A discussion forum for history enthusiasts everywhere
 
HomeHome  Recent ActivityRecent Activity  FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  SearchSearch  

Share | 
 

 European monarchies and republics pre WW1

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Meles meles
Censura
avatar

Posts : 2911
Join date : 2011-12-30
Location : Pyrénées-Orientales, France

PostSubject: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Fri 28 Aug 2015, 12:29

Throughout the 19th century and into the 20th, dynastic monarchies seem to have been the most resilient form of government in Europe. By 1910 nearly every European state was headed by an emperor, king, prince, or other hereditary potentate. The only significant states in Europe that were not monarchies were Switzerland and France and the latter, after its bloody revolution, had already lapsed back to an hereditary Empire a couple of times.

This regal gathering was for the funeral of Edward VII photographed at Windsor Castle on 20 May 1910:



Standing, from left to right: King Haakan VII of Norway, King Ferdinand of Bulgaria, King Manoel of Portugal, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, King George I of Greece, King Albert of the Belgians. Seated, from left to right: King Alfonso XIII of Spain, King George V of Great Britain, King Frederik VIII of Denmark.

Also present for the funeral were representatives of the Kingdoms/Empires of: Austria-Hungary, Russia, Italy, Romania, Serbia, The Netherlands, Sweden, Montenegro ... the Ottoman Empire, Japan and the Kingdom of Egypt.

Yet for all their glitter and swagger within 10 years many of these monarchies had been overthrown or abolished and replaced by republics (and more had gone by 1945). I can understand the role of the Great War in driving republican aspirations but what really surprises me is that change hadn’t come about earlier during the 19th century. The crowned heads of Europe managed not only to ride out the swell of rebellion that swept the continent in 1848, but then even to have further consolidated their power. In the Balkans, as one by one states threw off Ottoman control, they all became principalities and kingdoms, thereby swapping one hereditary head of state for another. Greece, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Montenegro, Albania all chose a local noble claimant as king for their newly independent state, or borrowed a second son from another, usually German-Danish-British, royal house. Similarly when Italy unified, the hotch-podge of local pricipalities, duchies and city states, including some like Florence and Venice that had had long histories as successful republics, meekly adopted a King (Victor Emmanuel II of Sardinia) with barely a republican whimper. Likewise all the German states reunited under the Prussian King, Kaiser Wilhelm I.

So why didn’t republicanism take a hold earlier, say during the almost continent-wide revolts, rebellions and revolutions of 1848-1850, or alongside the re-emerging nationalist independence movements?
Back to top Go down
PaulRyckier
Censura
avatar

Posts : 1859
Join date : 2012-01-01
Location : Belgium

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Mon 31 Aug 2015, 22:09

Meles meles,

had already prepared in mind a reply but will use this reaction as reminder to start it.
As usual too late on the evening and yet to elaborate on the Gods and Kings thread and Caro's "pity" thread...

Regards from the region nearing France from the North
Back to top Go down
nordmann
Nobiles Barbariæ
avatar

Posts : 5747
Join date : 2011-12-25

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Tue 01 Sep 2015, 08:23

@Meles meles wrote:
So why didn’t republicanism take a hold earlier, say during the almost continent-wide revolts, rebellions and revolutions of 1848-1850, or alongside the re-emerging nationalist independence movements?

A consensus on what "republicanism" actually means has always been difficult, and especially within societies where the possibility to impose that structure presented itself in a time when many emerging senses of national identity were independent of the absolute need to continue with traditional monarchy. It seems to have been easiest imposed where the consensus only needed to be obtained within a small but influential sector in that society and where the particular class which traditionally had sat at the top of the local power structure was easily displaced (or bought off). But it is fair to say that of all the nascent republics that emerged between the renaissance (Florence, Venice, Netherlands etc) and more recent ones (ex-colonial countries etc) no two have arrived at a precisely similar definition or application of republicanism though all use the term. It is also fair to say that in most of these countries where a distinct and powerful elite had already been established this elite was accommodated within the new set-up. At a time when expression of this elitism was almost by default monarchy it is no wonder that this model survived the initial wave of democratisations often expressed as republicanism. However the various degrees to which monarchs wielded power within their respective dominions were almost as plentiful as the monarchies themselves.
Back to top Go down
https://reshistorica.historyboard.net
PaulRyckier
Censura
avatar

Posts : 1859
Join date : 2012-01-01
Location : Belgium

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Sat 05 Sep 2015, 22:06

@nordmann wrote:
@Meles meles wrote:
So why didn’t republicanism take a hold earlier, say during the almost continent-wide revolts, rebellions and revolutions of 1848-1850, or alongside the re-emerging nationalist independence movements?

A consensus on what "republicanism" actually means has always been difficult, and especially within societies where the possibility to impose that structure presented itself in a time when many emerging senses of national identity were independent of the absolute need to continue with traditional monarchy. It seems to have been easiest imposed where the consensus only needed to be obtained within a small but influential sector in that society and where the particular class which traditionally had sat at the top of the local power structure was easily displaced (or bought off). But it is fair to say that of all the nascent republics that emerged between the renaissance (Florence, Venice, Netherlands etc) and more recent ones (ex-colonial countries etc) no two have arrived at a precisely similar definition or application of republicanism though all use the term. It is also fair to say that in most of these countries where a distinct and powerful elite had already been established this elite was accommodated within the new set-up. At a time when expression of this elitism was almost by default monarchy it is no wonder that this model survived the initial wave of democratisations often expressed as republicanism. However the various degrees to which monarchs wielded power within their respective dominions were almost as plentiful as the monarchies themselves.


