Tilly, state building

What is Tilly's definition of a state?

Coercive organizations distinct from households that exercise some priority over other organizations within a given territory.

Priority - administering priority in some extent, not a monopoly (ex-administering justice)

• Empires

• City-states

• Theocracies

• National states

empires

central locust of authority than encompasses various power organizations

• some were pretty centralized, some were not

• multiple political entities are subject to the same principal of authority

city-states

states that correspond to the territory of one city

• wall of city are boundaries of state

• were geopolitical powers, rich and influential

urban leagues

cities for commercial purposes formed some sort of federation

Tilly vs Weber state definition

weber produces a def of the modern state, Tilly’s is an implicit criticism of his

• Tilly’s does not include monopoly or use of force or legitimacy (historically states do not always have consent, they governed through force)

• tilly thinks webers def is too narrow

organizational definition

tilly says when we are talking about organizations we are essentially talking about the state

national state

centralized, differentiated, autonomous organization successfully claiming priority by the use of force within a large, contiguous, and clearly bounded territory

• centralized form of organization

• encompasses contiguous regions

• territory is bounded

one centralized government controlling a large, connected, clearly bordered territory through force.

nation state

state whose people share a strong linguistic, religious, and symbolic identity.

ex- sweden and ireland now

End of the 15th century

• national states were not a dominant force

• fragmented, about 200 states

• huge variety of forms of gov

end of 19th century

• fewer states and most are national states (dominant form of gov)

• can identify more than 30 states by Tilly’s def of states

Explanation for emergence and domination of national states

• the state that survived was the best adapted to warfare (natural selection)

• national state was the fittest

war makes states because

1) compels state rulers to set up orgs to get resources for war

2) states need to organize resources for war

war makes states

• war + states have in common that they are made possible through coercion

• historical emergence of states as temporal clusters

• in order to wage war, states needed guns, weapons (CAPITAL)

• they need financial and human resources

• in order to wage war, states need to erect institutions to get capital and people (taxes, soldiers)

• to get men you need something to forcefully enroll people in war

how do cities affect getting/having capital for war?

• mattered bc cities made capital available, source of revenue for rulers

• they affected the dynamic of sociopolitical relationships, rulers who needed money needed to bargain with cities'

urban factor

why does Tilly not start out with the national state in her definition for states?

does not want to take the end point (national states) as the point of reference

= teological bias and reasoning backwards

national state developed through trials and errors, was not bound to happen

coercive intensive path - relationship between cities and states as an interaction of capital and coercion ???

• in economically backwards areas

• enlisted men

seats of monarchs such as Berlin and Madrid, on the other hand, stood much higher with respect to coercion than to capital.

Rulers:

• Extract resources directly

• Build large coercive structures

Examples:

• Russia

• Brandenburg-Prussia

Characteristics:

• Few cities

• Agricultural economies

• Heavy use of coercion

In the coercion-intensive mode, rulers squeezed the means of war from their own populations and others they conquered, building massive structures of extraction in the process. Brandenburg and Russia - especially in their phases as tribute-taking empires - illustrate the coercion-intensive mode. At the very extreme of the mode, however, armed landlords wielded so much power that no one of them could establish durable control over the rest; for several centuries, the Polish and Hungarian nobilities actually elected their own kings, and struck them down when they strove too hard for supreme power.

capital intensive path - relationship between cities and states as an interaction of capital and coercion ???

• economically developed areas as a result of the prescence of cities

European ports such as Amsterdam and Barcelona typically wallowed in capital while having relatively thin coercive apparatuses

Rulers:

• Depend on capitalists

• Purchase military force

Examples:

• Genoa

• Dutch Republic

• Venice

Characteristics:

• Strong commercial cities

• Less centralized states

• Extensive bargaining

In the capital-intensive mode, rulers relied on compacts with capitalists whose interests they served with care - to rent or purchase military force, and thereby warred without building vast permanent state structures. City-states, city-empires, urban federations, and other forms of fragmented sovereignty commonly fall into this path of change. Genoa, Dubrovnik, the Dutch Republic, and, for a time, Catalonia, exemplify the capital-intensive mode. As the history of the Dutch Republic illustrates, at the extreme this mode produced federations of largely autonomous city-states, and constant negotiation among them over state policy.

what are the 4 stages of development?

