Circle Association

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

District associations were alliances of various imperial circles in the early modern Holy Roman Empire , primarily after the Thirty Years' War . In the west of the empire in particular, the Vordere Reichskreise tried in different constellations to compensate for their military weakness by joining forces. The goals were also different. They were most important for Emperor Leopold I and his successors until the end of the War of the Spanish Succession in defense against France. At the height of their importance, the district associations of the Vordere Reichskkreis contributed more to the defense of the Reich than the imperial troops formed by all imperial estates . At times the associations also acted on an international level.

The 10 imperial circles at the beginning of the 16th century
  • Burgundian circle
  • Westphalian district
  • Lower Saxony district
  • Upper Saxon District
  • Franconian district
  • Upper Rhine district
  • Swabian district
  • Bavarian Circle
  • Austrian circle
  • Kurheinischer Reichskreis
  • District-free areas

    • backgrounds

    The imperial circles were the carriers of the imperial defense by providing troops for the imperial army in a fixed amount . In addition, there were forms of security cooperation among each other. Their designation is different. In research, this type of alliance is collectively referred to as a circle association . In contrast, an alliance also means alliances with foreign powers. The common security policy supplemented the general imperial defension. In case of danger, it was possible to react more quickly. Military advance payments could be made or, if the general imperial troops were absent, replacements could be made for them. In the event of threats or as a result of contracts, the strength of the contingents actually to be provided for the Reich Army could be increased.

    The amalgamation of individual imperial circles goes back in principle to the imperial execution order of 1555. The associations then served to restore peace . After the Thirty Years' War, mostly in the west of the empire, often non-armored, weaker imperial estates or imperial circles formed associations in order to strengthen their common security and to compensate for deficits in the imperial war constitution.

    Beginnings

    The Archbishop of Mainz, Johann Philipp von Schönborn, attempted to create the first approaches to an association of all the front circles of the empire in 1651. The project failed, but became a model for later approaches.

    After the war, France often tried to influence imperial politics through associations. This was evident in the Rhenish Bund of 1658, which was primarily directed against the emperor and which France had also joined. When the Elector of Mainz, after the end of the Rhenish Confederation, planned to found associations whose protector this time would be the Kaiser, these attempts failed because of French resistance and imperial disinterest. After all, in 1671 the Marienburg alliance came about with the emperor at its head.

    Frankfurt and Laxenburg alliance

    Georg Friedrich von Waldeck-Eisenberg was the main initiator of the Frankfurt Alliance.

    In 1679, at the instigation of Georg Friedrich von Waldeck, the Frankfurt Alliance was formed. In this, small imperial estates joined together, in particular from the Wetterau , the Westerwald and the Eifel . In addition to protecting against French expansion , it was also about protecting their interests against stronger imperial estates. The threat posed by France became particularly evident through the occupation of the imperial city of Strasbourg . The members of the Frankfurt Alliance planned among other things to set up their own armies.

    The alliance was joined by other imperial estates and the Lower Rhine-Westphalian , the Kurrheinische , the Upper Rhine , the Franconian and the Swabian Empire .

    The alliance was expanded to form the Laxenburg Alliance when Leopold I joined in 1682. Shortly before, the Imperial Defense Order of 1681/1682 had been adopted as a compromise between the Emperor and the Imperial Estates. The imperial circles had to provide the contingents to the imperial army. But this has not yet been implemented in all. In addition, the army formed in this way from numerous units later proved to be difficult to use. For effective defense of the empire, the emperor therefore preferred the voluntary contributions of an association rather than the compulsory contributions of all imperial estates. With this he tried to compensate for the weakness of the real Reich Army. The idea of ​​association itself also had the potential to strengthen federal elements in the imperial constitution. But if the emperor himself played a leading role in the association, this could strengthen his influence in the empire.

    Both Protestant and Catholic estates were involved. The alliance was designed for three years and decided to set up three armies under imperial command. This construction made possible an imperial war against the reunion policy of Louis XIV without the formal approval of the Reichstag , which was not possible due to the pro-French policy of Kurbrandenburg . In the end, the troops were not deployed against France, but against the Ottoman Empire , whose army was besieging Vienna .