Nordmann and Meles,

yes good analysis...
And I wanted to add originally:

People are "traditional" and even with all the flaws they don't change that easely to what they are accustomed...look for instance...even at the birth of the Dutch Republic a William the Silent was looking, allthough perhaps for political reasons, for a "monarch"...en perhaps if it had be another person than the Duke of Anjou...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis,_Duke_of_Anjou


No the event which sparked the new trend were the United States and then the following French revolution, which sparked also the one year long United States of Belgium...
But in 1848 the Frankfurt parliament asked again the Prussian king Friedrich-Wilhelm IV to be their king and he refused while they as common people they hadn't that right to command a king who was king by the grace of God...
http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/germanunification.asp
"Friedrich Wilhelm IV, King of Prussia: Proclamation of 1849
I am not able to return a favorable reply to the offer of a crown on the part of the German National Assembly [meeting in Frankfurt], because the Assembly has not the right, without the consent of the German governments, to bestow the crown which they tendered me, and moreover because they offered the crown upon condition that I would accept a constitution which could not be reconciled with the rights of the German states."

Indeed we had to wait for the catastrophy of World War One to have that new tendency with the several republican former examples as guideline...

Kind regards, Paul.
Back to top Go down
Vizzer
Censura
avatar

Posts : 829
Join date : 2012-05-12

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Sat 16 Jan 2016, 16:33

@Meles meles wrote:
King Manoel of Portugal

The first to go. He would lose his throne in a republican coup within 5 months of the photograph being taken. Portugal would seem to be the exception to the rule in that the monarchy there was indeed replaced by a republic before the First World War. The Portuguese revolution of October 1910 is often forgotten internationally and tends to be overshadowed by the much more dramatic Mexican revolution which began the following month. Needless to say (and to echo nordmann's point) the Mexican revolution was a struggle between 2 different types of republicans. Mexico itself had indeed overthrown its very own 'European monarch', the Emperor Maximilian of the House of Habsburg-Lorraine 43 years earlier. Another 'European monarchy' in the Americas, the Empire of Brazil was also overthrown in a coup in 1889. Considering that Pedro II (the last Emperor of Brazil) was the great-uncle of Manuel II (the last King of Portugal) and that the former had attended the latter's christening, then the fate of the House of Braganza maybe bears investigation in this.

It could quite simply be that, being at the extreme western edge of Europe made Portugal much more receptive to the republican ethos in the Americas. This may seem facile at first until one considers the case of another country on the extreme western edge of Europe - namely Ireland. Unlike the case with many continental nationalist movements in the 19th Century, which more often than not proposed monarchies for their respective countries, the Irish variant from the 1840s onwards invariably contained a distinct republican streak. An early example of transatlantic geopolitics perhaps?
Back to top Go down
Gilgamesh of Uruk
Censura
avatar

Posts : 1400
Join date : 2011-12-27

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Sat 16 Jan 2016, 18:52

Back to top Go down
PaulRyckier
Censura
avatar

Posts : 1859
Join date : 2012-01-01
Location : Belgium

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Sat 16 Jan 2016, 22:00

Gil, you pushed me to search for:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_Long_Way_to_Tipperary



And my father could sing it with Dutch words...
"en de Keizer zat aan zijnen Ijzer..." (and the Kaiser sat at his Yser..."
But after some research this Tipperary song in Dutch version seems to be out of the collective memory at least at "Google" Wink

Your friend, Paul.
Back to top Go down
PaulRyckier
Censura
avatar

Posts : 1859
Join date : 2012-01-01
Location : Belgium

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Sat 16 Jan 2016, 22:13

And even in Russian:



But I prefer this one:



Regards, Paul.
Back to top Go down
Gilgamesh of Uruk
Censura
avatar

Posts : 1400
Join date : 2011-12-27

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Sat 16 Jan 2016, 22:29

Of course the Tommies had had enough of the song by 1914 and were singing  various obscene versions rather than the official one - and I'm not sure how many ever sang the verse ....
Back to top Go down
FrederickLouis
Aediles
avatar

Posts : 71
Join date : 2016-12-13

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Wed 18 Jan 2017, 00:38

The New York Times reported on December 15, 1905 there may be a plan to make Prince Eitel Friedrich, Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany's second son, as the new Regent of the Duchy of Brunswick.   
The present Regent was Prince Albrecht of Prussia. Albrecht was near 70 years old and wanted to retire.   
Would Prince Eitel Friedrich have been a successful Regent?
Back to top Go down
nordmann
Nobiles Barbariæ
avatar

Posts : 5747
Join date : 2011-12-25

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Wed 18 Jan 2017, 10:13

FL wrote:
Would Prince Eitel Friedrich have been a successful Regent?

How do you define success in that role? Popular? Politically active? Invisible? Inert?
Back to top Go down
https://reshistorica.historyboard.net
FrederickLouis
Aediles
avatar

Posts : 71
Join date : 2016-12-13

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Thu 19 Jan 2017, 03:50

Would Eitel Friedrich have been chosen as Regent simply because he was the son of Emperor Wilhelm II?
Back to top Go down
nordmann
Nobiles Barbariæ
avatar

Posts : 5747
Join date : 2011-12-25

PostSubject: Re: European monarchies and republics pre WW1   Thu 19 Jan 2017, 08:29

And that's success? I'm confused now. Have you an opinion or are you just asking random questions? Is there some reason why you don't answer questions yourself? Why are you interested in a regency appointment that didn't occur? A few answers to these questions would help allow someone actually respond to you, as your posing of a question in the first place implies you might like to receive.
Back to top Go down
https://reshistorica.historyboard.net
 

European monarchies and republics pre WW1

View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Res Historica History Forum :: The history of ideas ... :: Political ideology-