Imperialism

Author(s):  
Krishan Kumar

Imperialism relates to the theory and practice of the European empires of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. There were European empires before that, many of which had a continuous history from those earlier times well into the twentieth century. These include some of the best known: the Ottoman; Portuguese; Spanish; Austrian; Russian; Dutch; British; and French empires, all of which had their origins in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Running alongside these was the even longer-lasting though sometimes ineffectual Holy Roman Empire, whose important role in keeping the imperial idea alive in the Middle Ages and beyond has unfairly been slighted owing to the popularity of Voltaire's quip that it was “neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire.” For some students of empire, empire represents an ever-present possibility, because imperialism is a drive that is inherent in the very nature of human society and politics. The most influential theory of modern imperialism was penned not by a Marxist or even a socialist but by a self-professed English liberal, J. A. Hobson.

1988 ◽  
Vol 57 (S1) ◽  
pp. 89-107
Author(s):  
Manfred Fleischer

Religious division has determined Germany's destiny. In the Middle Ages, it was the struggle between Emperor and Pope which doomed the Holy Roman Empire. During the Reformation, and the Thirty Years' War, it was Protestantism as well as the anti-Imperial diplomacy of the Pope and the French cardinals, which prevented the emergence of a national state and a centralized government. “From the split of the church dates all our misfortune,” complained in 1846 the Lutheran historian Johann Friedrich Böhmer, editor of a major medieval source collection. “It is a pity that the nation in the heart of Europe was drawn away from its political profession by quarrels with the church, that the development of strong political institutions was interrupted, that they eroded under the acids of religious passion and negation, so that the German people finally got into a stage of the disease where they are either seized by violent fever, or rot in apathy and despair. All our inner ferment which soon will erupt in a revolutionary outburst, all our political impotence and lethargy were, in the final analysis, caused by the split of the church, which tore us apart, and which no one can bridge. Only a new St. Boniface who would restore ecclesiastical unity could help us.”


2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 449-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernd Schneidmüller

This article analyses specific characteristics of pre-modern rule in medieval central Europe. It becomes clear from the analysis that although the notion of monarchy implies a single ruler (mon-archia), it was actually the case, however, that in political practice, the kings and rulers of the Holy Roman Empire had to come to an arrangement with the elites and nobles. Therefore, the famous model developed by Max Weber regarding the three types of legitimate rule: legal, traditional and charismatic, fall short of encompassing the alterity and plurality of politics in the Middle Ages. Here, the concept of consensual rule is conceptualised through the use of additional case studies. These case studies more appropriately capture the fluid decision-making process in the Middle Ages through ongoing negotiation. Thus, the kings and emperors are clearly integrated into the framework of pre-modern oligarchies and therefore offer a counter-outline to the doctrine of divine right.


1969 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manfred Fleischer

Religious division has determined Germany's destiny. In the Middle Ages, it was the struggle between Emperor and Pope which doomed the Holy Roman Empire. During the Reformation, and the Thirty Years' War, it was Protestantism as well as the anti-Imperial diplomacy of the Pope and the French cardinals, which prevented the emergence of a national state and a centralized government. “From the split of the church dates all our misfortune,” complained in 1846 the Lutheran historian Johann Friedrich Böhmer, editor of a major medieval source collection.


2001 ◽  
pp. 225-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milos Blagojevic

