Dr Piotr Napierała 18th Century Studies Poznań Poland

Simon van Slingelandt (1664–1736) – ostatnia szansa Holandii

2011-12-21T01:07:00.000-08:00

Piotr Napierała, Simon van Slingelandt (1664–1736) – ostatnia szansa Holandii, Wydawnictwo Libron-Filip Lohner, Kraków 2012. ISBN 978-83-62196-37-1

My new book concerns the life and public service of one of the most important Dutch politicians of the 18th Century.

Simon van Slingelandt was one of the best informed Dutch politicians of his era. He tried to reform the administration of the United Provinces of the Netherlands and thereby restore its former military and economical glory. He was also very active preserving peace in Europe. All his life he was adherent of the British alliance, but tried to avoid political dependence on Britain. According to one of the best contemporary Dutch historians of early modern times, A.T. van Deursen , Slingelandt, his views and actions (as secretary of the council of state - Secretaris van de Raad van State, 1690-1725, general treasurer of the Dutch Republic - Thesaurier-Generaal van de Unie, 1725-1727, and the Grand Pensionary of Holland – the mightiest of the seven united provinces - Raadpensionaris van Holland, 1727-1736, an unofficial foreign secretary of the Union is the key to getting known the whole administrative practice of United Provinces in 18th Century.

The war of Spanish succession (1701-1714) ends the era of the Dutch Republic as one of the dominant powers in Europe. Reforms proposed by Slingelandt in 1716 and 1718 to the General Staaten i.e. the parliament of the Republic could have prevented reduction of countries powers, but only minority of the delegates supported his motions. Slingelandt played a role of Cassandra, meanwhile other countries like Prussia have made a huge progress modernizing their administration and imposing various protectionist laws in economy. Slingelandts memorials were printed only in 1784-1785, when most of Dutch political decision makers realized that the lack of reform brought only economical and political losses.

As far as his political views are concerned, Slingelandt was a typical Dutch republican, and also to some extend a conservative, because he was a member of the ruling class of regents, and didn’t want to alter the form of government, but to centralize it and subject existing organs to new ministries based on the French or British model (secretaries of states), nevertheless Slingelandts proposals constituted an inspiration for the ‘patriots’ and even more radical democrats of the second half of 18th century, and Johan Rudolph Thorbecke (1798-1872), the author of a set of liberal reforms, who perceived Slingelandt as one of the central figures in Dutch history.

ZE WSTĘPU:

Jeden z najlepiej poinformowanych i najlepiej wykształconych polityków swojej epoki, reformator z powołania, który chciał utrzymać mocarstwową pozycję Republiki Zjednoczonych Prowincji Niderlandów na arenie międzynarodowej drogą reformy administracyjnej, szef dyplomacji Republiki mocno zaangażowany na rzecz europejskiego pokoju, polityk, który wytrwale dążył do tego, by jego kraj traktowano z szacunkiem, zwolennik sojuszu z Wielką Brytanią, który jednak unikał uzależnienia swojego państwa od silniejszego partnera, obywatel Dordrechtu, skąd pochodził także XVII-wieczny tytan polityki holenderskiej Johan de Witt.

Zdaniem jednego z największych ekspertów od historii Republiki Zjednoczonych Prowincji, A.T. van Deursena, postać Slingelandta i jego działalność urzędnicza jako sekretarza rady stanu (Secretaris van de Raad van State, 1690–1725), następnie generalnego skarbnika unii, czyli Republiki (Thesaurier-Generaal van de Unie, 1725–1727), i w końcu wielkiego pensjonariusza prowincji Holandii – najsilniejszej prowincji Republiki (Raadpensionaris van Holland, 1727–1736), czyli nieoficjalnego ministra spraw zagranicznych Republiki, to klucz do poznania całościowego obrazu praktyki polityczno-administracyjnej dawnej Republiki Niderlandzkiej. Korzystając z owej wskazówki van Deursena, postanowiłem napisać tę książkę, zwłaszcza że w języku polskim zdecydowanie brakuje opracowań dotyczących historii Holandii, a szczególnie jej dziejów w XVIII wieku, okresie często pomijanym, nawet przez badaczy holenderskich, na korzyść tzw. złotego wieku – wieku XVII, kiedy to Republika Zjednoczonych Prowincji była europejską potęgą. Okres ten zakończył się po wojnie o sukcesję hiszpańską (1701–1714). Plany reformy Slingelandta, gdyby wprowadzono je w życie w latach 1716–1717, kiedy przedstawiał je Stanom Generalnym, czyli parlamentowi Republiki, mogły zapobiec stoczeniu się tego kraju do grona państw drugorzędnych. Republika Niderlandzka mogłaby być znowu potęgą. Niestety, inne kraje poczyniły w XVIII wieku znacznie większe postępy w dziedzinie administracji, a Republika pozostała w tyle. Slingelandt był więc w pewnym stopniu Kasandrą dla swego narodu, podobnie jednak jak ona nie został wysłuchany. Jego memoriały o potrzebie reformy państwa zostały wydane w wiele lat po jego śmierci (1784–1785), kiedy wreszcie przypominano sobie o jego radach i przestrogach. Brak reformy przyniósł Republice same klęski i ostateczne osłabienie pozycji kraju na arenie międzynarodowej.

Pod względem ideologicznym Slingelandt był typowym holenderskim republikaninem, ale w pewnym sensie również konserwatystą, ponieważ jako przedstawiciel klasy rządzącej nie starał się zmienić ustroju państwa, lecz wzmocnić efektywność pracy administracji poprzez centralizację i utworzenie ministerstw z prawdziwego zdarzenia o szerokich kompetencjach, których decyzje obowiązywałyby na równi patrycjuszowskich urzędników wszystkich siedmiu prowincji tworzących Republikę. Jak to zwykle bywa, brak reformy przyniósł zmiany rewolucyjne: wystąpienia drobnomieszczan w latach czterdziestych, ruch „patriotów” i demokratów w późniejszych dekadach. Autor liberalnej reformy parlamentarnej w XIX wieku Johan Rudolph Thorbecke (1798–1872) uznał Slingelandta za jedną z postaci będących inspiracją dla obozu reformy i jednego z najwybitniejszych polityków w holenderskiej historii.

Typowo biograficznych opracowań dotyczących Slingelandta brak. Pracując nad tą książką, korzystałem z tekstów jego samego, źródeł drukowanych z epoki na temat jego działalności oraz opracowań holenderskich i brytyjskich dotyczących poszczególnych dziedzin jego działalności, jak również ze źródeł i opracowań holenderskich, brytyjskich, niemieckich i francuskich traktujących o ówczesnej polityce i dyplomacji holenderskiej. Wiele z tych opracowań zostało napisanych już dawno, co wskazuje na to, że postać Slingelandta nie jest obecnie zbyt „modna” wśród historyków, tym bardziej warto przypomnieć ją dziś, gdy w Polsce Simon van Slingelandt, człowiek, który przez niemal 40 lat współdecydował o polityce holenderskiej i europejskiej, jest niemal nieznany.

Na koniec pewna uwaga w kwestii nazewnictwa. Państwo, w którym mieszkał i dla którego pracował Slingelandt, nazywało się Republiką Zjednoczonych Prowincji Niderlandów, obejmującą siedem prowincji Niderlandów Północnych, czyli to, co dziś nazywamy zamiennie Niderlandami lub Holandią, w odróżnieniu od Belgii, tj. Niderlandów Południowych, znajdującej się w czasach bohatera tej książki pod kontrolą Królestwa Hiszpanii (do 1714 r.), a potem cesarza Świętego Cesarstwa Rzymskiego Narodu Niemieckiego, będącego jednocześnie głową Domu Austriackiego. W czasach Slingelandta mianem Holandii nazywano tylko jedną z siedmiu prowincji tworzących Republikę, choć przynoszącą 2/3 jej dochodów podatkowych i dominującą politycznie oraz gospodarczo w jej ramach. Właśnie ze względu na tę dominację już w tamtych czasach „Holandią” potocznie nazywano czasem całą republikę i tak zostało do dziś, kiedy w ten sposób określa się całe obecne Królestwo Niderlandów. Jednocześnie mianem Holendrów określam mieszkańców całej Republiki, o ile nie zaznaczam wyraźnie, że chodzi jedynie o mieszkańców prowincji Holandia (ze „stolicą” w Amsterdamie, podczas gdy siedzibą rządu całej Republiki była Haga). Van Slingeland był Holendrem i w szerokim, i w wąskim znaczeniu jako urodzony w południowej części prowincji Holandii, w mieście Dordrecht.

Mam nadzieję, że moja książka przyczyni się, w miarę możności, do wzrostu zainteresowania dość skomplikowanymi i, jak sądzę, ciekawymi dziejami małego, ale silnego i dzielnego państwa – Republiki Zjednoczonych Prowincji.

Piotr Napierała

Piotr Napierała - my publications

2011-12-17T01:23:00.001-08:00

B O O K S:

Piotr Napierała, Sir Robert Walpole (1676-1745) – twórca brytyjskiej potęgi, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań 2008. ISBN 978-83-232189-8-2

Piotr Napierała, Hesja-Darmstadt w XVIII stuleciu. Wielcy władcy małego państwa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań 2009. ISBN 978-83-232-2007-7

Piotr Napierała, Światowa metropolia. Życie codzienne w osiemnastowiecznym Londynie, Novae Res, Gdynia 2010. ISBN 978-83-61194-43-9

Piotr Napierała, "Kraj wolności" i "kraj niewoli" - brytyjska i francuska wizja wolności w XVII i XVIII wieku, Wydawnictwo Libron-Filip Lohner, Kraków 2011. ISBN 978-83-62196-11-1

Piotr Napierała, Simon van Slingelandt (1664–1736) – ostatnia szansa Holandii, Wydawnictwo Libron-Filip Lohner, Kraków 2012. ISBN 978-83-62196-37-1

A R T I C L E S:

1. Piotr Napierała, "Christian Europe and Enlightened Europe" [w:] EU Enlargement - Chance for all, Collegium Europaeum Gnesnense Foundation, Gniezno 2005, s. 101-105. ISBN 83-922470-6-X
vide:

2. Piotr Napierała, "Die polnisch-sächsische Union (1697-1763) - Polens letzte Hoffnung - Sachsens Traum von der Macht" [w:] Polen und Deutschland. Zusammenleben und -wirken, Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań 2006, s. 60-66. ISBN 83-60247-63-3
vide:

3. Piotr Napierała, "Spadek polityczny po szwedzkim Frihetstiden (1718-1772)", w: Współczesność i przyszłość nauk humanistycznych. Problemy i perspektywy badawcze, Instytut Historii UAM Poznań 2008, s. 13-24. ISBN 978-83-89407-53-5
vide:

4. Piotr Napierała, "Europa oświecona a świat islamu", w: Kultura-Historia-Globalizacja Numer 4, rok 2009, s. 13-21.
vide:

5. Piotr Napierała, "Frédéric Bastiat i Herbert Spencer - źródła myśli politycznej Janusza Korwin-Mikkego" [w:] T.Sikorski, A. Wątor (red.), Marzyciele i realiści O roli tradycji w polskiej myśli politycznej od upadku powstania styczniowego do XXI wieku, Szczecin 2009, s. 620-632. ISBN 978-83-751814-0-1
vide:

6. Piotr Napierała, "Germain Louis Chauvelin i rozbrat pomiędzy Francją a Wielką Brytanią, 1727-1737", w: C. Taracha (red), Szpiegostwo, wywiad, państwo, Wydawnictwo Polihymnia, Lublin 2009, s. 45-65. ISBN 978-83-7270-727-8
vide:

7. Piotr Napierała, "Konflikt dwóch światów. Terezjańscy i józefińscy biurokraci w Galicji (1772-1790)", W: G. Pełczyński, K. Święcicki (red.), Polacy wobec wielości kultur. Wczoraj-dziś-jutro, KMB-DRUK Gniezno 2009, s. 91-102. ISBN 978-83-61352-40-2
vide:

8. Piotr Napierała, "Reinhard Keiser (1674-1739) a Hamburg - uniwersalny twórca w europejskiej metropolii", w: R.D. Golianek, P.Urbański, Händel, Haydn i idea uniwersalizmu muzyki, Rhytmos Poznań 2010, s. 191-203 ISBN 978-83-60593-12-7
vide:

9. Piotr Napierała, "Rządy patrycjatu w przedrozbiorowym Poznaniu na tle innych miast europejskich", ", w: W. Łazuga, S. Paczos, Poznań-Szczecin-Wrocław, Trzy uniwersytety, trzy miasta, trzy regiony, Libron Kraków 2010, s. 397-412. ISBN: 978-83-62196-13-5.
vide:

10. Piotr Napierała, "Europa oświecona a świat islamu"; w: Adam Nobis, Piotr Badyna (red.), Historia - Kultura - Globalizacja, vol. II, Gajt, Wrocław 2010, ss.175-184.
vide:

11. Piotr Napierała, "Ah! ça ira, Heart of Oak, Gustafs skål – pieśń patriotyczna jako źródło do badania historii mentalności i propagandy", w: "Monteskiusz. Res Politica et historica", nr. 2, 2010. vide:

12. Piotr Napierała, "Piotr Napierała Spór między historiografią niemiecką i holenderską o miejsce i rolę Holandii w Europie", "Przegląd Zachodni" Październik-Grudzień 2010 Nr 4, s. 228-236. vide:

13. Piotr Napierała, "Karol II Habsburg i wyimaginowana głupota niektórych władców", w: Głupota w zwierciadle humanistyki, Stowarzyszenie „Nowa Humanistyka” kwiecień 2011 ISBN: 978-83-62854-02-8 vide:

14. Piotr Napierała, "Najbardziej rozpolitykowane miasto Europy Życie codzienne w XVIII-wiecznym Londynie", w: M. Moskalewicz, A. Paradowska, Homo sum: Humani nil a me alienum puto. Życie codzienne wczoraj i dziś, Instytut Historii Poznań 2011, s. 129-141 ISBN 978-83-89407-79-5 vide:

15. Piotr Napierała, „Świat Zachodu”, „Wschód” i idea postępu w XVIII-wiecznej Wielkiej Brytanii", w: Kultura-Historia-Globalizacja Numer 10, rok 2011, s. 133-147.
vide:

16. Piotr Napierała, "Wigowski mit historyczny a historia nowożytna Wielkiej Brytanii", w: T. Błaszczyk, K. Brzechczyn, D. Ciunajcis, M. Kierzkowski (red.), Uwikłania historiografii. Między ideologizacją dziejów a obiektywizmem badawczym (Studia i materiały poznańskiego IPN, t. XVIII). Poznań, IPN, 2011, s. 221-238. ISBN 978-83-932188-9-9

17. Piotr Napierała, "Aktywność dyplomacji brytyjskiej w Europie Środkowo-wschodniej a próby i możliwości naprawy polskiego ustroju w oparciu o brytyjską myśl polityczną"

18. Piotr Napierała, "Protosocjalistyczna koncepcja wolności i własności Rousseau a analogiczne teorie polskiego jakobina Hugo Kołłątaja".

19. Piotr Napierała, "Fabularny film historyczny, propaganda, prawda historyczna i prawda esencjonalna".

20. Piotr Napierała, "William Hogarth (1697-1764) a początki europejskiej karykatury politycznej".

22. Piotr Napierała, "Drogi kariery politycznej w Wielkiej Brytanii przed i po wielkiej reformie wyborczej (Reform Act) 1832 roku".

22. Piotr Napierała, „‘Western World’, ‘East’ and the Idea of Progress in eighteenth century Britain” (w druku UJ)

23. Piotr Napierała, "Elie Freron (1718-1776), Charles Palissot (1730-1814) i francuska prasa konserwatywna XVIII stulecia"

24. Piotr Napierała, "Georg Friedrich Händel jako poddany brytyjski"

Rule Britannia and Wilhelmus

2011-12-08T15:09:00.000-08:00

Patriotic songs constitute a part of every nation’s culture, but are rarely taken as seriously as written historical sources. Even if the are, it’s due to patriotic character of some monographs. Text and message of a patriotic song is often to be elaborated by countrymen, although it has even better quality as a source, to foreign researcher, for whom other nation’s songs and anthems are the best gate to the spirit of the nation and it’s ‘national values” or myths, on which nations and states are built. This is most visible in national anthems, which could be more popular, royal, conservative or revolutionary, according to the vision of the state, they are supposed to somehow depict. Changing the character or word of the national anthem is always a serious matter as connected with the ideological change of the state and the nation. It’s even more serious, because the national anthem is supposed to have educational impact on younger generations.

In Poland it was considered for some time replacing the martial “Dąbrowski’s Mazurka” ("Poland is not yet lost") with more ‘psalmic’, and less optimistic Rota ("The Oath"), the same situation we have in the United States, it’s national anthem and the sentimental tunes of: America the Beautiful. In the UK we see adherents of the royal anthem: God save The Queen, the artistic though very popular and more ‘democratic’: Rule Britannia, other more ‘pacifistic’ songs like: Jerusalem or Scottish, Welsh and English traditional works.

Some nations can to boast of their huge collections of patriotic songs, some cannot. The powerful and populous Germany has no impressive collection of them unlike the Netherlands, that, besides the oldest official European anthem, the 16-th Century Wilhelmus, has a very rich set of patriotic anthems and songs, among which the most fascinating are those dating from the time of formation of the Dutch state, that is the last decade of 16th Century, and the next two-three decades. Among them we can mention: Al uwe boos' aenslagen (1568), Bede voor het Vaderland (1586), and even older Laet sang en spel (1572), that tells us about the Dutch hatred towards the Spanish governor the duke of Alba (…Duc d'Alve den tyran…). The song contains an invocation to God to repulse the Spaniard from the Low Countries. Many old Dutch patriotic songs have survived to our times were edited in the popular set of patriotic music: Nederlandtsche Gedenck-clanck from 1626.

Germany has maybe the biggest collection of folk songs from the pre-romantic era , before the pan-Germanic patriotism was really invented almost ex nihilo by German poets and philosophers, but there are almost no songs of clearly patriotic message among them. That can possibly explain why non-classical music written before the age of romanticism are rarely performer in Germany (the splendid exception are maybe: Die Gedanken sind frei and the oldest Prussian military marches like: Dessauer Marsch from the beginning of the eighteenth Century and Auf Ansbach Dragoner ! composed reportedly by the Frederick the Great about 1756. The Kingdom of Prussia that was established in 1701 is today perceived not only as the state that reunited German lands, but also as the cultural predecessor of today’s Germany. By the way it is worth noticing that for instance: Auf Ansbach Dragoner and other songs of this type are only as popular, as the German post-WWII politically correct sense of guilt allows, since the Prussian military has both positive and sinister connotations. German Prussian, Saxon, Bavarian etc. military marches were equivalents of patriotic songs in Germany before 19th Century. In the first decades of 19th Century German poets and musicians seemed still to prefer the universalistic approach than nationalistic1. The famous: Deutschland über alles, was composed as the ‘song of the Germans’ (Lied der Deutschen), using the same Haydn’s andante that the first Austrian anthem: Gott erhalte Franz den Kaiser. As to the post-martial guilt, today only the third stanza of Deutschland über alles can be sung legally and publically although e.g. La Marseillaise has much more bellicose character. But we must remember that France was an ally during WWII, ant its anthem contains no territorial claims.

From all pre-romantic patriotic music created in German land outside Prussia, only those are remember, which have been included into the classical music canon2, like in case of the frequently performed Johann Sebastian Bach’s cantata3: Preise Dein Glücke gesegnetes Sachsen (“Praise Your Luck Blessed Saxony”) composed in 1733 for the occasion of seizing the throne of Poland by the elector of Saxony Frederick Augustus I (Polish king Augustus II the Strong). Works like: Preise Dein Glücke gesegnetes Sachsen were by no means a rarity in the era of baroque and classicism. (e.g. the cantata composed by Johann Christian Freislich for Augustus III in Dantzig in 1755), but they hardy could be compared to patriotic music as we under stand this term today. Many of them were intended for a small group of listeners, although the aforementioned Bach’s cantata could be something of an exception, because it was performed in the center of Dresden, a city that enjoyed the long tradition of common aristocratic-plebeian feasts on open air, we can at least mention the entertainment organized for Frederick IV of Denmark’s visit in the capital of Saxony in June 17094. But still: Preise Dein Glücke lacked one feature of patriotic music as we understand it today it’s to complicated to be performed, ore even whistled by average subjects or citizens. This is the reason why baroque patriotic music rarely can become popular among masses, an why the splendid operatic song Rule Britannia, composed by Thomas Augustine Arne (1710-1778) in 1740 sung in UK during the Night of the Proms (opera singers sing the stanzas, and the mob replies with the chorus: Rule Britannia / Britannia rule the waves / Britons never never never shall be slaves won’t replace less popular but easier: God save The Queen, composed nota bene in the same historical period5.

In Scandinavian countries there are two official anthems; the royal and the popular one, which are more less on the same level of importance, but are performer on different occasions. In Sweden the role of royal anthem is played by : Kungssången6, and that of a popular one, by: Du gamla, Du fria, which is still less official. Their Danish equivalents are: Kong Kristian from about 1770 roku, and: Der er et yndigt land (‘There is a beautiful country’) accepted as the official anthem of Denmark in 1844. In Noway there use: Kongesangen sung in the tune of: God Save the King (stanzas were composed in the 1840’s and in 1906 roku), and: Ja, vi elsker dette landet (‘Yes, we love this country’) from the 1860’s. This is how the compromise between the royal and the national spirit can look like.

How important it is to nations or political movements to possess not only a catching ideology, but also its own anthem, can proof the case of the Spanish nationalistic song: Cara al. Sol (‘Facing the Sun’) from 1935. This hymn was composed as an answer for the anarchistic song: A Las Barricadas sung by the anarchists in tune of the Polish: Warszawianka (‘La Varsovienne’ / ‘The Song of Warsaw’) composed by Jean-François Casimir Delavigne and Karol Kurpiński in 1831 roku with reference to La Marseillaise.

In many countries the role of patriotic music before the rise of nationalism was played by religious anthems7”. It was normal to sing: Te Deum laudamus, before the battle to secure God’s help and mercy. Lutheran soldiers had their: Ein Feste Burg is unser Gott sung in German or in translation (as e.g. Swedish version: Vår Gud är oss en väldig Borg). The Swedish historian, writer and the distinguished member of the Swedish Royal Academy, Peter Englund, working on his book about the battle of Poltava (1709), tried to penetrate the soul of a 18th Century Swedish private soldier, for whom singing a religious song before the battle was the most important thing, because he would have interpreted every event as a sign of God’s will. The snowstorm that dazzled the Russian army at Narva (1700) was perceived as the sign of God’s benevolence for Swedish cause. The problems with food supply during the Ukrainian campaign were being interpreter as a sign of God’s disapproval. In his book Englud has written that Te Deum was Heard by both armies at Poltava, which is doubtful.

In England before the Victorian era, patriotic music used to be composed either as practical military music8, like: British Grenadiers (end of XVII C.), or operatic or occasional music. From the 17th Century on there was in England a tradition of so-called occasional music; occasional arias, odes or oratories. The famous Henry Purcell (1659-1695) used to compose funeral odes for the royalty, e.g. In December 1694 for Mary Stuart, the wife of William III. But these works never become sung as patriotic music, as we today under stand this term, contrary to some operatic arias and chorals – the music composed mainly for entertainment. The chorus by George Frederick Handel: See The conquering Hero comes, which is part of 1747 oratorio: Judas Maccabaeus, still frequently played and popular (it was also one of the most popular musical works of the 18th Century) we can hear even in the famous film: Out of Africa (1985), performed by Robert Redford and Michael Kitchen. At the beginning of the 19th Century the melody of Handel’s chorus was applied in German carrol: Tochter Zion freue Dich. Arne’s: Rule Britannia was also originally a part of stage music work, namely the opera: Alfred (1740), telling the story of famous king Alfred the Great. Very similar transition we can observe in case of Verdi’s opera: Nabucco, and the chorale: Va pensiero chich is still known as the hymn of the slaves, and was sung in Verdi’s Times as the first informal Italian anthem.
The British was probably the first to enjoy patriotic music in today’s meaning of this word. Those songs are the medieval equivalent of today’s patriotic mass culture. We always think about the hundred years war (1337-1453), as a conflict which has awaken the patriotic/nationalistic spirit among the English and French, but in France the patriotic music was for a very long time limited to religious music, or military marches, like those composed by Jean-Baptiste Lully (1632-1687) both for Louis XIV’s army and opera. The mediaeval English: Agincourt Carol, also known as: Deo gratias Anglia redde pro Victoria was printed as a part of the so-called: Robertsbridge Codex in 15th Century. But, according to Shakespearian tradition, at the fields of Agincourt in 1415, the English sung psalm: Non nobis, Domine, non nobis / Sed nomini tuo da gloriam9.

British and American historiography already in the 19th Century studied with care the connection between ideology and patriotic music, which can be the effect of the relatively early democratization in Anglo-Saxon world. One of the favorite topics for historians dealing with American revolutionary war (1775-1783) is what song was sung by George’ III’s troops after the battle of Yorktown (1781)10. It is a very concrete question – was it: The World Turned Upside Down11 or: The King Will Cover into This Again ”)12. The answer could provide information about something so imperceptible as the mood of the surrendering army. Were the British depressed and dispirited, Or maybe they perceived Yorktown as a temporary lack of good fortune? We know that British banner was honored by troops of Rochambeau and Washington, but this could be the effect of military conventions. Of course we can find some memoires, but remarks we can find there will always belong only to individuals. The music only could provide the final answer about collective spirit of an army and some particular period. It’s possible that the British at Yorktown sung: When the King enjoys his own again, the song of English royalists fighting Cromwell. This song uses the same tune as: The World Turned Upside Down, and fits perfectly to revolutionary struggle13.

Sometimes the traced existence of some patriotic song can constitute proof for existence of some political organization, or of the for its political importance. Niall Ferguson cites in his work: Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World (London 2003), the loyalist song: The Congress, sung during the revolutionary war, and comments, that the existence of such songs proofs how strong was the loyalist movement in the thirteen colonies14”. These are first two stanzas of the song:

Ye, Tories all rejoice and sing,
success to George our gracious King.
The faithful subjects tribute bring,
and execrate the Congress.
There hardy knaves and stupid fools,
Some apish and pragmatic mules,
Some servile acquiescing tools,
These, these compose the Congress.

The vicissitudes of Fortune of the famous song: Yankee Doodle can show us, how much changes in history affects the worlds of ideologies and music. The melody itself probably came into being in 17th Century Netherlands than become popular in England. About 1775 British officers used the popular tune to compose a song to satirize commonplace customs of the American colonial population. This text was sung by the British at Bunker Hill. In the year of this battle another version was already known and sung from time to time by Americans. This version tells the story of brother Ephraim, who went for a war against the French (probably it relates to the French and Indian Wars). Soldiers of both sides, and Americans after the war created some other versions, which makes the case of Yankee Doodle, an example of ideological-musical war15.

This is the British version mocking the ignorance and common manners of American colonists, who Gould think, that putting a feather in their hats could make them: macaroni, that is; very fashionable16:

Yankee Doodle went to town,
A-Riding on a pony;
He stuck a feather in his hat,
And called it macaroni.
Yankee Doodle, keep it up,
Yankee Doodle dandy;
Mind the music and the step,
And with the girls be handy

And a new stanza addend by the British, after the battle of Bunker Hill (1775):

The seventeen of June, at Break of Day,
The Rebels they supriz'd us,
With their strong Works, which they'd thrown up,
To burn the Town and drive us.

This British version we can compare with one of earliest American version telling the story of brother Ephraim, which nota bene is also a bit contemptuous towards a common colonist. We deal here with a situation similar with that of Goebbels’ desart rats; something regarded as an insult by the enemy, is fully accepted by the nation as a positive set of values:

Brother Ephraim sold his Cow
And bought him a Commission;
And then he went to Canada
To fight for the Nation;
But when Ephraim he came home
He proved an arrant Coward,
He wouldn't fight the Frenchmen there
For fear of being devour'd.