Patrimonialism, Brokerage, Nationalization, and Specialization

Factors of Capital and Coercion for Patrimonialism

Capital:

• direct extraction of resources, usually through some form of tribute collection

Coercion:

• capacity to have reliance on vassals (people committed personally to state ruler) for warfare

• vassals were committed through the commitment to someone committed to the ruler

• hierarchical, personal, localized

Until roughly the 15th century

Factors of Capital and Coercion for Brokerage

Capital

• relied on capitalists to provide loans or taxes

Coercion:

• use mercenaries for war

Roughly 1400-1700

Factors of Capital and Coercion for Nationalization

Capital

• tax collection is exercised by the state

Coercion:

• national conscription (draft)

Roughly 1700-1850

Factors of Capital and Coercion for Specialization

Capital:

• state nationalizes tax collections, bureaucratic affair

Coercion:

• professional armies, separate police force

Mid-1800s onward

Coercion

making people do something as a result of a threat or through threat of physical force (possibility of force, not necessarily use)

Example: A ruler collecting taxes through threat of punishment.

Critiques of Tilly’s argument ???

• dynamic of social relations

• principal - agent relationships

• dynamics of relationships with representative institutions

  • underdeveloped in Tilly’s account

Webers def of state

human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory

• legitimate - how polity members think/relate to the use of force (and consent), the populus grants state actors the right to use force

How Does Capital Create Cities?

Capital accumulation encourages:

• Trade

• Banking

• Manufacturing

• Population concentration

As capital accumulates and concentrates:

• Cities grow

• Urban networks emerge

Example: Amsterdam became a dominant commercial city because of concentrated capital.

How Does Coercion Create States?

When coercive means become:

• Accumulated

• Concentrated

They produce states that:

• Control force

• Rule territories

• Outcompete rivals

Formula: Accumulation of coercion + concentration of coercion = state formation.

What is Tilly's central argument about war?

War drives state formation and transformation.

War forces rulers to:

• Raise taxes

• Build administrations

• Recruit armies

• Extract resources

These wartime institutions become permanent state structures.

Example: France built stronger bureaucracies to support military competition.

Why does war lead to stronger states?

To fight wars rulers need:

• Men

• Money

• Weapons

• Supplies

They must therefore:

• Tax populations

• Develop bureaucracies

• Monitor citizens

• Negotiate with elites

Analysis: War-making unintentionally creates administrative capacity

Under what conditions do empires emerge?

Over the centuries, tribute-taking empires have dominated the world history of states. Empires appeared mainly under conditions of relatively low accumulation of coercive means with high concentration of the available means. When anyone other than the emperor accumulated important coercive means, or the emperor lost the ability to deploy massive coercion, empires often disintegrated. For all its appearance of massive durability, the Chinese Empire suffered incessantly from rebellions, invasions, and movements for autonomy, and long spent a major part of its budget on tribute to Mongols and other nomadic predators.

• Low accumulation of coercion

• High concentration of coercion

What is fragmented sovereignty?

temporary coalitions and consultative institutions played significant parts in war and extraction, but little durable state apparatus emerged on a national scale.

Political arrangements with:

• Multiple centers of power

• Limited central control

• Examples:

  • City-states

  • Urban federations

  • Medieval leagues

  Characteristics:

  • High accumulation of coercion

  • Low concentration of coercion

  Example: Fourteenth-century western European city militias.

In such states, a relatively small coalition of nominal subjects could equal the ruler's forces, while individuals, groups, and whole populations had abundant opportunities for defection to competing jurisdictions.

Capitalized-intensive path

In the intermediate capitalized coercion mode, rulers did some of each, but spent more of their effort than did their capital-intensive neighbors on incorporating capitalists and sources of capital directly into the structures of their states. Holders of capital and coercion interacted on terms of relative equality. France and England eventually followed the capitalized coercion mode, which produced full-fledged national states earlier than the coercion intensive and capital-intensive modes did.

How does Hungary illustrate Tilly's theory of state formation?

Hungary demonstrates the coercion-intensive path to state formation and shows how early conditions shape a state's long-term development.

The Hungarian state originated when the Magyars, a nomadic warrior people from the Eurasian steppe, conquered the Carpathian Basin during the tenth century. After settling, they relied heavily on agriculture in a territory that had very few cities.

Because Hungary lacked strong urban centers:

• Capital accumulation was relatively weak.

• Merchants and urban elites had little political influence.

• Landed nobles became the dominant social class.

• The state depended heavily on rural coercion and military power.

Over time, the Hungarian nobility gained enormous autonomy. They won privileges that exempted them from many taxes and even claimed a right to resist kings who violated noble rights. When King Matthias died, the nobility weakened the monarchy and reduced its military capacity. As a result, Hungary became vulnerable to outside powers such as the Ottomans.

Why This Matters for Tilly:

Hungary supports Tilly's claim that:

The balance between capital and coercion shapes state development.

Since Hungary had little urban capital but strong rural military elites, it evolved differently from commercial states like Holland or England.

