scholarly journals East Central Europe in the First Globalization (1850-1914)

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-90
Author(s):  
Uwe Müller
Keyword(s):  
Central Europe ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Habsburg Monarchy ◽  
East Central Europe ◽  
East Central ◽  
Positioning Strategy ◽  
Economic Elites ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
European Economies ◽  
German Reich

Summary The article analyzes the position and the positioning strategy of East Central Europe in the so-called “first globalization (1850-1914)”. The focus is on foreign trade and the transfer of the two most important production factors, i.e. capital and labor. East Central Europe included in this period the territories of the Habsburg Monarchy, the Kingdom of Poland as a part of the Russian Empire, and the eastern provinces of the Kingdom of Prussia which were from 1871 onwards part of the German Reich. The article combines the theories and methods of economic history and transnational history. It sees itself as a contribution to a trans-regional history of East Central Europe by analyzing first the main “flows” and then the influence of “controls”. The article analyzes to what extent and in what way East Central Europe was involved in the globalization processes of the late 19th century. It discusses whether East Central Europe was only the object of global developments or even shaped them. In this context it asks about the role of the empires (Habsburg monarchy, German Reich, Russia) for the position of East Central European economies in the world economy. It shows that the economic elites in the centers but also on the edges of the empires developed different strategies for how to respond to the challenges of globalization.

Monuments and Memory: Immortalizing Count M. N. Muraviev in Vilna, 1898

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 551-564
Author(s):  
Theodore R. Weeks
Keyword(s):  
Central Europe ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Historical Event ◽  
East Central Europe ◽  
East Central ◽  
Historical Memories ◽  
The Russian Empire

Ernest Renan argued over a century ago that belonging to a nation entails forgetting just as much as it required remembering past events. Certainly this is the case in East Central Europe, where not infrequently different nationalities create out of a single historical event utterly opposing historical memories. In the western borderlands of the Russian Empire, one historical event that has been variously interpreted by different nationalities is the Insurrection of 1863. To simplify somewhat, prerevolutionary Russian historians generally interpreted this key event as a mutiny against the established legal order—the term miatezh (mutiny) was always used in such accounts—while the Poles interpreted the uprising as perhaps naive and foolish, but in any case a noble attempt to regain rights usurped by the Russian occupiers. With such a sharply opposed memory of the uprising as a whole, it comes as no surprise that the figure who did the most to crush the insurrection in the Northwest (Lithuanian and Belarusian) provinces, Count M. N. Muraviev, should also be a controversial figure, praised by conservative Russians and demonized by Poles, Lithuanians, and liberals of all nationalities.

scholarly journals Assimilation and Nationalism in East Central Europe During the Last Century of Habsburg Rule

1983 ◽  
pp. 20
Author(s):  
Istvan Deak
Keyword(s):  
Central Europe ◽  
Recent History ◽  
Habsburg Monarchy ◽  
East Central Europe ◽  
East Central ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
History Of ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Social Upheaval

The recent history of East Central Europe has been marked by wars, political and social upheaval, and extra-ordinary economic and technological advances. But few changes are likely to be of more lasting significance than the disappearance, step by step, of multinational states and their replacement by national ones. The Habsburg Monarchy, which once encompassed almost all ofEast Central Europe, was composed of eleven major1 and scores of minor nationalities. Although the Habsburgs were German princes and the main menarchial institution, the Army, used German as its language of command, the ruling house showed no preference for any one nationality during the entire periodof its existence. The multinational character of the Monarchy was weakened, but not eliminated by the Compromise Agreement of 1867, which divided the realm into two associated estates: the Austrian Empire (or - Cisleithania) and the Hungarian Kingdom (or Transleithania). In the first of these states, the German element played the strongest role but was far from dominant, either politically, economically, or numerically. In the second state, the Magyar nation's numerical superiority was precarious at best, but its political domination was very real2.

Considering the Sub-Regional Cooperation in East-Central Europe – Some Conclusions on Integrating and Disintegrating Tendencies in the Sub-Regional Dialogue

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacek Wieclawski
Keyword(s):  
Central Europe ◽  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
East Central Europe ◽  
East Central ◽  
New Ideas ◽  
Ukrainian Crisis ◽  
Regional Interests ◽  
Visegrad Group ◽  
East Central European

This article discusses the problems of the sub-regional cooperation in East-Central Europe. It formulates the general conclusions and examines the specific case of the Visegrad Group as the most advanced example of this cooperation. The article identifies the integrating and disintegrating tendencies that have so far accompanied the sub-regional dialogue in East-Central Europe. Yet it claims that the disintegrating impulses prevail over the integrating impulses. EastCentral Europe remains diversified and it has not developed a single platform of the sub-regional dialogue. The common experience of the communist period gives way to the growing difference of the sub-regional interests and the ability of the East-Central European members to coordinate their positions in the European Union is limited. The Visegrad Group is no exception in this regard despite its rich agenda of social and cultural contacts. The Russian-Ukrainian conflict confirms a deep divergence of interests among the Visegrad states that seems more important for the future of the Visegrad cooperation than the recent attempts to mark the Visegrad unity in the European refugee crisis. Finally, the Ukrainian crisis and the strengthening of the NATO’s “Eastern flank” may contribute to some new ideas of the sub-regional cooperation in East-Central Europe, to include the Polish-Baltic rapprochement or the closer dialogue between Poland and Romania. Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v10i1.251  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document