The message of some patriotic songs is today understandable only in relation to our knowledge about historical facts. We can ‘feel’ the social situation thanks to such songs like: Ah! ça ira, Heart of Oak or: Gustafs skål. Three mentioned pieces relate to different values cherished by Three different nations in very specific historical period.

Ah! ça ira was the most popular of French revolutionary songs. Like: Rule Britannia it was based on operatic music. Lyrics of Ah! ça ira was the work of veteran named Ladré, who earned his life as street singer. The melody has a form of a typical contredance and was primarily used for an aria, popularly called: le Carillon national, a work of violinist and composer Bécourt. The queen Marie Antoinette was reportedly very fond of the aria and used to play it on harpsichord. The title of it’s next version: Ah! ça ira, comes from Benjamina Franklina, American envoy in Paris (1776-1785), who was asked about the chances of American revolutionary forces during the war against the British, and replied, that he believed in success: ça ira,

Analyzing two versions of Ah! ça ira’s lyrics we cant race the radicalization of attitude among the revolutionary politicians and mob. The version from 1790 is very ‘religious’ in character. We see the reference to the Gospel, and the ‘genuine catechism’, carefully distinguished from the horrible fanaticism and bigotry. We can also find a call for great lawgiver, someone like Draco or Solon, which is typical for republicans always idealizing the myths about Athenian lawfulness. We can feel some disdain for aristocracy (if an aristocrat protests, the ‘genuine citizen’ should laugh into his face) , but no calls for its extermination. As Jeremy Black observes the Eighteenth Century European culture was basically still a Christian one17, so it’s no wonder that we could find in Ah! ça ira a mixture of exclusive anticlericalism and the catholic virtues deeply rooted in mob’s minds. These are some of the words of the 1790 version:

Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira,
Le peuple en ce jour sans cesse répète,
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira,
Malgré les mutins tout réussira.

Nos ennemis confus en restent là
Et nous allons chanter « Alléluia ! »
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira,
Quand Boileau jadis du clergé parla
Comme un prophète il a prédit cela.
En chantant ma chansonnette
Avec plaisir on dira :

Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira !
Suivant les maximes de l’évangile
Du législateur tout s’accomplira.
Celui qui s’élève on l’abaissera
Celui qui s’abaisse on l’élèvera.
Le vrai catéchisme nous instruira
Et l’affreux fanatisme s’éteindra.
Pour être à la loi docile
Tout Français s’exercera.
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira !

The later version composed and sung by radical sans-culottes in times of terror (1793) is much more aggressive than the previous one, calling to kill aristocrats and clergymen. In 1795 th French Directory prohibited performing both versions publically. That prohibition was maintained by Napoleon. This is almost the whole lyrics of the sans-culotte version:

Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira !
Les aristocrates à la lanterne,
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira !
Les aristocrates on les pendra !
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira !
Les aristocrates à la lanterne.
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira !
Les aristocrates on les pendra.

Si on n’ les pend pas
On les rompra
Si on n’ les rompt pas
On les brûlera.
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira,

Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira,
Nous n’avions plus ni nobles, ni prêtres,
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira,
L’égalité partout régnera.
L’esclave autrichien le suivra,
Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira,
Et leur infernale clique
Au diable s’envolera.

Today in France sometimes both versions are sung together., although the most famous is the version, based on the sans-culotte one, sung in the 60’s by Edith Piaf, who has changed significantly the melody.

Another song that can tell us much about the spirit of times, in which it was composed is: Heart of Oak from 1759. The author of words used in it was the most famous British actor of 18th Century David Garrick (1717-1779), whereas the melody was composed by William Boyce (1711-1779). The song tells us how the British patriotism of the era looked like. The king is mentioned only once, most likely due to the supremacy of parliament as a leading political power already in those days:

Come, cheer up, my lads, 'tis to glory we steer,
To add something more to this wonderful year;
To honour we call you, as freemen not slaves,
For who are as free as the sons of the waves?

CHORUS:
Heart of oak are our ships, jolly tars are our men,
we always are ready; Steady, boys, steady!
We'll fight and we'll conquer again and again.

We ne'er see our foes but we wish them to stay,
They never see us but they wish us away;
If they run, why we follow, and run them ashore,
And if they won't fight us, we cannot do more.

They swear they'll invade us, these terrible foes,
They frighten our women, our children and beaus,
But should their flat bottoms in darkness get o'er,
Still Britons they'll find to receive them on shore.

Britannia triumphant, her ships sweep the sea,
Her standard is Justice -- her watchword, 'be free.'
Then cheer up, my lads, with one heart let us sing,
Our soldiers, our sailors, our statesmen, and king.

The key-word as in most British patriotic songs is ‘freedom’, although – in the contrary to Rule Britannia’ s lyrics, that freedom is not opposed to some tyranny of foreign powers. Heart of Oak came into being in ‘wonderful year’ of 1759, when British fleet and armies defeated the French in India (Robert Clive) and Canada (James Wolfe). The unprecedented success of British armed forces was promising a new era of British domination, although the British politicians were so thrilled by triumphs, that were unable to find any amicable solution of the American conflict 16 years later18.

Very often the political situation influences the world of art, including music. During WWI the French authorities has prohibited public performance of German music, especially the pieces by Schubert and Wagner, on the other hand German authorities prohibited Gershwin’s works in 1941. This of course reminds us the recent problem of American fries instead French fries. These are examples of somewhat childish nationalism.

The pre-revolutionary era was dominated by philosophical enlightened universalism, that was focused on universal idea of truth and beauty, that could have being discovered, or betrayed. Very interesting situation was in Paris and Versailles of the 1750s and 1760s where the adherents of energetic music of Rameau opposed the more static and solemn traditional music of Lully, that used to add splendor to all royal ceremonies, and later were attacked by adherents of Italian baroque music like Diderot and Rousseau (who was himself a rather mediocre composer). The most characteristic feature of this conflict is the tension between musical and political attitude of both sides. As soon as les rameauneurs and les lullyistes were reconciled, the music of Rameau started to be perceived as monarchist and pro-absolutistic, whereas Italian music of Piccinini and others was treated like an incarnation of more republican tendencies. No wonder that (liberal) monarchist like Voltaire was rameauneur19.

Very similar situation was in Britain in 1730s, but there a musical taste played even more humble role than in Paris ot the 1750s. We mean a conflict between enthusiasts of Handel’s music, and the king George II, and adherents of prince of Wales Frederick, the parliamentary ‘patriot’ opposition, and Nicola Porpora’s music performed in the Theather of The Nobility. This conflict was precede by a former strictly musical quarrel between fans of Handel and Italian opera, and those of traditional English masque that John Gay and John Christopher Pepusch tried to revive with their Beggar’s Opera (1729).

The rivalry between Theather of The Nobility and Handel’s Covent Garden had little in common was not about matters of taste. Both Handel and Porpora represented Italian mainstream baroque opera, but Handel was party sponsored by the king, so it was a duty to every nobleman of the opposition (either anti-ministerial ‘patriot whigs’ or tories) to visit Theather of The Nobility (where the famous castrato- singer Farinelli used to sing), as it was for every friend of the establishment and the prime minister Roberat Walpole, to show up in Covent Garden. There was some nationalistic element of this quarrel, as both the king and Handel were Germans, as was prince Frederick, who however played the role of true-borne Englishman20.

The cultural and musical wars were known also to early modern Sweden. The rivalry between the parties of: Hattar (hats), and Mössor (caps), chich dominatem the period of Swedish Era of Liberty (Frihetstiden): 1718-1772 (from the liquidation of absolutism after the tragic death of Charles XII , up to the restoration of 1772 by Gustav III) had an impact on Swedish cultural life. Already in the 1740’s the leaders of Mössor like Mattias Alexander von Ungern-Sternberg (1689-1763) expressed a cultural connection with England, read Locke, ad were interested in British industrial inventions. The famous Swedish composer who was somewhat connected to Mössor, Johan Helmich Roman (1694-1758) learnd the art. Of composing on Handel’s works21. Politically the Mössor, were connected also to Russia, whereas Hattar Francophiles fascinated by French modern philosophy, especially that of Voltaire. The party was lead by diplomats, among whom many used to serve as Swedish envoys in Paris: Carl Gyllenborg (1679-1746) , Carl Gustaf Tessin (1695-1770), Anders Johan von Höpken (1712–1789)22. The ‘Hats” dreamed about stronger Sweaden thank to French support. To that party used to belong the composer Carl Michael Bellmann (1740-1795), known as ‘Swedish Mozart’, who, after Gustav III’s coup d’etat (1772) changed hist views to more royalist. The Swedish middle class were tired of both parties and the corruption applied by them, so they supported gladly the pro-bourgeois king Gustav23.

In 1772 Belmann composed (from his own free will) a song intitled: Gustafs skål (‘Toast to Gustaf’), which dleighted the monarch. From this time on the song become an unofficial national anthem, up to 1805, when: Bevare Gud vår kung was composed by Abraham Niclas Edelcrantz (1754-1821). In Gustafs skål the rule of parliament are called as injust and insane. We can also find in this song a trace of a strong monarchist credo realated to the idea of royal god-given privilegies.

Gustafs skål (1772)
Translation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustafs_sk%C3%A5l

Gustafs skål!
Den bäste Kung, som Norden äger:
Han ej tål,
At vigtskåln ojämt väger. :||:

God och glad,
Han Ilskans röst föraktar
Samt afvaktar
Och betraktar
Dårskap i sin grad. :||:

Sådan Kung
Är värd att styra Sveriges öden:
Rask och ung,
Ej rådlös uti nöden. :||:

Wasa Ätt
Har aldrig lärt att svika,
Aldrig tvika,
Men at fika
Till at göra rätt. :||:

Gustafs Toast!
The greatest king of the north:
He can't rest,
While injustice rules. :||:

Decent and cheerful,
He detests anger
and waits
and studies
lunacy in progress :||:

A king like he
Is worthy to govern Swedens destiny
Bold and young
Never in hopeless need :||:

Of Vasa dynasty
Is taught to never fail
Never hesitate
But rather do
What is just and fair. :||:

To conclude we can once more say, that patriotic songs are rich source of historical knowledge about the historical attitudes of elite and mob, and the social imagination referring to particular historical events.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Barbier P., Farinelli Prawdziwa historia genialnego kastrata, Warszawa 1998.
Beaurepaire P.Y., Le mythe de l’Europe française au XVIIIe Siècle. Diplomatie, culture et sociabilités au temps des Lumières, Éditions Autrement Paris 2007.
Beaussant Ph., Rameau de A à Z, Fayard, Paris 1983.
Boehn M. von, England im XVIII. Jahrhundert, Askanischer Verlag Berlin 1922.
Blake J., Eighteenth Century Europe, Palgrave Macmillan 1999.
Czok K., Am Hofe Augusts des Starken, Leipzig 1989.
Davies N., The Isles, Oxford University Press 1999.
Drake D., Flint E., Baen J., The World Turned Upside Down, NY 2005.
Ferguson N., Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World. Allen Lane London 2003.
Fumaroli M., Quand l'Europe parlait francais, Le Livre De Poche Paris 2003.
Hoppe, H.H., Democracy: The God that Failed, Transaction Publishers, Rutgers, N.J., 2001.
Jarrick A., Back to Modern Reason: Johan Hjerpe and Other Petit Bourgeois in Stockholm in the Age of Enlightenment, Liverpool University Press 1998.
Krehlikowa A., Haendel, PWM, Warszawa 1972.
Lipoński W., Dzieje kultury brytyjskiej, PWN Warszawa 2005.
Maistre J. de, Wybór pism, Warszawa 1968.
Nouvelle Histoire de Paris: Paris au XVIIIe siècle, Hachette Paris 1988.
Rackwitz W., Il caro sassone, Georg Friedrich Handel: Lebensbeschreibung in Bildern. 1. Aufl. Leipzig: Deutscher Verlag für Musik, 1986.
Roberts M., Era of Liberty - Sweden 1718-1771, Liverpool University Press, 1995.
Rousset Ch., Jean-Philippe Rameau, Actes SUD Paris 2007.
Ruśinowa I., Saratoga–Yorktown 1777-1781, z dziejów wojny amerykańsko - angielskiej, Warszawa 1984.
Schweitzer A., Johann Sebastian Bach. Breitkopf & Härtel, Wiesbaden 1990.
Tessin C.G., Tableau de Paris et la cour de France 1739-1742. Lettres inédites, de Carl Gustaf, comte de Tessin, Jean Touzot/Gunnar von Prochwitz Paris/Göteborg 1983.
Wettenberg G., Från tolv till ett Arvid Horn (1664-1742), Atlantis Stockholm, 2006.

WEBSITES:
http://www.colonialmusic.org
http://www.americanrevolution.org
http://www.bayern.landtag.de

Piotr Napierała - my publications:

2011-12-07T07:50:00.000-08:00

B O O K S:

Piotr Napierała, Sir Robert Walpole (1676-1745) – twórca brytyjskiej potęgi, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań 2008. ISBN 978-83-232189-8-2

Piotr Napierała, Hesja-Darmstadt w XVIII stuleciu. Wielcy władcy małego państwa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań 2009. ISBN 978-83-232-2007-7

Piotr Napierała, Światowa metropolia. Życie codzienne w osiemnastowiecznym Londynie, Novae Res, Gdynia 2010. ISBN 978-83-61194-43-9

Piotr Napierała, "Kraj wolności" i "kraj niewoli" - brytyjska i francuska wizja wolności w XVII i XVIII wieku, Wydawnictwo Libron-Filip Lohner, Kraków 2011. ISBN 978-83-62196-11-1

A R T I C L E S:

1. Piotr Napierała, "Christian Europe and Enlightened Europe" [w:] EU Enlargement - Chance for all, Collegium Europaeum Gnesnense Foundation, Gniezno 2005, s. 101-105. ISBN 83-922470-6-X
vide:

2. Piotr Napierała, "Die polnisch-sächsische Union (1697-1763) - Polens letzte Hoffnung - Sachsens Traum von der Macht" [w:] Polen und Deutschland. Zusammenleben und -wirken, Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań 2006, s. 60-66. ISBN 83-60247-63-3
vide:

3. Piotr Napierała, "Spadek polityczny po szwedzkim Frihetstiden (1718-1772)", w: Współczesność i przyszłość nauk humanistycznych. Problemy i perspektywy badawcze, Instytut Historii UAM Poznań 2008, s. 13-24. ISBN 978-83-89407-53-5
vide:

4. Piotr Napierała, "Europa oświecona a świat islamu", w: Kultura-Historia-Globalizacja Numer 4, rok 2009, s. 13-21.
vide:

5. Piotr Napierała, "Frédéric Bastiat i Herbert Spencer - źródła myśli politycznej Janusza Korwin-Mikkego" [w:] T.Sikorski, A. Wątor (red.), Marzyciele i realiści O roli tradycji w polskiej myśli politycznej od upadku powstania styczniowego do XXI wieku, Szczecin 2009, s. 620-632. ISBN 978-83-751814-0-1
vide:

6. Piotr Napierała, "Germain Louis Chauvelin i rozbrat pomiędzy Francją a Wielką Brytanią, 1727-1737", w: C. Taracha (red), Szpiegostwo, wywiad, państwo, Wydawnictwo Polihymnia, Lublin 2009, s. 45-65. ISBN 978-83-7270-727-8
vide:

7. Piotr Napierała, "Konflikt dwóch światów. Terezjańscy i józefińscy biurokraci w Galicji (1772-1790)", W: G. Pełczyński, K. Święcicki (red.), Polacy wobec wielości kultur. Wczoraj-dziś-jutro, KMB-DRUK Gniezno 2009, s. 91-102. ISBN 978-83-61352-40-2
vide:

8. Piotr Napierała, "Reinhard Keiser (1674-1739) a Hamburg - uniwersalny twórca w europejskiej metropolii", w: R.D. Golianek, P.Urbański, Händel, Haydn i idea uniwersalizmu muzyki, Rhytmos Poznań 2010, s. 191-203 ISBN 978-83-60593-12-7
vide:

9. Piotr Napierała, "Rządy patrycjatu w przedrozbiorowym Poznaniu na tle innych miast europejskich", ", w: W. Łazuga, S. Paczos, Poznań-Szczecin-Wrocław, Trzy uniwersytety, trzy miasta, trzy regiony, Libron Kraków 2010, s. 397-412. ISBN: 978-83-62196-13-5.
vide:

10. Piotr Napierała, "Europa oświecona a świat islamu"; w: Adam Nobis, Piotr Badyna (red.), Historia - Kultura - Globalizacja, vol. II, Gajt, Wrocław 2010, ss.175-184.
vide:

11. Piotr Napierała, "Ah! ça ira, Heart of Oak, Gustafs skål – pieśń patriotyczna jako źródło do badania historii mentalności i propagandy", w: "Monteskiusz. Res Politica et historica", nr. 2, 2010. vide:

12. Piotr Napierała, "Piotr Napierała Spór między historiografią niemiecką i holenderską o miejsce i rolę Holandii w Europie", "Przegląd Zachodni" Październik-Grudzień 2010 Nr 4, s. 228-236. vide:

13. Piotr Napierała, "Karol II Habsburg i wyimaginowana głupota niektórych władców", w: Głupota w zwierciadle humanistyki, Stowarzyszenie „Nowa Humanistyka” kwiecień 2011 ISBN: 978-83-62854-02-8 vide:

14. Piotr Napierała, "Najbardziej rozpolitykowane miasto Europy Życie codzienne w XVIII-wiecznym Londynie", w: M. Moskalewicz, A. Paradowska, Homo sum: Humani nil a me alienum puto. Życie codzienne wczoraj i dziś, Instytut Historii Poznań 2011, s. 129-141 ISBN 978-83-89407-79-5 vide:

15. Piotr Napierała, „Świat Zachodu”, „Wschód” i idea postępu w XVIII-wiecznej Wielkiej Brytanii", w: Kultura-Historia-Globalizacja Numer 10, rok 2011, s. 133-147.
vide:

16. Piotr Napierała, "Wigowski mit historyczny a historia nowożytna Wielkiej Brytanii"

17. Piotr Napierała, "Aktywność dyplomacji brytyjskiej w Europie Środkowo-wschodniej a próby i możliwości naprawy polskiego ustroju w oparciu o brytyjską myśl polityczną"

18. Piotr Napierała, "Protosocjalistyczna koncepcja wolności i własności Rousseau a analogiczne teorie polskiego jakobina Hugo Kołłątaja".

19. Piotr Napierała, "Fabularny film historyczny, propaganda, prawda historyczna i prawda esencjonalna".

20. Piotr Napierała, "William Hogarth (1697-1764) a początki europejskiej karykatury politycznej".

22. Piotr Napierała, "Drogi kariery politycznej w Wielkiej Brytanii przed i po wielkiej reformie wyborczej (Reform Act) 1832 roku".

22. Piotr Napierała, „‘Western World’, ‘East’ and the Idea of Progress in eighteenth century Britain” (w druku UJ)

23. Piotr Napierała, "Elie Freron (1718-1776), Charles Palissot (1730-1814) i francuska prasa konserwatywna XVIII stulecia"

24. Piotr Napierała, "Georg Friedrich Händel jako poddany brytyjski"

Piotr Napierała - my book about British and French concept of freedom in 17th and 18th Centuries

2011-12-07T07:49:00.001-08:00

Przedstawiam moją nową książkę powstałą jako praca doktorska i zachęcam do lektury

IF YOU WANT TO BUY A BOOK::

Piotr Napierała, "Kraj wolności" i "kraj niewoli" - brytyjska i francuska wizja wolności w XVII i XVIII wieku, Wydawnictwo Libron-Filip Lohner, Kraków 2011. ISBN 978-83-62196-11-1

IF YOU WANT TO BUY A BOOK:

SUMMARY:

In my doctoral thesis: „Kraj wolności” i „kraj niewoli” - brytyjska i francuska wizja wolności – XVII i XVIII wieku (A ‘country of liberty’ and a ‘country of slavery’ – The British and French Concept of political Liberty in 17th and 18th Century) I attempted to compare the British and the French concepts of political freedom which were being developed in course of the 17th and 18th centuries. My idea was to examine if the popular vision of the early modern France as the ‘county of political slavery’ and – in the same time – of Britain as a mecca for every freedom-lover is really justified. In this case both political thought and ideas of various thinkers and informations about the reality of that era were of great interest of mine.

To achieve this goal I had to define which of the two main existing ideas of political liberty I myself support. Authors of the majority of already existing monographs about it are inclined to the so-called: ‘positive liberty’ which consists mainly in giving to the huge number of people the possibilyty to somehow control the government by participating in it (voting). For those who believe in ‘positive liberty’ (a concept developer first and foremoste by Thomas Paine and John Stuart Mill) the best way to secure it - is to transform every autocratic rule into a more democratic one. I am far more inclined to akcept the idea of ‘negative liverty’ prefered among other by Isaiah Berlin who was the first to distinguish between the two main concepts. ‘Negative liberty’ is refering to the necessity to secure as Little interference from the governments side into the people’s everyday life as possibile. Because of this two ways of under standing political Liberty we can divide all thinkers who have liberal inclinations in two groups: democratic liberals and aristocratic (or conservative) liberals (as Henry Spencer or Frideric Bastiat), who normally treat the demoratic administration as the same potential threat for individual freedom as any other administration – everything depends on the steps taken by minister, kings or parliaments. From the democratic perspective the concept of this thesis would be pointless but it is not from the point of view which I prefer as a more real perspective.

My PhD Thesis is divided into six chapters. In the first chapter I attempted to present an abstract of the general history of possibile Liberty concepts. In the next chapter my aim was to discover why so many British (not only political) political authors of the 17th and 18th centuries are so much concerned about the problem of individual and public liberty. I have analysed the so-called „whiggish historical myth”, according to which the whole English (after 1707 – British) political history is perceived as a great struggle for freedom against various ‘oppressors’ such as: Roman Empire, the Papacy, Spain of Charles V and Philip II, France of Louis XIV, Louis XV, Robespierre and Napoleon Bonaparte. I dealt with the koncept of the so much praised English „monarchia mixta’ in which the aristocratic, the democratic and the monarchical elements of the government co-exist in a splendid harmony, whithout which, as it was believed, England would have fallen into a state of horrid tyranny and its people – into slavery. I tried to understand why the Britons living in the early modern era called the French: pope-ridden, wooden-shoed slaves. On the other hand I analised the first absolutist treatises written in England (Robert Filmer, Thomas Hobbes etc.) to observe the arguments used in them especially those concerning political liberty. The same I did in the third chapter with French treatises written by local adherents of ‘king’s divine rights’ (Domat, Bossuet, Le Bret etc.) and its relation to individual liberty. The ‘voice of nobility’ of both nations was also of great interest to me because diffrent historical experiences defined different koncept of liberty of the rich and powerful. In the post-norman Britain the nobility was accustomed to co-operate in the king’s government whereas in France they used to fight against him especially when he attempted to extend his political influence. The aristocratic version of political freedom is best represented by Sunderland’s and Boulainvilliers’ concepts developed independently on both sides of the Channel in the first half of the 18th century.

In the fourth chapter I analysed the new ideas concerning freedom and political Liberty created by the Anglo-Scottish enlighenment. The koncept of the freedom of the press (Defoe, Hume), the individualisation of a subject, new vision of the just law and new thoughts on mutiny (Johnson, Burke) and slavery. The following chapter is devoted to the various concepts of French political thought in the 18th century, such as: the monarchical idea of Voltaire, the thèse nobiliaire of Montesquieu and Boulainvilliers, the plan of administrative decentralisation of d’Argenson, the ‘american’ vision of Diderot, Mercier and Condorcet, as well as the first clearly democratic and pre-ocialist ideology represented by Meslier, Rousseau an Morelly. The diversity of al. those thinkers used to thundestand by ‘liberty’ convinces me that there was no national ideas of liberty but merely a number of various ideas created by a number of political philosophers and this fact makes even today very hard to define what we perceive as ‘liberal thinking’.

All the aforementioned ideas are confronted with facto stated by historians specialising in the 17th and 18th centuries. In sixth and the last chapter I have presented the evolution in French vision of the ‘English liberty’ and the other way round and how they looked like prom perspective of several 19th and 20th century thinkers of various ideological background.

IF YOU WANT TO BUY A BOOK:

Piotr Napierała

My doctoral promotion

2011-12-07T07:48:00.002-08:00

My doctoral promotion has taken place on 9.12.2010:

Title of the PhD thesis: „Kraj wolności” i „kraj niewoli” – brytyjska i francuska wizja wolności – XVII-XVIII wiek (A ‘country of liberty’ and a ‘country of slavery’ – The British and French Concept of political Liberty in 17th and 18th Century)

promoter: prof. Waldemar Łazuga

SUMMARY pracy doktorskiej
In my doctoral thesis: „Kraj wolności” i „kraj niewoli” - brytyjska i francuska wizja wolności – XVII i XVIII wieku (A ‘country of liberty’ and a ‘country of slavery’ – The British and French Concept of political Liberty in 17th and 18th Century) I attempted to compare the British and the French concepts of political freedom which were being developed in course of the 17th and 18th centuries. My idea was to examine if the popular vision of the early modern France as the ‘county of political slavery’ and – in the same time – of Britain as a mecca for every freedom-lover is really justified. In this case both political thought and ideas of various thinkers and informations about the reality of that era were of great interest of mine.
To achieve this goal I had to define which of the two main existing ideas of political liberty I myself support. Authors of the majority of already existing monographs about it are inclined to the so-called: ‘positive liberty’ which consists mainly in giving to the huge number of people the possibilyty to somehow control the government by participating in it (voting). For those who believe in ‘positive liberty’ (a concept developer first and foremoste by Thomas Paine and John Stuart Mill) the best way to secure it - is to transform every autocratic rule into a more democratic one. I am far more inclined to akcept the idea of ‘negative liverty’ prefered among other by Isaiah Berlin who was the first to distinguish between the two main concepts. ‘Negative liberty’ is refering to the necessity to secure as Little interference from the governments side into the people’s everyday life as possibile. Because of this two ways of under standing political Liberty we can divide all thinkers who have liberal inclinations in two groups: democratic liberals and aristocratic (or conservative) liberals (as Henry Spencer or Frideric Bastiat), who normally treat the demoratic administration as the same potential threat for individual freedom as any other administration – everything depends on the steps taken by minister, kings or parliaments. From the democratic perspective the concept of this thesis would be pointless but it is not from the point of view which I prefer as a more real perspective.
My PhD Thesis is divided into six chapters. In the first chapter I attempted to present an abstract of the general history of possibile Liberty concepts. In the next chapter my aim was to discover why so many British (not only political) political authors of the 17th and 18th centuries are so much concerned about the problem of individual and public liberty. I have analysed the so-called „whiggish historical myth”, according to which the whole English (after 1707 – British) political history is perceived as a great struggle for freedom against various ‘oppressors’ such as: Roman Empire, the Papacy, Spain of Charles V and Philip II, France of Louis XIV, Louis XV, Robespierre and Napoleon Bonaparte. I dealt with the koncept of the so much praised English „monarchia mixta’ in which the aristocratic, the democratic and the monarchical elements of the government co-exist in a splendid harmony, whithout which, as it was believed, England would have fallen into a state of horrid tyranny and its people – into slavery. I tried to understand why the Britons living in the early modern era called the French: pope-ridden, wooden-shoed slaves. On the other hand I analised the first absolutist treatises written in England (Robert Filmer, Thomas Hobbes etc.) to observe the arguments used in them especially those concerning political liberty. The same I did in the third chapter with French treatises written by local adherents of ‘king’s divine rights’ (Domat, Bossuet, Le Bret etc.) and its relation to individual liberty. The ‘voice of nobility’ of both nations was also of great interest to me because diffrent historical experiences defined different koncept of liberty of the rich and powerful. In the post-norman Britain the nobility was accustomed to co-operate in the king’s government whereas in France they used to fight against him especially when he attempted to extend his political influence. The aristocratic version of political freedom is best represented by Sunderland’s and Boulainvilliers’ concepts developed independently on both sides of the Channel in the first half of the 18th century.
In the fourth chapter I analysed the new ideas concerning freedom and political Liberty created by the Anglo-Scottish enlighenment. The koncept of the freedom of the press (Defoe, Hume), the individualisation of a subject, new vision of the just law and new thoughts on mutiny (Johnson, Burke) and slavery. The following chapter is devoted to the various concepts of French political thought in the 18th century, such as: the monarchical idea of Voltaire, the thèse nobiliaire of Montesquieu and Boulainvilliers, the plan of administrative decentralisation of d’Argenson, the ‘american’ vision of Diderot, Mercier and Condorcet, as well as the first clearly democratic and pre-ocialist ideology represented by Meslier, Rousseau an Morelly. The diversity of al. those thinkers used to thundestand by ‘liberty’ convinces me that there was no national ideas of liberty but merely a number of various ideas created by a number of political philosophers and this fact makes even today very hard to define what we perceive as ‘liberal thinking’.
All the aforementioned ideas are confronted with facto stated by historians specialising in the 17th and 18th centuries. In sixth and the last chapter I have presented the evolution in French vision of the ‘English liberty’ and the other way round and how they looked like prom perspective of several 19yh and 20th century thinkers of various ideological background.

