Version actuelle datée du 18 décembre 2020 à 17:01

The history of the concept of empire

Données clés
Professeur(s)	Alexis Keller^[1]^[2]^[3]
Cours	History of legal and political thought: the concept of empire from its origins to the present day

Lectures

Languages

Español Français

Why the empire? Let us start from a premise: it is surely a mistake to see the history of political and legal thought or the history of the institutions of Europe as a linear history in which we would pass from great empires to the 16th - 17th centuries and then to the constitution of nation-states. Professor Keller refuses to see the institutional history of the legal and political history of Europe as a linear history. It is a mistake to read history in this way because there is not a very simple passage between medieval Europe, Renaissance Europe, modern Europe and finally contemporary Europe.

In fact, this history of European legal and political thought is the history of a conflict of tension between two important concepts that have always been opposed: the concept of the state and the concept of empire. European political and legal thought should not be read as a chronological and linear sequence of great ideas, but as a tension of great ideas. Historians have often forgotten this tension and in particular two very important points.

L'arrivée de Christophe Colomb en Amérique, gravure de 1893.

the very emergence of the European States took place in parallel with the emergence of the great empires: when we look at the great institutions, they were set up in parallel with the French, English, Spanish and Portuguese empires. There is a tension because these two concepts have evolved together. The birth of the English state went hand in hand with that of the English empire.
We underestimate the colossal impact that the discovery of the New World in 1492 by the Europeans had on Western legal thought. From 1942 onwards, a whole series of problems arose, political, theoretical, legal and practical, which influenced law, the concept of the state and the concept of empire. In particular, European jurists asked themselves who owned the newly conquered territories, the status of indigenous peoples, and how to include them in a legal order if they were men.

These questions relating to the right of conquest will have a colossal impact on the very vision of the great European empires and in particular on the vision of the law of nations that will be defended by the great founders of classical international law. The history of Europe is a tension between the concept of state and the concept of empire. This issue has been little studied, as historians have forgotten two important facts, namely that European states were born in parallel to European empires and the failure to take into account the discovery of the New World. When we include these two parameters, we realise that Europe was built largely on and from the idea of empire.

The aim of this course is to show how since Rome this concept of empire has constituted the intellectual matrix of classical international law and contemporary thinking on classical international law.

When we look a little bit at the history of terms in the French language, we are supposed to see that the three main terms have a fairly recent history. The term "empire" should not be confused with the term "imperialism". The word "empire" refers first of all to the ideology in favour of an imperial regime, but basically the word only appears in the French language at the beginning of the 20th century. Imperialism" is a word and an ideology that emerges at the beginning of the 20th century in Lenin's Imperialism, the supreme stage of capitalism. The terms "imperialism" and "imperial" were debated in the French language at the beginning of the 20th century.

Scene at the signing of the United States Constitution, by Howard Chandler Christy. This chart depicts the 33 delegates who signed the Constitution.

The term "empire" refers to a plurality of experiences, one thinks of extremely varied things. We're going to realise that there are many different conceptions of empires, there are extremely different visions and models of empires. There is a Roman conception of empire, a papal conception, a European conception and an extremely precise American conception of empire, which is based on a fascinating ideology with the ideology of Manifest Destiny. The word "empire" refers to realities and pluralities of experience. We can see this very clearly in historiography, where everyone has their own definition. Contrary to the idea of "state", the idea of "empire" or the "imperial fact" is based on great heterogeneity.

The term "colonialism" is a term which also appears very late in the French language, in 1904, to be precise, referring to a real system of colonial expansion which marked the whole of the 19th century. This term appears late, which is not the case with the term "colony", which appeared in English in the 16th century, referring to a territory administered by a foreign power, but also to a people living on this territory. The term "colony" is used in both French and English to refer to the point of view of both the settler and the colonised. The term colony refers to a group of people exploiting a territory. The term is ambiguous because it refers to a territory without designating to whom that territory belongs.