One-Sentence Exam Example:

"Hungary followed a coercion-intensive path because weak urban development and powerful nobles pushed rulers to rely on military coercion rather than commercial capital, producing a relatively decentralized state."

How does Prussia illustrate Tilly's theory?

During the medieval period, the region was controlled by the Teutonic Knights, who created a highly centralized military order. Eventually, local nobles became powerful political actors, while rulers faced constant military competition from neighboring powers.

To survive, Prussian rulers had to:

• Raise larger armies.

• Secure tax revenues.

• Build administrative institutions.

• Bargain with nobles.

The monarchy reached agreements with powerful landowners (the Junkers).

The bargain worked as follows:

• Nobles received local authority and privileges.

• The crown gained military service and regular revenues.

Over time, rulers expanded state capacity and integrated society into military institutions.

By the eighteenth century:

• Nobles served as officers.

• Peasants served as soldiers.

• The army became the foundation of the state.

Prussia became one of Europe's strongest military states.

Why This Matters for Tilly:

Prussia directly demonstrates Tilly's famous argument:

War drives state formation and transformation.

The need to prepare for war forced rulers to:

• Extract resources.

• Build bureaucracies.

• Develop institutions.

• Centralize authority.

One-Sentence Exam Example:

"Prussia's military institutions, taxation systems, and bureaucracies grew out of rulers' efforts to wage war, supporting Tilly's argument that war drove state formation."

How does the Dutch Republic illustrate Tilly's theory?

The Dutch Republic represents the capital-intensive path to state formation.

Unlike Prussia or Russia, the Dutch Republic developed in one of Europe's most urbanized and commercially advanced regions.

Characteristics included:

• Dense networks of cities.

• Extensive trade.

• Wealthy merchants.

• Strong capitalist classes.

Rather than extracting resources directly through coercion, rulers depended heavily on cooperation with merchants and financiers. The state often borrowed money from urban elites and relied on commercial wealth to support military efforts.

Political authority was fragmented because individual cities retained significant autonomy.

Power frequently rested in negotiations among:

• Merchants

• Provincial authorities

• Urban governments

Instead of rulers dominating capitalists, capitalists exercised major influence over the state.

Why This Matters for Tilly:

The Dutch Republic demonstrates that states can develop through capital as well as coercion.

It also shows that:

Different combinations of capital and coercion produce different kinds of states.

Exam Analysis:

The Dutch Republic challenges any argument that strong states must emerge through centralized military domination. Instead, commercial wealth and bargaining created a viable political system.

One-Sentence Exam Example:

"The Dutch Republic followed a capital-intensive path because wealthy merchants and cities played a central role in financing and shaping the state."

“As the history of the Dutch Republic illustrates, at the extreme this mode produced federations of largely autonomous city-states, and constant negotiation among them over state policy.”

How does England support Tilly's theory?

England is an example of the capitalized-coercion path, where rulers successfully combined coercion and capital.

English monarchs faced constant military competition, particularly with France. To wage war effectively they needed:

• Revenue

• Credit

• Soldiers

This forced rulers to cooperate with merchants, financiers, and landowners while simultaneously building stronger military institutions.

As war became more expensive:

• Taxation expanded.

• Administrative capacity increased.

• The military became more professional.

• The state penetrated society more deeply.

Unlike highly coercive states such as Russia, or highly commercial states such as the Dutch Republic, England integrated both sources of power.

Why This Matters for Tilly:

Tilly argues that states combining capital and coercion became the most successful competitors in European warfare.

England eventually became one of the strongest national states because it could mobilize:

• Commercial wealth

• Tax revenue

• Military force

simultaneously.

Exam Analysis:

England helps explain why national states became the dominant political form in Europe.

One-Sentence Exam Example:

"England successfully integrated capital and coercion, allowing it to fund large military institutions and emerge as a powerful national state."

tilly’s theory in arrows

• Military competition threatened survival.

• Rulers needed more resources.

• Resources required taxation and extraction.

• Extraction required administration.

• Administration created bureaucracy.

• Bureaucracy strengthened the state.

Why were European state paths different but outcomes similar?

Different paths because regions had:

• Different class structures

• Different levels of urbanization

• Different distributions of capital and coercion

Similar outcomes because:

• All states faced military competition

• War rewarded efficient extraction

• Competition pushed states toward national-state forms

What is the single most important takeaway from Tilly?

States are products of the interaction between coercion and capital under conditions of military competition.

War forces rulers to:

• Extract resources

• Negotiate with social classes

• Build administrations

• Centralize coercion

The result is state formation.

One-sentence exam answer: "According to Tilly, war-making and preparation for war drove rulers to concentrate coercion, extract resources, and build administrative institutions, ultimately producing the modern national state."