Les grands empires: Histoire et geopolitique (review)

Based on an analysis of secondary sources, this book is a work of comparative history, meant to examine the rise, structure, policies, and decline of a number of empires throughout history. Using the Roman Empire as a model, Philippe Richardot goes on to consider such diverse examples of imperial or imperial-inspired rule as the Ottoman Empire, the Habsburg Empire, the Russian and Soviet empires, Germany from the Middle Ages to the present, and the British and French colonial empires. As a concise introduction to the histories of these places and periods, Richardot's work is worthwhile. In terms of its comparative value, a number of important similarities are described concerning the decline of each empire. These include the problem of military overstretch; the rise of nationalism and democracy in response to the basic nature of empires as territories of inequality; the pressure of outside forces, such as Great Power rivalry in the Ottoman region; and, in some cases, such as Russia and Turkey, the significance of internal political divisions focused on the relationship of nation to empire, or whether the empire really was seen as the best expression of nationalism. Indeed, Richardot concludes that the uncovering of signs of "decadence" that lead to inevitable decline is among the most important findings he makes, with overstretch (defined militarily, economically, and politically) being the most prominent cause of decline throughout history (p. 430).

Making significant comparisons and contrasts regarding different governing structures and policy decisions, however, proves less convincing to this reader. Richardot's examination of imperial rule includes a number of insights on such topics as the inefficiency and uncertainty of the "personal" model of the Habsburg Empire; the violence of imperial rule under the leadership of Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great, and Stalin in Russia; and the migratory impact of colonialism, in both colonial and metropolitan territory. Yet as an attempt to compare and contrast various forms of imperial rule, these individual observations rarely lead to larger conclusions. Where Richardot is to be commended, in terms of comparing different case studies of imperial rule, is his stress on the longevity of economic reasons as a motivation for both imperial and neocolonial activities. In this instance, his commentary on the current power of both Germany (p. 202) and the United States (p. 422) in the globalized world is worthwhile. Whether or not such economic power means that current global "empires" reflect a historical "tendency" towards imperial "renaissance," equal to Charlemagne's effort to "revive the Roman model," as Richardot argues at the end of the book (p. 437), is a question worthy of more debate.