In the third episode of Betwixt The Sheets’ Royal Sex mini-series, Dr Kate Lister is joined by Virginia Rounding, author of ‘Catherine the Great: Love, Sex, and Power’ and a literary critic specialising in Russian and women’s history, to delve into the extraordinary life of this Russian empress. Did Catherine the Great really die having sex with a horse? Was she involved in her husband’s death? And were her lovers selected for political reasons?

Prepare to challenge long-held myths and uncover the fascinating realities of one of history’s most powerful and controversial female rulers.

Subscribe to Betwixt The Sheets

From German Princess to Russian Empress

Born Sophie of Anhalt-Zerbst in Prussia in 1729, Catherine was a minor German princess never destined for imperial rule. Her path to power was unexpected, a result of intricate family connections and her own formidable ambition. It was her mother, Joanna, who leveraged a sentimental connection with Empress Elizabeth of Russia, who sought a suitable bride for her nephew and heir, Grand Duke Peter.

Aged just 14, Sophie (Catherine) arrived in Russia as Peter’s chosen fiancée. Peter, slightly older and an orphan, was delighted to have company, hoping for an ally against the Russian court.

Their marriage, when it finally occurred after much pomp and religious conversion, was far from auspicious. Catherine was led to the marital chamber only to find Peter absent, engrossed in his supper. Upon his eventual arrival, he simply climbed into bed, remarked on the servants’ amusement if they saw them, and promptly fell asleep. For nearly a decade, their marriage remained unconsummated.

Catherine, intelligent and ambitious, found herself isolated in the Russian court, enduring years of neglect and unhappiness. Yet this period of personal frustration proved to be a crucial crucible for her political development. She dedicated herself to mastering the Russian language, culture, and Orthodox faith, shrewdly cultivating relationships with key figures in the court and military that would later serve her well.

Tsar Peter III and his wife, the future Catherine the Great. He reigned only six months, and died on 17 July 1762.

Image Credit: Georg Cristoph Grooth / Public Domain

An awakening: love, politics, and motherhood

Empress Elizabeth, desperate for an heir, grew concerned about the lack of a child. It was ultimately revealed that Peter simply didn’t know what to do. Elizabeth then employed a shrewd tactic: a young widow was brought in to educate Peter on conjugal matters. Peter, it seems, proved a receptive student.

However, Catherine had already experienced her own “sexual awakening”. By her early twenties, she had fallen deeply in love with a courtier, Sergei Saltykov, her first true experience of physical affection. Later, Peter finally consummated his marriage with Catherine. Catherine fell pregnant following two earlier miscarriages, and when her son, Paul, was finally born, his paternity remained a mystery – was he Peter’s, or Saltykov’s?

Paul was immediately taken by Elizabeth to be raised as the future emperor, leaving Catherine isolated and deeply depressed. This period of intense self-education and introspection, befriended by figures like the British Ambassador Sir Charles Hanbury Williams, cemented her resolve to forge her own path.

Coup and courtly power

When Empress Elizabeth died in 1761, Peter finally became Tsar, but his reign lasted a mere six disastrous months. With little political instinct, he alienated the Orthodox Church and the army, even ceding territory during the Seven Years’ War. Sensing his instability, Catherine, having meticulously built a network of influence, seized her moment.

In 1762, supported by figures like Grigory Orlov and his brothers in the powerful Guards regiments, Catherine orchestrated a swift and largely bloodless coup d’état. Peter was swiftly deposed and, shortly thereafter, died under mysterious circumstances. Catherine was proclaimed Empress. Had she had a hand in Peter’s demise?

Her ascension immediately fuelled the scandalous rumours about her private life. 

Catherine II on a balcony of the Winter Palace on 9 July [O.S. 28 June] 1762, the day of the coup.

Image Credit: Public Domain

The imperial lovers: power and passion

Catherine’s long reign (1762-1796) saw immense territorial expansion of the Russian Empire, enlightened reforms, and a flourishing cultural court. Yet her succession of male favourites – including Grigory Orlov and Grigory Potemkin – often dominated public discourse. Unlike many monarchs who conducted affairs discreetly, Catherine’s relationships were often openly acknowledged, deeply entwined with political influence.

In the podcast, Kate and Virginia explore whether Catherine’s romantic attractions in her private life may have intertwined in a calculated political move to secure crucial support and enable her ambitious reforms, or whether they were a genuine quest for companionship and love.

They also delve into the personal lives of these influential figures and their complex impact on the Empress and the Empire. You’ll discover how relationships, particularly with Potemkin – her closest confidant until his death – blurred the lines between personal passion and statecraft. Even later in her life, Potemkin continued to play a unique role, even ‘procuring’ younger lovers for her – men who were both pleasing and teachable.

Grigory Potemkin

Image Credit: Public Domain

Servant of Russia?

Catherine the Great died in 1796. For centuries, the popular narrative of Catherine the Great has been dominated by exaggerated tales of sexual excess, most notoriously including the infamous rumour involving Catherine and a horse. The podcast delves into this pervasive myth, aiming to separate fact from fiction. By examining contemporary accounts, diplomatic reports, and Catherine’s own extensive correspondence, Kate and Virginia explore how such salacious rumours originated and why they endured, revealing the profound societal anxieties surrounding female authority in the 18th century.

Catherine the Great was undeniably a woman of intellect, ambition, and extraordinary will. She corresponded with Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire and Diderot, reformed laws, founded schools, and dramatically expanded Russia’s borders. Her personal relationships, while fascinating, were but one facet of an empress who redefined Russian power. 

As Virginia suggests, Catherine “saw herself as a servant of Russia”, a civilising influence who embraced Enlightenment ideals – much of the stigma surrounding Catherine stems from the very fact she was a successful female ruler who defied 18th century expectations.

Join Dr Kate Lister on Royal Sex: Catherine the Great to navigate the intricate world of rumour, power, and passion that defined one of history’s most compelling monarchs. Uncover the true legacy of Catherine the Great – beyond the whispers and into the complexities of her reign.

Subscribe to Betwixt The Sheets

A prominent figure in the growing universities of St Petersburg and Berlin, Euler’s contributions furthered the fields of geometry, trigonometry and calculus for decades, despite him going almost completely blind in later life.

But who exactly was Leonhard Euler?

Early life

Euler was born in Basel, Switzerland on 15 April 1707. His father, Paul III Euler, was a pastor of the Reformed Church, and his mother Marguerite Brucker belonged to a long line of well-known scholars in the classics. 

Soon after his birth the family moved to the Swiss town of Riehen near Basel, where he spent most of his childhood with his three younger siblings.

