–95, 218–21, 222, 232–35, 249, 306, 331–33, 513–14, 536, 581; vol. 3, fol. 3, 113–14; Vossische Zeitung, no. 108, May 10, 1848.

43. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 2, fol. 137–40, 579–80.

44. Buchholz, Franz, Braunsberg im Wandel der Jahrhunderte (Braunsberg, 1934), p. 213.Google Scholar Similar riots also occurred that same day in nearby Wormditt. See Jasiński, “Wiosny Ludöw na Warmii,” pp. 527–28.

45. Hein, Geschichte der Stadt Bartenstein, p. 152.

46. Elbinger Morgenblatt, no. 3, May 6, 1848; StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 2, fol. 155–58.

47. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. l, fol. 285–86; vol. 2, fol. 67, 122–25, 129, 146, 337–38, 387–89; Mittheilungen aus dem Leben des Grafen Dohna, pp. 134–35; Thimm, , Aus Tilsits Vergangenheit, 3: 38ffGoogle Scholar; Orr, “Königsberg,” p. 286.

48. Orr, “Konigsberg,” pp. 287–89.

49. Here the major sources of primary information remain either newspapers or else official reports. Unfortunately, as regards the latter, only those for the Königsberg Regierungsbezirk are available. For the Gumbinnen district one must rely on more scanty information either from newspapers or local histories. The existing official accounts fall into two groups—Landrat reports from the fall of 1848 in response to inquiries from Berlin regarding size, membership, statutes, activities, and connections of political organizations in the area (Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 5) and comparable reports made in 1850–51 (Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 2) when the Interior Ministry remained anxious about the possible continued existence of subversive organizations in a now mostly quiescent Prussian monarchy.

50. StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 5, fol. sff; Nr. 2, fol. 45ff; Königsberger Zeitung, nos. 165, 200, 250 of July 18, Aug. 28, Oct. 25, 1848; Berliner Zeitungshalle, no. 158, July 10, 1848; Helwig, Geschichte der Stadt Preussisch-Holland, p. 212; Rosenberg, Ostpreussische Abgeordneten, p. 36; Thimm, , Aus Tilsits Vergangenheit, 3: 21ff.Google Scholar

51. StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 1, fol. 14–15,66–67. These figures should be set against the approximately one and a half million inhabitants of East Prussia as a whole.

52. Königsberger Zeitung, 1848, nos. 152, 163, 167, 168, 173, 177, 220.

53. Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 289–90.

54. StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. l, fol. 52, 56–65; Nr. 3, fol. 50ff.; Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 4, fol. 83ff; Hein, Geschichte der Stadt Bartenstein, pp. 153–55. In one issue the Bartensteiner Anzeiger went so far as to suggest that attitudes of such members of the royal family as the Prince of Prussia would make the Hohenzollerns as impossible for Prussia as the Habsburgs for Austria—daring rhetoric indeed in view of the deference shown the monarchy by even some of the more radical opposition.

55. StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 1, fol. 18–24. See also Sembritzki, Geschichte der Stadt Memel, 2: 153–54.

56. StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 5, fol. 23–26.

57. Helwig, Geschichte der Stadt Preussisch-Holland, p. 212.

58. StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 1, fol. 18.

59. Such are the conclusions provided by detailed statistics kept by the authorities on press circulation: StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 1, passim.

60. Hensel, Sebastian, Carl Witt: Ein Freund und Lehrer der Jugend (Berlin, 1894), pp. 48ff.Google Scholar His paper was evidently sufficiently appealing to prompt Landrat von Lavergne-Peguilhen and other conservatives to challenge it with their own loyalist, Polish-language venture. Both papers expired at the end of 1849 with the general ebb of political involvement. StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 2, fol. 203. See also Sukertowa-Biedrawina, Emilia, “Przyczynek do końcowego okresu Wiosny Ludów na Mazurach [Contribution to the Concluding Phase of the Revolution of 1848 in Masuria],” Komunikaty Mazursko-War-mińskie, 1959, no. 3, pp. 46ff.Google Scholar

61. Cieślak, Tadeusz, Prasa polska na Mazurach i Warmii 1718–1939 [The Polish Press in Masuria and Ermland 1718–1939] (Olsztyn, 1964), pp. 36ff.Google Scholar

62. Orr, “Westpreussen,” pp. 197–99.

63. Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 292–94.

