Underwood​ ​1 The​ ​formation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​is​ ​one​ ​that​ ​is​ ​unique​ ​as​ ​it​ ​is​ ​convoluted​ ​through​ ​its coagulation​ ​of​ ​numerous​ ​different​ ​German​ ​governments​ ​into​ ​one​ ​imperial​ ​state.​ ​The​ ​foundation for​ ​unification​ ​in​ ​Germany​ ​was​ ​not​ ​initially​ ​established​ ​through​ ​a​ ​political​ ​or​ ​cultural​ ​measure; rather,​ ​the​ ​foundation​ ​of​ ​unification​ ​was​ ​based​ ​in​ ​economics.​ ​The​ ​earliest​ ​basis​ ​from​ ​which economics​ ​contributed​ ​to​ ​the​ ​formation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​is​ ​the​ ​congealing​ ​of​ ​a​ ​multitude​ ​of trade​ ​unions​ ​in​ ​the​ ​hundreds​ ​of​ ​old​ ​German​ ​states,​ ​kingdoms,​ ​duchies,​ ​and​ ​free​ ​cities​ ​into​ ​the Zollverein​ ​(customs​ ​union).​ ​The​​ ​Zollverein​ ​was​ ​in​ ​existence​ ​from​ ​1834​ ​to​ ​the​ ​formation​ ​of​ ​the German​ ​empire​ ​in​ ​1871​ ​and​ ​became​ ​the​ ​first​ ​unified​ ​German​ ​economic​ ​system​ ​before​ ​a​ ​unified German​ ​political​ ​state​ ​was​ ​formed.​ ​At​ ​the​ ​heart​ ​of​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​paradigm​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​lay the​ ​economic​ ​philosophy​ ​of​ ​Friedrich​ ​List.​ ​List​ ​was​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​earliest​ ​advocates​ ​of​ ​forming​ ​the Zollverein​ ​as​ ​a​ ​way​ ​to​ ​assist​ ​in​ ​industrialization​ ​and​ ​strengthening​ ​a​ ​German​ ​economy​ ​that​ ​was disjointed​ ​following​ ​the​ ​Napoleonic​ ​wars​ ​and​ ​the​ ​domination​ ​of​ ​the​ ​global​ ​and​ ​continental economy​ ​by​ ​the​ ​British​ ​Empire,​ ​“the​ ​lack​ ​of​ ​effective​ ​political​ ​unity​ ​in​ ​Germany​ ​and​ ​the​ ​strength of​ ​particularism​ ​in​ ​1815​ ​help​ ​to​ ​explain​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​backwardness​ ​of​ ​the​ ​country​ ​in comparison​ ​with​ ​Britain​ ​and​ ​France.”1​ ​His​ ​economic​ ​ideas​ ​are​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​foundations​ ​of​ ​the emergence​ ​of​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​policies​ ​of​ ​neomercantilism​ ​in​ ​the​ ​19th​ ​century.​ ​Specifically,​ ​his model,​ ​the​ ​listian​ m ​ odel​ ​of​ ​neomercantilism​ ​championed​ ​an​ ​idea​ ​of​ ​a​ ​national​ ​innovation​ ​system and​ ​spurning​ ​nationalism.​ ​This​ ​essentially​ ​put​ ​the​ ​idea​ ​of​ ​the​ ​nation​ ​as​ ​central​ ​to​ ​any​ ​system​ ​of economics.​ ​Listian​ ​economic​ ​ideas​ ​also​ ​countered​ ​the​ ​argument​ ​of​ ​free​ ​trade​ ​championed​ ​by Adam​ ​Smith​ ​through​ ​economic​ ​protectionism.​ ​Friedrich​ ​List’s​ ​key​ ​work​ ​The​ ​National​ ​System​ ​of Political​ ​Economy​ ​outlines​ ​these​ ​economic​ ​ideas​ ​for​ ​Germany​ ​following​ ​the​ ​Napoleonic​ ​wars 1 ​ ​ ​W.O.​ ​Henderson,​ ​The​ ​Zollverein​,​ ​(London:​ ​Frank​ ​Cass,​ ​1984),​ ​p.10. Underwood​ ​2 and​ ​the​ ​negotiations​ ​at​ ​the​ ​Congress​ ​of​ ​Vienna.​ ​ ​The​ ​coupling​ ​of​ ​a​ ​Listian​ ​neo-mercantilistic economic​ ​paradigm​ ​and​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​mechanics​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​contribute​ ​to​ ​make​ ​the structure​ ​of​ ​empire​ ​in​ ​Germany​ ​one​ ​of​ ​a​ ​unique​ ​nature.​ ​Specifically,​ ​these​ ​economic​ ​ideas, structures,​ ​and​ ​mechanics​ ​contribute​ ​to​ ​the​ ​structure​ ​of​ ​empire​ ​and​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​in​ ​a significant​ ​way​ ​in​ ​German​ ​East​ ​Africa​ ​(Tanganyika).