As a youth, Leonhard received schooling in mathematics from his father, who had taken courses from the prominent mathematician Jacob Bernoulli at the University of Basel while training to be a Protestant minister. At 8 years old, Leonhard was enrolled in the Latin school in Basel, and at 13 he enrolled in the University of Basel, not an uncommon practice at the time.

Portrait of Bernoulli in volume I of his 1742 ‘Opera omnia’

Image Credit: Bernoulli, Jean, 1667-1748, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

There he took a course on elementary mathematics by Johann Bernoulli, the younger brother of Jacob Bernoulli. In his autobiography, Euler later wrote: “the famous professor…made it a special pleasure for himself to help me along in the mathematical sciences”, and despite being too busy to give him private lessons, allowed the young boy to visit him every Saturday afternoon to go over difficulties in his reading.

During this time, Euler was given his father’s permission to set aside the career of pastor and become a mathematician.

Establishing his name

In 1723, Euler received his Master of Philosophy after submitting a dissertation comparing the philosophies of Descartes and Newton, and enrolled in the theological faculty of the university.

Continuing his studies, he wrote a further dissertation on propagation of sound before applying for a position to teach physics at the university. This was rejected.

Instead, he was offered a position at St. Petersburg Academy in Russia, established by Peter the Great in 1724. He had been recommended by Johann Bernoulli’s son Daniel, after his brother Nicholas Bernoulli had sadly died 8 months after taking up the position.

At Bernoulli’s behest, Euler was promoted to the mathematics department in St. Petersburg, and alongside his teaching served as a medical lieutenant in the Russian Navy. It was only after he became a professor and therefore a full member of the academy that he was able to quit this venture.

Swiss stamp with Leonhard Euler, c. 2007

Image Credit: rook76 / Shutterstock.com

In 1733, Daniel Bernoulli left his post as the Senior Chair of mathematics in St Petersburg, due to censorship by the Russian Orthodox Church and disputes over his salary. Euler then took over the position, allowing him to get married.

Family life

On 7 January 1734 he married Katharina Gsell, the daughter of painter Georg Gsell, who would remain his wife for 39 years until her death.

They had 13 children, 5 of which survived childhood, and by all accounts were a happy and loving family. Euler even once claimed to have made some of his best mathematical discoveries while holding a baby or with his children at his feet.

Work in Berlin

By 1740, Euler was renowned for his work and was personally offered a position at the University of Berlin by Frederick the Great of Prussia. Faced with mounting turmoil in Russia, he accepted, arriving in Berlin the following year.

He would spend the next 25 years there in what was his most productive period, writing 380 works (of which 275 were published). His most celebrated is perhaps his Introductio in analysin infinitorum, which laid the foundations of mathematical analysis and introduced the notation for sin(x) and cos(x).

Despite his outstanding academic record, he was passed for the position of President of the Berlin Academy, with Frederick taking the role instead. A simple and devout man, Euler stuck out like a sore thumb at Frederick’s court, who reportedly found him unsophisticated and badly informed on matters outside of mathematics.

Portrait of Frederick the Great by Johann Georg Ziesenis, c. 1763

Image Credit: Johann Georg Ziesenis, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

He clashed with the witty Voltaire, who held great standing at court, and the pair were often said to have gotten into lengthy debates at Euler’s expense.

Eventually, Euler was invited to return to St Petersburg following the country’s stabilisation under Catherine the Great, where he returned in 1766.

Blindness

As Euler grew older, his eyesight worsened following a severe and life-threatening fever in 1735. He blamed his vision issues on a period of intense cartographic work in 1738, and by 1740 he had lost all vision in his right eye, to the extent that Frederick the Great called him Cyclops.

Euler however jokingly stated “Now I will have fewer distractions”, and indeed, his productivity did not cease even after going almost completely blind in 1766. He produced half of his entire works during this time with help from his sons, colleagues and his grandson-in-law.

Death

On 18 September 1783, Euler had lunch with his family and was later discussing the newly discovered planet Uranus with a student. Suddenly, he collapsed and died from a brain haemorrhage at around 5pm, aged 76.

Euler was buried next to his wife at the Smolensk Lutheran Cemetery on Vasilievsky Island and in 1957, to commemorate the 250th anniversary of his birth, his tomb was moved to the Lazarevskoe Cemetery at the Alexander Nevsky Monastery.

Following his death, his huge body of work was continuously published for almost 50 years. So vast was the outpouring of his work throughout his life, it has been estimated he was the author of a quarter of the combined output in mathematics, physics, mechanics, astronomy, and navigation in the 18th century.

In 1796, while working as a local physician in the small town of Berkeley, Gloucestershire, Edward Jenner made the incredible discovery that would end this deadly plight, earning him the title ‘father of immunology’ in the West.

But who exactly was Jenner? And how did he make this world-altering discovery?

Early life

Edward Jenner was born on 17 May 1749 in Berkeley, Gloucestershire, a town in the southwest of England. The second youngest of nine children, his parents were Reverend Stephen Jenner, the town vicar, and Sarah Jenner.

As a youth, he received a strong basic education and is noted to have received inoculation for smallpox using the method of variolation. Variolation originated in China in at least the 15th century, before reaching Europe by the 18th. This method involved infecting healthy people with material from smallpox patients, in the hope that only a mild infection would result and the recipient would then be immune to the disease.

While this often achieved success, it could also cause the deaths of its patients. In 1783, Prince Octavius died following the procedure aged 4, to the agony of his father King George III.

A young surgeon

At the age of 14, Jenner was apprenticed to a surgeon named Daniel Ludlow, where he would gain valuable experience in becoming a surgeon himself.

In 1770, Jenner joined the ranks of St George’s Hospital in London at the age of 21, to train under distinguished surgeon John Hunter. Hunter was impressed by the young Jenner’s skills, and would reportedly tell him “Don’t think; try.”, a well known piece of advice in medical circles and a phrase which would aptly capture the character of the Age of Enlightenment.

Three years later, Jenner returned to his hometown of Berkeley to set up a practice as a family doctor and surgeon. He would keep in touch with his old mentor, John Hunter, who would later recommend him to the Royal Society.

A keen zoologist

In 1788, Jenner became a fellow of the prestigious Society following his publication on the misunderstood life of the nested cuckoo. His impressive study meticulously combined observation, experiment and dissection.

It would be Jenner’s keen interest in zoology coupled with his expertise in human anatomy that would ultimately lead him to his greatest discovery.

Dr Edward Jenner’s house, Berkeley, Gloucestershire, England. 23 May 2016

Image Credit: abcbritain / Shutterstock.com

The smallpox vaccination

Amongst Britain’s rural communities, it was a noted observation that milkmaids were generally immune to smallpox. This country lore intrigued Jenner.

