Summary „A pharmacopoeia for any prescription“ (Paolo Mattia Doria).Machiavelliana after 1700 Recent research has gained many new insights into Machiavelli’s influence on Early Modern European political history. This article focuses on a so far little researched, but decisive stage in the history of Machiavelli’s influence, namely Paolo Mattia Doria’s treatise „La Vita Civile“ (1709/10; further editions in the 18th century), which was written in Naples, a centre of the Early European Enlightenment. In a peculiar mixture of anti-machiavellism that is inspired by Platonic thought and allegiance to Machiavellian ideas, Doria follows the structure and texture of Machiavelli’s „Il Principe“. The political treatise is still coloured by humanist ideas and includes a speculum principis („L’Educazione del Principe“). Despite the similarities, Doria criticizes Machiavelli’s amoral analysis of power politics and postulates, with reference to Machiavelli’s „Discorsi“, an ideal republic or a principality of virtue with a virtuous ruler (principe virtuoso) at the top. In the course of his analysis, Doria re-moralizes Machiavelli’s morally neutral, praxeological concept of virtù. The treatise reflects the fork in the history of Machiavelli’s influence both on a general level and in its details: the ambivalence of „Il Principe“ as political advice for the successful and unscrupulous prince on the one hand but, on the other hand, as an exposure of unscrupulous power politics, written modo obliquo by the passionate Republican whom Rousseau, for example, wanted to see in Machiavelli.
摘要“任何处方的药典”（Paolo Mattia Doria）。1700年后的马基雅维利主义最近的研究对马基雅维利对近代欧洲早期政治史的影响有了许多新的见解。本文关注马基雅维利影响史上一个迄今为止研究较少但具有决定性意义的阶段，即Paolo Matia Doria的论文《文明生活》（1709/10；18世纪的进一步版本），写于早期欧洲启蒙运动的中心那不勒斯。在受柏拉图思想启发的反马基雅维利主义和对马基雅维利思想的忠诚的独特混合中，Doria遵循了马基雅维利的《Principe》的结构和质地。这篇政治论文仍然带有人文主义思想的色彩，并包含了一个推测原则（“L’Educazione del Principe”）。尽管有相似之处，Doria还是批评了马基雅弗利对权力政治和公设的非道德分析，并参考了马基雅维利的《Discorsi》“，一个理想的共和国或美德公国，最高有一位美德的统治者（艺术大师）。在他的分析过程中，多利亚重新道德化了马基雅维利的道德中立、实践论的virtú概念。这篇论文从总体和细节上反映了马基雅弗利影响历史的分叉：“Il principe”的矛盾心理“一方面，作为对成功和肆无忌惮的王子的政治建议，但另一方面，也作为对肆无忌惮的权力政治的揭露，这是热情的共和党人莫多·奥利奥写的，例如卢梭希望在马基雅维利身上看到的。
{"title":"„Ein Arzneibuch für alle Rezepte“ (Paolo Mattia Doria)","authors":"Gisela Schlüter","doi":"10.3790/zhf.45.3.465","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/zhf.45.3.465","url":null,"abstract":"Summary „A pharmacopoeia for any prescription“ (Paolo Mattia Doria).Machiavelliana after 1700 Recent research has gained many new insights into Machiavelli’s influence on Early Modern European political history. This article focuses on a so far little researched, but decisive stage in the history of Machiavelli’s influence, namely Paolo Mattia Doria’s treatise „La Vita Civile“ (1709/10; further editions in the 18th century), which was written in Naples, a centre of the Early European Enlightenment. In a peculiar mixture of anti-machiavellism that is inspired by Platonic thought and allegiance to Machiavellian ideas, Doria follows the structure and texture of Machiavelli’s „Il Principe“. The political treatise is still coloured by humanist ideas and includes a speculum principis („L’Educazione del Principe“). Despite the similarities, Doria criticizes Machiavelli’s amoral analysis of power politics and postulates, with reference to Machiavelli’s „Discorsi“, an ideal republic or a principality of virtue with a virtuous ruler (principe virtuoso) at the top. In the course of his analysis, Doria re-moralizes Machiavelli’s morally neutral, praxeological concept of virtù. The treatise reflects the fork in the history of Machiavelli’s influence both on a general level and in its details: the ambivalence of „Il Principe“ as political advice for the successful and unscrupulous prince on the one hand but, on the other hand, as an exposure of unscrupulous power politics, written modo obliquo by the passionate Republican whom Rousseau, for example, wanted to see in Machiavelli.","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43768988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Philip R. Hoffmann-Rehnitz, A. Krischer, Matthias Pohlig
Decision-Making and History From antiquity on, decisions have been a central topic of historiography. On a conceptual level, historians have rarely thought about the questions what a decision is, how decisions are made, and if deciding has a history. Instead, the terms have been used in amore or less every day manner. After shortly presenting how decisions and decision making have been understood and discussed in historiography, we attempt to identify deciding as a specific type of social action. Deciding is orientated towards producing a decision. As trite as that sounds, it emerges that an explication of this definition could be away to outline deciding/decisions as an object of historical research. We argue that deciding is not as self-evident as it seems but that it is a processual activity based on a number of specific, culturally shaped conditions. The way how decisions are made and the conditions under which they are made are different according to social and cultural contexts. Thus, they have a historical dimension. At the same time, deciding is multidimensional and complex. In order to show this complexity, we present several dimensions that have to be taken into account: the framing of decision-making, its performance, its mediality, materiality, and resources. Finally, we discuss the historicity of decision-making with regard to the distinction between modernity and premodernity.
