---nothing against calls for accuracy in translation, but they do need to be proportionate. The OP text looks like it’s a bit of back-cover blurb, or from a light review, and not a piece of Heidegger or Handke.
I don’t insist on “fervor,” esp. after eastworld pointed out they consider it too strong (a weaker version would be “enthusiasm”), but I would stress the need for idiomatic E. usage here, and “insistence,” etc., doesn’t fit the bill (Gibson’s point, I think, in #7).
Useful to be reminded of the rhetorical sense of Emphase (#8), though I’m not convinced it fits, either, unless taken in a figurative sense.
Ultimately I think one needs to try to take a look at what lies behind the language (i.e., in history and/or the history of ideas), because that’s the ground we’re on (given the preceding “Enlightenment,” “Romanticism,” “Biedermeier”). “Die Wacht am Rhein” evidently served as a rallying cry and immensely popular vehicle for nationalist sentiment right up to and including World War II. But what movement or development exactly in the world out there, between Bismarck and 1945, is the author referring to with her “from Biedermeier to … ” ? One needs to be clear in one’s mind about that (or come to a decision for oneself, or ask the author)—the E. will follow with (relative) ease.