Piotr Napierała

London in the Eighteenth Century

2011-12-07T07:48:00.001-08:00

My book about London in the Eighteenth Century:

Piotr Napierała, Światowa metropolia. Życie codzienne w osiemnastowiecznym Londynie, Novae Res, Gdynia 2010. ISBN 978-83-61194-43-9

interested ?

SUMMARY

This book is an attempt to show to the polish reader the richness and diversity of the eighteenth-century London live. First and foremost this book informs, why Lodnon was so unique as the largest city in eighteenth-century Europa, a prototype of the modern multicultural metropolis as we know today. The leading intellectuals of enlightenment esed to look upon London as an example of ‘free’ city ruled by public opinion expressed not only by mighty aristocrats but also humble subjects. In those days London had more to offer to an English or a foreign visitor, than any other city in the continent: parks opened to visitors, rich museum collections, fine shops, elegant partie organized by upper class (beau monde as it used to be called in that century), cosy inns, taverns with good food. Many Frenchmen, Italians and Spaniards used to go to London to see parliamentarism in working, modern manufactures, English and Italian art.
The mob, and even sometimes the political elite of the eighteenth-century London was Rather hostile to foreigners. The Spaniards had a reputation of cruel and canning people, the French were called chattering baboons, the Germans and Dutch were believed to be somewhat ‘primitive’. Very interesting was the evolution of the British-American relations, not only on the political level but also in everyday life. The example of Georg Friedrich Händel or George Frideric Handel naturalised as a British subject in 1727 is used in this book to exhibit how the process of adaptation of a foreigner to living among Britons could have looked like.
The third of the six chapters concernes the eighteenth-century London’s political life, that is; functioning of political clubs, topics of political discussions, the media (press, caricature). The problem of caricature – one of the arts in which the Britons of that era were particularily master ful is in this book strictly connected with life and output of an English great caricaturist William Hogarth. There are also some reference to the army and navy’s world.
From the next chapter the leader can learn what was the time of the breakfast the eighteenth-century londoners used to have and what was actually eaten at this breakfast. The same he or she can learn aobut dinners, favorite English disches including very fine recipes by Benjamin Franklin who was particularily fond of good cuisine. In this very chapter there are many informations about lodging, hotels, inns, education, prices, currency, salaries and wag es, clothes, fashion, morality, religion, enlightenment in London, the poor, the rich and the women of London in cluding the problems of marriage and the al most impossible in those days - divorce.
The last chapter is about the risks and dangers of everyday life in the eighteenth-century London. We are pursuing the Londonem of the era through every stages of his life – from the cradle to the tomb. Here we are refering to the problem of criminality, prostitution, police forces, crime and punishment, medical treatment, diseases, housing and social taboos.
I am fully aware of the fact, that it is not possibile to refer to every kind of human activity and so it is in the case of this book, but I hope still that this book can contribute to a better under standing of the British history and culture of the eighteenth century in Poland.

Piotr Napierała (17. X 2009)

Robert Walpole - prime minister and a 'romantic'

2011-12-07T07:46:00.001-08:00

Politician can also be romantics if they want:

Piotr Napierała, Sir Robert Walpole (1676-1745) – twórca brytyjskiej potęgi, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań 2008. ISBN 978-83-232189-8-2 (Chapter II)

... these years (first decade of the eighteenth century), were wery succesful for Walpole. He had a large, legitimate and less legitimate, revenue from Houghton Hall and the wine trade. His wife had bestowed him with the already quite numerous offspring. His love for the hysterical and capricious, but beautiful lady Walpole flourished, what can be confirmed by the contents of one of the few letters of the future prime minister from this period:

„…May I measure Your heart by my own. O there I find that love that tendernesse for You that are any failings in You they are still perfections to me and doth my Dearest doe or omit any thing that might seem better otherwise, I am blind , cannot, would not, see any thing in my deare but what is most agreeable …”.

It is difficult to say whether he actually saw in his wife "only the most pleasant things", or perhaps he considered that is was better for him to look on her in this way. We can assume that a man gifted with such a cheerful disposition as Walpole was, who always forgived others their mistakes and impertinence, and who used to say: "When I go to sleep, I strip off all my worries, with my dress", would have been able to find happiness even in a company of a much more troublesome wife. It's not surprising than, that he never ceased to buy her expensive gifts, what used to bring his steward John Wrott, who was in charge of Houghton Hall during his master's absence, to despair. Wrott was so worried about debts of his master, that he could not sleep at night ...

Georg von Hessen-Darmstadt - hero of Hessians and Catalans

2011-12-07T07:44:00.000-08:00

Can one be a hero in the eyes of two geographically very distant nations? Yes! And it's possible even if 300 years passed since his death.

Piotr Napierała, Hesja-Darmstadt w XVIII stuleciu. Wielcy władcy małego państwa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań 2009. ISBN 978-83-232-2007-7 (fragment of the chapter III)

The skillful defense of Barcelona against the French (May 1696) earned him much recognition . On 1st of June he was attacked by overwhelming French forces, himself having only 2000 infantry and 2500 cavalry at his disposal. He started a daring attack against the enemy cavalry, which deed was praised by the Catalan historian Antonio de Bofarull (1821-1892). Bofarull has contributed to the legend of the brave german prince (El Princep Jordi), friend of Catalansand and enemy of the French, which is alive even today.

From September 1701 to February 1702 year, Georg von Hessen-Darmstadt was in Landgraviate of Hesse-Dramstadt. Has always been very close to all his family. Between a great leader and the Landgrave Ernst Ludwig were exemplary brotherly relations, even though a blunder resulted of the high expenditure of George's, who, after leaving Darmstadt, visited his mother in Butzbach. George was looking for the alleged treasure in the family castle. The Landgrave had nothing against it, as he was himself a lover of mysteries.

In February, George went through Frankfurt to London to organise troops for Austro-British military operation in Spain. As a military representative of the Emperor Leopold, he often talked with William III, and -later- with Queen Anne (reigned: 1702-1714). The destination of the operation was Cadiz, where where 160 ships landed on 26th of august 13.800 soldiers. The attack failed. Next the British-Austrian-Dutch-Hessian army began its raids around Cadiz. Duke wasn't able to do anything about it, because even his aide-de-camp Steinwehr participated in plundering . At the same time the army was attacked by guerrillas. Shortly afterwards a fierce quarrel occurred between the Hessian and the English commander James Butler, 2nd Duke of Ormonde (1665-1745). The Englishman was angry at his ally, becouse his conviction about the pro-Hapsburg attitude of the Spaniards didn't correspond with the truth. In response he heard from prince Georg about his bad manner of deploing troops, which had caused the ineffectivness ot the assault.

English discouragement prevailed and the fleet sailed back home on September the 20th 1702. Complaints made by Prince George in London and The Hague led to nothing but an fruitless investigation. He remained until January 1704 in London as a diplomatic representative of the Austrian army and head of the Emperor's party in Spain (since 1703).

In May 1703 Georg's younger brother, Georg Heinrich, came to London. He used to suffer from poor health and depression in his youth, so the family hesistated long what kind of career would be appropriate for him.

Soon after the capture of Gibraltar, Georg who was the hero of this assault, had to defend the town against the Spanish-French army. George died on September the 14th 1705 while assaulting Fort Montjuïc (Castell de Montjuïc). When British commander in chief Charles Mordaunt, 3rd Earl of Peterborough (1658-1735) drove closer, he saw George's body lying on the ground. He and other witnesses were shocked. Heinrich, George's brother was devastated. Barcelona was re-conquered after naxt assault. The Habsburg Pretender entered the city on October the 23th 1705.

The body of the duke was embalmed and buried in a sarcophagus at the monastery near Barcelona Gracia. It was later missing, and unsucessfuly sought for.

His heart was to be sent to George's Mother to Butzbach, but she died in 1709 year, when the heart was (from 1705 on) still in possession of Louis XIV, who used the relic as a bargaining chip. It was not until 1711 years when it was eventually buried in Darmstadt, where it was arranged in a silver casket in the dukes' tomb (Fürstengruft) in Stadtkirche. To honour "the prince Jordi" a Catalan poet from Barcelona wrote an epitaph in 1706:

Visqué el Príncep per la Glòria de Catalunya, en la defensa de la seva Capital, expugnada de francesos. I per redimir-la, captiva dels mateixos, havia de morir, en la llei del fidel amic. orí en la captura de Montjuïc. Amb ella sortí lliure Catalunya, de la dura opressió i del tirànic jou de França. El nostre Sereníssim Jordi, com Pare de la Pàtria, li procurà a Catalunya, la més sobirana Joia. Defensà el Príncep Barcelona, assetjada de francesos. Qui mort com a noble, mai cau rendit. Aquí viu a qui la fama ernitza

(...Prince lived for the Glory of Catalonia, and defended the capital (Barcelona), he died capturing the castle of Montjuic to free Catalonia from the harsh oppression and tyrannical yoke of France. Our most serene George, who died as a nobleman, and live in eternal fame...)

Cicisbei - cavalieri serventi

2011-12-07T07:42:00.000-08:00

Das wissenschaftliche Studium von Kazimierz Chłędowski hat nachgewiesen, dass es in vielen nördlich-italienischen Staaten eine soziale Institution gab, die auch den Ausländern Kontakte zu den verheirateten Frauen ermöglichte. Die Kavaliere, die viele Stunden in Begleitung solcher Damen verbrachten, wurden in Venedig cicisbei und in Padua cavalieri serventi genannt. Die Ehemänner hatten nichts dagegen, weil sie auch bei den anderen Frauen als cicisbei oder cavalieri dienen konnten.

Enlightened Europe and the Islamic World

2011-12-07T07:41:00.000-08:00

in polish see:

What islam meant for Europeans of the 18th C. Was it familiar Or strange? Since the 16th C the Ottoman Empire was a constant factor in European policy and diplomacy, and already AT that time the spilit of crusades was extinct. The best proof of this was the joy of german protestants when the emperor Charles V was unable to overpower them becouse of the Turkish threat (Bues 1998).

It seems that for western Europeans of the early 18th century Turkey was no more ‘exotic’ than Russia (Chaunu 1989), which was seen as a small germanic (german-speaking officials of Curland) „principality of Petersburg” serrounded by bizantine-asiatic desert of superstition (Chaunu 1989). The Russians used to appear in eighteenth-century philosophical literature along with the Hurons, Persians, the Chinese and Indians. (Lettres persanes of Montesquieu, L’Ingenu by Voltaire’a etc.) (Montesquieu 1979, Voltaire, Powiastki filozoficzne 2003). A Turk could not appear in the character of the ‘good savage’, not because his country was better known, but becouse the fear from Turkey and its armies Tűrkenfurcht was only recently decreased .

The Turks and other islamic nations were commonly seen as highly moral and unaffected (Hen 1978). It was also believed that they were restrained, because it was said in the Coran that they should be and the reality wasn’t known to the Europeans. In spite of the memory about the atrocies commited by turkish armie in ekstern Europe, the Turks were rarely estimated as barbaric as were the Russian (Moscovites). The Turks were Rather seen as a kind of some ultra-civilized nation, and an effeminated one. Because they used to wear long clothes made of delicate materials. Such was the depiction of Turks and Russians on the ‘Table of Nations’ – Völkertafel printed in Augsburg about 1726. This table was made in such a way to praise the Spanish, French and German virtues about those of other nations, so the later had to be presented in less favorable light. As to the mentioned purity of Turkish charakter - David Hume in his: Of National Characters stated that Turkish gravity, honesty and bravery are a fine contrast to conceit and cowardice of modern (i.e. not ancient - those were ‘of course’ insuperable) Greeks. (Stanzel 1999).

Turkey which used to suffer from many administrative problems in the 18th C was called ‘ill Man of Europe’ (Reychman 1973), so it was concidered as a part of this continent. Today Turkey, in spite of reforms brought by kemalism is often believed to be an asiatic county. And many Europeans fear its presence in the EU although Turkey is much more euro pean than in 18th C. Some traces of Tűrkenfurcht are possibel to observe even today. In southern Italy children when being frightened by strange men of ten cry: mammina Turchi (Fallaci 2004), on the other hand we can cite Frederic the Great who many Times said that He would welcome diligent muslims in his Kingdom of Prussia exactly as warm as protestants.

Opinions about islam used to be very diverse. One of the admirers of this religion was the count Henri de Boulainvillers (1658-1722). In his printed pothumously (1731) biography of Mahomet – Vie de Mahomet, this philosopher depicted the prophet as a deistic free-thinker (Armour 2004) and was of the opinion that the original rationalistic doctrine of islam was in the course of centuries perverted by a group of islamie theologists (Cardini 2006). The most probable explanation is taht the cont used islam as a weapon against christian morals without trying to get more knowledge about islam itself. Even today we can percieve many adherents of islam who are in fact no admirers of this religion or of Mahomet but merely opponents of christian values. John Locke (1632–1704) suggested to other philosophers to search for ‘religion without a secret’, - some of them thought apparently that islam would fit.
The writers and intelectuals of the Enlightenment were familiar only with the Middle East-version of the islamie civilisation.

Voltaire has changed several times his opinion about islam. He was fighting etery kind of intolerance and religious fanatism, but also called the influentian madame de Pompadour as ‘sultan’s wife’ and it was a sign of his admiration for Her. Voltaire was author of the play: Le fanatisme, ou Mahomet (Voltaire, The Dramatic works of M. de Voltaire 1763) staged in Paris for the first time in 1741 was in fact no play about islam but about Christian religious intolerance. Voltaire has maliciously sent this play to the pope Benedict XIV (pontificate: 1740-1758). The Pope ‘revanged’ by sending his blessing to the philosopher.

Both Voltaire and Diderot contributed to the birth of orientalism in European literature which consists in such elements like: cruelty, tyranny (despotic power of sultans), refined erotism (harems). Diderot in his: Les bijoux indiscrets from 1748 (Diderot 1992) used an attractive oriental scenery to smuggle some his philosophic ideal which had nothing in common with islam or the power of sultans. Giacomo Casanova in his Memoires gave himself airs that he menaged to seduce a Turkish woman taking advantage of Her husbands absence. Casanova’s biographer Roberto Gervaso finds the whole story highly improbable (Gervaso 1990).

Gotthold Ephreim Lessing (1729-1781) in his theatrical play: Nathan Der Weise (1779) (Lessing 2002) had presented a vison of medievel Palestine in the era of crusades. Dramatis personae of this play are both christians and muslims and also Jews. The Jews were depicted most favorably, the chistians as the most fanatic and uncivilised group, becouse one of Lessing’s goals was to criticise the idea of crusades. Islam in the play is represented among others by the Turkish prudent and tolerant leader Saladin (d. 1193), but islam itself was not much praised.

The famous british historian Edward Gibbon (1737-1794) in his: Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Gibbon 2002), in which book he blamed chistianity for this fall, metioned islam as an important era of the human history but in the same time called Coran as a mixture of ridiculous and useless tales.

Islam was an inspiration also to the eighteenth century composers. We can mention a famous concerto by Antonio Vivaldi; Grosso mogul (RV 208), the Tanz persischer Soldaten) in the operatic work: Croesus (1711) by Reinhard Kaiser (1674-1739), the director of the Hamburg opera-house, and of course Mozarts turkish opera: Entführung aus dem Serail and a famous march alla turca. The sounds of the janissary military orchestras was well known in Austria already in the 16th Century, because of the Turkish agressive foreign Policy. One of the composers who aplied the popular musical form of turcaria was the austrian baroque composer Johann Joseph Fux (1660-1741), who composed several turcarie.

Islam used to inspired also the European painters, but they rarely knew anything about the moral part of islamic doctrine. For ex ample the Spaniards gave to the sultan of Morocco Mohammed Ben Abdallah (reigned 1757–1790) a nice chariot with painted ornaments depicting naked human bodies. The sultan used this chariot only when they were removed (Dziubiński 1977).

In the 18th C European scholars started to conduct serious researches about islamie civilisations. German travelers and archeologist Carsten Niebuhr (1733-1815) was sent in 1761 by the king of Denmark Frederic V to the Middle East. When reached Yemen in 1762 the expedition wandered through the entire arabian peninsula and Persia (1763-1767). Back in Denmark Niebuhr has written Reisebeschreibung von Arabien (1772) printed in two volumes in 1774 and 1778 (Scurla 1961). In this work we can find not only archeological reports but also very interesting informtions about eighteenth century Ottoman Empire and Persia. Niebuhr has mentioned for instance the very inquisitiv Arabian (Ottoman) customs officials who have searched the entire baggage of the expedition even running their knifes through each mattress.

On the Mediterranean sea European ships used to become victims of Moroccan, Tunesian and Algierian corsairs. Even such exotic from Moroccan point of view countries like Sweden or Denmark prefered to sent gifts to North African leaders to secure paece for their ships than to sedt armed convoys to protect them. Generous Frenchmen and Spaniards used to have far better relation with Morocco than saving Britons or Americans (Dziubiński 1977). On the Indian Ocean pirates working for the Angria family used in the first Tyree decades to attack the Bitish WIC’s ships. Menwhile in 1697 one of british pirate captains has plundered the fleet belonging to the Great Mogul and heading to Mecca. After this the Indian ruler thought about repealing All English commercial piviligies (Cordingly 2006).

The Mediterranean islamie corsairs used to kidnapp Christian travelers of both sexes. The Dutch woman Maria ter Meetelden live as a slave in the harem of Moroccan sultan. Her memoirs are a vital Skurce of informations about the sultans, even more import ant because Morocco hasn’t had its own archives in this period. She has notice that most of the Rother women in harem suffered from obesity, what is contradicting with the orientalistic myth about the unique beauty of All sultan’s wifes (Dziubiński 1977). Maria was living in Morocco against Her will, but escaping to Morocco or Turkey was an almost typical move of political adventurers who were ‘burnt’ in Europe. The fact that they were thinking about such an escape and finaly escaping, proofs that living in Morocco or Turkey was not unimmaginable for christian Europeans in the 18th C (Dziubiński 1977).

European diplomatic relations with Turkey date back to 16 th C (Venice, Poland, Moscow, France, England, Austria). Sultans of Turkey were convinced that European ambasadors were the proof of Turkish supriority over other countries. Ambassadors used to let this ilussion to live on, although not All of them were billing to participate in a Rather humiliating procedure during the audiencje in the sultan’s palace. (Dyplomaci w dawnych czasach 1959). In the meantime European monarchs were embarassed to see Turkish or Moroccan ambassadors crawling before them. In the 18th century all European powers had an embassy in Istanbul. Some of them, like Goethe’s friend Prussian ambasador (from 1784-to 1791) Heinrich Friedrich von Diez (1750-1817) were famous orientalists.

Algieria was nominalny Turkish but in fact controlled by Algierian pirate leaders. Morocco in the West was the second important islamic partner of Europe. In 1605 the Duch sent Pieter Coy to this country. The British Got interested in Morocco when they conquered the Spanish Gibraltar. Becouse of the undersandable Spanish hostility it was vital to have good relations with Morocco. The sultans were suppling the fortress surrounded by Spanish troops. Gibraltar (1704). The whole matter was first discussed with Moroccans in 1707 by George Delaval (1667-1723), British envoy to Lisbon.

France used to have a consulate in Morocco Since the 16th century (1577 monsieur Bérard) In 1693 the French ambassador François Pidoux de Saint-Olon came to the sultan. Than it was a long brake of relations, till 1767 when the next ambassador count de Breugnon, negotiated a commercial treaty. To gain better conditions the French government run by the duke Étienne-François de Choiseul (1758-1770) bombarded moroccan towns which were situated close to the coastline. Here we can percieve the huge difference between French and Moroccan way of thinking. Sultan Mohammed III ibn Abdullah (reigned 1757–1790) informed about the cost of French military expedition declared to the ambasador the have Louis XV given half of this amount to him, he wolud have those towns destroyed himself (Dziubiński 1977). Mohammed III was an inteligent ruler, far more interested and orientated in the European problems than his predecesors and succesors, thanks to his long conversations with ambassadors, envoys and consuls. He signed commercial treaties with Denmark (1751-1765), Great Britain (1790), Sweden (1773), France (1773) and Portugal. In 1767 concluded a treaty with Spain, which county was theoreically continuing the Policy of anti-islamic reconquista. In 1766 Spanish ingeneur and diplomat Jorge Juan y Santacilia (1713-1773) came as the first Spanish ambassador to the Moroccan court of Meknes. It was an end of a certain era. Spanish Primero Secretario de Estado (1776-1792) José Moniño, hrabia Floridablanca (1728-1808) has said that ‘one should talk to the Moroccans like to Italians or the British’. Religion ceased to be important as a political factor. In 1777 Morocco as the first nation in the world recognized the independance of the USA.

It is worth mentioning the fictious persian embassy to Paris in 1715. We can read about it in the Memoires of the duke de Saint-Simon (Saint-Simon 1984). Louis XIV didn’t know that had to do with impostors. The real Persia became a factor in European Policy only when its ruler Karim Khan (ruled 1750-1779) let the British WIC to establish a settlemet in the southern part of his country.

During the reign of the imam Said Ibn Hamad (1783-1786) the British WIC helped him to fight revolting tribes. In this way Oman become more and more dependent on Britain. Very similar process we can obseve in India. (Hansen 1972). It appears that the British applied double standards in realtions with islamic states. Wherever they were strong they treated them with respekt, but when they were weak, they talked to them from the position of the superior power.

Turkish sultan Ahmed III (rule 1703-1730) was eager to imitate European fashions especially in baroque architecture. Uniforms were introduced in the Turkish army (the sultans of Morocco failed in introducing them)and the first Turkish printing house was opened in Istanbul, but the books printed by it were in no relation to the European enlightened thought. The Turkish ‘era of tulips’ remained merely an episode (Reychman 1973).

Turkish and Moroccan diplomats sent very irregularly to Europe were as pragmatic as the Mount of Floridablanca, althoughed much embarassed when seeing decolletage of European Coourt ladies (Dziubiński 1977). Turkish diplomats were sometimes annoing to European officaials (most often – Austrians) because of their noisy behaviour (Arenth 1864).

We can assume that tere were no such Hing as the general European and Enlightened attitude towards islam and islamie countries. They were no more seen as thread to the Europe but some of the prehudices lasted and are alive also today. Orientalism invented by Voltaire, Rousseau, and Chateaubriand (Said 1991) is alive as well. From the other hand when we see defenders of islam among the European world we must always ask ourselfs if they are really friends of this religion like Hume was, or are they merely oppponents of traditional Christian values as Boulainvilliers or Lessing, although their own ideas wouldn’t be acceptable in the muslim world.

BIBLIOGRAFIA
• Arenth A., Prinz Eugen von Savoyen, Wiedeń 1864.
• Armour R., Islam, Chrześcijaństwo i Zachód. Burzliwe dzieje wzajemnych relacji, Wydawnictwo WAM Kraków 2004.
• Bues A., Historia Niemiec XVI-XVIII wieku, Warszawa 1998.
• Cardini F., Europa a islam. Historia nieporozumienia, Kraków 2006.
• Chaunu P., (1971), Cywilizacja wieku Oświecenia, PIW, Warszawa 1989.
• Cordingly D., Życie i zwyczaje Piratów, Warszawa 2006.
• Diderot D., Niedyskretne klejnoty, PIW Warszawa 1992.
• Dziubiński A., Między mieczem, głodem i dżumą - Maroko w latach 1727-1830, Ossolineum Wrocław 1977
• Dziubiński A., Afryka północna i zachodnia w relacjach z XVIII i XIX wieku, PIW Warszawa 1980.
• Dziubiński A., Historia Maroka, Ossolineum Wrocław 1983.
• Dziubiński A., Encyklopedia Historyczna Świata, tom IX Azja -cz. 2, Kraków 2002.
• Fallaci O., Siła rozumu, Warszawa 2004.
• Gervaso R., Casanova, PIW Warszawa 1990.
• Gibbon E, Upadek Cesarstwa Rzymskiego na Zachodzie, PIW Warszawa 2002.
• Hansen W, Pawi Tron: Dramat Indii Wielkich Mogołów, Warszawa 1972.
• Hen J., Ja, Michał z Montaigne, Warszawa 1978.
• Hof U. im, Europa Oświecenia, Warszawa 1995.
• Koneczny F., Obronić cywilizacje łacińską, Lublin 2002.
• Lessing G.E., Natan mędrzec, Universitas Kraków 2002.
• Montesquieu Ch, Listy Perskie, Warszawa 1979.
• Przyboś A., Żelewski R. (red.), Dyplomaci w dawnych czasach : relacje staropolskie z XVI-XVIII stulecia, Kraków : Wydaw. Literackie, 1959.
• Reychman J., Historia Turcji, Ossolineum Wrocław 1973.
• Said E.W., Orientalizm, PIW Warszawa 1991.
• Saint-Simon L. de, Pamiętniki, PIW Warszawa 1984, t. I-II.
• Scurla H (Hrsg.), Reisen im Orient. Carsten Niebuhr, Ulrich Jasper Seetzen, Richard Lepsius, Heinrich Brugsch – Berichte deutscher Forscher aus dem 18. und 19. Jahrhundert ausgewählt von Herbert Scurla, Verlag der Nation Berlin 1961.
• Stanzel F.K., Europäischer Völkerspiegel. Imagologisch-etnographische Studien zu den Völkertafeln des frühen 18. Jahrhunderts, Uviversitätsverlag C. Winter Heidelberg 1999.
• Taracha C., Szpiedzy i dyplomaci. Wywiad hiszpański w XVIII wieku, Lublin 2005.
• Voltaire, Księżniczka Babilonu, Opolpress Opole 1993.
• Voltaire, Powiastki filozoficzne, Kraków 2003.
• Voltaire, The Dramatic Works of M. de Voltaire : Mahomet. Socrates. Alzira, Printed for J. Newbery, R. Baldwin, W. Johnston, S. Crowder, T. Davies, J. Coote, G. Kearsley, and B. Collins, at Salisbury., 1763.

Dreißigjähriger Krieg - Ein erster Totaler Krieg?

2011-12-07T07:40:00.000-08:00

Der Dreißigjährige Krieg von 1618 bis 1648 war ein Konflikt um die Hegemonie in Deutschland und Europa und zugleich ein Religionskrieg. In ihm entluden sich sowohl die Gegensätze zwischen der Katholischen Liga und der Protestantischen Union innerhalb des Heiligen Römischen Reiches als auch der habsburgisch-französische Gegensatz auf europäischer Ebene. Gemeinsam mit ihren jeweiligen Verbündeten im Reich trugen die habsburgischen Mächte Österreich und Spanien ihre dynastischen Interessenkonflikte mit Frankreich, den Niederlanden, Dänemark und Schweden aus.

interview - how the British ideas influenced Polish political culture

2011-12-07T07:39:00.000-08:00

http://www.polskieradio.pl/zagranica/ru/news/artykul113514.html

http://www.polskieradio.pl/zagranica/ru/news/artykul113514.html

http://www.polskieradio.pl/zagranica/ru/news/artykul113804.html

Почему Станислав Август Понятовский интересовался Англией, а магнаты- нет? 06.08.2009

Слово «либерал» пришло в русский (и английский) языки от латинского «либералис» — что значит свободный, присущий свободному человеку.

