1. careers
2. job fairs

Vienna 1815
The Making of a European Security Culture
Conference booklet
Royal Netherlands Academy for Arts and Sciences
The Trippenhuis
Kloveniersburgwal 29, Amsterdam
5-7 November 2014
CONFERENCE ORGANISERS
2 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
ORGANISATION COMMITTEE
Prof. Beatrice de Graaf
Professor for the History of International Relations and Global Governance
Utrecht University, The Netherlands
[email protected]
Prof. Ido de Haan
Professor of Political History
Utrecht University, The Netherlands
[email protected]
Dr. Lotte Jensen
Associate Professor Early Modern Dutch History
University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands
[email protected]
Prof. Herman Paul
Professor of secularization studies, Groningen University, The Netherlands
Associate professor Philosophy of History, Leiden University, The Netherlands
[email protected]
Prof. Maarten Prak
Professor of Social and Economic History
Utrecht University, The Netherlands
[email protected]
Bert van der Zwan
Coordinator History Unit
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Netherlands
[email protected]
Conference Secretariat
Royal Netherlands Academy for Arts and Sciences
Jeffrey Muskiet
+31 20 551 07 02
Visiting address
Het Trippenhuis
Kloveniersburgwal 29
NL-1011 JV Amsterdam
5-7 November 2014
3 / 33
PROGRAMME OUTLINE
5 November 2014 | Public Event
National Archives, The Hague
Address: Prins Willem Alexanderplein 20, The Hague
7:30 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.
Registration and welcome
8:00 p.m. – 9:20 p.m.
Opening and keynotes
9:20 p.m. – 9:40 p.m.
Public debate
9:40 p.m. – 10:15 p.m.
Drinks
6 November 2014 | Conference day 1
Royal Netherlands Academy for Arts and Sciences
Address: Kloveniersburgwal 29, Amsterdam
9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.
Registration
9:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m.
Welcome and keynotes
10:45 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.
Break
11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Workshop 1: 1815 and its old and new threats
1:00 p.m. – 1:45 p.m.
Lunch break
1:45 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
Workshop 2: Cultural Memory I
3:00 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.
Break
3:15 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Workshop 3: 1815 and its new institutions
5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
Drinks
7 November 2014 | Conference day 2
Royal Netherlands Academy for Arts and Sciences
Address: Kloveniersburgwal 29, Amsterdam
9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.
Registration
9:30 a.m. – 10:30 a.m.
Welcome and keynotes
10:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m.
Break
10:45 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Workshop 4: 1815 and its professional agents
1:00 p.m. – 1:45 p.m.
Lunch break
1:45 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
Workshop 5: Cultural memory II
3:00 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.
Break
3:15 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Concluding remarks and research desiderata
4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Farewell reception
4 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROGRAMME OUTLINE........................................................................................................................................... 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................................................. 5
PUBLIC EVENT – 5 NOVEMBER 2014 ................................................................................................................. 7
PAPER SUMMARIES AND AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES ..................................................................................................................... 9
CONFERENCE DAY 1 – 6 NOVEMBER 2014.....................................................................................................11
KEYNOTES .................................................................................................................................................................................... 12
WORKSHOP SESSION 1: VIENNA 1815 AND ITS OLD AND NEW THREATS ........................................................................ 13
WORKSHOP SESSION 2: VIENNA 1815 AND ITS CULTURAL LEGACY I ............................................................................... 16
WORKSHOP SESSION 3: VIENNA 1815 AND ITS NEW INSTITUTIONS ................................................................................ 18
CONFERENCE DAY II – 7 NOVEMBER 2014 ....................................................................................................21
KEYNOTE...................................................................................................................................................................................... 22
WORKSHOP SESSION 4: VIENNA 1815 AND ITS PROFESSIONAL AGENTS ......................................................................... 23
WORKSHOP SESSION 5: VIENNA 1815 AND ITS CULTURAL LEGACY II ............................................................................. 26
CONCLUDING REMARKS .......................................................................................................................................28
ERC: SECURING EUROPE, FIGHTING ITS ENEMIES ......................................................................................29
PRACTICAL INFORMATION .................................................................................................................................31
CONFERENCE LOCATIONS .......................................................................................................................................................... 31
5 November 2014: Public opening .............................................................................................................................. 31
6 & 7 November 2014: Academic Conference ......................................................................................................... 31
HOTEL INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................................................ 32
PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE NETHERLANDS ......................................................................................................................... 32
Travel from Schiphol to Amsterdam Central Station ........................................................................................... 32
Buying train tickets........................................................................................................................................................... 32
USEFUL WEBSITES ...................................................................................................................................................................... 33
QUESTIONS .................................................................................................................................................................................. 33
5-7 November 2014
5 / 33
6 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
PUBLIC EVENT – 5 NOVEMBER 2014
1814 – 1914 – 2014
Lessons from the past, challenges for the future
National Archives, The Hague
Prins Willem Alexanderplein 20, The Hague
Day chair: Prof. Beatrice de Graaf (Utrecht University)
7:30 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.
Registration and welcome
8:00 p.m. – 8:15 p.m.
Opening
8:15 p.m. – 9:20 p.m.
200 years Conference of Vienna and the Creation of the Kingdom of the
Netherlands
Jozias van Aartsen (Mayor of The Hague and former minister of Foreign
Affairs)
The United Kingdom of the Netherlands (1814-1831). European Bulwark or
Security Risk
Niek van Sas (Professor of Modern History, University of Amsterdam)
From collective security to European catastrophe, 1815-1914
Christopher Clark (Regius Professor of History, Cambridge University)
Commentary: Architects versus Sleepwalkers? Discussing the system of
Vienna for today
Mark Jarrett (Author of the book ‘The congress of Vienna and its legacy’)
9:20 p.m. – 9:40 p.m.
Public Debate
9:40 p.m.
Drinks
5-7 November 2014
7 / 33
8 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Paper summaries and author biographies
Jozias van Aartsen (Mayor of The Hague)
200 years Conference of Vienna and the Creation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Jozias van Aartsen studied law at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. He served as minister of Agriculture,
Nature and Food Quality between 1994 and 1998, and as minister of foreign affairs of The Netherlands
from 1998 until 2002. Subsequently, he was member of Dutch parliament in the period 2002-2006 and EU
coordinator for energy. In 2008 he was installed as mayor of The Hague, a function that he holds until
today. Van Aartsen was one of the founders of the The Hague Institute for Global Justice, an international
think tank.
Prof. Niek van Sas (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
The United Kingdom of the Netherlands (1814-1831). European Bulwark or Security Risk ?
The union of the former United Provinces and the Austrian Netherlands in 1814 was meant to create a
barrier against France in case revolution would break out again. Especially between 1815 and 1818 the
Great Powers closely watched developments in the new Kingdom, not least because so many French
revolutionaries had sought refuge there. How to develop a Great Power code of conduct in this
instance became a major topic of diplomatic discourse. Quite unexpectedly the Belgian Revolt of 1830
made the Netherlands once more a test case of Great Power cooperation. In the meantime William I had
valiantly tried to make a success of his new merger-state as a "union intime et complète".