He proposed that if the milkmaids caught cowpox, which belonged to the same family as smallpox yet was significantly less dangerous, it would also protected them from the latter more deadly disease.

To test his theory, on 14 May 1796 Jenner inoculated an eight year old boy named James Phipps with pus from the blisters of Sarah Nelmes, a milkmaid with cowpox.

The boy experienced a fever and some uneasiness, but no serious infection. Later, he was injected with matter from a smallpox patient, suffering no side effects. Though James had been inoculated using cowpox, which had been tried before, Jenner had proved that he was now immune to smallpox. He had also shown that cowpox pus could be inoculated from person to person, not just from cattle.

Recording his findings

Jenner successfully tested his hypothesis on 23 more people, including his 11-month old son Robert, prompting him to present his findings to the Royal Society. The familiar words vaccine and vaccination derive from the term Variolae vaccinae (‘smallpox of the cow’), first used by Jenner in this report.

Edward Jenner vaccinating 8 year old James Phipps with cowpox to provide immunity against smallpox, 1796

Image Credit: Everett Collection / Shutterstock.com

After revisions and further investigations, his incredible findings were accepted. Yet all were not so welcoming. Jenner received pushback from members of the medical community who profited from variolation, while the public became fearful of using matter from cows in vaccination.

He continued to promote his methods however, providing free vaccination from a one-room hut in the garden of his home in Berkeley, which he called the “Temple of Vaccinia”. This hut is considered to be “the birth-place of public health”.

Worldwide acclaim

Despite these initial shortcomings, news of Jenner’s discovery soon spread around Europe. Labelling himself “the Vaccine Clerk to the World”, he spent the rest of his life supplying cowpox material to medical practitioners across the globe, as cowpox did not occur widely.

A strong supporter of vaccination, Napoleon inoculated all his French troops and even awarded Jenner a medal for his work. At the great physician’s request, and despite being at war with Britain, Napoleon also released two British prisoners of war and allowed them to return home, apparently remarking “Ah, Jenner, I can refuse him nothing.”

Legacy

As Jenner’s work had prevented him from earning a living as a practitioner, he was compensated well for his research, and in 1821 was appointed physician to King George IV. On 26 January 1826, after devoting his life to the pursuit of science and vaccination, Jenner died of an apparent stroke aged 73.

By 1840, the British government had banned variolation and provided Jenner’s vaccination free of charge. By 1980, WHO declared smallpox eradicated, in one of the greatest victories of man over nature.

Jenner himself had predicted this outcome in 1801, stating of his vaccinations: “the annihilation of smallpox—the most dreadful scourge of the human race—will be the final result of this practice”. He was proved right, and today his work is thought to have saved more lives than any other in history.

Humboldt’s pioneering studies of the natural world were hugely significant in the 19th century, while the extraordinary breadth of his interests ultimately inspired generations of naturalists and scientists. Moreover, it’s said that more locations and living things are named after Humboldt than anyone else in history, including mountain ranges, animal species and a lunar sea.

Here are 10 facts about Alexander von Humboldt.

1. He was born to a wealthy Prussian family

Humboldt was born in Berlin on 14 September 1769 to a prominent Prussian family. His father, Alexander Georg, had served in the Prussian Army for which he was rewarded with the post of royal chamberlain. His mother was Maria Elisabeth Colomb, with whom Alexander Georg had another son named Wilhelm.

Alexander became interested in the natural world at an early age, and his habitual collection and identification of plants earned him the nickname ‘the little apothecary’.

2. He became a miner

Humboldt studied at the University of Göttingen from 1789 to 1790. From there, he prospected the worlds of geology and mineralogy at the School of Mines in Freiberg, Saxony, before procuring a job in the Prussian Mining Department where he set up a school for young miners.

He resigned from his post in 1797. In 1799, Humboldt travelled to France where, thanks to his social standing, he met with some of the leading scientific thinkers of the day. With the support of the Spanish prime minister, he was granted permission from the Spanish government to visit the Spanish colonies in Central and South America.

3. He spent five years exploring Central and South America

In 1799, Humboldt embarked on a five-year scientific expedition to Latin America, during which he made important observations in a variety of fields including botany, geology, meteorology and oceanography.

He set sail from Marseille, France, with botanist Aimé Bonpland, on a voyage Humboldt was able to finance with the proceeds of his inheritance. They travelled by canoe as they charted river systems and trekked deep into tropical forests. They made a huge amount of scientific observations on topics extending from ocean currents to mountain sickness.

Humboldt and his fellow scientist Aimé Bonpland near the foot of the Chimborazo volcano, painting by Friedrich Georg Weitsch (1810)

Image Credit: Public Domain

4. Humboldt was the first European to climb Mount Chimborazo

Along with Bonpland and the Ecuadorian Carlos Montúfar, Humboldt was among the first Europeans to climb Mount Chimborazo in Ecuador. He reached a height he recorded as 5,875 metres. Due to the Earth’s equatorial bulge, Mount Chimborazo’s summit is the farthest point from the Earth’s centre.

Humboldt’s climb of Chimborazo was a world mountain-climbing record, which held fast for almost 30 years.

5. He published groundbreaking findings on his return

After returning to Europe in 1795, Humboldt published his findings from the expedition in his Personal Narrative of Travels to the Equinoctial Regions of the New Continent, which had a wide readership.

Humboldt and Bonpland had returned with a library of information, which they exploited for a range of insights. Humboldt also published on the social and economic conditions of Spain’s colonies, in which he denounced slavery.

Humboldt’s depiction of an Andean condor.

Image Credit: Public Domain

6. He was a prolific scientist

Humboldt continued to travel and conduct research throughout his life, making important contributions to the fields of astronomy, magnetism and climatology. He eventually published over 60 scientific works, including Cosmos, an influential book on the evolution of the universe.

His pioneering work informed research in many disciplines. Following his study of Andean volcanoes, he contradicted the hypothesis that the surface of the Earth had been totally formed by sedimentation from a liquid state. Meanwhile, his collection and representation of meteorological data helped lay the foundation for the discipline of comparative climatology.

7. He introduced the notion of nature’s ‘web of life’

In Cosmos, Humboldt introduced a proto-environmentalist conception of the universe and the natural world as a single interconnected system. The multi-volume work was published between 1845 and 1847, and 1850 and 1858.

This helped to establish the framework for modern ecological thinking. His concept of nature’s ‘web of life’ was perhaps the first time that the interconnectedness of all living things was identified and described in scientific terms.

