Democracy was no more than a marginal force during the eighteenth century, unanimously denounced as a chimerical form of government unfit for passionate human beings living in commercial societies. Placed in this context this thesis studies the concept of ‘representative democracy' during the French Revolution, particularly under the Directory (1795–1799). At the time the term was an oxymoron. It was a neologism strategically coined by the democrats at a time when ‘representative government' and ‘democracy' were understood to be diametrically opposed to each other. In this thesis the democrats' political thought is simultaneously placed in several contexts. One is the rapidly changing political, economic and international circumstances of the French First Republic at war. Another is the anxiety about democratic decline emanating from the long-established intellectual traditions that regarded the history of Greece and Rome as proof that democracy and popular government inevitably led to anarchy, despotism and military government. Due to this anxiety the ruling republicans' answer during the Directory to the predicament—how to avoid the return of the Terror, win the war, and stabilize the Republic without inviting military government—was crystalized in the notion of ‘representative government', which defined a modern republic based on a firm rejection of ‘democratic' politics. Condorcet is important at this juncture because he directly challenged the given notions of his own period (such as that democracy inevitably fosters military government). Building on this context of debate, the arguments for democracy put forth by Antonelle, Chaussard, Français de Nantes and others are analysed. These democrats devised plans to steer France and Europe to what they regarded as the correct way of genuinely ending the Revolution: the democratic republic. The findings of this thesis elucidate the elements of continuity and those of rupture between the Enlightenment and the French Revolution.

This thesis is primarily concerned with the literary aspects of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Its immediate focus rests on the evolution of the Islamic republican poetic trend, encompassing both the disillusioned and conformist voices that rose to prominence in the course of the 1979 Revolution and their on-going engagement with the ruling political power. In this vein, this thesis investigates the various cultural policies of the state, as well as select political transformations of the past three decades, all of which played a pivotal role in this literary evolution. The thesis shows how the official poets that emerged during the 1979 Revolution, and which proved significantly active throughout the immediate history subsequent to that event (war with Iraq, the death of Ayatollah Khomeini and the rise and fall of the reform movement), evolved over time and thereby either received political support for their commitment to the state ideology or became gradually excluded from official cultural institutions. Finally, this thesis reviews the manner in which state strategies have shaped an institutionalised form of poetry that is monitored and reinforced by the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic and official cultural authorities. It demonstrates how an innate linking of the project of Islamic republican literature to underlying ideologically defined notions such as 'religious verse', 'legitimate poetry' and 'commitment' was and continues to be an intrinsic part of the literary foundations of the ideological apparatus of the Islamic Republic.