Основная идея либерализма, возникшего в 17 и 18 вв. и вступившего в пору расцвета в 19 в., состоит в том, что человек должен располагать свободой для определения своей собственной судьбы. С точки зрения либералов, государство существует лишь для того, чтобы защищать человека от насилия со стороны других людей или групп и расширять рамки осуществления индивидуальной свободы. В сфере политики либерализм возник как реакция на авторитарные режимы. Либералы стремились ограничить права наследственной власти, установить институты парламентского правления, расширить круг лиц, имеющих право голоса, и обеспечить гарантии гражданских свобод. Такого рода меры рассматривались одновременно как реализация политической свободы, и как средство достижения экономических реформ, на которых настаивали либералы. В Польше сегодня в исповедании либеральных ценностей признаются многие политики и мыслители. Но история говорит о том, что поначалу либерализм – главное направление британской политической мысли, можно сказать, ее дитя - воспринимался в Польше очень слабо.
О настоящем влиянии британской политической идеи в Польше можно говорить лишь в 20 веке. И хотя в 16 и 17 веке контакты между Речью Посполитой Обоих Народов и Англией оживились, то польская шляхта предпочитала опираться на мысль Венецианской республики, иногда на голландский строй. Подобным образом ситуация обстояла в период Просвещения. Если взять как пример труды о политике короля Станислава Лещинского, то в его текстах на тему модернизации политической системы Речи Посполитой мы найдем одну незначительную ссылку, относящуюся к примеру британского политического строя.

Для более подробного анализа влияния британской политической мысли на поляков Сандра Ужуле-Фонс пригласила к микрофону историка идеи Петра Напералу из Познаньского Университета им. Адама Мицкевича.

СУ: Скажите пожалуйста, с чем был связан столь малый интерес к Англии со стороны поляков до, практически, 20 века? Понятно, что Англия была далеко, а поляки знали в основном французский и русский языки. К тому же, в те времена в области модели политического строя главенствовала Франция. Действительно ли языковой и географический факторы сыграли в этом значимую роль?

Петр Наперала: И то, и другое. Англичане придавали огромное значение своей Славной революции 1688-1689 гг., в которой говорилось о повиновении праву, чего и придерживались граждане этой страны. В этой конституции не было речи о склочничестве. Станислав Август Понятовский во время своего визита в Лондон в 50-е годы 18 века отметил, что когда там собирается толпа с антиправительственными криками, то при первом появлении стражей порядка - толпа исчезает. Следовательно, там нет никаких примет склочничества, свойственных Речи Посполитой Обеих Народов.

Что касается преобладания французской политической мысли среди поляков, то оно было огромным, так же как и господство французского языка. Французский понимали магнаты, в свою очередь английский присутствовал лишь в окружении короля Станислава Августа Понятовского. В варшавских библиотеках тех времен было множество книг по-французски, согласно исследованиям польского историка Яна Башкевича, почти 30% всех книг. И нет смысла искать там английских книг. Их тщательно собирал Станислав Август Понятовский, не пропуская ни одной возможности. Он очень тепло принимал всех англичан, которые появлялись в Польше. Он сразу же приглашал их к себе, и для него это был своего рода источник знаний об Англии. Кстати, польский король был более искренним в беседах с англичанами, чем с представителями других народов. Возможно это следовало из того, что Англия не имела прямых интересов, связанных с Польшей. К тому же среди гостей короля не было английских политиков. Это были в основном образованные купцы.

СУ: Скажите, чем был вызван интерес Станислава Августа Понятовского к Великобритании?

Петр Наперала: Это вытекало из личного опыта Станислава Августа Понятовского, который, будучи саксонским послом в Петербурге, прошел настоящую школу политики и дипломатии у Чарлза Хамбери Вильямса - британского опытного дипломата, человека в возрасте. Своими успехами Станислав Август Понятовский обязан именно ему. Будущий польский король интересовался вопросами политического строя, ходил на заседания Палаты Общин, пытался понять, о чем там говорят, хотя поначалу это сложно ему давалось. Кроме всего этого огромное впечатление на него произвела встреча с Вильямом Питом старшим. В то время это был главный министр, который в кулуарах управлял британским правительством.

СУ: Скажите, а переводились ли английские книги на польский язык в то время?

Петр Наперала: Станислав Август Понятовский поддерживал всех, кто переводил с английского на польский. Но по сравнению с преобладанием французской литературы в то время, это было ничто. Присутствие на книжных полках Дидро, Руссо привело к тому, что в Польше появились якобинцы. Любопытен факт, что в своих собраниях у Станислава Августа Понятовского не было Эдмунда Берка - классика английской политической мысли. Берк - это протест против радикальных перемен, т.е. это начало эволюционного консерватизма с нотой либерального мировоззрения. И это не было доступно в Польше. «Размышления о революции во Франции» Эдмунда Берка были переведены на польский лишь после падения коммунизма в 1994 году. Похоже ситуация обстояла с другими английскими авторами. Например, лишь в конце 19 века Джон Стюарт Милл и его либеральная идея кое-как доходила до Польши.

СУ: Интересно, а как Польша запечатлелась в воспоминаниях англичан тех времен?

Петр Наперала: Например, Джеймс Харрис, купец московской кампании, приехал в Польшу из Пруссии после 1767 года. Его воспоминания о Польше, которые могли быть для британского читателя достоверными, имели негативный оттенок - бедность крестьян, верховодство знати. Похожий взгляд был у Джозефа Маршалла. Он был в Польше в 1770 году и описывал в основном Гданьск и Эльблонг. Маршалла больше интересовали торговые вопросы, а не аспекты политического строя.

СУ: Вы сказали, что английских политиков Польша, как страна не интересовала. Известно, что в 19 веке, в период когда Польша, исчезая с политической карты мира на 123 года в результате раздела страны между Россией, Пруссией и Австро-Венгрией особенно нуждалась в дипломатической поддержке других стран, Альбион не отвечал взаимностью. А как это выглядело ранее, до 19 века, когда Польша была сильным государством?

Петр Наперала: Польско-британские контакты обычно имели место в 18 веке. В эпоху Просвещения они были случайными. В 1714 году произошел неприятный дипломатический конфликт: жители Гданьска задержали британский корабль, принимая его за шведский. Вспыхнул дипломатический скандал. Но большим и худшим скандалом стали события 1724 года в Торуни, когда в этом городе протестанты помешали католической процессии. В результате, городские чиновники-протестанты получили судебный приговор. Это вызвало волну неудовлетворения со стороны европейских протестантов. Подумывалось даже провести военную акцию как в Пруссии, так и в Великобритании. Чуть было не началась британско-саксонско-польская война. Король Август Второй Сильный из Саксонии был тесно связан с Францией, так что тут мы имели дело с французским влиянием, отнюдь не британским.

СУ: Наверняка более интенсивно Англия и ее политическая мысль присутствовала в сознании поляков в 19 веке - веке пробуждения народов, зарождения идеологии. Об этом мы узнаем в нашей следующей передаче, на которую мы вместе с моим интересным собеседником Петром Напералой из Университета им. А. Мицкевича в Познани вас приглашаем через неделю.

Автор: Сандра Ужуле-Фонс

Piotr Napierała - Hessen-Darmstadt im 18. Jahrhundert. Grosse Regenten des kleinen Staates

2011-12-07T07:37:00.000-08:00

Piotr Napierała, Hesja-Darmstadt w XVIII stuleciu. Wielcy władcy małego państwa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań 2009. ISBN 978-83-232-2007-7

HESSEN-DARMSTADT IM 18. JAHRHUNDERT GROßE REGENTEN DES KLEINEN STAATES

Zusammenfassung

Siehe auch:

Die Landgrafschaft Hessen-Darmstadt existierte von 1567 bis 1918 (ab 1806 als das Großfürstentum Hessen). Im 18. Jahrhundert begann für diesen kleinen Staat (1802 betrug die Fläche des Landes 100 Quadratmeilen und 1770 hatte Hessen-Darmstadt etwa 140.000 Einwohner) eine Blütezeit.

Der Landgraf Ernst Ludwig, der 1688 die Regierungsgewalt in Hessen-Darmstadt übernahm, orientierte sich an Frankreich und dessen König Ludwig XIV., der als Vorbild eines absolutistischen Herrschers galt. Von diesen Idealen geleitet, kam Ernst Ludwig auf die Idee, Darmstadt umzubauen. Der Landgraf bemühte sich seit 1711 darum, den renommierten französischen Architekten Louis Rémy de la Fosse (1659-1726), der bereits für den Kurfürsten von Hannover gearbeitet hat, nach Darmstadt herbeizuholen. In Darmstadt hat de la Fosse das 1715 verbrannte Schloss im Hochbarockstil wiederaufgebaut. Um sich das Geld zu weiteren restauratorischen Zwecken zu verschaffen, begann Ernst Ludwig diesbezüglich mit den Landständen zu verhandeln, die ihm schließlich 300.000 Gulden versprachen, wobei diese Mittel innerhalb von sieben Jahren abzuheben waren. Nach 1722 wurde deutlich, dass das vorgenommene Projekt nur teilweise hätte realisiert werden können. Bei anderen Bauwerken hat Ernst Ludwig mehr Glück gehabt, was heutzutage die prachtvolle, in den Jahren 1716-1721 erbaute Orangerie bezeugt. Sie ist im heutigen Stadtbezirk Bessungen gelegen, der erst 1888 an Darmstadt angeschlossen wurde.

Der Landgraf Ernst Ludwig interessierte sich auch für andere Künste. Im Jahre 1709 hat er Christoph Graupner (1683-1760) als Kapellmeister eingestellt. Graupner war einer der größten deutschen Komponisten des Hochbarocks. Darüber hinaus verband ihn mit Händel und Telemann eine tiefe Freundschaft.

Ernst Ludwig hatte die Gabe, nicht nur talentierte Baumeister und Komponisten anzustellen, sondern auch begabte Minister wie: den Staatskanzler Wilhelm Ludwig von Maskowsky (1675-1731), den Geheimrat Leopold Persius von Lindorf († 1721) und Christian Eberhard von Kameytsky († 1726) in Dienst zu nehmen.

Der jüngere Bruder Ernst Ludwigs dagegen, der Prinz Georg von Hessen-Darmstadt (1669-1705) eroberte als kaiserlicher und hessischer General 1704 die Festung Gibraltar für Großbritannien.

Ludwig VIII. (1739-1768) folgte seinem Vater Ernst Ludwig auf den Thron. Er wurde als Jagdlandgraf oder Jäger–Landgraf bezeichnet, was aus seinem Hobby resultierte. Ludwig VIII. setzte seine Truppen zweimal (1741-1748, 1756-1763) auf der Seite des Kaisers ein und blieb ihm sein ganzes Leben lang treu. In der Schlacht bei Roßbach (5. November 1757) war das Darmstädter Regiment das einzige, das nicht in Panik geraten war.

Der Landgraf Ludwig IX. (1768-1790) war dafür bekannt, dass er als Soldaten-Landgraf sein Leibregiment nach dem Vorbild des preußischen König Friedrichs II. scharf exerzieren ließ. Es ist zu bemerken, dass der Alte Fritz Verbündeter des Landgrafen war.

Unter der Regierung Ludwigs IX. wurde Darmstadt zum Zentrum der deutschen Aufklärung, das von solchen literarischen Größen wie Wieland, Gleim, Goethe und Herder besucht worden war.

Der Landgraf Ludwig X. (1790-1830), dem 1806 der Titel des Großfürsten zuteil wurde, unterstützte Napoleon Bonaparte, so wie seine Vorgänger dem Kaiser und dem preußischen König Treue hielten. Im Gegensatz zu den sächsischen Truppen hat die Armee Ludwigs X. Napoleon nicht verraten (die Völkerschlacht bei Leipzig vom 16. bis zum 19. Oktober 1813), sondern zusammen mit den Franzosen kapituliert.

Aus dem Grund, dass Hessen-Darmstadt mit vernünftigen Regenten gesegnet war, hielt ich für unentbehrlich, eine Monographie in polnischer Sprache zu verfassen, die die Leser mit der Problematik der Regierungsführung in Hessen-Darmstadt im 18. Jahrhundert vertraut machen würde.

My book about Rober Walpole

2011-12-07T07:36:00.000-08:00

Piotr Napierała, Sir Robert Walpole (1676-1745) – twórca brytyjskiej potęgi, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, Poznań 2008. ISBN 978-83-232189-8-2

See also:
ROBERT WALPOLE YOUTUBE

SUMMARY:

The Walpole family originated from Norfolk. It gained certain importance already in the 13th century. Robert Walpole’s grandfather Edward Walpole played some role in the restoration of the English Monarchy in 1660. Robert Walpole senior (b. 1650) was interested in science and agriculture. He arranged his son’s first marriage (to Catherine Shorter) and it was after him that Robert Walpole junior (1676-1745) inherited the estate and the constituency. Had Walpole’s brothers not died early, he would not have made any career in politics.

The future prime minister Robert Walpole entered parliament in 1701. By 1704 he had already been well known among other Whig politicians. In 1705 he become member of the Council of Admirality, where he was dealing with public finances. In those days he was called often “the laughing admiral ” because of his jovial disposition. In 1710 the Tories seized power. Among them was the Walpole’s greatest enemy Henry St. John, viscount Bolingbroke. During the investigation of the Whig financial policy Walpole was to play a role of a scapegoat, and was subsequently imprisoned for a couple of months.

The new king George I of Britain has chosen in 1714 only Whigs as members of the new cabinet. The Whigs used this situation to revenge for the persecutions of 1710-1714. At tat time Walpole was not given the position of “prime minister” yet , because the group of “old Whigs” (James Stanhope, Charles Spencer, 3rd Earl of Sunderland) still controlled all situation, and had the King’s ear. In 1717 Walpole and his brother-in-law Charles Townshend were forced to join the opposition, and it was only the economical crisis (known as “South Sea Bubble”) which caused by financial speculation in 1720/1721 and discredited the government, enabled them to take charge and rule the country.

For over twenty years afterwards (1721-1742) Walpole ruled Britain as it’s first prime minister in the modern sense of the word. Many of his individual ways of working and acting become a pattern, subsequently reproduced by his successors. It would suffice to mention the residence at Downing Street 10 given to him by king George II, which he refused to accept as a private man, but accepted as minister of the government.

Walpole offered Britain stability and peace, both at home and abroad. Most of the books (by John Morley, Henry Dickinson, John Harold Plumb, Jeremy Black and many other not necessarily British authors) have so far focused, either on the moral problem of the usage of corruption when he was in the capacity of prime minister, or his dealings with the opposition, the press and his revolutionary economical policy (excise scheme, sinking fund). Only few authors decided to take a closer look on his foreign policy. Many doubted Walpole’s ability to conduct international affaires and suggested that it was Townshend who directed it all or at least had decisive vote. Only F.S. Oliver in the early 30’s and Jeremy Black in the 80’s and 90’s assumed that it was always Walpole who made crucial decisions.

My contribution to this research is a book entitled “Sir Robert Walpole (1676-1745) Twórca Brytyjskiej Potęgi” (The Architect of British Power) in which I have attempted to find a satisfying balance between Walpole’s home policy and diplomacy. My work is the first Polish attempt of a biography of a person who is one of the most important figures in the history of Great Britain, but still not so much recognized outside Britain.

Piotr Napierała

Patritan rule in early modern Poznań - Rządy patrycjatu w przedrozbiorowym Poznaniu na tle innych miast europejskich

2011-12-07T07:34:00.002-08:00

Mój opublikowany artykuł o wczesnonowożytnym Poznaniu.

polish version:

Piotr Napierała, "Rządy patrycjatu w przedrozbiorowym Poznaniu na tle innych miast europejskich", w: W. Łazuga, S. Paczos, Poznań-Szczecin-Wrocław, Trzy uniwersytety, trzy miasta, trzy regiony, Libron Kraków 2010, s. 397-412. ISBN: 978-83-62196-13-5

SUMMARY

Political system of particular more economically important early modern european cities is well known in historiography. It does not mean however that those systems are often a subject of a comparative study. This article is an attempt to analyse how patrician families used to control their cities and to consolidated their power within the representative bodies of the city. I have used the example of various Polish German and Dutch cities granting the most import ant place to early modern Poznań. The separate and characteristic ethos of patrician families and officials were also of great interest of mine but the article is maliny foused on monopolizing power by patricians and ways of depriving other townsmen of any political influence. Very interesting is the fact that patrician families of 18th century Europe tended to give up the profession of tradesmen and the way of life which was typical for them. This article refers also to the relationship between the political situation of various countries and the policy of urban authorities.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

• Balicki J., Bogucka M., Historia Holandii, Ossolineum Wrocław 1989.
• Battenberg F., Darmstadts Geschichte. Fürstenresidenz und Bürgerstadt im Wandel der Jahrhunderte. Eduard Roether Verlag, Darmstadt 1984.
• Bieniarzówna J., Małecki J. M., Dzieje Krakowa t. 2. Kraków w wiekach XVI-XVIII, Wydawnictwo Literackie Kraków 1984.
• Boxer C.R., Morskie imperium Holandii 1600-1800, Wydawnictwo Morskie Gdańsk 1980.
• Bromley J., Meyer J., „The Second Hundred Years War (1689-1815)” in: Britain and France Ten centuries, Folkestone (Kent) 1970.
• Cieślak E. (red.), Historia Gdańska t. III/1, Gdańsk 1993.
• Darmstadt in der Zeit de Barock und Rokoko, Magistrat der Stadt Darmstadt, 1980.
• Davies N, Moorhouse R., Mikrokosmos. Portret miasta środkowoeuropejskiego. Wrocław. Breslau. Vratislavia, Wydawnictwo Znak Kraków 2002.
• Deppert F., Darmstädter Geschichte(n), Verlag H.L. Schlapp Darmstadt 1980.
• Dziesięć wieków Poznana. I. Dzieje społeczno-gospodarcze, Sztuka Poznań/Warszawa 1956.
• Florkowski H. (red.), Kościan rzemiosłem stał, Kościan 1974.
• Gallois J.G., Geschichte der Stadt Hamburg nach den besten Quellen bearbeitet, B. II., Stern Hamburg 1854.
• Gaxotte P., Rewolucja francuska, Wydawnictwo ARCHE, Gdańsk 2001.
• Gersdorff D. von, Matka Goethego, Warszawa 2005.
• Goslinga A., Slingelandt's efforts towards European peace, M. Nijhoff The Hague 1915.
• Huizinga J., Jesień średniowiecza, PIW Warszawa 1961.
• Jarochowski, Zdobywcy i okupanci staropolskiego Poznania, Wydawnictwo Miejskie Poznań 2007.
• Lademacher H., Geschichte der Niederlande. Politik-Verfassung-Wirtschaft, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Darmstadt 1983.
• Łukaszewicz J., Obraz historyczno-statystyczny miasta Poznania w dawniejszych czasach, Wydawnictwo Miejskie Poznań 1998.
• Mika M. J., Studia nad patrycjatem poznańskim, Wydawnictwo Miejskie Poznań 2006.
• Napierała P., Hesja-Darmstadt w XVIII stuleciu. Wielcy władcy małego państwa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM Poznań 2009.
• Noël J. F., Święte cesarstwo, Volumen Warszawa 1998.
• Przywileje miasta Poznania XIII-XVIII wieku, Wydawnictwo PTPN Poznań 1994.
• Rischsbieter H., Hannoversches Lesebuch oder: Was in Hannover und über Hannover geschrieben, gedruckt und gelesen wurde. Bd. 1, 1650-1850, Hannover 1986.
• Schindler N., Ludzie prości, ludzie niepokorni. Kultura ludowa w początkach dziejów nowożytnych, Wiedza Powszechna Warszawa 2002.
• Schramm P.E., Hamburg, Deutschland Und die Welt. Leistung Und Grentzen hanzeatischen Bürgertums in der Zeit zwischen Napoleon I. und Bismarck. Ein Kapitel deutsche Geschichte, Universitätsverlag Georg D.W. Callwey München 1943.
• Suchodolski S., Ostapowicz D., Obalanie mitów i stereotypów. Od Jana III Sobieskiego do Tadeusza Kościuszki, Bellona Warszawa 2008.
• Topolski J. (red.), Dzieje Poznania do roku 1793, T 1**, PIW Warszawa/Poznań 1988.
• Tyszkiewicz B., Komisja Dobrego Porządku w Poznaniu 1780-1784, Wydawnictwo Miejskie Poznań 2005.
• van Huffel W., Willem Bentinck van Rhoon, zijn persoonlijkheid en leven, 1725-1747, 's-Gravenhage 1923.
• Vann, J.A., Württemberg auf dem Weg zum modernen Staat 1593-1795, Stuttgart 1986.
• Wawrykowa M., Niemcy 1648-1789, PWN, Warszawa 1976.
• Wielgosz Z., Zimniewicz K. (red.), Kościan zarys dziejów, PWN Warszawa/Poznań 1985.
• Wiesiołowski J., Wojciechowska Z., Władze miasta Poznania. Tom I. 1253-1793, Wydawnictwo Miejskie Poznań 2003.
• Zientara W., Gottfried Lengnich ein danziger Historiker in der Zeit der Aufklärung. Teil 1, Wydawnictwo UMK Toruń 1995

‘Western World’, ‘East’ and the Idea of Progress in eighteenth century Britain

2011-12-07T07:34:00.001-08:00

Article presented at the conference:

Writing Central Eastern Europe

International Conference, Jagiellonian University, Kraków
11-12 June 2010

In this article I tried to explain how was it possibile that from 18th Century the elite of western european countries started on to distinguish the ‘eastern Europe’ as a group of states and nations which desprerately needed reform and political education. To achieve this goal I will analise the terms ‘Eastern Europe’ and ‘progress’ as well as such problems like the Enlightenment’s ideal of a good economy, the 18th Century British vision of Poles and Russians with all superiority/inferiority complexes connected with that vision and the idea of marquess Condorcet concerning the progress as a vital factor in the history of nations.

An English poet Richard Glover (1712–1785) and politician published in 1737 an epic poem in praise of liberty: Leonidas which was a literary attack on Sir Robert Walpole’s government and the corruption which the minister developped into a political system. Leonidas, the King of Sparta was depicted in it not only as a defender of liberty fighting against Persian tyranny (Walpole’s government was to ‘asian’ for Glover), but also as a representative of the West (‘western world’) fighting against ‘Asian world’. It appears that all Europe was than considered to be thw West. When ‘the West’ started to mean ‘western European’ i.e. France, Britain or Italy? There are very few examples of using the term ‘Eastern Europe” in British eighteenth century press and books. One we can find for example in the article about Polish Jews , which referred to the book by Beatrice Baskerville: The Polish Jew published in the same year:

…The two great movements among the Polish Jews, and indeed among all the Jews of
Eastern Europe, have been the Zionist scheme and the Bund…

Eastern Europe as a purely geographic term appers also in a title of Edmund Burke’s article in the 33th volume of his periodical The Annual Reigister - Situation of Northern and Eastern Europe at the Commencement of 1790 , also such words as: ‘western’ or ‘west’ were almost never meant to be anything more than as a purely geographical statement (West Indies, West Friesland) and even as such were by no means frequent.

For example the title of one of Philipp Johann von Strahlenberg’s (1676-1747) works from 1738: An historico-geographical description of the north and eastern parts of Europe and Asia: but more particularly of Russia, Siberia, and Great Tartary; both in their ancient and modern state: together with an entire new polyglot-table of the dialects of 32 Tartarian nations contains the name: „Western Europe” and „Western Europe” as a purely geographical term, without any cultural connotations. In december 1756 edition of London Magazine we can find a term: ‘eastern Europe’ but the adjective: ‘eastern’ begins with minuscule as a refering to geography only . Very similar is the case of an article from: The Monthly Magazine edition from 1800 , or the biography of Carl von Linné written by Dietrich Johann Heinrich Stöver in 1794, an than translated from swedish to english . Even in the text of: The Theosophist from 1609 we can find the term ‘eastern Europe’ as geographical statement . In relation to Eastern European countries the most frequent name used in 18th century was: eastern kingdoms of Europe. The same we can find for example in a work of a Dutchman Cornelis de Bruins: Reizen over Moskovie, door Persie en Indie from 1711.

The other problem consists in the fact that the countries we know today as a part of Eastern Europe like Russia and Poland were very often called ‘the nations of the North’, just like Sweden or England in the early modern period. In his main work from 1576 Jean Bodin reffered for instance to the character of northern nations who praise personal independence and dislike absolute monarchy . This manner of naming nations was still alive in the 18th century (Great Northern War – 1700-1721, Catherine’s the Great alliance with Prussia and Britain called ‘the northern concerto’ in opposition to ‘the southern concerto’ formed by Austria and France).
The clear division we know today between ‘civilised’ Western Europe and somehow barbaric Eastern Europe is first and foremost the result of Condorcet’s idea of progress. Marquess de Condorcet stated that Britain and France are more ‘advanced’ than other European countries in securing the public liberty and constructing reliable, lawful administration for the people. The Germans and Italians were supposed to be still somehow errant, and the inhabitants of Eastern Europe (although the term itself was of no interest to Condorcet) tending to despotism. The aforementioned Condorcet’s idea of progress was yet nothing more but a scientific elaboration of an older sentiment typical for the age of Enlightenment, that all human institutions can be relatively easily reformed and their functioning - rationalized. The conservative Polish or Hungarian nobility was seen as slaves of the old ways of governing. At the end of the 18th century even some Polish political theorists (Hugo Kołłątaj, Stanisław Staszic) started to describe the Polish liberty as ‘archaic’ unlike the British implicating the responsible law-abiding attitude and respect for individual rights .

The tendence of perceiving Eastern European countries as barbaric and underdeveloped was by no means practiced in Britain only. The same was the position of 18th century Austrians and Germans. On the so-called Table of Nations (Völkertafel) printed between 1730 and 1740 in Vienna, the nations of Western Europe are depicted as genarally more virtuous. The French were seen as great warriors, who end their lives in battles but also a bit unreliable . The Englishman (nervous – unruhig, man of the world - Welt-weiß) positioned between Swede and German is somehow inferior to the wise Spaniard and bellicous Frenchman. Eastern nations were presented as far more infterior even to Englishman. The Russians were seen as barbaric, a Turk as a lazy, egoistic, tyrannical and effeminated sort of Man, the Poles and Hungarians were as primitive and unreliable. Poles were seen as a nations of brawlers and Hungarians as the most disloyal subjects (anti-Hapsburg rebellion of 1702). The British negative vision of eastern Europeans based first and foremost on their uncompatibility with the enlightened ideas popularised by The Spectator (1711-1714).
The suposed effeminacy of the Turks was also mentioned in the march 1792 edition of: The European Magazine and London Review containing information about Persia, Turkey, and a travel journal of a man called Beauchamp who travelled in the Middle East in 1787.

The British relationship with Poland was more complicated, although Poland was almost as exotic to 18th century Londoners as Turkey was. Polish minister to St. James Court (1769-1772) Tadeusz Burzyński (b. about. 1730, d. 1773) noticed that: ‘the two free nations have some sort of a deep respect for each other ’. On the other hand Lord Mansfield informed him once about British view of Poland: In this country Poland has no enemy. But Poland and its problems were still exotic. It is always easy to like a distant and a barely known nation. The Russians were disliked and feared like in Poland, but for instance the contradictions in Polish and Prussian foreign policy used to be uncomprehended. Poland and its political system was frequently seen as unjust as William Pitt the Elder put it in his speech given in the House of Lords on January the 9th 1770 roku about the previous speech by George III and some governmental proposals: If this question be given up, the freeholders of England are reduced to a condition baser than the peasantry of Poland ”. Poland as some sort of hell to farmers and peasants used to appear in many political texts and speeches of the era.