{"title":"Entscheiden als Problem der Geschichtswissenschaft.","authors":"Philip R. Hoffmann-Rehnitz, A. Krischer, Matthias Pohlig","doi":"10.3790/ZHF.45.2.217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/ZHF.45.2.217","url":null,"abstract":"Decision-Making and History From antiquity on, decisions have been a central topic of historiography. On a conceptual level, historians have rarely thought about the questions what a decision is, how decisions are made, and if deciding has a history. Instead, the terms have been used in amore or less every day manner. After shortly presenting how decisions and decision making have been understood and discussed in historiography, we attempt to identify deciding as a specific type of social action. Deciding is orientated towards producing a decision. As trite as that sounds, it emerges that an explication of this definition could be away to outline deciding/decisions as an object of historical research. We argue that deciding is not as self-evident as it seems but that it is a processual activity based on a number of specific, culturally shaped conditions. The way how decisions are made and the conditions under which they are made are different according to social and cultural contexts. Thus, they have a historical dimension. At the same time, deciding is multidimensional and complex. In order to show this complexity, we present several dimensions that have to be taken into account: the framing of decision-making, its performance, its mediality, materiality, and resources. Finally, we discuss the historicity of decision-making with regard to the distinction between modernity and premodernity.","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46751204","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
During the late 1750s a fundamental shift in the perception of the Moravian Church took place among the upper classes of central Europe. The older view of reality dating from around the year 1750 according to which the Moravians were dangerous sectarians was replaced by the perception that the Moravians were hardworking, obedient, yes almost exemplary subservients. This resulted in the Moravian Church receiving over 100 invitations between 1758 and 1804 from aristocratic houses throughout central Europe to establish a community. This paper shows that the shift in perception took place because both among the subjects and the objects of this perception, fundamental attitudes had changed: from the late 1740s onwards, the Moravian Church had successfully developed its own manufacturing and commercial projects. The new generation of nobility however, which had taken over control in states and/or territories from the 1760s onwards, regarded the economic benefits as a raison d’état. For example, Catholic nobles such as Landgrave Frederick II of Hessen’Kassel were prepared to establish pietistic groups owing to financial considerations. At the same time, aristocratic councillors were turning away from a primarily quantitative population policy and paying more attention to the quality of the settlers. The Seven Years’ War served as a catalyser for this shift in perception because during the years 1757 and 1758, when the fighting paused, several hundred princes and nobles personally took a closer look at Herrnhut. The majority of the aristocratic invitations to establish communities were economically motivated and had the aim of setting up a manufacturing operation. According to the Moravians’ self–perception however, factories were not a sufficient reason to establish a new community. They only felt duty bound to fulfil the Great Commission of the Bible and therefore paid attention to whether an invitation offered the possibility of spreading the Gospel in a territory. Nevertheless, the governing institutions of the Moravian Church did not venture to accept or decline an invitation independently. They figured out the will of Jesus Christ with the help of (usually three) lots. The specific custom of drawing lots could lead to an invitation being declined that was initially favoured, due to a negative result when drawing lots.