Niek van Sas is Professor of Modern History at the University of Amsterdam. His research is mainly
concerned with the political and cultural history of the Netherlands and Western Europe, particularly with
themes like state- and nation-building, international relations, national identity, history and memory. A
major research interest is the revolutionary era around 1800. His books include Onze Natuurlijkste
Bondgenoot. Nederland, Engeland en Europa, 1813-1831 (1985), De metamorfose van Nederland. Van oude
orde naar moderniteit, 1750-1900 (2004) and The burgher of Delft. A painting by Jan Steen (with Frans
Grijzenhout, 2007). From 2007 till 2012 he was an honorary curator of the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.
Prof. Christopher Clark (Cambridge University, United Kingdom)
From collective security to European catastrophe, 1815-1914
Christopher Clark studied history at the University of Sydney and the Freie Universität Berlin. He is
currently professor in Modern European History at the University of Cambridge and Director of Studies of
St. Catherine’s College. Among his publications is the award winning Iron Kingdom: The Rise and Downfall
of Prussia, 1600-1947 (London 2006), for which he received the Wolfson History Prize in 2006. In 2010 he
became the youngest recipient of the German Historians’ Prize. His latest book studies the outbreak of the
First World War and is titled: The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 (London 2012).
Mark Jarrett (Author of the book “The congress of Vienna and its legacy”
Commentary: Architects versus Sleepwalkers? Discussing the system of Vienna for today
Mark Jarrett is an attorney, historian and publisher, and the author of The Congress of Vienna and its
Legacy. Historian Andrew Roberts praises his book as “meticulously researched, elegantly written and
penetratingly insightful.” Robert Jervis, past President of the American Political Science Association, calls
it “a model treatment,” while Charles Maier of Harvard University writes that this “impressively
researched volume promises to become our generation’s authoritative study of the peace settlements of
1814-1815.” Mark attended Columbia University (BA); the LSE (MA); UC Berkeley (J.D.), and Stanford
University (Ph.D.). He was an attorney in the San Francisco office of the international law firm of Baker &
McKenzie.
5-7 November 2014
9 / 33
10 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
CONFERENCE DAY 1 – 6 NOVEMBER 2014
Vienna 1815:
The Making of a European Security Culture
Royal Netherlands Academy for Arts and Sciences
Address: Kloveniersburgwal 29, Amsterdam
Day chair: Prof. Ido de Haan (Utrecht University)
9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.
Registration & coffee
9:30 a.m. – 9:40 a.m.
Welcome and opening
9:40 a.m. – 10:45 a.m.
Studying European Security Cultures across History and the Social Sciences
Prof. Marieke de Goede (University of Amsterdam)
After Napoleon, the construction of a new European security culture:
Institutional innovations, norms, paradoxes
Prof. Matthias Schulz (University of Geneva)
Discussion
10:45 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.
Break
11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Workshop 1: 1815 and its old and new threats
Chair: Prof. Beatrice de Graaf
1:00 p.m. – 1:45 p.m.
Lunch break
1:45 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
Workshop 2: Cultural Memory I
Chair: Dr. Lotte Jensen
3:00 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.
Break
3:15 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Workshop 3: 1815 and its new institutions
Chair: Prof. Ido de Haan
5:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
Drinks
5-7 November 2014
11 / 33
Keynotes
Prof. Marieke de Goede (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
Studying European Security Cultures across History and the Social Sciences
This paper takes De Graaf’s position paper as its starting point, and discusses different approaches to
studying European security cultures across history and the social sciences. For de Graaf, elements of a
European security culture include shared threat perceptions, networks of professional agents, processes
of juridification and technological innovations. Among the merits of De Graaf’s framework are its attention
to the historically and socially situated processes of the exchange of ideas and cultural notions of threat
and security, that are combined with detailed attention to the practices and (juridical) technologies of
security. De Goede will discuss the commonalities and differences between De Graaf’s approach and her
own research project on European Security Culture at the University of Amsterdam, that focuses
empirically on post-9/11 European pre-emptive security measures. Her project, which takes its
conceptual starting points from the work of Foucault, has focused on threats, technologies and
temporalities as key factors for comprehending and critically analysing European security cultures. She
will discuss a number of findings of her project, including contemporary threat perceptions that
emphasise the unknowability and unpredictability of current threats; and the historically durable security
technology of the ‘List.’ She will conclude by arguing that Foucauldian notions of the dispositif, or
assemblage, are important so as not to make the European security culture appear to be fully coherent and
consensual.
Marieke de Goede is Professor of Political Science at the University of Amsterdam and coordinator of the
‘European Union in a Global Order’ MSc programme. She directs the NWO-Vidi research project ‘European
Security Culture’ at the Amsterdam Institute for Social Science research (AISSR). The project team has
recently published a special issue of Security Dialogue 45.5 (2014) on the theme of ‘Preemption, Politics,
Practice.’ De Goede is author of Speculative Security: the Politics of Pursuing Terrorist Monies (University of
Minnesota Press, 2012), and co-editor, with Louise Amoore, of Risk and the War on Terror (Routledge,
2008).
Prof. Matthias Schulz (University of Geneva, Switzerland)
After Napoleon, the construction of a new European security culture: Institutional innovations, norms,
paradoxes
Since Paul W. Schroeder published his seminal synthesis on the ‘Transformation of European Politics,
1763-1848’ (1994), some historians and lawyers have criticized and countered his, while others, focusing
on new event-types and constructivist approaches to international history, have compounded the thesis
that the European states system underwent profound changes around 1813-1815. Indeed, some have
probed into the era beyond 1848 to find out how long-lasting the changes really were, and which effects
they produced in the long run. Based upon the constructivist notion of a ‘culture of peace’ developed in an
article in 2007 and, in depth, in my book ‘Normen und Praxis’ (2009) I will sketch a broad picture of
changes which occurred in the international system (18th to 19th centuries), analyze structural,
institutional, procedural and normative innovations, and inquire into their consequences for 19th century
international relations. Far from idealizing the results, I shall highlight itineraries for further research on
collective practices and international regimes set up after 1815 which point to layers of ‘Europeanness’
which are usually submerged in a historiography interpreting the 19th century broadly as the age of
nationalism.
Dr. phil. habil. Matthias Schulz, is Professor of History of International Relations and Transnational
History at the University of Geneva and director of the Department of General History. Publicatiions
include Normen und Praxis: Das Europäische Konzert der Grossmächte als Sicherheitsrat, 1815-1860
(München 2009), Das 19. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart 2011), Deutschland, der Völkerbund und die Frage der
europäischen Wirtschaftsordnung (Hamburg 1997), The Strained Alliance: US-European Relations from
Nixon to Carter (co-edited with Thomas A. Schwartz, Cambridge 2010).
12 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Workshop session 1: Vienna 1815 and its old and new threats
Chair: Prof. Beatrice de Graaf (Utrecht University)
Jeroen van Zanten (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
Brussels as a liability, 1815-1820
At the congress of Vienna Great-Britain, Russia and Austria decided to create a union of the Netherlands
and Belgium. The Low Countries were to form ‘a boulevard de l'Europe contre la France’, and therefore
played an important role in maintaining the balance of power and security in Europe. At Waterloo this
construction proved itself, but in the years after Napoleons fall the capital of the United Kingdom of the
Netherlands, Brussels, quickly became a centre of political conspiracy and agitation. Brussels as a refuge
for ‘malcontents’ became a liability. How did King William react to this threat? And more importantly,
what was the response of the Allies? What countermeasures were drawn up in Paris, London, Vienna and
St-Petersburg to face the problems in Brussels and to secure and maintain peace?
