By consulting rare manuscripts, images, maps, and books, Jonathan Hart explores the relatively neglected empires of Portugal and the Netherlands to draw new conclusions about those of Spain, France, and England (as well as its successor the US). The book ranges from the Portuguese voyages to Africa to the Spanish-American War of 1898 and concentrates on the frictions and shifting rivalries among the empires.

English summary: European Empires with their multi-ethnic societies have long been considered as failures, and their history was often presented as a narrative of mere disintegration and decay. With the ever dominating subject of nation-state formation receding, a new scope for considering empires as the much longer and pervasive alternative in European history opens up. Against this background, this volume contributes to a more systematic comparison of the ambivalent and changing relationships between centre and periphery, between colonizers and colonized in the British Empire, the Habsburg Monarchy, Russia and the Ottoman Empire. The spectrum of such relationships reaches from infrastructures and political conflicts to the practice of monarchy and religion and war experiences. A mere addition of case-studies is avoided by inter-relating the contributions on the basis of comparative comments by leading specialists in the respective fields. German text. German description: Europas Grossreiche waren gepragt von ethnischer Differenz und raumlicher Vielfalt. Gerade diese Pluralitat galt lange als Ursache fur Scheitern und Zerfall. Empires pragten die Geschichte Europas jedoch viel langer und starker als die jungen Nationalstaaten, die unsere Vorstellung von Europa bis heute bestimmen. Die Beitrage dieses Bandes vergleichen systematisch vier europaische Empires im 19. und fruhen 20. Jahrhundert: das Britische Empire, die Habsburgermonarchie, Russland und das Osmanische Reich. Wie spannungsreich die Beziehungen zwischen Zentrum und Peripherie sowie zwischen Herrschern und Beherrschten waren, wird am Beispiel von Infrastrukturen, Konflikten und Kriegserfahrungen ebenso deutlich wie anhand der Praxis von Monarchie und Religion.

Burbank and Cooper examine Rome and China from the third century BCE, empires that sustained state power for centuries.

First comparative analysis of the role of local elites and populations in the formation of the two main Hellenistic empires.

Transcending ethnic, linguistic, and religious boundaries, early empires shaped thousands of years of world history. Yet despite the global prominence of empire, individual cases are often studied in isolation. This series seeks to change the terms of the debate by promoting cross-cultural, comparative, and transdisciplinary perspectives on imperial state formation prior to the European colonial expansion. Two thousand years ago, up to one-half of the human species was contained within two political systems, the Roman empire in western Eurasia (centered on the Mediterranean Sea) and the Han empire in eastern Eurasia (centered on the great North China Plain). Both empires were broadly comparable in terms of size and population, and even largely coextensive in chronological terms (221 BCE to 220 CE for the Qin/Han empire, c. 200 BCE to 395 CE for the unified Roman empire). At the most basic level of resolution, the circumstances of their creation are not very different. In the East, the Shang and Western Zhou periods created a shared cultural framework for the Warring States, with the gradual consolidation of numerous small polities into a handful of large kingdoms which were finally united by the westernmost marcher state of Qin. In the Mediterranean, we can observe comparable political fragmentation and gradual expansion of a unifying civilization, Greek in this case, followed by the gradual formation of a handful of major warring states (the Hellenistic kingdoms in the east, Rome-Italy, Syracuse and Carthage in the west), and likewise eventual unification by the westernmost marcher state, the Roman-led Italian confederation. Subsequent destabilization occurred again in strikingly similar ways: both empires came to be divided into two halves, one that contained the original core but was more exposed to the main barbarian periphery (the west in the Roman case, the north in China), and a traditionalist half in the east (Rome) and south (China). These processes of initial convergence and subsequent divergence in Eurasian state formation have never been the object of systematic comparative analysis. This volume, which brings together experts in the history of the ancient Mediterranean and early China, makes a first step in this direction, by presenting a series of comparative case studies on clearly defined aspects of state formation in early eastern and western Eurasia, focusing on the process of initial developmental convergence. It includes a general introduction that makes the case for a comparative approach; a broad sketch of the character of state formation in western and eastern Eurasia during the final millennium of antiquity; and six thematically connected case studies of particularly salient aspects of this process.

Discusses colonies before 1815 including Spanish, Portuguese, French, Dutch, and British colonies in the Americas and the events leading to their disolution. Then discusses colonies of the British, French, Dutch, Russians, Portuguese, Belgians, Germans and Americans in Africa, Asia, and the Pacific

Although empires have shaped the political development of virtually all the states of the modern world, "imperialism" has not figured largely in the mainstream of scholarly literature. This book seeks to account for the imperial phenomenon and to establish its importance as a subject in the study of the theory of world politics. Michael Doyle believes that empires can best be defined as relationships of effective political control imposed by some political societies—those called metropoles—on other political societies—called peripheries. To build an explanation of the birth, life, and death of empires, he starts with an overview and critique of the leading theories of imperialism. Supplementing theoretical analysis with historical description, he considers episodes from the life cycles of empires from the classical and modern world, concentrating on the nineteenth-century scramble for Africa. He describes in detail the slow entanglement of the peripheral societies on the Nile and the Niger with metropolitan power, the survival of independent Ethiopia, Bismarck's manipulation of imperial diplomacy for European ends, the race for imperial possession in the 1880s, and the rapid setting of the imperial sun. Combining a sensitivity to historical detail with a judicious search for general patterns, Empires will engage the attention of social scientists in many disciplines.

Throughout the 'long 19th century', the Ottoman and Russian empires shared a goal of destroying one another. Yet, they also shared a similar vision for imperial state renewal, with the goal of avoiding revolution, decline and isolation within Europe. Adrian Brisku explores how this path of renewal and reform manifested itself: forging new laws and institutions, opening up the economy to the outside world, and entering the European political community of imperial states. Political Reform in the Ottoman and Russian Empires tackles the dilemma faced by both empires, namely how to bring about meaningful change without undermining the legal, political and economic status quo. The book offers a unique comparison of Ottoman and Russian politics of reform and their connection to the wider European politico-economic space.

This book is a comparative study of imperial organization and longevity that assesses Ottoman successes as well as failures against those of other empires with similar characteristics. Barkey examines the Ottoman Empire's social organization and mechanisms of rule at key moments of its history, emergence, imperial institutionalization, remodeling, and transition to nation-state, revealing how the empire managed these moments, adapted, and averted crises and what changes made it transform dramatically. The flexible techniques by which the Ottomans maintained their legitimacy, the cooperation of their diverse elites both at the center and in the provinces, as well as their control over economic and human resources were responsible for the longevity of this particular 'negotiated empire'. Her analysis illuminates topics that include imperial governance, imperial institutions, imperial diversity and multiculturalism, the manner in which dissent is handled and/or internalized, and the nature of state society negotiations.

This volume provides a multidimensional assessment of the diverse ends of the European colonial empires, addressing different geographies, taking into account diverse chronologies of decolonization, and evaluating the specificities of each imperial configuration under appreciation (Portuguese, Belgian, French, British, Dutch).