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
not able to become absolutist as a whole, but individual states could:
Brandenburg-Prussia (Hohenzollerns)
Austria (Habsburgs)
1806 – HRE dissolved
Brandenburg-Prussia
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 Eastern Europe
serfdom abolished serfdom reestablished
weak lords powerful lords
urban agrarian
strong middle class weak middle class
strong states – strong central
authority
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:
14th-15th c. agricultural depression & pop.
labor shortage
landlords tie peasants to land
16th 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
Western Europe Eastern Europe
What
happened
strong monarchs =
landlords power
weak monarchs + war =
landlords power
Different
concepts of
monarchical
authority
monarch has sovereignty
and protects interests of
his people
monarch is only 1st
among equals; does not
protect interests of his
people
political interpretation (continued):
Western Europe Eastern Europe
Power of the
peasantry
stronger weaker – uprisings rarely
succeeded
Power of the
towns &
urban
classes
stronger: towns
retained greater
privileges
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 15th c.
service nobility – new class loyal to tsar
1st 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
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
Alexis
What were his policies? What made him “great”? Was he really great?