Jeroen van Zanten (1972) studied History and Philosophy. In 2004 he obtained a PhD at the university of
Leiden. Since 2006 he lectures Modern European and Dutch History at the University of Amsterdam. Van
Zanten has written articles and books on parliamentary history, monarchy, revolution, restoration and
political culture in Europe during ‘the long 19th century, 1789-1914.' In 2013 he published a biography of
the Dutch king William II (1792-1849). Currently he is working on a book on Waterloo and its Nachleben,
1815-2015.
Gabriel Leanca (Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania)
The Eastern Question (1821-1861): a Catalyst or a Threat to the 1815 Settlement?
This paper focusses on the ways in which the Eastern Question shaped the international arena in the first
half of the nineteenth century; how collective diplomacy subordinated bilateral diplomacy in the major
crisis arising from the Ottoman Empire. Two major threats to the Concert of Europe existed: France
endeavoured to regain the place it had in Europe during the Napoleonic period and Russia developed a
dual policy, one meant to preserve its role within the European Concert as settled in 1814-1815; the other
constructed on the basis of bilateral, but largely asymmetric relation with the Ottoman Empire.
Confronted with these centrifugal forces, the balance of power settled in Vienna was difficult to survive.
Change in France’s attitude towards England and a growing interest with respect to collective diplomacy
gave new life to the 1815 settlement. The Straits Convention (1841) constituted the base for France’s new
policy in the Near East: France’s aim was to revert the 1814 defeat, but this ideal was achieved using the
means provided by the European Concert. Thus, the peace of 1856 was a continuation and a reform of the
Vienna Settlement. Simultaneously, the Crimean system transformed Austria in a scapegoat. The
misunderstanding of Austria’s role probably limited the functionality of collective and multilateral
diplomacy after the French military intervention in Lebanon (1860-1861) under European mandate.
Gabriel Leanca holds a PhD from Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania and Bourgogne University,
France (2007). His research interests cover themes in international, political and cultural history. He
teaches at the Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, and was a Fulbright Senior Fellow at Columbia University
(New York) and Postdoctoral Fellow at Angers University (France). He recently edited and contributed to:
La politique extérieure de Napoléon III (Paris 2011), and published among others L’annexion de la
Dobroudja du Sud par la Roumanie en 1913 et l’alliance franco-russe in: Catherine Horel ed., Les guerres
balkaniques 1912-1913. Conflits, enjeux, mémoires, (Brussels 2014) 129-151.
5-7 November 2014
13 / 33
Christoph Nübel (Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany)
Monarchism of fear? Security as a culture in British and Prussian political thought, 1814/15-1850
The Congress of Vienna concerned itself not merely with security in international relations but also with
European states' internal affairs. In the eyes of contemporaries, the French Revolution and the reign of
Napoleon together with its subsequent wars had shown that both revolutionary ideas and a regime's
actions had consequences for the political order of all European states. In 1814/15 diplomats agreed that
they had to prevent revolution and stifle its intellectual dissemination, as both gave rise to crisis and
confusion: stability and security in domestic affairs would provide the most effective safeguard against the
overthrowing of Europe's most recently devised system of ensuring harmonious international relations.
This paper shows that the international security culture of the 19 th century cannot be fully understood
without considering both states' internal and external affairs, due to their symbiotic nature. By focussing
on the examples of Britain and Prussia it demonstrates that in both countries a security culture became
the paradigm of domestic policy. At its core lay the concept of monarchy, which throughout Europe
provided the bastion against revolution and notions of popular sovereignty. By utilising the widespread
fear of revolution and by promoting monarchs as benevolent patriarchs, states' security culture was also
formed through emotional appeals. This paper will discuss if it is correct to speak of a “monarchism of
fear” shaped by the intellectual thought and emotions evoked in response to the events of 1789.
Since 2011 Christoph Nübel is Associate Professor at the History Department of Humboldt-Universität zu
Berlin. In 2012 he received the Werner Hahlweg prize for his PhD dissertation. Since 2013 he is editor at
“1914-1918-online”, the international encyclopedia of the First World War. His research interests focus on
military history, the history of political ideas and Otto von Bismarck. Recent publications: Durchhalten und
Überleben an der Westfront. Raum und Körper im Ersten Weltkrieg (Paderborn 2014), and ‘Der BismarckMythos in den Reden und Schriften Hitlers. Vergangenheitsbilder und Zukunftsversprechen in der
Auseinandersetzung von NSDAP und DNVP bis 1933’, in: Historische Zeitschrift 298 (2014), 349-380.
Claudia Reichl-Ham (Universität Wien, Austria)
Peace and Stability? Austria’s Security-Political Role after the Congress of Vienna with Respect to the Oriental
Question
After the Congress of Vienna the Habsburg Empire’s policy aimed at the “Concert of Europe” to establish
and maintain a peaceful balance of power, preserve the status quo and protect “legitimate” governments.
One of its main efforts was to find a solution of the Oriental Question. Austria took a vivid interest in the
integrity of the decaying Ottoman Empire, as it had no desire to see a weak Ottoman neighbour be
replaced by a strong Russia, as the fear that South-Eastern European nationalist movements might spread
over to Austria and lead to destabilization. The expansionist efforts of Russia in the East of the Ottoman
Empire and the reactions of other great powers to the nationalist movements left Austria isolated. This
paper will show that the “Long Peace” was only a myth with respect to the Balkans. It deals with Austria’s
futile efforts to prevent the other great powers from engaging in regional, imperialistic wars (e.g. the
Crimean War or the Russo-Turkish War of 1877/78). However, despite its rapprochement with the
Ottoman Empire after 1815 and its diplomatic support for its “neighbour” throughout the 19th/early 20th
centuries, Austria’s actions were determined by mere political calculation: in case of a complete
disintegration of its protégé Austria also wanted to have its (territorial) share. The annexation of BosniaHercegovina in 1908 finally resulted in an alienation between the two empires.
Claudia Reichl-Ham studied history and translation studies at the University of Vienna and did a
postgraduate on archival studies at the Institut für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung (MAS). Her fields
of interest contain: military, political and cultural history from the 16th to the 19th centuries, AustrianOttoman Wars and relations, and studies on the history of Central and South-Eastern Europe. Besides
being lecturer at the University of Vienna she works as Deputy Department Head of the Research
Department, Head of Publications and Library of the Museum of Military History Vienna and as Secretary
General of the Austrian Commission of Military History.
14 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Michal Chvojka (University of Trnava, Slovakia)
Between observation, prevention and prosecution. Habsburg security policies following the Congress of
Vienna
Inspired by Christopher Daase´s extended concept of security, this paper distinguishes a reference, spatial
and a danger dimension of Habsburg security after 1815. In my paper, Austria´s securitization and the
security transfer from the state to regional level (between Vienna, Prague and Brno) will be investigated.
