Year/Année XII, no. 2, Dec. 2011

2000

The European Journal/ Die Europäische Zeitschrift/ La Revue Européenne/ Revista Europea/ Rivista Europea Dear colleagues, There is news, we don’t know whether good or bad, concerning our journal. The bad news is that the Ministry for Heritage cancelled the little miserable grant, lately reduced to €1,000 a year, -and paid erratically,- to our little journal. This decision, far from disappointing us, was received with a sense of liberation, because it relieved us of the annoying task of submitting an application every year. Furthermore last February the postal service doubled the cost of mailing for each copy, and this was not received with a sense of liberation. There was a last straw, obviously. To publish the journal, twelve years ago we had to submit to the tribunal of Rome a lot of legal documents. We protested with the European Community against a law that we consider illegal, illogical,

out-of-date (it goes back to 1947, when there were very few newspapers: see 2000. The European Journal, no. 2, Dec. 2004), but we had to comply, there being no alternative. For twelve years bureaucrats have ignored us, but recently they have begun to annoy us with e.mails, asking us to comply with etc. etc., threatening a fine from €516 to a maximum of €103,000 (yes, €103,000!), unless we etc. etc. This is too much indeed, for our patience. We are therefore projecting to publish the journal abroad, basing it in any European country where there are no such annoying laws, which would be in the reality ‘prescribed’, were it not for the zeal of bureaucrats and of courts whose judges have a bureaucratic mentality.

Apart from this, from next year onwards we will publish the journal in the form of a newsletter, at least in one yearly issue with more pages, and more issues any time we want. The layout will be as much as possible similar to the present one, but in the size of a single page format. To print in the present format, ‘typographically’ (this is the technical term used by printers), is in fact very expensive. Publishing it in digital form will be less expensive, and with numerous advantages. For example, we will be able to add more pages at a low additional cost, and we will be able to print exactly the number of copies we want, even five or ten each time, on demand. Thanks to the internet the journal will serve our cultural aims even better. On p. 8 you will find the ‘manifesto’ for

our ‘Directory of Scholars in European Studies’, that many have already joined, and that many will join. All of the colleagues who will join us will receive an electronic copy of the journal, with additional information about the European cultural activities. Last, we remind colleagues that all the past issues are on the internet, with free access to everybody. V. M. PS: Some colleagues were disappointed when we told them about this forthcoming innovation. We answered that progress (and bad laws) kills what is beautiful in the name of what is useful. We have had to surrender to the law of progress.

The necessity of a democratic regime 1. Introduction Spring in the Middle East is an extra-ordinary string of events, full of horror, full of hope. The events make us face again the question of democracy and its use. The youngsters who called for democracy and freedom on the Tahrir square in Cairo presented a form of direct democracy which in order to be viable must be transformed in a representative system which meets their demands. Will the Arab spring turn into a democratic summer? Nobody knows. The horrifying scenes in Libya and Syria show the cruelty of the regimes and the heroism of those who oppose them. At present no one can predict the outcome, even though the Khadafi-regime has been toppled and its leader killed. Even if all repressive regimes disappear in the Middle East there remain many hurdles on the road from direct to representative democracy. So what is democracy, how can we achieve it and how can we maintain it? These questions not only concern the Middle East. We used to say that we must make the world safe for democracy. Now we should rather say that we need democracy to make the world a safer place. 2. What is Democracy? Herodotus made his Persian spokesman say “the masses are a feckless lot” and “it would be an

intolerable thing to escape the murderous caprice of a king only to be caught by the equally wanton brutality of the rabble.”1 Many since have agreed with Otanes and yet we keep a soft spot for direct democracy. Amartya Sen explains its secret. He writes that an open and rational discussion about common interests is a precondition for justice.2 And for that type of discussion we need democracy. We like spontaneous discussions either on squares or with electronic devices, but in order to organize a rational discussion we need rules on how to conduct these and use institutions on how to implement them. In short we need a representative democracy. Jefferson wrote to a friend: The introduction of this new principle of representative democracy has rendered useless almost everything written before on the structure of government.3 Indeed the newly born American Republic was the first representative democracy in history. However Jefferson’s boast that its invention made obsolete all preceding political theory cannot be taken seriously. Since the Roman Republic representation has been a cherished thought. And then what new political science was connected with the new

Montesquieu

American Republic? Some of it was formulated in the incomparable Federalist written jointly, by Madison, Hamilton and Jay, but did their conclusions suffice to answer the question on how to establish a democratic regime? 3. How to establish a Representative Democracy? This question is urgent and not only since the Arab spring occurred. During the process of decolonisation Western constitutions were introduced in the former colonies, as was the case with the Westminster model in Zimbabwe. This country has become the saddest example of democratic failure. Zimbabwe

had a prosperous economy and a high standard of civilised life. It has turned into a mess ruled by despotism. The formal rules of a democratic regime are straightforward. In the course of European history the principle of an independent judiciary has evolved. Harold Berman has argued that the medieval papal glossators made a unique contribution to the rule of law in evolving the principle that right governs might.4 An independent judiciary is often seen as an element of trias politica, that is the separation of the executive, legislative and judiciary powers. A persistent misunderstanding, nurtured particularly by jurists, tells us that Montesquieu invented the principle, but he did not. He advocated the balance of powers between Commons, the Peers and the King. It made sense for the Founding Fathers to emphasize the separation of powers, because they had to build the political institutions from scratch, but in the course of American history the separation between executive and legislative powers became less important, because – as in all established democracies – efficient government demands that these two powers work together. However an independent judiciary is the essential condition for the rule of law. The rule of law then is the

first condition for establishing a democracy and it antedates representative democracy. The second condition is a written constitution. Americans were the first to introduce it as a document which sums up the institutions, how they should work together and how delegates to Congress are elected.5 The Bill of Rights attached to the constitution stipulates the rights of the

INDEX F. L. van Holthoon The necessity p. 1 V. Merolle On the reasons p. 3 M. Jorio Das Fürstbistum Basel p. 7 David Hume and Northern Europe p. 7 Directory of Scholars in European Studies p. 8 1

individual citizen. Thirdly a government is chosen by voters and is accountable to the representatives of these voters. Any person, male or female, should have the right to vote. The usual argument for universal suffrage is that any adult citizen must be in the position to promote his personal interests, but the right to vote goes further than this. In the act of voting a person must be able to convert his personal interest into a contribution to the general interest. Ideally such a transformation creates something which Rousseau called the general will, which must direct us in finding solutions acceptable to all. Fourthly, everywhere in the Middle East the cry for freedom is heard. It is a term with two different meanings. It means freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and freedom -in the classical definition of John Stuart Mill - to pursue your life in the way you want as long as you don’t hurt the interests of others. Political freedom is something different. It not only stipulates the right to participate in politics, but it can also be seen as entailing the duty to commit to politics. The freedom of coalition is a useful link between personal and political freedom. These are formal criteria and many so-called democracies do not live up to them. However, not all is lost. India is a splendid example of a democracy that survives against the odds of religious and ethnic diversity. Germany, which had a shaky reputation as a democratic state until the fall of the Third Reich, has become a model democracy since 1945 and West Germans deserve enormous credit for the way they incorporated the former D.D.R. after 1989. The Germans, you might say, learnt the lesson that democracy is the best guarantee for prosperity and one can only hope that the Chinese and Russian regimes will see the importance of this lesson before their regimes face total collapse. The conclusion of this paragraph is that formal criteria are necessary for the introduction of democracy, but are no guarantee for its future existence. 3. How to Maintain a Democratic Regime? Robert Dahl has provided us with another list of criteria which mark a democracy: Effective participation Equality in voting Gaining enlightened understanding Exercising control on the agenda Inclusion of adults6 These criteria are different from the formal criteria that were discussed before. They tell us how a democracy operates, if all is well and so they provide us with an indication how a democratic regime is maintained. Equality in voting is not synonymous with universal suffrage. The formal right to vote does not guarantee that everyone can vote as the history of the AfricanAmericans since the Fifteenth Amendment demonstrates.7 The inclusion of Adults is an obvious criterion, but effective participation, gaining enlightened understanding and exercising control over the agenda are not. Effective participation as a mini-

2

mum argument means that every adult sees it as his duty to vote, but his duty is more demanding. He must feel responsible for the common interest and be prepared to defend it. In practice voters leave the responsibility for this wider duty to their political delegates, but even so, voting attendance in many democratic countries is dismally low. Between 1920 and 1984 the percentage of voter participation in presidential elections in the United States oscillates between 49.2% (Harding) and 63.3% (Eisenhower). So, effective participation is a problem, particularly in well-established democracies (where election-results are not manipulated). Gaining enlightened understanding means that citizens acquire the virtues (toleration, moderation and reasonableness) that make democracy function. How? Frank Ankersmit recently described democracy as an elective aristocracy.8 Choosing the best persons means that we as voters not only choose our political representatives to promote our practical interests, but also that they must be able to set us a moral example. The idea of an elective aristocracy harbours an important truth. Without an elite that is prepared to pursue political aims, which transcend their personal interests and that cannot be corrupted by accepting favours which make it deviate from these aims, no democracy can function properly. Mosca was the first to emphasize this truth. He even went a step further. Those who are wielding political power must be members of and be supported by a governing class for which a culture of virtuous politics is normal and self-evident.9 Obviously a political elite has control over the agenda, because of its expertise and responsibilities, but ultimately the public must be able to choose the political priorities. This fact establishes a second truth. No democracy can function properly without a continuous exchange between the aims of the few and the views of the many. Evidently there is no such exchange in authoritarian regimes. However, how is the situation in well-established democracies, such as the Netherlands? Not all is well in my country, I suspect. The Dutch suffer from discontented voters and a government that is unsure of what its policies should be. Marc Chavannes, a wellknown Dutch commentator, recently published a book on the matter. Its title tells it all: Nobody governs.10 Soaring costs and accidents have almost brought to a halt the construction of a new metro-line in Amsterdam. The present government (a minority government!) frantically tries to cut the costs of social and cultural programs, but the growing protests of the interested parties make it highly uncertain that they can reach their goal of a budget cut of 18 billion euros. The exchange between the few and the many has turned into a dialogue des sourds. Political leaders are more interested in their image than a charisma based on achievement and the voters regard themselves less as citizens than as clients that have to be sat-

isfied by the state. So what is the message to the youngsters of the Arab spring? Possibly this: That if they manage to get a democratic regime to be installed they will have to watch the functioning of that regime, because the challenge of the modern economy but also of population growth, makes democratic life very complicated. Their problem seems to be how to get an honest elite; to their credit we can say that they are committed to the democratic cause, much more than we are. Commitment seems to be a problem for the older democracies. 4. Lessons from the French Revolution, Guizot and Tocqueville Let us take a short excursion in history and discuss the reactions of Tocqueville and Guizot to the French Revolution of 1789 and after. It may help us to focus on the problems that face us when we try to maintain a viable democracy. The first French revolution is regarded as a watershed in European history and as a decisive chapter in the democratic revolution which started in America. Yet the odd thing is that the political reasoning of the

