Abstract
The balance of power is resilient because no one agrees what it really is. This instability makes the concept useful for a variety of purposes, and that is precisely why it has become an institution of international society. Considering Hedley Bull’s writings, this chapter argues that histories of conceptual change can help us understand the adaptability, prevalence and resilience of institutions. British debates from the Congress era illustrate that, first, the dominant meaning of the balance of power has been variable and contested throughout history and, second, that the balance of power concept changed from being an expression of a common public interest to a management principle between independent states. This chapter ends by reflecting on what this change, adaptability and resilience of the balance of power means for the institutions of international society, for the English School, and for contemporary international politics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
This rural metaphor was recurrent in arguments for the independence of states, and against the policies of the Congress. See Hemstad (2014).
- 10.
Whilst the end of the Congress system is often taken to be the 1826 Protocol of St. Petersburg, the 1822 Congress of Verona marked a British break with the allies and, as seen below, a shift in its rhetoric towards the Congress system.
Bibliography
Andersen, Morten Skumsrud and William C. Wohlforth. 2021. “Balance of power. A key concept in historical perspective”, in Benjamin de Carvalho, Julia Costa Lopez, Halvard Leira (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Historical International Relations. London: Rotuledge.
Armitage, David. 2012. “What’s the Big Idea? Intellectual History and the Longue Durée”, History of European Ideas, 38: 493–507.
Bull, Hedley. 2002[1977]. The Anarchical Society. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Bullen, Roger. 1979. “The Great Powers and the Iberian Peninsula, 1815–48”, pp. 54–78 in Sked, Alan (ed.) Europe’s Balance of Power 1815–1848. London: Macmillan.
Chotiner, Isaac 2022. “Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine”, The New Yorker, March 1, https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/why-john-mearsheimer-blames-the-us-for-the-crisis-in-ukraine.
Emirbayer, Mustafa. 1997. “Manifesto for a Relational Sociology”, American Journal of Sociology, 103(2): 281–317.
Gallie, W.B. 1955. “Essentially Contested Concepts”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56: 167–198.
Hansard, Thomas Curson. 1815. The Parliamentary Debates from the Year 1803 to the Present Time, Vol. XXX. London: Longman.
Hansard, Thomas Curson. 1823. The Parliamentary Debates. New Series. Vol. VIII. London: T.C. Hansard.
Hampsher-Monk, Iain. 2005. “Edmund Burke’s Changing Justification for Intervention”, The Historical Journal, 48(1): 65–100.
Hemstad, Ruth (ed). 2014. Like a Herd of Cattle. Parliamentary and Public Debates Regarding the Cession of Norway, 1813–1814. Oslo: Dreyers Forlag.
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 2006. “What Are Institutions?”, Journal of Economic Issues, 40(1): 1–25.
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus. 2006. “The Present as History”, pp. 490–500 in Robert E. Goodin and Charles Tilly (eds.) The Oxford Handbook on Contextual Political Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus and Daniel Nexon. 1999. “Relations before States: Substance, Process and the Study of World Politics”, European Journal of International Relations 5(3): 291–332.
Jarrett, Mark. 2014. The Congress of Vienna and its Legacy. War and Great Power Diplomacy after Napoleon. London: I.B. Tauris.
Kissinger, Henry A. 1957. A World Restored. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kleinschmidt, Harald. 2000. The Nemesis of Power. London: Reaktion Books.
Korosteleva, Elena and Trine Flockhart (eds.) 2020. Resilience in EU and International Institutions. London: Routledge.
Mälksoo, Maria. 2022. “The Postcolonial Moment in Russia’s War Against Ukraine”, Journal of Genocide Research, Published online: 11 May 2022.
Neumann, Iver. 2019. Concepts of International Relations. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press
Nicolson, Harold. 1961[1946]. The Congress of Vienna. A Study in Allied Unity: 1812–1822. London: Methuen & Co.
Skinner, Quentin. 2002. Visions of Politics. Vol 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Somers, Margaret R. 1994. “The Narrative Constitution of Identity: A Relational and Network Approach”, Theory and Society, 23(5): 605–649.
Toye, Richard. 2013. Rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Webster, Charles K. 1921. British Diplomacy 1813–1815. London: G. Bell and Sons Ltd.
Wright, Thomas. N.d. History of the Reigns of George IV. and William IV. London: Jones & Company.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Andersen, M.S. (2022). The Balance of Power and the Independence of Nations. In: Flockhart, T., Paikin, Z. (eds) Rebooting Global International Society. Governance, Security and Development. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11393-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11393-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-11392-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-11393-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)