Presentations

ADOLF HITLER

Adolf Hitler, an Austrian-born politician, was the leader of the Nazi Party and a notorious dictator of Germany. Before coming to power as a dictator, he was the Chancellor of Germany from 1933 to 1945 and Head of State serving from 1934 to 1945. As a leader of the Nazi party, Hitler promoted nationalism, anti-semitism, anti-communism through establishing a Fascist dictatorship in Germany and espoused a foreign policy of world conquest. Hitler was born on 20 April 1889 in Braunau am Inn, Austria-Hungry to Alois Hitler and Klara Polzl. Of their six children, only Hitler and his younger sister, Paula could survive into adulthood. His father Alois, a custom official by profession, was tremendously violent to his wife and son, and used to beat them often. According to Hitler’s book, “he had a terrible childhood”. The regular whipping and violence committed by his father made him extremely sympathetic to his mother, while having an unfathomable bitterness towards his father. In spite of his father’s constant pressure to pursue a career like his, Hitler dropped out of high school without a diploma, as a revolt against his father. Even after his father’s death on 3 January 1903, he did not show any liking for studies and rather tried to be a painter.

Why was the Treaty of Versailles so significant?

The 'Big Four' at the Treaty of Versailles

The Treaty of Versailles was put together at the Paris Peace Conference starting in January 1919. The main signatories of the treaty were Britain (Prime Minister David Lloyd George), the USA (President Woodrow Wilson), France (Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau) and Italy (Prime Minister Vittorio Orlando). These leaders were known as the 'Big Four' and met to decide the fate of Germany after the First World War.

So why is this treaty so significant? To answer this question, it is important to consider a number of issues.

Firstly consider the attitude of each country that attended the negotiations:

Britain (David Lloyd-George)	France (George Clemenceau)
Many in Britain (having seen their husbands, sons and friends killed in the war) were eager for revenge. A popular saying was "Squeeze them until the pips squeak". However Lloyd-George himself was worried about the dangers of treating Germany too harshly.	Clemenceau was nicknamed "The Tiger". He wanted to make Germany pay for all the damage that France suffered during the years of fighting. He wanted to punish Germany so strongly that that couldn't even start a war again.
America (Woodrow Wilson)	Italy (Vittorio Orlando)
The USA had only declared war in April 1917 and thus experienced far fewer casualties herself. Wilson arrived in Europe with his 'Fourteen Points'. These were his plans to ensure future peace in Europe. He believed Germany should be treated fairly and that a 'League of Nations' should be set up to settle future disputes between countries.	Italy had declared war on Germany in 1915, changing sides from her alliance with Germany at the beginning of the war. Italy had been promised territory as a reward for changing sides. Orlando's main aim was to get the extra land for Italy - he wanted his 'fair share' from the spoils of war.

Germany wasn't even invited to the peace treaty. The German Government expected the treaty to be based on Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points.
Clearly agreement was going to be very difficult, as each country felt they knew best. For example: the USA didn't want Italy getting their territory, France wanted an industrial area called the Rhineland, but Great Britain felt it should only be a demilitarized zone (area where any military equipment or soldiers are banned). The final treaty was published in June 1919:

It is important to actually consider what the terms of the treaty said:
A summary of the terms of the treaty includes:

• Germany had to take full responsibility for the war.
• Germany had to pay for all the war damage (reparations) - later set at £6.6billion.
• Germany’s army was reduced to 100,000 men.
• Germany could have no airforce or submarines, and was limited to six large ships.
• Germany to loose territory on all sides, & split in two by new nation of Poland.
• Germany to lose all her colonies.

You can read an overview of the full terms of the treaty here [from Spartacus].

Think:
1. How fair was this treaty?
2. Which of the nations would have been the most pleased with the outcome?

The impact of this treaty is the most important thing to consider:
This is the part where you need to think yourself. Remember that this treaty was to prevent another European war ever breaking out again. You know what happened in 1939....
Ordinary Germans were dismayed when they discovered the terms of the treaty. The Government had expected they would get fair treatment, based on Wilson's fourteen points. However, they were in no position to do anything and simply had to agree with the treaty.

Look at the cartoon below [click on it to get a larger image]

"Curious! I seem to hear a child weeping..." [CLICK]

The cartoon above was created (incredibly) in 1920. It was titled "Peace and future cannon fodder". There is a small child with a copy of the Treaty behind them. Above the child's head is a comment "1940 class". The leaders of the nations at Versailles are seen walking past, and there is a caption: "The Tiger: Curious! I seem to hear a child weeping!".

