ABSTRACT
Nineteenth-century international peace and stability derived mainly from systemic change, reflected in major institutionalized arrangements and practices divergent from the 18th-century norm. Certainly there was serious competition in 19th-century international politics. It was essentially competition for advantage, like the competition for shares of the market in an oligopolistic industry. Some evidence even exists to satisfy those who would like quantifiable data to support the supposed qualitative difference between 18th-and 19th-century international politics. During the latter part of the 18th century and the Napoleonic Wars, British naval practices aroused much resentment of Britain on the continent, as British statesmen were well aware; several major efforts at united action were promoted against them. The chapter shows how the typical 19th-century conception of the European equilibrium differed from the prevailing 18th-century ideas of balance of power, and explains how new rules and practices of politics emerged in the crucible of the Napoleonic Wars, would require lengthy historical analyses.
