## Learning Outcomes

- Understand how the **Concert of Europe** worked after **1815**
- Explain how the settlement of the **Congress of Vienna** differed from the Concert that enforced it
- Identify the main conservative principles of **legitimacy**, **balance of power**, and intervention
- Recall key evidence including **Aix-la-Chapelle (1818)**, **Troppau (1820)**, **Laibach (1821)**, **Verona (1822)**, and the **Carlsbad Decrees (1819)**
- Analyse why the Concert preserved the status quo in the short term but failed to stop later revolutions
- Use this topic in SAQs, DBQs, and LEQs focused on causation, continuity, and change

## AP European History Syllabus

For the AP European History, you are expected to understand how the post-1815 conservative order tried to preserve stability in Europe, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

- Know that the **Congress of Vienna (1814–1815)** created a conservative settlement after Napoleon
- Identify the distinction between the **Vienna settlement** and the **Concert of Europe** as the method for maintaining it
- Explain the role of **Klemens von Metternich** in defending monarchy and opposing liberalism and nationalism
- Understand the principles of **legitimacy**, **compensation**, and **balance of power**
- Explain how the powers used intervention at **Troppau**, **Laibach**, and **Verona** to suppress revolution
- Know how the **Carlsbad Decrees (1819)** repressed liberal and nationalist movements in the German states
- Understand why Britain often differed from Austria, Prussia, and Russia on intervention
- Evaluate the limits of the Concert, including **Belgian independence**, **Greek independence**, and the growing challenge of the **Revolutions of 1848**

## Test Your Knowledge

_Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, look more closely at that area during your revision._

1. What was the difference between the **Congress of Vienna** and the **Concert of Europe**?
2. How did the great powers try to preserve the status quo after **1815**?
3. Why were the **Carlsbad Decrees** important to the conservative order?
4. Name two examples of intervention against revolution in the **1820s**.
5. Why can the Concert of Europe be seen as successful in the short term but limited in the long term?

## Introduction

After the defeat of Napoleon in **1815**, Europe’s rulers wanted two things above all: peace and control. They had seen what the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars could do to dynasties, borders, and old political systems. Their answer was not democracy or national self-determination. It was a conservative order built to keep traditional rulers in place and prevent new revolutions from spreading.

For AP European History, this topic sits in **Period 3: c. 1815 to c. 1914**, but it is rooted in the revolutionary upheaval of the late eighteenth century. It connects strongly to the themes of **states and other institutions of power** and **national and European identity**. The key argument is that the Concert of Europe did preserve the status quo for a time, especially from **1815** into the **1820s**, but it did so through repression, compromise among great powers, and constant resistance to liberalism and nationalism.

> **Key Term: Concert of Europe**
> The post-1815 system of great-power cooperation designed to preserve peace and uphold the conservative settlement created at the Congress of Vienna.

### The Vienna settlement and the conservative goals behind it

Students often blur together the **Congress of Vienna** and the **Concert of Europe**, but the distinction matters.

The **Congress of Vienna (1814–1815)** was the meeting where the major powers redrew Europe after Napoleon. The **Concert of Europe** was the continuing system of consultation and cooperation that tried to enforce that settlement afterward. A strong SAQ or LEQ answer usually makes that difference clear.

> **Key Term: Congress of Vienna**
> The meeting of major European powers in 1814–1815 that redrew the map of Europe after Napoleon and aimed to restore stability.

The settlement rested on three linked ideas.

First was **legitimacy**: traditional dynasties should be restored where possible. That is why the Bourbons returned to the French throne. Conservatives believed rightful monarchs created order because they represented continuity, not popular upheaval.

Second was **compensation**: states that had fought Napoleon should receive territory or influence as payment for their sacrifices. This was less about justice than about rewarding the victors and making the system workable.

Third was **balance of power**: no one state, especially France, should again dominate Europe. That is why the powers strengthened states around France. The Kingdom of the Netherlands was created to the north, Prussia gained territory on the Rhine to the east, and Piedmont was strengthened in the south.

> **Key Term: balance of power**
> A political arrangement intended to prevent any one state from becoming dominant enough to control Europe.

These aims were conservative because they defended hierarchy, monarchy, and stability rather than popular sovereignty. This was not a Europe organized around national wishes. Polish hopes for independence were ignored, and the German lands were not unified into one nation-state. Instead, the powers created the **German Confederation**, a loose grouping of **39 states** that kept central Europe fragmented and easier to manage.

