Heart of Europe: A History of the Roman Empire (132 page)

Notes

INTRODUCTION

1
. James Madison writing in
The Federalist
, 19 (8 Dec. 1787), in E. H. Scott (ed.),
The Federalist and Other Constitutional Papers by Hamilton, Jay, Madison
(Chicago, 1898), pp.103–8 at 105. For a critical reading, see Helmut Neuhaus, ‘The federal principle and the Holy Roman Empire’, in Hermann Wellenreuther (ed.),
German and American Constitutional Thought
(New York, 1990), pp.27–49. For a more positive comparison between the Empire and the US, see also W. Burgdorf, ‘Amerikaner schreiben ihre Verfassung von den Deutschen ab’,
Focus- Online
(23 May 2014),
http://www.focus.de/wissen/experten/burgdorf
(accessed 27 June 2014).

2
. S. Pufendorf,
Die Verfassung des deutschen Reiches
[1667], ed. Horst Denzer (2nd ed. Stuttgart, 1994). Madison had clearly read this, referring to ‘the deformities of this political monster’: Scott (ed.),
The Federalist
, p.106. Voltaire’s comments appeared in 1761 in his
Essai sur les moeurs et l’esprit des nations
, ed. R. Pomeau (Paris, 1963), I, p.683.

3
. B. Schneidmüller, ‘Konsens – Territorialisierung – Eigennutz. Vom Umgang mit spätmittelalterlicher Geschichte’,
FMS
, 39 (2005), 225–46 at 236–8. For recent examples of its persistence, see H. A. Winkler,
Germany: The Long Road West
(2 vols., Oxford, 2006–7), and H. Myers,
Medieval Kingship
(Chicago,1982), pp.120–21. For further discussion, see E. Wolgast, ‘Die Sicht des Alten Reiches bei Treitschke und Erdmannsdörffer’, in M. Schnettger (ed.),
Imperium Romanum – irregulare corpus – Teutscher Reichs-Staat
(Mainz, 2002), pp.169–88.

4
. Again, this view is deeply entrenched in the general and specialist literature: H. Plessner,
Die verspätete Nation
(Stuttgart, 1959); F. Meinecke,
Weltbürgertum und Nationalstaat
(Munich, 1908). The term ‘consolation prize’ comes from Len Scales’ insightful essay ‘Late medieval Germany: An under-Stated nation?’, in L. Scales and O. Zimmer (eds.),
Power and the Nation in European History
(Cambridge, 2005), pp.166–91 at 167.

5
. An influential example of this approach is G. Barraclough,
The Origins of Modern Germany
(Oxford, 1946). Further discussion in W. W. Hagen,
German History in Modern Times
(Cambridge, 2012), pp.6–20, and his ‘Descent of the Sonderweg: Hans Rosenberg’s history of old-regime Prussia’,
CEH
, 24 (1991), 24–50; T. Reuter, ‘The origins of the German Sonderweg? The Empire and its rulers in the high Middle Ages’, in A. J. Duggan (ed.),
Kings and Kingship in Medieval Europe
(London, 1993), pp.179–211.

6
. F. Frensdorff, ‘Reich und Reichstag. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der deutschen Rechtssprache’,
Hansische Geschichtsblätter
, 16 (1910), 1–43; E. Schubert,
König und Reich
(Göttingen, 1979), pp.245–54.

7
. The literature on this is appropriately imperial in scope. Useful contributions include: H. Münkler,
Empires: The Logic of World Domination from Ancient Rome to the United States
(Cambridge, 2007); S. N. Eisenstadt,
The Political Systems of Empires
(Glencoe, IL, 1963); J. Burbank and F. Cooper,
Empires in World History
(Princeton, 2010), pp.1–22.

8
. For example, at 1.2 million square kilometres, Charlemagne’s original empire just makes it into one influential list of empires, but thereafter the Empire disappears from the list by falling below the arbitrary threshold of 1 million square kilometres minimum: P. Turchin, ‘A theory for formation of large empires’,
Journal of Global History
, 4 (2009), 191–217.