J. S. Mill

French revolutionaries is of a low quality. William Sewell characterizes Sieyès’ politics as a “rhetoric of amnesia”, i.e. a way of avoiding the real issues. Sewell writes: However desirable the wholesale abolition of privilege [on 4 August 1789] may have seemed to him in retrospect, it was an unanticipated consequence of What is the Third Estate? and not the fulfilment of a conscious plan.11 What is said of Sieyès could be said of all French revolutionary leaders. Events happened to them, they did not control them. The revolution ended with Napoleon who ironically introduced many reforms –in the educational system and in law for instance – which had been on the agenda of the French kings before the revolution, but which they could not realize. From the time of Napoleon the French state became more powerful than the Bourbon monarchy ever was and that was not the intention of the revolutionaries at the beginning of the revolution. The lesson, which Tocqueville

learnt from the French revolution, was that the coming of democracy was inevitable. Yet, according to him, the threat to a democratic regime is individualism, which means that individuals pursue their own interests and do not commit to the public interest. During his tour through the United States (with his friend Gustave de Beaumont) he discovered to his delight that Americans had a solution to this problem. Citizens were trained in local institutions to govern themselves and so they became committed to deal with national issues. As to France, Tocqueville was more pessimistic about the commitment of its citizens. In the second volume of his de la Démocratie en Amérique, published in 1840 we find this sublime sentence: Au-dessus de ceux-là s’élève un pouvoir immense et tutélaire, qui se charge seul d’assurer leur jouissance et de veiller sur leur sort.. Il est absolu, détaillé, régulier, prévoyant et doux. Il ressemblerait à la puissance paternelle si, comme elle, il avait pour objet de préparer les hommes à l’âge viril; mais il ne cherche, au contraire, qu’à les fixer irrévocablement dans l’enfance; il aime que les citoyens se réjouissent, pourvu qu’ils ne songent qu’à se réjouir.12 Tocqueville was a master of formulating paradoxes. The people will not protest and they will not even notice that the state treats them as children, because they have it so good. How realistic is this view of a benevolent paternalism? Probably not very much. Paternalistic regimes tend to become less friendly, when they cannot meet the demands of their subjects. Ten years after Tocqueville’s death mass political parties emerged and these proved to be an engine for commitment. Yet at present, in the modern welfare state, commitment has again become a problem. As we have seen in the Dutch example, citizens tend to become clients. And Tocqueville’s warning that individualism will undermine any democratic regime is still relevant. Guizot has the reputation of having been a stubborn conservative. In fact his political thought was more subtle than his reputation suggests. In his famous lectures on Representative Government he wrote: Ainsi le gouvernement représentatif provoque la société tout entière, ceux qui exercent des pouvoirs et ceux qui possèdent des droits, à chercher en commun la raison et la justice; il provoque la multitude à se réduire à l’unité et il fait sortir l’unité du sein de la multitude.13 So he understood the important principle that there must be a fruitful dialogue between the few and the many. Guizot did not believe in the doctrine of popular sovereignty, instead we should have the sovereignty of the law. Democracies that

admettent un droit inhérent à l’homme de se faire luimème(sic) sa loi et ils abaissent ainsi la souverainité de droit qui, n’appartenant qu’à la raison et à la justice, ne doit jamais tomber sous l’empire absolu de l’homme, toujours prêt à usurper la souverainité de droit pour l’exercer au profits de ses intérêts ou de ses passions.14 Too great a reverence for the existing laws will create a standstill, but that something must be permanent is important in a stable democracy. The Americans have understood this lesson very well. Their reverence for the constitution of the United States is proverbial and judicial review has made it into a yardstick for judging the constitutionality of all laws. Guizot was a great admirer of the American Republic and in fact Americans have come very close in interpreting popular sovereignty as a system of sovereignty of the law. The combined lesson of Guizot and Tocqueville is that within a democracy we need a dialogue between the few and the many and that all partners in this dialogue accept that the principle of justice has a permanent character. 5. The Necessity of Democracy Preaching democracy is preaching necessity. Democracy is not a panacea, but without democracy we cannot start solving problems. The diagnosis for establishing and maintaining a democracy is simple. Honest and rational elites must be able to communicate with responsible citizens and these must be willing to listen. It is a diagnosis without a medicine. We have seen that the dialogue between the few and the many in well-established democracies leaves much to be desired while the priority for the rest of the world is how to create democracies rather than how to maintain them. So the future of democracy looks pretty grim. The problems that threaten the survival of mankind or at least the collapse of modern civilization are global warming, population growth, an exhaustion of resources and regional wars. How could democracy help to solve them? “Modern representatives do not fight wars with one another”, Dahl has remarked.15 So we can expect that the introduction of democracy on a global scale will at least diminish the number of regional wars. In another sense the introduction of democracy on a global scale will help. Dahl is famous for introducing the notion of polyarchy.16 Within a democracy we must have a hierarchy of decision-making. That is a matter of delegation and centralization. Local government must be able to make independent decisions while at the same time keeping in mind the directives of central government. Polyarchy is not only relevant in national government, but also in international governing bodies such as the United Nations. Block forming such as the European Union and comparable organizations in the other continents may be an important step to a viable global polyarchy. However, the precondition for such a global government

remains viable national governments at the bottom. Major threats to mankind need public support for government. Without this support governments only produce flawed solutions. A case in point is the onechild policy which the Chinese regime introduced many years ago that is now creating many imbalances in Chinese society. In modern democracies families manage to reduce their number of children without government intervention. Will this automatic response help to stop global population growth after we now have passed the seven billion mark? It is hard to believe. We need interplay between government policies and the actions of individuals who accept their responsibility facing this issue. Generally speaking we need both government measures and initiatives of businesses and individuals to reach sustainable solutions. The overall strategy in dealing with problems, of global warming and the exhaustion of resources is that we learn to control the effects of economic growth and focus less on growth than on creating a fair distribution of labour, food and resources. That is not a new thought. John Stuart Mill asked in 1848 why we should be afraid of a stationary state of the economy (an economy without economic growth). He wrote: I confess I am not charmed with the ideal of life held out by those who think that the normal state of human beings is that of struggling to get on; that the trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading on each other’s heels, which form the existing type of social life, are the most desirable lot of human kind, or anything but the disagreeable symptoms of one of the phases of industrial progress.17 As a true follower of Ricardo Mill had the illusion that population growth would stop the economy in its tracks anyway and that people would be forced to make the rational decisions of reducing their number of children and focus on a better distribution of wealth.18 Instead population growth and the increase of wealth went together even to the extent that an increasing population became a factor of economic growth. However now, 160 years later we must face the fact that the earth cannot sustain the existing population, let alone the ten billion we must expect in the near future. Mill also wrote: It is scarcely necessary to remark that a stationary condition of capital and population implies no stationary state of human improvement.19 Perhaps not, but how shall we set this human improvement in motion? On paper it seems easy invent the scenario for a sustainable world. Tim Jackson’s Prosperity Without Growth 20 is a sober and convincing account in this respect. Why then is the prospect of a peaceful, stable world so far away? It will become

clear from this essay that we have no recipe for creating well-functioning democracies. We can only add to the diagnosis of what a successful democracy is, that a well-functioning civil society seems to be an important requirement for success. Civil Society should be understood as society as it operates without interference from the state. As such it sets standards for honesty, efficiency and rationality in the public debate. Corruption and oppression are the reasons that many civil societies cannot function properly. Moral improvement as Mill envisaged it requires a change of lifestyle. Nowadays we accept the virtues, which made modernization possible – rule of law, freedom and democracy - as a matter of fact. Perhaps we should cultivate them more and make them part of our inward culture.

F.L. van Holthoon

University of Groningen * With thanks to Vincent Hope for making the necessary corrections. 1 Herodotus, The Histories, (London, 1972: Penguin Books), Aubrey de Sélincourt & A.R. Burn transl., (3, 82), 239; Otanes was one the three plotters to overthrow the existing Persian regime. In the end they chose a new king, Darius, who behaved with the same murderous caprice as before. Herodotus himself was a great admirer of Athenian freedom, which did not necessarily make him a democrat (see 5, 81, 369). 2 A. Sen, The Idea of Justice (London, 2010: Penguin Books), 327. 3 Cited by G. Woods, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787 (Boston 1972: Norton), 565. 4 H. J. Berman, Law and Revolution, the Formation of the Western Legal Tradition (Cambridge Mass., 1983: Harvard University Press) 5 Formerly written contracts between ruler and subjects were known such as the Declaration of Right of 1689 in England. However as to a written constitution for a representative government Great Britain is the exception to the rule. It does not have such a document. 6.R.A. Dahl, On Democracy (New Haven, 1998), 38. 6 The fifteenth amendment (1870) declared that all (male) citizens regardless of race have the right to vote. The Nineteenth Amendment (1920) gave women the right to vote. 7 F. Ankersmit, De Representatieve Democratie is een Electieve Aristocratie (Farewell Address, University of Groningen, 2010). 8 F.L. van Holthoon, The State and Civil Society, Theories, Illusions, Realities, a Survey of Political Theories in the 19th Century Western World, (Maastricht, 2003: Shaker), 353 ff. 9 M. Chavannes, Niemand Regeert, de Privatisering van de Nederlandse Politiek (NRC boeken 2009).