> **Key Term: legitimacy**
> The conservative principle that rightful dynasties should be restored to their thrones after the Napoleonic era.

The person most associated with this order was **Klemens von Metternich**, Austria’s foreign minister. Austria was a multinational empire vulnerable to both nationalism and liberal reform, so Metternich saw revolution not just as disorder, but as a direct threat to his state’s survival.

> **Test Tip:** If an AP prompt asks how conservatives tried to restore order after 1815, do not stop at “they met at Vienna.” Explain the principles behind the settlement and then show how those principles were enforced afterward.

### How the Concert preserved the status quo in practice

The Concert preserved the status quo not simply by drawing borders, but by regular great-power cooperation. In other words, the post-1815 order was not meant to be a one-time peace treaty. It was meant to be supervised.

The practical machinery of this system came through alliances and congresses. Students should not confuse the **Holy Alliance** with the full Concert. The Holy Alliance, formed by **Russia, Austria, and Prussia** in **1815**, was highly ideological and symbolic, full of Christian-monarchical language. More useful in practice was the **Quadruple Alliance** of **Britain, Austria, Prussia, and Russia**, which aimed to uphold the Vienna settlement and contain future threats. When France was brought back into the system at **Aix-la-Chapelle (1818)**, this became the **Quintuple Alliance**.

> **Key Term: Holy Alliance**
> An agreement of Russia, Austria, and Prussia in 1815 that defended monarchy in religious and ideological language, but was less practical than the broader Concert system.

Aix-la-Chapelle matters because it showed that the powers wanted stability through inclusion as well as punishment. France was no longer treated as a permanent enemy. Instead, once occupation ended, it was readmitted to great-power diplomacy. This strengthened the system because a humiliated France might have become permanently revisionist. A supervised France could be folded back into European order.

The more controversial side of the Concert appeared when revolution broke out. At **Troppau in 1820**, Austria, Russia, and Prussia declared that states experiencing revolution could be subject to intervention. This was a huge step. It meant revolution was no longer just a domestic matter. It was treated as an international threat.

At **Laibach (1821)**, Austria was effectively authorized to suppress revolts in **Naples** and **Piedmont**. This was conservatism in action. The point was not to negotiate constitutional reform. It was to restore existing rulers and stop unrest from spreading across the Italian peninsula.

At **Verona (1822)**, the powers supported French intervention in **Spain**, where revolution had forced **Ferdinand VII** to accept a constitution. In **1823**, French troops restored his authority. Again, the system worked to preserve monarchy, not to protect popular demands.

The logic behind all this was clear: revolutions spread. If one succeeded, others might copy it. Conservatives had learned from **1789**, **1792**, and Napoleon that political change in one country could shake the whole continent.

This is why many historians call the system the **Metternich System**. It relied on surveillance, diplomacy, and selective military force to stop change before it became contagious.

### Repression in the German Confederation and the attack on liberalism and nationalism

The Concert of Europe preserved the status quo not only by invading states in crisis but also by limiting ideas before they turned into uprisings. Nowhere is that clearer than in the German lands.

The **German Confederation** was deliberately loose. It replaced Napoleonic reorganization but did not create German unity. Austria preferred this because a unified Germany would likely strengthen Prussia and intensify nationalism. Smaller states also preferred survival to absorption. So the confederation preserved fragmentation, which itself was part of the status quo.

When nationalist and liberal student groups became active, especially after the murder of the conservative writer **August von Kotzebue** in **1819**, Metternich used the event as justification for repression. The result was the **Carlsbad Decrees (1819)**.

> **Key Term: Carlsbad Decrees**
> Repressive measures imposed in 1819 in the German Confederation that censored the press, monitored universities, and suppressed nationalist and liberal activism.

The decrees targeted universities because students and professors were spreading new political ideas. They imposed censorship on publications, placed universities under surveillance, and weakened nationalist student societies. This mattered because nationalism in the early nineteenth century often began as an intellectual movement before it became a mass political one. Stop the professors, censor the press, watch the students: that was the logic.

The decrees also show why the conservative order was hostile to both **liberalism** and **nationalism**. Liberalism challenged absolute or traditional authority by demanding constitutions, rights, and representative institutions. Nationalism challenged multinational empires and fragmented political maps by insisting that peoples sharing culture or language should govern themselves.