Think:
1. How old would a child born in 1919 be by 1940?
2. What is this cartoonist suggesting about the Treaty of Versailles?

The final treaty was not popular. Many in Britain and France were angry that Germany hadn't been treated more harshly and that the German Kaiser (King) hadn't been put on trial. Most Germans were humiliated and horrified by the treaty - disgusted at being made to take the blame for the entire war (the War Guilt clause - 231) and having to pay for it.
 

---

The bitterness and resentment of the German people could be used to by someone wishing to unite the German people. This is exactly what Adolf Hitler did. This is why many historians suggest that the harshness of treaty of Versailles helped cause the Second World War. This is why the Treaty of Versailles is so significant.

Presentations - Campana/ Head

Alex Campana-   

Following World War II, the British withdrew from their mandate of Palestine, and the UN partitioned the area into Arab and Jewish states, an arrangement rejected by the Arabs. Subsequently, the Israelis defeated the Arabs in a series of wars without ending the deep tensions between the two sides. The territories Israel occupied since the 1967 war are not included in the Israel country profile, unless otherwise noted. On 25 April 1982, Israel withdrew from the Sinai pursuant to the 1979 Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty. In keeping with the framework established at the Madrid Conference in October 1991, bilateral negotiations were conducted between Israel and Palestinian representatives and Syria to achieve a permanent settlement. Israel and Palestinian officials signed on 13 September 1993 a Declaration of Principles (also known as the "Oslo Accords") guiding an interim period of Palestinian self-rule. Outstanding territorial and other disputes with Jordan were resolved in the 26 October 1994 Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace. In addition, on 25 May 2000, Israel withdrew unilaterally from southern Lebanon, which it had occupied since 1982. In April 2003, US President BUSH, working in conjunction with the EU, UN, and Russia - the "Quartet" - took the lead in laying out a roadmap to a final settlement of the conflict by 2005, based on reciprocal steps by the two parties leading to two states, Israel and a democratic Palestine. However, progress toward a permanent status agreement was undermined by Israeli-Palestinian violence between September 2003 and February 2005. In the summer of 2005, Israel unilaterally disengaged from the Gaza Strip, evacuating settlers and its military while retaining control over most points of entry into the Gaza Strip. The election of HAMAS to head the Palestinian Legislative Council froze relations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA). Ehud OLMERT became prime minister in March 2006 and presided over a 34-day conflict with Hizballah in Lebanon in June-August 2006 and a 23-day conflict with HAMAS in the Gaza Strip during December 2008 and January 2009. OLMERT, who in June 2007 resumed talks with PA President Mahmoud ABBAS, resigned in September 2008. Prime Minister Binyamin NETANYAHU formed a coalition in March 2009 following a February 2009 general election. Direct talks launched in September 2010 collapsed following the expiration of Israel's 10-month partial settlement construction moratorium in the West Bank.

Presentations-

The Israeli–Palestinian conflict is the ongoing struggle between
Israelis and Palestinians that began in the early 20th century. The
conflict is wide-ranging, and the term is also used in reference to
the earlier phases of the same conflict, between the Zionist yishuv
and the Arab population living in Palestine under Ottoman and then
British rule. It forms part of the wider Arab–Israeli conflict. The
remaining key issues are: mutual recognition, borders, security, water
rights, control of Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, Palestinian freedom
of movement and legalities concerning refugees. The violence resulting
from the conflict has prompted international actions, as well as other
security and human rights concerns, both within and between both
sides, and internationally. In addition, the violence has curbed
expansion of tourism in the region, which is full of historic and
religious sites that are of interest to many people around the world.

-Ronni Balko

Presentations

NOOR-
 
The last royal family of Russia led a country with full control in their hands. The ultimate power over the entire country resided in their hands, and if one got through to the Tsar, one had the access to power and rule over the whole nation. Because of this unrestrained government Grigory Efimovich Rasputin was able to manipulate the Russian government by acquiring the royal family's personal favor. 

     At the time the people of Russia, mainly poor peasants, were waging revolts against the Tsar. Their living conditions were horrid, as most had barely any food, shelter or possibility of trade, as well as a freezing climate to endure. Meanwhile, Russia had a humiliating defeat against the Japanese in the Russo-Japanese war, where many lives were lost. Shortly after the defeat Russia was engaged in World War I. The citizens of Russia needed a true leader to support them through these harsh conditions, because their Tsar, Nicholas II, was a weak man, overruled by his own wife, Alexandra. 