The term "emperor" and the term "empire", basically, until the end of the 18th century, are terms that hardly appear in official documents, be it treaties or constitutions. The reason for this is that when we speak of an "emperor" or "empire" up to the French Revolution and precisely up to 1806, we are talking about an entity that bears the name of the Holy Roman Germanic Empire. In legal terms, the only one who had the right to bear the term "emperor" until 1806 in the European constitutional order was the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. This is the attribute of only one entity in Europe. The French, the English or the Spanish and the empires do not call themselves "Empire". It is this ambiguity of language that makes the English have a very large empire in 1870, but do not speak of it in official terms, we speak of the "lands of the King of England".

Coronation of Charlemagne. Grandes Chroniques de France (illuminated version by Jean Fouquet).

The concept of empire therefore has a history that can be traced. The history can be divided into five parts:

The Roman model: this is an extremely important model because Rome has haunted Western thought, it is the common heritage of Western thought.
The coronation of Charlemagne in the year 800, which will give the concept of empire another meaning, we leave the model of the Roman empire in order to give a quasi-religious meaning to the idea of empire.
The birth of the Holy Roman Empire in 962, whose jurists also gave a new meaning to the term "empire" and the imperial model. The dimension of "Saint" is the religious dimension, the imperial jurists will defend the idea that the emperor is the holder of the "dominus mundi". Basically, the religious heir of the Empire is the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. "Roman" because the Holy Roman Empire will claim to be the heir of the Roman Empire, 'Germanic' because it has a German connotation, German is gradually becoming the language of the Empire. This is the emergence of the largest empire model that Europe experienced between 962 and 1806. This model will not remain unchanged. The Pope is also an empire, the Holy Roman Empire will be challenged by the papal model. The Pope will defend the thesis that he is the one who holds the "dominus mundi". One should not forget the universalist claim of the church with a claim to rule the world and not to have a statutorily superior emperor. The German imperial model will be criticised by the papal model.
The moment after the discovery of the New World: until the end of the 15th century, the Germanic model and the papal model clashed, and the discovery of the New World brought everyone to agree. A new conception of the imperial model was born, with the Spanish model in particular at the beginning, with the famous questions that European jurists were asked. The question of whether the natives are men is a fundamental question, because if they are men, they have natural rights. John Locke will be the absolute champion of property rights. If you are a man, you have natural rights to ownership of your body and material goods.
The moment after the American Revolution: this is the moment when the American Republic comes into being. The victors of history are going to defend a republic model resembling the Roman ideology, that is, the model of the imperial republic. A fact that has to be justified from the point of view of international law is the shifting of borders. The United States of America was formed between 1776 and 1793 around thirteen colonies on the east coast. The question of shifting to the east coast arises. The American Republic is faced with the legal problem of whether it is possible to become an empire, to apply the Roman models. The United States has had lively debates, especially with the Supreme Court, which has tried to stop the expansion of the American Republic towards the west and to show the illegality of the conquest of the west. In particular, the Supreme Court handed down three decisions called the Marshall decisions, named after the Chief Justice, which called for the Native American nations to be considered to stop the illegal expansion towards the West. The then U.S. President Andrew Jackson says « John Marshall made his decision, let him enforce it! ». Thus we will see the imperial origins of the American Republic. The tension around the imperial vision of the United States of America is still the subject of debate today.

Annexes[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

References[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

[1] Alexis Keller - Wikipedia

[2] Alexis Keller - Faculté de droit - UNIGE

[3] Alexis Keller | International Center for Transitional Justice

[1]

[2]

[3]

