Section 1: Conditions in early century Rome Flashcards
1
Q
what was the Holy Roman empire?
A
- a vast empire covering all of central Europe,
- not a single country (nation state)
- a federation made up of over 390 states (prdeominatly German)
2
Q
what did the HRE consist of?
A
- secular states ruled by princes.
- spirtitual states ruled by ‘prince bishops’46 ecclesiastical states ruled by ‘prince bishops’
- some places run by councils, some almost like kingdoms
- largely governed themselves but had a limited alligence to the emperor
3
Q
what is a nation state
A
- a country made up mainly of one nationality
4
Q
why did people in the HRE want a nation state
A
- In the 15th and 16th centuries, a developing sense of German identity began to emerge with the advent of humanist scholars who believed in the need for these states
- in the 16th century nation states were becoming a norm, led by strong monarchies in Spain, France and England
- Even in the 16th century, the concept of a HRE was beginning to seem outdated to some
5
Q
why could the individual states and emperor balance be seen as positive?
A
- smaller states liked it as it protected them from their bigger neighbours.
- most states too small to be safe on their own. The HRE provided defence against external threats (particularly from the France or the Ottoman empire) and to prevent internal conflict
- they needed some sort of central organisation and single leader
- but still allowed them to partially govern on their own without major interference
6
Q
why did the emperor and individual state ratio create conflict
A
- no consistency in how the different states were ruled
- ongoing debate about amount of power princes should have.
- central gvm had to be strong enough to fulfil its functions (defence, law and order) but not so strong that it undermined the autonomy of the states and cites
7
Q
how did the emperor to induivudal sate ratio work
A
- the emperor was more remote and allowed more indolence than countries like england and france
8
Q
what is the emperor
A
the secular head of christendom
9
Q
what was the difficulty of the emperor
A
- huge area, poor communications
- in theory the emperor was supposed to dictate imperial policies, yet due to its size and fragmented nature of the states ,it was difficult to govern effectively
- no good system of taxation made it hard to rule
- large princes wanted as much independence from their emperor as possible
10
Q
how was the emperor chosen
A
- the position was not hereditary
- the emperor was elected by 7 electors (very important princes)
- in theory any prince could stand for election, however the position had gone to a memeber of the Hapsburg family since 1437
11
Q
Why did the position of emperor always go to the Hapsburgs?
A
- they were the biggest landowners in the empire, therefore the only family rich enough for the position
- also their Austrain lands provided a buffer against threats from the Ottoman empire
12
Q
When was Maximilian I emperor from?
A
1493-1519
13
Q
How good of an emperor was Maximiliam I?
A
- he had many great qualities: was cultured, charming, brave and generous, however he was also indecisive
- he was guilty of flitting from one scheme to another but never settling on one
- sometimes distracted from looking at the empire as he’s concerned with whats going on in his own lands
- If he focused on anything it was improving the fortunes of his family through expensive wars in Italy and shrewd marriage alliances
14
Q
how much power did the emperor have?
A
- in theory a lot, title holds greatest honour and status
however in reality, very little: - no salary
- no imperial army
- no effective system of imperial taxation or any of imperial coinage
15
Q
how could the emperor do aything?
A
- he could raise troops to defend the empire, but only with the electors permisssion
- he could raise money he needed for those troops, but had to ask the diet which was dominated by the princes, for the right to tax
- he could arbitrate in disputes between states, but only if asked by the princes
- he could propose reforms, but had no right to directly intervene in the internal affairs n the empire