     The royal son and heir to the throne, Alexei, suffered from the deadly disease hemophilia. The Tsar and Tsarina enlisted the magic "man of God" Rasputin to use his "healing powers" to save their child's life. The boy lived and from that moment on Rasputin became the most important and influential person in the Russian court. This mysterious and destitute Siberian peasant manipulated the royal family and acquired immediate access to the ruling of the country. He deeply influenced the Tsarina, who in turn controlled her husband. Rasputin had gained the personal worship of the Romanov family and therefore was able to gain full access to the government of Russia. He influenced the political and religious scene. 

     The lack of a checks and balances system, and rather an unrestrained government, was the reason of Rasputin's sudden rise to power and the demise of the Russian dynasty.

Presentations Wednesday May 2

http://books.google.com/books?id=IVvnrsaIgA8C&pg=PA662&lpg=PA662&dq=transition+from+the+czar+to+vladimir+lenin&source=bl&ots=Bpobrn5nVU&sig=skM6MDEVDjYiIdirbBrYxSh4n6o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9qGgT5eGCIqc9gSbzMiCCA&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Presentations Tuesday May 1

Miranda

Attorney General v. X.

Ireland. Supreme Court.

Abstract

KIE:

In this case in which a 14-year-old girl said she had become pregnant after being raped by her friend's father, the Attorney General of Ireland had enjoined the girl and her parents from traveling to England for an abortion. A psychologist had testified that in her present state of mind, the girl was suicidal. The Supreme Court of Ireland held that the right to life supersedes all other rights, including the right to travel. However, if there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother which can only be avoided by termination of the pregnancy, then an abortion is permissible. The Court determined that the girl's risk of suicide satisfied this condition, and therefore the girl was allowed to terminate her pregnancy.

Tyler - 

The bitter, bloody feud between the two branches of Islam, the Sunnis and the Shi’ites, has gone
on for centuries and now this vicious sectarian strife is exploding again in Bahrain, threatening to
cause an even greater conflict in the Middle East between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

The implications of the worsening hostility for the world are nightmarish, for the entire region
could soon be gripped by turmoil, bloodshed and economic meltdown. What was naively seen
a few weeks ago as a fight between freedom and autocracy could descend into an epic clash
between two Muslim ideologies, the savagery made all the worse by their long history of enmity.

The roots of the hostility between Sunni and Shia lie not in profound theological differences,
but in the political intrigues that took place in the Muslim world in the 7th Century. When
the Prophet Mohamed died in AD 632, the question of the succession to his leadership was
dominated by family rivalries and disputes.

Essentially, there were four candidates to succeed as ‘caliph’, or leader, and one group in
particular, which went on to form the Shi’ites, strongly favoured the claims of Ali, the grandson
of Mohamed. Even the name, Shi’ite, derives from ‘party of Ali’. But three times in succession,
Ali was passed over as each of the other candidates was chosen before him.

The opposition to Ali deepened the sense of anger among his supporters. Eventually, in this
climate of tribal factionalism, Ali became the fourth caliph, though the indignation of his
followers was provoked when he was then brutally assassinated.

The tribal feuding in the post-Mohamed era reached its climax at the Battle of Karbala in AD 
680. This is really the key moment in the creation of the Shi’ite movement, the point at which the
fissure was permanently established.

Presentations Mon April 30

Lisie

On the 21st of December 1988, Pan Am flight 103 was flying 31,000 feet

above Lockerbie, Scotland, en route from London to New York, when the plane

exploded and killed all 259 people on board along with 11 on the ground. A hole in

the side of the jet allowed the wind to rip the plane apart and caused it to plummet

to the ground (Rodney). On the ground in Lockerbie "the whole sky lit up and it was

raining fire,” (Keith). Mr. Carnaham, a Lockerbie resident recounted what he saw

when the debris of the plane hailed down on Lockerbie. When the plane crashed,

bodies and debris were scattered over 15 miles, and bodies were found the next

day on roofs, scattered on lawns and even hanging from trees. One was found lying

across the doorstep of a Lockerbie resident that discovered it when she walked out

her door and tripped over it (Keith). "There was barely a mark on him. But from the

way he was lying, like a rag doll, you knew all his limbs were broken,” Robin Devlin

said (Emerson, Duffy)

Libya was behind the crash, acting through a man named Abdelbaset Ali

Mohmed Al Megrahi. After the crash, many investigators had hypotheses before

all the evidence was gathered, that Iran, Palestine and even Syria had caused the

disaster. But after much evidence was put together, Libya became the main focus,

especially Megrahi. Megrahi was arrested and charged with the bombing of Pan

Am flight 103, but the Libyan Intelligence Services were the driving force of the

operation. Much evidence was gathered against Libya as well as against Megrahi,

but all the blame was placed on Megrahi. Megrahi did not act alone, though. He had

the Libyan Intelligence Services behind him and one known companion at his side

helping with the operation.

