第一章 欧洲:多元化的国际秩序
-
Kevin Wilson and Jan van der Dussen,The History of the Idea of Europe (London: Routledge, 1993).
-
Frederick B. Artz,The Mind of the Middle Ages (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953), 275–80.
-
Heinrich Fichtenau,The Carolingian Empire: The Age of Charlemagne, trans. Peter Munz (NewYork: Harper & Row, 1964), 60.
-
Hugh Thomas,The Golden Age: The Spanish Empire of Charles V (London: Allen Lane, 2010),23.
-
James Reston Jr.,Defenders of the Faith:Charles V, Suleyman the Magnificent, and the Battle for Europe, 1520–1536 (New York: Penguin Press, 2009), 40,294–95.
-
见第三章。
-
See Edgar Sanderson, J. P. Lamberton, and John McGovern, Six Thousand Years of History, vol. 7, Famous Foreign Statesmen (Philadelphia: E. R. DuMont, 1900),246–50; Reston, Defenders of the Faith, 384–89. 对日后桀骜不驯、对普世诉求存有戒心的欧洲而言,查理大帝的统治更像盛气凌人的威胁,而不是他几乎实现了人民期待的统一。正如18世纪启蒙运动的重要人物、苏格兰哲学家大卫·休谟所说,“查理大帝将众多王国和公国置于统一管理之下,使人类再次感到了单一君主统治世界的威胁。”David Hume, “On the Balance of Power,” in Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary (1742), 2.7.13.
-
See Jerry Brotton,A History of the World in Twelve Maps (London: Penguin Books, 2013), 82–113 (discussion of the Hereford Mappa Mundi, ca. 1300); 4 Ezra 6:42; Dante Alighieri,The Divine Comedy, trans. Allen Mandelbaum (London: Bantam, 1982), 342; and Osip Mandelstam, “Conversation About Dante,” inThe Poet’s Dante, ed. Peter S. Hawkins and Rachel Jacoff (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2001), 67.
-
黎塞留自己有一位“灰衣主教”,即他的心腹谋士弗朗索瓦·勒克莱尔·德·特朗布莱。他因身披嘉布遣会约瑟夫神甫的袍子而被人称为黎塞留的“灰衣主教”。此后,在外交史上,这一称号被用来指幕后的权势人物。Aldous Huxley, Grey Eminence: A Study in Religion and Politics (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1941).
-
See, for example, Niccolò Machiavelli,The Art of War (1521),Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livy (1531),The Prince (1532).
-
Joseph Strayer, Hans Gatzke, and E. Harris Harbison,
The Mainstream of Civilization Since 1500(New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1971), 420.
-
Richelieu, “Advis donné au roy sur le sujet de la bataille de Nordlingen,” inThe Thirty Years War: A Documentary History, ed. and trans, Tryntje Helfferich (Indianapolis: Hackett,2009), 151.
-
Peter H. Wilson,The Thirty Years War: Europe’s Tragedy (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2009), 673.
-
大多数代表都是带着非常实际的指示来参加会议的。Ibid., 676.
15.Instrumentum pacis Osnabrugensis (1648)andInstrumentum pacis Monsteriensis (1648), in Helfferich,Thirty Years War, 255, 271.
-
Wilson,Thirty Years War, 672.
-
这些倡导宽容的正式条文只适用于三个得到承认的基督教教派:天主教派、路德教派和加尔文教派。
-
巴麦尊对下院的演讲,1848年3月1日。奥兰治的威廉亲王也表达了同样的思想。他为反对法国称霸企图奋斗了一代人的时间(先任荷兰执政,后来又是英格兰、爱尔兰和苏格兰的国王)。他向一位助手吐露说,假如他活在哈布斯堡王朝即将称霸欧洲的16世纪50年代,他会“既是一位西班牙人(哈布斯堡人),也是一位法国人”。日后的温斯顿·丘吉尔也是一样。20世纪30年代有人抨击他反德。他回复说:“假如目前情形颠倒过来,我们同样会亲德反法。”
-
Palmerston to Clarendon, July 20, 1856, quoted in Harold Temperley and Lillian M. Penson,Foundations of British Foreign Policy from Pitt (1792) to Salisbury(1902) (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1938), 88.
-
促使霍布斯撰写《利维坦》的主要原因是英国的内战。这场战争给英国造成的破坏虽然不及“三十年战争”给欧洲大陆造成的破坏,但依然很严重。
-
Thomas Hobbes,Leviathan (1651) (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994), 233.
-
记住以下一点很重要:当时中欧只有一个大国——奥地利及其领地。普鲁士尚是位于德国最东边的一个二流国家。德意志是一个地理概念,而不是一个国家。数十个小邦国,有的微不足道,各有各的治理方式。
-
Lucy Norton, ed.,Saint-Simon at Versailles (London: Hamilton, 1958), 217–30.