Firstly, we will track the geographical lines, upon which the Habsburgs police had confronted the transfer
of various security threats from abroad into the Austrian Empire. Secondly, we will pay our attention to
the “dangerous security targets” (revolutionaries, exiles or intellectuals) and their networks. Finally, we
will try to analyze both the vectors of their productivity within the Habsburg provinces of Bohemia,
Moravia and Silesia as well as the new system of so-called situation reports launched there in August of
1815 in order to monitor more precisely “popular feelings, foreign news or conduct of public servants”.
Michal Chvojka studied history at universities in Slovakia, the Czech republic and Austria. Since
defending his dissertation in 2007, he has been teaching at the University of SS. Cyril and Methodius in
Trnava (Slovakia). His historical research has been focused on Modern European history, history of the
Habsburg monarchy (1780-1848) and vertical social control.
5-7 November 2014
15 / 33
Workshop session 2: Vienna 1815 and its cultural legacy I
Chair: Dr. Lotte Jensen (Radboud University Nijmegen)
Jos Gabriëls (Huygens ING, The Netherlands)
Cutting the Cake. The Congress of Vienna in British, French and German political caricature
Although the Congress of Vienna was not a main topic in political caricature, it was anything but ignored.
In the first six months of 1815, while monarchs and diplomats were deliberating on Europe’s future, the
Congress was depicted in various satirical prints in Great Britain, France and the German states alike. This
corpus of satirical imagery was submitted to a twofold analysis in which both the context and the content
of the prints were subjected to close scrutiny. Firstly, the identity of the artists who produced the
caricatures was ascertained, as well as with what purpose they made these satires? How were the prints
published and brought to public attention? And for what audiences were they intended anyway? Secondly,
the research explored the political message the caricatures on the Vienna Congress try to convey, and in
what artistic way (simplification, exaggeration, allusion, symbolism) these points of view are visualised. In
both context and content analysis, the differences and similarities between the British, French and
German prints were carefully taken into account.
Jos Gabriëls is a senior researcher at the Huygens Institute in The Hague. He specializes in the political
and military history of the Napoleonic era, with a special interest in biographical and prosopographical
research. He is currently working on a book about Roustam, the Mamelukes and Napoleon. His new
research project will compare Dutch and German royal courts in the period 1780 to 1820 as centres of
political power.
Janneke Weijermars (Groningen University, The Netherlands)
The Conference of Vienna and the Battle of Waterloo in Dutch, Luxembourgian and Belgian literature, 18151915
The aim of this lecture is to analyse the cultural construction and literary representation of Europe and
European characters within a vast corpus of texts published in the Low Countries, which refer to the
crucial years 1814-1815. The lectures’ underlying hypothesis is, that the commemoration of the
conference of Vienna and the battle of Waterloo in 1865 uncovered an idea of a new cultural
consciousness in the Low Countries: a transnational, European sphere, in which the sense of a common
thought is articulated, the teamwork of the conference and the Allied Army is indicated, or the future of
Europe and European citizenship is defined.
Janneke Weijermars teaches Modern Dutch literature at the University of Groningen. She publishes
about nineteenth- and twentieth-century Dutch literature and book history, and she earned a Ph.D. in
Literature from the University of Antwerp (2012). Her dissertation Stepbrothers. Southern Dutch
Literature and Nation Building under Willem I, 1814-1834 will be published by Brill (Leiden/Boston) in
December 2014.
16 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Eva Maria Werner (Universität Innsbruck, Austria)
The memory of the Congress of Vienna in the context of World War I
The phase from 1914 to about 1925 was a very special period of remembrance of the Congress of Vienna.
Though there were hardly any celebrations of its centenary, the intensity of consideration of the topic
increased significantly and took on a new quality: The Congress of Vienna was seen in relation to a new
worldwide peace agreement, which was realized in 1919 in Paris and carried on in Locarno in 1925. All
over Europe various studies and articles about the events of 1814/15 were published during this period,
most of them taking up a comparative angle and asking what the proceeding a hundred years ago could
teach nowadays. The Congress of Vienna became a role model. The transition to concrete political usage of
these reflections on the past was smooth. Apart from text-based and specific reflections, politicians in this
period also referred to the Congress of Vienna during their practice. These various needs for application of
historical perceptions will be analyzed in this lecture.
Dr. Eva Maria Werner studied history and art history. She completed an international PhD program at
Innsbruck and Trento in 2008, working on revolutionary ministries in 1848. From 2008 to 2014 she was
occupied with the research project “The Congress of Vienna and the political press”. Since 2014 she is
head of the research project “The Congress of Vienna in European Cultures of Memory” at Innsbruck and
Frankfurt a.M.
5-7 November 2014
17 / 33
Workshop session 3: Vienna 1815 and its new institutions
Chair: Prof. Ido de Haan (Utrecht University)
Stella Ghervas (Harvard University, United States)
The Holy Alliance versus the Quadruple Alliance. Two Contrasting Views of the Vienna Peace Order
While the signatories of the Treaty of Chaumont of 1st March 1814 had reaffirmed the virtues of the
balance of power in order to end the war against Napoleon, there was not a common opinion among the
Great Powers on how to subsequently institute and maintain the peace. In fact, each had a different view
of the new international order to be created. A case in point are two treaties standing only one month
apart: the Holy Alliance conceived by Czar Alexander I (26 September 1815), and the Quadruple Alliance
sponsored by England (20 November 1815). While the first was promoting a long-term confederative
system, the second was designed to cater more immediate needs of military security. Beyond the famous
quip of Castlereagh about Alexander’s mystical phraseology and the obviously divergent geopolitical
ambitions of the two empires, were there deeper causes for these differences? To answer that question,
we will examine the intellectual sources of the continental and British views on European affairs (from the
18th century on), thus revealing two strongly contrasting political models for Europe, which rested on
distinct interpretations of “balance of power”. By drawing from unpublished documents in the Russian
archives, this paper will also shed new light on the Russian position at the Congress of Vienna.
Stella Ghervas is currently a visiting scholar at Harvard University's Center for European Studies and
Senior Fellow at the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme d’Aquitaine in Bordeaux. Her research interests
include European and international history (18th-21st century), the history of ideas, international
relations, as well as the history of Russia and Southeastern Europe. In 2008 she published the acclaimed
book “Reinventing tradition: Alexander Stourdza and Europe of the Holy Alliance”. She is currently
completing a book entitled Conquering Peace: From the Enlightenment to the European Union for Harvard
University Press.
Karin Schneider (Universität Innsbruck, Austria)
A chance to participate. Criteria of inclusion and exclusion at the Congress of Vienna
This presentation will focus on the question of membership in the several committees that were erected
throughout the Conference of Vienna. How was membership organized and regulated? Which political
and diplomatic deliberations were responsible for selecting the committees’ members and delegates?
Obviously, there was no general rule: The adjacent states of the Rhine sat on the Committee on the
navigation of the Rhine, whereas the Swiss Commission included no Swiss delegates at all. Austria, Prussia
and Russia were members of the Commission for the abolition of the Save trade, although these countries
were not affected by this evil. Specific political constellations seem to be responsible for this practice –
France, as it is well known, became a member of the Commission of the Five because of the impasse in the
Polish-Saxon Question. The organization of the Congress of Vienna presents itself as the laboratory of the
later Concert of Europe. In 1814/15 the powers experimented with different categories of inclusion and
exclusion – a topic not only relevant for the negotiations in Vienna, but also for the Quintupelalliance and
the Holy Alliance, founded in autumn 1815, and fervidly discussed at the Congress of Aachen in 1818.