    Augsburg Alliance

    Leopold I also used the idea of ​​association to increase his influence in the empire.

    Although an armistice had been concluded with France against the background of the threat posed by the Ottomans with the Regensburg standstill of 1684, the emperor tried to extend the Laxenburg alliance to protect the western borders. Initially, the imperial circles and estates saw no need for this. This changed only after the successes against the Ottomans had promoted the imperial reputation and with the repeal of the Edict of Nantes in 1685 by Louis XIV in the Edict of Fontainebleau the French reputation among the Protestant estates declined. Against this background, the elector of Brandenburg supported the emperor again and promoted an association among relatives in southern Germany.

    The Augsburg alliance of 1686 included various imperial estates, the Franconian, Upper Rhine and Bavarian circles as well as the emperor, as well as foreign powers such as Sweden and Spain. The latter were represented in the form of the Burgundian Imperial Circle . The Swabian Reichskreis did not participate. The aim was to preserve the status quo on the basis of the Peace of Westphalia , the Peace of Nijmegen and the Regensburg standstill of 1684. Not closed in an acute war, the alliance was designed to be emphatically defensive. But the alliance was not really effective. Most of the parties involved had not even ratified the treaty. When Louis XIV began the War of the Palatinate Succession , he named, among other things, the alleged danger posed by this alliance as a reason for war. The War of the Palatinate Succession from 1688 onwards is known, especially in French historiography, as the War of the Augsburg Alliance .

    Frankfurt Association

    Johann Georg Kulpis

    During the Palatinate War of Succession, the burden of war was initially on the armed imperial estates, before Margrave Ludwig Wilhelm von Baden in particular, as imperial commander, prepared a military alliance from the Swabian, Franconian and Rhenish imperial circles. The Reich journalist Johann Georg von Kulpis and the Archbishop of Mainz, Lothar Franz von Schönborn , did similar things . This initially met with resistance from the armed imperial estates and also from the emperor, until the alliance came into being in 1697 as the Frankfurt Association . It was decided to raise an army of 40,000 men in peacetime and 60,000 men in war. This number was never reached because, among other things, the Reich circles on the Rhine, which were particularly affected by the consequences of the war, were promised significant reductions in their obligations. The alliance was integrated by the international Vienna Grand Alliance . The alliance was involved in the negotiations for the Peace of Rijswijk . The alliance was again set up on a purely defensive basis. The attempt to extend it beyond the war failed.

    Nördlinger Association

    The Franconian and Swabian Imperial Circles had already renewed their former Nuremberg Association in Heidenheim in 1700. Initially it was all about protecting one's own areas. At the beginning of the Spanish War of Succession, the association between the emperor and France wanted to remain neutral. The actors on the Bavarian and French sides were encouraged to do so. Certain tendencies towards the neutrality of the empire also emanated from the Archbishop of Mainz and Imperial Chancellor Lothar Franz von Schönborn and from the Bavarian Elector Max Emanuel on the Heilbronn Association Day of August 1701.

    Ludwig Wilhelm von Baden contributed significantly to the creation of the Frankfurt association recession.

    The Archbishop of Mainz wanted to expand the alliance between the Swabian and Franconian districts to include the Upper Rhine, the Kurrheinische and the Bavarian Empire. However, with Württemberg one of the leading imperial estates in Swabia opposed this . The situation changed when Schönborn went over to the emperor's side and concluded a subsidy contract with him in October 1701 . Already at this time the idea of ​​an imperial barrier in Alsace with border corrections and the occupation of fortresses was envisaged.

    As a result, the Swabian and Frankish imperial circles also approached the emperor. In the Nördlinger Association (also Nördlinger Traktat ) of March 1702, the Kurrheinische, the Oberrheinische, the Niederrheinisch-Westfälische and the Austrian Reichskreis came together. The emperor was also involved through the latter. The imperial and Mainz ideas continued to differ, but it was clear that the association entered the war on the imperial side. Federal head was von Schönborn.