Did the 18th Century Britons know something vital about Poland, or was this country completely exotic? To anwser this question we must observe how the Britain’s policy towards Poland looked like. It seems that there was no such thing as a separate British policy towards this country. The Sir Robert Walpole’s cabinet (1721-1742) tended to stay away from the conflicts of the continent. Even the war with Spain (1739) was announced under the strong pressure of public opinion. The main source of information of this cabinet’s foreign policy: Memoirs of the Life and Administration of Sir Robert Walpole edited by William Coxe in 1798 contains only a very few remarks about the political situation in Eeastern Europe. Walpole was anxious about the political and military growth of Russia , but it seems that there was no gouvernmental conception how the situation could be altered. Walpole and his ministers generalny relied on the French alliance (1717-1735) and French diplomacy, and after the brech with Versailles they started to rely on Austria (even in early 1730’s polititians openly hostile to Austria, like Charles Townshend (1674-1738) were not tolerated , other like Thomas Pelham-Holles, duke of Newcastle (1693-1756) liked very much to play role of imperial loyals to please the king George II who was in the same time elector of Hannover and thus – subject to the emperor.

Also after 1748 the collaboration with Austria was a priority of british diplomatic service . It is worth remembering that British diplomats were among the most limited by ministerial instructions, so the only British diplomat who really tried in the period of 1748-1756 to influence the British policy towards Eastern-Europe was Charles Hanbury Williams (1708-1759) residing subsequently in Dresden (1747-1750), Berlin (1750-1751) and Petersburg (from 1751 on). Williams was also political instructor to young Stanisław August Poniatowski, whom he had introduced in 1755 to Catherine the Great . Leaving almost all initiative in Eastern Europe to Austria was a mistake, as the isolated Britain A.D. 1756 can confirm. The only Britain’s ally than was king of Prussia depending on British subsidies. The 18th century ends for the British diplomats with the conquest of Canada and the lost of America. The war against american rebels, alhough justified by law, temporarily endangered the vision of Britain as a ‘country of freedom’ in Poland , France and Germany . To conclude: there was no moment during 18th century in which Britain elaborated some kind of separate Policy towards Poland.

It is hard to find among 18th century Britons someone who possesed similar knowledge of Polish affairs as Charles Hanbury Williams did. Poland seemed to interest the British more after 1764 i.e. after the coronation of Stanisław August Poniatowski, a great anglophile, who never missed an oportunisty to practice the english language especially during conversations about the perfection of english political system. Becouse of this many Britons had an easy acces to king, who confined with them. James Harris, a diplomat who arrived to Poland from Prussia in 1767 noticed the poor condition of peasants and the policy of the allmighty Russian ambasador. The king discussed with Harris the problem of the famous new military academy (Szkoła Rycerska) saying that the only reason the Russians agreed to establish the academy was that they found it potentially useful for Russian officers in the future . The tradesman Joseph Marshall, who was in the Polish Commonwealth in 1770 (mainly to Gdańsk and Elbląg), has mentioned the private little wars among magnates and noblemen which terrified him . Nathaniel William Wraxall, agent of the East India Company, and – later – of the British government, who has visited (1777-1779) all central and eastern european courts was mainly interested in Polish economy. One of the British minister in Warsaw Thomas Wroughton’s (d. 1787) duties was to give Wraxall all information he needed. The Journal (published in 1778) of Wraxall is dominated by the lack of faith in Poniatowski’s economical knowledge and experience. Wraxall was also shocked why the Poles were so little interested in using the natural resources of their land. Wraxall was one of the very few British of his time aware of the Prussian economical pressure Poland suffered .

The best British historical work written in 18th century concerning Poland was William Coxe’s Travel to Poland (1778). Coxe has made a very minute analysis of Poland’s internal affaires and history of Polish realm . Befor this editio, the British had to rely maliny on the information given by the German from Gdańsk Gottfried Lengnicha and his series of editions known as Polnishe Bibliothek. Poland was still much less known to a British reader than Spain or Bavaria.

The press information about Poland concerned mainly the private live and movements of the monarch. For example information about August II personal character in Gentleman’s Magazine (May the 2nd 1732) . This magazine used to bring news about Polish diets and confederacies but no information about the condition of Polish population. There were also little news from Warsaw when compared with those from the Hague, Paris, Madrid, Vienna or Philadelphia, so stereotypes took place of reliable information. The travel journals like Marshall’s mentoning a loaded gun kept by one Polish nobleman as a warning and weapon against his neightbour, must have been confirming all negative stereotypes.

The British, and especially the English of the 18th century were a rather xenophobic nation . They were afraid of the possibility of French invasion, of Spanish customs officers and inquisitors, they laughed at the Dutch Republic not as prosperous as in the previous century. The German preacher Wendeborn visiting London in the 1780’s was suprised seeing that even an English beggar thinked himself superior to German or French rich tourist, becouse they weren’t as ‘free’ as he was . A poor Polish nobleman would have reacted in a similar way , but Poland was still to much exotic for Britons to anable any recognition of similar public virtues in both countries.
Russia was as exotic as Poland, but also much feared. That was why Russian diplomats were treated with great civility by British authorities. The appearance of Russian troops at the Rhine (1735) shocked Londoners what Sir Joseph Jekyll commented in 1738 saying ‘God had punished French ambitions using the Russian army’. Defoe has written some lines about Muscovite stupid ignorance in 1701 roku. In spite of all this Britain never really avoided to cooperate with the somwhat barbaric Power. In 1734 a commercial treaty was signed, in 1738 Britain proposed an alliance to Russian government, which was eventually signed in 1742, and than renewed in 1746 and 1752 . The British were terrified hearing of Russian brutality in the Eastern Prussia during the seven years war (1756-1763). It is also very hard to find some trace of sympathy for Russian absolutistic reforms made by Peter the Great and later by Catherine the Great, which was so distinct among enlightened circles in Paris (before Diderot went to Russia and found himself very dissapionted).

How was it possibile that the British point of view on European affairs became so important? Great Britain (England befor the union with Scotland -1707) eneterd the 18th century as a new-born superpower. The whole Europe was astonished that the British monarchia mixta (mixed monarchy) was able to fight and defeat absolutistic France and to take a stable place between the greatest european powers. The British growth of power was a proof that it was possibile to combine declarations of individual ‘freedom’ with political power. Venice and tho other republic – the Dutch Republic were unable to acheive this goal. Being in London in 1754 Stanisław Poniatowski was impressed that a ‘free’ nation could be and was so well organised , so he became an anglophile for the rest of his life . The absolutistic Kingdom of France were in 18th century less attractive for its form of governemt, although Paris was still concidered as center of european culture. In the same age the characteristic inferiority complex of the eastern european nations started to be visible. It was not only caused by British and French cultural influence but also by the changes in the political map of Eastern Europe where the new powers like Prussia and Russia were gaining advantage over old multinational countres – Poland, Hapsburg Empire and Turkey. Being aware of tis situation the western europeans tended to think themselves superior to the East . This superiority complex was based on being a ‘free’ nation, or on technological development (Britain) or on military and administrative superiority (France, Prussia).

Professor Hubert Orłowski who has studied the origins of german negative stereotypes concering Poland and Poles came to opinion that the Prussians built their conviction on the modernity of absolutistic bureaucracy or the rationality of Prussian economical discours (cameralism) , especially when it was all confronted with polish constitutional and administrative dis order. Already Samuel von Pufendorf (1632-1694) Prussian historian and theorist of state depicted Polish political system as an examle of constitutional chaos:

„…caprice of several deputies makes the whole work of the diet point less… but they call it jus contradicendi – the very soul of Polish liberty … ”.

Very similar was the opinion of Prussian economist Johann Heinrich Gottlob von Justi (1717-1771), who praised enlightened absolute monarchy which would protect private property and act within the frames of law as the best form of government. His opinion about Poland we can know from the passage in his work: Die Natur und das Wesen der Staaten (1760):

„…Polish constitution is arranged in such a way, that it’s absolutly impossible to do anything useful … ”.

Justi claimed that a state is a mechanism but also a moral organism. This position implicated that it must have been something wrong with the character of Polish nation itself if Polish economy was so disorganised and week . The Swedes also refered to Polish troubles, liberum veto etc. by creating a word: polsk riksdag.
According to Johann Christoph Krause (1748-1799), professor ath the Univesrity of Halle the Polish constitusion was so defectiv becouse it was developed without any planning or rational concept . Here we can see an enlightened but not neceserily absolutistic point of view.
Poland controled by selfish and uneducated nobility was no favorite of pragmatic german bourgeoisie whose virtues were by 18th century becoming german national virtues .

German scientist and a supporter of the french Johann Georg Forster (1754-1794) has invented the expression: Polnische Wirtschaft in his letter from december the 7th 1784 in which he mentioned filth of Polish inns, lazyness of Polish servants and lack of good artisans . During next two years he wrote much about the lack of entrepreneurial spilit and lack of practicism among Poles as well as ignorance and extravagance of Polish nobility and the general poverty of the people. He has written in one of his letters: In Poland the poor half-barbaric people coexists with the decadence of the rich nobility . German virtues like: order, industry, frugality and hygiene (Ordnung, Fleiß, Sparsamkeit, Sauberkeit), which Forster praised didn’t let him to approve the state Poland was in . Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803) was -unlike Forster – fond of both Poles and revolution , but it was Forster who was ‘typical’ in his opinions.

Very similar were bourgeois virtues praised by już Joseph Addison (1672-1719) and his news paper (edited in years: 1711-1714) The Spectator. Under the impression of English pragmatism Voltaire wanted to transplant the same way of thinking to France. The French-German thinker Paul Henry Thiry, baron d'Holbach (1723-1789) tried to combine pragmatism with atheism and strict morality:

„...An atheist is a Man who knows the nature and its rules and who knowi his own nature and his responsibility ...”.

In his work: Ethocratie, ou le gouvernement fondé sur la morale (Ethocracy or Government Founded on Ethics) published in 1776 in Amsterdam Holbach highlighted the need to apply morality in politics , wrote against the French nobility wanting new privileges and advised to the king Louis XVI (the work was dedicated to the monarch) to preserve simplicity and modesty which sholud secure the respect of the people and public order . Reading d’Holbach’s work one can get an impression that it could have been written in 17th century – so much it was all about morality and virtue. But it was the discours typical also for englightened philosophers , especially those coming from bourgeoisie (especially german) , who was to be united by pragmatic virtues . Holbach, didn’t share Voltaire’s respekt for entrepremeurs but he did share his pragmatic viewpoint.

Poles and other Eastern European countries were thus seen as not pragmatic enough to be called prosperous and not prosperous enough to be perceived as promising. Already in 18th century they started to be seen as far less ‘progressive’ than western-Europeans. All this does not mean that Britons of the age of Enlightenment never considered themselves superior to other nations - of course they did and this convincement was connected with pride of British political achievements. When they criticized the French – they used to refer rather to the ‘despotic’ power of Burbon monarchs, than to French culture. On the other hand they used to have much sympathy for Poles and Russians although they perceived them as barbaric.
In Eighteenth Century Britain the word ‘progress’ still used to mean first and foremost the individual progress of a men i.e.: his achievements and his ability to make choices. Sometimes this word referred also to the process of constructing some political system.

The typical example of using of the word ‘progress’ in 17th- and 18th century British literature is the title of the work by John Bunyan (1628-1688): The Pilgrim's Progress from This World to That Which Is to Come published in 1678 roku. Bunyan has depicted a pilgrimage of an anonymous Christian to Zion. The preacher Benjamin Keach (1640-1704) was Th author of: The Progress of Sin: or the Travels of Ungodliness (1684). The pelaograph Thomas Astle (1735-1803) has written in 1784 a book intitled: The Origin and Progress of Writing. The seres of graphics by Williama Hogarth (1697-1764): A Rake's Progress (1732–1733) about a merchant’s son wasting his inheritance is very famous. An American of Scottish descent James Thomson Callender (1758-1803) has written: The political progress of Britain: or, An impartial history of abuses in the government of the British Empire, in Europe, Asia, and America: From the Revolution, in 1688, to the present time. This work was published in 1794. In the same year in London was Publisher: The history of the origin, progress, and termination of the American war by Charles Stedman. The year after the English edition of marquess de Condorcet’s work: Outlines of an historical view of the progress of the human mind.

It seems that the word: progress was initially an equivalent of other word – process and could mean something neutral, positive or negative depending on the context. It will suffice to mantion the poem: The progress of religion by Jacob Hildebrand (ed. London 1737) or the aforementioned: The Rake’s Progress i The Progress of Sin.
In Condorcet’s work the word: ‘progress’ has a definitely positive connotation and to some extents gets a new meaning – as a stable process of gaining more and more freedom and happines by humanity thanks to respect for personal responsibility.
„Progress’ not as a term but as a modern Condorcet’s way to understand it comes from Francis Bacon and his hope in power of science. This scientific enthusiasm was expressed by Locke, d’Holbach, Voltaire, Kant and many other in relation to human institutions. Condorcet was sure that the progress is stable and irrevercible whereas Kant thought about it as about some sort of prize for human efforts. History was – according to Kant – very hard and errant way from barbaric conditions to civilisation. An age later Nietsche didn’t believe in progress at all, and prefered the old tradition of ages of happines and dark ages.

In the opinion of a liberal and a critic of liberalism Pierre Manent, the liberals living after French revolution praised its acheivements although abhored the crimes commited by jacobins. For those the progress was so sure that it became a sort of religion . In Times of the revolution it wasn’t so easy. Whereas Georg Forster believed in revolution and progress despite the jacobin terror, but Herder and Schiller fund themselves very dissapointed. With the idea of a stable and sure progress determinism has invaded all humanities preparing the way for secular regions like marxism.

Assuming that progress is irrevesivle we must came to a motion that if some countries succesfully develop themselves through ages it will be very difficult to Reach heir level of civilisation. Today the inhabtants of Eastern Europe are constantly afraid that they will never be able to compete their western european collegues.

Marquess of Condorcet wrote his main work: Outlines of an historical view of the progress of the human mind (Esquisse d'un tableau historique des progrès de l'esprit humain) in 1793-1794, when he concealed himself from the gang of Robespierre and was eventually captured The conflict between him and jacobins resulted from the quarrel about natural equalities of mankind. Condorcet wanted them preserved becouse the differences in property or intelligence were not result of defective political or educational systems but of individual industry and virtue. Esquisse d'un tableau was edited in 1795 when jacobine terror was already over. Condorcet is an unique case of an intellectual who played a vital role both in enlightenment and the revolution. Robespierre have accused him of prefering Voltaire’s idea to that of Rousseau. Today Condorcet is perceived as one of French national heroes. His monument is situated next to the mint in which he has worked for years.
The very core of Condorcet’s political philosophy and his idea of progress was a believ that every monopole is harmful for society. It should be thus avoided both in science, education and in political culture. He was against Church’s monopole for morality, as well as nobility’s monopole for making politics . Although he was never a radical democrat, he praised the United States for fighting those monopoles, as much as he praised some of the characteristics of the political life in antient Athens. Condorcet thought, that Great Britain (if the crown will let the Americans go their way). The United States inherited good English laws , and revolutionary France were very close to realisation of the concept of a free country, with education for all, and easy acces to inventions and science. Poland controlled by ill-educated nobility had still very much to do. Although we don’t find only mention of Poland in: Esquisse d'un tableau historique des progrès de l'esprit humain we can assume that Condorcet’s opinion of it would be very much like Forster’s.

When Condorcet was developing his liberal ideas in Prussia and Austria were still many devoted absolutists who – in spite of their different political views - shared with English and French liberals their ‘modern’ contempt for archaistic institutions of Poland and Hungary. Russia was given more chance because of the breathtaking reforms of Peter the great ang Catjerine the Great. In relation to Prussian absolutistic reforms very frequently is used the term ‘separate way’ - Sonderweg to modernity, which is sometimes praised as the most efficient way to control the conservative and anarchistic nobility , and sometimes seen as a source of all later german troubles with transition from absolutism to liberal society . Notwithstanding the differencies between the 18th century Prussia, Britain and France and the countries culturally depending on them formed and still form the core of the modern West.

In Condorcet’s main work we cannot find any case of using the terms of ‘West’ and ‘East’ in some not only geographic but also cultural context, I thint that the cultural meaning of ‘Eastern Europe’ we know today is based first and formost on the idea of progress, which explains why ‘Eastern Europe’ meant anything onl to geograpgs before the idea of progress was formuled. The word ‘progress’ gained his positive meaning only thanks to real administrative and economical achievements of particular states and nations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

• Adler E., Herder i oświecenie niemieckie, PIW Warszawa 1965.
• Bodin J., Six books of the commonwealth, Barnes & Noble, Wheaton, Illinois 1967.
• British Diplomatic Instructions – France 1727-1744, London 1930.
• Burke E, The Annual Register, vol. 33 London 1791.
• Butterwick R., Stanisław August a kultura angielska, Warszawa 2000.
• Condorcet J.A., Outlines of an historical view of the progress of the human mind: being a posthumous work of the late M. de Condorcet, J. Johnson London 1795.
• Condorcet J.A., De l’Influence de la Révolution d’Amérique sur l’Europe, Éditions Manucius Houilles 2010.
• Duffy M., The Englishman and the Foreigner
• Coxe W., Memoirs of the Life and Administration of Sir Robert Walpole, T. Cadell & W. Davis, London 1798.
• The European Magazine and London Review III 1792 .
• Gentleman’s Magazine (since 1731) - http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/ilej/ (acces: 2.05.2010 r.)
• Grześkowiak-Krwawicz A., Regina libertas. Wolność w polskiej myśli politycznej XVIII wieku, Wydawnictwo słowo/obraz-terytoria Gdańsk 2006.
• Hanczewski P., Dyplomacja brytyjska w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej w latach 1748-1756, Toruń 2000.
• Holbach P., System przyrody czyli prawa świata fizycznego i moralnego, Warszawa 1957.
• Holbach P., Etokracja, czyli rząd oparty na moralności, PWN Warszawa 1979.
• Kimber I., Kimber E., The London magazine, or, Gentleman's monthly intelligencer R. Baldwin London 1756.
• Kochanowska-Nieborak A., Das Polenbild in Meyers Konversationslexika des 'langen' neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, praca doktorska napisana w Zakładzie Historii Literatury Instytutu Filologii Germańskiej UAM nr. 432996.
• Libiszowska, Życie polskie w Londynie w XVIII wieku
• Manent P., Intelektualna historia liberalizmu, Wydawnictwo Arcana Kraków 1994.
• Napierała P., Światowa metropolia. Życie codzienne w osiemnastowiecznym Londynie, Novae Res Gdynia 2010.
• Oliver F.S., The Endless Adventure-Personalities and Practical Politics in Eighteenth Century England, Boston/NY 1931.
• Orłowski H., Polnische Wirthschaft. Nowoczesny niemiecki dyskurs o Polsce, przekład Izabela i Sven Sellmer, Wspólnota Kulturowa Borussia Olsztyn 1998.
• Orłowski H., Z modernizacją w tle. Wokół rodowodu nowoczesnych niemieckich wyobrażeń o Polsce i Polakach, Wydawnictwo PTPN Poznań 2002.
• Orłowski H., Die Lesbarkeit von Stereotypen. Der deutsche Polendiskurs im Blick historischer Stereotypenforschung und historischer Semantik, Oficyna Wydawnicza ATUT – Wrocławskie Wydawnictwo Oświatowe Wrocław 2004.
• Orłowski H. (red.), Sonderweg. Spory o „niemiecką drogę odrębną”, Wydawnictwo Poznańskie Poznań 2008
• Perkins J.B., France during The Regency, Cambridge University Press, 1920.
• Pitt W., The Speeches of the Right Honourable the Earl of Chatham in the Houses of Lords and Commons, London 1848.
• Schindler N., Ludzie prości ludzie niepokorni, Wiedza Powszechna Warszawa 2002.
• Stanzel F.K., Europäischer Völkerspiegel. Imagologisch-etnographische Studien zu Völkertafeln des frühen 18. Jahrhunderts, Heidelberg 1999.
• Stedman Ch., The history of the origin, progress, and termination of the American war, J. Murray London 1794.
• Stöver D. J. H.,, The life of Sir Charles Linnæus, Printed by E. Hobson for B. and J. White London 1794.
• Strahlenberg P.J. von, An historico-geographical description of the north and eastern parts of Europe and Asia: but more particularly of Russia, Siberia, and Great Tartary; both in their ancient and modern state: together with an entire new polyglot-table of the dialects of 32 Tartarian nations, W. Innys and R. Manby London 1738.
• The Theosophist, Madras 1609.
• Wolff-Powęska A., Niemiecka myśl polityczna wieku oświecenia, Poznań 1988
• Zamoyski A., Ostatni król Polski, Warszawa 1994.
• Zawadzki W., Polska stanisławowska w oczach cudzoziemców, Warszawa 1963.

Sachsens Glanz und Preussens Gloria

2011-12-07T07:27:00.004-08:00

Die historische Bedeutung des Werks La Saxe Galant, das von jeher die Basis für die Biografen des polnischen Königs August II. bildet ist fraglich. Wir sind uns nicht sicher, ob der preußische Hofmann Pöllnitz August II. rühmen oder kritisieren wollte. Es steht außer Frage, dass Pöllnitz sein Werk erst ein Jahr nach dem Tod August des Starken veröffentlichen ließ. Im 19. Jahrhundert dagegen wurde der polnische Herrscher August II. beispielsweise von Józef Ignacy Kraszewski literarisch scharf angegriffen, wobei folgende Tatsache bekannt ist, dass August II. für seine Zeitgenossen als galanter Eroberer der weiblichen Herzen nachzuahmen war. Darüber hinaus sollte bemerkt werden, dass der Lebensstil des preußischen Autors und des Königs sehr ähnlich aussahen.

Das andere problem ist, dass die preussischen Historiker bereits im ausgehendem achtzehnten Jahrhundert (Georg Förster, August Schlözer) die ganze deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft dominierten, genauso wie Preussen dominierte politisch das Deutsche Reich nach dem Siebenjährigen Krieg (1756-1763). Diese aufgeklärte Geschichtswissenschaftler verfolgten das Ziel, die Glorie Friedrichs II von Preussen zu festigen. Es gab kein Platz dafür, andere deutsche Herrscher zu feiern besonders wenn diese Herrscher Rivalen Preussens waren. Diese preußische Dominanz endete sich erst im 20. Jh. Wir müssen dessen Bewusst sein dass nicht mehr existierende Staat Kurfürstentum Sachsen kann heute keine Verteidiger treffen und Geschichtswissenschaft auch ein Kampffeld ist.
Ganz anders wie sein Vorgänger Jan III Sobieski, kannte August II nicht nur kämpfen, sondern auch politische Pläne bereiten. Aber für polnische Historikern des nationalistischen 19. Jahrhunderts hatte er ein großes Nachteil: er war Deutsche. Sobieski, dagegen, ständig in Polen gelobt wird, obwohl die taktischen Kenntnisse seine einzige Vorzüge waren. Er mochte die Politik nicht und konnte sich darin nicht aus, deswegen musste seine Frau die berühmte Französin Marie („Marysieńka”) viele Aufgaben übernehmen, jedoch mit bescheidenen Effekt.

Durch die späteren Forschungen der heutigen polnischen Historiker wie Jacek Staszewski, Kazimierz Bartkiewicz, Kazimierz Maliszewski und Marian Drozdowski ist die positive Aspekte der Wettiner wieder bemerkbar. Jacek Staszewski war und ist der Meinung, dass August II. viel für politische Verstärkung Polens tun können hätte, falls er aus dem Nordischen Krieg (1700-1721) als Sieger hervorgegangen wäre. Während seines letzten Besuch zur Historischen Institut des UAM hat Jacek Staszewski (am ende des Jahres 2007) festgestellt, dass sogar die Wettiner uns von der Teilungen Polens nicht verhüten könnten, aber dass war natürlich nicht die Sorge Augusts des Starken, der schon 1733 starb.
Die Angelegenheit des Hochverrats, den die berühmte Gräfin Cosel hätte begehen sollen, bildet eine Schnittstelle zwischen mehreren literarischen Bilder und der Geschichtswissenschaft. Anna Konstanze von Brockdorf (1680-1765) wurde literarisch als eine Schönheit ausgemalt, die von einem Despoten verletzt wurde. In diesem Fall haben wir eher mit einem polnischen Mythos von Kraszewski als mit einem deutschen Bild zu tun. Diese Holsteinerin fühlte sich mit dem Kurfürstentum Sachsen bestimmt nicht verbunden. Sie identifizierte sich nicht mit den kursächsischen Interessen und aus diesem Grund konnte sie feststellen, dass Polen einen Polen und nicht einen Sachsen zum polnischen König hätten wählen sollen. Anna Konstanze hatte sicherlich ein heuchlerisches Wesen, denn sie wurde dem König August II. von der Koterie der Familie Flemming vorgestellt, gegen die sie sich später wendete. Sie kümmerte sich nicht um die finanzielle Situation Sachsens und so können wir vermuten, dass sie eine preußische Spionin hätte werden können, als das Geld August des Starken erschöpft war und keine Geschenke mehr von ihm kamen.

1713 Treaty of Utrecht between Spain and Britain

2011-12-07T07:27:00.003-08:00

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Peace_and_Friendship_Treaty_of_Utrecht_between_Spain_and_Great_Britain

Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the Most Serene and Most Potent Princess Anne, by the Grace of God, Queen of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c. and the Most Serene and Most Potent Prince Philip the Fifth, the Catholic King of Spain, concluded at Utrecht the 2/13 Day of July, 1713.