Mag. Dr. Karin Schneider studied History as well as journalism and communication sciences in Vienna
and graduated the training course in historical auxiliary subjects and archive studies at the Institute of
Austrian Historical Research at the University of Vienna. Currently she is Academic Fellow at the Institute
for Historical Sciences and European Ethnology at the University of Innsbruck. Her research interests
include International History of the 19th century, Austrian History of the 19th and first half of the 20th
century, History of the middle classes, Women and Gender History.
18 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Prof. Karl Härter (Max Planck Institut Frankfurt, Germany)
Transnational Security and the Protection of the Constitution in Central Europe after 1815
The main purpose of the German Confederation, established by the Congress of Vienna 1815, was the
maintenance of external and internal security and the protection of its member states („Erhaltung der
äußeren und inneren Sicherheit Deutschlands und der Unabhängigkeit und Unverletzbarkeit der einzelnen
deutschen Staaten“). After 1815 political crime and dissidence were perceived as current security threats
endangering the confederation and its members from the inside as well as from abroad. This was even
complicated by the complex constitutional structure of the German Confederation as a confederacy of
sovereign states which themselves could endanger the security and constitution of other members or the
whole confederation. However, the constitutional structure of the confederation made it impossible to
establish a security regime that was based on the sovereign nation state and its monopoly of legitimate
force. As a consequence, the German Confederation tried to establish a federal security regime from 1815
onwards that could deal with this hybrid setting of internal and external security and aimed at state
protection (Staatsschutz) and the protection of the constitution (Verfasssungsschutz). The presentation
will present the main developments of this federal security regime - notably regarding transnational
security issues – which in the end lead to the formation of a new security culture in Central Europe after
1815.
Karl Härter is Research Group Leader at the Max-Planck-Institut for European Legal History,
Frankfurt/M. and Professor for Early Modern and Modern History at the University of Darmstadt. His
major research interests are Legal and Constitutional History of Early Modern Europe, notably the history
of crime and penal law. Current projects concern the history of political crime and the formation of
transnational criminal law regimes. He has published monographs on the Imperial Diet in the Age of the
French Revolution and Policey und Strafjustiz in Kurmainz, and over 90 articles in several collected
volumes and journals as well as more than 80 book reviews and shorter contributions to encyclopaedias,
journals and volumes.
Prof. Jens E. Olesen (Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald, Germany)
The representation of Denmark and Sweden as small states at the Congress of Vienna
Denmark and Sweden did not play an important role at the Congress at Vienna, but due to their
involvement in the Napoleonic Wars the new situation in northern Europe had to be dealt with by the
Great powers. Denmark had according to the peace-treaty from Kiel on the 14th of January 1814 handed
over Norway to Sweden. Due to the Swedish military threat to Denmark Norway was given up in order to
save the Danish core lands. The Swedish Crown-prince, the French Marshall Jean Baptiste Bernadotte
(Swedish: Karl XIV. Johan) did not attend the Congress himself, but was represented by the experienced
Carl Löwenhielm. - Denmark had been promised Swedish-Pomerania as a compensation for the loss of
Norway, but Sweden tried to avoid this, and Prussia strongly wanted this territory. A solution was found
during the Congress: Denmark was given a greater sum of money and the small duchy of Lauenburg. Thus
it was possible for Sweden to hand over Swedish-Pomerania to Prussia 1815. Sweden had at the Congress
to recline from other claims. The presence of the Danish king in Vienna helped to secure the friendship of
Russia and England, but also against possible futural threats from Sweden.
Jens E. Olesen is professor of History and holds the Chair of Scandinavian and Finnish history at the
University of Greifswald since 1996. He studied at the University of Aarhus and wrote his dissertation on
the Kalmar Union (1980). He has published on late-medieval and reformation history in Scandinavia as
well as on the Struggle for the Baltic between Denmark and Sweden during the Early Modern Era. Among
his scholarly interests are also Scandinavianism, constitutional history and the history of the Baltic Sea
region. He is co-editor of the Cambridge history of Scandinavia volume 2 (1520-1870), which is published
2015.
5-7 November 2014
19 / 33
Constantin Ardeleanu (University Dunarea de Jos of Galati, Romania)
Danube navigation and the application of the principles of the 1815 Vienna Congress
The principles of the Vienna Congress regarding the navigation on international rivers played a significant
role in the diplomatic dispute between Russia and the western powers related to Russia’s impositions in
the way of free trade and shipping along the lower course of the Danube. After the Crimean War, a
European Commission of the Danube was established for carrying out the technical works necessary for
removing the hindrances that impeded proper navigation, an institution that soon became the guarantee
of preserving free shipping on the river. It also brought about new juridical interpretations on how the
Vienna principles should be applied on international rivers and the Commission was a veritable
laboratory of transnational administration. The institution had a clear technical task, which resulted in
lasting engineering works for the amelioration of Danube’s navigable channel. But, most importantly, it
had a juridical activity that covered both a diplomatic and a maritime dimension. In juridical terms, the
continuous extension of the Commission’s powers led to instructing debates at several European
diplomatic conferences, and also to the drafting of several regulations (related to the use of lighters, the
taxation of international shipping, police rules along international waterways, etc.) that came to be used in
different other areas of the world.
Constantin Ardeleanu is associate professor of modern Romanian history at “The Lower Danube”
University of Galaţi, where he teaches courses on the economic development of the Danubian and Black
Sea areas during the 19th and 20th centuries. His latest book is titled “International Trade and Diplomacy at
the Lower Danube: the Sulina Question and the Economic Premises of the Crimean War (1829–1853)”,
Brăila, 2014.
20 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
CONFERENCE DAY II – 7 NOVEMBER 2014
Vienna 1815:
The Making of a European Security Culture
Royal Netherlands Academy for Arts and Sciences
Address: Kloveniersburgwal 29, Amsterdam
Day chair: Prof. Herman Paul (Leiden University)
9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.
Registration & coffee
9:30 a.m. – 9:45 a.m.
Welcome
9:45 a.m. – 10:30 a.m.
Lessons from 1815. Peace, Security and the Vienna System in History and
Politics (1815 to present)
Prof. Eckart Conze (Philipps-Universität Marburg)
Discussion
10:30 a.m. – 10:45 a.m.
Break
10:45 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Workshop 4: 1815 and its professional agents
Chair: Prof. Duco Hellema
1:00 p.m. – 1:45 p.m.
Lunch break
1:45 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
Workshop 5: Cultural memory II
Chair: Prof. Henk te Velde
3:00 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.