Minh
My presentation will be about the fighting tactics, tunnels, and traps that the Vietcong used in the battle. There will be sections about traps, tunnels, and tactics. In each section, there will be descriptions of the section, why they are effective...  There will be pictures of traps and tunnel system, the use of each traps, each part of the tunnels. There will be overall tactics in fighting of the Vietcong used, what they do to earn the trust of the peasant.

Causes of WWI

CAUSES OF WWI -  Please complete the following tasks in this order.

1. http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/lessons/wwi/wwicauses.htm

2. https://docs.google.com/document/d/15MgUdxkjgWJS-l3K0MgOvx_Rw6J5P27WAZd6O31a51w/edit

You will need to make a copy and then answer the questions and share it with me. 

3. Final Task:  Spend the rest of your time playing the game, Trench Warfare.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/worldwarone/hq/trenchwarfare.shtml

Scramble for Africa

Rudyard Kipling White Mans Burden


The Interesting Narrative of Olaudah Equiano

COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING ASSIGNMENT BASED ON THE FOLLOWING READINGS AND CHARTS.  THE ASSIGNMENT QUESTIONS CAN BE FOUND HERE.

*****TURN IN ASSIGNMENT HERE*****




  THE BERLIN CONFERENCE

Because of its size, surface features, climate, resources, and strategic importance, Africa became a prime candidate for conquest by ambitious European empires. Although Africa is physically remote from the power centers of Europe, North America, and Asia, it is surrounded by water and can therefore be reached easily from the other continents. This meant that the Europeans needed to establish rules for dealing with one another if they were to avoid constant bloodshed and competition for African resources. The Berlin Conference established those ground rules.

By the mid-nineteenth century, Europeans had established colonies all along the African coast and competed for control. The push for overseas territories was made even more intense by the Industrial Revolution and the need for cheap labor, raw material, and new markets. The competition between the Europeans often lead to violent conflict.

The conference was held in Berlin between November 15, 1884 and November 26, 1885, under the leadership of German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck. Although controlling the slave trade and promoting humanitarian idealism were promoted as the focus of the conference, the conference only passed empty resolutions about the ending of slave trade and providing for the welfare of Africa. In truth, the result of the Conference was a method of dividing the continent of Africa between the European powers.

Article 34 of the Berlin Act states that any European nation that took possession of an African coast, or named themselves as “protectorate” of one, had to inform the other powers of the Berlin Act of this action. If this was not done then their claim would not be recognized. This article introduced the “spheres of influence” doctrine, the control of a coast also meant that they would control the hinterland to an almost unlimited distance.

Article 35 determined that in order to occupy a coastal possession, the nation also had to prove that they controlled sufficient authority there to protect existing rights such as freedom of trade and transit. This was called the doctrine of “effective occupation” and it made the conquest of Africa a less bloody process.

The Berlin Act was an important change in international affairs. It created the rules for “effective occupation” of conquered lands, ensuring that the division of Africa would take place without war among the European powers. Through the Berlin Act, the European powers justified dividing a continent among themselves without considering the desires of the indigenous peoples.

While this appears extremely arrogant to us now, it seemed to them to be the obvious extension of their imperialism. The Berlin Conference is one of the most clear examples of the assumptions and preconceptions of this era, and its effects on Africa can still be seen today.

the above information used with permission from http://www.campus.northpark.edu/history/WebChron/Africa/BerlinConf.html

 The Scramble for Africa 

SCRAMBLE CARTOON

Answer the following questions based on the Scramble for Africa cartoon

AFRICA MAP COMPARISON

Examine the Maps below. Then answer the questions that follow

MAP 1

MAP 2

above maps from http://fresno.k12.ca.us/schools/s090/lloyd/imperialism.htm

AFRICA POLITICAL DIVISIONS IN 1913

Percentage of Africa Controlled by European Countries in 1913

data above compiled from Modern World History: Patterns of Interaction , 1999 by McDougal Littell, page 308

 Answer the following questions based on the chart above

1. What percentage of Africa was colonized by 1913?

2. According to the graph, Which 2 European countries held the most territory in Africa? (did you get the same answer as #4 in the Map Comparison above?)