On the reasons for compiling a ‘European Dictionary’1 A cosmopolitan world of learning I am grateful to ‘La Sapienza’ University, where I graduated many years ago and where I spent my academic life, for inviting me to speak on the occasion of this Eurolinguistics Convegno. For a start, I want to consider how the world - the world of learning, I mean - has been changing, in the last few decades. If we consider the great historians of the past two or three generations, we find a very few eminent figures who were international

J. A. Schumpeter

10

W.H. Sewell jr., A Rhetoric of Bourgeois Revolution, the Abbé Sieyès and What is the Third Estate (Durham, 1994: Duke University Press), 144. 11 De la Démocratie en Amérique (Parijs, 1990: Vrin), E. Nolla ed., vol. 2, 265. 12 F. Guizot, Cours d’Histoire Moderne (1820-22), Histoire des Origines du Gouvernment Représentatif en Europe (Brussel 1851), 74-75. 13 F. Guizot, Gouvernment Représentatif, 86. 14 R.A. Dahl, On Democracy, 57. 15 R.A. Dahl, On Democracy, 90. 16 J.S. Mill, The Principles of Political Economy (Toronto, 1965: University of Toronto Press), Coll. Works III, book IV, ch. vi, 754. 17 See for Mill’s arguments F.L. van Holthoon, The Road to Utopia, a Study of John Stuart Mill’s Social Thought (Assen 1971: Van Gorcum), ch.6:”Improvement and Wealth. A Case for the Stationary State.” 18 J.S. Mill, The Principles of Political Economy, Coll. Works III, book iv, ch. vi, 756. 19 (Earthscan, 2009)

figures with an international experience and a wide grasp of the European or Western world of learning. I instance, to begin with, Joseph Alois Schumpeter (1883-1950), the Austrian-born economist, author of the History of Economic Analysis, who, after teaching for years in Germany, moved to the United States fleeing from Nazism. When one reads, in his masterpiece, his analysis of the writers on economics, it is astonishing to find how deeply he understands them all, the Italians included. Or take Friedrich Augustus von Hayek (18991992), also Austrian-born, who lived for many years in Great Britain and America; or Arthur Oncken Lovejoy (1873-1962), founder of the Journal of the History of Ideas, and author of The Great Chain of Being. Lovejoy was born in Berlin, and this explains the splendid cultural background of his masterpiece, deeply rooted in the European tradition. Likewise Peter Gay (Peter Joachim Fröhlich, also born in Berlin, in 1923), author of The Enlightenment. An Interpretation (1969), who shows such a thorough command of both the French and German worlds of learning. Add Ernst Cassirer (born in Prussia in 1874, died in America in 1945) and Leo Strauss, a student of his (also born in Prussia in 1899, died in America in 1973). All these authors, born in the German world, and subsequently, with many others, fleeing from the Nazi regime to the United States, became fluent in English and wrote books in both English and German.2 Meanwhile, many others, while enjoying an international reputation, lived their lives mainly in a national context, in the nation where they had been born, teaching and working for the cultural heritage of their own country and writing only in their mother tongue. So for example Mario Praz (1896-1982), the most eminent of the teachers the present speaker had at ‘La Sapienza’, who had been for eight years lecturer in Italian at Liverpool University, and then in 1932-34 professor of Italian Studies at Victoria University, Manchester. Twice

disappointed in trying to get the chair of Italian literature at Cambridge, as he recounts in his majestic autobiography, La Casa della Vita (1960) - in English translation A House of Life - he accepted the professorship at ‘La Sapienza’ and remained there until his retirement, in the city that he loved and that he described in his Panopticon Romano. A splendid prose writer, his best known work, La carne, la morte e il diavolo nella letteratura romantica (1930) – in English translation The Romantic Agony - enjoyed immediate international success, although, in my judgment, his Storia della letteratura inglese should not be neglected because of the splendour of the prose, which, in some parts, makes me think of James Boswell’s rich use of the English vocabulary. Or again, Friedrich Meinecke (1862-1954), the historian of ideas, who spent his life in Germany, mostly in Berlin, writing in German books whose originality was immediately recognized by the European world of learning. If I might add a personal recollection, I spent a whole summer, years ago, in a German library, reading his Die Entstehung des Historismus, his Weltbürgertum und Nationalstaat and, in particular, Die Idee der Staatsräson in der neueren Geschichte, admiring his astonishing grasp of the French and Italian authors, especially when using, as his source for the Italians, the Corso sugli scrittori politici italiani by Giuseppe Ferrari. Franco Venturi (1914-1994) also comes to mind. After spending his youth abroad, where his father, the art historian Lionello Venturi, lived in antifascist exile, he returned to Italy after the fall of Fascism and became a professor in Turin. In that city he spent the rest of his life, though his research work brought him frequently abroad, where he enjoyed a high reputation. Does not belong in this category of scholars a singular figure, the Russian Nikolaj Ottokar (b. in Saint Petersburg in 1884, d. in Florence in 1957), Lord Rector of the University of Perm in Russia, afterwards professor of Medieval History at the University of Florence, author of outstanding studies on the history of Florence in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. But these great scholars represented an élite, an intellectual world in which, early last century, Benedetto Croce (1866-1952), one of the greatest European intellectuals of his own age, promoted the translation into Italian of the works of Hegel – a major event in Italian culture - and

3

himself translated Hegel’s Enzyklopädie der Philosophischen Wissenschaften in 1907. Such was the international web of Croce, such his cosmopolitan world, that he could dedicate his Storia d’Europa nel secolo decimonono to Thomas Mann, his Storia dell’età barocca in Italia to Karl Vossler, his Storia della storiografia italiana to Eduard Fueter, his Ultimi Saggi to Julius von Schlosser, his La filosofia di G. B. Vico to Wilhelm Windelband, ‘nel ricordo di quella che fu l’Università di Strasburgo negli anni che precedettero immediatamente la prima guerra mondiale’ (‘in the remembrance of what was the University of Strasbourg in the years that immediately preceded the First World War’): words nostalgic of a world of peace and of international cooperation in the progress of knowledge. The previous generation and the world today If now we revert to the generation immediately preceding our own, the generation of our teachers, in Italy and in Rome in particular, we find, for example, Federico Chabod (Aosta 1901Rome 1960), who attended the seminars of Meinecke in Berlin, and Franco Valsecchi (19031991), professor of Modern History in our Faculty of Political Sciences, who spent years in Vienna, and was defined as ‘storico autenticamente europeo’ (an authentically European historian) and ‘un credente nell’Europa’ (a believer in Europe). Both wrote in no other language than that of their own country, trying from their national observatories to understand what Europe was, and what its history was. They were themselves ‘intellectual prisoners’ of a Europe of nations, of a Europe of which they vaguely, often confusedly, tried to understand the history; wondering whether there had been, whether there was, or was not, a common history, or a unified entity. For example, when reading the Storia dell’idea d’Europa by Chabod, one inevitably finds that that work, much praised at its appearance,3 inevitably retains the taste and limitations of its own epoch, and, I am sorry to add, it has not much to say to our contemporary readers, although its relevance in the history of historiography ranks high. The world of learning nowadays has been rapidly changing, following the dramatic changes in the economy and communications. It is a world in which a purely national dimension is becoming more and more meaningless, while tens of millions cross the barriers every year for business, for tourism and for learning. For a researcher it is now unthinkable to spend his entire life in the country where he was born, unless he accepts a substantial provincialism, i.e., a second-hand knowledge. But, if in the scientific field the circulation of knowledge is rapid, owing to the common vocabulary in scientific subjects (a mathematical equation is a mathematical equation whether in English, French or German, no matter), in the field of the humanities it is quite different. Languages, for example, are deeply rooted in

4

national traditions, having been elaborated, during the centuries or the millennia by the ‘popular element’, to cite Antonio Gramsci, the theorist of Italian Marxism, or by the poets, who express in poetry the ‘popular’ feelings’, giving them a literary form. And this was particularly evident in the age of Romanticism, although, paradoxically – a paradox that should be reflected upon - it was in the age the ‘cosmopolitan’ of Enlightenment that Latin was progressively abandoned as a lingua franca,4 and the great national literatures came into their own. So, staying in the field of moral sciences, in Great Britain writers like Hume, Smith, Samuel Johnson, writing their masterpieces in their national languages, were men of the Enlightenment, while in Germany Kant, Herder, the Grimm brothers, were themselves men of the late and early Enlightenment Romanticism. European centres In recent years many universities in our continent have opened ‘European centres’, but the problem is whether these centres are really ‘European’, or simply aim at being so. In my experience in Great Britain, for example, most teachers in these centres write in English, obviously, but only on French literature. This is much but, in my view, not enough to be really ‘European’, since Europe, not only geographically, but also culturally, reaches the Atlantic to the Urals. It is in fact extremely difficult to command the whole of the European tradition, even if limiting ourselves to the Western part of it, where there occurred a separation between the Latin and the Germanic element: a separation that is not as wide as many seem to believe. And, as for Russia, one should not ignore that that country had a history parallel to that of Western Europe, until the outbreak of the Revolution, at the beginning of last century. The Russian world of learning in the 17th century realized that the culture of the country must be ‘European’, for the advancement of the country towards civilization. “In 1685 wurde die berhümte Moskauer Slavo-Graeco-Lateinische Akademie begründet, die ‘Academia Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitana’;Publikationsorgane n waren die Commentarii und Acta”, as Karl Vossen puts it in his brilliant book Mutter Latein und ihre Töchter. Europas Sprachen und ihre Herkunft.5 Later on, in the eighteenth century, Latin was displaced by French, and the ‘Academia Petropolitana’ became ‘Académie Impériale des Sciences de St. Petersburg’. But the reform of the educational system at the beginning of the 19th century ‘gab dem klassizistischen Charakter der Ausbildung erneut Auftrieb, wobei das deutsche Gymnasium als Muster diente. So war die klassische Ausbildung zu Beginn des 20sten Jahrhunderts weit verbreitet. Tatsächlich existierte der humanistis-

che Gymnasialunterricht bis 1917. Entsprechend gehörten Latein und Altgriechisch zur Ausstattung des gebildeten Russen’.6 But if Russian language is discouraging to deal with for WestEuropean scholars, the first trouble being with its Cyrillic characters, nevertheless Russia knocks at the doors of Europe, and becomes every day more and more ‘European’, although there are still too many barriers - the inheritance of a dark past -with the Western part of our continent. The European tradition The difficulties of commanding the whole of the European tradition, even for the greatest scholars,7 are obvious.. Every scholar inevitably concentrates upon the tradition of his own country, where he has his cultural roots, and it is extremely difficult, for example, to write with equal adequacy in two different languages, and to know equally well two different traditions, unless they are very similar, like French, Italian and Spanish, for example, which share in common a Latinate vocabulary. No less true is it that nowadays, within our industrial society, we have, and we can compile, instruments of consultation which help us in our endeavours. These instruments, or multilingual dic-