64. StAK, Rep. 2, II, Nr. 2884, fol. 78–90; Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 4, fol. 50–51; Thimm, Aus Tilsits Vergangenheit, 3: 53–54.

65. Szameitat, Max, “Memel im Revolutionsjahr 1848,” Memelland Kalendar 1961 (Oldenburg, 1961), p. 29Google Scholar; Sembritzki, Geschichte der Stadt Memel, 2: 153.

66. Helwig, Geschichte der Stadt Preussisch-Holland, p. 213; National-Zeitung, nos. 233, 239, Dec. 9 and 15, 1848.

67. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 4, fol. 22–23, 29–30, 47, 78, 194–99; Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 3, fol. 28, 31; Königsberger Zeitung, nos. 269–73, 276, Nov. 16–21, 24, 1848; Thimm, Aus Tilsits Vergangenheit, 3: 47ff; Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 294–95.

68. As the archival sources indicate, this area had been considerably agitated during the fall by the belief of the peasants in an imminent redistribution of the land. After the pro rogation of the National Assembly the Democratic Club had been urging a tax boycott, and Gąsiorowski had issued placards in both German and Polish appealing to this end.

69. StAK, Rep. 2, II, Nr. 2884, fol. 56–61, 68, 76, 101, 149; Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 4, fol. 43, 258; Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 3, fol. 42–43, 45, 50–55, 62, 100; Rep. 10, Tit. 36, Nr. 4, fol. 39–40.

70. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 40, Nr. 2, vol. 18, fol. 570, vol. 19, fol. 11–12.

71. StAK, Rep. 2, Tit. 30, Nr. 30, vol. 2, fol. 52–59, 78–79, 147–51, 462ff., 468ff.; vol. 4, fol. 146, 206, 241, 242, 283; National-Zeitung, nos. 160, 250, Sept. 13, Dec. 18, 1848, no. 61, 03 5, 1849; jacoby, Johann, Briefwechsel 1816–1849, ed. Silberner, Edmund (Hanover, 1974), pp. 488–89, 549.Google Scholar

72. Orr, “Königsberg,” p. 296; Thimm, Aus Tilsits Vergangenheit, 3: 66; Helwig, Geschichte der Stadt Preussisch-Holland, p. 213.

73. Graudenzer Anzeiger, no. 41, May 23, 1849; Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 297–98.

74. StAK, Rep. 2, II, Nr. 2881, fol. 54, 98ff., 102, 103, 104–5, 112; National-Zeitung, no. 178, June 30, 1849; Thimm, Aus Tilsits Vergangenheit, 3: 90; Orr, “Königsberg,” p. 298.

75. The authorities tabulated the results Kreis by Kreis for both Regierungsbezirke. In the Gumbinnen Regierungsbezirk of 111,353 qualified voters only 36,370 or 33% voted. The breakdown by the three classes was as follows: I: 7,348 (3,824 = 52%), II: 16,249 (7,623=47%), III: 87,756 (25,253=29%). For the Königsberg Regierungsbezirk: Total: 163,446 (51,515=31.5%), I: 7,602 (3,693=48.5%), II: 20,004 (7,870=39%), III: 135,840 (39,952=29%). StAK, Rep. 2, II, Nr. 2881, fol. 144ff., 148ff.

76. Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 299–301.

77. Thimm, Aus Tilsits Vergangenheit, 3: 79ff. A few copies of the Dorfzeitung are still extant. StAK, Rep. 10, Tit. 37, Nr. 10, fol. 3–30.

78. Hensel, Carl Witt, pp. 59–60.

79. Hamerow, Theodore S., Restoration, Revolution, Reaction: Economics and Politics in Germany, 1815–1871 (Princeton, N.J., 1966).Google Scholar

80. Orr, “Königsberg,” pp. 303–4; Orr, “Westpreussen,” pp. 196–99.

81. The charge was not entirely fair. These workers did, in fact, show considerable class solidarity and perseverance, as 1843 and 1848 strikes of Danzig dock and lumber workers demonstrated. See Orr, “Westpreussen,” pp. 196–97.