@@ Ligne 19 : / Ligne 19 : @@
 {{Translations
-| en = The history of the concept of empire
+| fr = L'histoire du concept d'empire
-| es =
+| es = La historia del concepto de imperio
 }}
-Pourquoi l’empire ? Partons d’un postulat : il est surement une erreur de voir l’histoire de la pensée politique et juridique ou l’histoire des institutions de l’Europe comme une histoire linéaire ou l’on passerait de grands empires jusqu’aux XVIème siècle – XVIIème siècles et ensuite à la constitution des États-nations. Le professeur Keller refuse de voir l’histoire institutionnelle de l’histoire juridique et politique de l’Europe comme une histoire linéaire. C’est une erreur de lire l’histoire de cette manière parce qu’il n’y a pas un passage très simple entre l’Europe médiévale, l’Europe de la Renaissance, l’Europe moderne et enfin l’Europe contemporaine.
+Why the empire? Let us start from a premise: it is surely a mistake to see the history of political and legal thought or the history of the institutions of Europe as a linear history in which we would pass from great empires to the 16th - 17th centuries and then to the constitution of nation-states. Professor Keller refuses to see the institutional history of the legal and political history of Europe as a linear history. It is a mistake to read history in this way because there is not a very simple passage between medieval Europe, Renaissance Europe, modern Europe and finally contemporary Europe.
-En fait, cette histoire de la pensée juridique et politique européenne est l’histoire d’un conflit d’une tension entre deux concepts importants qui se sont toujours opposés : le concept d’État et le concept d’empire. La pensée politique et juridique européenne ne doit pas se lire comme une suite chronologique et linéaire de grandes idées, mais comme une tension de grandes idées. Les historiens ont souvent oublié cette tension et notamment deux points très importants. [[Image:Columbus Taking Possession.jpg|thumb|300px|L'arrivée de Christophe Colomb en Amérique, gravure de 1893.]]
+In fact, this history of European legal and political thought is the history of a conflict of tension between two important concepts that have always been opposed: the concept of the state and the concept of empire. European political and legal thought should not be read as a chronological and linear sequence of great ideas, but as a tension of great ideas. Historians have often forgotten this tension and in particular two very important points. [[Image:Columbus Taking Possession.jpg|thumb|300px|L'arrivée de Christophe Colomb en Amérique, gravure de 1893.]]
-*l’émergence même des États européens s’est faite en parallèle avec l’émergence des grands empires : lorsqu’on regarde les grandes institutions, elles se sont mises en place en parallèle à l’empire français, anglais, espagnol ou encore portugais. Il y a une tension parce que ces deux concepts ont cheminé ensemble. La naissance de l’État anglais est allée de pair avec celle de l’empire anglais.
+* the very emergence of the European States took place in parallel with the emergence of the great empires: when we look at the great institutions, they were set up in parallel with the French, English, Spanish and Portuguese empires. There is a tension because these two concepts have evolved together. The birth of the English state went hand in hand with that of the English empire.
-*on sous-estime l’impact colossal que la découverte du Nouveau Monde en 1492 par les Européens a eu sur la pensée juridique occidentale. À partir de 1942 surgit toute une série de problèmes, politiques, théoriques, juridiques et pratiques qui ont influencé le droit, le concept d’État et le concept d’empire. Les juristes européens se posent notamment la question de savoir à qui appartiennent ces territoires nouvellement conquis, quel est le statut des peuples autochtones, comment les inclure dans un ordre juridique si ce sont des hommes.
+*We underestimate the colossal impact that the discovery of the New World in 1492 by the Europeans had on Western legal thought. From 1942 onwards, a whole series of problems arose, political, theoretical, legal and practical, which influenced law, the concept of the state and the concept of empire. In particular, European jurists asked themselves who owned the newly conquered territories, the status of indigenous peoples, and how to include them in a legal order if they were men.
-Ces questions relevant du droit de conquête vont avoir un impact colossal sur la vision même des grands empires européens et notamment sur la vision du droit des gens qui va être défendue par les grands fondateurs du droit international classique. L’histoire de l’Europe est une tension entre le concept d’État et la conception d’empire. Cette question a été peu étudiée, car les historiens ont oublié deux faits importants à savoir que les États européens sont nés en parallèle aux empires européens et la non-prise en compte de la découverte du Nouveau Monde. Lorsqu’on inclut ces deux paramètres, on se rend compte que l’Europe s’est construite en grande partie à partir et sur l’idée d’empire.