A process of simplification and unification of European languages is in fact slowly taking place. These languages are progressively discarding words that are not shared in common, or are not mutually understandable. They are gradually adopting a vocabulary that is as common as possible to them all. In a couple of generations the vocabulary of the principal languages in Europe and the West has moved a great deal nearer to being simplified and unified. The aim of 2.000. The European Journal, that is now in its twelfth year, is that of moving alongside these changes, observing and monitoring these tongues, simply because we are convinced that Europe has much to say in this third millennium. Therefore, it will gradually become, and is indeed already, nonsensical to buy, say, a FrenchEnglish, or a Spanish-English, dictionary. One should rather think of a French-European Dictionary, of a GermanEuropean Dictionary, and so on. We are moving towards a unification of the vocabulary of the European languages, as I have repeatedly explained,9 and bilingual dictionaries will become less and less useful, in the near future. People must now realize that the concept of national languages is being progressively replaced by the concept of a European lan-

Benedetto Croce

tionaries, are necessary to boost consciousness of the unity of the European continent: a consciousness that is on the way, and must be recognized and supported by the world of learning. It is a common observation that bilingual dictionaries are now becoming more and more oldfashioned in modern Europe. Ours is in fact no more a ‘Europe of Nations’, as the Romantics used to believe.8 It is substantially a unified entity, in which at least the world of learning should try to command, as far as possible, the whole of our cultural tradition. And, in my experience as an historian of political ideas, having always tried to cite the sources from their original languages, I have particularly felt this difficulty. But I have also realized that our tradition is on the whole a common one, and it is not impossible to command the whole of it, providing one uses proper instruments of consultation.

guage. In this way, for example, my mother tongue, Italian, should be considered, and studied, no longer as the language of the Italian nation, but as a European language, in the sense that it is no more than a variant of a common tradition which, after only five centuries of separation, following the Protestant Reformation, needs now to reunify with the rest of Europe, emphasizing what is common, and not what separates us. In past issues of the journal,10 now all on the internet and therefore available to everybody - I have emphasized the role of the Latinate vocabulary in modern European languages, and particularly in the English language, which is officially classified as a Germanic language. Its vocabulary is nevertheless at least up to 70% of Latinate origin. Not that I should need to repeat, here, what I have abundantly demonstrated elsewhere. I wish just to add that, in the Hungarian Diet, as Karl Vossen writes in his

Mutter Latein, “im Parliament wurden die Debatten noch bis 1843 ausschließlich in Lateinischer Sprache geführt”.11 Certainly, I am an historian of political ideas, and not a professional linguist. And, if I am not, ‘je vous en demande pardon d’avance’, avec les paroles de mon vieil ami, Monsieur de Voltaire.12 Nor was the great Émile Littré (1801-1881), the author of the celebrated Dictionnaire de la Langue Française, a professional linguist, his interests being primarily philosophical and philological. And a more recent editor of dictionaries, Jan Frederik Niermeyer, the editor of the Mediae Latinitatis Lexicon Minus, in the preface to his work, also makes it clear that he is not a professional linguist.13 Therefore, I am probably justified in my ambition of promoting and supporting, as much as I can, this demanding project, even though it raises some perplexity on the part of professional linguists. And I flatter myself that I am justified in this for the very reason that I have, hopefully, a comprehensive social and political idea of European history, and am moving from the cultural concept of ‘civilization’, of the advancement of learning, of what the Italians of the eighteenth century called civilizzazione. So, I can reassure the professional linguists, telling them that I am far from encroaching on their own territory, because, as I willingly admit, I am not sufficiently equipped to compete with their own sophisticated analyses, my aim being a different one. I am moving, in fact, from a comprehensive idea of European history and civilization, from a particular feeling, hopefully, of the idea, or concept, that our present moment needs this particular cultural achievement, also realizing that future generations, at a different stage of the advancement of civilization, will have to face different cultural needs. My point of departure is therefore different from that of the linguists, no less than my aims. Multilingual dictionaries When we consider the history of plurilingual dictionaries, we see that, until now, they have been mostly bilingual,14 obviously because they reflected the concept, still current but on the wane, of nation and of national languages and, consequently, that of the relations between nations. But we are now facing a different concept, that of Europe and of the European world of learning, that we must consider as a unified entity, with a common history and tradition. During the last few decades a number of polyglot dictionaries have been compiled, but they represent only a first step, only an attempt, non-systematic and lacking a basic concept of what is needed. But their having been compiled proves, in my judgment, also the effectiveness, or validity, of my project. They are the following ones: Polyglot Dictionaries based on the ‘One-Language-System’, Otto Holtzmann Hg., vol 1, ‘General Technical Terms’ (Oldenbourg, München und Berlin, 1937);

Elsevier’s Nautical Dictionary, Third completely revised edition French, English/American, Spanish, Dutch, German (1994); in the editions 1965-6 and 1978 Italian was comprised, but it disappeared in the 1994 edition, to be replaced by English/American; Harrap’s 5-Language Dictionary, English-French-German-ItalianSpanish (Harrap’s Books Ltd, Bromley, Kent, 1991); Größes Euro Wörterbuch, GrundWortschatz Deutsch, English, Französisch, Italienisch, Spanisch, in 5 Sprachen (Buch und Zeit Verlagsgesellschaft MbH, Köln); Europa Wörterbuch Simultan Dictionary, Deutsch English Französisch Spanish Italienisch, Eurobooks by Lechner (Geneva, 1999); Visual 5-Language Dictionary, English, French, German, Spanish, Italian (Dorling Kindersley Ltd, London 2006); Visual Five-Language Dictionary. English French German Spanish Italian (Oxford UP, 2006); Orefice Giuseppe Alberto, The 5 Language European Dictionary, Sperling & Kupfer (Milano, 1973; London Editions Ltd 1977, distributed by Croom Helm); Gourseau Monique and Henry, Six Languages Dictionary, Mosaik Verlag (Berlin, 1993; Geocenter International as European Dictionary); Last, Harper-Collins have put on the internet an online English to French-Italian-Spanish Dictionary, that seems to be the most advanced attempt towards a multilingual dictionary, although still lacking the concept of an organic, systematic project. It is, in fact, the product of technology, not of culture. So, too, the Oxford University Press, that is putting on the internet its bilingual dictionaries, but this operation, in my judgment, lacks a systematic concept, a cultural aim. And what is unsystematic is in the long run rarely successful. In a world so rapidly changing, innovation is in fact the fundamental quality in any field, in that of business no less than in that of learning. Therefore, something new should be produced, to be put on the internet, given that what we already have is neither enough nor long-lasting.15 Intellectuals authentically European The problem now is how to train intellectuals to be authentically European. What we can do, I believe, is essentially to compile a new, systematic, fundamental instrument of consultation, in order to boost the idea of the unity of European languages and tradition, mainly in order to help the training of young generations. Certainly, one could object that we are trying to elaborate a language of learning, while we should simply recognize the movements of the spontaneous, uncontrollable forces of society, and limit ourselves to record them. In sum, the learned poetry of John Milton, as against the ‘popular element’ of William Shakespeare. If this is true in principle, it does not apply to my case, because, as I have said above, the process of unification of the European languages is on its way, and the

instrument of consultation I am proposing to compile will be limited to the task of accompanying it, of boosting the consciousness of it: certainly, not that of creating a new, purely literary language. After all, this is self-evident, nor does it need a particular demonstration. An appeal to the European world of learning Certainly, with my project I have committed myself to the work of twenty men and, in some moments, I think of Samuel Johnson, who, when compiling his Dictionary, Lord Chesterfield having refused his support, felt like ‘a man struggling for life in the water’. My first submissions to publishers have in fact been fruitless, on the ground of the difficulties of the market, also alleging the economic recession, and so on. The internet is furthermore a severe competitor, and many publishers, instead of planning new productions, are simply putting on the internet what they already have, it being considered risky to undertake investments that promise an uncertain return. At the same time, I receive from distinguished colleagues the exhortation to go on, along with their commitment to provide their help and advice, while the so-called institutions stay idle, and mostly squander enormous sums for useless purposes. But the battle becomes more exciting now, in a moment of difficulty, in which I feel called to demonstrate the validity of my endeavour. Particular dictionaries, like the great literary works, mark in fact a distinctive, turning point, in the history of civilization, and represent the end of a period and the beginning of a new one. So Dr Johnson’s Dictionary for English, so the Grimm brothers’ Wörterbuch for German, and so on. And, no doubt, we are at a turning point, at an historical moment that represents in Europe the substantial disappearance of the idea of ‘national’ states, of national ‘traditions’, which are being replaced by the idea of European civilization. Some colleagues and, with more reasons some publishers, fear that I am conceiving a purely academic product, i.e., from a commercial point of view, something that cannot really conquer the world of learning at large, and risks to remain on the shelves of libraries. Must I repeat that I cannot, and do not want, to compete with the great Émile Littré, with the Grimm brothers, or even with the too often neglected, but splendid, eight-volume Dizionario della Lingua Italiana by Niccolò Tommaseo (18021874)? That I am not equipped for such a kind of work, and am not aiming at such a work? The part that I have compiled up till now - about 20%16 of the total proves, on the contrary, that I am working for something that aims at influencing civilization, and not just a limited number of scholars: something that should certainly stay on the shelves, but of any educated person, students, teachers, knowledgeable people. Whether I will succeed or not remains in mente Dei, in the

mind of God, it being difficult to predict what will happen in the future, and it being impossible that one man can perform the work of a team of scholars. But the progress of learning, the progress of mankind, is something in which I deeply believe, something that is worth all our efforts, something that helps us avoid what Immanuel Kant called “the natural laziness of mankind”.