​ ​Thus,​ ​the​ ​purpose​ ​of​ ​this​ ​paper​ ​is​ ​to analyze​ ​the​ ​relationship​ ​between​ ​List,​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​,​ ​and​ ​how​ ​they​ ​relate​ ​to​ ​the​ ​structure​ ​of​ ​the German​ ​empire,​ ​specifically​ ​in​ ​the​ ​case​ ​of​ ​Tanganyika. To​ ​understand​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​ideas​ ​behind​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​and​ ​how​ ​this​ ​relates​ ​to​ ​the structure​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​it​ ​is​ ​important​ ​to​ ​look​ ​at​ ​the​ ​economist​ ​Friedrich​ ​List.​ ​Friedrich List​ ​was​ ​a​ ​German-American​ ​journalist​ ​and​ ​economist​ ​that​ ​taught​ ​administration​ ​and​ ​politics​ ​at the​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Tubingen.​ ​Friedrich​ ​List​ ​also​ ​assisted​ ​in​ ​founding​ ​the​ ​historical​ ​school​ ​of economics​ ​and​ ​the​ ​American​ ​school​ ​of​ ​economics​ ​which​ ​stressed​ ​the​ ​idea​ ​of​ ​protectionism​ ​over free​ ​trade​ ​in​ ​economic​ ​policies.​ ​“List’s​ ​work​ ​marked​ ​a​ ​radical​ ​departure​ ​from​ ​the​ ​spatial assumptions​ ​of​ ​classical​ ​economic​ ​paradigms.”2​ ​Moreover,​ ​List’s​ ​departure​ ​from​ ​classical political​ ​economy​ ​ ​is​ ​reflected​ ​in​ ​his​ ​shift​ ​of​ ​spatial​ ​understanding​ ​of​ ​political​ ​economics, “classical​ ​political​ ​economy​ ​conceived​ ​the​ ​division​ ​of​ ​labor​ ​and​ ​markets​ ​as​ ​abstract configurations​ ​with​ ​no​ ​specific​ ​spatial​ ​extension.​ ​In​ ​contrast,​ ​the​ ​central​ ​organizing​ ​category​ ​of List’s​ ​framework​ ​was​ ​the​ ​self​ ​inclosed​ ​nation,​ ​signalling​ ​a​ ​shift​ ​from​ ​an​ ​abstract​ ​special reference​ ​to​ ​a​ ​place-bound​ ​focus.”​ ​List’s​ ​changes​ ​from​ ​the​ ​paradigms​ ​and​ ​policies​ ​of​ ​classical economics​ ​into​ ​the​ ​parameters​ ​of​ ​a​ ​nation​ ​contribute​ ​to​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​ideas​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German imperial​ ​policies​ ​of​ ​realpolitik​ ​and​ ​weltpolitik​.​ ​These​ ​departures​ ​from​ ​Smithian​ ​Liberalism​ ​marks ​ ​Manu​ ​Goswami,​ ​Producing​ ​India:​ ​From​ ​Colonial​ ​Economy​ ​to​ ​National​ ​Space​,​ ​(Chicago:​ ​Chicago​ ​University Press,​ ​2004),​ ​p.216 2 Underwood​ ​3 List​ ​as​ ​one​ ​the​ ​earliest​ ​writers​ ​of​ ​the​ ​emergence​ ​of​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​philosophy​ ​of​ ​neomercantilism. Moreover,​ ​the​ ​method​ ​through​ ​which​ ​List​ ​analyzes​ ​the​ ​ideas​ ​of​ ​classical​ ​economics​ ​is​ ​attributed as​ ​“one​ ​of​ ​unmasking:​ ​the​ ​regime​ ​of​ ​free​ ​trade​ ​was​ ​dismissed​ ​as​ ​a​ ​direct​ ​expression​ ​of​ ​British national​ ​economic​ ​interest,​ ​and​ ​classical​ ​economic​ ​theory’s​ ​stress​ ​on​ ​cosmopolitanism​ ​was regarded​ ​as​ ​a​ ​ploy​ ​to​ ​retain​ ​Britain's​ ​economic​ ​and​ ​imperial​ ​hegemony.”3​ ​Neomercantilism​ ​is generally​ ​defined​ ​as​ ​a​ ​nationalistic​ ​spinoff​ ​of​ ​traditional​ ​mercantilism,​ ​but​ ​the​ ​Listian​ ​version emphasized​ ​the​ ​addendum​ ​of​ ​achieving​ ​complete​ ​autarky​ ​in​ ​all​ ​aspects​ ​of​ ​an​ ​economy. Furthermore,​ ​Listian​ ​neomercantilism​ ​emphasized​ ​a​ ​national​ ​autarky​ ​of​ ​science​ ​and technological​ ​development​ ​in​ ​what​ ​is​ ​referred​ ​to​ ​as​ ​the​ ​“National​ ​System”​ ​or​ ​the​ ​“National System​ ​of​ ​Innovation.”​ ​List’s​ ​The​ ​National​ ​System​ ​of​ ​Political​ ​Economy​ ​is​ ​his​ ​most​ ​notable work​ ​and​ ​uses​ ​history​ ​as​ ​the​ ​evidence​ ​for​ ​constructing​ ​and​ ​visualizing​ ​ ​his​ ​economic​ ​ideas.