László Kontler, Antonella Romano, Silvia Sebastiani and Borbala Zsuzsanna Török eds. Negotiating Knowledge in Early-Modern Empires: a Decentered View. Studies in Cultural and Intellectual History, New York: Palgrave Publishers, 2014. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Re-examining Empires from the Margins: Towards a New Imperial History of Europe
2021
This workshop will bring together scholars working at the forefront of new research into the imperial entanglements of European spaces not conventionally thought of as major imperial powers (e.g. the Nordic countries and parts of Central and Eastern Europe). The purpose of the event is to provide an opportunity to take stock and learn from each other, but also to identify gaps in the emerging literature and push the field into fruitful new directions transcending individual national contexts.
The present book is the result of the conference ‘Renovatio, inventio, absentia imperii. From the Roman Empire to Contemporary Imperialism’, held in Brussels at the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the Academia Belgica in Rome (September 11-13, 2014). At the heart of the conference was the ‘reception’, ‘Nachleben’ or ‘permanence’ of the Roman Empire, of an idea and a historical paradigm which since classical Antiquity has supported the most widespread claims to obtain and consolidate power. The volume’s focus is on culture in a broad sense, i.e. including besides the arts, philosophy, religion and, most importantly, discourse. As such, a wide array of themes are subjected to academic scrutiny. Whereas the main focus is on Europe and North America, some contributors also reach out towards non-Western contexts, whether or not directly related to the Roman example. A theoretical and sociological dimension is also added thanks to the discussion on methodological issues. More specifically, the following question(s) receive particular attention: what is our position as researchers, embedded in a contemporary, often Western, democratic and capitalist context; what about the notion of empire itself, its constituent elements and the kind of ideological prerogatives to which it is generally subjected; in other words, apart from the many historical variants and instances of reception of empire, through which filters can, and inevitably do, we approach this topic? A question that has become ever more pregnant since the beginning of the twenty-first century, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the events of September 11, which have revivified what could be called American ‘imperialism’, and at a time when an essentially economic variant, driven by ‘emerging’ powers such as China, has increasingly contested existing power structures. In light of such meta-historical awareness, this book touches as much on the nature of the Roman Empire as it does on its historical legacy and, more importantly so, on who claims the latter inheritance throughout the most diverse epochs. By discussing some highly contrasting views upon this topic, participants explore issues that are of fundamental importance to the writing, not only of cultural history, but also of history itself.
The present book is the result of the conference ‘Renovatio, inventio, absentia imperii. From the Roman Empire to Contemporary Imperialism’, held in Brussels at the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the Academia Belgica in Rome (September 11-13, 2014). At the heart of the conference was the ‘reception’, ‘Nachleben’ or ‘permanence’ of the Roman Empire, of an idea and a historical paradigm which since classical Antiquity has supported the most widespread claims to obtain and consolidate power. The volume’s focus is on culture in a broad sense, i.e. including besides the arts, philosophy, religion and, most importantly, discourse. As such, a wide array of themes are subjected to academic scrutiny. Whereas the main focus is on Europe and North America, some contributors also reach out towards non-Western contexts, whether or not directly related to the Roman example. A theoretical and sociological dimension is also added thanks to the discussion on methodological issues. More specifically, the following question(s) receive particular attention: what is our position as researchers, embedded in a contemporary, often Western, democratic and capitalist context; what about the notion of empire itself, its constituent elements and the kind of ideological prerogatives to which it is generally subjected; in other words, apart from the many historical variants and instances of reception of empire, through which filters can, and inevitably do, we approach this topic? A question that has become ever more pregnant since the beginning of the twenty-first century, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the events of September 11, which have revivified what could be called American ‘imperialism’, and at a time when an essentially economic variant, driven by ‘emerging’ powers such as China, has increasingly contested existing power structures. In light of such meta-historical awareness, this book touches as much on the nature of the Roman Empire as it does on its historical legacy and, more importantly so, on who claims the latter inheritance throughout the most diverse epochs. By discussing some highly contrasting views upon this topic, participants explore issues that are of fundamental importance to the writing, not only of cultural history, but also of history itself.
Review of Event: Empires: Towards a Global History
"Territorialization processes in open inter-imperial frontiers: the Río de la Plata in the crossing of the Iberian empires (XVIII-XIX centuries)" During the second half of the eighteenth century both Iberian monarchies sought to reinvent themselves as commercial empires with the task of breaking the relative backwardness of England, which emerged as the most successful imperial regime. Within the framework of this inter-imperial competition, each monarchy carried out a process of territorialization of its domains, which implied, on the one hand, to know better the potential that each specific region could have in productive and strategic terms for the benefit of the empire as a whole, and, on the other, to improve the link between metropolis and colony, making it more virtuous for both parties. In this context, and together with the patriotic descriptions and exaltations of the territory -or passionate physiographies- elaborated by officials interested in the renewal of their respective monarchies, a process of singularization of the diverse territories that composed those empires was carried out. In the present paper we intend to understand this process of territorialization for a specific case, the Rio de la Plata, characterized by being a frontier between both Iberian empires and the scenario for strong disputes for the occupation of the space that also other empires tried to conquer. Based on the study of the speeches about the territory by Iberian officials settled in the region in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century we intend to show some specificities of these processes in regions of open imperial borders. In these spaces the passionate physiographies were still projects for the effective occupation of the area and one of the various methods of dispute over the territory. However, by singling out the potentialities of a region, these patriotic discourses opened up paths of identification with those spaces and put together a set of knowledge about the territory that was later used in a new ideological context, characterized by the appearance of states that later on were known as República Oriental del Uruguay, and Província de Rio Grande do Sul in the south of the Brazilian Empire.