Vincenzo Merolle

University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’

Summary The author, an historian of social and political ideas, makes the case for polyglot, five-language dictionaries, which, he believes, must help in the formation of the European cultural union that is on its way. He observes that European languages are slowly unifying, this being a necessary process, and maintains that it is up to the world of learning to accompany it. While, in fact, early last century international experience was

3.First

edition, Edizioni dell’Ateneo (Rome, 1959); see German translation as Der Europagedanke (Stuttgart, 1963). 4 Still in 1742 Francis Hutcheson published in Latin his Philosophiae Moralis Institutio Compendiaria and, while teaching at the university of Glasgow, it was the opinion of a former student that “he wrote and spoke, at least we thought so, better in Latin than English”, see James Moore, Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004), p. 999. In Edinburgh, in Professor’s Stevenson class of Logic, in which prize essays were submitted from 1737 to 1751, about half were written in Latin, and the other half in English. Latin survived longest in the Faculty of Medicine, where theses were composed solely in that language until 1833: see D. B. Horn, A Short History of the University of Edinburgh 1556-1889 (Edinburgh, 1967). Similarly, in Germany, “in die Hörsäle der Universitäten drang das Deutsche erst seit 1687 durch Christian Thomasius in Leipzig. Noch bis im 19. Jh. mußten in einigen Fächern Doktordissertationen lateinisch verfaßt werden”: see P. von Polenz, Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache (Berlin-New York, 1978), p. 93. 5 Stern Verlag, Jaunssen & co (14 Auflage, 1999), ‘Moskau, das dritte Rom’, p. 207. 6 Vossen, ibid., p. 208. 7 Even the great Mario Praz, for example, seems to have had no substantial knowledge of the German world of learning, having concentrat-

ed upon English, Italian and French literature. Nevertheless in advancing age he had some interest in Russian language, for his Filosofia dell’Arredamento 2nd ed. Rome, 1964 (in English translation An Illustrated History of Interior Decoration, Thames and Hudson (London, 1984). 8 ‘una d’arme, di lingua, d’altare/ di memorie, di sangue e di cor’, with these words the Romantic poet Alessandro Manzoni defined the concept of nation in his ode ‘Marzo 1821’, strophe 4, lines 7-8. 9 See ‘2000. The European Journal’, year IV, Dec. 2003; VI, Dec. 2005; VII, Dec. 2006; VIII, June 2007; IX, June 2008. 10 See here above, note 8. 11 Vossen, op. cit., p. 200. 12 See Adam Ferguson, Correspondence, in two vols, edited by V. Merolle (London, 1995), I, 116, letter 72 to William Robertson. 13 “There is no reason to apologize for the fact that a historian, who has gained some acquaintance with charters and other documents, should have ventured on this enterprise”, second edition (Brill, Leiden-Boston, 2002), preface, p. XIII. 14 Merely erudite is the Calepino, or Ambrosii Calepini Dictionarium Undecim Linguarum, First edition 1502, last edition by Jacopo Facciolati, 1772. 15 See furthermore Beis European Dictionary, a combination of dictionaries, English, French, Spanish, German, without a soul, and Eudict, itself a collection of free online dictionaries. Last, Erhard Steller, Wörterbuch der Europäischen Sprache (Ex-Libris, 2010). 16 See on the internet, under European Dictionary.

Mario Praz

limited to a small number of great intellectuals, nowadays it is the common destiny of many scholars, and the necessity of having proper instruments of consultation and of education, such as multilingual dictionaries, -in a world in which English has replaced French, as French in its turn had replaced Latin as lingua franca,- appears more and more evident. The author ends by making an appeal to the European world of learning, to colleagues and to institutions, to join him in his efforts towards the compilation of the first of these polyglot dictionaries, -the one on the basis of English as langue de départ- it being impossible for one man to perform the work of twenty men.

1 This paper was delivered for the

ELA workshop at the Eurolinguistics Convegno held in Rome, at the University ‘La Sapienza’, on 19-21 April 2011. 2 Excepting, apparently, Peter Gay, who emigrated to the USA at the age of 18, and was educated in American universities.

5

Das Fürstbistum Basel

Reformen in einem geistlichen Staat zwischen Eidgenossenschaft, Reich und Frankreich SUMMARY The bilingual (German/French) and confessionally mixed (Catholic/Protestant) PrinceBishopric of Basel (in present-day northwest Switzerland) survived the Reformation and existed until the French Revolution. The northern part was an exclave of the Holy Roman Empire, while the southern part was Swiss. In the 18th century the ecclesiastical state enjoyed a modest cultural and economic blossoming in spite of its geographic setting in the unproductive mountainous Jura region. The absolutist rule of the prince-bishops and an enlightened administration achieved governmental, ecclesiastical, economic and social reform. This article sketches the partially researched reforms and the related discussions of these reforms. Das Fürstbistum Basel „Alles, bis auf den Namen herab, war an diesem Staate unnatürlich und zwitterhaft. Ein katholischer Bischof, der zur Hälfte über Ketzer regierte und über seine eigene Hauptstadt nicht einmal die kirchliche Jurisdiktion besass (…), ein deutscher Reichsfürst, von dessen Gebiet man im Zweifel war, ob es ganz oder halb zur Schweiz gehöre, dessen Untertanen meist französisch sprachen, (…), solche Missbildungen konnten nur da gedeihen, wo der Moder des heiligen römischen Reiches mit demjenigen der alten Eidgenossenschaft zusammentraf.“1) So umschrieb 1920 der national-liberale Zürcher Historiker Ernst Gagliardi das Fürstbistum Basel.2) Anders dagegen urteilten die Zeitgenossen. 1789 reiste der reformierte Neuenburger Gelehrte und preussische Kämmerer Jean-François de Chambrier durch das Hochstift und meinte: „Les sujets paraissent heureux et attachés à la domination de leur Prince, il faut en conclure qu’ils sont sagement gouvernés“.3) Und der aus Magdeburg stammende und in der Schweiz lehrende Heinrich Ludwig Lehmann machte zwar aus seiner Ablehnung des „Pfaffen Regiments“ und des „unvernünftigen“ Staatsaufbaus keinen Hehl, kam aber etwa zur gleichen Zeit wie Chambrier zum Schluss: „Alle leben in der liebenswürdigsten Harmonie und man sieht mit so viel Vergnügen als Erstaunen ein Volk unter der Herrschaft eines geistlichen Fürsten leben, der einen fremden Gottesdienst nicht nur duldet, sondern auch beschützt und die Diener desselben reichlich besoldet“.4) Das Hochstift Basel im 18. Jahrhundert Tatsächlich war das Fürstbistum Basel im 18. Jahrhundert ein Kuriosum in der europäischen Staatenwelt. Die alte Diözese Basel, ein Suffraganbistum des Erzbistums Besançon in der

6

Freigrafschaft Burgund, umfasste die heutige Nordwestschweiz und vor allem das Oberelsass, in etwa das heutige französische Departement Haut-Rhin. Das weltliche Herrschaftsgebiet hatte die Reformation überlebt; die Basler Bischöfe verloren zwar die Herrschaft über die Stadt Basel und deren Territorium, in etwa den heutigen Kanton Basel. Sie mussten ihre Bischofsstadt verlassen und residierten ab rund 1530 in Pruntrut/Porrentruy, in ihrem weltlichen Herrschaftsgebiet, aber ausserhalb ihrer Diözese im Erzbistum Besançon. Erst 1779 kam die Ajoie/Elsgau mit Pruntrut im Rahmen eines Gebietsaustausches unter die geistliche Jurisdiktion des Bischofs von Basel – womit bereits die erste Reform angesprochen ist, nämlich die „vernünftige“ Absicht, weltliche und geistliche Grenzen in Übereinstimmung zu bringen. Das rechtsrheinische Schliengen dagegen unterstand dem Bischof von Konstanz. Das geistliche Fürstentum mit seinen rund 65’000 Einwohnern sass rittlings auf der Jurakette. Es erstreckte sich vom Bielersee, wo es Anteil am Schweizer Mittelland hatte, zur Burgundische Pforte und in die Oberrheinische Tiefebene. Sprachlich war das Land zweigeteilt: Die Mehrheit sprach französisch; deutsch waren die Ämter Zwingen, Pfeffingen, Birseck, Biel und das rechtsrheinische Schliengen sowie der fürstliche Hof in Pruntrut. Auch konfessionell war das Hochstift zweigeteilt: Der Süden war reformiert, der Norden und die deutschen Ämter katholisch. Daneben lebten auch Juden und auf den Jurahöhen deutschsprachige Wiedertäufer, welche vom Berner Rat vertrieben worden waren. Die staatsrechtliche Situation Geradezu verwirrend präsentierte sich die staatsrechtliche Situation: Der Norden gehörte zum Heiligen Römischen Reich und bildete mit dem württembergischen Montbéliard (Mömpelgard) eine Reichsexklave zwischen Frankreich und der Schweiz. Die südlichen Ämter dagegen waren in unterschiedlicher Kombination mit drei Schweizer Kantonen, Bern, Solothurn und Freiburg verburgrechtet, wobei vor allem der mächtige Stadtstaat Bern einen dominierenden Einfluss ausübte und etwa im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert die Rekatholisierung des Südens verhindert hatte. Die deutschsprachige Stadt Biel – Kuriosum im Kuriosum – war ein sogenannter Zugewandter Ort, also ein Verbündeter der Eidgenossenschaft, und betrieb eine eigene Politik. Der Fürstbischof war nur nominell Stadtherr. Unklar war daher, wo die Grenze zwischen