​ ​“It​ ​is beyond​ ​all​ ​doubt​ ​that​ ​riches​ ​can​ ​only​ ​be​ ​acquired​ ​by​ ​the​ ​means​ ​of​ ​the​ ​mind​ ​and​ ​of​ ​the​ ​body,​ ​or​ ​of work;​ ​but​ ​that​ ​is​ ​not​ ​assigning​ ​a​ ​case​ ​from​ ​which​ ​useful​ ​deductions​ ​may​ ​be​ ​drawn;​ ​for​ ​history shows​ ​that​ ​nations​ ​have​ ​sunk​ ​into​ ​poverty​ ​and​ ​misery​ ​despite​ ​the​ ​labor​ ​and​ ​economy​ ​of​ ​their citizens.”4​ ​List​ ​was​ ​massively​ ​influential​ ​in​ ​his​ ​economic​ ​ideas​ ​for​ ​the​ ​new​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​even though​ ​he​ ​committed​ ​suicide​ ​before​ ​the​ ​empire​ ​was​ ​formed.​ ​List​ ​ideas​ ​in​ ​relation​ ​to​ ​what​ ​he wanted​ ​for​ ​German​ ​imperialism​ ​mimicked​ ​his​ ​economic​ ​ideas, The​ ​new​ ​development​ ​of​ ​industry​ ​and​ ​industrial​ ​thinking​ ​gave​ ​rise​ ​to​ ​a​ ​new​ ​form​ ​of​ ​colonialism,​ ​This​ ​new form,​ ​first​ ​stated​ ​in​ ​detail​ ​in​ ​Germany​ ​by​ ​List​ ​himself,​ ​presented​ ​colonies,​ ​not​ ​as​ ​settlement​ ​areas,​ ​but​ ​as means​ ​of​ ​protecting​ ​Germany’s​ ​markets​ ​and​ ​sources​ ​of​ ​raw​ ​materials​ ​from​ ​possible​ ​retaliation​ ​by​ ​foreign competitors​ ​against​ ​the​ ​import​ ​tariffs​ ​ ​that​ ​List​ ​recommended​ ​for​ ​Germany.5 ​ ​Goswami,​ ​p.​ ​216. ​ ​Friedrich​ ​List,​ ​The​ ​National​ ​System​ ​of​ ​Political​ ​Economy,​ ​(Delaware:​ ​Vernon​ ​Press,​ ​2013),​ ​p.93. 5 ​ ​Smith,​ ​p.​ ​13​. 3 4 Underwood​ ​4 Friedrich​ ​List’s​ ​contribution​ ​to​ ​economics​ ​and​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​paradigm​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein and​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​is​ ​monumental.​ ​This​ ​contribution​ ​can​ ​be​ ​seen​ ​in​ ​the​ ​imperial​ ​idea​ ​of Weltpolitik​ ​(world​ ​politics)​ ​and​ ​how​ ​the​ ​industrialization​ ​and​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​policies​ ​of​ ​Listian neomercantilism​ ​propelled​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​into​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​strongest​ ​empires​ ​by​ ​the​ ​end​ ​of​ ​the 19th​ ​century. The​ ​history​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​has​ ​its​ ​beginnings​ ​with​ ​the​ ​formation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​multitude​ ​of minor​ ​customs​ ​unions​ ​in​ ​the​ ​newly​ ​formed​ ​German​ ​confederation​ ​following​ ​the​ ​dissolvement​ ​of the​ ​Holy​ ​Roman​ ​Empire​ ​during​ ​the​ ​Napoleonic​ ​wars,​ ​(Fig​ ​1).​ ​With​ ​the​ ​French​ ​Empire diminished​ ​in​ ​its​ ​influence​ ​on​ ​the​ ​German​ ​states​ ​and​ ​as​ ​with​ ​many​ ​matters​ ​concerning​ ​the German​ ​States,​ ​the​ ​one​ ​that​ ​played​ ​the​ ​largest​ ​role​ ​during​ ​the​ ​19th​ ​century​ ​was​ ​the​ ​Kingdom​ ​of Prussia.​ ​The​ ​consistent​ ​fracturing​ ​of​ ​“unified”​ ​German​ ​governments​ ​contributed​ ​to​ ​a​ ​systemic disunity​ ​in​ ​an​ ​economic​ ​and​ ​political​ ​sense.​ ​“Almost​ ​the​ ​only​ ​form​ ​of​ ​unity​ ​which​ ​Germany possessed​ ​in​ ​the​ ​eighteenth​ ​century​ ​was​ ​that​ ​of​ ​language​ ​and​ ​culture,​ ​and​ ​even​ ​this​ ​was​ ​no​ ​strong bond.”6​ ​With​ ​this​ ​disunity​ ​in​ ​the​ ​German​ ​areas,​ ​“the​ ​German​ ​Zollverein​ ​provided​ ​an​ ​economic union​ ​of​ ​most​ ​German​ ​States​ ​without​ ​impairing​ ​their​ ​political​ ​independence,​ ​and​ ​so​ ​constituted the​ ​first​ ​non-political​ ​union​ ​among​ ​independent​ ​states.”7​ ​Before​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​was​ ​officially formed​ ​in​ ​ ​1834​ ​the​ ​numerous​ ​German​ ​custom​ ​unions​ ​were​ ​dominated​ ​by​ ​the​ ​massive​ ​Prussian customs​ ​union​ ​in​ ​the​ ​1820s.