Heirs to the Throne in the Constitutional Monarchies of Nineteenth-Century Europe (1815-1914)

19世纪欧洲的君主立宪制是一个了不起的成功故事。1914年，法国、葡萄牙和瑞士是君主制大陆上仅有的三个共和国。尽管“君主立宪制”的模式在每个国家都有不同的表现，但这一概念显然已成为欧洲的一种规范。这是在环境急剧变化的背景下发生的：革命；识字率不断提高；由各种媒体维持的不断扩大的公共领域；吸引更多选民的政党；欧洲社会、经济、知识和技术生活的变化；帝国扩张和全球化。它指出了君主制制度的力量、柔韧和足智多谋，它们在这个世纪的变革中蓬勃发展。这项研究项目将专注于那些等待进入欧洲王冠辉煌遗产的人所扮演的角色。它将对非洲大陆的王位继承人进行比较分析，并就君主制的运作提出新的发现。由于世袭统治的生物学现实，王位继承人是一个至关重要的组成部分。当他们预测当前统治的结束时，像普鲁士的弗雷德里克·威廉、威尔士的伯蒂王子或奥地利的鲁道夫大公这样的王储既体现了王朝的连续性，也体现了变革的必然性。根据特定的政治、文化和宪法背景以及相关个人的不同，王位继承人可能会巩固或破坏现状，扮演重要或微不足道的角色，体现变化或停滞不前。尽管存在这种多样性，王位继承人仍提供了对欧洲规范的迷人见解。调查他们对未来以他们为轴心的制度的运作、失灵、转型和僵化的贡献，有助于我们更好地理解君主制欧洲的政治和政治文化，以及维持王冠的机构和个人。该项目将建立在现有研究机构的基础上，处理19世纪君主制在媒体史、文化史和跨国历史领域的维度。该项目不是以传记的形式进行，而是将解决几个君主立宪制国家(英国、法国、意大利、西班牙、德国各州和奥地利)的主题问题：-王位继承人是通过支持政治现状还是通过充当未来变革的希望载体来稳定君主制？或者，王位继承人的国际角色是什么(例如，通过王朝婚姻、出席活动、旅行、公共外交等)？-王位继承人是否充当了主权/政府当局和人民之间的中间人？他们以什么方式与不同的公众、政党、议会和媒体互动？新的君主风范(资产阶级、平民化)和通过各种媒体塑造名人公众形象有多重要？-他们的公众形象在传递政治信息方面有什么用处？-王位继承人被认为是代际变化的象征吗？-王位继承人参与了创造“软实力”吗？网络(如对簿公堂或委员会)在这方面发挥了作用吗？他们的角色可以被归入白芝浩的“庄严”和“高效”类别吗？该项目旨在探索灵活性、机智、媒体敏锐性和社会融合在19世纪君主制成功中的作用。它将促使人们重新考虑那些强调其所谓的前现代、封建、操纵或压迫元素的解释，并有助于解释君主制结构在许多当代欧洲社会中继续流行的原因。

The constitutional monarchies of nineteenth-century Europe were a remarkable success story. In 1914 France, Portugal and Switzerland were the only republics in a continent of monarchies. Although the model 'Constitutional Monarchy' manifested itself differently in each nation, the concept had clearly established itself as a European norm. This had happened against the background of a dramatically changing environment: revolutions; growing literacy; an expanding public sphere sustained by a variety of media; political parties appealing to larger electorates; changes in Europe's social, economic, intellectual and technological life; imperial expansion and globalization. It points to the strength, suppleness and resourcefulness of monarchical systems that they flourished throughout this century of transformation.This research project will focus on the roles played by those waiting to come into the glittering inheritance of a European crown. It will pursue a comparative analysis of the heirs to the continent's thrones and offer new findings on the workings of the monarchical system. Because of the biological realities of hereditary rule, heirs to the throne were a crucial component. While they were anticipating the end of the current reign, crown princes such as Frederick William of Prussia, 'Bertie' Prince of Wales or Archduke Rudolf of Austria embodied both dynastic continuity and the inevitability of change. Depending on the specific political, cultural and constitutional contexts as well as on the individuals involved, they could consolidate or undermine the status quo, play momentous or insignificant roles, embody change or stasis.Notwithstanding this variety, heirs to the throne offer fascinating insights into the European norm. An investigation of the contribution they made to the functioning, malfunctioning, transformations and rigidities of the systems whose future pivoted on them helps us better to understand the politics and political cultures of monarchical Europe as well as the institutions and individuals that sustained the crowns.The project will build on the existing body of research tackling dimensions of nineteenth-century monarchy in the fields of media history, cultural history and transnational history. Rather than proceed biographically, the project will address thematic questions across several constitutional monarchies (Britain, France, Italy, Spain, the German states and Austria):- Did heirs to the throne stabilise monarchical systems by supporting the political status quo or by acting as a vehicle of hope for future change? Or were they corrosive of the current reign by crystallizing internal opposition?- What was the international role of heirs to the throne (e.g. through dynastic marriages, attendance at functions, travel, public diplomacy etc.)?- Did heirs to the throne function as intermediaries between the sovereign/governmental authority and the people? In what ways did they interact with different publics, parties, parliaments and the media? How important were new styles of princely comportment (embourgeoisement, folksiness) and the creation of a celebrity public image through various media?- What use was made of their public profile for the transmission of political messages?- Were heirs to the throne perceived as embodying generational change?- Were heirs to the throne engaged in generating 'soft power' and did networks (such as counter-courts or coteries) play a role here?- Can their roles be placed into Bagehot's categories of 'dignified' and 'efficient'?The project aims to explore the role of flexibility, resourcefulness, media acumen and societal integration in the success of nineteenth-century monarchies. It will invite a reconsideration of interpretations which emphasize their allegedly pre-modern, feudal, manipulative or oppressive elements and help to explain the continuing popularity of monarchical structures across many contemporary European societies.