{"title":"Von ‘bösen Sektierern’ zu ‘fleißigen Fabrikanten’. Zum Wahrnehmungswandel der Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine im Kontext kameralistischer Peuplierungspolitik (ca. 1750 – 1800)","authors":"Thomas Dorfner","doi":"10.3790/ZHF.45.2.283","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/ZHF.45.2.283","url":null,"abstract":"During the late 1750s a fundamental shift in the perception of the Moravian Church took place among the upper classes of central Europe. The older view of reality dating from around the year 1750 according to which the Moravians were dangerous sectarians was replaced by the perception that the Moravians were hardworking, obedient, yes almost exemplary subservients. This resulted in the Moravian Church receiving over 100 invitations between 1758 and 1804 from aristocratic houses throughout central Europe to establish a community. This paper shows that the shift in perception took place because both among the subjects and the objects of this perception, fundamental attitudes had changed: from the late 1740s onwards, the Moravian Church had successfully developed its own manufacturing and commercial projects. The new generation of nobility however, which had taken over control in states and/or territories from the 1760s onwards, regarded the economic benefits as a raison d’état. For example, Catholic nobles such as Landgrave Frederick II of Hessen’Kassel were prepared to establish pietistic groups owing to financial considerations. At the same time, aristocratic councillors were turning away from a primarily quantitative population policy and paying more attention to the quality of the settlers. The Seven Years’ War served as a catalyser for this shift in perception because during the years 1757 and 1758, when the fighting paused, several hundred princes and nobles personally took a closer look at Herrnhut. The majority of the aristocratic invitations to establish communities were economically motivated and had the aim of setting up a manufacturing operation. According to the Moravians’ self–perception however, factories were not a sufficient reason to establish a new community. They only felt duty bound to fulfil the Great Commission of the Bible and therefore paid attention to whether an invitation offered the possibility of spreading the Gospel in a territory. Nevertheless, the governing institutions of the Moravian Church did not venture to accept or decline an invitation independently. They figured out the will of Jesus Christ with the help of (usually three) lots. The specific custom of drawing lots could lead to an invitation being declined that was initially favoured, due to a negative result when drawing lots.","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49171014","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Korruption in der Frühen Neuzeit. Das Beispiel Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorf, ca. 1570–1721","authors":"O. Ulbricht","doi":"10.3790/zhf.45.1.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/zhf.45.1.1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":"27 1","pages":"1-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84836497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Herrscherin, Ausnahme, Mythos. Neue Publikationen zu Maria Theresia","authors":"K. Keller","doi":"10.3790/ZHF.45.1.83","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/ZHF.45.1.83","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":"77 1","pages":"83-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85911694","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary This article examines justifications for and understandings of serfdom in the early modern Holy Roman Empire. It does this with particular reference to the Wildfang dispute between 1650 and 1669. In this conflict, the Elector Palatine reactivated an old privilege that allowed him to make the subjects of neighbouring rulers his serfs. Under the leadership of the Elector of Mainz, the neighbouring princes protested against these encroachments with tracts and longer pamphlets, diplomatic efforts, and ultimately through warfare. Between the German Peasants’ Wars of the sixteenth and the ‘peasant liberation’ in the nineteenth century, the Wildfang dispute was the only occasion on which a form of serfdom became a matter of wide public debate in the Holy Roman Empire, thus allowing to reconstruct commonly held but rarely recorded views of this institution. Narratives about its origins were a key element in early modern discourses of serfdom, because they allowed to underline the institution’s long tradit...
