Cross-territorial ties and multiple loyalties in the diplomacy around 1700: Johann Christoph von Urbich's (1653-1715) network of relationships between the Holy Roman Empire, Denmark and Russia

这一对早期现代外交实践的调查集中于外交官在雇主关系的多层次和非合同网络中的活动，这些关系补充并部分地与受管制的协会和联盟竞争。这种活动模式导致外交官同时受到多重效忠。可以通过具体的例子表明，在与许多法院同时建立契约关系的背景下，跨领土行动在1700年左右的外交实践中是一个事实。目前的历史研究揭示了许多在这方面双重忠诚的例子。然而，可以表明，除此之外，还有外交官在工作过程中建立多种关系的情况。研究外交官在这种情况下的潜在范围，一方面将比迄今为止更清楚地展示专业精英成员的自我概念和地位，另一方面将更清晰地展示非正式关系的价值。本研究中外交官这种跨领土活动的代表性基础是由职业外交官von Urbich提供的，他的广泛的政治论文以前是在这一领域工作的历史学家所不知道的。1690年至1712年，除了短暂的休息时间，他还担任丹麦驻维也纳的使者，在帝国宫廷担任顾问，并为沃尔芬比特的杜克安东·乌尔里希（Anton Ulrich of Wolfenbüttel）服务了大约20年。他在1707年至1712年期间作为俄国使者的工作可以根据现有的原始资料来描述，与以前的假设相反，这是他多重忠诚的进一步延伸。对当代外交官忠诚的具体理解问题，以及他可能采取未经授权的行动的问题，集中在对他被俄罗斯法院解雇的情况以及由此造成的“他的”个人关系网的损失的历史分析中。工作的假设是，一个运作多年的模式在提供其基础的系统中固有的弱点上崩溃了。这种雇主关系网只有在参与者的利益得到平衡的情况下才能存在。一旦雇主之间的政治紧张关系被认为是无法解决的，外交官就会因为他的多重忠诚而被视为叛徒。以前被视为具有政治优势的网络突然被视为企图施加敌对影响的可能来源。

This investigation into the early modern practice of diplomacy focuses on the activity of diplomats in a multi-layered and non-contractual network of relationships of employers that complemented and in part competed with regulated associations and alliances. This mode of activity led to diplomats being subject to multiple loyalties at one and the same time. It can be shown by means of concrete examples that cross-territorial action against the background of simultaneous contractual relationships to numerous courts was a fact in the practice of diplomacy around 1700. Current historical research has revealed many instances of dual loyalties in such respects. However, it can be shown that beyond this there were cases where diplomats entered a multiplicity of relationships in the course of their work. Researching the potential scope of a diplomat in such a situation will bring out on the one hand much clearer than up to now the self-conception and status of members of a professional elite, while on the other hand providing a sharper image of value of informal connections. The basis for the representation of such cross-territorial activity of a diplomat in this study is provided by the professional diplomat von Urbich, whose extensive political papers of have previously been unknown to historians working in this field. Apart from short breaks he served as Danish emissary in Vienna from 1690 to 1712, carried out official missions as Councillor at the Imperial Court, and stood also for around twenty years, as his very regular correspondence demonstrates, in the service of Duke Anton Ulrich of Wolfenbüttel. His work as Russian emissary between 1707 and 1712 can be described on the basis of source material now available and contrary to previous assumptions as a further extension of his multiple loyalties. The question of the specific understanding of loyalty for a contemporary diplomat and at the same time of his potential for unauthorized action are focused thereby in the historic analysis on the circumstances of his dismissal from service to the Russian court and the resulting loss of ‘his’ personal relational network. The working hypothesis is that a model which worked for many years fell apart at a weak point inherent in the system which provided its foundation. Such a relational network of employers can only subsist as long as the interests of participants are balanced out. As soon as political tensions between employers are judged to be insolvable the diplomat incurs the danger of being seen as a traitor on account of his multiple loyalties. Networks that were previously valued as politically advantageous are suddenly perceived as a possible source of attempts at hostile influence.