On retient généralement de Louis de Bonald (1754-1840) la paternité d’une doctrine contre-révolutionnaire, comme son rôle de chef spirituel des ultras sous la Restauration. Une relecture de l’œuvre du philosophe, confrontée à des sources moins étudiées (articles de presse, opuscules, discours parlementaires, correspondance), mais surtout complétée par un matériau inédit (dont des extraits sont produits en annexes) a permis une approche transversale de la vie et de la carrière de cet homme politique au sens le plus contemporain du terme : de la fin du règne de Louis XV à celui de Louis-Philippe, ce métaphysicien à la théorie globalisante (on a pu le considérer comme le père de la sociologie) a sans cesse mobilisé cette dernière pour agir sur le réel historique, tout en l’enrichissant, voire la redéfinissant progressivement. Induisant une méthode pluridisciplinaire et s’inscrivant dans une chronologie vaste, ce travail a tenté de déconstruire l’image stéréotypée d’un penseur figé dans la nostalgie d’un Ancien Régime dont il aurait souhaité le retour, et dont la postérité se cantonnerait aux divers courants conservateurs ultérieurs. Personnage de son temps, s’inscrivant pleinement dans le propos régénérateur de l’époque post révolutionnaire, Bonald se présente au contraire sous une facette inattendue, celle d’une incontestable modernité : de l’âge romantique à l’âge industriel, les questions qu’il pose à son temps, et, partant, au nôtre, sont bien souvent terriblement actuelles. Quant à ses réponses, elles nous ont conduit à suggérer des pistes d’interprétation nouvelles autour de concepts tels que ceux de contre-utopie ou encore de contre-subversion. Bonald, en somme, est tout autant moderne dans son rapport à son siècle que dans sa dimension atemporelle, qu’on pourrait qualifier d’intempestive. / For most readers, of his time and until now, Louis de Bonald (1754-1840) was the father of a counter-Revolutionary doctrine, acting as a spiritual leader of the Ultras under the Restoration. A closer reading of the philosopher’s work, confronted with less-studied sources (articles published in the press, monographs, parliamentary speeches, correspondence) and completed by some unpublished material (extracts of which are published in our appendix) opens up a more transversal approach to the life and career of this politician, in the most contemporary sense of the word: from the end of Louis XV’s reign to the beginning of Louis-Philippe’s, Bonald, who is considered to be a forerunner of sociology, unceasingly mobilized his all-embracing theory of metaphysics to impact real history in the making, bringing enrichment and, gradually, even redefining it. Drawing on a multidisciplinary method, and taking into account a broad chronology, we have endeavored to deconstruct the stereotype of a thinker considered to be frozen in time, yearning for the return of the Ancien Régime, whose thinking put him on the path of an ultra-conservative heritage. A figure of his time, participating to the full in the post-Revolutionary discourse on regeneration, Bonald, unexpectedly and undoubtedly, reveals the face of a Modern. From the Age of the Romantics to the Industrial Age, the challenges which he defined in his time, are still incredibly relevant to ours. As for his answers, they lead us to put forward new interpretations of concepts such as counter-utopia or counter-subversion. Overall, Bonald is just as pertinent for his contemporaries as for our century and beyond. His thinking could be construed as timeless in nature.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Im Russischen Zarenreich waren Drohungen ein zentrales Instrument der Machtausübung. Die Androhung von Gewalt erlaubte es dem Staat, seine Untertanen in Schach zu halten, ohne Gewalt tatsächlich anwenden zu müssen. Als während der Gewaltexzesse der Revolution von 1905 die Drohkulisse des Zarenreiches in sich zusammenfiel, geriet das System in eine elementare Krise. In dieser Arbeit wird anhand einer Fallstudie untersucht, wie die imperiale russische Armee als zentraler politischer Akteur neue Praktiken entwickelte, die das Überleben des Zarenreichs sicherten. In Zusammenarbeit von Militäreinheiten vor Ort und dem Ministerium in St. Petersburg wurden Regelungen ausgearbeitet, mit denen die symbolische Androhung von Gewalt durch den tatsächlichen, realisierten Gewaltakt ersetzt werden sollte. Hierzu wollten die Militärs zunächst, dass die Differenz zwischen Soldaten und Zivilisten wieder sichtbar gemacht werden sollte. Soldaten sollten sich nur noch in Extremsituationen auf den Strassen blicken lassen um dann „schnell und entschieden“, wie eine der zentralen Forderungen jener Zeit lauerte, zur Waffe zu greifen. Diese Taktiken hatten kurzfristig Erfolg. Langfristig führten sie jedoch zur Erosion des russischen Zarenreichs: Die Revolution von 1905 hatte die Grenzen der Drohpotentiale des Zaren aufgezeigt. / In Tsarist Russia, the threat was an important instrument of rule. Threats of violence enabled the state to subdue its subjects without the need to resort to the actual use of violence. But when the Tsar’s threats lost their effectiveness during the excessive violence of the revolution of 1905, Russia endured a fundamental crisis. My work uses Warsaw as a case study to examine how the Imperial Russian Army secured the survival of Tsarist Russia by developing new practices of threat. Units on the ground and the military bureaucracy in St. Petersburg developed new regulations that aimed at replacing the symbolic threat of violence with its actual and finely regulated application. As a precondition for this, the military command wanted to reestablish the symbolic boundaries between soldiers and civilians. Soldiers were allowed to leave their barracks only in situations when this was absolutely necessary. However, they then had to use violence “quickly and decisively,” as a popular phrase described it. In the short term, these tactics proved successful. In the longer run, however, they led to the erosion of the Tsarist regime during its next fundamental moment of crisis. The revolution of 1905 had shown to the people the limitations of the Tsar’s threat potential.

