How did the basic structure of society in eastern Europe become different from that of western Europe in the early modern period? How and why did the rulers of Austria, Prussia, and Russia manage to build powerful absolutist states?
3 aging empires: A. Holy Roman Empire B. Republic of Poland C. Ottoman Empire 3 emerging states: A. Austria B. Prussia C. Russia
never very strong Voltaire 30 Years War delivered final blow econ, arts, lit, science religious disunity central authority Holy Roman empire in 1648
emperor elected by 9 electors, leaders of imp. German states Habsburg position bargain w/ electors to keep it imperial diet authority to raise troops & taxes lost after 30 Yrs. War
Brandenburg-Prussia not able to become absolutist as a whole, but individual states could: Brandenburg-Prussia (Hohenzollerns) Austria (Habsburgs) 1806 HRE dissolved Austria
Kingdom of Poland + Grand Duchy of Lithuania republic = elected king + constitutional liberties weak central authority real authority = szlachta (landed aristocracy) & regional diets Heterogeneous (diverse) pop. Catholic
1795 end of republic: carved up by stronger, expansionistic states
Similar paths of development up to 1300: trade, towns, pop. expansion into frontier opportunities for socioeconomic advancement
Diverged after 1300: Western Europe serfdom abolished weak lords urban strong middle class strong states strong central authority Eastern Europe serfdom reestablished powerful lords agrarian weak middle class weak empires weak central authority
How did eastern European landlords return peasants to serfdom? (1) made rulers issue laws restricting peasants movement hereditary subjugation = serfdom passes on through generations (2) took over peasants land and labor obligations growth of estate agriculture
How were eastern landlords able to enforce their changes to the condition of the peasantry? Controlled local justice.
Why did serfdom reemerge in eastern Europe? economic interpretation: 14 th -15 th c. agricultural depression & pop. labor shortage landlords tie peasants to land 16 th c. prosperity returns but lords finish what they started flaw in argument: Western Europe had identical economic development but did not reinstate serfdom
Why did serfdom reemerge in eastern Europe? political interpretation: most convincing argument What happened Different concepts of monarchical authority Western Europe strong monarchs = landlords power monarch has sovereignty and protects interests of his people Eastern Europe weak monarchs + war = landlords power monarch is only 1st among equals; does not protect interests of his people
political interpretation (continued): Power of the peasantry Power of the towns & urban classes Western Europe stronger stronger: towns retained greater privileges Eastern Europe weaker uprisings rarely succeeded weaker: landlords took power & privileges away - lords sold directly to foreign capitalists instead of urban merchants - peasants lost right of refuge
Monarchs vs. landlords successful monarchs gained power in 3 key areas: 1) taxation 2) army 3) foreign policy
Habsburgs mostly in HRE, but also outside to SE Austrian rulers = HRE emperors Catholic Habsburg domains to 1795.