+These questions relating to the right of conquest will have a colossal impact on the very vision of the great European empires and in particular on the vision of the law of nations that will be defended by the great founders of classical international law. The history of Europe is a tension between the concept of state and the concept of empire. This issue has been little studied, as historians have forgotten two important facts, namely that European states were born in parallel to European empires and the failure to take into account the discovery of the New World. When we include these two parameters, we realise that Europe was built largely on and from the idea of empire.
-Le propos de ce cours est de montrer comment depuis Rome ce concept d’empire a constitué la matrice intellectuelle du droit international classique et de la réflexion contemporaine sur le droit international classique.
+The aim of this course is to show how since Rome this concept of empire has constituted the intellectual matrix of classical international law and contemporary thinking on classical international law.
-Lorsqu’on regarde un tout petit peu l’histoire des termes en langue française, nous sommes censés de constater que les trois termes principaux ont une histoire assez récente. Il ne faut pas confondre le terme « empire » d’avec le terme d’« impérialisme ». Le mot « empire » désigne tout d’abord l’idéologie favorable à un régime impérial, mais au fond le mot n’apparait dans la langue française qu’au début du XXème siècle. L’« impérialisme » est un mot et une idéologie qui émerge au début du XXème siècle dans l’ouvrage de Lénine L’impérialisme, stade suprême du capitalisme. Les termes d’« impérialisme » et l’« impérial » sont débattus en langue française au début du XXème siècle.
+When we look a little bit at the history of terms in the French language, we are supposed to see that the three main terms have a fairly recent history. The term "empire" should not be confused with the term "imperialism". The word "empire" refers first of all to the ideology in favour of an imperial regime, but basically the word only appears in the French language at the beginning of the 20th century. Imperialism" is a word and an ideology that emerges at the beginning of the 20th century in Lenin's Imperialism, the supreme stage of capitalism. The terms "imperialism" and "imperial" were debated in the French language at the beginning of the 20th century.
-[[Image:Scene_at_the_Signing_of_the_Constitution_of_the_United_States.jpg|300px|thumb|left|''Scène à la signature de la Constitution des États-Unis'', par Howard Chandler Christy. Ce tableau représente les 33 délégués qui signèrent la Constitution.]]
+[[Image:Scene_at_the_Signing_of_the_Constitution_of_the_United_States.jpg|300px|thumb|left|''Scene at the signing of the United States Constitution'', by Howard Chandler Christy. This chart depicts the 33 delegates who signed the Constitution.]]
-Le terme d’« empire » renvoie à une pluralité d’expériences, on pense à des choses extrêmement variées. On va se rendre compte qu’il y a de très nombreuses conceptions d’empires, il y a des visions et des modèles d’empires extrêmement différents. Il y a une conception romaine de l’empire, une conception papale, une conception européenne et une conception américaine de l’empire extrêmement précise qui repose sur une idéologie fascinante avec l’idéologie du Manifest Destiny. Le mot « empire » renvoie à des réalités et des pluralités d’expériences. On le voit très bien dans l’historiographie ou chacun y va de sa définition. Contrairement à l’idée d’« État », l’idée d’« empire » ou le « fait impérial » est fondé sur une grande hétérogénéité.
+The term "empire" refers to a plurality of experiences, one thinks of extremely varied things. We're going to realise that there are many different conceptions of empires, there are extremely different visions and models of empires. There is a Roman conception of empire, a papal conception, a European conception and an extremely precise American conception of empire, which is based on a fascinating ideology with the ideology of Manifest Destiny. The word "empire" refers to realities and pluralities of experience. We can see this very clearly in historiography, where everyone has their own definition. Contrary to the idea of "state", the idea of "empire" or the "imperial fact" is based on great heterogeneity.
-Le terme « colonialisme » est un terme qui également apparait très tardivement dans la langue française en 1904 pour être précis renvoyant à un véritable système d’expansion colonial qui marque tout le XIXème siècle. Ce terme parait tardivement ce qui n’est pas le cas du terme « colonie » qui apparait en langue anglaise au XVIème siècle désignant un territoire administré par un pouvoir étranger, mais également un peuple qui vie sur ce territoire. Le terme « colonie » est utilisé à la fois du point de vue dans la langue française et anglaise aussi bien pour désigner le point de vue du colon que le colonisé. Le terme colonie désigne un groupe de personne exploitant un territoire. Ce terme est ambigu parce qu’il désigne un territoire sans désigner à qui appartient ce territoire.