8. Humboldt lived a gregarious life in Paris

Humboldt lived in Paris until 1827, during which time he had many friendships and participated in the city’s salons. He had spent much of his fortune on his travels and his research, and returned to Berlin unable to support himself.

There, he taught the crown prince and served as a member of the privy council. He was also able to evade the suspicion of Prussian officials in order to organise one of the first international scientific conferences in 1828.

Humboldt, portrait by Henry William Pickersgill (1831)

Image Credit: Public Domain

9. He died at the age of 89

Humboldt died in 1859 at the age of 89, having spent the previous 30 years in Berlin. The book that was the result of his last decades, Cosmos, was a success: it was published in most European languages, and he was working on its 5th volume when he died.

Humboldt is considered one of the most important scientists of his time, and his work continues to influence scientific research today. The mineral humboldtine, the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the Humboldt University of Berlin, and numerous species of plants and animals have been named in his honour.

10. He is remembered as a forgotten father of environmentalism

For his contributions to the natural sciences, Alexander von Humboldt has been credited with inspiring generations of early naturalists in the Western world. In her biography of Humboldt, The Invention of Nature, Andrea Wulf describes him as a “founding father” of environmentalism, albeit one that has “been largely forgotten in the English-speaking world.”

Yet those who knew him were aware of his importance. Thomas Jefferson described him as “the most scientific man of his age”, and Charles Darwin declared that he owed his voyage on board the Beagle to Humboldt’s work. The poet Johann Wolfgang von Goethe compared Humboldt to “a fountain with many spouts from which streams flow refreshingly and infinitely, so that we only have to place vessels under them.”

Though many myths falsely credit him with the invention of sparkling champagne, he simply pioneered many methods which improved its manufacture. By the end of his life, Pérignon’s namesake champagne was prized across the world by monarchs such as the French King Louis XIV.

But who was Dom Pierre Pérignon, and how did he change the course of champagne making forever?

He was born in the Champagne region of France

Pérignon was born in 1638 in Saint-Menehould in the Champagne region of France. He was one of eight children, and his father, who was the clerk of a local judge, owned a few vineyards. When he was 19, he entered the Benedictine order, first being educated in and serving the Abbey of Saint-Vannes in Verdun.

In 1668, he transferred to the Abbey of Hautvillers close to the town of Épernay, where he served as cellar master of the Abbey until he died in 1715. Thanks to his sustained and enterprising work, over the course of his life the abbey doubled its vineyard size, and he elevated the wine-making reputation of the region into one that was highly-regarded for its white wines.

Pérignon was so well-respected that upon his death he was buried in a section of the abbey normally only reserved for abbots.

He vastly improved champagne-making methods

When Pérignon first arrived at the Abbey, the region’s wine was shunned by the French court since its wines were not as intense and colourful as others made in areas such as Burgundy and Bordeaux. In addition, the world was experiencing a Little Ice Age which made wine production even more difficult in the winter.

In spite of these obstacles, Pérignon made many improvements to the winemaking process. Particularly revolutionary developments included inventing a press which allowed him to make a clear white wine from black grapes, forging a better understanding of the impact of climate upon winemaking, reintroducing the cork as a more effective seal and using ‘verre anglais’ (English glass) which was stronger and better able to withstand pressure.

‘Dom Pérignon discovering the prize de mousse’, from an old postcard.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

However, it was for his vast improvements to the ‘méthode champenoise’ wine-production style that Pérignon became most well-known. This production style came about when winemakers realised that bubbles could be created through a secondary fermentation in the bottle, and that contrary to common belief, it was something that people enjoyed. However, issues arose every spring when the yeast was re-awakened, creating lots of CO2 and causing the bottles to explode.

Pérignon was instrumental in studying how to avoid the explosions by warding off re-fermentation. He became an advocate for harvesting in cool conditions, small crops and blending grapes before sending them to the press. He also popularised practicing winemaking methods using naturally occurring processes.

There was a cult of personality around his brand of champagne

Dom Pérignon initially undertook the development of the monastery’s wine production to help it with its financial difficulties. However, his technical understanding of wine making was matched by his business prowess: his white wines were sold in Paris and London, with barrels being quickly delivered to the French capital via the Marne River.

His fame quickly grew, and Pérignon had the sense to name his wares after his own name. In response, wines bearing his name sold for twice as much as other champagnes.

This personal branding was the first time that a wine had been identified with its maker rather than a region or religious order, and more broadly was one of the first times in economic history that an individual had successfully used their own name and personality as a marketing tool.

There are many myths about him

A pervasive myth about Pérignon is that he invented champagne. However, the golden-bubbly drink that we enjoy today was actually invented by a woman called Widow Clicquot, who, in the 1810s, developed a technique to balance the secondary fermentation process that is intrinsic to the white wines from the Champagne region of France.

Dom Pérignon “invented” Champagne. From ‘Le Petite Journal’, 1914.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

A quote – ‘come quickly, I am tasting stars!’ – has also been falsely attributed to Pérignon, who was said to have uttered the phrase when he first tasted sparkling champagne. However, it is more likely that the phrase came from a print advertisement in the late 1800s.

Many of the myths surrounding Pérignon are likely because of one of his successors at the Abbey of Hautvillers, Dom Groussard, who wrote an account of Pérignon in 1821. In it, he stated that Pérignon ‘invented’ champagne and also invented other grossly exaggerated stories in order to generate interest in and prestige for the church.

Further myths about Pérignon include the statement that he was able to name vineyards precisely by tasting a single grape, and that he was blind, with the latter probably originating from Pérignon having conducted ‘blind tasting of wine’.

The monastery where he worked is now owned by Moët & Chandon

Dom Pérignon’s tomb, Abbey Saint-Pierre d’Hautvillers.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

In 1937, Moët & Chandon bought the brand name Dom Pérignon for their prestige cuvée. Today, Dom Pérignon is part of the Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton empire owned by France’s richest man, Bernard Arnault. It is one of the most highly prized champagnes in the world and frequently breaks bidding records when sold at auction.

The remains of the Abbey of Hautvillers where Dom Pérignon spent his adult life is now the property of Moët & Chandon.

Throughout British history, capital punishment has been enforced in various ways, determined by shifts in society’s attitudes towards religion, gender, wealth and morality. Yet as negative attitudes towards state-sanctioned killing grew, the nature and number of death sentences wained, eventually leading to abolition in the mid 20th century.

Here’s the history of the death penalty in Britain and its eventual abolishment.

The ‘Long Drop’

From the time of the Anglo-Saxons until the 20th century, the most common form of capital punishment in Britain was hanging. The punishment initially involved putting a noose around the condemned neck and suspending them from a tree branch. Later, ladders and carts were employed to hang people from wooden gallows, who would die by asphyxiation.