These two ideologies often worked together in this period. A student demanding a constitutional Germany was both liberal and nationalist. That made such people doubly threatening to Metternich.

Cause-and-effect here is important. The Carlsbad Decrees did help preserve the status quo in the short run by silencing open opposition. But repression also bred resentment. Ideas did not disappear; they were forced underground. This is one reason the revolutions of **1848** later exploded so widely.

> **Test Tip:** On an LEQ, avoid saying “Metternich stopped nationalism.” A better claim is: “Metternich repressed nationalist and liberal activism, delaying but not eliminating these movements.” That kind of qualified judgement earns stronger analysis.

### Limits, exceptions, and why the system did not last

A strong AP answer must not treat the Concert of Europe as an all-powerful machine. It worked, but imperfectly.

The first limit was disagreement among the great powers, especially **Britain** versus the eastern monarchies. Britain supported the balance of power and wanted European stability, but it was less enthusiastic about a general rule of intervention against all revolutions. British leaders worried that constant intervention would create endless commitments and strengthen rival continental powers. Britain also had a more constitutional system at home, so it was less comfortable with sweeping repression abroad.

That difference weakened unity at **Troppau**, **Laibach**, and **Verona**. Austria, Prussia, and Russia were far more willing to crush revolt on principle. Britain was more selective.

The second limit was that geopolitics sometimes outweighed strict conservatism. The clearest example is **Greek independence**. The Greek revolt began in **1821** against Ottoman rule. In theory, conservatives should have opposed it as another rebellion. In practice, sympathy for Greece, Christian solidarity, admiration for classical Greek heritage, and strategic interest in weakening the Ottoman Empire led **Britain, France, and Russia** eventually to support Greek independence. This showed that the Concert could bend when interests changed.

A similar exception came with **Belgian independence** in **1830**. The Congress of Vienna had united Belgium with the Netherlands to create a stronger barrier against France. But when Belgians revolted, the powers accepted separation and later recognized Belgian neutrality. Again, preserving peace mattered more than preserving every exact territorial arrangement from 1815.

These examples matter because they show the Concert defended the status quo, but not blindly. It was practical as well as ideological.

The third limit was time. By the **1830s**, the revolutions in France, Belgium, and Poland showed that the conservative order could not fully stop political pressure. By **1848**, the system faced continent-wide revolutions. Even though many of those revolutions were eventually defeated, **Metternich himself fled Vienna**, which symbolized the collapse of the old order’s confidence.

So how should you evaluate the claim that the Concert of Europe preserved the status quo?

The best answer is: to a significant extent in the short term, but not permanently. It kept peace among the great powers better than Europe had seen in decades. It restored monarchies, defended existing rulers, preserved fragmentation in central Europe, and suppressed several revolutions. But it could not remove the deeper forces of liberalism and nationalism. Those forces survived repression and returned with greater force in **1830** and **1848**.

For AP essays, that qualified judgement is the key. A one-sided answer misses the complexity.

## Key Point Checklist

_This article has covered the following key knowledge points:_

- The **Congress of Vienna (1814–1815)** created the conservative post-Napoleonic settlement
- The **Concert of Europe** was the ongoing system used to maintain that settlement
- Conservative principles after 1815 included **legitimacy**, **compensation**, and **balance of power**
- **Metternich** was the leading defender of the conservative order
- The **German Confederation** preserved political fragmentation in the German lands
- **Aix-la-Chapelle (1818)** readmitted France into great-power diplomacy
- **Troppau (1820)** advanced the principle of intervention against revolution
- **Laibach (1821)** backed Austrian action against revolts in Naples and Piedmont
- **Verona (1822)** supported French intervention in Spain
- The **Carlsbad Decrees (1819)** censored the press and monitored universities to suppress liberalism and nationalism
- Britain often supported stability but resisted a broad principle of automatic intervention
- The system had limits, shown by **Greek independence**, **Belgian independence**, and the eventual crisis of **1848**

## Key Terms and Concepts

- Concert of Europe
- Congress of Vienna
- balance of power
- legitimacy
- Holy Alliance
- Carlsbad Decrees


The Concert of Europe and European Conservatism - Concert of Europe preserved status quo