Break
3:15 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Concluding remarks and research desiderata
Prof. Beatrice de Graaf
4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Farewell reception
5-7 November 2014
21 / 33
Keynote
Prof. Eckart Conze (Philipps-Universität Marburg, Germany)
Lessons from 1815. Peace, Security and the Vienna System in History and Politics (1815 to present)
As a historical model of how to end an extended period of international conflict and to establish a stable
and peaceful international order the Vienna Congress has found the attention of academics and politicians
ever since 1815. Against this background the paper will deal with the question how the Congress of
Vienna and the Vienna system were regarded by various actors and under changing political
circumstances. Rather than merely collecting views and interpretations of the Congress and the
international system taking shape in 1814/15, the paper will ask how the varying interpretations of
Vienna and the Vienna system reflected changing ideas and visions of international order and they can tell
us about national and international security cultures in the 19 th and 20th centuries.
Eckart Conze is Professor of Modern and Contemporary History at the University of Marburg where he is
also Director of the International Centre for War Crimes Research and Documentation (ICWC). He was a
Visiting Professor at the Universities of Cambridge, Toronto and Bologna. His research and teaching cover
19th and 20th century German and International History. Among his latest publications are monographs on
the history of the Federal Republic of Germany (2009) and the history of the German Foreign Office
(2013) as well as various articles on a renewed history of international relations and a history of security.
22 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Workshop session 4: Vienna 1815 and its professional agents
Chair: Prof. Duco Hellema (Utrecht University)
Mark Jarrett (Author of ‘The Congress of Vienna and its Legacy’)
Castlereagh and Counter-Revolution, at home and abroad
The statesmen who attended the Congress of Vienna confronted the twin problems of restoring peace and
taming the spirit of the French Revolution. Professors Cornel Zwierlein and Beatrice de Graaf have
recently suggested that these statesmen were in fact forging a new ‘security culture.’ Closely tied to this
new culture was fear of conspiracy. The British foreign minister, Viscount Castlereagh, epitomized these
tendencies. For most of his life, Castlereagh confronted the threat of revolution. As a young man, he played
a critical role in suppressing revolution in Ireland. In the Irish context, Castlereagh developed a
conspiratorial view of revolution; at the same time, he always retained some of his youthful reformism.
The result was a unique approach to counter-revolution, combining punishment of revolutionary leaders,
leniency towards the rank-and-file, and a program of limited reform designed to permit elite manipulation
of representative bodies while making a show of public participation. Castlereagh’s Irish experiences
affected his conceptualization of revolution, and these ideas in turn influenced his policies towards the
restoration of the monarchy in France and later revolutions. Because he saw most revolutionary
movements as essentially shallow and conspiratorial, Castlereagh often took a sanguine view of the ability
of established governments to defeat them.
Mark Jarrett is an attorney, historian and publisher, and the author of The Congress of Vienna and its
Legacy. Historian Andrew Roberts praises his book as “meticulously researched, elegantly written and
penetratingly insightful.” Charles Maier of Harvard University writes that this “impressively researched
volume promises to become our generation’s authoritative study of the peace settlements of 1814-1815.”
Jarrett attended Columbia University (BA); the LSE (MA); UC Berkeley (J.D.), and Stanford University
(Ph.D.). He was an attorney in the San Francisco office of the international law firm of Baker & McKenzie.
Thierry Lentz (Fondation Napoléon, Paris, France)
The French delegation at the congress of Vienna
Thierry Lentz (born 1959) is director of the Fondation Napoléon in Paris. Specialising in the history of
the French Consulate and the First Empire he has published widely on the international relations,
institutions and the general history of France in the time of Napoléon. In 2013 he received the prix-Pierre
Lafue for his book “Le congrès de Vienne. Une refondation de l'Europe. 1814-1815”.
Prof. Robert Mark Spaulding (University of North Carolina Wilmington, United States)
Professional Agency in Negotiating the ‘Articles concernant la navigation du Rhin’
This paper re-examines the origins of the thirty-two “Articles concernant la navigation du Rhin” concluded
by the Committee on River Navigation at Vienna in March 1815. Those articles served as the foundation of
the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine (CCNR), Europe’s oldest international regime. The
essay explores how in 1814 the allied occupation authorities, led by Baron Karl vom Stein, chose to
preserve the existing administration of Rhine commerce and how that decision framed the future course
of discussions that took place in Vienna. None of the few existing examinations of the Vienna negotiations
on rivers link those talks to the events taking place along the Rhine itself before the congress assembled,
came to order, or established the Committee on River Navigation. Explicating the record of conscious
Allied decisions about how the Rhine trade would be governed in 1814 offers an essential new insight into
how the Committee on River Navigation reached its important conclusions with such rapidity. On that
basis, this essay reconsiders the locus of agency in the creation of the CCNR, shifting away from the
diplomats in Vienna in 1815 to the directors of the occupation administration along the Rhine in 1814.
5-7 November 2014
23 / 33
Robert Mark Spaulding is Professor of History, University of North Carolina, Wilmington. His research
interests lie in German and European History and the history of global political economy.
His publications include: Osthandel and Ostpolitik (1997) and essays in numerous journals and collections,
including International Organization, Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, and the
Oxford Handbook of the Cold War. He is currently working on a book manuscript titled: The Commercial
Life of the Rhine: Trade Politics, and Economic Growth in the Old Reich 1600-1800.
Marion Koschier (Alpen-Adria Universität Klagenfurt, Austria)
‘This Government gives us our Bread and Butter’ - The Role of Merchant Bankers and Speculators in the
Creation of the Vienna Peace System
When discussing the Congress of Vienna and the years after the final fall of Napoleon, historians tend to
refer basically to the political and diplomatic dimension of the emerging European peace system.
According to Paul W. Schroeder, there was a “transformation of European politics”, what means a
comprehensive change in the relationships between the European Powers. However, up to now little
attention has been paid to the financial aspects of the post-napoleonic aera, as 1814/15 was also a vital
turning point for the international banking system as a whole. Henceforth the financially sound London
banks like Baring Brothers or NM Rothschild superseded the banking houses of Amsterdam in granting
funds to foreign governments. Thus British assets contributed in safeguarding the emergence of a stable
European peace system between 1815 and 1825. The paper aims to analyze the role of merchant bankers
in the politically and economically unstable period after the Napoleonic Wars and illustrates the
importance of merchant bankers for Europe´s post-napoleonic peace policy.
Marion Koschier studied history at the Alpen-Adria Universität Klagenfurt. She is currently working on
her PhD thesis dealing with the financial aspects of the Vienna Peace System. From 2011 until 2014 she
was a research associate of the FWF research project "The Congress of Vienna and the European Peace
System” at the Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt, Austria. From 2013 to 2014 she worked as a research
associate at the University of Innsbruck, Austria. Her main research interests include the European
Concert/European politics in the 19th century – Austrian Economic History (18th/19th century) – Nation
and Nationalism in Austria during the 19th century.
