Lineages of the Absolutist State

Lineages of the Absolutist State is a book by Perry Anderson.

Contents
The foreword outlines the goals and approach of a comparative study on the Absolutist State across Europe. It aims to bridge the divide between broad theoretical models and specific historical case studies by analyzing both the general structural features of Absolutism as well as the diverse manifestations found in different European monarchies. Rather than focusing solely on Western Europe as is typical, the study gives equal attention to the Eastern part of the continent, examining the differences and interrelationships between the two regions. The temporal scope is also unconventional - instead of a single chronological period, it traces the varied timelines of the rise and decline of Absolutism in different European states. Grounding the study in Marxist theory, the foreword emphasizes the centrality of the state as the political arena where class conflicts play out. Understanding the machinery of class domination throughstate apparatuses is deemed essential. The work on Absolutist States is positioned as the first part of a broader examination, with future volumes planned on the bourgeois revolutions and the subsequent capitalist states that emerged from them.

Western Europe
Anderson's work examines the rise of centralized monarchical states in Western Europe from the 16th to 18th centuries, analyzing them as a reorganized system for preserving the ruling power of the feudal nobility class amid changing economic and social conditions marking the transition away from feudalism towards capitalism. These absolutist states concentrated political authority in the hands of monarchs and the noble landholding class. This was a reaction to the breakdown of feudal economic relations like serfdom as well as the growth of urban commercial and manufacturing classes. Institutional innovations like standing professional armies, centralized bureaucracies, streamlined taxation, mercantilist economic policies, and formal diplomacy allowed the nobility to adapt their traditional dominance while accommodating the rising bourgeois classes to a limited degree. The absolutist regimes drew legitimacy from revived concepts of Roman law emphasizing absolute private property rights for landowners and unlimited sovereign authority for monarchs. However, the absolutist states fundamentally remained rooted in the feudal social order, oriented towards expanding aristocratic landholdings through territorial conquest via warfare rather than capitalist economic development. There was some overlap of interests where promoting trade and primitive capital accumulation benefited both the landed nobility and urban capitalist classes. But the absolutist states' essential feudal character meant they ultimately obstructed the full unfolding of capitalist production relations while paradoxically permitting some proto-capitalist economic changes. The absolutist states thus represented an archaic reorganization of feudal power coexisting alongside, and restraining, emerging capitalist socioeconomic forces.

The book traces the evolution of the Absolutist State system in Western Europe from the Middle Ages through the 18th century. It focuses on the changing power dynamics between monarchs and the nobility class as the key for understanding Absolutism's different phases. In medieval times, kings had to gain consent from noble assemblies and estates to raise taxes, creating a balance of authority. During the Renaissance, monarchs began consolidating more centralized control, but still had to manage powerful noble factions vying for state positions and patronage networks. The 17th century saw Absolutism's high point, with monarchs vastly expanding armies, bureaucracies, and dismantling the old system of estates — moves that provoked noble uprisings in various regions resisting this centralization of power. By the 1700s, a new equilibrium emerged, with the nobility regaining its footing in directing the Absolutist state machinery. The upper bureaucracy became re-aristocratized. Legal measures like strict property settlements helped entrench the nobility's landed wealth against market forces in this period as well. Military conflicts persisted, largely driven by feudal territorial motives emblematic of Absolutism, though trade emerged as a secondary aim for some states by this stage. Overall, the narrative depicts Absolutism's project to centralize the noble ruling class's power at the expense of medieval decentralized authority — process punctuated by periods of crisis and realignment in the monarchy's relationship with the nobility.

The book examines the distinct path of absolutist rule in Spain compared to other Western European nations during the same period. The marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella in 1469, uniting Castile and Aragon, established the foundations for Spanish absolutism. However, the two kingdoms maintained separate political structures and institutions. Spain's acquisition of American colonies and the inflow of colonial wealth enabled it to pursue expansionist policies abroad without initially undertaking substantial domestic fiscal and administrative reforms. However, the costly wars waged by Charles V and Philip II, especially in the Low Countries, eventually drained Spanish resources and exposed the divisions within its composite monarchy. During the 17th century, Spain witnessed a gradual erosion of its economic and military might. This decline was compounded by the loss of Portugal and revolts in Catalonia and Naples in the 1640s, highlighting the weaknesses of the Habsburg absolutist system. The ascension of the Bourbon dynasty in the 18th century introduced greater centralization and reforms modeled on French absolutism. However, these reforms could not revive Spain's faltering economy and society, which remained burdened by feudal remnants. Despite creating a more unified Spanish state, the limitations of Bourbon reforms were evident in the persistence of seigneurial jurisdictions and the continued local power of the nobility.