3. What percentage Africa was controlled by the rest of the countries (excluding the 2 countries mentioned in #2)?

4. Think about it: Would the information in MAP 2 and the pie chart above be the same if there had never been a Berlin Conference?

5. Using ALL of the information you have learned about the 'Scramble for Africa' draw your own cartoon about the 'Scramble for Africa'.

Link to today:

Compare MAP 2-- PARTITION OF AFRICA with the map of Africa from 1997 below

How did the Scramble for Africa in the 1800's and 1900's effect the current borders of Africa?

HISTORY OF SOUTH AFRICA

People have inhabited southern Africa for thousands of years. Members of the Khoisan language groups are the oldest surviving inhabitants of the land, but only a few are left in South Africa today--and they are located in the western sections. Most of today's black South Africans belong to the Bantu language group, which migrated south from central Africa, settling in the Transvaal region sometime before AD 100. The Nguni, ancestors of the Zulu and Xhosa, occupied most of the eastern coast by 1500.

The Portuguese were the first Europeans to reach the Cape of Good Hope, arriving in 1488. However, permanent white settlement did not begin until 1652 when the Dutch East India Company established a provisioning station on the Cape. In subsequent decades, French Huguenot refugees, the Dutch, and Germans began to settle in the Cape. Collectively, they form the Afrikaner segment of today's population. The establishment of these settlements had far-reaching social and political effects on the groups already settled in the area, leading to upheaval in these societies and the subjugation of their people.

By 1779, European settlements extended throughout the southern part of the Cape and east toward the Great Fish River. It was here that Dutch authorities and the Xhosa fought the first frontier war. The British gained control of the Cape of Good Hope at the end of the 18th century. Subsequent British settlement and rule marked the beginning of a long conflict between the Afrikaners and the English.

Beginning in 1836, partly to escape British rule and cultural hegemony and partly out of resentment at the recent abolition of slavery, many Afrikaner farmers (Boers) undertook a northern migration that became known as the "Great Trek." This movement brought them into contact and conflict with African groups in the area, the most formidable of which were the Zulus. Under their powerful leader, Shaka (1787-1828), the Zulus conquered most of the territory between the Drakensberg Mountains and the sea (now KwaZulu-Natal).

In 1828, Shaka was assassinated and replaced by his half-brother Dingane. In 1838, Dingane was defeated and deported by the Voortrekkers (people of the Great Trek) at the battle of Blood River. The Zulus, nonetheless, remained a potent force, defeating the British in the historic battle of Isandhlwana before themselves being finally conquered in 1879.

In 1852 and 1854, the independent Boer Republics of the Transvaal and Orange Free State were created. Relations between the republics and the British Government were strained. The discovery of diamonds at Kimberley in 1870 and the discovery of large gold deposits in the Witwatersrand region of the Transvaal in 1886 caused an influx of European (mainly British) immigration and investment. In addition to resident black Africans, many blacks from neighboring countries also moved into the area to work in the mines. The construction by mine owners of hostels to house and control their workers set patterns that later extended throughout the region.

Boer reactions to this influx and British political intrigues led to the Anglo-Boer Wars of 1880-81 and 1899-1902. British forces prevailed in the latter conflict, and the republics were incorporated into the British Empire. In May 1910, the two republics and the British colonies of the Cape and Natal formed the Union of South Africa, a self-governing dominion of the British Empire. The Union's constitution kept all political power in the hands of whites.  

Statistics of the Industrial Revolution

Tables Illustrating the Spread of Industrialization

---

Table 1

Percentage Distribution of the World's Manufacturing Production,

1870 and 1913

(percentage of world total)

	1870	1913
USA	23.3	35.8
Germany	13.2	15.7
U.K.	31.8	14.0
France	10.3	6.4
Russia	3.7	5.5
Italy	2.4	2.7
Canada	1.0	2.3
Belgium	2.9	2.1
Sweden	0.4	1.0
Japan		1.2
India	11.0	1.1
Other Countries		12.2

Table 2

The Rate of Industrial Growth in Five Selected Countries

Indices of Industrial Production

(Base Figures - 1905-13 = 100)