​ ​The​ ​struggle​ ​between​ ​the​ ​Prussian​ ​Customs​ ​union​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Middle German​ ​Commercial​ ​Union​ ​from​ ​1828-1833​ ​preceded​ ​the​ ​formation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​in​ ​1834 and​ ​was​ ​on​ ​the​ ​first​ ​obstacles​ ​overcome​ ​in​ ​the​ ​creation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein.​ ​Another​ ​obstacle​ ​during this​ ​period​ ​from​ ​1828-1833​ ​was​ ​negotiations​ ​between​ ​the​ ​Prussian​ ​Customs​ ​Union​ ​and​ ​the ​ ​W.O.​ ​Henderson,​ ​ ​p.1 ​ ​Arnold​ ​H.​ ​Price,​ ​The​ ​Evolution​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​,​ ​(Ann​ ​Arbor:​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Michigan​ ​Press,​ ​1949​ ​),​ ​p.1. 6 7 Underwood​ ​5 Bavaria-Wurttemberg​ ​Customs​ ​Union.​ ​Once​ ​these​ ​negotiations​ ​had​ ​finished​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​was created​ ​after​ ​fifteen​ ​years​ ​of​ ​bitter​ ​economic​ ​strife​ ​that​ ​followed​ ​the​ ​issue​ ​of​ ​Prussia’s​ ​tariff​ ​of May​ ​1818.8​ ​After​ ​its​ ​creation​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​was​ ​put​ ​on​ ​trial​ ​to​ ​see​ ​if​ ​it​ ​could​ ​actually​ ​work.​ ​The Zollverein​ ​itself​ ​went​ ​through​ ​two​ ​tumultuous​ ​periods​ ​after​ ​its​ ​formation​ ​in​ ​1834. The​ ​first​ ​crisis​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​occurred​ ​in​ ​1848​ ​as​ ​“the German​ ​states​ ​on​ ​the​ ​brink​ ​of​ ​modernity,​ ​were​ ​subjected​ ​to​ ​a complicated​ ​mixture​ ​of​ ​old​ ​fashioned​ ​agricultural​ ​failure​ ​and new​ ​fangled​ ​industrial​ ​crisis​ ​which​ ​impacted​ ​on​ ​crucial sectors​ ​of​ ​the​ ​population​ ​to​ ​produce​ ​a​ ​situation​ ​of​ ​potential unrest.”9​ ​This​ ​crisis​ ​is​ ​attributed​ ​to​ ​the​ ​political​ ​unrest​ ​in​ ​the German​ ​confederation​ ​where​ ​there​ ​were​ ​calls​ ​to​ ​reform​ ​the German​ ​constitution​ ​into​ ​a​ ​unified​ ​state​ ​and​ ​to​ ​reform​ ​the economy​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Habsburg​ ​empire.​ ​After​ ​the​ ​first​ ​crisis​ ​period there​ ​was​ ​a​ ​period​ ​of​ ​economic​ ​growth​ ​from​ ​1849-1854.​ ​This period​ ​of​ ​growth​ ​is​ ​attributed​ ​to​ ​the​ ​energizing​ ​of​ ​the​ ​commercial​ ​middle​ ​class,​ ​the​ ​lowering​ ​of other​ ​customs​ ​barriers​ ​in​ ​Europe,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​continuation​ ​of​ ​construction​ ​of​ ​railways​ ​during​ ​the 1850s.10​ ​The​ ​second​ ​crisis​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​was​ ​spurn​ ​from​ ​the​ ​political​ ​ambitions​ ​of​ ​Otto​ ​von Bismarck​ ​and​ ​his​ ​wars​ ​of​ ​unification​ ​during​ ​the​ ​1860s.​ ​During​ ​this​ ​time​ ​there​ ​was​ ​also​ ​a​ ​rising push​ ​for​ ​free​ ​trade​ ​within​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​as​ ​the​ ​particularism​ ​of​ ​Germany​ ​still​ ​existed​ ​in Zollverein​ ​as​ ​self​ ​interest​ ​was​ ​still​ ​primary​ ​and​ ​the​ ​needs​ ​of​ ​the​ ​customs​ ​union​ ​came​ ​second.11 ​ ​Henderson,​ ​p.​ ​95. ​ ​John​ ​R​ ​Davis,​ ​Britain​ ​and​ ​the​ ​German​ ​Zollverein​,​ ​(London:​ ​MacMillan​ ​Press​ ​Ltd,​ ​1997),​ ​p.​ ​48. 10 ​ ​Henderson,​ ​p.​ ​229-230. 11 ​ ​Henderson,​ ​p.​ ​272. 