Anderson discusses the evolution and characteristics of French absolutism from the 16th to 18th centuries. He traces the gradual centralization of power by the French monarchy, despite setbacks like the Hundred Years' War, the Wars of Religion, and the Fronde rebellion. His book examines how absolutism under Richelieu, Mazarin, and Louis XIV created a complex administrative apparatus that integrated the nobility into the state while allowing the monarchy to exert control over the provinces through intendants. The book highlights the contradictions in French absolutism, as the monarchy sold offices to the nobility and bourgeoisie to raise funds, while also repressing those same classes when they resisted royal authority. In the 18th century, the nobility reasserted its position, but absolutism ultimately declined due to its inability to tax the privileged classes to fund wars and colonial conflicts, leading to the fiscal crisis that precipitated the French Revolution. The analysis underscores the feudal character of the French state and the tensions between the monarchy's centralizing efforts and the entrenched powers of the nobility and provincial particularisms.

England developed a powerful feudal monarchy at an earlier stage compared to France, allowing it to undertake ambitious military campaigns like the Hundred Years' War. However, unlike absolutist monarchies on the European continent, the English monarchy lacked the resources and motivation to build and maintain a large permanent standing army. Over time, the English nobility progressively shifted away from a militaristic orientation earlier than their continental counterparts. Instead, they became increasingly commercialized and aligned with the rising gentry and capitalist classes rather than the monarchy. The Tudor and Stuart kings attempted to consolidate absolutist monarchical power by suppressing the nobility and expanding royal authority. However, several factors hampered these efforts — England's insular position, lack of a standing army, resistance from the gentry-dominated Parliament, and the monarchs' limited ability to raise taxes without parliamentary consent. Aristocratic resistance and rebellions in Scotland and Ireland exacerbated the tensions between King Charles I and Parliament, ultimately leading to the English Civil War in the 1640s. The bourgeois capitalist forces represented by Parliament were able to defeat the incomplete English absolutist project before it could fully develop along the lines of continental European absolutist states. Geographic factors, changing social alignments, and unique constitutional arrangements prevented England from establishing a strong absolutist monarchy comparable to France. This incomplete absolutism was eventually overthrown by the 17th century bourgeois revolutionary forces.

The book provides an examination of the Renaissance period in Italy, focusing on the transition from city-state republics to princely lordships known as signorie. It discusses the economic dynamics of the time, highlighting the dominance of urban centers like Florence and Venice in industries such as textiles and banking. Guilds regulated production methods, presenting obstacles to technological progress, while mercantile capital faced competition from abroad. Socially, Anderson explores the tensions between urban artisans and the ruling elite, as well as the influence of feudal nobles in the countryside. The rise of signorie is attributed to feudal lords seizing power in cities, often through suppression of existing oligarchies. These new rulers, though often seen as modernizers, faced challenges in integrating urban and rural interests. Machiavelli's political theory is analyzed, emphasizing his focus on pragmatic governance and the creation of a strong, centralized state. However, Machiavelli's ideas, rooted in the context of Italian city-states, lacked understanding of the emerging monarchies in Western Europe. The narrative also examines the historical trajectory of Piedmontese Absolutism, highlighting its strategic alliances and administrative reforms. Ultimately, Piedmontese Absolutism emerges as a coherent and successful form of centralized monarchy in Italy, albeit lagging chronologically behind its larger European counterparts.

Anderson's work explores the historical development of Swedish Absolutism, highlighting its unique characteristics compared to other European forms of monarchy. It discusses how Swedish Absolutism was shaped by factors such as the presence of a free peasantry, limited urban influence, and the exploitation of mineral wealth. The narrative spans several centuries, detailing the political maneuvers, economic strategies, and military campaigns of Swedish rulers, including Gustavus Adolphus and Charles XII. Despite periods of internal conflict and external expansion, Swedish Absolutism maintained a relatively stable grip on power, transitioning between periods of strong royal authority and aristocratic influence. The text concludes with the eventual decline of Absolutism in Sweden, marked by constitutional reforms and the rise of parliamentary governance.