By the 13th century, this sentence had evolved into being ‘hanged, drawn and quartered’. This particularly grisly punishment was reserved for those who committed treason – a crime against your crown and countrymen.

It involved being ‘drawn’ or dragged to their place of execution, hanged until the near-point of death, before being disemboweled or ‘quartered’. As final penance for their crimes, the offender’s limbs or head were sometimes displayed publicly as a warning to other would-be criminals.

The drawing of William de Marisco, a disgraced knight who supported the failed revolt of Richard Marshal, 3rd Earl of Pembroke in 1234.

Image Credit: Chronica Majora by Matthew Paris / Public Domain

In the 18th century, the system of the ‘new drop’ or ‘long drop’ was devised. First used at London’s Newgate Prison in 1783, the new method involved gallows able to accommodate 2 or 3 guilty at a time.

Each of the condemned stood with a noose looped around their neck before a trapdoor was released, causing them to fall and break their necks. The quick death administered by the ‘long drop’ was seen as more humane than strangling.

Burning and beheading

Not all those found guilty were sentenced to hanging however. Burning at the stake was also a popular form of capital punishment in Britain and was used for those who committed heresy in the 11th century and treason from the 13th (although it was replaced by hanging in 1790).

During the reign of Mary I, a large number of religious dissidents were burnt at the stake. Mary reinstated Catholicism as the state religion when she became queen in 1553, and had some 220 Protestant opponents convicted of heresy and burnt at the stake, earning her the nickname ‘Bloody’ Mary Tudor.

Burning was also a gendered sentence: women convicted of petty treason, killing their husband and therefore overturning the patriarchal order of state and society, were often burnt at the stake. Those accused of witchcraft, disproportionately women, were also sentenced to burning, continued in Scotland until the 18th century.

Nobles, however, could escape the excruciating fate of the flames. As a final mark of their status, the elite were often executed by beheading. Swift and considered the least painful of capital punishments, notable historical figures such as Anne Boleyn, Mary Queen of Scots and Charles I were all condemned to lose their heads.

The ‘Bloody Code’

In 1688, there were 50 offences in the British criminal code punishable by death. By 1776, this number had quadrupled to 220 offences that could be sentenced with death. Due to the unprecedented rise in capital sentences during this period in the 18th and 19th centuries, it has retrospectively been called the ‘Bloody Code’.

Most of the new Bloody Code laws were concerned with defending property and resultantly disproportionately affected the poor. Crimes known as ‘Grand Larceny’, the theft of goods worth over 12 pence (around a twentieth of a skilled worker’s weekly wage), could be awarded the death penalty.

As the 18th century drew to a close, magistrates were less willing to hand out capital punishment for what today are considered ‘misdemeanours’. Instead, those convicted were sentenced to transportation following the 1717 Transportation Act and shipped across the Atlantic to work as indentured labourers in America.

Macquarie Harbour Penal Station, depicted by convict artist William Buelow Gould, 1833.

Image Credit: State Library of New South Wales / Public Domain

However, with the American rebellion during the 1770s, alternatives were sought to both capital punishment and transportation; large prisons were established as well as alternative penal colonies in Australia.

There was also an ongoing campaign for the abolition of the death penalty on moral grounds. Campaigners argued that causing pain was uncivilised and capital punishment did not give criminals any chance at redemption unlike prison.

The Judgement of Death Act in 1823 reflected this change in practice and attitudes. The act kept the death penalty only for the crimes of treason and murder. Gradually, during the middle of the 19th century, the list of capital offences reduced and by 1861 numbered 5.

Gaining momentum

By the early 20th century, further limitations were applied to using capital punishment. In 1908, those under 16 could not be sentenced to death which was again raised to 18 in 1933. In 1931, women could not be executed for infanticide after giving birth. The issue of abolishing the death penalty came before the British Parliament in 1938, but was postponed until after the end of World War Two.

The abolition movement gained momentum with several controversial cases, the first being the execution of Edith Thompson. In 1923 Thompson and her lover Freddie Bywaters were hanged for murdering Percy Thompson, Edith’s husband.

Controversy arose for several reasons. Firstly, it was generally considered abhorrent to hang women and a woman had not been executed in Britain since 1907. With rumours spreading that Edith’s hanging had gone awry, almost a million people signed a petition against the imposed death sentences. Nevertheless, Home Secretary William Bridgeman would not grant her a reprieve.

Another publicly debated woman’s execution, the hanging of Ruth Ellis, also helped to sway public opinion against the death penalty. In 1955, Ellis shot her boyfriend David Blakely outside a London pub, becoming the last woman to be hanged in Britain. Blakely had been violent and abusive towards Ellis, and these circumstances generated widespread sympathy and shock towards her sentence.

The end of capital punishment

With the end of Wolrd War Two in 1945, capital punishment returned as a prominent political and social issue. The election of the Labour government in 1945 also fed the growing call for abolition, as a higher proportion of Labour MPs supported abolition than Conservatives.

The 1957 Homicide Act further restricted the death penalty’s application to certain types of murder, such as in the furtherance of theft or of a police officer. Up until this point, death had been the mandatory sentence for murder, only mitigated via political reprieve.

In 1965, the Murder (Abolition of the Death Penalty) Act suspended the death penalty for an initial 5-year period before, supported by all 3 major political parties, the act was made permanent in 1969.

It was not until 1998 that the death sentence for treason and piracy were abolished in both practice and law, fully ending capital punishment in Britain. 

Although the Russian Enlightenment peaked in the 18th century under Catherine the Great, it first found its footing under Peter the Great in the 17th century, whose government started to encourage the proliferation of the arts and sciences.

The movement encouraged key developments in various fields – including mathematics, architecture and fashion – and laid many of the foundations for Russian governmental institutions today.

Here are 10 facts about the Russian Enlightenment.

1. The Enlightenment was started by Peter the Great

The Russian Enlightenment began with the Russian state’s emergence from its medieval period, especially during the reign of Peter the Great. Peter became Tsar of Russia in 1682 when he was only 10 years old. When he reached adulthood, Peter began to search for ways to modernise Russia.

2. It was a form of absolutism

In early modern Russia, enlightenment ideals (progress, innovation, the search for knowledge) coexisted within an absolutist political system. In other words, the Russian Enlightenment was instigated by an absolute ruler, Peter the Great, making his rule one of ‘Enlightened Absolutism’, in which leaders used their total power to encourage change and innovation.

Portrait of Peter I by Jean-Marc Nattier.