8 9 Underwood​ ​6 Even​ ​with​ ​this​ ​particularism​ ​still​ ​engrained​ ​in​ ​the​ ​German​ ​states,​ ​political​ ​unification​ ​by Bismarck​ ​was​ ​able​ ​to​ ​finish​ ​the​ ​work​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​: With​ ​the​ ​political​ ​unification​ ​of​ ​Germany​ ​in​ ​1871​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​unification​ ​of​ ​the​ ​country​ ​was​ ​practically complete.​ ​Prussia​ ​had​ ​taken​ ​a​ ​leading​ ​part​ ​in​ ​accomplishing​ ​both​ ​these​ ​tasks.​ ​It​ ​had​ ​taken​ ​Bismarck​ ​less than​ ​ten​ ​years​ ​to​ ​eject​ ​Austria​ ​from​ ​Germany,​ ​to​ ​defeat​ ​France​ ​and​ ​to​ ​annex​ ​Schleswig-Holstein​ ​and Alsace-Lorraine.​ ​Economic​ ​unification​ ​had​ ​been​ ​brought​ ​about​ ​more​ ​slowly.​ ​But​ ​the​ ​laborious​ ​work​ ​of Civil​ ​Servants​ ​such​ ​as​ ​Motz​ ​and​ ​Delbruck​ ​had​ ​at​ ​least​ ​been​ ​brought​ ​to​ ​a​ ​successful​ ​conclusion.​ 12 ​ Beyond​ ​its​ ​crises​ ​and​ ​shortfall,​ ​this​ ​precedent​ ​of​ ​economic​ ​unity​ ​that​ ​was​ ​able​ ​to​ ​transcend political​ ​unity​ ​adds​ ​a​ ​unique​ ​connection​ ​between​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​and​ ​the​ ​structure​ ​of​ ​empire​ ​in Germany.​ ​Because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​relevant​ ​success​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​in​ ​creating​ ​a​ ​somewhat​ ​unified economy​ ​the​ ​foundational​ ​economic​ ​ideas​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​that​ ​ ​were​ ​championed​ ​by​ ​Friedrich List​ ​and​ ​other​ ​economists​ ​and​ ​became​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​policies​ ​copied​ ​by​ ​the​ ​imperial​ ​German government: The​ ​Kaiserreich,​ ​as​ ​the​ ​empire​ ​of​ ​Wilhelm​ ​and​ ​Bismarck​ ​was​ ​known,​ ​was​ ​a​ ​late​ ​comer​ ​to​ ​Europe’s imperial​ ​competition.​ ​German​ ​leaders​ ​worried​ ​about​ ​lagging​ ​behind​ ​Great​ ​Britain’s​ ​industrialization​ ​and about​ ​access​ ​to​ ​raw​ ​materials.​ ​They​ ​were​ ​influenced​ ​by​ ​the​ ​writings​ ​of​ ​Friedrich​ ​List​ ​(1789-1846),​ ​who advocated​ ​a​ ​“national”​ ​approach​ ​to​ ​economic​ ​policy,​ ​meaning​ ​that​ ​the​ ​state​ ​should​ ​make​ ​a​ ​vigorous​ ​effort to​ ​develop​ ​its​ ​internal​ ​resources​ ​and​ ​catch​ ​up​ ​with​ ​rivals.13 Ultimately,​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​was​ ​not​ ​able​ ​to​ ​fully​ ​overcome​ ​the​ ​self​ ​interest​ ​particularism​ ​that​ ​was prevalent​ ​in​ ​the​ ​German​ ​states​ ​within​ ​the​ ​German​ ​Confederation,​ ​however,​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​laid the​ ​economic​ ​foundations​ ​utilizing​ ​a​ ​Listian​ ​economic​ ​paradigm​ ​at​ ​the​ ​center​ ​of​ ​its​ ​policies​ ​and the​ ​economic​ ​unity​ ​that​ ​preceded​ ​political​ ​union​ ​in​ ​Germany. After​ ​the​ ​formation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German​ ​Empire​ ​in​ ​1871​ ​under​ ​Chancellor​ ​Otto​ ​von​ ​Bismarck and​ ​the​ ​newly​ ​crowned​ ​Kaiser​ ​Wilhelm​ ​I,​ ​the​ ​German​ ​imperial​ ​government​ ​didn’t​ ​immediately attempt​ ​to​ ​establish​ ​a​ ​colonial​ ​empire.​ ​This​ ​was​ ​because​ ​there​ ​was​ ​no​ ​immediate​ ​imperial political​ ​drive​ ​as​ ​Germany​ ​was​ ​just​ ​formed,​ ​and​ ​there​ ​were​ ​pressing​ ​domestic​ ​concerns​ ​for ​ ​Henderson,​ ​p.​ ​329. ​ ​Jane​ ​Burbank​ ​and​ ​Frederick​ ​Cooper,​ ​Empires​ ​In​ ​World​ ​History:​ ​Power​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Politics​ ​of​ ​Difference​,​ ​(Princeton: Princeton​ ​University​ ​Press,​ ​2010),​ ​p.​ ​351. 12 13 Underwood​ ​7 Bismarck’s​ ​administration.