Zentrale Aufgabe der russischen Gouverneure war es für Ruhe und Ordnung in den Provinzen zu sorgen. Damit wurden sie zu zentralen Akteuren der ersten Russischen Revolution von 1905-1907, in der sie bei der Auflösung von Streiks, Aufständen und ländlichen Unruhen persönlich vermitteln sollten. Die an der Mikrogeschichte orientierte Frage nach den Einflüssen des revolutionären Raums auf die Praktiken und Inszenierung ihrer Herrschaft steht im Mittelpunkt dieser Arbeit. Seit der Gründung des Gouverneursamtes waren die Gouverneure als Stellvertreter des Zaren mit einer umfassenden Machtfülle ausgestattet und zählten zu den wichtigsten Stützen der autokratischen Herrschaft im imperialen Russland. Die eingeübten Herrschaftspraktiken der Gouverneure wurden in der Revolution von 1905-1907 auf eine harte Probe gestellt und verlangten von den Stellvertretern des Zaren sich der neuen Situation anzupassen und ihre Herrschaft neu zu inszenieren. Wie sich die Repräsentationen der Autokratie und ihrer Vertreter unter dem Druck des sozialen und gesellschaftlichen Wandels veränderten, spiegelte sich unter anderem in den Begegnungen zwischen den Gouverneuren und den Bewohnern der Provinzen. Die persönliche Anwesenheit und die individuelle Ausgestaltung des Amtes stellten eine Konstante in den Herrschaftspraktiken der Gouverneure dar. Dies ermöglichte es ihnen entweder als Vollstrecker des zarischen Willen Aufstände niederzuschlagen oder als Vertrauens- und Konfliktvermittler aufzutreten und damit am Sieg der Autokratie über die revolutionären Kräfte entscheidend mitzuwirken. / The primary task of the Russian governors was to provide peace and order in the provinces. This is why they were central protagonists of the first Russian Revolution of 1905-1907. Here they personally had to enter into conflicts like for instance strikes, peasant disturbances and uprisings. Which effect this revolutionary space had on the governors'' way to rule, in their ability to use their symbolic power and on their old fashioned practices to solve conflicts, is the leading question of this book. Since the establishment of the gubernatorial office during Peter the Great''s reign the governors were the viceroys of the czar in the provinces. Provided with immense power the governors were very important supporters of the autocratic regime. But the violent revolution of 1905-1907 put the established ways to rule and practiced rituals to hard test and demanded from the governors skills for adaptation and improvisation in many difficult situations. The representations of the autocracy changed. This can for example be studied in the direct encounters between the governors and the inhabitants of the provinces. The personal presence of the governor and his ability to individually define his politics in the gubernatorial office were two important moments in the viceroys'' power in the provinces. These enabled them to act as the executors of the Czar''s intentions. In this role the governors could strike down riots and disturbances violently but could also act as trust brokers and mediators of conflicts. This scope of action and how the individual governor filled in his role therefore had a deep impact of the autocratic victory over the revolutionary forces.

Master of Arts / Department of History / Louise A. Breen / The land west of the Alleghany Mountains and along the Ohio River and Great Lakes was an area of hotly contested land and sovereignty claims during the colonial period, complete with shifting loyalties and highly factionalized alliances. Warfare and diplomacy in the western territories often hinged on the actions of just one man or a small group of people, with consequences that could cause the collapse of entire empires. The long-standing battle for land and power throughout the Ohio Valley has been called the Long War because once conflict began between the French, British, and Indians in 1754, no one power was truly able to claim the land and its people until the British were forced out of their Great Lakes forts in 1815. George Rogers Clark uniquely united these groups for a short moment in history. A feat made all the more impressive when we consider how long the region remained contested ground between empires. These factions united only once prior the era of American control. During the expedition of George Rogers Clark in 1778, backcountry settlers, French habitants, Indian chiefs, and Spanish officials all united during a small window of time to overthrow British control of the Illinois Country. He moved freely from the top political circles of Virginia to the remote frontier outposts of the Illinois Country. This thesis argues that George Rogers Clark was especially successful at gaining the cooperation of diverse groups of populations and coordinating those groups to work together towards his own goals. Clark certainly owes part of his success to being the right man in the right place at the right time, but it must be remembered that he was the only man to ever bring all of these factionalized groups together.

No description available.