According to the simplified Byzantine idea, which was never discarded, the Byzantine basileus is the God's elected ruler. He is the only legitimate emperor in the world because he is the legitimate heir of Roman emperors. Apart from Byzantium, a series of other sovereign states existed throughout the Middle Ages on the territory of the former Roman Empire. That condition lead to the formulation of a sustainable interpretation of the conjured hierarchy of rulers and states. At the top of the fictitious ladder stood only the Byzantine emperor, and, at its bottom, rulers of the lowest rank to whom the emperor issued "orders". All other rulers were distributed between these two instances along the fictitious ladder of hierarchy, depending on their power and the esteem they enjoyed. At the same time, the Byzantine basileus was also perceived as the "spiritual parent" of the Christian nations and rulers who, on the otherhand, depending on their esteemed, boasted varying degrees of "spiritual kinship" with the emperor. These Byzantine concepts were adopted by Stefan Nemanja and his heirs, so that, at times, in medieval Serbia they were real and not fictitious. In the last decades of the XIV century, the power and esteem of Byzantium waned rapidly. The Empire had to take on difficult obligations towards the Ottoman Turks of which she was freed only after the Battle of Ankara (1402). The liberation from demeaning commitments brought on a revival of the ever present concept of ideal supremacy of the Byzantine emperor, especially among rulers in the Balkans. Such ideas were adopted by Constantine of Kostenec, the author of the Vita of Stefan Lazarevic, who, however, added certain corrections, conforming them to the views of the Serbian spiritual elite. According to the treaty of Gallipoli, sultan Suleiman accepted (1403) emperor Manuel II Palaiologos as his "father", a fact known also to Constantine the Philosopher, as was later also repeated by sultan Mehmed I. At the time when, in 1410, Stefan Lazarevic received for the second time the crown of despots from Manuel II, relations between the Byzantine basileus and the Serbian despots were defined as those of "father and son". By those means, Constantine the Philosopher elevates the position of the Serbian ruler to the level once held by king Milutin following his marriage to Simonis. The author of the Vita of Stefan Lazarevic took strict care to state the noble rank of the Serbian despots and thus matched it with those of sultan Mehmed I and the contender to the throne, Musa, who addressed the despots as "brother". Constantine the Philosopher makes no mistake either when referring to the king of Hungary and emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, Sigismund, whose vassal Stefan was. Regardless, of such ties between the two rulers, Sigismund is never mentioned as the despots' "parent" but solely as his "comrade"(ally), probably because the Hungarian king belonged to the oicumene of Western and not Eastern Christianity and could thus by no means have been a "spiritual parent" to the Orthodox Serbian despots.


Author(s):  
R.M. Valeev ◽  
O.D. Vasilyuk ◽  
S.A. Kirillina ◽  
A.M. Abidulin

Abstract The study of the Turkic, including Asia Minor sociopolitical, cultural and ethnolinguistic space of Eurasia is a long and significant tradition of practical, academic and university centers in Russia and Europe, including Ukraine. The Turkic, including the Ottoman political and cultural heritage played a particularly important role in the history and culture of the peoples of Russia, Ukraine and modern Turkic states. Famous states and societies of the Turkic world (Turkic Khaganates, Volga Bulgaria, Ulus Juchi, the Ottoman Empire and other states of the Middle Ages and the New Age), geographical and historical-cultural regions of the traditional residence of the Turkic peoples of the Russian and Ottoman empires and Eurasia as a whole became the object and subject of scientific studies of Russian and European orientalists Turkologists and Ottomans of the nineteenth beginning of the twentieth century.Аннотация Исследование тюркского, в том числе малоазиатского социополитического, культурного и этнолингвистического пространства Евразии является давней и значимой традицией практических, академических и университетских центров России и Европы, в том числе Украины. Особо важную роль тюркское, в том числе османское политическое и культурное наследие играло в истории и культуре народов России, Украины и современных тюркских государств. Известные государства и общества тюркского мира (Тюркские каганаты, Волжская Булгария, Улус Джучи, Османская империя и другие государства Средневековья и Нового времени), географические и историко-культурные регионы традиционного проживания тюркских народов Российской и Османской империй и в целом Евразии стали объектом и предметом научных исследований российских и европейских востоковедов тюркологов и османистов ХIХ начала ХХ в.


Author(s):  
Duncan Hardy

The Holy Roman Empire, and especially Upper Germany, was notoriously politically fragmented in the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries. A common way to interpret this fragmentation has been to view late medieval lordships, particularly those ruled by princes, as incipient ‘territories’, or even ‘territorial states’. However, this over-simplifies and reifies structures of lordship and administration in this period, which consisted of shifting agglomerations of assets, revenues, and jurisdictions that were dispersed among and governed by interconnected networks of political actors. Seigneurial properties and rights had become separable, commoditized, and highly mobile by the later middle ages, and these included not only fiefs (Lehen) but also loan-based pledges (Pfandschaften) and offices, all of which could be sold, transferred, or even ruled or exercised by multiple parties at once, whether these were princes, nobles, or urban elites. This fostered intensive interaction between formally autonomous political actors, generating frictions and disputes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document