​ ​However,​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​incentive​ ​to​ ​begin​ ​colonization​ ​was​ ​instilled early​ ​on.​ ​“Even​ ​before​ ​1871​ ​it​ ​had​ ​been​ ​argued​ ​that​ ​German​ ​integration​ ​through​ ​the​ ​Zollverein would​ ​eventually​ ​force​ ​Germany​ ​to​ ​seek​ ​her​ ​own​ ​overseas​ ​colonies.​ ​It​ ​was​ ​thought​ ​that​ ​the Zollverein​ ​might​ ​come​ ​to​ ​ ​be​ ​considered​ ​by​ ​Britain​ ​and​ ​other​ ​countries​ ​as​ ​an​ ​economic​ ​rival against​ ​whom​ ​informal​ ​sanctions,​ ​and​ ​possibly​ ​tariffs​ ​would​ ​have​ ​to​ ​be​ ​levied.”14​ ​Moreover, there​ ​were​ ​many​ ​events​ ​over​ ​the​ ​course​ ​of​ ​the​ ​19th​ ​century​ ​that​ ​led​ ​to​ ​an​ ​increased​ ​political interest​ ​in​ ​expanding​ ​German​ ​power​ ​overseas.​ ​It​ ​wasn’t​ ​until​ ​the​ ​1880s​ ​when​ ​Bismarck​ ​was losing​ ​political​ ​influence​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Reichstag​ ​due​ ​to​ ​the​ ​rise​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Social​ ​Democrat​ ​Party​ ​that Bismarck​ ​shifted​ ​the​ ​imperial​ ​focus​ ​to​ ​external​ ​imperialism.​ ​However,​ ​the​ ​tardiness​ ​of​ ​Germany developing​ ​an​ ​overseas​ ​empire​ ​meant​ ​that​ ​Germany​ ​had​ ​weaker​ ​colonies.​ ​“In​ ​comparison​ ​with the​ ​overseas​ ​possessions​ ​of​ ​Britain​ ​and​ ​France,​ ​Germany’s​ ​colonies​ ​were​ ​small.​ ​Even​ ​more importantly,​ ​they​ ​were,​ ​with​ ​minor​ ​exceptions,​ ​economically​ ​unprofitable.”15​ ​As​ ​Woodruff Smith​ ​argues,​ ​“the​ ​prime​ ​importance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​colonial​ ​empire​ ​to​ ​Germany​ ​lay​ ​neither​ ​with​ ​its negligible​ ​economic​ ​worth​ ​nor​ ​with​ ​its​ ​equally​ ​negligible​ ​strategic​ ​value​ ​but​ ​with​ ​its​ ​role​ ​as​ ​a source​ ​of​ ​political​ ​controversy​ ​and​ ​a​ ​means​ ​of​ ​building​ ​support​ ​in​ ​German​ ​politics.”16​ ​Moreover, “colonies​ ​would​ ​perform​ ​two​ ​major​ ​functions:​ ​they​ ​would​ ​protect​ ​existing​ ​overseas​ ​markets​ ​and sources​ ​to​ ​of​ ​raw​ ​materials​ ​from​ ​British​ ​retaliation,​ ​and​ ​they​ ​would​ ​increase​ ​effective​ ​German markets​ ​by​ ​organizing​ ​underdeveloped​ ​areas​ ​for​ ​trade​ ​and​ ​keeping​ ​foreign​ ​investments.”17 However,​ ​the​ ​most​ ​important​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German​ ​colonial​ ​possessions​ ​was​ ​German​ ​East Africa/Tanganyika/modern​ ​day​ ​Tanzania. ​ ​Woodruff​ ​D.​ ​Smith,​ ​The​ ​German​ ​Colonial​ ​Empire​,​ ​(Chapel​ ​Hill:​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Chapel​ ​Hill​ ​Press,​ ​1978),​ ​p.7​. ​ ​Smith,​ ​p.​ ​ix. 16 ​ ​Smith,​ ​p.​ ​x. 17 ​ ​Smith,​ ​p.​ ​14. 14 15 Underwood​ ​8 A​ ​brief​ ​history​ ​of​ ​German​ ​East​ ​Africa/Tanganyika/modern​ ​day​ ​Tanzania​ ​begins​ ​before the​ ​Germans​ ​arrive​ ​in​ ​the​ ​1880s​ ​as​ ​Tanganyika’s​ ​coastline​ ​owed​ ​its​ ​allegiance​ ​to​ ​the​ ​sultan​ ​of Zanzibar​ ​who​ ​in​ ​turn​ ​was​ ​supported​ ​by​ ​the​ ​British​ ​government,​ ​(Fig​ ​2).​ ​When​ ​the​ ​German explorer​ ​Dr.​ ​Peters​ ​arrived​ ​in​ ​1884​ ​he​ ​acquired​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Gesellschaft​ ​für​ ​deutsche​ ​Kolonisation some​ ​treaty​ ​rights​ ​with​ ​native​ ​chiefs,​ ​for​ ​which,​ ​on​ ​February​ ​27,​ ​1885,​ ​an​ ​Imperial​ ​Charter​ ​of Protection​ ​(Schutz-breif)​ ​was​ ​granted.18​ ​After​ ​having​ ​thus​ ​admitted​ ​the​ ​establishment​ ​of​ ​German interests​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Zanzibari​ ​region,​ ​the​ ​Chancellor took​ ​steps​ ​to​ ​have​ ​them​ ​adequately​ ​protected,​ ​and when​ ​the​ ​Sultan​ ​of​ ​Zanzibar​ ​protested​ ​against​ ​the depletion​ ​of​ ​his​ ​possessions​ ​on​ ​the​ ​mainland,​ ​a German​ ​patrol​ ​fleet​ ​made​ ​a​ ​demonstrations​ ​in​ ​the harbour​ ​of​ ​Dar-es-Salaam.19​ ​However,​ ​the​ ​German and​ ​British​ ​were​ ​able​ ​to​ ​resolve​ ​most​ ​of​ ​the political​ ​tension​ ​during​ ​Germany’s​ ​push​ ​for acquiring​ ​East​ ​Africa​ ​with​ ​the​ ​German-Anglo treaty​ ​of​ ​1890.