	UK	France	Germany	Russia	Italy
1781-90	3.8	10.9	-	-	-
1801-14	7.1	12.3	-	-	-
1825-34	18.8	21.5	-	-	-
1845-54	27.5	33.7	11.7	-	-
1865-74	49.2	49.8	24.2	13.5	42.9
1885-94	70.5	68.2	45.3	38.7	54.6
1905-13	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
% of world industrial production in 1913	14.0	6.4	17.7	5.5	2.7

Table 3

Output of Coal and Lignite - Selected Countries, Annual Averages

(in million metric tonnes)

	UK	France	Germany	Austria	Belgium	Russia
1820-4	17.7	1.1	1.2	0.1	-	-
1840-4	34.2	3.5	4.4	0.52	4.1	-
1860-4	86.3	10.0	20.8	4.1	10.2	0.04
1880-4	158.9	20.2	65.7	17.0	17.5	3.7
1900-4	230.4	33.0	157.3	38.8	23.3	17.3

Table 4

Output of Pig Iron - Selected Countries, Annual Averages

(in thousand metric tons)

	UK	France	Germany	Austria	Belgium	Russia
1781-90	69	141	-	-	-	-
1825-29	669	212	90	85	-	164
1855-59	3,583	900	422	306	312	254
1875-79	6,484	1,462	1,770	418	484	424
1900-14	8,778	2,665	7,925	1,425	1,070	2,773

Table 5

Growth of the Cotton Industry in Selected Countries

(Cotton Spindles - Selected Countries, Annual Total Figures [in 1000's])

	UK	France	Germany	Austria	Belgium	Russia
1834	10,000	2,500	626(`36)	800	200	700 (1840)
1877	39,500	5,000	4,700	1,558	800	2,500
1913	55,700	7,400	11,186	4,909	1,492	9,212

Table 6

[See this data presented in a variety of ways - Table 6 Extra]

Spread of Railways in Ten Selected Countries

(Length of line open [in kilometers [1km = 5/8 mile])

	1840	1860	1880	1900
Austria-Hungary	144	4,543	18,507	36,330
Belgium	334	1,730	4,112	4,591
France	496	9,167	23,089	38,109
Germany	469	11,089	33,838	51,678
Great Britain	2,390	14,603	25,060	30,079
Italy	20	2,404	9,290	16,429
Netherlands	17	335	1,846	2,776
Russia	27	1,626	22,865	53,234
Spain	-	1,917	7,490	13,214
Sweden	-	527	5,876	11,303

Table 7

Illiteracy in Europe, c. 1850

(Approximate Percentage of Adult Illiterates is Indicated Where Known)

Countries with less than 30% illiterate	Countries with 30 to 50% illiterate	Countries with over 50% illiterate
Denmark	Austria 40-45%	Bulgaria
Germany	Belgium 45-50%	Greece
(Prussia 20%)	England 30-33%	Hungary
Netherlands	France 40-45%	Italy 75-80%
Scotland 20%		Portugal
Sweden 10%		Rumania
Switzerland		Russia 90-95%
		Serbia
		Spain 75%

Table 8

Population

(tentative estimates in millions - much of it guesswork)

*	1750/1	1800/1	1850/1	1990
Great Britain	7.4	10.5	20.8	57.1
France	21	27.3	35.8	56.1
Germany |			34.0	79.0
|-[Germ+Aust]	18	23
Austria |			17.5	7.6
Hungary	3.5	5.0	13.2	10.5
Belgium	2.2	3.1	4.3	9.9
Italy	16.0	19.0	24.4	57.6
Netherlands	1.6	2.1	3.1	14.9
Portugal	2.3	2.9	3.5	10.5
Russia	28	40.0	68.5	146.4
Spain	8.2	10.5	15.0	39.6
Sweden	1.8	2.3	3.5	8.4
EUROPE (approx)	132.0	190.0	260.0	775.0

Notes:

Austria and Hungary in the 19th century included many areas now independent. Modern Germany is somewhat smaller that Bismarckian Empire. 1990 figures for Russia are for the Russian Federation. To compare with the 19th century Ukraine's [52 Million] and Belorussia's [10.3 Million] figures must be taken into account.

Sources:

Table 1: League of Nations: Industrialization and World Trade (1945)

Tables 2-7: are based on the statistical appendices in the Fontana Economic History of Europe Vol 4, Part 2

Table 8: History Faculty at the University of Edinburgh 1978 [keep those undergraduate notes!]. 1990 figures from World Almanac 1992.

Industrial Revolution: Rise of Industrialism

 

The Industrial Revolution: Agricultural Revolution