ANNE, by the grace of God, Queen of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c. To all and singular to whom these presents shall come, greeting. Whereas a certain treaty of peace and friendship, between us and our good brother Philip the Fifth, Catholic King of Spain, was concluded and signed at Utrecht the 2/13 day of this present month, by our ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries, who were provided on each part with sufficient authority, in the form and words following:

Whereas it has pleased the Supreme Ruler of all things, after a most grievous war, which for so many years has laid desolate almost the whole Christian world with blood and slaughter, of his divine clemency to dispose the minds of the Princes engaged in the dispute to the thoughts of peace and concord, after they had been so long inflamed with the rage and fury of arms: and whereas the Most Serene and Most Mighty Lady Anne, by the grace of God, Queen of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, &c. and the Most Serene and Most Mighty Prince Philip the Fifth, by the grace of God, Catholic King of Spain, &c. wish for nothing more heartily, and endeavour nothing more earnestly, than that the ancient bonds of alliance and friendship between the British and Spanish nations should not only be renewed, but also more strongly knit together by fresh engagements of amity and interest on both sides, and transmitted indissoluble to all posterity; in order at last to finish happily so wholesome and so very desirable a work, they have nominated on each side their ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries, and have instructed them with sufficient orders; that is to say, the Queen of Great Britain on her part, the Right Reverend John, by divine permission, Bishop of Bristol, keeper of the privy seal of England, privy counsellor to her Royal Majesty, dean of Windsor, and register of the most noble Order of the Garter; and the most noble, most illustrious, and most excellent Lord Thomas Earl of Strafford, Viscount Wentworth of Wentworth Woodhouse, and of Staineborough, baron of Raby, privy counsellor to her Royal Majesty, her ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to the High and Mighty Lords the States General of .the United Provinces, colonel of her Majesty's royal regiment of dragoons, lieutenant general of her Majesty's armies, first commissioner of the admiralty of Great Britain and Ireland, and knight of the most noble Order of the Garter. And the Catholic King on his part, the most illustrious and most excellent Lord Francis Maria de Paula, Tellez, and Giron, Duke of Ossuna, Count of Urvegna, Marquis of Pennafiel, grandee of Spain of the first class, high chamberlain of the King, great notary of the kingdoms of Castile, one of the commanders, and grand clavero of the Order of Callatrava, and likewise commander of the Order of St. Jago, one of the grandees of the chamber to the Catholic King Philip the Fifth, general commander in his armies, and captain of the first troop of his Majesty's life guards; and the most illustrious and most excellent Lord Isidore Cazado de Azevedo de Rosalez, Marquis of Monteleone, Viscount of Alcazar Real, counsellor of his Catholic Majesty in the supreme council, one of the honourable chamberlains of the King: which ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries have consented and agreed to the following conditions of peace and friendship, to the same effect as there which were made at the courts of London and Madrid, by ministers on each side.
[edit] ARTICLE I

That there be a Christian universal peace, and a perpetual and true friendship, between the Most Serene and Most Mighty Princess Anne, Queen of Great Britain, and the Most Serene and Most Mighty Prince Philip the Fifth, Catholic King of Spain, and their heirs and successors, and also the kingdoms, states, dominions, and provinces of both parties, wheresoever situated, and their subjects; and that the same be so sincerely preserved and cultivated, that neither party do, under any colour whatever, endeavour to attempt any thing to the destruction or detriment of the other, or yield any aid, by what name soever it be called, to there who attempt the same, or who endeavour to do any damage, neither may or ought they to help them by any means. On the contrary, their Royal Majesties shall be obliged the one to promote the advantage, honour, and interest of the other, and to direct their councils to that end with all care, that by mutual proof of friendship, the peace which is now made may daily receive new additions of strength.
[edit] ARTICLE II

But whereas the war which is so happily ended by this peace, was at the beginning undertaken, and was carried on for so many years with the utmost force, at immense charge, and with almost infinite slaughter, because of the great danger which threatened the liberty and safety of all Europe, from the too close conjunction of the kingdoms of Spain and France. And whereas to take away all uneasiness and suspicion, concerning such conjunction, out of the minds of people, and to settle and establish the peace and tranquility of Christendom by an equal balance of power (which is the best and most solid foundation of a mutual friendship, and of a concord which will be lasting on all sides) as well the Catholic King as the Most Christian King have consented, that care should be taken by sufficient precautions, that the kingdoms of Spain and France should never come and be united under the same dominion, and that one and the same person should never become King of both kingdoms. And to this end his Catholic Majesty has for himself, his heirs, and successors, most solemnly renounced all manner of right, title, and pretension to the crown of France, in the form and words following:
The KING.

Whereas on the 5th of November in this present year 1712, before Don Manuel of Vadillo and Velasco, my secretary of state, and chief notary of the kingdoms of Castille, and Leon, and witnesses, I delivered, swore to, and signed a public instrument of the tenor following, which is, word for word, as here ensues.

DON PHILIP, by the grace of God, King of Castille, Leon, Arragon, the Two Sicilies, Jerusalem, Navarre, Granada, Toledo, Valentia, Galicia, Majorca, Seville, Sardinia, Corduba, Corsica, Murcia, Jaen, the Algarves, Algezira, Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, the East and West Indies, the islands and terra firma of the ocean, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, and Milan, Count of Habspurg, Flanders, Tirol, and Barcelona, Lord of Biscay and Molina, &c. By the account and information of this instrument and writing of renunciation and relinquishment, and that it may remain for a perpetual remembrance, I do make known and declare to kings, princes, potentates, commonwealths, communities, and particular persons, which now are, and shall be in future ages: That it being one of the principal positions of the treaties of peace, depending between the crowns of Spain and of France, with that of England, for the rendering it firm and lasting, and proceeding to a general one, on the maxim of securing for ever the universal good and quiet of Europe, by an equal weight of power, so that many being united in one, the balance of the equality desired, might not turn to the advantage of one, and the danger and hazard of the rest; it was proposed, and insisted on by England, and it was agreed to on my part, and on that of the King my grandfather, that for avoiding at any time whatever the union of this monarchy with that of France and the possibility that it might happen in any case, reciprocal renunciations should be made by me, and for all any descendants, to the possibility of succeeding to the monarchy of France, and on the part of those princes, and of all their race, present and to come, to that of succeeding to this monarchy; by forming a proper project of abdication of all rights which might be claimed by the two royal houses of this, and of that monarchy, as to their succeeding mutually to each other; by separating, by the legal means of my renunciation, my branch from the royal stem of France, and all the branches of France from the stem of the blood royal of Spain; by taking care at the same time, in pursuance of the fundamental and perpetual maxim of the balance of power in Europe, which persuades and justifies the avoiding, in all cases imaginable, the union of the monarchy of France with that of Spain, that the inconvenience should likewise be provided against, left, in default of my issue, the case should happen that this monarchy should devolve again to the House of Austria, whose dominions and dependencies, even without the union of the empire, would make it formidable; a motive which at other times made it justifiable to separate the hereditary dominions of the House of Austria from the body of the Spanish monarchy; it being agreed and settled to this end by England with me, and with the King my grandfather, that in failure of me, and of my issue, the Duke of Savoy, and his sons and defendants, being males, born in constant lawful marriage, are to enter upon the succession of this monarchy; and in default of his male line, the Prince Amadeo of Carignan, and his sons and descendants, being males, born in constant lawful marriage; and in default of his line, Prince Thomas, brother of the Prince of Carignan, his sons and descendants, being males, born in constant lawful marriage, who, as descendants of the Infanta Donna Catharina, daughter of Philip the Second, and being expressly called, have a clear and known right, supposing the friendship and perpetual alliance, which the Duke of Savoy, and his descendants, are to solicit and obtain from this crown; it being to be believed, that by this perpetual and never-ceasing hope, the needle of the balance may remain invariable, and all the powers, wearied with the toil and uncertainty of battles, may be amicably kept in an equal poise; it not remaining in the disposal of any of the parties to alter this federal equilibrium by way of any contract of renunciation, or retrocession, since the same reason, which induced its being admitted, demonstrates its permanency, a fundamental constitution being formed, which may settle by an unalterable law the succession of what is to come. In consequence of what is abovesaid, and for the love I bear to the Spaniards, and from the knowledge I have of what I owe to them, and the repeated experience of their fidelity, and for making a return to Divine Providence, by this resignation to its destiny, for the great benefit of having placed and maintained me on the throne, among such illustrious and well-deserving vassals, I have determined to abdicate, for myself, and all my descendants, the right of succeeding to the crown of France, desiring not to depart from living and dying with my beloved and faithful Spaniards; leaving to all my descendants the inseparable bond of their fidelity and love. And to the end that this resolution may have its due effect, and that the matter may cease, which has been looked upon as one of the principal motives of the war, which has hitherto afflicted Europe, of my own motion, free, spontaneous, and unconstrained will, I Don Philip, by the grace of God, King of Castille, Leon, Arragon, the Two Sicilies, Jerusalem, Navarre, Granada, Toledo, Valencia, Galicia, Majorca, Seville, Sardinia, Corduba, Corsica, Murcia, Jaen, the Algarves, Algezira, Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, the East and West Indies, the islands, and terra firma of the ocean, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, and Milan, Count of Habspurg, Flanders, Tirol, and Barcelona, Lord of Biscay and Molina, &c. do by this present instrument, for myself, for my heirs and successors, renounce, quit, and relinquish for ever and ever all pretensions, rights, and tides, which I have, or any descendant of mine hath at present, or may have at any time to come, to the succession of the crown of France; and I declare, and hold myself for excluded and separated, me, and my sons, heirs, and descendants for ever, for excluded and disabled absolutely, and without limitation, difference, and distinction of persons, degrees, sexes, and times, from the act and right of succeeding to the crown of France. And I will and consent, for myself, and my said descendants, that now, as well as then, it may be taken to be passed over and transferred to him, who by mine and their being excluded, disabled, and incapacitated, shall be found next and immediate in degree to the King, by whose death it shall become vacant; and the succession to the said crown of France is at any time, and in any case, to be settled on, and given to him, to have and to hold the same as true and lawful successor, in the same manner as if I and my descendants had not been born, or been in the world; since for such are we to be held and esteemed, because in my person, and in that of my descendants, there is no consideration to be had, or foundation to be made of active or passive representation, beginning, or continuation of lineage effective, or contentive of substance, blood, or quality, nor can the descent, or computation of degrees of those persons be derived from the Most Christian King, my lord and grandfather, nor from the dauphin my father, nor from the glorious Kings their progenitors; nor by any other means can they come into the succession, nor take possession of the degree of proximity, and exclude from it the person, who, as is abovesaid, shall be found next in degree. I will and consent for myself, and for my descendants, that from this time, as well as then, this right be looked upon and considered as passed over and transferred to the Duke of Berry my brother, and to his sons and descendants, being males, born in constant lawful marriage; and in default of his male issue, to the Duke of Orleans my uncle, and to his sons and descendants, being males, born in constant lawful marriage; and in default of his issue, to the Duke of Bourbon my cousin, and to his sons and descendants, being males, born in constant lawful marriage; and in like manner successively to all the princes of the blood of France, their sons and descendants, being males, for ever and ever, according to the place and order in which they shall be called to the crown by right of their birth; and consequently to that person among the said princes, who (I and all my said descendants being, as is abovesaid, excluded, disabled, and incapacitated) shall be found the nearest in immediate degree after that King, by whose death the vacancy of the crown of France shall happen, and to whom the succession ought to belong at any time, and in any case whatsoever, that he may possess the same as true and lawful successor, in the same manner as if I, and my descendants, had not been born. And for the greater strength of this act of abdication of all the rights and titles which appertained to me, and to all my sons and descendants, of succeeding to the aforesaid crown of France, I depart from, and relinquish especially that which might moreover accrue to the rights of birth from the letters patents, or instrument, whereby the King my grandfather preserved and reserved to me, and enabled me to enjoy the right of succession to the crown of France, which instrument was dispatched at Versailles in the month of December, in the year 1700, and passed, and approved, and registered by the parliament. I will that it cannot serve me for a foundation to the purposes therein provided for, and I reject and renounce it, and hold it for null, void, and of no force, and for cancelled, and as if no such instrument had ever been executed. I promise and oblige myself, on the faith of a King's word, that as much as shall relate to my part, and that of my sons and descendants, which are and shall be, I will take care of the observation and accomplishment of this writing, without permitting or consenting that any thing be done contrary thereunto, directly or indirectly, in the whole, or in part; and I relinquish and depart from all and all manner of remedies, known or unknown, ordinary or extraordinary, and which by common right, or special privilege, might belong to us, to me, and to my sons and descendants, to reclaim, mention, or allege against what is abovesaid; and I renounce them all, and especially that of evident prejudice, enormous, and most enormous, which may be reckoned to have happened in this relinquishment and renunciation of the right of being able at any time to succeed to the crown aforementioned. I will that none of the said remedies, nor others, of whatsoever name, use, importance, and quality they may be, do avail us, or can avail us. And if in fact, or under any colour, we should endeavour to seize the said kingdom by force of arms, by making, or moving war, offensive or defensive, from this time for ever, that is to be held, judged, and declared, for an unlawful, unjust, and wrongfully undertaken war, and for violence, invasion, and usurpation, done against reason and conscience; and on the contrary, that is to be judged and esteemed a just, lawful, and allowed war, which shall be made or moved in behalf of him, who by the exclusion of me, and of my said sons and defendants, ought to succeed to the said crown of France, to whom the subjects and natives thereof are to apply themselves, and to obey him, to take and perform the oath and homage of fealty, and to serve him as their lawful king and lord. And the relinquishment and renunciation, for me, and my said sons and descendants, is to be firm, stable, valid, and irrevocable perpetually, for ever and ever. And I declare and promise, that I have not made, neither will I make, any protestation or reclaiming in public or in secret, to the contrary, which may hinder or diminish the force of what is contained in this writing; and that if I should make it, although it be sworn to, it is not to be valid, neither can it have any force; and for the greater strength and security of what is contained in this renunciation, and of what is said and promised on my part therein, I give again the pledge of my faith, and royal word, and I swear solemnly by the gospels contained in this missal, upon which I lay my right hand, that I will observe, maintain, and accomplish this act and instrument of renunciation, as well for myself as for all my successors, heirs, and descendants, in all the clauses therein contained, according to the most natural, literal, and plain fence and construction; and that I have not sought, neither will I seek, any dispensation from this oath; and if it shall be sought for by any particular person, or shall be granted motu proprio, I will not use it, nor take any advantage of it. Nay in such case as that it should be granted me, I make another the like oath, that there may always be and remain one oath above and beyond all dispensations which may be granted me. And I deliver this writing before the present secretary, notary of this my kingdom, and I have signed it, and commanded it to be sealed with my royal seal; there being provided, and called as witnesses, the Cardinal Don Francisco de Judice, inquisitor general, and archbishop of Montreal, one of my council of state; Don Joseph Fernandez of Velasco and Tobar, constable of Castille, Duke of Frias, gentleman of my chamber, my high steward of my household, great cup-bearer, and great huntsman; Don Juan Claros Alfonso Perez de Gusman el Bueno, Duke of Medina Sidonia, knight of the Order of the Holy Ghost, my great master of the horse, gentleman of my chamber, and one of my council of state; Don Francisco Andres de Benavides, Count of Santistevan, one of my council of state, and high steward to the Queen; Don Carlos Homodei Laco de la Vega, Marquis of Almonacir, and Count of Casa Palma, gentleman of my chamber, one of my council of state, and great master of the horse to the Queen; Don Restayno Cantelmo, Duke of Popoli, knight of the Order of the Holy Ghost, gentleman of my chamber, and captain of my Italian life-guards; Don Fernando of Aragon and Moncada, Duke of Montalto, Marquis of los Velez, commander of Silla and Benaful in the Order of Montesa, gentleman of my chamber, and one of my council of state; Don Antonio Sebastian de Toledo, Marquis of Mansera, gentleman of my chamber, one of my council of state, and president of that of Italy; Don Juan Domingo of Haro and Guzman, great commander in the Order of St. James, one of my council of state; Don Joachim Ponce de Leon, Duke of Arcos, gentleman of my chamber, great commander in the Order of Calatrava, one of my council of state; Don Domingo de Giudice, Duke of Giovenazzo, one of my council of state; Don Manuel Coloma, Marquis of Canales, gentleman of my chamber, one of my council of state, and captain general of the artillery of Spain; Don Joseph de Solis, Duke of Montellano, one of my council of state; Don Rodrigo Manuel Manrique de Lara, Count of Frigiliana, gentleman of my chamber, one of my council of state, and president of that of the Indies; Don Isidro de la Cueva, Marquis of Bedmar, knight of the Order of the Holy Ghost, gentleman of my chamber, one of my council of state, president of that of the Orders, and first minister of war; Don Francisco Ronquillo Briceño, Count of Gramedo, governor of my council of Castille; Don Lorenzo Armangual, Bishop of Gironda, one of my council and chamber of Castille, and governor of that of the revenues; Don Carlos de Borja and Centellas, Patriarch of the Indies, one of my council of the Orders, my chaplain and great almoner, and vicar general of my armies; Don Martin de Guzman, Marquis of Montealegre, gentleman of my chamber, and captain of my guard of halberdiers; Don Pedro de Toledo Sarmiento, Count of Gondomar, one of my council and chamber of Castille; Don Francisco Rodrigues de Mendarosqueta, commissary general of the Cruzada; and Don Melchior de Avellaneda, Marquis of Valdecañas, one of my council of war, and director general of the infantry of Spain.

I the King.

I Don Manuel of Vadillo and Velasco, Knight of the Order of Saint James, and commander of Bosuelo in that of Calatrava, secretary of state to his Majesty, public notary and writer in his kingdoms and dominions, who was present at the delivery, and at all the rest herein above contained, do testify the same: and in witness of the truth I have signed it, and put my name thereto, in Madrid, the fifth of November 1712.

Manuel Vadillo y Velasco.

Now in regard to the federal conventions, whereof mention is made in the said instrument here inserted, and to the end it may appear authentically to all the parties where it appertains, and who may pretend to make use of the contents thereof; and for all the effects which may take place in right, and which may be derived from the delivery hereof, under the clauses, conditions, and suppositions therein contained, I have commanded these presents to be made out, signed with my hand, and sealed with the seal of my royal arms, and countersigned by my underwritten secretary of state, and chief notary of these my kingdoms, at Buen Retiro, the seventh of November, 1712.

(L. S.) I the King.
Manuel de Vadillo y Velasco.

I Don Francisco Antonio le Quincoces, Knight of the Order of Saint James, one of his Majesty's council, and secretary of that of the chamber, and of state of Castille, public notary, and writer in his kingdoms and dominions, Do certify, that in pursuance of the proposition which the King our lord (whom God preserve) made to the kingdom assembled in Cortes, represented by all the knights, deputies from the cities and towns, which have a vote therein, the fifth day of this present month and year, in his royal palace of Buen Retiro, and upon fight of the instrument of renunciation, delivered by his Majesty, the same day, month, and year, before Don Manuel of Vadillo and Velasco, his secretary of state, and public notary and writer in all his kingdoms and dominions, which his Majesty ordered him to present, and which was read, and published in the meeting of the Cortes, which the kingdom held for this alone, the ninth of this month, the following resolution was agreed upon.

That the most humble representation be made by the kingdom, laying ourselves at the royal feet of his Majesty, giving him immortal thanks for the immense benefits, and exceeding great favours, wherewith he has been pleased to honour and exalt the Spanish nation, by taking care of the greatest good and advantage of his most loving vassals, by procuring to this monarchy the ease of this desired peace and tranquillity. And that the kingdom, desiring on their part to contribute to the attaining the royal intention of his Majesty, assents to, and if it were necessary for the greater authority, validity, and strength, approves and confirms the renunciation which his Majesty is pleased to make for himself, and in the name of all his royal descendants, to the succession which possibly may happen of the monarchy of France, with this circumstance, that the like renunciation to this crown is to be executed by the princes of that royal family, and their descendants: and likewise the perpetual exclusion of the House of Austria from the dominions of this monarchy; and in like manner in case of failure (which God forbid) of the royal issue of his Majesty, the calling of the House of the Duke of Savoy, and of all his sons, and male descendants, born in constant lawful matrimony; and in default of all these lines, of the prince Amadeus of Carignan, his sons, and male descendants, born in constant lawful matrimony; and in failure thereof, of the Prince Thomas, brother of the said Prince of Carignan, his sons, and male descendants, born in constant lawful matrimony; who as descendants of the Infanta Donna Catharina, daughter of Philip the Second, and being expressly called, have a clear and known right, supposing the friendship and perpetual alliance with this crown, which ought to be fought and obtained by the Duke of Savoy, and his descendants. And that the kingdom approves, agrees to, and ratifies all these three things, and each of them, with the same qualities, conditions, and suppositions, as are expressed, inferred, and concluded in the said instrument of renunciation executed by his Majesty, which has been mentioned and referred to. And lastly, that for securing and establishing the strength of these treaties, these kingdoms oblige themselves, with all their power and force, to cause to be maintained the royal resolutions of his Majesty, sacrificing in his royal service, even to the last drop of their blood, offering to his Majesty their lives and fortunes, in token of their love. And that for the eternal remembrance and observance of the royal deliberation of his Majesty, and agreement of the kingdom, it be desired in their name (as in effect they have desired and petitioned by their representation and consultation, made the same ninth day of this month) that his Majesty would be pleased to order, that by annulling all that shall be found to the contrary, it be established as a fundamental law, as well the aforesaid renunciations, as the perpetual exclusion of the House of Austria from the dominions of this crown, and the calling of that of Savoy to the succession of these kingdoms, in default (which God forbid) of descendants from his Majesty; which the kingdom, with the approbation of his Majesty, does even now agree to, as the foundation, whereon depends the greatest good and advantage of this monarchy, so much pursued, favoured, and exalted by the royal benevolence of his Majesty.

And the King our lord, having agreed to this unanimous and uniform resolution and representation of all the knights deputies in the Cortes of the kingdom; he has been pleased, by his royal decree of the seventh of this month, to command it to be remitted to his supreme council, jointly with the writing of renunciation, ordaining that the tenor of the law be forthwith formed, extended, and disposed, with all the circumstances of clearness and strength, for its more inviolable and perpetual observation.

As all that is abovesaid does more largely appear from the aforementioned instruments, the resolution, and supplication of the kingdom, which are cited, and to which I refer. And this certificate signed with my hand, sealed with the seal of the royal arms of his Majesty, I give by virtue of his royal order, in the paper of the Marquis of Mejorada and of Brena, one of his council, gentleman of his chamber, his secretary of state, and of the universal dispatch. At Madrid, the ninth of November, 1712.

(L. S.) Don Francisco de Quincoces.

DON PHILIP, by the grace of God, King of Castille, Leon, Aragon, and both Sicilies, Jerusalem, Navarre, Granada, Toledo, Valencia, Galicia, Majorca, Seville, Sardinia, Corduba, Corsica, Murcia, Jaen, the Algarves, Algezira, Gibraltar, the Canaries, the East and Weft Indies, the islands and continent of the ocean, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, and Milan, Count of Hapsburg, Flanders, Tirol, and Barcelona, Lord of Biscay and Molina, &c. The earnest desires, which moved the Most Christian King my grandfather, and myself, to procure an end to the bloody and obstinate war, which has afflicted Europe so many years, and to give a due relief to our vassals, who were overwhelmed with such labours and fatigues, as were not to be supported but by their invincible courage and constant love and fidelity, made us use all possible endeavours to obtain a general peace with the powers confederated against the two crowns, preferring that to our interest: and whereas, having begun to treat of peace with the Queen of England, it was agreed between the three crowns of Spain, France, and England, that I should, in my own and my descendants name, renounce the right which we have or might have to the crown of France, together with the rest —and in the form contained in the act, the tenor whereof is as follows:

"Don Philip, by the grace of God," &c.

[The Renunciation is inserted above.]

And whereas the renunciation and the act above inserted, being by my command communicated to the States of my kingdom, who, for the greater validity of the said renunciation and act, were assembled in this place, were received and approved by them in all its parts, and they; by their representation of the ninth of November last, did desire me, in my royal wisdom, to command that the exclusion of the Houses of France and Austria, and the order of succession in the House of Savoy after all my descendants (which are contained in the abovementioned act of renunciation) should be established as a fundamental law: and whereas, because this method is as useful and necessary to the benefit of the general peace of Europe, the quiet and comfort of my vassals, as to the common good of these kingdoms, my counsellors did therefore advise me to it, I thought it good, and determined to command, as I do command, that every thing contained in the abovementioned act be observed, fulfilled, and executed for ever, as it is contained therein: and in consequence of the said act, I and all my descendants are for ever excluded from the succession to the crown of France, so that we never can succeed to the said crown, under any pretence, at any time, or on any accident or occasion whatsoever; and all the Princes of the Blood of France, and all of their race, either in being or that shall be, are by the said act excluded reciprocally from the monarchy of Spain; and all the princes, as well males as females, of the House of Austria, that are either now in being or that shall be, are in the same manner excluded, so that neither the one nor the other can ever in any case, either yet thought of, or not thought of, succeed to the monarchy of Spain, or to the provinces that now are or hereafter may be united to it: and in case of failure of my royal person, and of my lawful descendants, as well male as female, I do declare, that the Duke of Savoy ought to succeed to this monarchy, and his sons, and male descendants, coming from the male line in constant and lawful wedlock; and in failure of his male line, the Prince Amadeus of Carignan, and his sons, and male descendants from the same line, born in constant and lawful wedlock; and on failure of his male line, Prince Thomas, brother of the Prince of Carignan, his sons, and male descendants from the same line male, born in constant lawful wedlock; all whom, as descending from the Infanta, the Lady Catharine, daughter of Don Philip the Second, and by this express vocation have an evident and acknowledged right to the succession of this monarchy. It is my will that this order of succession be for ever observed, fulfilled, and executed, according to the letter, as is above contained, notwithstanding the law of partition, commonly called Partida, which speaks of the form and manner of succeeding in these kingdoms, and notwithstanding any other laws, ordinances, statutes, or customs whatsoever, which are or may be contrary thereunto, and notwithstanding any testamentary dispositions, made by the Kings our ancestors when they were alive, and notwithstanding any declaration which we made in favour of the Duke of Orleans, and his sons and descendants, as grandson of the Infanta the Lady Anna Mauricia, deceased, Queen of France, from all which we derogate by this law, and rescind and annul them, inasmuch as they are contrary to the tenor of this act, the rest remaining in their force, in like manner as this renunciation, exclusion, and order of succession, for ever, with the other things there expressed, for the fundamental law of the succession of this monarchy, in the same form as is there expressed. And this is my will. Given at Madrid the 18th day of March, 1713.

I the King.

I Don Lorentius de Vivanco Angulo, secretary of our lord the King, have writ this by his command.

Count de Gramedo.
Marquis of Andea.
Don Garcias de Araciel.
Marquis of Aranda.
Don Peter of Reatiqui and Colona.

Publication.

In the city of Madrid, the 18th day of the month of March, 1713, before the gate of his Majesty's palace, at the gate of Guadalaxera, where the merchants and officers resort upon business, and in the presence of the licentiates Don Melchior Prous, Don Diego de Pellizer and Thobar, Knight of the Order of St. James, Don Francisco Zephirino de Villa, and Don John Gaspar Fovilla, of St. Martin, alcaid of the house and court of his Majesty: the law and royal ordinance above inserted, were published by a herald with sound of drums and trumpets, many of the guards of his Majesty's house and court being present, which I Don John of Barco and Oliva, notary of the King our master’s chamber, and one of his counsellors, do certify; and besides those above named, many others were present.

Don John of Barco and Oliva.

This is a copy of his Majesty's royal ordinance, and of its publication, the original whereof is preserved in the archives of the council which I certify for every one who is of the order of counsellors; I Don Michael Rubin of Noriega, notary of the King our master's chamber, the most ancient of those who are of the King's council, I signed this at Madrid, the 18th day of March, 1713.

Don Michael Rubin ds Noriega.

And whereas the Princes also of the House of France have, in like manner, for themselves, their heirs and successors, renounced on their part all kind of right, title, and pretension to the crown of Spain, or to any the dominions thereof, in the form and words following:

Letters Patents by the KING,

Which admit the Renunciation of the King of Spain to the Crown of France, and those of M. the Duke of Berry, and of M. the Duke of Orleans, to the Crown of Spain.