{"title":"Leibeigenschaft rechtfertigen. Kontroversen um Ursprung und Legitimität der Leibeigenschaft im Wildfangstreit","authors":"L. Scholz","doi":"10.3790/ZHF.45.1.41","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/ZHF.45.1.41","url":null,"abstract":"Summary This article examines justifications for and understandings of serfdom in the early modern Holy Roman Empire. It does this with particular reference to the Wildfang dispute between 1650 and 1669. In this conflict, the Elector Palatine reactivated an old privilege that allowed him to make the subjects of neighbouring rulers his serfs. Under the leadership of the Elector of Mainz, the neighbouring princes protested against these encroachments with tracts and longer pamphlets, diplomatic efforts, and ultimately through warfare. Between the German Peasants’ Wars of the sixteenth and the ‘peasant liberation’ in the nineteenth century, the Wildfang dispute was the only occasion on which a form of serfdom became a matter of wide public debate in the Holy Roman Empire, thus allowing to reconstruct commonly held but rarely recorded views of this institution. Narratives about its origins were a key element in early modern discourses of serfdom, because they allowed to underline the institution’s long tradit...","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":"136 1","pages":"41-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76328816","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary Absolutism is a Source Term after All! On the Appearance of the Word in 18th-Century Poland and the Consequences for the Debate on Absolutism In the discussion about the concept of absolutism, no one so far has questioned the fact that the term was first coined in the 19th century. Nicholas Henshall has gone so far as to demand that the term be banned from historiography of the early modern period. He argues that the first occurrences of the word date from the 1820 s and were meant to denote contemporary monarchies. The term was transferred to historiography only afterwards and in order to designate monarchies of the early modern period, whichwere very different from those of the 19th century. This article challenges Henshall’s claim and argues that the word did in fact already appear with it’s full political meaning during the 18th century in sources from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The first occurrence the author found is in a pamphlet from the time of the interregnum of 1733. The Polish...
{"title":"Absolutismus ist doch ein Quellenbegriff! Zum Auftauchen des Wortes im 18. Jahrhundert in Polen und zu den Konsequenzen für die Absolutismus-Debatte","authors":"M. Faber","doi":"10.3790/ZHF.44.4.635","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/ZHF.44.4.635","url":null,"abstract":"Summary Absolutism is a Source Term after All! On the Appearance of the Word in 18th-Century Poland and the Consequences for the Debate on Absolutism In the discussion about the concept of absolutism, no one so far has questioned the fact that the term was first coined in the 19th century. Nicholas Henshall has gone so far as to demand that the term be banned from historiography of the early modern period. He argues that the first occurrences of the word date from the 1820 s and were meant to denote contemporary monarchies. The term was transferred to historiography only afterwards and in order to designate monarchies of the early modern period, whichwere very different from those of the 19th century. This article challenges Henshall’s claim and argues that the word did in fact already appear with it’s full political meaning during the 18th century in sources from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The first occurrence the author found is in a pamphlet from the time of the interregnum of 1733. The Polish...","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":"321 1","pages":"635-659"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77272620","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Summary Burghers versus Beisassen. Legal-Policy Regulation on Immigration in Early Modern Frankfurt am Main The article examines the immigration of religious and economic refugees to the imperial city of Frankfurt between the mid-16th century and the end of the 18th century. The study focuses on the evolution of legal conditions that determined how someone could become a burgher or a Beisasse, a person with less civil rights. It considers, whether the council granted citizenship in a way that reflected the economic and religious situation in the city. The analysis of the relevant sources reveals that the city was economically dependent on immigrants in the beginning of the 16th century. Eventually, this changed and the immigrants moved into direct competition with the local population. Moreover, many poor labourers migrating to Frankfurt burdened the social system. To stabilize the position of the local population, the council changed the conditions under which the status of Beisasse could be granted in 1...
{"title":"Bürger- und Beisassenrecht. Die rechtspolitische Steuerung der Immigration im frühneuzeitlichen Frankfurt am Main","authors":"Sonja Breustedt","doi":"10.3790/ZHF.44.4.597","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/ZHF.44.4.597","url":null,"abstract":"Summary Burghers versus Beisassen. Legal-Policy Regulation on Immigration in Early Modern Frankfurt am Main The article examines the immigration of religious and economic refugees to the imperial city of Frankfurt between the mid-16th century and the end of the 18th century. The study focuses on the evolution of legal conditions that determined how someone could become a burgher or a Beisasse, a person with less civil rights. It considers, whether the council granted citizenship in a way that reflected the economic and religious situation in the city. The analysis of the relevant sources reveals that the city was economically dependent on immigrants in the beginning of the 16th century. Eventually, this changed and the immigrants moved into direct competition with the local population. Moreover, many poor labourers migrating to Frankfurt burdened the social system. To stabilize the position of the local population, the council changed the conditions under which the status of Beisasse could be granted in 1...","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":"45 1","pages":"597-633"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87011132","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Emotionen und die Geschichte des Politischen. Perspektiven in der Mittelalter- und Frühneuzeitforschung","authors":"H. Ziegler","doi":"10.3790/ZHF.44.4.661","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3790/ZHF.44.4.661","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":"10 1","pages":"661-691"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87590069","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：