30 Years War set stage: Habsburgs (losers) turn inward and eastward to strengthen state events in Bohemia (Phase 1) introduce new nobility loyal to Habsburgs Habsburgs reestablish control over Bohemia
Bohemian Estates (Protestant) revolt against Habsburgs (Catholic) Battle of White Mountain (1620) Bohemian Estates crushed Habsburgs take land/power from Protestant Czech nobles and give it to Catholic Czech nobles = new Bohemian nobility loyal to Habsburgs
Habsburgs reestablish control over Bohemia Protestantism eliminated peasants exploited even more: enforced labour - the robot
1529 & 1683 unsuccessful Ottoman sieges on Vienna Habsburgs acquire Hungary & Transylvania (Romania) from Ottomans new Habsburg state = Austria, Bohemia, + Hungary
common Habsburg ruler but each state kept own laws/gov t (Estates) Pragmatic Sanction (1713) Habsburg possessions are never to be divided and are to be passed to single heir Hungary not fully integrated Hungarian nobles revolted somewhat successfully why and how: religion (Protestant Hungarians vs. Catholic Habsburgs), Hungarian nationalism, Ottoman military support 1703 revolt under Rákóczy Hungarians accept Habsburg rule & Habsburgs restore Hungarian nobility s privileges
Ferdinand II (r. 1619-1637) crushes Bohemian Estates & creates new loyal Bohemian nobility Ferdinand III (r. 1637-1657) consolidates German-speaking provinces (Austria, Styria, Tyrol) creates permanent standing army Charles VI (r. 1711-1740) Pragmatic Sanction (1713) Rákóczy s revolt
Hohenzollerns = elector of Brandenburg & duke of Prussia elector of Brandenburg helps choose Holy Roman emperor 1618 Prussia became possession of elector of Brandenburg when junior branch of Hohenzollern family died out
Hohenzollerns had little power until 30 Years War elector of Brandenburg = position bestowed no real power Brandenburg: land-locked, no natural defenses, poor land Prussia: separated from Brandenburg, basically part of Poland 30 Years War weakened the Estates (rep. assemblies) allowed monarchs to take more power
Frederick William, the Great Elector (r. 1640-1688) Frederick III, the Ostentatious (r. 1688-1713) Frederick William I, the Soldiers King (r. 1713-1740)
strengthened central authority: unified 3 provinces: Brandenburg, Prussia, lands along the Rhine forced Estates to accept permanent taxation w/o their consent created permanent standing army factors enabling his success: foreign invasions Estates more willing to issue funds for army Junkers did not support the towns elector broke town liberties
weak focused on copying Louis XIV s style Frederick III Louis XIV
most influential in est. Prussian absolutism military obsessed strengthened royal authority: created best army in Europe created strong, centralized bureaucracy honest and conscientious worked to develop economy eliminated threat from nobility by enlisting Junkers in army (became officers) almost always at peace civil society became militarized very rigid & disciplined
1250-1700: Russia becomes quite different from W. Europe cause: Russia under brutal foreign rule (Mongols)
unified eastern Slavs Allowed Russian princes who demonstrated good service/loyalty to retain some authority. Muscovite princes served Mongols well given more power. Over time Muscovite princes territory and consolidate power.
Ivan I, Ivan Moneybags (r. 1328-1341) Ivan III (r. 1462-1505) Ivan IV, Ivan the Terrible (r. 1533-1584) Michael Romanov (r. 1613-1645) Alexis (r. 1645-1676) Peter the Great (r. 1682-1725)
stingy made $$$ by lending $ to princes for Mongol tax collection Mongols made him tax collector & great prince
Muscovite power consolidated no longer recognized leadership of Mongol khan hello Russian absolutism! Why did this happen? 1. Ivan III felt strong 2. tsars believed they had to carry on Byzantine legacy (Orthodox Xtianity ; Moscow as Third Rome after Constantinople) monarchy became more powerful than nobility boyard nobility lost power in 15 th c. service nobility new class loyal to tsar
1 st to take title of tsar wars of expansion successful in the E. took Mongol land unsuccessful in the W. (Poland-Lithuania) subjugated boyars reign of terror service nobles demand more from peasants peasants flee and form independent outlaw groups = Cossacks urban traders & artisans bound to towns so Ivan could tax them limited middle class (vs. W. Europe)
Theodore (r. 1584-1598) Time of Troubles (1598-1613) fighting over who would be tsar unsuccessful Cossack rebellion led by Ivan Bolotnikov Michael Romanov (r. 1613-1645) elected by nobles became new hereditary tsar restored power of the tsar
Alexis (r. 1645-1676) 1649 peasants enserfed social class gap widens Alexis split in Russian Orthodox church: Nikon wants reforms along Greek Orthodox model vs. Old Believers want to stick to Russian ways Old Believers persecuted & Russians alienated from church 1670-71 unsuccessful Cossack rebellion led by Stenka Razin
What were his policies? What made him great? Was he really great?