​ ​“Although​ ​Britain​ ​and​ ​Germany avoided​ ​armed​ ​conflict​ ​over​ ​East​ ​Africa,​ ​there were​ ​frequent​ ​diplomatic​ ​confrontations,​ ​which​ ​in​ ​turn​ ​created​ ​political​ ​problems​ ​in​ ​Germany.”20 After​ ​these​ ​tensions​ ​were​ ​resolved​ ​the​ ​German​ ​government​ ​began​ ​forming​ ​a​ ​colonial government​ ​in​ ​East​ ​Africa​ ​to​ ​take​ ​over​ ​the​ ​taxation​ ​and​ ​trade​ ​duties​ ​of​ ​the​ ​area.​ ​ ​However,​ ​one​ ​of the​ ​greatest​ ​challenges​ ​facing​ ​the​ ​Germans​ ​in​ ​East​ ​Africa​ ​tinged​ ​on​ ​the​ ​question​ ​of​ ​railways, ​ ​Heinrich​ ​Brode,​ ​British​ ​and​ ​German​ ​East​ ​Africa​,​ ​(New​ ​York:​ ​Arno​ ​Press,​ ​1977),​ ​p.4. ​ ​Albert​ ​F.​ ​Calvert,​ ​German​ ​East​ ​Africa​,​ ​(New​ ​York:​ ​Negro​ ​Universities​ ​Press,​ ​1970),​ ​p.​ ​vi. 20 ​ ​Smith​ ​p.​ ​91. 18 19 Underwood​ ​9 which​ ​were​ ​regarded​ ​as​ ​the​ ​key​ ​to​ ​economic​ ​development​ ​but​ ​which​ ​were​ ​also​ ​capital investments​ ​that​ ​no​ ​private​ ​company​ ​would​ ​bear​ ​by​ ​itself.21​ ​Under​ ​the​ ​administration​ ​of​ ​Adolf Graf​ ​von​ ​Goetzen​ ​(1901-1905)​ ​there​ ​were​ ​economic​ ​reforms​ ​and​ ​ideas​ ​that​ ​mirrored​ ​a​ ​Listian economic​ ​ideology​ ​with​ ​Goetzen's​ ​focus​ ​on​ ​establishing​ ​a​ ​railroad​ ​with​ ​the​ ​help​ ​of​ ​the​ ​reichstag in​ ​1901​ ​and​ ​Goetzen's​ ​push​ ​to​ ​establish​ ​a​ ​culture​ ​of​ ​cash​ ​crops,​ ​in​ ​particular​ ​cotton.​ ​Yet, Goetzen’s​ ​policies​ ​aided​ ​in​ ​the​ ​uprising​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Maji​ ​Maji​ ​rebellion​ ​as​ ​his​ ​economic​ ​reforms threatened​ ​East​ ​African​ ​culture.The​ ​Maji​ ​Maji​ ​rebellion​ ​was​ ​eventually​ ​put​ ​down​ ​by​ ​the​ ​German colonial​ ​government​ ​in​ ​1907.​ ​However,​ ​business​ ​in​ ​German​ ​East​ ​Africa​ ​didn’t​ ​ultimately succeed,​ ​and​ ​German​ ​enterprise​ ​in​ ​East​ ​Africa​ ​did​ ​not​ ​make​ ​a​ ​profit.22​ ​Even​ ​with​ ​the​ ​failure​ ​of Germany’s​ ​colonial​ ​positions​ ​to​ ​produce​ ​a​ ​profit,​ ​the​ ​acquisition​ ​of​ ​colonies,​ ​the​ ​economic policies​ ​of​ ​German​ ​East​ ​africa,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​imperial​ ​policies​ ​of​ ​Realpolitik​ ​and​ ​Weltpolitik​ ​reflect​ ​the economic​ ​paradigms​ ​and​ ​policies​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​and​ ​List. In​ ​ ​conclusion,​ ​the​ ​structure​ ​of​ ​empire​ ​in​ ​East​ ​Africa,​ ​the​ ​imperial​ ​policies​ ​of​ ​Germany, and​ ​the​ ​influences​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​and​ ​Friedrich​ ​List​ ​are​ ​immense​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​establishing​ ​an economic​ ​paradigm​ ​that​ ​was​ ​ingrained​ ​into​ ​the​ ​foundations​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​in​ ​both​ ​the background​ ​and​ ​how​ ​it​ ​continued​ ​as​ ​an​ ​imperial​ ​government.​ ​List’s​ ​unique​ ​interpretation​ ​of​ ​how political​ ​economy​ ​should​ ​function​ ​in​ ​the​ ​19th​ ​century​ ​influenced​ ​the​ ​economic​ ​policies​ ​that​ ​the Zollverein​ ​adopted,​ ​even​ ​though​ ​List​ ​was​ ​not​ ​a​ ​policy​ ​maker​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Zollverein.