LEWIS, by the grace of God, King of France and Navarre: to all people present and to come, greeting. During the various revolutions of a war, wherein we have fought only to maintain the justice of the rights of the King, our most dear, and most beloved grandson, to the monarchy of Spain, we have never ceased to desire peace. The greatest successes did not at all dazzle us, and the contrary events, which the hand of God made use of to try us, rather than to destroy us, did not give birth to that desire in us, but found it there. But the time marked out by Divine Providence, for the repose of was not yet come; the distant fear of seeing one day our crown, and that of Spain upon the head of one and the same Prince, did always make an equal impression on the Powers which were united against us; and this fear, which had been the principal cause of the war, seemed also to lay an insuperable obstacle in the way to peace. At last, after many fruitless negotiations, God being moved with the sufferings and groans of so many people, was pleased to open a surer way to come at so difficult a peace. But the same alarms still subsisting, the first and principal condition, which was proposed to us by our most dear and most beloved sister the Queen of Great Britain, as the essential and necessary foundation of treating was, that the King of Spain, our said brother and grandson, keeping the monarchy of Spain and of the Indies, should renounce for himself and his descendants for ever, the rights which his birth might at any time give him and them to our crown, that on the other hand, our most dear and most beloved grandson the Duke of Berry, and our most dear and most beloved nephew the Duke of Orleans, should likewise renounce, for themselves, and for their descendants, male and female for ever, their rights to the monarchy of Spain and the Indies. Our said sister caused it to be represented to us that without a formal and positive assurance upon this point, which alone could be the bond of peace, Europe would never be at rest; all the Powers which share the same being equally persuaded, that it was for their general interest, and for their common security, to continue a war, whereof no one could foresee the end, rather than to be exposed to behold the same Prince become one day master of two monarchies, so powerful as those of France and Spain. But as this Princess (whose indefatigable zeal for re-establishing the general tranquillity we cannot sufficiently praise) was sensible of all the reluctancy we had to consent that one of our children, so worthy to inherit the succession of our forefathers, should necessarily be excluded from it, if the misfortunes, wherewith it has pleased God to afflict us in our family, should moreover take from us, in the person of the Dauphin, our most dear and most beloved great grandson, the only remainder of those Princes which our kingdom has so justly lamented with us; she entered into our pain, and after having jointly sought out gentler means of securing the peace, we agreed with our said sister to propose to the King of Spain and other dominions, inferior, indeed, to those which he possesses, yet the value thereof would so much the more increase under his reign, inasmuch as in that case he would preserve his rights, and annex to our crown a part of the said dominions, if he came one time or other to succeed us. We employed therefore the strongest reasons to persuade him to accept this alternative. We gave him to understand, that the duty of his birth was the first which he ought to consult; that he owed himself to his house, and to his country, before he was obliged to Spain; that if he were wanting to his first engagements, he would perhaps one day in vain regret his having abandoned those rights which he would be no more able to maintain. We added to these reasons, the personal motives of friendship and of tender love, which we thought likely to move him; the pleasure we should have in seeing him from time to time near us, and in passing some part of our days with him, which we might promise ourselves from the neighbourhood of the dominions that were offered him, the satisfaction of instructing him ourselves concerning the state of our affairs, and of relying upon him for the future; so that, if God should preserve to us the Dauphin, we could give our kingdom, in the person of the King our brother and grandson, a regent instructed in the art of government; and that if this child, so precious to us and our subjects, were also taken from us, we should at least have the consolation of leaving to our people a virtuous King, fit to govern them, and who would likewise annex to our crown very considerable dominions. Our instances, reiterated with all the force, and with all the tender affection necessary to persuade a son, who so justly deserves those efforts which we made for preserving him to France, produced nothing but reiterated refusals on his part, ever to abandon such brave and faithful subjects, whose zeal for him had been distinguished in those conjunctures when his throne seemed to be the most shaken. So that, persisting with an invincible firmness in his firs resolution, asserting likewise, that it was more glorious and more advantageous for our house, and for our kingdom, than that which we pressed him to take, he declared in the meeting of the States of the kingdom of Spain, assembled at Madrid for that purpose, that for obtaining a general peace, and securing the tranquillity of Europe by a balance of power, he of his own proper motion, of his own free will, and without any constraint, renounced for himself, for his heirs and successors for ever and ever, all pretensions, rights, and titles, which he or any of his descendants have at the present, or may have at any time to come whatsoever, to the succession of our crown; that he held for excluded therefrom, himself, his children, heirs, and descendants for ever; that he consented for himself and for them, that now, as well as then, his right, and that of his descendants, should pass over and be transferred to him among Princes whom the law of succession and the order of birth calls or shall call to inherit our crown, in default of our said brother and grandson the King of Spain, and of his descendants, as it is more amply specified in the act of renunciation approved by the States of his kingdom; and consequently he declared, that he desisted particularly from the right which hath been added to that of his birth by our letters patents of the month of December 1700, whereby we declared, that it was our will, that the King of Spain and his descendants, should always preserve the rights of their birth and original, in the same manner as if they resided actually in our kingdom; and from the registry which was made of our said letters patents, both in our court of parliament, and in our chamber of accounts at Paris. We are sensible, as King, and as Father, how much it were to be desired that the general peace could have been concluded without a renunciation, which makes so great a change in our Royal House, and in the ancient order of succeeding to our crown; but we are yet more sensible how much it is our duty to secure speedily to our subjects a peace, which is so necessary for them. We shall never forget the efforts which they made for us during the long continuance of a war which we could not have supported if their zeal had not been much more extensive than their power. The welfare of a people so faitful, is to us a supreme law, which ought to be preferred to any other consideration. It is to this law that we this day sacrifice the right of a grandson who is so dear to us, and by the price which the general peace will cost our tender love, we shall at least have the comfort of shewing our subjects, that even at the expence of our blood, they will always keep the first place in our heart.

For these causes, and other important considerations us thereunto moving, after having seen in our council the said act of renunciation of the King of Spain, our said brother and grandson, of the fifth of November last, as also the acts of renunciation which our said grandson the Duke of Berry, and our said nephew the Duke of Orleans, made reciprocally of their rights to the crown of Spain, as well for themselves as for their descendants, male and female, in consequence of the renunciation of our said brother and grandson the King of Spain, the whole hereunto annexed, with a copy collated of the said letters patents of the month of December 1700, under the counter-seal of our chancery, of our special grace, full power, and Royal authourity, we have declared, decreed, and ordained, and by these presents, signed with our hand, we do declare, decreee and ordain, we will, and it is our pleasure, that the said act of renunciation of our said brother and grandson the King of Spain, and those of our said grandson the Duke of Berry, and of our said nephew the Duke of Orleans, which we have admitted and do admit, be registered in all our courts of parliament, and chambers of our accounts in our kingdom, and other places where it shall be necessary in order to their being executed according to their form and tenor. And consequently, we will and intend, that our said letters patent of the month of December 1700, be and remain null, and as if they had never been made, that they be brought back to us, and that in the margin of the registers of our said court of parliament, and of our said chamber of accounts, where the enrolment of the said letters patents is, the extract of these presents be placed and inserted, the better to signify our intention as to the revocation and nullity of the said letters. We will, that in conformity to the said act of renunciation of our said brother and grandson the King of Spain, he be from henceforth looked upon and considered as excluded from our succession, that his heirs, successors, and descendants be likewise excluded for ever, and looked upon as incapable of enjoying the same. We understand that in the failure of them, all rights to our said crown, and succession to our dominions, which might at any time whatsoever belong and appertain to them, be and remain transferred to our most dear and most beloved grandson the Duke of Berry, and to his children and descendants, being males born in lawful marriage; and successively, in failure of them, to those of the Princes of our Royal House, and their descendants, who in right of their birth, or by the order established since the foundation of our monarchy, ought to succeed to our crown. And so we command our beloved and trusty counsellors, the members of our court of parliament at Paris, that they do cause these presents, together with the acts of renunciation made by our said brother and grandson the King of Spain, by our said grandson the Duke of Berry, and by our said nephew the Duke of Orleans, to be read, published, and registered, and the contents thereof to be kept, observed, and executed, according to their form and tenor, fully, peacably, and perpetually, ceasing, and causing to cease, all molestations and hinderances, notwithstanding any laws, statutes, usages, customs, decrees, regulations, and other matters contrary thereunto; whereto, and to the derogations of the derogations therein contained, we have derogated, and do derogate by these presents, for this purpose only, and without being brought in to precedent. For such is our pleasure.

And to the end this may be a matter firm and lasting for ever, we have caused our seal to be affixed to these presents. Given at Versailles, in the month of March, in the year of our Lord 1713, and of our reign the 70th. Signed, Lewis; and underneath, By the King Phelypeaux. Visa Phelypeaux. And sealed with the great seal on green wax, with strings of red and green silk.

Read and published, the court being assembled, and registered among the rolls of the court, the King's attorney general being heard, and moving for the same, to the end that they may be executed according to their form and tenor, in pursuance of, and in conformity to the acts of this day. At Paris, in parliament, the 15th of March, 1713.

(Signed) Dongois.
[edit] The Renunciation of the Duke of Berry to the Crown of Spain

CHARLES son of France, Duke of Berry, Alenson, and Angoulesme, Viscount of Vernon, Andely, and Gifors, Lord of the Chatellenies of Coignac and Merpins: to all Kings, Princes, Commonwealths, Communities, and to all other bodies and private persons, present and to come, be it known. All the Powers of Europe finding themselves almost ruined on account of the present wars, which have carried desolation to the frontiers, and into many other parts of the richest monarchies, and other dominions, it has been agreed, in the conferences and treaties of peace, which are negociating with Great Britain, to establish an equilibrium and political boundaries between the kingdoms, whereof the interests have been, and are still, the sad occasion of a bloody dispute; and to hold it for a fundamental maxim, in order to preserve this peace, that provision ought to be made, that the forces of these kingdoms may not become formidable, nor be able to cause any jealousy; which, it has been thought, cannot be settled more solidly, than by hindering them from extending themselves, and by keeping a certain proportion, to the end that the weaker being united together may defend themselves against the more powerful, and support themselves respectively against their equals.

For this purpose the King, our most honoured lord and grandfather, and the King of Spain, our most dear brother, have agreed and concluded with the Queen of Great Britain, that reciprocal renunciations shall be made by all the Princes, both present and to come, of the crown of France, and of that of Spain, of all rights which may appertain to each of them, to the succession of the one or of the other kingdom, by establishing an habitual right to the succession to the crown of Spain, in that line which shall be made capable thereof, and declared immediate after that of King Philip the Fifth our brother, by the Estates of Spain, who were to assemble for this purpose; by making an immoveable balance to maintain the equilibrium, which is intended to be placed in Europe, and by going on to particularise all the cases of union which are foreseen, to serve as an example for all such as may happen. It has likewise been agreed and concluded between the King, our most honoured lord and grandfather, King Philip the Fifth, our brother, and the Queen of Great Britain, that the said King Philip shall renounce for himself, and for all his descendants, the hopes of succeeding to the crown of France; that on our side we shall renounce in like manner, for us, and for our descendants, the crown of Spain; that the Duke of Orleans, our most dear uncle, shall do the same thing: so that all the lines of France and of Spain, respectively and relatively, shall be excluded for ever, and by all kind of ways, from all the right which the lines of France might have to the crown of Spain, and the lines of Spain to the crown of France: and lastly, that care shall be taken, that under pretence of the said renunciations, or under any other pretence whatsoever, the House of Austria may not make use of the pretensions which it might have to the succession of the monarchy of Spain; forasmuch as by uniting this monarchy to the hereditary countries and dominions of that House, it would become formidable, even without the union of the Empire, to the other Powers, which are between both, and which would find themselves as it were surrounded; which would destroy the equality that is establishing at present, to secure and strengthen more perfectly the peace of Christendom, and to take away all manner of jealousy from the Powers of the North and of the West, which is the end that is proposed by this political equilibrium, by removing and excluding all these branches, and calling to the crown of Spain, in default of the lines of King Philip the Fifth, our brother, and of all his children and descendants, the House of the Duke of Savoy, which descends from the Infanta Catharina, daughter of Philip the Second; it having been considered, that in making the said House of Savoy succeed immediately in this manner, this equality and balance between the three Powers may be fixed as it were in its centre, without which it would be impossible to extinguish the flame of war which has been kindled, and is capable of destroying every thing.

Being willing therefore to concur by our relinquishment, and by the abdication of all our rights, for us, our successors, and descendants, to the establishing of the universal repose, and the securing the peace of Europe, because we believe that this method is the surest and most effectual in the terrible circumstances of this conjuncture, we have resolved to renounce the hopes of succeeding to the crown of Spain, and all the rights thereunto, which belong to us, and may belong to us, under any title, and by any means whatsoever. And to the end that this resolution may have its full effect, and also by reason that King Philip the Fifth, our brother, did on his part, the fifth of this present month of November, make his renunciation of the crown of France, we of our mere, free, and frank will, and without being moved thereunto by any respectful awe, or by any other regard, except those above-mentioned, do declare, and hold ourselves from this present, we, our children, and descendants, excluded and disabled absolutely for ever, without limitation or distinction of persons, degrees, or sexes, from every act, and from all right of succeeding to the crown of Spain. We will and consent, for us, our said children, and descendants, that from this time, and for ever, we and they, in consequence of these presents, be held to be excluded and disabled, in like manner as all the other descendants of the House of Austria, who, as it has been said and supposed, ought also to be excluded, in whatever degree we may be, both the one and the other; and if the succession falls to us, our line, that of all our descendants, and all the others of the House of Austria, as it has been said, ought to be separated and excluded therefrom, that for this reason the kingdom of Spain be accounted as devolved and transferred to him, to whom in such case the succession ought to devolve and be transferred at any time whatsoever, so that we do take and hold him for true and lawful successor, because for the same reasons and motives, and in consequence of these presents, neither we, nor our descendants, ought any more to be considered as having any foundation of representation, active or passive, or making any continuation of line effective, or contentive of substance, blood, or quality, or likewise to derive any right from our descent, or to reckon our degrees from .the persons of the Queen Maria Theresa of Austria, our most honoured lady and grandmother, of the Queen Anne of Austria, our most honoured lady and great-grandmother, or of the glorious Kings their ancestors; on the contrary, we ratify the clauses of their wills, and the renunciations made by the said ladies, our grandmother and great-grandmother; we renounce likewise the right which may belong to us, and to our children and descendants, by virtue of the will of King Charles the Second, which, notwithstanding what is above-mentioned, calls us to the succession of the crown of Spain, in case of failure of the line of Philip the Fifth. We therefore relinquish this right, and renounce the same, for us, our children and descendants; we promise and engage, for us, our said children and descendants, to employ ourselves with all our might in causing this present act to be fulfilled, without allowing or suffering that the same be violated, directly or indirectly, in the whole or in part; and we relinquish all means, ordinary or extraordinary, which by common right, or by any special privilege, might belong to us, our children, and descendants; which means we likewise renounce absolutely and particularly, that of evident, enormous, and most enormous prejudice, which may be found in the said renunciation of the succession to the crown of Spain. And we will, that none of the said means may or can have any effect, and that if, under this pretext, or any other colour, we would possess ourselves of the said kingdom by force of arms, the war which we should make, or stir up, be deemed unjust, unlawful, and unduly undertaken. And on the contrary, that the war which he should make upon us, who by virtue of this renunciation should have right to succeed to the crown of Spain, be deemed just and allowable. And that all the subjects and people of Spain do acknowledge him, obey him, defend him, do him homage, and swear fealty to him, as to their King and lawful lord.

And for the greater security of all that we say and promise for ourselves, and in the name of our children and descendants, we swear solemnly on the Gospels contained in this Missal, upon which we lay our right hand, that we will keep, maintain, and fulfil the same in all and every part thereof; that we will never ask to be relieved from the same, and if any one do ask it for us, or if it be granted us motu proprio, we will not make use or take advantage of it. But rather, in case it should be granted us, we over and above make this other oath, and this shall subsist and remain for ever, whatever dispensations may be granted us. We swear and promise likewise, that we have not made, neither will we make, in public or in secret, any protestation or reclamation to the contrary, which may hinder what is contained in these presents, or lessen the force thereof; and if we should make any, whatever oaths they may be accompanied with, they shall not have any force or virtue, or produce any effect.

In witness whereof, and to render these presents authentic, they have been passed before masters Alexander le Fevre, and Anthony le Moyne, councilors to the King, notaries, minute-keepers to his Majesty, and seal-keepers in the Chatelet of Paris, here-under written, who have wholly delivered this present act; and for causing these presents to be published and registered, wherever it shall be necessary, my Lord the Duke of Berry has constituted the bearers of these dispatches, by duplicates thereof, his general and special attornies, to whom my said Lord has, by these said presents, given special power and authority in that behalf. At Marly, the twenty-fourth day of November, 1712, before noon, and has signed the present duplicate and another, and the minute thereof remaining in the hands of the said le Moyne, notary.

(Signed) CHARLES.
Le Fevre, Le Moyne.

WE Jerome d'Argouges, Knight, Lord of Fleury, counsellor to the King in his councils, honorary master of the requests of his household, civil lieutenant of the city, provostship, and vicounty of Paris, do certify to all to whom it may appertain, that masters Alexander le Fevre, and Anthony le Moyne, who have signed the act on the other side, are counsellors to the King, notaries, minute-keepers to his Majesty, and seal-keepers at the Chatelet of Paris, and that faith is to be given, as well in court as out of it, to the acts received by them. In witness whereof we have signed these presents, caused the same to be countersigned by our secretary, and the seal of our arms to be affixed. At Paris, the twenty-fourth of November, 1712.

(Signed) D'Argouges.
By my said Lord, Barbey.

Read and published, the court sitting, and registered in the rolls of the court, the King's attorney general being heard, and moving for the same, in order to its being executed according to its form and tenor, in pursuance of and in conformity to the acts of this day. At Paris, in parliament, the fifteenth of March, 1713.

(Signed) Dongois.
[edit] The Renunciation of the Duke of Orleans to the Crown of Spain

PHILIP, grandson of France, Duke of Orleans, Valois; Chartres, and Nemours: to all Kings, Princes, Commonwealths, Potentates, Communities, and to all persons, as well present as to come, we make known by these presents; that the fear of the union of the crowns of France and Spain, having been the principal motive of the present war, and the other Powers of Europe having always apprehended left these two crowns should come upon one head, it has been laid down as the foundation of the peace, which is treated of at present, and which it is hoped may be cemented more and more, for the repose of such a number of countries which have sacrificed themselves, as so many victims, to oppose the dangers wherewith they thought themselves threatened, that it was necessary to establish a kind of equality and equilibrium between the Princes who were in dispute, and to separate for ever, in an irrevocable manner, the rights which they pretend to have, and which they defended, sword in hand with a reciprocal slaughter on each side.

That with intent to establish this equality, the Queen of Great Britain proposed, and upon her instances it has been agreed by the King, our most honoured lord and uncle, and by the Catholic King, our most dear nephew, that for avoiding at any time whatsoever the union of the crowns of France and Spain, reciprocal renunciations should be made, that is to say, by the Catholic King Philip the Fifth our nephew, for himself, and for all his descendants, of the succession to the crown of France; as also by the Duke of Berry, our most dear nephew, and by us, for ourselves, and for all our descendants, of the crown of Spain; on condition likewise, that neither the House of Austria, nor any of the descendants thereof, shall be able to succeed to the crown of Spain, because this House itself, without the union of the Empire, would become formidable, if it should add a new power to its ancient dominions; and consequently this equilibrium, which is designed to be established for the good of the Princes and States of Europe, would cease. Now it is certain, that without this equilibrium, either the states suffer from the weight of their own greatness, or envy engages their neighbours to make alliances to attack them, and to reduce them to such a point, that these great Powers may inspire less fear, and may not aspire to an universal monarchy.

For attaining the end which is proposed, and by reason that his Catholic Majesty has on his part made his renunciation the fifth of this present month, we consent that, in failure of Philip the Fifth, our nephew, and of his descendants, the crown of Spain do pass over to the House of the Duke of Savoy, whose rights are clear and known, inasmuch as he descends from the Infanta Catharina, daughter of Philip the Second, and as he iscalled by the other Kings his successors; so that his right to the succession of Spain is indisputable.

And we desiring on our side to concur towards the glorious end, which is proposed for re-establishing the public tranquillity, and for preventing the fears which the rights of our birth, or all others which might appertain unto us, might occasion, have resolved to make this relinquishment, this abdication, and this renunciation of all our rights, for ourselves, and in the name of all our successors and descendants; and for the accomplishing of this resolution, which we have taken of our mere, free, and frank will, we declare and hold ourselves from this present, us, our children, and descendants, for excluded and disabled, absolutely, and for ever, and without limitation or distinction of persons, of degrees, and of sexes, from every act, and from all right of succeeding to the crown of Spain. We will and consent, for us and our descendants, that from this time, and for ever, we be held, we and ours, for excluded, disabled, and incapacitated, in whatever degree we may happen to be, and in what manner soever the succession may fall to our line, and to all others, whether of the House of France or of that of Austria, and of all the descendants both of the one and the other House, which, as it is said and supposed, ought likewise to hold themselves for cut off and excluded; and that for this reason, the succession to the said crown of Spain be deemed to be devolved and transferred to him to whom the succession of Spain ought to be transferred, in such case, and at any time whatsoever; so that we do take and hold him for true and lawful successor, because neither we, nor our descendants, ought any more to be considered as having any foundation of representation, active or passive, or making a continuation of a line effective, or contentive of substance, blood, or quality, nor ought we to derive any right from our descent, or reckon the degrees from Queen Anne of Austria, our most honoured lady and grandmother, nor from the glorious Kings her ancestors. On the contrary, we ratify the renunciation which the said lady Queen Anne made, and all the clauses which the Kings Philip the Third and Philip the Fourth inserted in their wills. We renounce in like manner all the right which may appertain to us, and to our children and descendants, by virtue of the declaration made at Madrid, the twenty-ninth of October 1703, by Philip the Fifth King of Spain, our nephew; and any right which might appertain to us, for us, and our defendants, we relinquish the same, and renounce it for us and for them; we promise and engage, for us, our said children and descendants, present and to come, to employ ourselves, with all our might, in causing these presents to be observed and fulfilled, without allowing or suffering that directly or indirectly the same be violated, whether in the whole or in part. And we relinquish all means, ordinary or extraordinary, which by common right, or any special privilege, might appertain to us, our children, and descendants; which means we renounce absolutely, and in particular that of evident, enormous, and most enormous prejudice, which may be found in the renunciation of the succession to the said crown of Spain; and we will that any of the said means neither may nor can serve or avail us. And if under this pretext, or any other colour whatever, we would possess ourselves of the said kingdom of Spain by force of arms, that the war which we should make, or stir up, be held for unjust, unlawful, and unduly undertaken; and that on the contrary, that which he should make upon us, who by virtue of this renunciation should have right to succeed to the crown of Spain, be held for just and allowable; and that all the subjects and people of Spain do acknowledge him, obey him, defend him, do homage to him, and take the oath of fealty to him, as to their King and lawful lord.

And for the greater assurance and security of all that we say and promise, for us, and in the name of our successors and descendants, we swear solemnly on the holy Gospels contained in this Missal, whereon we lay our right hand, that we will keep, maintain, and fulfil the same, wholly and entirely; and that we will at no time ask to have ourselves relieved therefrom; and if any person asks it, or if it is granted us motu proprio, we will not make use or avail ourselves thereof; but rather, in case it should be granted us, we make another oath, that this shall subsist and remain for ever, what dispensation soever may be granted us. We further swear and promise, that we have not made, neither will we make, either in public or in secret, any protestation or reclamation to the contrary, which may hinder that which is contained in these presents, or lessen the force thereof, and if we should make any, what oath soever they may be attended with, they shall not have either force or virtue, or produce any effect.

And for greater security, we have passed and do pass the present act of renunciation, abdication, and relinquishment, before masters Anthony le Moyne and Alexander le Fevre, counsellors to the King, notaries, minute-keepers, and seal-keepers at the Chatelet of Paris, here-under written, in our palace royal at Paris, 1712, the nineteenth of November, before noon; and for causing these presents to be insinuated and registered in every place where it shall appertain, we have constituted the bearer to be our attorney, and we have signed these presents, and the minute thereof remaining in the possession of the said le Fevre, notary.

PHILIP OF ORLEANS.
Le Moyne, Le Fevre.

WE Jerome d'Argouges, Knight, Lord of Fleury, counsellor to the King in his councils, honorary master of the requests of his household, civil lieutenant of the city, provostship, and vicounty of Paris, do certify to all to whom it shall appertain, that master Anthony le Moyne, and Alexander le Fevre, who have signed the act of renunciation on the other side, are counsellors to the King, notaries at the Chatelet of Paris, and that faith ought to be given, as well in judgment as out of the same, to the acts by them received. In witness whereof we have signed these presents, caused the same to be counter-signed by our secretary, and the seal of our arms to be affixed. At Paris, the twenty-first of November, 1712.

(Signed) D’Argouges.
By my said Lord, Barbey.

Read and published, the court being assembled, and registered in the rolls of the court, the King's attorney general being heard and requiring the same, that it may be executed according to its form and tenor, in pursuance of, and in conformity to the acts of this day. At Paris, in parliament, the fifteenth of March, 1713.

(Signed) Dongois.
[edit] The King's Letters Patents of the Month of December, 1700

LEWIS, by the grace of God, King of France and Navarre; to all present and to come, greeting. The prosperities which it has pleased God to heap upon us during the course of our reign, are so many motives to us to apply ourselves, not only for the time present, but also for the future, to the happiness and tranquillity of the people whereof Divine Providence has entrusted to us the government. His impenetrable judgments let us only see, that we ought not to place our confidence neither in our forces, nor in the extent of our dominions, nor in a numerous posterity, and that these advantages, which we receive from his goodness alone, have no other solidity than what it pleases him to give them. But as it is however his will, that the Kings, whom he chuses to lead his people, should foresee afar off the events able to produce disorders, and the most bloody wars; that they should make use of the lights which his divine wisdom pours upon them; we fulfil his designs, when, in the midst of the universal rejoicings of our kingdom, we look upon as a possible thing, a sad futurity, which we pray God to avert for ever. At the same time that we accept the will of the late King of Spain; that our most dear and most beloved son the Dauphin renounces his lawful right to that crown in favour of his second son the Duke of Anjou, our most dear and most beloved grandson, instituted by the late King of Spain, his universal heir; that this Prince, known at present by the name of Philip the Fifth, King of Spain, is ready to enter his kingdom, and to answer the earnest wishes of his new subjects. This great event does not hinder us from carrying our views beyond the time present, and when our succession appears the best established, we judge it to be equally the duty of a King, and of a Father, to declare for the future our will conformably to the sentiments which these two qualities inspire in us. Wherefore, being persuaded that the King of Spain, our grandson, will always preserve for us, for our House, for the kingdom wherein he is born, the same tenderness, and the same sentiments whereof he has given us so many proofs, that his example, uniting his new subjects to ours, is going to form a perpetual amity, and the most perfect correspondence between them; we should think likewise that we do him an injustice, whereof we are incapable, and occasion an irreparable prejudice to our kingdom, if we should hereafter look upon as a stranger, a Prince, whom we grant to the unanimous requests of the Spanish nation.

For these causes, and other great considerations us hereunto moving, of our special grace, full power, and royal authority, we have resolved, declared, and ordained, and by these presents, signed with our hand, we do resolve, declare, and ordain, we will, and it is our pleasure, that our most dear and most beloved grandson the King of Spain do preserve for ever the rights of his birth, in the same manner as if he made his actual residence in our kingdom; wherefore our most dear and most beloved only son the Dauphin, being the true and lawful successor and heir of our crown, and of our dominions, and after him our most dear and most beloved grandson the Duke of Burgundy, if it should happen (which God forbid) that our said grandson the Duke of Burgundy should come to die without male children, or that those which he should have in good and lawful marriage should die before him, or if the said male children should not leave any male children after them, born in lawful marriage, in such case our said grandson the King of Spain, making use of the rights of his birth, is to be the true and lawful successor to our crown, and to our dominions, notwithstanding he should be at that time absent, and residing out of our said kingdom; and immediately after his decease, his heirs male begot in lawful marriage, shall come into the said succession, notwithstanding that they may be born, or that they may dwell out of our kingdom; we will that for the abovesaid causes, neither our said grandson the King of Spain, nor his children, being males, be deemed and reputed less able and capable to enter upon the said succession, or upon others which may fall to them within our said kingdom. On the contrary, we intend that all rights, and generally other things whatever, which may at present or for the future belong and appertain to them, be and remain preserved whole and entire, as if they did reside and dwell constantly within our kingdom to the time of their decease, and as if their heirs had been natives and inhabitants of the kingdom; having for this purpose, as far as there is or shall be need, enabled and dispensed with them, as we do enable and dispense with them by these presents. And so we give it in command to our beloved and trusty counsellors, the members of our court of parliament, and chamber of our accounts at Paris, presidents and treasurers general of France, in the office of our exchequer established in the same place, and to all other our officers and justices to whom it shall appertain, that they cause these presents to be registered, and our said grandson the King of Spain, his children and descendants, being male, born in lawful marriage to enjoy and use the contents thereof, fully and peaceably, any thing to the contrary notwithstanding; to which, by our grace and authority as abovesaid, we have derogated and do degrogate; for this is our pleasure. And that this may be a matter firm and lasting for ever, we have caused our seal to be put to these presents. Given at Versailles, in the month of December, in the year of our Lord 1700, and of our reign the 58th. Signed LEWIS; and on the fold, By the King, Phelipeaux. And sealed with the great seal on green wax, with strings of red and green silk.

