期刊文献+

腓特烈二世时代罗马城的多重治权问题初探

The Exploration of the Multiple Sovereignties of the City of Rome under the Reign of Emperor Frederick Ⅱ
原文传递
导出
摘要 中世纪的意大利自治城市被称为“韦伯式城市”,以成功抵御外部控制为特征,罗马城是其中的重要代表。在神圣罗马帝国皇帝腓特烈二世统治时期,帝国政治以征服意大利为中心,而意大利自治城市则寻求独立与扩张。这两种政治力量之间冲突不断,以帝国的失败而告终。长久以来,学界强调意大利自治城市的自由理想与反抗精神,视之为西方现代政治文化的基石。然而,皇帝、教宗和罗马城市公社围绕罗马城的控制和治理表明,“多重治权”的角力与制衡是罗马城政治的本质特征。罗马城的案例证明,“多重治权”的政治结构使帝国对罗马城的控制不能长久奏效,从而为罗马城的自主发展提供了土壤。然而,“多重治权”也引发了城市内部激烈的党派对立与暴力冲突,寡头政治取代了城市的共和政治。在此过程中,罗马市民的市民意识觉醒,并积极寻求调和的解决方案。 The medieval Italian city-states,referred to as‘Weberian cities',distinguished themselves through their successful resistance to external control,with Rome as a notable example.During the reign of Emperor Frederick II,the imperial agenda prioritised the conquest of Italy,whereas the Italian citystates sought for autonomy and expansion.The constant clash between imperial ambitions and city-state resilience resulted in the failure of the Holy Roman Empire.Scholars have traditionally highlighted the Italian city-states'ideals of freedom and resistance spirit as foundational to the Western political culture.However,the conflicts among the emperor,the pope,and the Roman city commune regarding Rome's control and governance suggested that the interplay of‘multiple sovereignties'represented the core of the politics in the city of Rome.The case of Rome illustrates that'multiple sovereignties'hindered the Empire's long-term dominance over the city,thereby fostering an environment conductive to autonomous growth.However,this structure also brought significant factionalism and violent conflicts within Rome,replacing its republican politics of an oligarchic framework.In this process,the civic consciousness of the Roman citizens awaked and they actively pursued the conciliatory strategies.
作者 李文丹 Li Wendan
出处 《世界历史》 CSSCI 北大核心 2024年第2期147-163,F0003,共18页 World History
基金 国家社科基金青年项目“神圣罗马帝国之意大利问题再研究(10-13世纪)”(项目编号:22CSS024)的阶段性成果。
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献130

  • 1吴于廑.世界历史上的农本与重商[J].历史研究,1984(1):3-24. 被引量:42
  • 2斯金纳.《近代政治思想的基础》上卷.奚瑞森等译.北京:商务印书馆,2002年.第217,246页.
  • 3[1]Arthur P. Monahan, From Personal Duties Towards Personal Rights, Late Medieval and Early Modem Political Thought,1300-1600[M], Mcgill-Queen's University Press, 1994, p.21
  • 4[2][3]J.H. Burns, The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought [ M ], c. 350 - c. 1450, Camhridge University Press,1988, p.661 ,p.358
  • 5[4][5][13]Antony Black, Political Thought In Europe 1250- 1450[M], Cambridge University Press, 1992,p.l16,p.l16,p.128- 129
  • 6[6][9][16][17]Cecil N. Sidney Woolf, M.A., Bartolns Of Sassoferrato, His Position In The History Of Medieval Political Thought [ M], Cambridge, at the University Press, 1913, p. 160,p. 161,p. 180 - 181,p. 185 - 186
  • 7[7]Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Moden Political Thought[ M], Cambridge University Press, 1978, Volume One, p. 10
  • 8[8][10]Walter Ullmann, Medieval Political Thought[M], Penguin Books, 1965, p.215 -216
  • 9[11][12]James M. Blythe, Ideal Government and the Mixed Constitution in the Middle Ages[M], Princeton University Press,1992, p.94,p.174
  • 10[14][15][18][19]R.W.Carlyle&A.J.Carlyle, A History Of Medieval Political Theory In The West[M], New York Barnes & Noble,Inc, 1936, Volume Ⅵ,p.27,p.81 - 82,p.79 - 80,p.81

共引文献20

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部