Early and Medieval Periods in German Economic History

Author(s):  
Thilo R. Huning ◽  
Fabian Wahl

The study of the Holy Roman Empire, a medieval state on the territory of modern-day Germany and Central Europe, has attracted generations of qualitative economic historians and quantitative scholars from various fields. Its bordering position between Roman and Germanic legacies, its Carolingian inheritance, and the numerous small states emerging from 1150 onward, on the one hand, are suspected to have hindered market integration, and on the other, allowed states to compete. This has inspired many research questions around differences and communalities in culture, the origin of the state, the integration of good and financial markets, and technology inventions, such the printing press. While little is still known about the economy of the rural population, cities and their economic conditions have been extensively studied from the angles of economic geography, institutionalism, and for their influence on early human capital accumulation. The literature has stressed that Germany at this time cannot be seen as a closed economy, but only in the context of Europe and the wider world. Global events, such as the Black Death, and European particularities, such as the Catholic Church, never stopped at countries’ borders. As such, the literature provides an understanding for the prelude to radical changes, such as the Lutheran Reformation, religious wars, and the coming of the modern age with its economic innovations.

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 117-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. J. W. Evans

ABSTRACTIn the vibrant current debate about European empires and their ideologies, one basic dichotomy still tends to be overlooked: that between, on the one hand, the plurality of modern empires of colonisation, commerce and settlement; and, on the other, the traditional claim to single and undividedimperiumso long embodied in the Roman Empire and its successor, the Holy Roman Empire, or (First) Reich. This paper examines the tensions between the two, as manifested in the theory and practice of Habsburg imperial rule. The Habsburgs, emperors of the Reich almost continuously through its last centuries, sought to build their own power-base within and beyond it. The first half of the paper examines how by the eighteenth century their ‘Monarchy’, subsisting alongside the Reich, dealt with the associated legacy of empire. After the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire in 1806 the Habsburgs could pursue a free-standing Austrian ‘imperialism’, but it rested on an uneasy combination of old and new elements and was correspondingly vulnerable to challenge from abroad and censure at home. The second half of the article charts this aspect of Habsburg government through an age of international imperialism and its contribution to the collapse of the Dual Monarchy in 1918.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin P. Schennach

This is the first work of its kind devoted to Austrian constitutional law, which has so far received little attention in (legal) historical research. It examines its origins, its authors, its connection with the “Reichspublizistik”, its sources and methods as well as its contents and, last but not least, its role in university teaching. Of all the particular state rights in the Holy Roman Empire, its subject was probably the one most intensively discussed. In the second half of the 18th century, Austrian constitutional law was a flourishing genre of literature promoted by the Habsburg dynasty. This is accounted for by its main themes: It flanked the process of internal integration of the heterogeneous Habsburg ruling complex and aimed at the discursive and legal construction of an Austrian state as a whole and the legitimation of absolutism.


Author(s):  
Ralph Keen

Luther’s position on the duties of rulers to preserve social order and on the obligation of subjects to obey them for the sake of civil tranquility is scripturally grounded, principally in Romans 13:1–7, and presupposes an anthropology in which humans are so sinful as to need worldly government. The foundations of Luther’s thought about politics can be located in two sources: his doctrine of the Two Kingdoms and his understanding of the Pauline precept in Romans 13 to obey worldly authorities. Woven into each of these positions is a theological anthropology that holds that fallen humanity is too sinful to survive without divine aid. In the political realm, this aid takes the form of civil government; as a correlate, the authority of the church for Luther is limited to spiritual matters only and has no influence in the governance of the people. Luther’s defense of the social order and civil government set him in sharp opposition to the leaders of the Peasants’ War and led him to support the Protestant princes in their opposition to the Holy Roman Empire (founded on the spurious authority of the Roman Catholic Church in political affairs) after the 1530 Diet of Augsburg. In his defense of obedience to worldly powers and his grounds for justified resistance to impious rule, Luther left a seemingly ambiguous legacy that manifested itself after his death in a division over advocates of obedience to a conciliatory ruler (who wished to reintroduce elements of Roman worship) and purists who insisted that such obedience was a violation of Luther’s intention.