Frederik van Dam (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium)
The poet as diplomat: The Congress of Vienna and Thomas Moore’s The Fudge Family in Paris
At first sight, there seem to have been two ways in which British writers responded to the Congress of
Vienna. Admirers of Napoléon such as Byron and Shelley fiercely criticized the Congress as a ‘base
pageant’. Detractors of Napoléon such as Wordsworth and Southey, in contrast, were adamant about their
support for the efforts of Wellington and Castlereagh. I would suggest that the Irish poet Thomas Moore
was subtler and more ambiguous in his response to the Congress than this clear-cut bifurcation would
allow for. In this paper, I will substantiate this claim by situating Moore’s The Fudge Family in Paris
(1818) in the context of other literary responses to British foreign policy. The Fudge Family in Paris, an
epistolary novel in verse that literary critics have neglected, is at once a reflection on the condition of
Europe and on the condition of Ireland: by couching the Congress in a comedy, this poem both questions
and reinforces the wonkish discourse of the Foreign Office that professed to explain Britain’s role in
Europe. The Fudge Family in Paris thus gives shape to what one might call a diplomatic aesthetic. Moore’s
poem was a course text, as it were, for the new generation of British diplomats and other professional
agents that this conference aims to examine.
Dr. Frederik Van Dam is a postdoctoral research fellow in English literature at the University of Leuven
(KU Leuven) and the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO). His forthcoming book, Anthony Trollope’s Late
Style, is to be published by Edinburgh UP. He is now developing a project that maps the impact of British
diplomacy on late-Romantic and mid-Victorian literature.
24 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Raphaël Cahen (Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Germany)
Friedrich Gentz and the Right of Intervention around 1815
The life and work of Friedrich Gentz was partly well known by the historiography after the studies from
Paul Sweet, Golo Mann and more recently Harro Zimmermann and Günther Kronenbitter. Nevertheless
many authors and historians like Iwan Michelangelo d’Aprile have stressed that many aspects and
questions upon this key agent of the congress system remained terra incognita for the research. This
presentation will highlight Gentz’s wide networks (especially within the French society and diplomats) as
well as his key role in the theorization and practice of the right of intervention within the Congress system
and the development of a European security culture after 1815. The presentation will based on Cahen’s
doctoral dissertation: “Friedrich Gentz (1764-1832): post-Enlightenment Thinker and actor of the
renewal of the European Order in the Time of Revolutions”.
Raphaël Cahen studied Law, History and Political Ideas at the Aix-Marseille University, the LudwigMaximilians-Universität and the Università degli studi di Perugia. Cahen’s research focuses on the history
of political thought and history of international relation and international law. His PhD Thesis is titled
“Friedrich Gentz (1764-1832), post-enlightenment thinker and actor of the renewal of the European order
in the time of revolutions”.
5-7 November 2014
25 / 33
Workshop session 5: Vienna 1815 and its cultural legacy II
Chair: Prof. Henk te Velde (Leiden University)
Lotte Jensen (Radboud Universiteit, The Netherlands)
1815: The shaping of a Dutch identity
After the abdication of Napoleon in April 1814 the allied powers established a new European political
order. It was decided in the eight Articles of London (21 June 1814) that the Belgian Provinces would be
added to the territory of the Netherlands. Consequently, in August 1814 prince William appointed a
temporary government in the southern part of what was to become his new kingdom. While further
details remained to be specified and ratified during the Congress of Vienna, Napoleon’s return from exile
hastened the proceedings. On 16 March 1815 William proclaimed himself king of the United Netherlands,
necessitating a ‘union intime et complète’ between two nations that had been separated since the Union of
Utrecht in 1579. All these decisions were made at the highest diplomatic level, but how did inhabitants of
both nations react to these proceedings? This paper will focus on the so-called Hundred Days of Napoleon
which marks the period between Napoleon’s return from exile in Paris and his final defeat at Waterloo. It
will investigate how Dutch identity was defined and shaped in occasional writings during this short
period: how did authors from both sides refer to the proclaimed new union with the Belgian provinces,
and to what extent did they actually refer to the negotiations of the Congress of Vienna? Discourse
analysis will be used to unravel what forms of ‘national’ identity were shaped and reshaped in reaction to
the events of these days.
Lotte Jensen is Associate Professor of Dutch Literary History at Radboud University, Nijmegen. She has
published widely on Dutch historical literature, cultural history and national identity formation. Her
publications include a prize-winning essay on Dutch literary resistance against Napoleon and the
conference volume Free Access to the Past. Romanticism, Cultural Heritage and the Nation (2010). She
currently heads the research project ‘Proud to be Dutch. The role of war and propaganda literature in the
shaping of an early modern Dutch identity between 1648 and 1815’, a VIDI project funded by the NWO
(Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research), which charts the rise and development of Dutch
national thought.
Markus Kirchhoff (Sächsische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Germany)
The Jewish Question at the Congress of Vienna. On its Legacy within the ‘European Concert of the Jews’
The Vienna Congress had a decisive impact on what became to be called the emancipation of the Jews. In a
narrower sense, this especially applied to Jewries in two newly formed entities – those of the United
Kingdom of the Netherlands and those of the German Confederation. The Jews of the former Austrian
Netherlands (to a larger degree, later Belgium) became emancipated, as the quite recent Dutch
Constitution was taken over for the United Kingdom of the Netherlands in general. By enforcing the
validity of this liberal constitution for the new state as a whole, the great powers secured, though not as
their primary intent, Jewish rights as equal citizens. Concerning the German confederation, the outcome
was the opposite. Though the powers expressly sought to secure Jews the status they had enjoyed under
Napoleon, the German states claimed and, in the end, maintained to handle the status of the Jews as a
matter of their sovereignty. Thus, emancipation among the German states remained inconsistent and
marked by setbacks for decades. In a broader sense, these two cases may be regarded as an early example
of new paths, but also the limits of humanitarian diplomacy in the modern age. In both regards, the
presentation will locate the legacy of the Congress of Vienna within the “European Concert of the Jews”:
During the 19th century, alongside great power diplomacy, an unofficial Jewish diplomacy on behalf of
discriminated or persecuted Jewries emerged. The agents of such initiatives were Jewish representatives
like Moses Montefiore or organizations like the Alliance Israélite Universelle, founded 1860. The
presentation will trace the prospects as well as the obstacles of this sort of humanitarian diplomacy as
already present at and, to a distinct degree, laid out by the Congress of Vienna.
26 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Dr. Markus Kirchhoff studied Modern History, Communication Science, and German Studies at the
universities of Essen and Dublin. He received his PhD at the University of Duisburg-Essen. Since 1999 he
has been a Research Associate at the Simon Dubnow Institute for Jewish History and Culture in Leipzig.
Since 2007 he is head of a research unit of the Saxonian Academy in Leipzig which publishes the 7-volume
Enzyklopädie juedischer Geschichte und Kultur (publ. 2011–2016). In his research and publications he
especially deals with the modern diplomatic history of the Jews. He is currently preparing a larger study
on German Jews and International Politics in the year 1919.
Matthijs Lok (Universiteit van Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
Conservative critics to the Viennese international order: Conservative notions on European regeneration and
security (1795-1830)
After the destruction of the old international order during the French revolution, intellectuals thought
about the construction of an new European Order. Especially conservative intellectuals such as Joseph de
Maistre , Edmund Burke, Louis de Bonald, Alexandre Stourdza and others believed that a secure and stable
European order could only be achieved through a regeneration of European culture and society. In their
view a simple return to the prerevolutionary situation would not end turmoil and permanent revolution
that tormented the continent. These conservative publicists were also critical of the Vienna system that
was put into place after 1815 as the Restoration statesmen in their eyes focused too much on stability and
power politics. The Vienna order would not be able to prevent a new revolution according to these right
wing critics as the revolutionary impulse had far deeper cultural roots. In my paper I will question the
idea that conservative Europeanist views were only looking backward, and I will stress their emphasis on
regeneration and spiritual renewal. Also I will relate the search for security and stability in the post
Napoleonic Europe to the striving for spiritual and cultural renewal. Also it is not well known that the
Vienna order was not only attacked by left wing progressive critics, but also by those on the right as well.