+The term "colonialism" is a term which also appears very late in the French language, in 1904, to be precise, referring to a real system of colonial expansion which marked the whole of the 19th century. This term appears late, which is not the case with the term "colony", which appeared in English in the 16th century, referring to a territory administered by a foreign power, but also to a people living on this territory. The term "colony" is used in both French and English to refer to the point of view of both the settler and the colonised. The term colony refers to a group of people exploiting a territory. The term is ambiguous because it refers to a territory without designating to whom that territory belongs.
-Le terme « empereur » et le terme « empire », au fond, jusqu’à la fin du XVIIIème siècle sont des termes qui n’apparaissent pratiquement pas dans les documents officiels qu’il s’agisse de traités ou de constitutions. La raison est que lorsqu’on parle d’« empereur » ou d’« empire » jusqu’à la Révolution française et jusqu’en 1806 précisément, on parle d’une entité qui porte le nom de Saint Empire romain germanique. En terme juridique, le seul qui a le droit de porter le terme d’« empereur » jusqu’en 1806 dans l’ordre constitutionnel européen est l’empereur du Saint Empire romain germanique. Ce n’est l’attribut que d’une seule entité en Europe. Les français, les Anglais ou encore les Espagnols et les empires ne se décrètent pas « Empire ». C’est cette ambiguïté de la langue qui fait que les Anglais ont un très grand empire en 1870, mais n’en parlent pas en termes officiels, on parle des « terres du roi d’Angleterre ».
+The term "emperor" and the term "empire", basically, until the end of the 18th century, are terms that hardly appear in official documents, be it treaties or constitutions. The reason for this is that when we speak of an "emperor" or "empire" up to the French Revolution and precisely up to 1806, we are talking about an entity that bears the name of the Holy Roman Germanic Empire. In legal terms, the only one who had the right to bear the term "emperor" until 1806 in the European constitutional order was the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. This is the attribute of only one entity in Europe. The French, the English or the Spanish and the empires do not call themselves "Empire". It is this ambiguity of language that makes the English have a very large empire in 1870, but do not speak of it in official terms, we speak of the "lands of the King of England".
-[[Fichier:Sacre de Charlemagne.jpg|250px|thumb|Couronnement de Charlemagne. ''Grandes Chroniques de France'' (version enluminée par Jean Fouquet).]]
+[[Fichier:Sacre de Charlemagne.jpg|250px|thumb|Coronation of Charlemagne. ''Grandes Chroniques de France'' (illuminated version by Jean Fouquet).]]
-Le concept d’empire a donc une histoire qu’il est possible de retracer. L’histoire peut être divisée en cinq parties :
+The concept of empire therefore has a history that can be traced. The history can be divided into five parts:
-#le modèle romain : c’est un modèle extrêmement important parce que Rome a hanté la pensée occidentale, c’est l’héritage commun à la pensée occidentale.
+#The Roman model: this is an extremely important model because Rome has haunted Western thought, it is the common heritage of Western thought.
-#Le couronnement de Charlemagne en l’an 800 qui va donner au concept d’empire une autre signification, on quitte le modèle d’empire romain afin de donner une signification quasi religieuse à l’idée d’empire.
+#The coronation of Charlemagne in the year 800, which will give the concept of empire another meaning, we leave the model of the Roman empire in order to give a quasi-religious meaning to the idea of empire.
-#La naissance à partir de 962 du Saint Empire romain germanique dont les juristes vont eux aussi donner une nouvelle signification au terme d’« empire » et au modèle impérial. La dimension de « Saint » est la dimension religieuse, les juristes impériaux vont défendre l’idée que l’empereur est titulaire du ''dominus mundi''. Fondamentalement, l’héritier religieux de l’Empire est l’empereur du Saint Empire romain germain. « Romain » parce que le Saint Empire romain se voudra l’héritier de l’Empire romain, « germanique » parce qu’il a une connotation allemande, l’allemand devient peu à peu la langue de l’empire. C‘est l’émergence du plus grand modèle d’empire que l’Europe ait connu de 962 à 1806. Ce modèle ne va pas rester sans être « challangé ». Le Pape est aussi un empire, le Saint Empire romain germanique va être défié par le modèle papal. Le Pape va défendre la thèse qu’il est celui qui détient le ''dominus mundi''. Il ne faut pas oublier la prétention universaliste de l’église avec une prétention de régner sur le monde et de ne pas avoir d’empereur supérieur statutairement parlant. Le modèle impérial germanique va être critiqué par le modèle papal.