Image Credit: The Hermitage, St. Petersburg / Public Domain

3. Russian nobles were sent abroad to learn

Peter the Great sent nobles abroad to study Western culture and bring back knowledge about science, mathematics, literature and other subjects that had not been taught in Russian schools before.

4. It led to the modernisation of Russia’s military

Peter the Great’s first major goal was to modernise Russia’s military forces. He built a new, European-style Russian army and launched the Great Northern War (1700-1721) against Sweden, which was then an emerging power in Europe. Although Russia eventually lost the war, Peter’s reforms succeeded in strengthening Russian military forces considerably.

5. St Petersburg became the capital of Enlightenment Russia

In 1698, Peter ordered the city of St Petersburg to be built at the head of the Gulf of Finland, where it would serve as a Russian port for trade with Western countries. Peter hired Italian and German architects to design it.

The city became Russia’s capital when Peter finally defeated Sweden in 1721 and would remain so until the Russian Revolution in 1917.

The Church of the Saviour on Spilled Blood on Griboyedov Canal in the early morning light, St Petersburg.

Image Credit: Shutterstock

6. The Enlightenment dictated Russian fashion

Around the turn of the 18th century, Peter moved on to reforming Russian society itself. In 1703 he made what amounted to a test of Russian nobles’ loyalty by forcing many of them to shave their beards, which Russian men had worn for centuries as symbols of manliness. Peter proclaimed that Russian men should dress like Western Europeans, with short hair and beards and Western European-style clothes and shoes.

Russian women were expected to have long hair covered by a scarf or wig. They were expected to dress in the French fashion of long skirts held out by petticoats under a jacket with sleeves reaching the wrists. Peter also banned Russians from wearing hats with brims so they would not look like Swedes, who had worn them since the 17th century.

7. Peter the Great changed the Russian calendar

In 1699, Peter changed the date of the new year from 1 September to 1 January. Traditionally in Russia, the years were kept according to the creation of the World but after Peter’s reforms, they were counted from the birth of Christ. So the year 7207 of the old Russian calendar became the year 1700 under the Julian Calendar.

8. The Russian Enlightenment peaked under Catherine the Great

Catherine became the reigning ruler of Russia in 1762 after she overthrew her husband, Peter III, in a bloodless coup. An admirer of Peter the Great, Catherine continued to modernise Russia, so much so that her reign is sometimes referred to as the ‘Golden Age of Russia’.

Under her rule, Russia produced more goods and enlisted thousands of troops to acquire new lands, including Crimea and Poland.

9. Not a lot changed for serfs

Despite advances in arts and science during the Russian Enlightenment, military conscription and the economy still depended on serfdom (the indentured servitude of peasants). In fact, the increasing demands of the state and private landowners meant even more exploitation of serf labour.

10. The Enlightenment era went into decline after Catherine’s death

The Russian Enlightenment was on the wane as Catherine’s son, Emperor Paul, ascended the throne in 1796. During the first year of his reign, Paul emphatically reversed many of his mother’s policies, trying to enforce the medieval code of chivalry on the gentry.

As well as lending his name to the modern country of Bolivia, Bolívar simultaneously served as president of Peru and of Gran Colombia, the first union of independent nations in Latin America which included present-day Venezuela, Colombia, Panama and Ecuador.

Here are 10 facts about Simón Bolívar, an extraordinary figure revered as a hero of South American history.

José Gil de Castro, Simón Bolívar, ca. 1823

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

1. Simón Bolívar came from one of the richest families in Venezuela

Bolívar was born into a wealthy family in Caracas, today the capital and largest city of Venezuela. He was born on 24 July 1783, the same year that the American Revolution ended. He was educated abroad, arriving in Spain aged 16. In Europe, he watched Napoleon’s coronation and met with Enlightenment scientist Alexander von Humboldt.

Bolívar was the son of a colonel and his noble, 23-years-younger wife. His parents were extremely prosperous. They were owners of numerous businesses, incorporating a copper mine, rum distillery, plantations and cattle ranches and a labour force of hundreds of slaves.

Simón was named for the first Bolívar to emigrate from Spain two centuries earlier, while through his mother he was related to the powerful German Xedlers.

2. The loss of his wife changed Bolívar’s life

Prior to his return to South America, Bolívar married Maria Teresa del Toro Alayza in 1802, whom he had met in Madrid two years earlier. The couple had only been married for several months when Maria died after contracting yellow fever in Caracas.

Bolívar never remarried, preferring short-lived flings. He later described Maria’s tragic death as the reason for his dedication to his political career.

3. Simón Bolívar financed independence movements across South America

There was deep frustration with Spanish rule in Caracas in the late 1700s. Its absolute rule strangled colonies, which were forbidden from trading with each other, while entrepreneurship was suppressed. The product of the monarchy’s repressive taxes went entirely to Spain.

Bolívar began campaigning for independence in Latin America in 1808, prompted by the distraction of the Peninsula War which raged in Spain. He funded independence movements from his own family’s wealth. Bolívar’s wars of independence would last until 1825, with the liberation of Upper Peru, by which time much of that wealth had been exhausted by the cause.

Battle of Junín, 6 August 1824

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

4. Simón Bolívar pushed the Spanish from Latin American shores

With no formal training as a soldier, Bolívar nevertheless proved to be a charismatic military leader capable of pushing the Spanish from Latin America. In her biography of the man, Marie Arana captures the scale of his success in “single-handedly conceiving, organizing and leading the liberation of six nations: a population one and a half times that of North America, a landmass the size of modern Europe.”

The odds against which he fought—a formidable, established world power, vast areas of untracked wilderness, the splintered loyalties of many races—would have proved daunting for the ablest of generals with strong armies at his command.

Yet, with little more than will and a genius for leadership, he freed much of Spanish America and laid out his dream for a unified continent. Marie Arana, Bolivar: American Liberator (W&N, 2014)

5. Bolívar betrayed the revolutionary Francisco de Miranda

Simón Bolívar was not the only soldier with a mind for independence from Spain. Other glorified revolutionary figures include Argentinian José de San Martín and Bolívar’s forerunner in Venezuela, Francisco de Miranda. Miranda had participated in the American Revolutionary War and the French Revolution before a failed attempt to liberate Venezuela in 1806.

After a coup in 1810, Bolívar persuaded Miranda to return. However, when a Spanish army entered the territory in 1812, Miranda capitulated. For this act of apparent treason, Bolívar arrested Miranda. Extraordinarily, he turned him over to the Spanish, who imprisoned him for the next four years until his death.