Author(s):  
Jens Wolff

Luther was a point of reference in all three of the confessional cultures during the confessional age, though this was not something he had intended. His theological “self-fashioning” was not meant to secure, canonize, or stabilize his own works or his biography. Rather, he believed, and was convinced, that the hidden God rules in a strange way. He hides himself in the course of the world and realizes what we would have liked to realizes. Apart from this theological viewpoint, historiographic differentiation is needed: Luther had different impacts on each of the three confessions. Furthermore, one also has to differentiate between a deep impact and the unintended effects of Luther’s thinking. Luther was an extremely polarizing figure. From the beginning, he underwent a heroization and a diabolization by his contemporaries. Apart from this black-and-white reception of his person, it was, and still is, extremely difficult to analyze Luther, his work and medial effects. Historians have always been fixated on Luther: he was the one and only founder of Protestantism. His biography became a stereotype of writing and was an important element of Protestant (or anti-Protestant) identity politics. For some Protestants, his biography became identical with the history of salvation (Heilsgeschichte). For his enemies, his biography was identical with the history of the devil. In all historical fields, one has to differentiate between the different groups and people who protected or attacked Luther or shared his ideas. The history of Luther can only be written as a shared history with conflict and concordances: the so-called Anabaptists, for example, shared Luther’s antihierarchical ideal of Christian community, although on the other hand “they” were strongly opposed toward his theology and person. Luther or example, had conflicts with the humanists and with Erasmus especially; he argued about the Lord’s Supper with Zwingli, he criticized the Fuggers because of their financial transactions in an early capitalist society; and, last but not least, he was in conflict with the Roman Church. The legitimization of different pictures of Luther always depends upon the perspectives of the posterity: either Luther was intolerant against spiritualists, Anabaptists, or peasants who were willing to resort to violence; or he was defended by humanists like Sebastian Castellio for defending religious tolerance. During his lifetime Luther was an extremely polarizing figure. Hundreds of pro-Lutheran and polemical anti-Lutheran leaflets or texts were published. The many literary forms of parody, satire, caricature, the grotesque, and the absurd were cultivated during the confessional age. Luther’s biography was often used by Lutheran theologians as an instrument of heroization and identity politics in public discourse. Historically, one can differentiate between the time before and after Luther. The political and religious unity of the Holy Roman Empire was strongly disturbed, if not broken, through the Reformation. The end of the Universalist dreams of universal powers like theology and politics (pope and emperor) were some of the central preconditions for political, cultural, and theological differentiation of Europe. Religious differentiation was one of the unintended effects of theology and the interpretation of the scripture. Decades after Luther’s death, the Holy Roman Empire slowly and surprisingly turned into a poly-, multi- and interconfessional society.


2001 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis Crouzet ◽  
Jonathan Good

AbstractIn Italy, the Holy Roman Empire, and France, one can discern in the last decades of the fifteenth century and the early years of the sixteenth a powerful anguish about the future, taking one of two forms: either the vision of an imminent Last Judgment, or a great rupture in time, announcing the dawn of a new Covenant. In France, one of the peculiar features of this historical process was the tension that built up around the year 1533, one thousand five hundred years after the death of Christ. This tension could explain the offensive launched individually or collectively by the men who stood behind Marguerite de Navarre-men of faith who hoped to bring the kingdom into the evangelical sphere of the Word of God, given to each and to all. Their defeat, following the inaugural address of Nicholas Cop, and the two Affairs of the Placards, left the way open for the emergence of a sharp division between, on the one hand, a "popery" proclaiming that the End of Time had come, and, on the other, a Calvinism seeking to "de-eschatologize" the human understanding of time.


2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-406
Author(s):  
Duane J. Corpis

Popular Marian devotion played a vital role in the Catholic Church of Germany during the early modern period, especially during the “golden age of religious revival” experienced by post-Tridentine, baroque popular Catholicism. For example, at least ninety-seven local Marian shrines scattered throughout the diocese of Augsburg attracted pilgrims in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The most famous was certainly Andechs, which drew half a million visitors each year in the seventeenth century from all over the Holy Roman Empire. In turn, Catholics from the diocese of Augsburg traveled beyond the bishopric's borders to major and minor shrines near and far, such as Altötting in Bavaria. Yet while major sites dedicated to the Virgin Mary such as Andechs and Altötting reflected theintensityof ongoing popular Marian devotions, thebreadthof the Virgin Mary's cultural significance is signaled by the large number of Marian shrines within the diocese itself, such as Kobel or Violau, which were mostly small, local affairs that attracted primarily nearby populations as pilgrims and supplicants.