+#The birth of the Holy Roman Empire in 962, whose jurists also gave a new meaning to the term "empire" and the imperial model. The dimension of "Saint" is the religious dimension, the imperial jurists will defend the idea that the emperor is the holder of the "dominus mundi". Basically, the religious heir of the Empire is the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. "Roman" because the Holy Roman Empire will claim to be the heir of the Roman Empire, 'Germanic' because it has a German connotation, German is gradually becoming the language of the Empire. This is the emergence of the largest empire model that Europe experienced between 962 and 1806. This model will not remain unchanged. The Pope is also an empire, the Holy Roman Empire will be challenged by the papal model. The Pope will defend the thesis that he is the one who holds the "dominus mundi". One should not forget the universalist claim of the church with a claim to rule the world and not to have a statutorily superior emperor. The German imperial model will be criticised by the papal model.
-#le moment postérieur à la découverture du Nouveau Monde : jusqu’à la fin du XVème siècle s’affrontent le modèle germanique et le modèle papal, la découverte du Nouveau Monde va mettre tout le monde d’accord. Une nouvelle conception du modèle impérial voit le jour avec surtout le modèle espagnol au départ avec ces fameuses questions qui se posent aux juristes européens. La question de savoir si les autochtones sont des hommes est une question fondamentale, car si ce sont des hommes, ils ont des droits naturels. John Locke se fera le chantre absolu du droit de propriété. Si vous êtes un homme, vous avez des droits naturels à la propriété de notre corps et de biens matériels.
+#The moment after the discovery of the New World: until the end of the 15th century, the Germanic model and the papal model clashed, and the discovery of the New World brought everyone to agree. A new conception of the imperial model was born, with the Spanish model in particular at the beginning, with the famous questions that European jurists were asked. The question of whether the natives are men is a fundamental question, because if they are men, they have natural rights. John Locke will be the absolute champion of property rights. If you are a man, you have natural rights to ownership of your body and material goods.
-#Le moment postérieur à la Révolution américaine : c’est le moment où la République américaine se met en place. Les vainqueurs de l’histoire vont défendre un modèle de république ressemblant à l’idéologie romaine c’est-à-dire le modèle de la république impériale. Il faut justifier un fait du point de vue du droit international qui est le déplacement des frontières. Les États-Unis d’Amérique sont constitués entre 1776 et 1793 autour de treize colonies suitées sur la côte est. La question du déplacement vers la côte est se pose. La République américaine est confrontée au problème juridique de savoir s’il est possible de devenir un empire, d’appliquer les modèles romains. Les États-Unis ont connu de vifs débats notamment avec la Cour suprême qui a tenté d’arrêter l’expansion de la République américaine vers l’ouest et montrer l’illégalité de la conquête de l’ouest. La Cour suprême rend notamment trois arrêts appelés les arrêts Marshall du nom du président de la Cour suprême qui demandent de considérer les nations amérindiennes est d’arrêter l’expansion illégale vers l’Ouest. Le président américain de l’époque, Andrew Jackson, dit {{citation|John Marshall made his decision, let him enforce it !}}. Ainsi, nous verrons les origines impériales de la République américaine. La tension autour de la vision impériale des États-Unis d’Amérique est encore l’objet de débats aujourd’hui.
+#The moment after the American Revolution: this is the moment when the American Republic comes into being. The victors of history are going to defend a republic model resembling the Roman ideology, that is, the model of the imperial republic. A fact that has to be justified from the point of view of international law is the shifting of borders. The United States of America was formed between 1776 and 1793 around thirteen colonies on the east coast. The question of shifting to the east coast arises. The American Republic is faced with the legal problem of whether it is possible to become an empire, to apply the Roman models. The United States has had lively debates, especially with the Supreme Court, which has tried to stop the expansion of the American Republic towards the west and to show the illegality of the conquest of the west. In particular, the Supreme Court handed down three decisions called the Marshall decisions, named after the Chief Justice, which called for the Native American nations to be considered to stop the illegal expansion towards the West. The then U.S. President Andrew Jackson says {{citation|John Marshall made his decision, let him enforce it!}}. Thus we will see the imperial origins of the American Republic. The tension around the imperial vision of the United States of America is still the subject of debate today.
 = Annexes =