6. He ruled with supreme power

After securing independence for all of Spanish South America, Bolívar dedicated himself to consolidating the former colonies including the majority that made up Gran Colombia. Yet wavering confidence in Bolívar’s judgement and dissent against centralized government in the countries he had created led to internal divisions.

As a result, Bolívar became convinced that Latin Americans were not, in fact, ready for democratic government. He instead resolved to act as a stern disciplinarian. He installed a dictator in Bolivia and sought to do the same in Gran Colombia.

Following the failure of the 1828 Convention of Ocaña to resolve political differences, Bolívar proclaimed himself dictator on 27 August 1828.

Map of Gran Colombia, reproduced in an 1840 atlas

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

7. Bolívar spared a friend convicted of conspiring to assassinate him

Francisco de Paula Santander was a friend of Bolívar’s who had fought beside him at the decisive Battle of Boyacá in 1819. By 1828, however, Santander resented Bolívar’s autocratic tendencies. His dissatisfaction led to Santander being swiftly blamed for an assassination attempt in 1828, despite a lack of evidence. He was then pardoned by Bolívar, who also ordered his exile.

8. He was commended for his military strategy

Bolívar became famed as the George Washington of South America. They shared in common wealthy backgrounds, a passion for freedom and an aptitude for warfare. Yet Bolívar fought for twice as long as Washington, across a much greater area.

Bolívar made tactical gambles that often paid off and one victory in particular has cemented Bolívar’s reputation.

In 1819, he led an army over the freezing Andes to surprise the Spanish in New Granada. He lost a third of his troops to starvation and the cold, as well as most of his weapons and all of his horses. Yet hearing of his rapid descent from the mountains, perhaps recalling Bolívar’s ruthless 1813 decree which permitted the killing of civilians, the Spanish abandoned their possessions in haste.

9. Two nations are named after Bolívar

While Bolívar’s ambition to permanently unite Latin America didn’t materialise, the modern countries of the continent bear resonances of the Liberator. His profound legacy is most conspicuous in the names of two nations.

Upon the liberation of Upper Peru in 1825, it was named the Republic of Bolívar (later Bolivia). As President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez (1954-2013) renamed the country “The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela” and added an extra star in honour of Bolívar to the national flag.

10. Bolívar died from tuberculosis aged 47

The risk from detractors and rebellious deputies to Bolívar’s personal health had been severe. Yet despite his wartime record and the numerous assassination attempts made against him, Bolívar died from tuberculosis. By the time of his death, Bolívar had renounced command over Gran Colombia and he was no longer tremendously wealthy.

He died in exile in relative poverty.

Its foundational ideas of free markets, division of labour and gross domestic product provided the basis for modern economic theory, leading many to consider Smith the ‘Father of Modern Economics’.

A central figure in the Scottish Enlightenment, Smith was also a social philosopher and academic.

Here are 10 facts about Adam Smith.

1. Smith was a moral philosopher as well as an economic theorist

Both Smith’s major works, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) and The Wealth of Nations (1776), are concerned with self-interest and self-governance.

In Moral Sentiments, Smith examined how natural instincts can be rationalised through “mutual sympathy” to create moral judgements. In The Wealth of Nations, Smith explored how free-market economies lead to self-regulation and the advancing of society’s wider interest.

‘The Muir Portrait’ of Adam Smith, one of many drawn from memory. Unknown artist.

Image Credit: The Scottish National Gallery

2. Smith had two more books planned when he died

At the time of his death in 1790, Smith was working on a book on the history of law, as well as another on the sciences and the arts. It has been suggested that completion of these works would have achieved Smith’s ultimate ambition: to present an extensive analysis of society and its many facets.

Although some later work was posthumously published, Smith ordered anything unsuitable for publication to be destroyed, potentially denying the world yet more of his profound influence.

3. Smith entered university aged 14

In 1737, aged 14, Smith enrolled at Glasgow University, then a central institution in the prevailing humanist and rationalist movement which later became known as the Scottish Enlightenment. Smith cites the lively discussions led by Professor of Moral Philosophy, Francis Hutcheson, as having a profound effect on his passion for liberty, free speech and reason.

In 1740, Smith was the recipient of the Snell Exhibition, an annual scholarship allowing Glasgow University students the opportunity to take up postgraduate study at Balliol College, Oxford.

4. Smith did not enjoy his time at Oxford University

Smith’s experiences at Glasgow and Oxford were completely different. While Hutcheson had prepared his students for vigorous debate through challenging new and old ideas, at Oxford, Smith believed “the greater part of the public professors [had] given up altogether even the pretence of teaching”.

Smith was also punished for reading A Treatise of Human Nature by his later friend David Hume. Smith quit Oxford before his scholarship ended and returned to Scotland.

Adam Smith statue in Edinburgh’s High Street in front of St. Giles High Kirk.

Image Credit: Kim Traynor

6. Smith was a voracious reader

One of the main reasons Smith was dissatisfied with his experience of Oxford was how much of his development occurred alone. However, this helped form a useful habit of extensive reading which Smith maintained throughout his life.

His personal library consisted of approximately 1500 books on varied subjects while Smith was also developed a strong understanding of philology. This underpinned his outstanding grasp of grammar across multiple languages.

7. Students travelled from abroad to be taught by Smith

Smith landed a public lecturing job at the University of Edinburgh in 1748. It was well-received and led to a professorship at Glasgow University two years later. When Professor of Moral Philosophy, Thomas Craigie, died in 1752, Smith took over the position, beginning a 13-year academic period he defined as his “most useful” and also his “happiest and most honourable period”.

The Theory of Moral Sentiments was published in 1759 and was so well-received that many wealthy students left foreign universities, some as far afield as Russia, to come to Glasgow and learn under Smith.

8. Smith didn’t like to discuss his ideas socially

Despite his extensive history of public speaking, Smith said very little in general conversation, particularly about his own work.

This is according to a former Glasgow University student of his, and fellow member of the Literary Club, James Boswell, who stated that Smith was reluctant to disclose ideas from his books through concern over limiting sales and for fear of misrepresenting his literary work. Boswell said that Smith vowed never to speak about matters that he understood.

9. Smith started writing The Wealth of Nations out of boredom

Smith began writing The Wealth of Nations “to pass away the time” in France during the 1774-75 period when he was hired by Chancellor of the Exchequer, Charles Townshend, to tutor his stepson, the Duke of Buccleuch.

Smith accepted Townshend’s lucrative offer of around £300 per year plus expenses, and a £300 pension a year, but found little intellectual stimulation in Toulouse and the nearby provinces. His experience improved significantly, however, when he was taken to Geneva to meet Voltaire, and to Paris where he was introduced to François Quesnay’s economic school of Physiocrats, who impressed him greatly.