Ethics & International Affairs, 2011
In 2001, Frederick Cooper wrote that 'globalization talk is influential-and deeply misleading-for assuming coherence and direction instead of probing causes and processes'.(1) Burbank and Cooper heed this warning and focus very clearly and ably on the causes and processes of global empire building in this new book. They join a flurry of recent books linking empire, imperialism, and global or world history. Building on the groundbreaking works in this genre (2), this book differentiates itself by beginning in ancient Rome, rather than the 15th or 16th century, and expressly stating that it does not want to explain 'the expansion of Europe' (p. 5). While this may be strictly true, the traditional 'expansion of Europe' has here been replaced with 'the expansion of Eurasia' and the book does not really touch in great detail on the African empires (with which Cooper is undoubtedly familiar), or the pre-Columbian American empires. However, the book is successful in expanding the traditional story to encompass a wider Eurasian scope, drawing, undoubtedly, on Burbank's expertise in Russian history. The authors' unique contribution is that they 'focus instead on how different empires emerged, competed, and forged governing strategies, political ideas, and human affiliations over a long sweep of time' (p. 2).
Diplomacy between and within empires: Early modern perspectives Venue: Central European University, Nador u. 13, N13 223 The panel explores shared themes across diverse geopolitical relationships in 17th and 18th cen- tury Habsburg, Ottoman, Mughal and Dutch diplomacy. It proposes that diplomatic practices developed in a more complex, multifarious and globally interconnected manner than the modern European, state-focused and national paradigm allows. Cumulatively, the three presentations, by virtue of their broad geographical range, further our understanding of the development of dip- lomatic phenomena in world history over long stretches of time and contribute to wider debates about the nature of cross-cultural encounters and the commensurability of di erent political cultures. Providing a broad early modern perspective on empires and foreign relations, the panel makes an important contribution to one of the key themes of the conference: ‘inter-imperial and international relations and forms of cooperation and competition; actors, institutions, and issues of cross-border collaboration’. Our contributors’ strong focus on the processes and signi cance of cultural exchanges between polities and imperial institutions challenges the conventional Eu- rope / Asia divide and reveals shared sociocultural assumptions, whilst also highlighting cultural di erence and demonstrating that it was possible for diplomats to negotiate the norms and codes of the polities to which they were sent. e three presentations and the commentary raise some of the key issues that are currently reshaping the eld of diplomatic history: who could claim diplomatic agency and in what circumstances? What are the social and cultural contexts in which diplomacy was practised? How do modern notions of state sovereignty change when placed in global and imperial contexts? Gabor Kármán (Budapest) demonstrates that Ottoman provinces and vassals used diplomatic ceremonial in order to claim relative independence and to mediate be- tween their con icting roles as sovereign princes in international relations, on the one hand, and tributaries to the Ottoman Empire, on the other. Highlighting the permeability of diplomatic activity, the panel o ers important insights into the ways in which the limits of diplomatic agency were marked by symbolic communication and how shrewd role-switching could enhance ambas- sadors’ ability to facilitate ongoing relations between polities of di erent cultural backgrounds. Guido van Meersbergen’s (Florence) paper shi s the emphasis from political structures and their representation to the level of individual actors and their roles in shaping international relations. He explores merchant-diplomacy in Bengal during the Mughal War of Succession (1657–1660), studying the roles that mercantile diplomats could assert as well as the tensions arising from their multivalent identities as representatives of a polity and a company. Diplomats’ ability to familiar- ize themselves with the cultural norms of socializing at their host court was essential to their success. Focusing on Ottoman networks in Vienna, Do Paço (Paris) demonstrates how diplomats mastered the sociocultural conventions of their hosts and became integrated into the social life of both city and court. e panel commentary will link the three papers in comparative perspective and elaborate the methodological implications of ‘imperial diplomacy’ more broadly. e panel builds on recent ground-breaking work in diplomatic history and cultural history to o er an im- portant new intervention in the ongoing reassessment of early modern international relations. e three presentations form part of a volume that the panel chair (Tracey Sowerby, Oxford) and the panel commentator (Jan Hennings, Budapest) are currently preparing for publication in the Routledge Research in Early Modern History series. e volume, entitled ‘Practices of Diplomacy in the Early Modern World (ca.1410–1800), is scheduled for publication in autumn 2017. Acknowledgement: is panel is supported by Sciences Po Paris, the Leverhulme Trust and the Uni- versity of Oxford. Convenors: Jan Hennings (Budapest), Tracey Sowerby (Oxford) Chair: Tracey Sowerby (Oxford) Commentator: Jan Hennings (Budapest) Papers: Guido van Meersbergen (Warwick): Merchant-diplomacy in Bengal during the Mughal War of Succession (1657–1660) Gábor Kármán (Budapest): Transylvanian diplomats at Buda: Relations between provinces and tributaries in Ottoman international society David Do Paço (Paris): Familiarity in cross-cultural diplomacy: Ottoman embassies in Vienna and the rise of a trans- imperial elite, 1740–1792