Eastern Europe
Anderson delves into the dynamics of Absolutism, particularly in Eastern Europe, focusing on Prussia, Russia, and Austria. The text explores how Absolutism manifested differently in the East compared to the West, emphasizing the militarization of the state and the integration of the nobility into the bureaucratic system. The narrative highlights the centralization of power under Absolutism, portraying it as a response to economic and social changes, particularly the need to control peasant mobility and ensure stability for the feudal class. The text then delves into historical examples, such as the Ukrainian Revolution of 1648 and various peasant uprisings across Eastern Europe, to illustrate the tensions between the nobility and the peasantry. Anderson contrasts the Eastern variant of Absolutism with its Western counterpart, noting differences in the role of the military, the absence of a significant urban bourgeoisie, and the lack of sale of offices in the East. While the Western model of Absolutism was influenced by commercial interests and saw the sale of bureaucratic positions, the Eastern model was more feudalistic, with nobles serving the state in exchange for land and privileges. The book explores the expansionist tendencies of Eastern Absolutism, highlighting the territorial acquisitions made by Prussia, Russia, and Austria. It discusses the unique characteristics of each state's administrative structure, with Prussia's militarization being particularly pronounced, Russia's emphasis on compulsory military service, and Austria's more heterogeneous nobility.

Eastern Europe's royalty and aristocracy had a story of their own. Unlike the West, Eastern Europe never embraced the whole "fiefdom" thing. Here, nobles mostly owned their land outright. Also, Eastern kings had more control over their nobles because there weren't all these middleman lords in the way. When threats loomed, Eastern Europe went full-on "powerful central government." This Absolutism thing wasn't exactly the same as the West's version though. Eastern nobles basically became state employees, without the back-and-forth deals Western nobles enjoyed. Interestingly, most Eastern nobles just went with the flow (except for Poland), unlike their Western counterparts who often put up a fight. Eastern Europe's whole royalty and nobility thing skipped a big chunk of feudalism and ended up with a stronger central government that bossed the nobles around in a different way.

Conclusion
Anderson's work explores the development of feudalism and absolutism in both Europe and Japan, focusing on their origins, structures, and eventual outcomes. It delves into historical, economic, and social factors that influenced the evolution of these systems. The book compares the emergence of feudalism in Europe, which arose from the fusion of Roman and Germanic civilizations after the collapse of the Roman Empire, with feudalism in Japan, which evolved from the disintegration of the Sinified imperial system. While both systems shared structural similarities, their historical trajectories were distinct due to differences in their origins. It discusses how Europe transitioned from feudalism to capitalism, spurred by factors such as the revival of classical antiquity, the consolidation of private property rights, and the development of urban centers. This transition was marked by the rise of absolutism, which provided stability to the feudal order while accommodating the growing influence of capitalism. It explores how absolutism emerged as a political system in Europe, characterized by centralized monarchies with considerable power. It contrasts Western European absolutism, influenced by the presence of a rising urban bourgeoisie, with Eastern European absolutism, which was rooted in feudalism and lacked significant capitalist development. It highlights the role of international dynamics in shaping the development of feudalism and absolutism in Europe, particularly the competition and conflict between Western and Eastern powers. It discusses the consequences of this division, including revolutions and upheavals that ultimately led to the transformation of political structures. Anderson's book reflects on the legacy of feudalism and absolutism in Europe and Japan, emphasizing how these systems influenced subsequent historical developments and continue to shape contemporary societies.

Receptions
Ellen Kay Trimberger argues that Anderson's theory of the absolutist state as primarily serving the dominant class overlooks complexities and variations within European states and their relationships with class structures. Anderson's theory is deemed insufficient in explaining differences in state development and fails to incorporate dynamic, change-oriented perspectives. Also, Timberger highlights Anderson's lack of a coherent theory linking the state to social change, particularly in his analysis of feudalism and capitalism's emergence in Europe. Anderson's economic determinism and idealist explanations are criticized for overlooking class conflict and political struggle. And Timberger challenges Anderson's characterization of non-Western societies, particularly Japan and the Ottoman Empire, as feudal. Timberger argues that Anderson's Eurocentric biases and oversimplifications lead to flawed analyses and fail to capture the unique dynamics of these societies' political and economic structures.