9
. M. W. Doyle,
Empires
(Ithaca, 1986).

10
. E.g. N. Ferguson,
Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World
(London, 2003). For a critique, see D. H. Nexon and T. Wright, ‘What’s at stake in the American empire debate’,
American Political Science Review
, 101 (2007), 253–71.

11
. E.g. M. Mazower,
Hitler’s Empire: Nazi Rule in Occupied Europe
(London, 2008).

12
. D. H. Nexon,
The Struggle for Power in Early Modern Europe
(Princeton, 2009); A. J. Motyl, ‘Thinking about empire’, in K. Barkey and M. von Hagen (eds.),
After Empire: Multiethnic Societies and Nation-building
(Boulder, CO, 1997), pp.19–29; S. Kettering, ‘The historical development of political clientelism’,
Journal of Interdisciplinary History
, 18 (1988), 419–47.

13
. I owe this insight to Johannes Burkhardt’s stimulating essay ‘Die Friedlosigkeit der frühen Neuzeit’,
ZHF
, 24 (1997), 509–74.

14
. Münkler,
Empires
, p.85.

15
. Historical periodization is yet another contested field. For convenience, this work uses the convention that late antiquity lasted into the mid-seventh century, followed by the early Middle Ages to about 1000, the high Middle Ages until around 1200, the late Middle Ages to around 1400, and then ‘early modernity’ into the late eighteenth century.

16
. B. Bowden,
The Empire of Civilisation
(Chicago, 2009).

17
. Cited from H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills (eds.),
From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology
(London, 1948), p.78. Useful further discussion is in S. Reynolds, ‘There were states in medieval Europe’,
Journal of Historical Sociology
, 16 (2003), 550–55.

18
. Notable examples include S. Rokkan,
State Formation, Nation-Building, and Mass Politics in Europe
(Oxford, 1999), pp.209–11; G. Benecke,
Society and Politics in Germany, 1500–1750
(London, 1974); G. Schmidt,
Geschichte des Alten Reiches. Staat und Nation in der Frühen Neuzeit 1495–1806
(Munich, 1999); M. Umbach (ed.),
German Federalism
(Basingstoke, 2002); J. Whaley,
Germany and the Holy Roman Empire, 1493–1806
(2 vols., Oxford, 2012). Critique in A. Kohler, ‘Das Heilige Römische Reich – ein Föderativsystem?’, in T. Fröschl (ed.),
Föderationsmodelle und Unionsstrukturen
(Munich, 1994), pp.119–26. For the discussion of federal ideas by early modern writers, see H. H. F. Eulau, ‘Theories of federalism under the Holy Roman Empire’,
American Political Science Review
, 35 (1941), 643–64.

19
. Scott (ed.),
The Federalist
, p.106.

20
. R. L. Watts,
Comparing Federal Systems
(2nd ed., Montreal, 1999), esp. pp.6–9. For the following, see also the extremely interesting comparison of the Empire and the US by R. C. Binkley, ‘The Holy Roman Empire versus the United States’, in C. Read (ed.),
The Constitution Reconsidered
(2nd ed., New York, 1968), pp.271–84.

21
. Much of this literature is cited in Chapter 7. See also Barbara Stollberg-Rilinger’s introduction to her (ed.),
Vormoderne politische Verfahren
(Berlin, 2001), pp.11–23; K. Rohe, ‘Politische Kultur und ihre Analyse’,
HZ
, 250 (1990), 321–46.

22
. B. Schneidmüller, ‘Konsensuale Herrschaft’, in P.-J. Heinig et al. (eds.),
Reich, Regionen und Europain in Mittelalter und Neuzeit
(Berlin, 2000), pp.53–87, and his ‘Zwischen Gott und den Getreuen. Vier Skizzen zu den Fundamenten der mittelalterlichen Monarchie’,
FMS
, 36 (2002), 193–224; G. Althoff,
Die Macht der Rituale: Symbolik und Herrschaft im Mittelalter
(Darmstadt, 2003).