    The powers of the Grand Alliance assured the Association that they would not make peace without their participation. This actually meant the association's recognition as a belligerent power. Not only individual imperial estates, but also imperial circles thus claimed the right to conclude alliances with foreign powers. This was not covered by the provisions of the Peace of Westphalia, but the inclusion of the association by the foreign powers and the emperor in the alliance meant a factual recognition of the claim.

    Lothar Franz von Schönborn played an important role as Elector of Mainz and Imperial Chancellor in association politics (portrait by Christian Schilbach, 1715).

    The association raised an army with a total of 45,000 men. The Franconian district provided 8,000, the Swabian over 10,000, the Kurrheinische 6,500, the Upper Rhine 300 and the Austrian 16,000 men. The army was subordinated to Margrave Ludwig Wilhelm von Baden and operated in the south of the Rhine. In the course of time, the alliance shrinks to the four front circles of the Reich.

    Since 1709 there has been a certain alienation between the Association and the Emperor. The association planned between 1709 and 1711, a continuing alliance with the naval powers Great Britain and the Netherlands beyond the end of the war. Against this background, several association days took place. The alliance project with the naval powers, to which the association wanted to provide 8,000 men, Great Britain and the Netherlands 20,000 men, also provided for mutual support outside the imperial borders. With this, these troops from the imperial circles would no longer have been subordinate to the imperial high command. With the departure of the sea powers from the war, the alliance no longer became effective.

    With regard to the demands for a peace treaty, the so-called imperial barrier played an important role, as it had been decided for the Spanish Netherlands . In this context there were different standpoints between Joseph I and the Association. As spokesman for the association, the Elector of Mainz had also called for the recovery of Alsace and the rest of the areas that had been lost since 1552. He found a majority among the other electors, but could not get the approval of the emperor.

    From 1709 onwards, the imperial districts hardly played a role in the preliminary negotiations for peace. However , the Franconian, Swabian and Upper Rhine Imperial Circles were able to send their own delegations to the negotiations in Utrecht from 1712. However, their influence remained small and the embassies were withdrawn in 1713 at the instigation of the emperor. At the negotiations in Baden the circles were only represented as part of the imperial delegation. Despite only taking part in the negotiations temporarily, the Imperial Circles had been able to expand their importance through the association. After the peace agreement, they lost much of this meaning again.

    In connection with the peace negotiations there was a meeting of the members of the association in October 1713. These were critical of the development, but had to bow to imperial pressure. From then on they had to deploy their troops on the emperor's side if requested. A Frankfurt Association Day on June 20, 1714 agreed to this in the Frankfurt Recess .

    Loss of meaning

    The general political development prevented the association from pursuing a semi-independent policy and forced it to side with the emperor. The emperor was then able to convene the association in times of war. In the event of war, 120,000 men were planned. In 1727 the troop contingents were increased.

    Because of its durability, the Nördlinger Bündnis was also known as the Eternal Association of the Front Circles. It didn't have a formal tip. Decisions were made through an association day. The association only became active in times of crisis.

    In 1733, in connection with the War of the Polish Succession, the association was again active by raising troops. The emperor ignored the association when he concluded the preliminary truce in Vienna in 1735.

    The congress of associates with a pro-Austrian tendency called in connection with the War of the Austrian Succession met with little response. Under pressure from France, Bavaria and Prussia , the alliance was not renewed in the Austrian sense. Nor was there a renewal in the sense of the Wittelsbacher Karl VII in 1742. In 1748 the association in favor of Austria was reactivated from the districts of Franconia, Kurrhein, Upper Rhine, Austria and parts of Swabia. But it had little meaning. The Renversement des alliances in 1756 made an association for protection from France unnecessary from the Austrian point of view.

