Balance of Power vs. Perpetual Peace: Paradigms of European Order from Utrecht to Vienna, 1713-1815

Over the course of the eighteenth century, two major models of European international order emerged as alternatives to universal monarchy: one was based on the balance of power; the other centred on the idea of perpetual peace. This article traces each back to its origins in debates around the momen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International history review 2017-06, Vol.39 (3), p.404-425
1. Verfasser: Ghervas, Stella
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 425
container_issue 3
container_start_page 404
container_title International history review
container_volume 39
creator Ghervas, Stella
description Over the course of the eighteenth century, two major models of European international order emerged as alternatives to universal monarchy: one was based on the balance of power; the other centred on the idea of perpetual peace. This article traces each back to its origins in debates around the moment of the Peace of Utrecht in 1713. In particular, it examines the evolution of the doctrine of balance of power in early eighteenth-century English political thought and then as a legal principle incorporated into the Treaty of Utrecht, before proceeding to the counter-proposal in the form of the Abbé de Saint-Pierre's Plan of Perpetual Peace and the objections it raised. It then shows how Saint-Pierre's paradigm of a league of European states found (albeit in altered form) its way into the Treaty of the Holy Alliance (1815) proposed by Tsar Alexander I after the defeat of Napoleon. It concludes by highlighting the fundamental soundness of the idea of European league, as well as the flaws inherent in the early model of Saint-Pierre.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/07075332.2016.1214613
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_07075332_2016_1214613</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26771110</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26771110</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-a7cce9bd9215ffd968b3c020c187fb3b2435d8ae294c28ba2608439cab1cb0f33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcFO3DAURa2qSJ0Cn4BkiU0XzeBnO4nNqhRRQEJiFsDWchy7zSiJp89JEX9fR0NZdMHKlu459vM1ISfA1sAUO2M1q0sh-JozqNbAQVYgPpAVaKmLqpTsI1ktTLFAn8jnlLaMlTmVK-K-296OztMY6CY-e6R_0ppuPO78NNs-76zz53Rj0bbdzyEt3NWMceftSO-xzULAONDHCb37NdEp0qfOj6P9SqEGUYCC8ogcBNsnf_y6HpLHH1cPlzfF3f317eXFXeGEFlNha-e8blrNoQyh1ZVqhGOcOVB1aETDpShbZT3X0nHVWF4xJYV2tgHXsCDEIfmyP3eH8ffs02SGLjnf5wf6OCcDSkMWpJYZPf0P3cYZxzxdppSAUkoJmSr3lMOYEvpgdtgNFl8MMLNUb_5Vb5bqzWv12TvZe9s0RXyTeFXXAMBy_m2fd2OIONjniH1rJvvSRwyYv6NLRrx_xV8ccZEa</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1883154441</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Balance of Power vs. Perpetual Peace: Paradigms of European Order from Utrecht to Vienna, 1713-1815</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Ghervas, Stella</creator><creatorcontrib>Ghervas, Stella</creatorcontrib><description>Over the course of the eighteenth century, two major models of European international order emerged as alternatives to universal monarchy: one was based on the balance of power; the other centred on the idea of perpetual peace. This article traces each back to its origins in debates around the moment of the Peace of Utrecht in 1713. In particular, it examines the evolution of the doctrine of balance of power in early eighteenth-century English political thought and then as a legal principle incorporated into the Treaty of Utrecht, before proceeding to the counter-proposal in the form of the Abbé de Saint-Pierre's Plan of Perpetual Peace and the objections it raised. It then shows how Saint-Pierre's paradigm of a league of European states found (albeit in altered form) its way into the Treaty of the Holy Alliance (1815) proposed by Tsar Alexander I after the defeat of Napoleon. It concludes by highlighting the fundamental soundness of the idea of European league, as well as the flaws inherent in the early model of Saint-Pierre.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0707-5332</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1949-6540</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/07075332.2016.1214613</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Toronto: Routledge</publisher><subject>18th century ; 19th century ; balance of power ; Congress of Vienna ; Europe ; Holy Alliance ; Paradigms ; Peace ; perpetual peace ; Political power ; Treaty of Utrecht</subject><ispartof>International history review, 2017-06, Vol.39 (3), p.404-425</ispartof><rights>2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor &amp; Francis Group 2016</rights><rights>2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor &amp; Francis Group</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-a7cce9bd9215ffd968b3c020c187fb3b2435d8ae294c28ba2608439cab1cb0f33</citedby><orcidid>0000-0002-1021-848X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26771110$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26771110$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ghervas, Stella</creatorcontrib><title>Balance of Power vs. Perpetual Peace: Paradigms of European Order from Utrecht to Vienna, 1713-1815</title><title>International history review</title><description>Over the course of the eighteenth century, two major models of European international order emerged as alternatives to universal monarchy: one was based on the balance of power; the other centred on the idea of perpetual peace. This article traces each back to its origins in debates around the moment of the Peace of Utrecht in 1713. In particular, it examines the evolution of the doctrine of balance of power in early eighteenth-century English political thought and then as a legal principle incorporated into the Treaty of Utrecht, before proceeding to the counter-proposal in the form of the Abbé de Saint-Pierre's Plan of Perpetual Peace and the objections it raised. It then shows how Saint-Pierre's paradigm of a league of European states found (albeit in altered form) its way into the Treaty of the Holy Alliance (1815) proposed by Tsar Alexander I after the defeat of Napoleon. It concludes by highlighting the fundamental soundness of the idea of European league, as well as the flaws inherent in the early model of Saint-Pierre.