Dr. Matthijs Lok is an assistant professor (tenured lecturer) of Modern (West-) European History at the
European Studies Department of the University of Amsterdam. Lok is specialised in the comparative
political and intellectual history of Europe (in a global context) from 1500 to the present, with a special
interest in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. Currently Lok is writing a monograph on the uses of the
past and temporality in ideas of Europe in the post revolutionary era.
5-7 November 2014
27 / 33
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Prof. Beatrice de Graaf (Utrecht University, The Netherlands)
Vienna 1815: The making of a security culture in Europe and beyond
Beatrice de Graaf (1976) is professor for the History of International Relations & Global Governance at
Utrecht University within the Strategic Theme Institution. She studied Modern History and German
language and culture at Utrecht University and Universität Bonn. In 2013, she was awarded an ERC
Consolidator grant for her research project “Securing Europe, fighting its enemies. The making of a
security culture in Europe and beyond, 1815-1914”. Amongst others, she is council member of the
European Council of Foreign Relations, member of the Dutch Young Academy, and sits on the editorial
boards of Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, Terrorism and Political Violence, Perspectives on Terrorism,
and Zeitschrift für Auswärtige und Sicherheitspolitik.
28 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
ERC: SECURING EUROPE, FIGHTING ITS ENEMIES
This conference is also part of a European Research Consolidator Grant project, initiated and coordinated
by prof. Beatrice de Graaf:
SECURE. Securing Europe, fighting its enemies, 1815-1914
Running: 2014-2019
This project will involve a team of researchers tracing the formation of a European security culture as the
sum of mutually shared visions on “enemies of the states”, “vital interests”, and associated practices
between 1815 and 1914.
The project pioneers a new multidisciplinary approach to the combined history of international relations
and internal policy, aiming to “historicize security.” A number of different security regimes will be
investigated in which Europe engaged globally, reaching around the world to the Ottoman Empire and
China. These highly dynamic regimes were dictated both by threats (anarchists, pirates, smugglers,
colonial rebels) and interests (political, moral, economic, maritime, colonial). Mobilising increasing
numbers of professional 'agents' from various quarters – including police, judicial authorities and armed
forces – they evolved from military interventions into police and judicial regimes and ultimately
contributed to the creation of a veritable European security culture.
By studying instances of supranational security cooperation and their professional agents De Graaf and
her team will analyse how this European security culture emerged as early as 1815 as an open process of
convergence and divergence, and of inclusion and exclusion.
Website: via http://www.uu.nl/hum/staff/BAdeGraaf
5-7 November 2014
29 / 33
30 / 33
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
PRACTICAL INFORMATION
Conference locations
5 November 2014: Public opening
National Archives, The Hague
Prins Willem Alexanderplein 20
2595 BE The Hague
Travel directions
The National Archives are located directly next to The Hague Central Station. There is currently a lot of
construction work going on around the station. We therefore advise you to come by public transport.
By train: Take the train to The Hague Central Station.
Leave the train and walk down the platform to the main
hall. Go right and exit the station through the side exit
(previously platform 12). Cross the Anna van Buerenplein.
The National Archives are located on your right hand.
By car: There is very little street parking around The
Hague Central Station. Nearby parking garage:
Q-Park CS - New Babylon
Prinses Irenestraat 1
2595 BD Den Haag
Directions from The Hague Central
Station to the National Archives
6 & 7 November 2014: Academic Conference
Royal Netherlands Academy for Arts and Sciences
Kloveniersburgwal 29
1011 JW Amsterdam
Travel directions
By train: Take the train to Amsterdam CS (Central
Station). The Trippenhuis Building is about 10 minutes
walk from Amsterdam CS. You can also use the metro
underground system. Take the metro from Amsterdam CS
to Nieuwmarkt Station (all lines, one stop, travelling time
about three minutes. Alternatively, take the metro from
Amsterdam Amstel railway station (all lines in the
direction of Amsterdam CS, travelling time about eight
minutes).
By car: Approaching Amsterdam on the A2 or A4
motorways, take the A10 motorway ring road and exit at
either S116 (Centrum) or S112 (Centrum).
Parking: Stadhuis, Waterlooplein entrance.
5-7 November 2014
Directions from the Albus hotel to the
conference location
31 / 33
Hotel information
We have made reservations at the Albus Hotel in the Amsterdam city centre. Check-in is at 2:00 p.m.,
check-out is at noon. For more information see the website of the hotel: www.albus.nl/en.
The Albus Hotel
Vijzelstraat 49
1017 HE Amsterdam
+31 20 530 62 00
Travel directions
By train: Take the train to Amsterdam Central Station.
When arriving at Central Station you can take tram 16,
and 24. Leave the tram at stop Keizersgracht. Walk 50
meters back over the bridge. On your right hand you will
find The Albus.
By Car: Parking “the Geelvinck” at Reguliersdwarstraat 59 is 25 meters away from the hotel. As a guest of
the Albus you pay € 36.50 per 24 hours instead of € 45.00. Parking tickets are available at the hotel front
desk.
Public Transport in The Netherlands
Travel from Schiphol to Amsterdam Central Station
The fastest way to Amsterdam is by train. From Schiphol,
trains depart every 15 minutes. The train station is
located directly underneath the main hall at Schiphol
Plaza. Train tickets can be bought at the yellow ticket
machines in the main hall or at the service desk.
Escalators take you down to the platforms. Up-to-date
train information will be provided on the displays in the
main hall. Though we would advise you to beware of
pickpockets and petty thieves, public transport in the
Netherlands is very save and comfortable.
Buying train tickets
There are a number of train tickets and travel passes
available, ranging from singles and returns to monthly and
annual subscriptions. International visitors should note
that since 2014 standard paper tickets are no longer
available as the Netherlands public transport now
uses a smart card (the OV-chipcard’). For those only
intending to use public transport sparsely it is possible to
purchase a one-journey or return jouney paper chip
ticket. With this ticket, it is necessary to check in at the
station gates at the beginning of your journey and
to check out once you reach your destination. Tickets
can be purchased from the yellow ticket machines at
stations (Visa, Mastercard and Maestro are accepted) or
at the customer service desks.
32 / 33
Make sure to always check-in and checkout when using the public transport system
Vienna 1815: The Making of a European Security Culture
Useful websites
Conference website
The conference website ican be found cia the following URL: www.knaw.nl/vienna1815
Public transport
http://9292.nl/en is a useful website to plan your trip with public transport. They also offer a mobile app
for your smartphone. Most trains and stations offer a free wifi connection.
Amsterdam tourist map
A useful tourist map is available online via the Tourist information office: http://www.iamsterdam.com/
Questions
For questions, please contact Susanne Keesman (Utrecht University):
[email protected]
+31 30 253 84 70
5-7 November 2014
33 / 33