23
. C. Tilly, ‘How empires end’, in Barkey and von Hagen (eds.),
After Empire
, pp.1–11 at 4. Here, the Empire is similar to other empires, for example China, where the effectiveness of the imperial authority ‘depended on the minimization of formal governmental intervention in the affairs of local communities’: R. A. Kapp,
Szechwan and the Chinese Republic: Provincial Militarism and Central Power, 1911–1938
(New Haven, CT, 1973), p.2.

24
. K. Epstein,
The Genesis of German Conservatism
(Princeton, 1966); L. Krieger,
The German Idea of Freedom
(Chicago, 1957); P. Blickle,
Obedient Germans? A Rebuttal
(Charlottesville, VA, 1997).

25
. A. Lüdtke,
Police and State in Prussia, 1815–1850
(Cambridge, 1989); H.-U. Wehler,
Deutsche Gesellschaftsgeschichte
(5 vols., Munich, 2008). Further discussion in D. Langewiesche,
Liberalism in Germany
(Basingstoke, 2000).

26
. K. H. Wegert,
German Radicals Confront the Common People: Revolutionary Politics and Popular Politics, 1789–1849
(Mainz, 1992).

27
. As claimed by P. C. Hartmann,
Das Heilige Römische Reich deutscher Nation in der Neuzeit 1486–1806
(Stuttgart, 2005), esp. pp.163–4. Further discussion of this point on pp.680–86.

28
. B. M. Bedos-Rezak, ‘Medieval identity: A sign and a concept’,
AHR
, 105 (2000), 1489–533.

29
. Some have interpreted this as the origins of ‘spin’: A. Wakefield,
The Disordered Police State: German Cameralism as Science and Practice
(Chicago, 2009), pp.9–13, 136–8. See more generally A. Gestrich,
Absolutismus und Öffentlichkeit. Politische Kommunikation in Deutschland zu beginn des 18. Jahrhunderts
(Göttingen, 1994), pp.34–56.

CHAPTER 1: TWO SWORDS

1
. G. Koch,
Auf dem Wege zum Sacrum Imperium. Studien zur ideologischen Herrschaftsbegründung der deutschen Zentralgewalt im 11. und 12. Jahrhundert
(Vienna, 1972), p.273; E. Müller-Mertens, ‘Imperium und Regnum im Verhältnis zwischen Wormser Konkordat und Goldener Bulle’,
HZ
, 284 (2007), 561–95 at 573–5. For the various titles and their use, see H. Weisert, ‘Der Reichstitel bis 1806’,
Archiv für Diplomatik
, 40 (1994), 441–513.

2
. P. Heather,
The Goths
(Oxford, 1996).

3
. M. Todd,
The Early Germans
(2nd ed., Oxford, 2004), pp.225–38; R. Collins,
Early Medieval Europe, 300–1000
(Basingstoke, 1991).

4
. H. J. Mierau,
Kaiser und Papst im Mittelalter
(Cologne, 2010), pp.26–39.

5
. T. F. X. Noble,
The Republic of St Peter: The Birth of the Papal State, 680–825
(Philadelphia, 1984). Further discussion of the Patrimonium on pp.189–93.

6
. D. A. Bullough, ‘Empire and emperordom from late antiquity to 799’,
EME
, 12 (2003), 377–87 at 384–5.

7
. R. McKitterick,
The Frankish Kingdoms under the Carolingians
(Harlow, 1983), pp.16–76; M. Costambeys et al.,
The Carolingian World
(Cambridge, 2011), pp.31–79.

8
. R. Schieffer,
Der Karolinger
(4th ed., Stuttgart, 2006).