</description><subject>18th century</subject><subject>19th century</subject><subject>balance of power</subject><subject>Congress of Vienna</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Holy Alliance</subject><subject>Paradigms</subject><subject>Peace</subject><subject>perpetual peace</subject><subject>Political power</subject><subject>Treaty of Utrecht</subject><issn>0707-5332</issn><issn>1949-6540</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kcFO3DAURa2qSJ0Cn4BkiU0XzeBnO4nNqhRRQEJiFsDWchy7zSiJp89JEX9fR0NZdMHKlu459vM1ISfA1sAUO2M1q0sh-JozqNbAQVYgPpAVaKmLqpTsI1ktTLFAn8jnlLaMlTmVK-K-296OztMY6CY-e6R_0ppuPO78NNs-76zz53Rj0bbdzyEt3NWMceftSO-xzULAONDHCb37NdEp0qfOj6P9SqEGUYCC8ogcBNsnf_y6HpLHH1cPlzfF3f317eXFXeGEFlNha-e8blrNoQyh1ZVqhGOcOVB1aETDpShbZT3X0nHVWF4xJYV2tgHXsCDEIfmyP3eH8ffs02SGLjnf5wf6OCcDSkMWpJYZPf0P3cYZxzxdppSAUkoJmSr3lMOYEvpgdtgNFl8MMLNUb_5Vb5bqzWv12TvZe9s0RXyTeFXXAMBy_m2fd2OIONjniH1rJvvSRwyYv6NLRrx_xV8ccZEa</recordid><startdate>20170601</startdate><enddate>20170601</enddate><creator>Ghervas, Stella</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis, Ltd</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1021-848X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20170601</creationdate><title>Balance of Power vs. Perpetual Peace: Paradigms of European Order from Utrecht to Vienna, 1713-1815</title><author>Ghervas, Stella</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-a7cce9bd9215ffd968b3c020c187fb3b2435d8ae294c28ba2608439cab1cb0f33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>18th century</topic><topic>19th century</topic><topic>balance of power</topic><topic>Congress of Vienna</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Holy Alliance</topic><topic>Paradigms</topic><topic>Peace</topic><topic>perpetual peace</topic><topic>Political power</topic><topic>Treaty of Utrecht</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ghervas, Stella</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>International history review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ghervas, Stella</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Balance of Power vs. Perpetual Peace: Paradigms of European Order from Utrecht to Vienna, 1713-1815</atitle><jtitle>International history review</jtitle><date>2017-06-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>404</spage><epage>425</epage><pages>404-425</pages><issn>0707-5332</issn><eissn>1949-6540</eissn><abstract>Over the course of the eighteenth century, two major models of European international order emerged as alternatives to universal monarchy: one was based on the balance of power; the other centred on the idea of perpetual peace. This article traces each back to its origins in debates around the moment of the Peace of Utrecht in 1713. In particular, it examines the evolution of the doctrine of balance of power in early eighteenth-century English political thought and then as a legal principle incorporated into the Treaty of Utrecht, before proceeding to the counter-proposal in the form of the Abbé de Saint-Pierre's Plan of Perpetual Peace and the objections it raised. It then shows how Saint-Pierre's paradigm of a league of European states found (albeit in altered form) its way into the Treaty of the Holy Alliance (1815) proposed by Tsar Alexander I after the defeat of Napoleon. It concludes by highlighting the fundamental soundness of the idea of European league, as well as the flaws inherent in the early model of Saint-Pierre.</abstract><cop>Toronto</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/07075332.2016.1214613</doi><tpages>22</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1021-848X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0707-5332
ispartof International history review, 2017-06, Vol.39 (3), p.404-425
issn 0707-5332
1949-6540
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_07075332_2016_1214613
source Jstor Complete Legacy
subjects 18th century
19th century
balance of power
Congress of Vienna
Europe
Holy Alliance
Paradigms
Peace
perpetual peace
Political power
Treaty of Utrecht
title Balance of Power vs. Perpetual Peace: Paradigms of European Order from Utrecht to Vienna, 1713-1815
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T17%3A00%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Balance%20of%20Power%20vs.%20Perpetual%20Peace:%20Paradigms%20of%20European%20Order%20from%20Utrecht%20to%20Vienna,%201713-1815&rft.jtitle=International%20history%20review&rft.au=Ghervas,%20Stella&rft.date=2017-06-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=404&rft.epage=425&rft.pages=404-425&rft.issn=0707-5332&rft.eissn=1949-6540&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/07075332.2016.1214613&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E26771110%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1883154441&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26771110&rfr_iscdi=true