Burbank, Cooper- Empires in World History Flashcards
What is the main argument?
-empires not nation states have been the dominant form of political organisation
-empires capitalised of diversity
-critiques the conventional narrative that suggests a linear progression from empire to nation-state, arguing instead that the dynamics of imperial power have shaped political possibilities and social relations across different contexts
Who is burbank?
Professor of history at New York University. She is known for her scholarship on Russia and its empire, as well as global history more broadly.
Who is Cooper?
Specializes in colonialization, decolonization, and African history.
What are their views on imperial trajectory?
They contend that empires, characterized by their expansionist nature and hierarchical governance of diverse populations, have shaped political structures and relationships far more significantly than the modern notion of the nation-state. By examining the complex interactions, adaptations, and strategies of various empires, the authors emphasize that the trajectory of political development is not a linear progression from empire to nation-state, but rather a multifaceted landscape where the legacies of imperial rule continue to influence contemporary political arrangements and identities.
What is the importance of imperial repertoires?
The study focuses on the diverse strategies employed by empires to govern different populations, emphasizing flexibility and adaptability in their ruling methods.
* Each empire’s approach was shaped by historical context, previous practices, and the geographical landscape, enabling varied responses to imperial challenges.
* Recognizing the concept of “imperial repertoires” allows for a nuanced understanding of how empires negotiated power and managed the struggle between control and autonomy.
* Empires like the Mongols exemplified effective governance through cultural inclusivity and the exploitation of conquered peoples’ skills to enhance imperial strength and stability.
* The exploration of imperial interactions underscores the broader historical implications of power configurations on state-building and political identity.
Do empires have set territory?
- ## empires have no end they can continue to grow, changed and negotiated
how did empires legitimise
- ideology like communism messianic message
-religion
-tradition- from roman empire
-civilisation - power strongest out of other empires- competition
-dynsaty
what makes empires so durable? and why did they give place to other state forms?
strength:
- flexibility
- legitimacy helps instill loyalty
- diversity
- ability to negotiate with locals
- absence of one dominant group
- loyalty to centre
- oppression
- economic- extract of resources
weakness:
- resistance to change
- size
- prone to coalitions in international relations- competition
- separatism
- disregard for peripheries
-oppression
how geography played a role in constraining imperial development?
flexibility of imperial rule
adaptability of empires
empires constraint by history
HRE- protector of Christianity reduced during the reformation