​ ​The​ ​Listian economic​ ​policies​ ​and​ ​paradigms​ ​that​ ​established​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​ultimately​ ​contributed​ ​to​ ​the structure​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​and​ ​of​ ​empire​ ​in​ ​general.​ ​Initially,​ ​these​ ​policies​ ​and​ ​paradigms contributed​ ​to​ ​the​ ​imperial​ ​policy​ ​of​ ​Realpolitik​ ​in​ ​which​ ​the​ ​imperial​ ​German​ ​government ​ ​Smith,​ ​p.​ ​101. ​ ​Smith​ ​p.​ ​9​1. 21 22 Underwood​ ​10 adopted​ ​Listian​ ​economic​ ​policies​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​.​ ​Then,​ ​as​ ​German​ ​politics​ ​shifted​ ​with​ ​the acquisition​ ​of​ ​overseas​ ​colonies,​ ​such​ ​as​ ​German​ ​East​ ​Africa,​ ​there​ ​was​ ​a​ ​continuity​ ​of​ ​Listian economic​ ​policies​ ​and​ ​a​ ​Listian​ ​economic​ ​paradigm​ ​that​ ​contributed​ ​to​ ​policy​ ​of​ ​Weltpolitik through​ ​its​ ​stressing​ ​of​ ​colonial​ ​possessions​ ​for​ ​the​ ​use​ ​of​ ​expanding​ ​and​ ​protecting​ ​German markets.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​not​ ​to​ ​say​ ​that​ ​a​ ​Listian​ ​economic​ ​paradigm​ ​is​ ​the​ ​lone​ ​driving​ ​force​ ​of​ ​German imperialism​ ​as​ ​there​ ​were​ ​many​ ​other​ ​factors​ ​that​ ​contributed​ ​to​ ​German​ ​imperialism.​ ​But​ ​rather that​ ​the​ ​unique​ ​circumstances​ ​of​ ​the​ ​background​ ​to​ ​the​ ​formation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​German​ ​empire​ ​and​ ​their relation​ ​to​ ​Listian​ ​economics​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Zollverein​ ​synthesize​ ​into​ ​the​ ​larger​ ​structure​ ​of​ ​empire​ ​as the​ ​economic​ ​and​ ​the​ ​political​ ​concepts​ ​of​ ​Realpolitik​ ​and​ ​Weltpolitik​. Underwood​ ​11 Bibliography: Henderson,​ ​W.​ ​O.​ ​(William​ ​Otto).​ ​The​ ​Zollverein​.​ ​Chicago:​ ​Quadrangle​ ​Books.​ ​1959. Price,​ ​Arnold​ ​Hereward.​ ​The​ ​Evolution​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Zollverein,​ ​a​ ​Study​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Ideas​ ​and​ ​Institutions​ ​Leading​ ​to German​ ​Economic​ ​Unification​ ​between​ ​1815​ ​and​ ​1833.​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Michigan​ ​Publications.​ ​History​ ​and Political​ ​Science​ ​Ann​ ​Arbor:​ ​Univ.​ ​of​ ​Michigan​ ​Press.​ ​1949. Davis,​ ​John​ ​R.​ ​Britain​ ​and​ ​the​ ​German​ ​Zollverein,​ ​1848-66​.​ ​London:​ ​MacMillan​ ​Press​ ​LTD.​ ​1997. Calvert,​ ​Albert​ ​Frederick.​ ​German​ ​East​ ​Africa.​ ​New​ ​York:​ ​Negro​ ​Universities​ ​Press.​ ​1970. Brode,​ ​Heinrich.​ ​1977.​ ​British​ ​and​ ​German​ ​East​ ​Africa,​ ​Their​ ​Economic​ ​&​ ​Commercial​ ​Relations​. European​ ​Business.​ ​New​ ​York:​ ​Arno​ ​Press. Burbank,​ ​Jane;​ ​Cooper,​ ​Frederick.​ ​Empires​ ​in​ ​World​ ​History:​ ​Power​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Politics​ ​of​ ​Difference​. Princeton:​ ​Princeton​ ​University​ ​Press.​ ​2010 List,​ ​Friedrich.​ ​The​ ​National​ ​System​ ​of​ ​Political​ ​Economy.​ ​Delaware​:​ ​Vernon​ ​Press.​ ​2013. Goswami,​ ​Manu.​ ​Producing​ ​India:​ ​From​ ​Colonial​ ​Economy​ ​to​ ​National​ ​Space​.​ ​Chicago:​ ​University​ ​of Chicago​ ​Press.​ ​2004. Smith,​ ​Woodruff.​ ​The​ ​German​ ​Colonial​ ​Empire​.​ ​Chapel​ ​Hill:​ ​University​ ​of​ ​Chapel​ ​Hill​ ​Press.​ ​1978 Images: “German​ ​Unification.”German_unified_1815_1871.jpg.​ ​Accessed​ ​April​ ​30,​ ​2017. “German​ ​East​ ​Africa.”German-East-Africa2.png.​ ​Accessed​ ​April​ ​30,​ ​2017.