The 150th anniversary of the Franco-Prussian War in 2020 has not gone unnoticed. Eminent scholars working on nineteenth-century military and political history have contributed publications to further our understanding of this still under-researched conflict. Its profile in the public sphere has been raised by means of international conferences, exhibitions, seminar series, and accessible social media projects. This (to many) rather unexpected level of interest in the military events of 1870 and the German unification in 1871 is inviting a re-evaluation of a conflict long overlooked in the shadow cast by two world wars.
Robert-Tarek Fischer's biography of Wilhelm I, King of Prussia and German Emperor, is hence timely and adds a fascinating and welcome voice to the research done in the field. Fischer is right in pointing out that, to date, there is no adequate scholarly biography written on Wilhelm. The author sets out to show that the first German emperor has been underestimated as a ruler and politician. The perception of Wilhelm as a compliant instrument in the hands of Bismarck has indeed a long history (firmly solidified in the older historiography on the “Iron Chancellor”) and requires careful revision. Fischer makes a fair argument that Wilhelm was no “historical extra” (“kein historischer Edelkomparse,” 20).
Fischer bases his research on archival materials from the Secret State Archives of the Prussian Cultural Heritage (Berlin Dahlem). A novel and very interesting perspective is added with diplomatic reports and correspondence the author accessed in the Austrian State Archives in Vienna. The printed primary sources as well as secondary literature are broad and relevant, with the caveat that works of eminent experts in the field like Frank Becker, Daniel Schönpflug, Johannes Paulmann, or Volker Sellin are underrepresented or do not feature at all. The bibliography does not venture much beyond German-language material, and some conceptual issues arise from Fischer's approach. Three observations shall be addressed here, concerning the book's focus on individual agency, its national narrative, and the author's engagement with theory and terminology.
The biography explores the life of Wilhelm, the professional soldier on the throne of Prussia, in five chronological chapters outlining stages of his career and rule: the soldier prince (1797-1840), the heir to the throne (1840-1857), regency and rule (1857-1863), the military leader during the German Wars of Unification (1864-1871), and the German emperor (1871-1888). In following the life of the Prussian king from cradle to grave, the author keeps the focus on the ruler's personal development, individual decision making, and agency. While this approach is successful in creating an accessible narrative, it diverts attention from the structural framework and the specific demands of Prussian constitutional (from 1848-1850) monarchical rule. In other words, as prince and monarch, Wilhelm was acting within a highly complex social and political framework which allowed for certain maneuvers and restricted others. Severe tensions were building up when Wilhelm's personal preferences did not agree with the expectations towards the office and function of a Hohenzollern dynast and ruler. When the liberal-dominated lower house of parliament opposed his proposal for military reform, particularly the controversial three-year term of conscription, Wilhelm's furious response tested the limits of the constitutional framework during the ensuing constitutional crisis of 1862-1866, but it was this very framework that defined the parameters of the conflict.
On a different note, recent research has called, with very good reason, for more comparative and transnational perspectives on monarchy as a modern institution. Royal dynasties in the nineteenth century were genuinely European, communicating with and visiting each other, frequently intermarrying, and with a firm understanding of belonging to a transnational social and political elite network. While the book provides some context on Prussia's relations with other dynasties, including Tsarist Russia and Austria, it is mainly interested in the internal perspective on the Hohenzollern as representatives of their developing nation state and particularly on Wilhelm's contributions to Prussian state formation. A more systematic transnational perspective could have provided additional layers of explanation to help our understanding of Wilhelm's (and Prussian constitutional monarchical) decision making.
A third and final observation: Since David Cannadine's seminal article on the performance and ritual of the British monarchy, published in 1983, international research on monarchy as a modern political institution has developed around theoretical concepts. A biography of Wilhelm I could have made an outstanding contribution to the debate of how monarchy was shaped by “modernity,” by engaging systematically with questions of royal “domestication,” diplomacy, and visibility. That Fischer decided not to come forward with a research thesis on this wider discussion is a loss, given the richness of the material gathered here. For example, the relationship of military and constitutional monarchical institutions, concentrated in the rather unique position of Wilhelm as a soldier on the throne, would have deserved broader exploration beyond the traditional heading of “militarism”—a term used by Fischer, unfortunately, without adequate definition.
General audiences as well as students and scholars working in the field will find a lot to like about this biography; it is well-written, entertaining, and informative. I particularly enjoyed the parts on Wilhelm's military prowess and professional relationship with the army. The narrative makes good use of some excellent research, including Frank Lorenz Müller's outstanding biography of Prince Friedrich Wilhelm (“Our Fritz”). The focus on a relatively narrow research interest (to show that the first German emperor was not a political bystander) does not provide much room for historical contextualisation of Wilhelm's life story: While we get a sound understanding of the individual's convictions and decisions, it would have been wonderful to learn more about how they speak to broader nineteenth-century European constitutional-monarchical developments.
