Andreas Rutz

Zum genuinen Bestandteil eines Staates gehören eindeutig definierte Grenzen. Vom Mittelalter bis an das Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts wurden sie verbal beschrieben, materiell und symbolisch markiert und schließlich auch kartographisch vermessen, um eine Herrschaft in ihren räumlichen Dimensionen zu repräsentieren. Die Studie analysiert die Akte territorialer Grenzziehung und ihre Bedeutung für die Entstehung politischer Räume im Heiligen Römischen Reich. Die Territorien des Reiches werden auf breiter Quellengrundlage und unter Einbeziehung westeuropäischer Vergleichsbeispiele untersucht. Dabei zielt die Untersuchung auf eine allgemeine Modellbildung zur Genese räumlich-territorialer Herrschaft in der Vormoderne. Im Mittelpunkt stehen die Verfahren zur Beschreibung und Markierung von Grenzen und deren intermediales Zusammenspiel.

In medieval and early modern Europe, women participating in political power were no exception to the rule. Rather, their political activities constituted an integral part of the exertion of power in the dynastic system. For this new interpretation of the role of women in the public sphere not only the insights of gender history are crucial, but also a new understanding of ruling and power in pre-modern times. These are no longer considered as a one-man-show, but rather as a complex interaction of different stakeholders, who participated on the institutional level, but also and especially by informally intervening in the process of political decision making. This is also true for women of the high nobility, for example the wife, mother, daughters or sisters of a ruler. Taking the duchy of Cleve on the lower Rhine in the 15th and 16th centuries as an example, the paper demonstrates the different possibilities women had to exert or influence politics. The discussion of women’s means of participating in political power is not only relevant for the territorial history of the duchy of Cleve and the region, but also for the political system of the Holy Roman Empire and the Western European monarchies.

The ‘Auslandsdeutsche’, emigrants from Germany living abroad, played an important role in Nazi ideology and propaganda. They were seen as outposts of the German nation to be mobilised for the political purposes of the Third Reich. In this context, research into emigration took on special importance in order to identify and localise individuals with German origins all over the world. Researchers following a different, non-political agenda were marginalised and suppressed. The controversy analysed in this paper between the Bonn-based scholar Joseph Scheben and the “Deutsches Ausland-Institut” (DAI) in the early 1940s on the methodology of research into emigration paradigmatically demonstrates this development. Being interested in emigration as such, Scheben belonged to a somewhat older research tradition based on international cooperation. The DAI, on the other hand, argued from the viewpoint of Nazi racial science and political rationale in line with the Foreign Office in Berlin. Research into emigration in National Socialism was to be conducted for political purposes and therefore kept secret.

Der Beitrag untersucht den Umgang der drei ersten preußischen Könige mit wilden Tieren. Dabei wird gezeigt, dass das Mensch-Tier-Verhältnis jeweils einem bestimmten Herrschaftsverständnis folgte und dessen Repräsentation auf der europäischen Bühne diente. Friedrich I. nutzte schon vor seiner Krönung zum preußischen König im Jahre 1701 wilde Tiere zur Betonung seiner Gleichrangigkeit mit den europäischen Königshäusern, indem er wie sie Tierkämpfe in antik-römischer Tradition veranstalten ließ. Friedrich Wilhelm I. lehnte das barocke Hofleben und die blutigen Tierspektakel seines Vaters ab. Stattdessen betrieb er Parforcejagden. Die für diese Jagdmethode notwendige Ordnung und Unterwerfung der Natur spiegelte im kleineren Maßstab die Ordnungstätigkeit und Fürsorge des Fürsten für Staat und Bevölkerung insgesamt. Friedrich II. verabscheute die Jagd, wilde Tiere wurden in seiner Regierungszeit zum Wohle des Staates als Schädlinge bekämpft und vielfach ausgerottet. Die Wahrnehmung seines Umgangs mit Tieren ist aber vor allem vom engen Verhältnis des Königs zu seinen Windspielen geprägt. Diese Tierliebhaberei fügt sich in den unkonventionellen, das höfische Zeremoniell ablehnenden Repräsentationsstil Friedrichs ein, bei dem der gezielte Bruch mit höfischen Traditionen Teil der Selbstinszenierung war. Insgesamt zeigt der Beitrag, dass wilde Tiere in unterschiedlicher Weise von den drei preußischen Königen zur Repräsentation von Herrschaft genutzt wurden. Dabei ging es weniger um individuelle Neigungen als jeweils zeitgemäße Formen herrschaftlicher Repräsentation

The article examines the handling of wild animals by the first three Prussian kings. In each case, the relationship between humans and animals adhered to a certain concept of rulership and served to represent it on a European scale. Even before his coronation as King of Prussia in 1701, Frederick I used wild animals to demonstrate equal status with the royal courts of Europe. Just like them, he staged animal fights in the tradition of ancient Rome. Frederick William I rejected the baroque court life and the atrocious animal fights of his father. Instead, he cultivated the par force hunt. The ordering and subjugation of nature necessary for this method of hunting reflected, on a small scale, the regulatory activities and benevolence of the king for the state and his subjects in general. Frederick II loathed hunting. During his rule wild animals were fought for the sake of public welfare and often exterminated as vermin. The perception of his relationship with animals is mainly shaped by his intimate company with his sighthounds. This special treatment of certain animals aligns with Frederick’s unconventional representative style, in which intentional breaks with traditions of courtly ceremony were part of the king’s self-staging. Overall, the article shows that the three Prussian kings used wild animals in differing ways for the representation of power. This was less a matter of individual inclination than an expression of forms of royal representation appropriate to each king’s era.

The article focuses on the importance of the Reformation and the confessional era for the development of girls‘ education in the Holy Roman Empire and Western Europe. Both, educational ideals and school practice are discussed. Firstly the situation in late medieval Europe is sketched. Girls were not only educated at home or at court, but also in convents, coeducational parish schools and even separate girls’ schools. Martin Luther was, therefore, not calling for something completely new, when he advocated the founding of girls’ schools in 1520. However, religious education now became the centre of all schooling. The elementary curriculum was to be taught within a confessionalised framework. Luther’s ideas for separate girls’ schools were included in many Protestant church- and schoolordinances, but only rarely put into practice. Girls in Protestant lands were mostly educated in coeducational schools. In contrast, for Catholic Europe a substantial development of girls’ schools can be observed since the late 16th century. The schools were mainly sustained by female religious communities. Thus, the religious orders which had been violently reviled by Luther proved more efficient in educational matters than expected.

... 00309230.2011.603344 Andreas Rutz a * Available online ... 31 31S. Inkmann, Die pädagogischen Grundsätze in den Konstitutionen der Chorfrauen des heiligen Augustinus, ihre zeitgeschichtliche Bedeutung und ihr Einfluß auf Overberg (Paderborn, 1928) [Frau und Erziehung. ...

Andreas Rutz schilderte Achim Fischelmanns (SFB 1167 "Macht und Herrschaft. Vormoderne Konfigurationen in transkultureller Perspektive", Bonn) nach seinem Vortrag im Rahmen der Ringvorlesung „Transkulturelle Annäherungen an Phänomene von Macht und Herrschaft“ unterschiedliche Formen weiblicher Teilhabe an Herrschaftsprozessen.