10. Smith was the first Scotsman commemorated on an English banknote

Given Smith’s seminal influence in the world of economics, an acknowledgement in the form of his face on a banknote seems entirely appropriate.

Sure enough, this happened twice, first in his native Scotland on £50 notes issued by Clydesdale Bank in 1981, and secondly in 2007 when the Bank of England commemorated him on £20 notes. On the latter occasion, Smith became the first Scotsman to be featured on an English banknote.

A commemorative plaque at Panmure House where Adam Smith lived from 1778 to 1790.

10. Smith disliked having his portrait painted

Smith disliked having his portrait painted and very rarely sat down for one . “I am a beau in nothing but my books”, he is reported to have said to a friend.

For this reason, nearly all portraits of Smith are drawn from memory while only one genuine portrayal survives, a profile medallion by James Tassie showing Smith as an older man.

Beginning in independence movements against colonial powers, nationalism has shaped the world we live in today more than is often acknowledged. It remains a powerful ideological tool today as Europe has begun to react against change and economic downturns by once again voting for parties which promise to preserve a set of values and promote a sense of nostalgic national identity.

What is nationalism?

Nationalism is based around the idea that a nation, defined by a shared group of characteristics, such as religion, culture, ethnicity, geography or language, should have the ability of self-determination and to govern itself, as well as be able to preserve and take pride in its traditions and history.

At the beginning of the 19th century, Europe’s borders were far from fixed entities, and it was largely comprised of a number of smaller states and principalities. The unification of many European nations in the face of Napoleon’s wars of expansion – and the oppressive nature of imperial conquest – led many to begin to think about the benefits of joining together with other states who had similar languages, cultural practices and traditions into bigger, more powerful entities who would be able to defend themselves against potential aggressors.

So too did those who had suffered imperial rule by politicians and kings in far away places begin to grow increasingly tired of a lack of political agency and cultural oppression.

But whilst these new theories and ideas may have been simmering below the surface, it takes a strong, charismatic leader to articulate them in a way which excites people enough to get behind them and act, whether that be through rebellion or going to the ballot box. We’ve rounded up 6 of the most important figures in 19th century nationalism, whose leadership, passion and eloquence helped incite major change.

1. Toussaint Louverture

Famous for his role in the Haitian Revolution, Louverture (whose name literally derives from the word for ‘opening’) was a believer in the principles of the French Revolution. As the French rose up against their oppressive masters, he channelled the revolutionary spirit on the island of Haiti.

The majority of the island’s population were slaves with little to no rights under colonial law and society. The uprising, led by Louverture, was bloody and brutal, but it was ultimately successful and inspired by the beginnings of French nationalism thousands of miles away, across the Atlantic Ocean.

Many now view the Haitian Revolution – which culminated in 1804 – as the most influential revolution in history, and Toussaint Louverture’s role in bringing it about cements him as one of nationalism’s earliest proponents.

2. Napoleon Bonaparte

The French Revolution of 1789 espoused values of liberté, égalité, fraternité and it was these ideals upon which Napoleon championed his own brand of early nationalism. As the supposed centre of the enlightened world, Napoleon justified his campaigns of military expansion (and of ‘natural’ French borders) on the basis that in doing so, France was also spreading its enlightened ideals.

Unsurprisingly, this came back to bite the French. The idea of nationalism they had spread, which included ideas like the right to self-determination, freedom and equality, seemed to be even further from reality for those whose right to self-determination and liberty had been taken by French conquest of their lands.

3. Simon Bolivar

Nicknamed El Libertador (the Liberator), Bolivar led much of South America to independence from Spain. After travelling to Europe as a teenager, he returned to South America and launched a campaign for independence, which ultimately succeeded.

However, Bolivar may have gained independence for the new state of Gran Colombia (comprised of modern day Venezuela, Colombia, Panama and Ecuador), but it proved difficult to keep such vast landmass and disparate territories as one body united against any potential further attacks from the Spanish or the newly independent United States.

Gran Colombia was dissolved in 1831 and broke into successor states. Today, many countries in northern South America recognise Bolivar as a national hero and use his image and memory as a rallying point for national identity and notions of independence.

4. Giuseppe Mazzini

One of the architects of Risorgimento (Italian unification), Mazzini was an Italian nationalist who believed Italy had a single identity and shared cultural traditions that should be united as a whole. Officially Italy’s reunification was completed by 1871, the year before Mazzini died, but the nationalist movement he started continued in the form of irredentism: the idea that all ethnic Italians and majority-Italian speaking areas should also be absorbed into the new nation of Italy.

Mazzini’s brand of nationalism set the stage for the idea of democracy in a republican state. The notion of cultural identity as paramount, and the belief in self-determination went on to influence many of the 20th century’s political leaders.

Giuseppe Mazzini

Image Credit: Public Domain

5. Daniel O’Connell

Daniel O’Connell, also nicknamed the Liberator, was an Irish Catholic who was a major figure in representing the Irish Catholic majority in the 19th century. Ireland had been colonised and ruled by the British for several hundred years: O’Connell’s aim was to get Britain to grant Ireland a separate Irish Parliament, regaining a degree of independence and autonomy for the Irish people, and for Catholic emancipation.

O’Connell succeeded in getting the Roman Catholic Relief Act passed in 1829: the British grew increasingly concerned about civil unrest in Ireland should they resist further. O’Connell was subsequently elected as an MP and continued to agitate for Irish Home Rule from Westminster. As time went on, he was increasingly accused of selling out as he continued to refuse to support taking up arms in the quest for independence.

Irish nationalism continued to plague the British for nearly another 100 hundred years, culminating in the Irish War of Independence (1919-21).

6. Otto von Bismarck

The mastermind of German unification in 1871, Bismarck later served as Germany’s first chancellor for another two decades. German nationalism had begun to take hold in the early 19th century, and philosophers and political thinkers found increasing reasons to justify a singular German state and identity. Prussian military successes and the War of Liberation (1813-14) also helped generate a significant sense of pride and enthusiasm for the idea.

Bismarck was the man to make this actually happen: whether unification was part of a wider master plan to expand Prussian power or based on true ideas of nationalism and a desire to unify German-speaking people remains hotly debated by historians.

Bismarck in his study (1886)

Image Credit: A. Bockmann, Lübeck / Public Domain

Nationalism in the 19th century was born of militarism and a desire for freedom from oppression by foreign powers or empires. However, the legacy of freedom and political self-determination these men initially championed quickly disintegrated into internal nationality conflicts, disputes over borders and arguments over history which eventually helped spark the First World War.