dem Reich und der Eidgenossenschaft verlief: Die Propstei Moutier-Grandval (Münster-Granfelden) und das Herrschaftsgebiet des Prämonstratenserklosters Bellelay galten je nach Situation als schweizerisch oder als Reichsgebiet. Die Bewohner dieser beiden Gebiete wussten jeweils daraus den grösstmöglichen Nutzen zu ziehen. Aussenpolitisch suchten die Basler Fürstbischöfe im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert die Nähe der katholischen Schweiz. 1579 schloss der kraftvolle, gegenreformatorische Fürstbischof Jakob Christoph Blarer von Wartensee ein Bündnis mit den sieben katholischen Orten (Kantone). Es gelang aber wegen der Opposition der reformierten Kantone nie, das Fürstbistum als 14. vollberechtigten Kanton in die Eidgenossenschaft zu führen. Im Rahmen der sog. Landestroublen zwischen 1726 und 1740 näherten sich die Fürstbischöfe Frankreich an, da

Fürstbischof Joseph Wilhelm Rinck von Baldenstein: Porträt, um 1750 Öl auf Leinwand von einem unbekannten Künstler, Musée jurassien d’art et d’histoire, Delsberg

die Eidgenossenschaft keine Truppen zur Niederschlagung des Aufstandes schicken wollte. 1739 schloss das Hochstift mit Frankreich einen 1780 erneuerten Allianzvertrag, der dem mächtigen Nachbarn grosse Einflussmöglichkeiten einräumte und 1792 bzw. 1797 die Rechtfertigung für die Besetzung des Fürstbistums und die spätere Eingliederung in die französische Republik bot. Das Domkapitel Das Domkapitel verliess 1529 Basel und übersiedelte nach Freiburg i. Br. unter den Schutz der vorderösterreichischen Regierung und kehrte 1678 nach Arlesheim ins Fürstbistum in Sichtweite der Stadt Basel zurück, wo es sich eine prachtvolle Residenz erbaute.5) Es zählte 18 Mitglieder, die vor allem aus dem breisgauischen, elsässischen

und einheimischen Adel stammten. Es war traditionell in eine elsässische (französisch gesinnte) und reichsdeutsche Fraktion gespalten. Die fürstliche Regierung sass in Pruntrut, wie auch das bischöfliche Ordinariat. Die Landstände wurden nach den „Landestroublen“ als Strafmassnahme weitgehend entmachtet und ihre Kompetenz auf die Steuerbewilligung eingeschränkt. Wirtschaftlich war das mehrheitlich hoch im kargen Jura gelegene Hochstift eigentlich arm: Weinbau am Bielersee und in Schliengen, eine etwas reichere Landwirtschaft in der Ajoie und im Birstal, sonst vor allem Weidund Waldwirtschaft. Wirtschaftlich überleben konnte das Hochstift nur dank den auswärtigen Einkünften, vor allem aus dem reichen Elsass. Die Fürstbischöfe waren aber durchaus bemüht, die prekäre wirtschaftliche Basis im eigenen Land zu stärken, so etwa durch die Förderung der aus Genf und Neuenburg verbreiteten Uhrenindustrie, die Eisenindustrie und Erträge aus dem Transitverkehr. Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts war die Industrialisierung im Süden bereits weit vorangeschritten und der sekundäre Sektor erreichte gegen Ende des Jahrhunderts, z.B. im Erguel, bereits europaweite Spitzenwerte von 50 Prozent der Beschäftigten. Reformdiskussionen und Reformen Das Hochstift besass kein intellektuelles Zentrum, keine Hochschule, keine Presse, keine Verlage und damit auch keine Publizistik. Der gelehrte Domherr Christian Franz von Eberstein klagte 1786: „Wir wohnen in einem öden, sehr öden Land“.6) Das Wenige, was an aufklärerischer Kritik geäussert wurde, stammt, wie im Fall der einleitenden Zitate, von Auswärtigen. Wie die politisch Verantwortlichen des Hochstifts Basel, allen voran die Fürstbischöfe selber und die Spitzenbeamten, die Zukunftsfähigkeit ihres Staates einschätzten, wissen wir (noch) nicht; dazu fehlen bis heute Untersuchungen. Erst in der Revolutionszeit tritt die Kritik am Geistlichen Staat deutlich hervor, dann aber massiv und auf die Vernichtung des Hochstifts zielend. Reformen und Reformwille lassen sich aber aus der Politik der Fürstbischöfe, des Domkapitels und der fürstlichen und kirchlichen Verwaltung ablesen. Und dazu gibt es Quellen und gute Forschungsliteratur. Das 18. Jahrhundert war für das Hochstift Basel ein Saeculum der Reformen. Die Initiative ging in der Regel von der Verwaltung aus, genauer gesagt von einigen Spitzenbeamten, auswärtigen und einheimischen, die z.T. in Deutschland, z.T. in Frankreich

studiert hatten. Die Rolle des Domkapitels ist unklar. Aus den formelhaften Wahlkapitulationen, welche vor allem die Rechte und Einkünfte der Domherren gegenüber dem Fürsten sicherten, geht kein besonderer Reformeifer des Domkapitels hervor, auch wenn wir wissen, das es durchaus reformerisch gesinnte und gebildete Domherren gab, die als Deputation des Domkapitels am fürstbischöflichen Hof aktiv Einfluss nahmen. Der „Reformstart“ misslang vorerst gründlich. 1726 erliess Fürstbischof Johann Konrad von Reinach-Hirzbach unter dem Einfluss des aus Eichstätt stammenden Hofratsvizepräsidenten Franz Christoph von Ramschwag und des einheimischen protestantischen Hofkammerrates Johann Laubscher eine Ordonnance (Verordnung), mit welcher das Fürstbistum im Sinne des französischen Absolutismus neu organisiert werden sollte. Dagegen erhoben sich die Städte, die Landgemeinden, einige Klöster sowie Teile der Landstände und des Domkapitels, welche die Fortführung der alten Privilegien, eine Steuersenkung und eine Einschränkung der fürstlichen Macht verlangten. Das Fürstbistum wurde in der Folge bis 1740 von „Landestroublen“ erschüttert, die unter der Herrschaft von Fürstbischof Jakob Sigmund von Reinach-Steinbrunn mit der blutigen Niederschlagung des Aufstandes durch französische Truppen und der Hinrichtung der Anführer endete.7) Damit war der Weg frei für die Umgestaltung des Hochstifts in einen absolutistisch-aufgeklärten Staat, jedenfalls im katholischen Reichsgebiet. Im eidgenössischen und reformierten südlichen Teil des Hochstifts verhinderte Bern die Errichtung einer absolutistischen Fürstenregimes. Die Herrschaftsverdichtung schlägt sich in der Zahl der Ordonnances nieder – übrigens eine erstklassige Quelle, um die Reformen und die dahinter stehenden Ideen nachzuzeichnen: Von den 875 erfassten Erlässen der Fürstbischöfe seit 1500 entfallen fast 600 oder über zwei Drittel auf die Zeit nach 1726, wobei vor allem in der zweiten Jahrhunderthälfte die Zahl stark zunahm. Rinck von Baldenstein Der grosse Reformfürstbischof war Joseph Wilhelm Rinck von Baldenstein, der von 1744 bis 1762 regierte.8) Beeinflusst von den Idealen der französischen „Administration éclairée“ und den aufklärerischen Gedanken aus den katholischen Territorien des Hl. Römischen Reiches setzten er und seine Berater, vor allem der einheimische Hofkammerpräsident Friedrich Konrad von Ligerz/Gléresse und der Elsässer Kammerrat Franz Decker ein eigentliches Reformprojekt in Staat und