-
直到残酷的外交导致波兰连续三次被瓜分前,腓特烈治下的疆土东边三面与波兰接壤,另一面邻波罗的海。
-
Gerhard Ritter,Frederick the Great: A Historical Profile, trans. Peter Paret (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), 29–30.
-
Frederick II of Prussia,Oeuvres, 2, XXV (1775), as quoted in Friedrich Meinecke,Machiavellism: The Doctrine of Raison d’état and Its Place in Modern History, trans. Douglas Scott (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1957) (originally published in German, 1925), 304.
-
“Not so bad for the eve of a great battle.” Frederick II, as quoted in Otto von Bismarck,Bismarck: The Man and the Statesman (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1899), 316; and Otto von Bismarck,The Kaiser vs. Bismarck: Suppressed Letters by the Kaiser and New Chapters from the Autobiography of the Iron Chancellor(New York: Harper & Brothers, 1921), 144–45.
-
正如蒲柏在1734年所说,“关于种种治理方式的问题,还是让愚人去争论吧。什么治理效果最好,什么就是最好的。”Alexander Pope, An Essay on Man (1734), epistle iii, lines 303–4.
-
As quoted in G. P. Gooch,Frederick the Great (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1947), 4–5.
-
David A. Bell,The First Total War: Napoleon’s Europe and the Birth of Warfare as We Know It (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2007), 5.
-
一些论著生动讲述了这一社会现象。See Susan Mary Alsop, The Congress Dances: Vienna,1814–1815 (New York: Harper & Row, 1984); Adam Zamoyski, Rites of Peace:The Fall of Napoleon and the Congress of Vienna (London: HarperPress, 2007).
-
Jean Le Rond d’Alembert,“éléments de Philosophie”(1759), as quoted in Ernst Cassirer, The Philosophy of the Enlightenment, trans. Fritz C. A. Koelln and James P. Pettegrove,(Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1951), 3.
-
Denis Diderot, “The Encyclopedia” (1755), inRameau’s Nephew and Other Works, trans. Jacques Barzun and Ralph H. Bowen (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2001), 283.
-
Ibid., 296.
-
Montesquieu,Considérations sur les causes de la grandeur des Romains et de leur décadence (1734), as quoted in Cassirer,Philosophy of the Enlightenment, 213.
-
Immanuel Kant, “Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose” (1784), inKant: Political Writings, ed. H. S. Reiss (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 44.
-
Ibid.,46.
-
Ibid., 47.
-
Immanuel Kant, “Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch (1795),” in Reiss,Kant, 96.
-
换言之,是指实行参与式统治、遵守平等适用于所有公民的法律体系的一批国家。“永久和平”此后被当作当代的“民主和平理论”。然而,康德在文中对共和国和民主制做了区分。他把前者说成是具有代表性的政治结构,“行政权力(政府)与立法权力相分离”。康德称,“真正意义上的民主”——即直接民主制,例如古希腊雅典晚期实行的民主,一切国家事务均付诸大众表决决定——“必然是一种专制主义”。Ibid., 101.
-
Ibid., 100. “亲身”两字值得强调。康德习惯抽象思维,故未提共和制的法国一例。当时法国与四周所有邻国交战并得到民众的热烈拥护。
-
Kant, “Idea for a Universal History,” 49.
-
卢梭的著名论断:“人生而自由,但却无往不在枷锁之中。”“当第一个人圈了一小块地,脑子里冒出一个念头后脱口而出‘这是我的’”时,人类发展道路就走入了歧途。因此,只有废除私有财产,而由人们共同拥有,同时消灭人为的社会等级制度后,才能实现正义。由于拥有财产或地位的人会抵制重新引入绝对平等,这一结果只有通过暴力革命方能实现。Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on the Origin of Inequality and The Social Contract, in The Basic Political Writings(1755; 1762) (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1987), 61, 141.
-
卢梭争辩说,只有当“我们每一个人把自己及个人的一切能力置于为公众意愿服务之下时,并且我们把每一个成员看作整体中不可分的一部分时”,才会有合法的统治。异见将被彻底消灭,因为在一个由理性和平等的社会结构组成的世界里,大众意愿内部的分歧代表了对给予民众权力原则的非法抵制。“无论是谁,只要拒绝遵从大众的意愿,全体民众就要强迫他遵从。这意味着他将被迫自由,因为每一位公民把自己托付给他的国家是确保他人身不依附他人的条件。”Rousseau, Social Contract, in The Basic Political Writings,150.
-
“Declaration for Assistance and Fraternity to Foreign Peoples” (November 19, 1792), inThe Constitutions and Other Select Documents Illustrative of the History of France, 1789–1907 (London: H. W. Wilson, 1908), 130.
-
“Decree for Proclaiming the Liberty and Sovereignty of All Peoples” (December 15, 1792), in ibid., 132–33.
-
Hegel to Friedrich Niethammer,October 13, 1806, in Hegel: The Letters, trans. Clark Butler and Christine Seiler with commentary by Clark Butler (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985).