    In the First Coalition War , Austria and Prussia tried to revive the idea of ​​association in 1791/1792. These efforts only found a response in Swabia. Towards the end of the Old Kingdom there were renewed efforts to establish a circle association of the front circles. However, this plan was rejected by Austria.

    literature

    Individual evidence

    1. ↑ Axel Gotthard: The Old Empire. 1495-1806. 4th edition. Darmstadt 2009, p. 27.
    2. ^ Johannes Burkhardt: Completion and reorientation of the early modern empire. 1648-1763. 10th edition. Stuttgart 2006, p. 123; Karl Otmar von Aretin: The Empire. Guarantee of Peace and European Balance 1648–1806. Stuttgart 1986, p. 186.
    3. ↑ Helmut Neuhaus: The empire in the early modern times. 2nd Edition. Munich 2003, pp. 48, 94.
    4. ^ Johannes Burkhardt: Completion and reorientation of the early modern empire. 1648-1763. 10th edition. Stuttgart 2006, p. 124.
    5. ↑ Heinz Duchhardt : Old Reich and European states. 1648–1806 (= Encyclopedia of German History. Vol. 4). Oldenbourg, Munich 1990, ISBN 3-486-55421-2 , p. 54.
    6. ^ Karl Otmar von Aretin: Das Reich. Guarantee of Peace and European Balance 1648–1806. Stuttgart 1986, p. 186 f.
    7. ↑ Axel Gotthard: The Old Empire. 1495-1806. 4th edition. Darmstadt 2009, p. 113 f.
    8. ^ Johannes Burkhardt: Completion and reorientation of the early modern empire. 1648-1763. 10th edition. Stuttgart 2006, p. 127.
    9. ^ Johannes Burkhardt: Completion and reorientation of the early modern empire. 1648-1763. 10th edition. Stuttgart 2006, p. 129.
    10. ^ Johannes Burkhardt: Completion and reorientation of the early modern empire. 1648-1763. 10th edition. Stuttgart 2006, p. 129.
    11. ↑ Michael Müller: The development of the Kurrheinische Kreis in its connection with the Oberrheinischer Kreis in the 18th century (= Mainz studies on modern history. 24). Lang, Frankfurt am Main et al. 2008, ISBN 978-3-631-58222-0 , p. 265; Johannes Burkhardt: completion and reorientation of the early modern empire. 1648-1763. 10th edition. Stuttgart 2006, p. 131.
    12. ↑ Winfried Dotzauer: The German Imperial Circles (1383-1806). History and file edition. Stuttgart 1998, p. 74; Johannes Burkhardt: completion and reorientation of the early modern empire. 1648-1763. 10th edition. Stuttgart 2006, p. 268.
    13. ↑ Winfried Dotzauer: The German Imperial Circles (1383-1806). History and file edition. Stuttgart 1998, p. 74.
    14. ^ Michael Kotulla : German constitutional history. From the Old Reich to Weimar (1495–1934). Springer, Berlin et al. 2008, ISBN 978-3-540-48705-0 , p. 145.
    15. ^ Harm Klueting : Das Reich and Austria 1648-1740 (= Historia profana et ecclesiastica. 1). Lit, Münster et al. 1999, ISBN 3-8258-4280-0 , p. 104.
    16. ↑ Winfried Dotzauer: The German Imperial Circles (1383-1806). History and file edition. Stuttgart 1998, p. 74.
    17. ↑ Winfried Dotzauer: The German Imperial Circles (1383-1806). History and file edition. Stuttgart 1998, p. 75.
    18. ^ Susanne Friedrich: Problems of legitimation of district alliances. New reflections on an 'old' debate. In: Wolfgang EJ Weber , Regina Dauser (Hrsg.): Fascinating early modern times. Empire, Peace, Culture and Communication 1500–1800. Festschrift for Johannes Burkhardt on his 65th birthday. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-05-004469-9 , pp. 27–50, here p. 31.
    19. ↑ Winfried Dotzauer: The German Imperial Circles (1383-1806). History and file edition. Stuttgart 1998, p. 76.
    20. ↑ Winfried Dotzauer: The German Imperial Circles (1383-1806). History and file edition. Stuttgart 1998, p. 76 f.
    21. ↑ Winfried Dotzauer: The German Imperial Circles (1383-1806). History and file edition. Stuttgart 1998, p. 77.
    22. ↑ Heinz Duchhardt: Old Reich and European states. 1648–1806 (= Encyclopedia of German History. Vol. 4). Oldenbourg, Munich 1990, ISBN 3-486-55421-2 , p. 48.