Kirche in Gang. Hier eine Auswahl von Reformen: - Reorganisation der Kammerverwaltung und der Finanzverwaltung angeblich nach dem Vorbild des Hochstifts Speyer: In kürzester Zeit erzielte das Hochstift durch Einsparungen und Mehreinnahmen einen Überschuss von einem Drittel (80’000 Basler Pfund Einnahmen, 60’000 Ausgaben), - Neuorganisation des Archivs und der Registratur durch Leonhard Leopold Maldoner aus Waldshut (Vorderösterreich): Das heutige fürstbischöfliche Archiv in Pruntrut folgt immer noch Maldoners Ordnung, - Kartografische Erfassung des Landes durch drei Geometer aus Besançon (Pierre-François Paris und die Brüder Didier und Barthélemy Trincano) nach dem Vorbild der französischen Militärkartografie: Dabei entstanden Katasterpläne und am Jesuitenkolleg Pruntrut eine Schule für Feldmesser, - Das Strassennetz wurde neu gebaut, um den internationalen Transitverkehr FrankreichSchweiz durch das Hochstift zu leiten: In der zweiten Jahrhunderthälfte verfügte das Hochstift über eines der modernsten Strassennetze der Schweiz, welches beträchtliche Erträge abwarf (Basel-Delsberg-Bellelay-Biel und Delle-PruntrutLes Rangiers-Delsberg). - 1753 liess Rinck das hoch rentable Stahlwerk Bellefontaine errichten, deren hoher Holzkonsum die Hochwälder des Jura ruinierte, - Deshalb erliess er 1755 ein Waldschutzgesetz, unseres Wissens das erste in Europa, das dem Raubbau der Wälder Einhalt gebot, in verschiedenen Ländern kopiert wurde und bis ins 19. Jahrhundert in der Schweiz als Vorbild für die Waldschutzgesetzgebung galt. - 1758 wurde ein fürstbischöfliches Regiment in französischen Diensten aufgestellt, das zusätzliche Einnahmen generierte. - Im kirchlichen Bereich erfolgten die üblichen Reform der katholischen Aufklärung: Reduktion der Feiertage, Reform der Priesterausbildung am Seminar in Pruntrut, 1762 die Errichtung einer theologischen Fakultät; die Herausgabe eines neuen Katechismus. Die Nachfolger Rincks, vor allem deren Kanzler, der einheimische Dominik Joseph von Billieux, setzten das Reformprogramm im Sinne des französischen Merkantilismus sowie des deutschen Kameralismus bis 1790 fort.9) Dabei liessen sich die letzten Fürstbischöfe vom Eudämonismus der Aufklärung leiten: Der gütige Landesherr, der für die Glückseligkeit seiner Untertanen sorgt, war ihr Ideal, etwa als sie in den Hunger- und Teuerungsjahren 1779/80 und 1789 auf eigene Kosten im Ausland teures Korn einkauften und es verbilligt dem Volk abgaben. Dank der jahrzehntelangen Überschüsse (dazwischen gab es aber auch Jahre mit Defiziten und Misswirtschaft) erlebte das Hochstift wirtschaftlich und kulturell eine Blütezeit: Heute noch zeugen prachtvolle Bauten

in Delsberg, Pruntrut, Arlesheim vom relativen Wohlstand und einer kulturellen Blüte. Das Schulwesen wurde ausgebaut; das Jesuitenkolleg nach 1773 reorganisiert und unter die Aufsicht des Fürstbischofs gestellt, 1784 wurde der obligatorische Schulbesuch eingeführt (wenn auch nicht durchgesetzt) und die Ausbildung für Schullehrer eingeführt. 1772 nahm eine weit über die Grenze hinaus bekannte Schule im Prämonstratenserkloster Bellelay nach dem Vorbild der französischen Kriegsschulen seine Tätigkeit auf. 1779 wurde eine fürstbischöfliche Post und 1780 zur Bekämpfung der Arbeitslosigkeit eine Textilfabrik in Pruntrut eingerichtet. Im ausgehenden 18. Jahrhundert war das Fürstbistum Basel trotz seiner mittelalterlich-feudalen Verfassung ein durchaus lebensfäriger Staat, der bezüglich der wirtschaftlichen, kulturellen und sozialen Entwicklung einen Vergleich mit den anderen geistlichen und weltlichen Staaten nicht zu scheuen brauchte. Bei den adligen Herrschaftsträgern bestanden kaum Selbstzweifel: Domherr von Eberstein beispielsweise gab in seiner weitläufigen Korrespondenz immer wieder seinen Stolz über das prächtige Gedeihen der geistlichen Staaten Ausdruck.

sche Diözese (unter seiner Leitung) zu schaffen, scheiterte hingegen. Inwieweit er bereits vor 1789 Reformen vorschlug oder wie er die Überlebensfähigkeit des geistlichen Staates in Frage beurteilte, ist noch nicht untersucht. Sicher betrieb er ab 1790 zusammen mit seinen geistlichen und weltlichen Getreuen, u.a. seinem Neffen Joseph-Anton Rengger, dem Syndikus des Landstände, den Sturz des „tyrannischen“ Fürstbischofs Joseph Sigismund von Roggenbach und die Entmachtung des Adels. Die anti-adlige und republikanische Grundströmung der revolutionären Bewegung kommt etwa prononciert in den fünf Pamphleten des jakobinisch gesinnten Pfarrers Louis François Zéphirin Copin zum Ausdruck, worin er ausdrücklich auf die Schweizer Republiken, aber auch auf die französischen Revolutionäre Bezug nahm und die Vertreibung des Fürstbischofs und des Adels verlangte.12) Hier besteht offensichtlich ein Zusammenhang zwischen vorrevolutionären Reformbestrebungen und Revolution. Die geistlichen und weltlichen Vertreter der alten Eliten gaben aber nicht so rasch auf und leisteten Widerstand. Der im Exil gewählte letzte Basler Fürstbi-

Die Hochöfen in Undervelier, Jura. Öl auf Leinwand, gemalt von Edouard-Frédéric Pape, 1845, Musée jurassien d’art et d’histoire, Delsberg

Reform und Revolution Trotzdem fielen die Ideen der Französischen Revolution im Hochstift Basel auf fruchtbaren Boden.10) Es ist offensichtlich, dass viele Reformer der vorrevolutionären Zeit sich nach 1789 unter den Revolutionären, ja einige sogar unter den führenden Jakobinern, befanden, die nach Ausbruch des 1. Koalitionskrieges im April 1792 nach dem Einmarsch der französischen Truppen im Reichsteil die alte Ordnung stürzten und den Anschluss des Fürstbistums Basel als „Département du Mont-Terrible“ (Schreckensberg) an die französische Republik betrieben. Es fällt auf, dass im Hochstift ausgerechnet Spitzenvertreter des Regimes sich an die Spitze der revolutionären Bewegung stellten, allen voran der zweite Mann in Staat und Kirche, der aus dem Elsass stammende Weihbischof Johann Baptist Gobel.11) Er hatte 1779 die Neuumschreibung der Diözesangrenzen ausgehandelt und im Allianzvertrag von 1780 Frankreich grossen Einfluss auf das Hochstift eingeräumt. Sein Plan, aus dem elsässischen Teil der Diözese Basel eine elsässi-

schof Franz Xaver von Neveu kämpfte bis zum letzten Moment für sein Hochstift. Noch nach dem Frieden von Lunéville vom 9. Februar 1801 hoffte er, wenigstens die rechtsrheinischen Herrschaften retten zu können und durch eine Union aller geistlichen Fürsten die Säkularisation abwenden zu können. Erst Ende 1801 kapitulierte er und behauptete nun plötzlich: „Das weltliche Regie-

ren ist nicht meine Sache, vielmehr bin ich froh, dessen überhoben zu werden“13) – was ihn dann 1814 nicht hinderte, am Wiener Kongress aktiv die Wiedererrichtung des Hochstifts als 23. Schweizer Kanton zu betreiben.

Marco Jorio

Historisches Lexikon der Schweiz 1

Ernst Gagliardi, Geschichte der Schweiz. Von den Anfängen bis auf die Gegenwart. Bd. 2, Zürich 1928, S. 198. 2 Zur Geschichte des Fürstbistums, des Domkapitels und der Diözese Basel (inkl. weiterführende Literatur ) s. Historisches Lexikon der Schweiz, Bd. 1, Basel 2002, S. 740-754. Elektronisch unter www.hls.ch (dort auch die Biographien zu den im Artikel genannten Personen). 3 Jean-François de Chambrier, Un voyage érudit dans l’évêché de Bâle en 1789. Hrsg. Von A. Schnegg. In: Actes de la société jurassienne d’émulation 65 (1961), S. 123-138 4 Heinrich Ludwig Lehmann, Das Bisthum Basel, der Zankapfel zwischen Frankreich und der Schweiz (Leipzig 1798), S. 53/54, S. 292. 5 Catherine Bosshart-Pfluger, Das Basler Domkapitel von seiner Übersiedlung nach Arlesheim bis zur Säkularisation (1678-1803), (Basel 1983). 6 Felix Ackermann, Christian Franz Freiherr von Eberstein (1719-1797), (Basel 2004). 7 Andreas Suter, „Troublen“ im Fürstbistum Basel (Göttingen 1985). 8 Patrick Braun, Joseph Wilhelm Rinck von Baldenstein (17041762), (Freiburg i. Ü. 1981). 9 Franz Abplanalp, Zur Wirtschaftspolitik des Fürstbistums Basel im Zeitalter des Absolutismus (Bern 1971). 10 Marco Jorio, Der Untergang des Fürstbistums Basel 17921815, (Freiburg i. Ü 1982); Jean-René Suratteau, Le département du Mont-Terrible sous le régime du Directoire (1795-1800), (Paris 1965). 11 Nouveau dictionnaire de biographie alsacienne 13 (1988), S. 1208-1210 (mit weiterführender Literatur). 12 Lionel Jeannerat, Louis François Zéphirin Copin (1723-1804), prêtre révolutionnaire, (Neuchâtel 2010). 13 Marco Jorio, op. cit., S. 148.

