How the Research Is Empirically Examined 99
understanding the vitality of peace and expressing impressive multilateral
support for keeping it.^94 These explanations explicitly rule out any sys-
temic change in international politics in this period in three ways: (1) it is
common to consider the arrangement of 1815 as a return of the balance of
power that characterized the 18th century and a return to the classic politi-
cal principles that prevailed in that century;^95 (2) most historians consider
the change that occurred after 1815 to be a temporary state of stability
and harmony of international politics that started to be destabilized in the
1820s, completely disappeared in 1830, and returned to normal political
competition in 1848;^96 and (3) peace and stability are usually explained
as being voluntary and a result of tendency more than structuralism, for
example, as a result of statesmen choosing to engage in international poli-
tics more than actions that the system encouraged them to take or allowed
them to take. The plea that the cause of peace in the 19th century was the
good mood of European statesmen after 1815 is insufficient because previ-
ous European wars were almost always as vicious as those that occurred
in 1792–1815, and the 30 Years’ War was even worse.^97
After the end of every major war in 1648, 1714, 1763–1783, 1801, 1807,
and 1809, it was statesmen who devised the peace and wanted not only
peace treaties but also durable peace arrangements. Therefore, the exis-
tence or absence of good will and peaceful intentions are simply insufficient
to explain this phenomenon.^98 The spirit of the conservative Holy Alli-
ance cannot explain the international stability of the 19th century either^99
because it never controlled Europe and did not survive the 1848 revolu-
tion, whereas the structural changes in the countries that were formed
in 1815 did survive. The third explanation includes systemic arguments:
(1) the international peace and stability of the 19th century stemmed primar-
ily from a structural change that was reflected in key institutional arrange-
ments and a practical deviation from the norms of the 18th century. The
1815 arrangement did not restore the balance of power of the 18th century,
nor did it review the political practices of that century. (2) The European
equilibrium that was formed in 1815 and survived the 19th century is com-
pletely different from what was known as the balance of power in the 18th
century. (3) The systemic changed proved stabile and it existed until the
last part of the century, except for the upheavals of 1848–1859 and the wars
of 1854–1871.^100 And (4) the most prominent explanation attributed peace
and stability in Europe to the existence of the European Concert.^101
The European Concert occurred in 1815–1914. This was a common
action system of the great powers, a policy for peaceful settlement of inter-
national problems that was based on cooperation between them^102 and
that was performed through ad hoc conferences that were convened when
international crises developed.^103 According to Mearsheimer, the Concert
worked well in 1815–1823. After 1823, the Concert was able to serve as an
effective coordinating instrument for the powers and continued to exist