2021 ◽  

Between the High Middle Ages and 1806, much of Central Europe was encompassed by an entity called the Holy Roman Empire (Heiliges Römisches Reich in the German spoken by most of its inhabitants). The polity’s name derived from the claims of its rulers—elected as “kings of the Romans” and sometimes subsequently crowned “Roman emperors”—to be successors of Charlemagne and ultimately of antique Rome, and to be the defenders of the Catholic Church and Christendom. Debates continue about when exactly the “Holy Roman Empire” began. Both the 9th-century Carolingian and 10th-century Ottonian realms are contenders, although the Latin term sacrum Romanum imperium did not gain widespread currency until the 13th century. In the period c. 1300–1650, the focus of this bibliography, the Empire exhibited important differences from most other realms in Europe, notably in its elective system of monarchical succession, its residual claim to universal authority (to be co-exercised, in theory, with the papacy), and its exceptional fragmentation among increasingly autonomous principalities, bishoprics, lordships, and cities (often called “territories”). It also notionally housed emerging polities in their own right, such as the Swiss Confederation and the kingdom of Bohemia; their relationship with the premodern Reich remains a contentious historiographical issue. At the same time, it shared some basic characteristics with neighboring kingdoms, being a monarchy that governed in concert with an aristocratic community of estates at emerging representative institutions (the diets, or Reichstage, as they were known by around 1500), and a polity that came increasingly to be identified with a national community (the deutsche Nation). Recent decades have therefore seen lively debates about how the Empire ought to be defined and categorized, and how its “constitution” (Reichsverfassung)—or, in another idiom, its political culture—operated. While several ambitious long-term histories of the Holy Roman Empire have attempted to synthesize the unwieldy evidence, it is important to keep in mind the challenges of generalizing about such a large entity over many centuries. As well as exhibiting considerable diversity across space, the Empire changed substantially over time in several respects. A phase of dynastic competition in high politics before 1437 gave way to a near-monopoly of control over the imperial office by the Habsburgs thereafter. A “monistic” imperial government, theoretically coordinated top-down by monarchs, developed into a “dualistic” conception of power in which the imperial estates shared in governance via collective institutions. In some regions, a landscape of utterly fragmented and intertwined jurisdictions held by myriad competing actors was gradually replaced by more clearly defined and centralized territories arranged hierarchically under princely families. Finally, the division of the estates between Catholics and various Protestant confessions in the course of the 16th and early 17th centuries contributed both to calamitous conflict (the Thirty Years’ War) and to the reshaping of the imperial constitution to manage the new confessional configuration (the 1555 “Religious and Profane Peace” of Augsburg, the 1648 Treaty of Osnabrück). The long and rich tradition of regional history (Landesgeschichte) in the German-speaking lands has enabled these changes to be studied at the local as well as the central level, and recent scholarship has made clear that both perspectives are indispensable to understanding the Holy Roman Empire’s complex structures and dynamics.


2018 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 637-672 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Chilosi ◽  
Max-Stephan Schulze ◽  
Oliver Volckart

This article addresses two questions. First, when and to what extent did capital markets integrate north and south of the Alps? Second, how mobile was capital? Analysing a unique new dataset on pre-modern urban annuities, we find that northern markets were consistently better integrated than Italian markets. Long-term integration was driven by initially peripheral places in the Netherlands and Upper Germany integrating with the rest of the Holy Roman Empire where the distance and volume of inter-urban investments grew primarily in the sixteenth century. The institutions of the Empire contributed to stronger market integration north of the Alps.


Author(s):  
Mathias Schmoeckel

‘The Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation’ cannot easily be explained in the terms of modern states. Deriving its authority from ancient history, it still upheld the aspiration to represent Christian society in secular affairs. Modern notions can hardly describe the structure and the ambition of the empire. The official denomination refers to essential features, which are used here as the fundamental descriptions. Like the four ‘notae’ of the Church in the tradition of the Nicaean creed, these terms may give access to an understanding of the mission and principle errands of the empire. The ‘empire’, therefore, assumes superiority over all other territories. It is ‘holy’ because it protects the one and only Church and ‘Roman’ due to its origin and its aspirations. Furthermore, ‘German nation’ indicates the slow integration into the system of European states.


In the first century of the Common Era, two new belief systems entered long-established cultures with radically different outlooks and values: in that century, missionaries started to spread the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth in the Roman empire and the Buddha in China. Both were not only ancient cultures but also cultures whose elites felt no particular urgency to adopt a new religion. Yet a few centuries later, the two new faiths had become so well established that their names were virtually synonymous with the polities they had entered as strangers. This book brings together specialists in the history and religion of Rome and China with a twofold aim. First, it wishes to explore in detail some of the similarities and differences in the processes by which each religion merged into its new cultural environment. Second, by juxtaposing the two cases, it aims to reveal aspects of these processes that are often overlooked when studying the history of just the one or the other. The approach of this volume is thematic as well as comparative. It provides a series of essays focusing on key questions and specific aspects of the very complex, multifaceted processes of accommodation, assimilation, and contestation that played out in each society. The chapters also showcase methods from different disciplines including history, philology, economic history, and religious studies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document