Ansicht von Pruntrut-Porrentruy. Gouache von David Alois Schmid, um 1845, Musée de l’Hôtel de Dieu, Pruntrut

THE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM:

David Hume and Northern Europe at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies on 3 and 4 October, hosted by Tatiana Artemyeva and Mikhail Mikeshin Looking at the contributions we should take the term reception in a double sense. First, how did Finns, Swedes, Norwegians, Russians and people from Northern Germany receive Hume’s writings in the past and secondly, how do scholars from these countries nowadays react to Hume. It was an excellent conference conducted by our hosts in an amiable and open manner and – as it should be – some new openings to the study of Hume were presented by the participants. So it was a pity that even those from Western Europe (including the U.K.) who had announced that they would come cancelled their visit, sometimes even at the last minute. Except for my person. However, my contribution on the subject of Hume’s reception in the Netherlands was a very minor one, for there was no reception of Hume in the Netherlands except for a flurry of publications (including those in Flanders) in recent times. The conference was a useful antidote to the Anglo-centric attitude in Hume studies which often prevails and those who did not attend the conference would have profited from the discussions. As to the reception of Hume in the first sense Carola Häntsch commented on Wilhelm Bolin’s translation of Hume’s Natural History of Religion. She concluded that Hume via Bolin was a major influence on Feuerbach and his critique of religion. Jani Hakkarainen dealt with Eino Kaila’s commentary on Hume. Kaila accused Hume of replacing logic by psychology. Hakkarainen gives the story of Hume’s psychologism a new twist by telling us that Kaila was an accomplished experimental psychologist himself. Tatiana Artemyeva presented us with a delightful account of the reception of the French Enlightenment by contemporary Russian writers. Information about Scottish writers reached them via the French. In this way Hume’s History influenced Russian historians. Muraview, for instance, appreciated the way Hume reconciled mercenary and benevolent partialities in his account. I particularly liked her comment that Russian noblemen were inspired by the French

7

enlightenment, while Russian academics tended to look to Christian Wolff as a representative of the German enlightenment. Pekka Hongisto dealt with the Swedish poet Thomas Thorild who worked and lived around the turn of the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century. Thorild discovered the poet in Hume. We should perhaps not take this too literally, I would like to suggest (if only because Hume had a bad taste for poetry), but there is certainly an aesthetical element in Hume’s definition of moral judgment. Four papers (mine included) dealt with Hume’s reception elsewhere. Vincenzo Merolle pointed out that not only the Dutch were under the sway of German scholarship in the nineteeth-century. So were the Italians with great names such as Winckelmann, Niebuhr and Mommsen writing about the Roman past. Mikko Tolonen gave a lively account of Hume’s position among the Scottish moderati. He argued that Hume does not fit in a scene that was dominated by Hutcheson. There is value in his line of reasoning, though I think that Tolonen is overstating his case. In my view the Hume of the Treatise made at least an attempt to fit into the Scottish scene which was dominated by the idea of moral improvement. The case of the reception of Hume by pragmatists such as Peirce and William James is a curious one as Sami Pihlström explained to us. James complained that Hume was too much of an atomist and that his ideas were only loosely connected. He apparently did not see that Hume’s theory of belief was instrumental in converting simple into complex ideas. And that theory has another aspect which should have appealed to James. All beliefs to Hume are causal beliefs and the truth value of these beliefs depends on whether we can predict the effects of the causes we recognize. In James’ terms ideas have truth value, because they work. This is my reading of the text and the pragmatist should have welcomed Hume as an ally, but

according to Pihlström they did not. As to the reception of Hume in the second sense Valentin Bazanov makes a good case for the function of contradictions in Hume’s epistemology. It almost makes Hume into a pre-Hegelian dialectician. Vesa Oittinen dealt with Deleuze’s defense of Hume’s empiricism against Kant and later critics of Hume’s theory of knowledge in that he discovers a free ranging subjectivity in Hume’s philosophy which makes Hume into a radical critic of rationalism. Petter Nafstad suggested that Hume’s definition and his handling of the indirect passions is a possible way of constructing a sociology of emotions. Oili Pulkkinen has discovered the knave in Hume’s moral theory and suggests that this trait in human character puts a narrow limit on human sociability. And Rope Kojonen emphasizes that Hume’s criticism of the design element is still pertinent to theology today. Henrik Bohlin treating a Dialogue in Hume’s first Enquiry explains how beneath the cultural relativism, which Hume presents, Hume made the case for a flexible approach to moral judgments based on universal standards. At the end Mikhail Mikeshin explained in a spirit of almost Humean playfulness that Hume was not a metaphysician. He accepted metaphysics as a method of inquiry but not as an independent system of explanation. This was my summing up of much earnest thought and two days of an amiable and fruitful discussion and I would like to thank Mikhail and Tatiana for bringing us together. The symposium was supported and hosted by the Helsinki Collegium of Advanced Studies with cordial and efficient hospitality. These papers will be published as no. 37 in the series of the St.Petersburg Center for the History of Ideas. The issues of this center can be consulted at the website http://ideashistory.org.ru. The papers of this conference will also appear on this website F.L. van Holthoon

Directory of Scholars in European Studies Dear Colleague, We are a little team of scholars working for the compilation of a Directory of Scholars in European Studies, which has the aim of boosting and systematizing the study of European history and of contributing to the cultural and political union of our continent. The Directory will be online, with free access, and will constitute a network of scholars which, we believe, will somehow influence the future of our civilization, promoting suitable cultural activities. We would be happy should you agree to join our Directory, along with the colleagues who have already given their assent. You should be as kind as to let us know, in four or five lines, your university affiliation, field of interest, e.mail for further communications on the part of the editorial board and of colleagues, and your postal address. To your e.mail we will forward all the communications about the activities that our society will promote and our journal (2.000. The European Journal: see all the past issues on the internet). We would furthermore be grateful if you could let us know the names of colleagues interested in joining our Directory and, in particular, the name and e.mail of younger scholars willing to help us in the work of compilation. This work can be done in odd moments, and will not be very demanding, if brought forward by several young people, who will be our editorial associates, and whose collaboration will be acknowledged. Yours sincerely

Cher/ère collègue, Nous sommes une petite équipe d’universitaires qui travaillent pour la compilation d’un Directory of Scholars in European Studies, dans le but de promouvoir et systématiser l’étude de l’histoire européenne et de contribuer à l’union culturelle et politique de notre continent. Le Directoire sera en ligne, avec accès gratuit, et constituera un réseau d’érudits qui, nous le croyons, influencera dans une certaine mesure l’avenir de notre civilisation, en promouvant des activités culturelles appropriées. Nous serions heureux que vous acceptiez de vous joindre aux collègues qui ont déjà adhéré

The journal appears twice a year, in June and December. The publisher is the ‘Milton School of Languages’ srl, Viale Grande Muraglia 301, 00144 ROMA. Cost of each issue € 10, $ 10, £ 7 The subscription (individuals €25, $25, £15; institutions and supporting € 50, $50, £35), can be sent to the ‘Milton School of Languages’, from any post office, in Italy, to our ‘conto corrente postale’ no. 40792566, with a ‘bollettino postale’. From outside Italy it is possible to make direct transfer of money to our postal account IBAN: IT-72-X-07601-03200-000040792566, or to send a cheque to the ‘Milton School Publishers’ plc. We do not have the capacity to accept credit card payments. Please, take out a subscription to the journal. Help us find a subscriber.

*** *** *** To contributors: essays should not exceed 3000 words, reviews should not exceed 700 words. They can be sent via e-mail to the editor, in Viale Grande Muraglia 301, 00144 ROMA, E-mail [email protected]. Stampato nel mese di dicembre 2011 dalla tipografia Città Nuova della P.A.M.O.M. Via Pieve Torina, 55 - 00156 Roma - tel. 066530467 - e-mail: [email protected]

8

au Directoire, ou Annuaire. Pourriez-vous avoir l’obligeance de nous indiquer, en quatre ou cinq lignes, votre université, votre champ de recherche, votre e.mail ainsi que votre adresse postale pour communications de la part du comité éditorial et des collègues? À votre e.mail nous ferons suivre toute communication sur les activités que notre société va promouvoir et notre revue (2.000. The European Journal: voir sur internet tous les numéros précédents). Nous vous serions en outre reconnaissants de nous faire connaître les noms des collègues susceptibles d’être intéressés par notre Directoire et, particulièrement, le nom et l’e.mail de jeunes chercheurs qui pourraient nous aider dans le travail de compilation. Ce travail se peut faire de temps en temps, et ne sera pas très exigeant, si il est fait par plusieurs jeunes collègues, qui seront notre secrétariat de rédaction. Leur collaboration sera reconnue. Cordialement Vincenzo Merolle

P.S.: The e.mail of the Directory is [email protected]; all the correspondence concerning the Directory should be sent to this address.

Directory of Scholars in European Studies Editor: Vincenzo Merolle (Rome, ‘La Sapienza’), private office: viale Grande Muraglia 301, 00144 Roma, e.mail [email protected]; co-editors: Andreas Golob (Graz), [email protected]; Erhard Steller, Köln [email protected]. Editorial Board: Tatiana Artemyeva (St Petersburg), Riccardo Campa (Siena), Francis Celoria (Keele), Annie Cointre (Metz), Desmond Fennell (Dublin), Harald Heppner (Graz), F.L. van Holthoon (Groningen), Vincent Hope (Edinburgh), Serge Soupel (Paris, Sorbonne Nouvelle), P. Sture Ureland (Mannheim). Editorial Associates: Federico Bonzi (Napoli), [email protected]; Olga Ermakova (Yekaterinburg), [email protected]; Andreas Golob (Graz), [email protected]; Sabine Kraus (Montpellier), [email protected]; Elisabeth Lobenwein (Salzburg), [email protected]; Katherine Nicolai (Edinburgh), [email protected]; Tatiana O. Novikova (St. Petersburg), [email protected]; Marine Riva-Ganofski (Oxford), [email protected]; Simona Seghizzi (Roma, ‘La Sapienza’), [email protected] .

2

000. The European Journal / La Revue Européenne

Editor/Directeur: VINCENZO MEROLLE - Università di Roma “La Sapienza” Board of Editors/Expertenbeirat: VINCENT HOPE (Edinburgh) / CAIRNS CRAIG (Aberdeen), HORST DRESCHER (Mainz) / SERGE SOUPEL (Paris III) Editorial Associates/ Secrétariat de Rédaction : ELIZABETH DUROT (Paris III), HARALD HEPPNER (Graz), Ronnie YOUNG (Glasgow) Consulting Editors/Comité de Lecture: FRANCIS CELORIA (Keele) / ANNIE COINTRE (Metz) / DESMOND FENNELL (Dublin-Rome) / FRITS L. VAN HOLTHOON (Groningen) / P. STURE URELAND (Mannheim) http//www.Europeanjournal.it Web-Editors: Kerstin Jorna (Perth), Claudia Cioffi (Roma) Direttore Responsabile: RICCARDO CAMPA - Università di Siena Publisher/Verleger: Milton School of Languages s.r.l.; Publisher & Editorial Offices/ Rédaction: Viale Grande Muraglia 301, 00144 ROMA; E-mail [email protected]; tel/fax 06/5291553 Reg. Tribunale di Roma n. 252 del 2/6/2000