Registered, the King's attorney general being heard, and requiring the same, in order to their being executed according to their form and tenor, pursuant to the act of this day. At Paris, in parliament, the first of February, 1701.

(Signed) Dongois.

His said Catholic Majesty hereby renews and confirms the most solemn renunciation above mentioned, made on his part; and as it has obtained the force of a general and fundamental law, he engages again, in the most sacred manner possible, that he will observe, and take care that the same be observed inviolably, and he will likewise use his utmost diligence, and provide with the greatest earnestness, that the aforesaid renunciations may be irrevocably observed, and put in execution, as well on the part of Spain as on the part of France, forasmuch as while they subsist in their full force, and are faithfully kept on both sides, as also the other transactions relating thereto, the crowns of Spain and France will be so separated and divided from each other, that they can never hereafter be united in one.
[edit] ARTICLE III

That there be a perpetual amnesty on both sides, and oblivion of all things which have been in an hostile manner committed in any place, or by any way, on one side and on the other, during the late war. So that neither on account thereof, nor by reason or under pretence of any other matter, shall the one any way do or suffer to be done any enmity to the other, or give any molestation, directly or indirectly, under colour of right, or by way of fact.
[edit] ARTICLE IV

All and singular the prisoners on each side, of what state or condition foever they be, shall, immediately after the ratification of this present treaty, be restored to their former liberty, without any ransom, paying only such debts as they may have contracted during their being prisoners.
[edit] ARTICLE V

Moreover, for giving a greater and more lasting strength to the peace which is restored, and to this friendship, which is never to be violated, and for cutting off all occasions of distrust, which may at any time arise from the established right and order of the hereditary succession to the crown of Great Britain, and the limitation thereof by the laws of Great Britain (made and enacted in the reign of the late King William the Third, of glorious memory, and in the reign of the present Queen) to the issue of the above-named Queen, and in failure thereof to the Most Serene Princess Sophia, Electress Dowager of Brunswick, and her heirs in the Protestant line of Hanover. That therefore the said succession may be well and securely preserved according to the laws of Great Britain, the Catholic King sincerely and solemnly acknowledges the above-mentioned limitation of the succession to the kingdom of Great Britain; and declares and engages, on the faith and word of a King, and on the pledge of his and his successors honour, that the same is, and shall for ever be approved and accepted by him and his heirs and successors; and, under the same tie of the word of a King and his honour, the Catholic King does promise, that no person besides the said Queen, and her successors, according to the order of limitation, established by the laws and statutes of Great Britain, shall ever be acknowledged or reputed by him, or by his heirs and successors, to be King or Queen of Great Britain.
[edit] ARTICLE VI

The Catholic King doth further promise, as well in his own name as in that of his heirs and successors, that they will not at any time disturb or molest the said Queen of Great Britain, her heirs and successors, of the Protestant line, as aforesaid, being in possession of the crown of Great Britain, and the dominions subject thereunto; neither will the aforesaid Catholic King, or any of his successors, give at any time any aid, succour, favour, or counsel, directly or indirectly, by land or by sea, in money, arms, ammunition, warlike instruments, ships, soldiers, seamen, or in any other manner whatever, to any person or persons, whosoever they be, who on any cause or pretence should hereafter endeavour to oppose the said succession, either by open war, or by encouraging sedition and forming conspiracies against such Prince and Princes, who are in possession of the throne of Great Britain, by virtue of the acts of parliament there made, or against that Prince or Princess to whom the succession to the crown of Great Britain shall belong, according to the acts of parliament, as abovesaid.
[edit] ARTICLE VII

That the ordinary distribution of justice be restored and open again through the kingdoms and dominions of each of their Royal Majesties, so that it may be free for all the subjects on both sides, to prosecute and obtain their rights, pretensions, and actions, according to the laws, constitutions, and statutes of each kingdom. And especially if there be any complaints concerning injuries or grievances, which have been done contrary to the tenor of the treaties, either in time of peace, or at the beginning of the war lately ended, care shall be taken that the damages be forthwith made good, according to the rule of justice.
[edit] ARTICLE VIII

That there be a free use of navigation and commerce between the subjects of each kingdom, as it was heretofore, in time of peace, and before the declaration of this late war, in the reign of Charles the Second, of glorious memory, Catholic King of Spain, according to the treaties of friendship, confederation, and commerce, which were formerly made between both nations, according to ancient customs, letters patents, cedulas, and other particular acts; and also according to the treaty or treaties of commerce which are now, or will forthwith be made at Madrid. And whereas, among other conditions of the general peace, it is by common consent established as a chief and fundamental rule, that the exercise of navigation and commerce to the Spanish West Indies should remain in the same state it was in the time of the aforesaid King Charles the Second; that therefore this rule may hereafter be observed with inviolable faith, and in a manner never to be broken, and thereby all causes of distrust and suspicion concerning that matter may be prevented and removed, it is especially agreed and concluded, that no licence; nor any permission at all; shall at any time be given, either to the French, or to any nation whatever, in any name, or under any pretence, directly or indirectly, to sail, to traffic in, or introduce negroes, goods, merchandizes, or any things whatsoever, into the dominions subject to the crown of Spain in America, except what may be agreed by the treaty or treaties of commerce abovesaid, and the rights and privileges granted in a certain convention, commonly called El Assiento de Negros, whereof mention is made in the twelfth article; except also whatsoever the said Catholic King, or his heirs or successors, shall promise by any contract or contracts for the introduction of negroes into the Spanish West Indies, to be made after that the convention or the Assiento de Negros above-mentioned shall be determined. And, that more strong and full precautions may be taken on all sides, as abovesaid, concerning the navigation and commerce to the West Indies, it is hereby further agreed and concluded, that neither the Catholic King, nor any of his heirs and successors whatsoever, shall sell, yield, pawn, transfer, or by any means, or under any name, alienate from them and the crown of Spain, to the French, or to any other nations whatever, any lands, dominions, or territories, or any part thereof, belonging to Spain in America. On the contrary, that the Spanish dominions in the West Indies may be preserved whole and entire, the Queen of Great Britain engages, that she will endeavour, and give assistance to the Spaniards, that the ancient limits of their dominions in the West Indies be restored, and settled as they flood in the time of the above-said Catholic King Charles the Second, if it shall appear that they have in any manner, or under any pretence, been broken into, and lessened in any part, since the death of the aforesaid Catholic King Charles the Second.
[edit] ARTICLE IX

It is further agreed and concluded as a general rule, that all and singular the subjects of each kingdom shall, in all countries and places, on both sides, have and enjoy at least the same privileges, liberties, and immunities, as to all duties, impositions, or customs whatsoever, relating to persons, goods, and merchandizes; ships, freight, seamen, navigation and commerce; and shall have the like favour in all things as the subjects of France, or any other foreign nation, the moss favoured, have, possess, and enjoy, or at any time hereafter may have, possess, or enjoy.
[edit] ARTICLE X

The Catholic King does hereby, for himself, his heirs and successors, yield to the Crown of Great Britain the full and entire propriety of the town and castle of Gibraltar, together with the port, fortifications, and forts thereunto belonging; and he gives up the said propriety to be held and enjoyed absolutely with all manner of right for ever, without any exception or impediment whatsoever. But that abuses and frauds may be avoided by importing any kind of goods, the Catholic King wills, and takes it to be understood, that the above-named propriety be yielded to Great Britain without any territorial jurisdiction and without any open communication by land with the country round about. Yet whereas the communication by sea with the coast of Spain may not at all times be safe or open, and thereby it may happen that the garrison and other inhabitants of Gibraltar may be brought to great straits; and as it is the intention of the Catholic King, only that fraudulent importations of goods should, as is above said, be hindered by an inland communications. it is therefore provided that in such cases it may be lawful to purchase, for ready money, in the neighbouring territories of Spain, provisions and other things necessary for the use of the garrison, the inhabitants, and the ships which lie in the harbour. But if any goods be found imported by Gibraltar, either by way of barter for purchasing provisions, or under any other pretence, the same shall be confiscated, and complaint being made thereof, those persons who have acted contrary to the faith of this treaty, shall be severely punished. And Her Britannic Majesty, at the request of the Catholic King, does consent and agree, that no leave shall be given under any pretence whatsoever, either to Jews or Moors, to reside or have their dwellings in the said town of Gibraltar; and that no refuge or shelter shall be allowed to any Moorish ships of war in the harbour of the said town, whereby the communication between Spain and Ceuta may be obstructed, or the coasts of Spain be infested by the excursions of the Moors. But whereas treaties of friendship and a liberty and intercourse of commerce are between the British and certain territories situated on the coast of Africa, it is always to be understood, that the British subjects cannot refuse the Moors and their ships entry into the port of Gibraltar purely upon the account of merchandising. Her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain does further promise, that the free exercise of their religion shall be indulged to the Roman Catholic inhabitants of the aforesaid town. And in case it shall hereafter seem meet to the Crown of Great Britain to grant , sell or by any means to alienate therefrom the propriety of the said town of Gibraltar, it is hereby agreed and concluded that the preference of having the sale shall always be given to the Crown of Spain before any others.
[edit] ARTICLE XI

Moreover the Catholic King doth in like manner for himself, his heirs and successors, yield to the crown of Great Britain the whole island of Minorca, and doth transfer thereunto for ever, all right, and the most absolute dominion over the said island, and in particular over the town, castle, harbour, and fortifications of the bay of Minorca, commonly called Port Mahon, together with the other ports, places, and towns situated in the aforesaid island. But it is provided, as in the above-written article, that no refuge or shelter shall be open to any ships of war of the Moors in Port Mahon, or in any other port of the said island of Minorca, whereby the Spanish coasts may be infested by their excursions: and the Moors and their ships shall only be allowed to enter the island aforesaid on account of traffic, according to the agreement of treaties. The Queen of Great Britain promises also on her part, that if at any time it shall happen that the island of Minorca, and the ports, towns, and places therein situated, be by any means hereafter alienated from the crown of her kingdoms, the preference shall be given to the crown of Spain, before any other nation whatever, of redeeming the possession and propriety of the aforesaid island. Her Royal Majesty of Great Britain moreover engages, that she will take care, that all the inhabitants of the said island, both ecclesiastical and secular, shall safely and peaceably enjoy all their estates and honors, and the free use of the Roman Catholic religion shall be permitted: and measures shall be taken for preserving the aforesaid religion in that island, provided the same be consistent with the civil government and laws of Great Britain. Those likewise who are now in the service of his Catholic Majesty, shall enjoy their honors and estates, though they continue in the said service , and it shall be lawful for any person, who is desirous to leave the said island, to sell his estate, and pass freely with the value thereof into Spain.
[edit] ARTICLE XII

The Catholic King doth furthermore hereby give and grant to her Britannic Majesty, and to the company of her subjects appointed for that purpose, as well the subjects of Spain, as all others, being excluded, the contract for introducing negroes into several parts of the dominions of his Catholic Majesty in America, commonly called El Pacto de el Assiento de Negros, for the space of thirty years successively, beginning from the first day of the month of May, in the year 1713, with the same conditions on which the French enjoyed it, or at any time might or ought to enjoy the same, together with a tract or tracts of land to be allotted by the said Catholic King, and to be granted to the company aforesaid, commonly called La Compañia de el Assiento, in some convenient place on the river of Plata (no duties or revenues being payable by the said company on that account during the time of the above-mentioned contract, and no longer); and this settlement of the said society, or those tracts of land, shall be proper and sufficient for planting, and sowing, and for feeding cattle for the subsistence of those who are in the service of the said company, and of their negroes; and that the said negroes may be there kept in safety till they are sold; and moreover, that the ships belonging to the said company may come close to land, and be secure from any danger. But it shall always be lawful for the Catholic King to appoint an officer in the said place or settlement, who may take care that nothing be done or practised contrary to his royal interests. And all who manage the affairs of the said company there, or belong to it, shall be subject to the inspection of the aforesaid officer, as to all matters relating to the tracts of land above-mentioned. But if any doubts, difficulties, or controversies, should arise between the said officer and the managers for the said company, they shall be referred to the determination of the governor of Buenos Ayres. The Catholic King has been likewise pleased to grant to the said company several other extraordinary advantages, which are more fully and amply explained in the contract of the Assiento, which was made and concluded at Madrid the 26th day of the month of March of this present year 1713. Which contract or Assiento de Negros, and all the clauses, conditions, privileges, and immunities contained therein, and which are not contrary to this article, are and shall be deemed and taken to be part of this treaty, in the same manner as if they had been here inserted word for word.
[edit] ARTICLE XIII

Whereas the Queen of Great Britain has continually pressed and insisted with the great earnestness, that all the inhabitants of the principality of Catalonia, of whatever state or condition they may be, should not only obtain a full and perpetual oblivion of all that was done in the late war, and enjoy the entire possession of all their estates and honours, but should also have their ancient privileges preserved safe and untouched; the Catholic King, in compliance with the said Queen of Great Britain, hereby grants and confirms to all the inhabitants of Catalonia whatsoever, not only the amnesty desired, together with the full possession of all their estates and honors, but also gives and grants to them all the privileges which the inhabitants of both Castilles, who of all the Spaniards are the most dear to the Catholic King, have and enjoy, or may hereafter have and enjoy.
[edit] ARTICLE XIV

And whereas the Catholic King, at the request of her Royal Britannic Majesty, has been pleased to yield the kingdom of Sicily to his Royal Highness Victor Amadeus Duke of Savoy, and by the treaty this day entered into between his Royal Catholic Majesty, and his Royal Highness of Savoy, does make a cession of the said kingdom, her Royal Majesty of Great Britain aforesaid promises and engages that she will take great care that in default of the heirs male of the House of Savoy, the possession of the aforesaid kingdom of Sicily shall revert again to the crown of Spain; and her abovesaid Royal Britannic Majesty doth further consent, that the kingdom of Sicily may not, under any pretence, or in any manner whatever, be alienated or given to any prince or state, unless to the Catholic King of Spain, and to his heirs and successors. And whereas the Catholic King hath made known to her Royal Britannic Majesty, that it would be both reasonable in itself, and acceptable to him, that not only the subjects of the kingdom of Sicily, although they may reside in the dominions of Spain, and be in the service of his said Catholic Majesty, but also the Spaniards and other subjects of Spain, who may perhaps have estates and honors in the aforesaid kingdom of Sicily, should, without any diminution, entirely enjoy their said estates and honors, and should in no wife, under pretence of personal absence out of the said kingdom, be troubled or disquieted: And whereas the abovesaid Catholic King freely promises likewise on his part, that he will consent, that the subjects of the said kingdom of Sicily, and other subjects of his said Royal Highness, if they should chance to have estates and honors in Spain, or other the dominions belonging to Spain, shall in like manner, without any diminution, entirely enjoy the same, and that they shall in no wife he troubled or disturbed under pretence of personal absence; therefore her Royal Britannic Majesty promises, that she will endeavour, and will give instructions to her ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries at Utrecht, that they interpose the most effectual good offices, that the Catholic King and his Royal Highness may mutually agree concerning this matter, and may take care and provide for the same, in such manner as shall be most commodious on both sides.
[edit] ARTICLE XV

Their Royal Majesties on both parts renew and confirm all treaties of peace, friendship, confederation, and commerce, made heretofore, and concluded between the crowns of Great Britain and Spain, and the said treaties are hereby renewed and confirmed, in as full and ample manner as if they were now particularly here inserted; that is to say, as far as they are not found to be contrary to the treaties of peace and commerce which were the last made and signed. And especially by this treaty those agreements, treaties, and conventions, are confirmed and strengthened, which relate as well to the exercise of commerce and navigation in Europe, and elsewhere, as to the introduction of negroes into the Spanish West Indies, and which either are already made, or will forthwith be made between both nations at Madrid. And whereas it is insisted on the part of Spain, that certain rights of fishing at the island of Newfoundland belong to the Guipuscoans, or other subjects of the Catholic King, her Britannic Majesty consents and agrees, that all such privileges as the Guipuscoans and other people of Spain are able to make claim to by right, shall be allowed and preserved to them.
[edit] ARTICLE XVI

Whereas in the convention for making a suspension of arms from the 11/22 day of the month of August last past, for four months, between the Queen of Great Britain and the most Christian King; which the Catholic King also approved by his consent, and does hereby further approve; and which by another convention was prolonged to the 11/22of the month of April of this present year, among other conditions it is expressly stipulated, in what cases the ships, merchandizes, and other moveables taken on one side and the other, should either become prize to the captor, or be restored to the former owner; it is therefore agreed, that in those cases the conditions of the aforesaid suspension of arms shall remain in full force, and all things relating to such captures, made either in the British and Northern seas, or elsewhere, shall be well and truly executed according to the tenor thereof.
[edit] ARTICLE XVII

But if it happen through inadvertency, or imprudence, or any other cause, that any subject of either of their aforesaid Royal Majesties do or commit any thing, by land, sea, or on fresh waters, in any part of the world, whereby this present treaty be not observed, or whereby any particular article of the same hath not its effect, this peace and good correspondence between the Queen of Great Britain and the Catholic King shall not therefore be interrupted or broken, but shall remain in its former strength, force, and vigour. And that subject only shall be answerable for his own fact, and shall suffer such punishment as is inflicted by law, and according to the prescriptions of the law of nations.
[edit] ARTICLE XVIII

But if (which God forbid) the disputes which are composed should at any time be renewed between their said Royal Majesties, and break out into open war, the ships, merchandizes, and goods, both moveable and immoveable, of the subjects on both sides, which shall be found to be and remain in the ports and dominions of the adverse party, shall not be confiscated, or suffer any damage, but the space of six months, on the one part and on the other, shall be granted to the said subjects of each of their said Royal Majesties, in order to their selling the aforesaid things, or any other their effects, or carrying away and transporting the same from thence, whitherfoever they please, without any molestation.
[edit] ARTICLE XIX

The Kings, Princes, and States, mentioned in the following articles, and all others who shall be nominated on either side, by common consent, before the ratifications are exchanged, or within six months after, shall, for a mark of mutual friendship, be included and comprehended in this treaty, their Royal Majesties aforenamed being persuaded that they will approve all the settlements made and established by it.
[edit] ARTICLE XX

Whatsoever shall be contained in the treaty of peace next entered into between his Sacred Royal Majesty of Spain, and his sacred Royal Majesty of Portugal, with the previous approbation of her Royal Majesty of Great Britain, shall be deemed an essential part of this treaty, in the same manner as if it was transcribed here word for word. Moreover her Sacred Royal Majesty of Great Britain offers herself to be a surety or guarantee of the aforesaid agreement of peace, which she promises to fulfil according to the substance and words thereof, to the end that it may be observed the more sacred and inviolable.
[edit] ARTICLE XXI

The treaty of peace this day entered into between his Royal Catholic Majesty and his Royal Highness the Duke of Savoy, is specially included in and confirmed by this treaty, as an essential part thereof, as fully as if it was inserted therein word for word, her Royal Majesty of Great Britain expressly declaring that she will be obliged by the terms of the promise and guaranty therein made.
[edit] ARTICLE XXII

The moss Serene King of Sweden, together with his realms, dominions, provinces, and rights, and the most Serene Princes the Great Duke of Tuscany, and the Duke of Parma, together with their people and subjects, and the liberties and advantages of their subjects in matters of trade, shall be included in this treaty in the most effectual manner.
[edit] ARTICLE XXIII

The most Serene Republic of Venice, for the sake of the neutrality which during the war they exactly observed between the parties in hostility, and for the sake of many acts of humanity performed by it (the dignity, power, and security of the estates and dominions thereof remaining ever inviolable) shall be particularly comprehended and included in this treaty, in the best manner possible, as a common friend, and one to whom their Royal Majesties, at all times, desire to repay the offices of a faithful friendship, according to the exigencies of the said republic.
[edit] ARTICLE XXIV

It has been thought good to comprehend in the present treaty, the most Serene Republic of Genoa, which, by a constant neutrality during the war, hath cultivated the ancient friendship with the crowns of Great Britain and Spain, that the benefit of this peace may be extended to every thing that concerns that republic, and the subjects thereof may in all things, and every where, fully enjoy the same liberty of commerce hereafter, as they enjoyed formerly, and during the life of Charles the Second Catholic King of Spain.
[edit] ARTICLE XXV

The city of Geneva is likewise included in this agreement, to the end that it may for the future enjoy all the advantages in trade which it has heretofore enjoyed in either kingdom, either by treaties or ancient custom.
[edit] ARTICLE XXVI

Solemn ratifications of this treaty, and drawn up in the proper form, shall be duly and reciprocally exchanged on both sides within six weeks, to be computed from the time of signing, or sooner if possible.

In witness whereof the ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries above-named, having on each side exhibited, and duly exchanged their letters of fullpowers, signed and sealed this present treaty at Utrecht, the Second/Thirteenth day of the month of July, in the year of our Lord 1713.

(L. S.) Joh. Bristol, C. P. S.
(L. S.) Duc de Ossuna.
(L. S.) Strafford.
(L. S.) El Marque le Monteleone.

We having seen and considered the treaty of peace and friendship above written, have approved, ratified, and confirmed the same, in all and every one of its articles, as we do by these presents approve, ratify, and confirm it, for ourselves, our heirs, and successors, promising and engaging our Royal word, that we will faithfully and inviolably perform and observe the aforesaid treaty, and all and every one of the things contained therein, and that we will never suffer the same to be violated or transgressed by any one, as far as lies in our power. For the greater testimony and validity whereof, we have caused our great seal of Great Britain to be affixed to these presents, which we have signed with our Royal hand. Given at our court at Kensington the 31th day of July, 1713, in the twelfth year of our reign.

ANNE R.

ANNE, by the grace of God, Queen of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c. To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting. Whereas a certain separate article, intituled, The First Separate Article, belonging to the treaty of peace and friendship between us and our good brother Philip the Fifth Catholic King of Spain, concluded at Utrecht, the 2/13 day of the last month, was signed on the same day, and in the same place, by our ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries, furnished with sufficient authority for that purpose, in the manner and form following:
[edit] The Firft Separate Article

Besides those things which have been stipulated between the Lord Baron of Lexington, on the part of her Royal Majesty of Great Britain, and the Lord Marquis of Bedmar, on the part of his Royal Catholic Majesty, by the treaty of the 27th of March last at Madrid, it is further agreed by this separate article, which shall be of the same force as if it was inserted word for word in the treaty this day concluded between their Royal Majesties, that since his Royal Catholic Majesty is steadfastly resolved, and does solemnly promise by these presents, that he will not consent to any further alienation of countries, provinces, or lands of any fort, or where-ever situate, belonging to the crown of Spain; her Royal Majesty of Great Britain does likewise reciprocally promise, that she will persist in those measures and councils, by which she has provided and taken care, that none of the parties in war shall require or obtain of his Catholic Majesty, that any farther part of the Spanish monarchy be torn from it; but that any new demand of that kind being made, and the same refused by his Catholic Majesty, her Royal Majesty of Great Britain will use her endeavours that such demands shall be receded from.

And when it shall seem to her Royal Majesty of Great Britain, to be for the common benefit that a new treaty be entered into, between her Britannic Majesty, the Catholic King, and King of Portugal, that the security of the crown of Portugal may be provided for, his Catholic Majesty does by these presents give his consent to so wholesome a work, and does hereby testify it.

This article shall be ratified, and the ratifications thereof shall be exchanged at Utrecht, within six weeks, or sooner if it can be.

In testimony whereof, we the ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries of their Royal Britannic and Catholic Majesties, by virtue of the full powers exchanged this day, have signed and sealed the present article, at Utrecht, the 2/13 of July, in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and thirteen.

(L. S.) Joh. Bristol, C. P. S.
(L. S.) Duc de Ossuna.
(L. S.) Strafford.
(L. S.) El Marque le Monteleone.

We having seen and considered the said first separate article, have approved and ratified, and by these presents do approve and ratify the same, promising on our Royal word, that we will sincerely and truly do and perform all things which are contained in the said article. In testimony whereof we have caused our great seal of Great Britain to be affixed to this instrument, which is signed with our royal sign manual. Given at our Court at Kensington the thirty-first day of July, 1713, and of our reign the twelfth.

ANNE, by the grace of God, Queen of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c. To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting. Whereas a certain separate article, intituled, The Second Separate Article, belonging to the treaty of peace and friendship between us and our good brother Philip the Fifth Catholic King of Spain, concluded at Utrecht, the 2/13 day of the last month, was signed on the same day, and in the same place, by our ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries, furnished with sufficient authority for that purpose, in the manner and form following:
[edit] The Second Separate Article

That it may appear what consideration her Sacred Majesty the Queen of Great Britain has for the Princess of Ursini, her said Majesty the Queen of Great Britain, in the XXIst article of the conventions of peace, made between the Baron of Lexington, on the part of her said Britannic Majesty, and the Marquis de Bedmar, on the part of his Catholic Majesty, at Madrid, the 27th day of March last, did oblige herself, as by the present article she does oblige herself, and promises an agrees for herself and her successors, that she will really procure and effect, that forthwith, and without any delay, the said Lady Princess of Ursini be put into real and actual possession of the Dutchy of Limburg, or of other countries in the Netherlands, which shall be substituted in lieu thereof, to the full satisfaction of the Lady Princess of Ursini, with all manner of absolute and independent superiority, clear from any fee, or other tie whatsoever, which shall produce an annual revenue of 30,000 scudo's, according to the form and tenor of the diploma granted by his said Catholic Majesty to the said Princess, the 28th day of September, 1711, to the effect following:

PHILIP, by the grace of God, King of Castille, Leon, Arragon, the Two Sicilies, Jerusalem, Navarre, Granada, Toledo, Valentia, Galicia, Majorca, Seville, Sardinia, Corduba, Corsica, Murcia, Jaen, the Algarves, Algezira, Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, the East and West Indies, the islands and terra firma of the ocean, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, and Milan, Count of Habspurg, Flanders, Tirol, and Barcelona, Lord of Biscay and Molina, &c. To all who shall see these presents, or hear them read, greeting. Our dearest and most well-beloved cousin the Princess of Ursini has, since the beginning of our reign, rendered us, and continues to render us, so many signal and acceptable services, that we thought we could not defer any longer giving her lively testimonies of our acknowledgments, and of the esteem we have for her person. This Princess having quited the rank and the prerogatives she had at the court of Rome, to accept the employment of first lady of the bed-chamber to the Queen our dearest confort, she went to meet her at Nice in Provence, and conducted her into our dominions of Spain, and discharged her duty with so much care, exactness, and wisdom, that she has gained all possible confidence and consideration.

When we trusted the regency of our kingdoms of Spain to the Queen our dearest confort, that we might go and command our armies in the kingdoms and states of Italy, the Princess of Ursini redoubled her zeal and assiduity about her person, she has always assisted her with her care and her counsel, with equal prudence and affection, and in all times, and on all occasions, we have experienced the happy effects of so judicious, so faithful, and so valuble conduct.

Since it has pleased God to bless our Royal House, and to secure the succession of it by a happy issue, she has likewise taken upon her to bestow her most tender and effectual care on the education of our dearest and most beloved son the Prince of the Asturias, in whom we already observe the benefit and progress of it. All these services, so distinguishing, and so important to the welfare of our dominions, and to the felicity of our reign, the application with which this Princess gives us still fresh proofs of an intire affection to the person of us, the Queen our dearest confort, and the Princes our children, and the good success that has attended the wholesome counsels she has given us, have engaged us to find out means to grant her a reward suitable to so many services, and that might serve for the future as a certain proof of the greatness of our gratitude, as well as of the merit and virtues of this Princess. This has given us occasion to think of securing to her not only a considerable revenue, but also a country she might enjoy with the title of sovereign, which we have embraced with the greater readiness, that this Princess being born of the House of la Trimouille, one of the most ancient and most illustrious of France, is not only allied to the Princes of the blood of the House of France, but likewise to several other sovereign Houses of Europe, and that knowing the endowments of her mind, and the wisdom of her conduct in all things, we are persuaded she will govern with justice the country and people that shall be under her subjection; and that this great favour will ever be looked upon as the just effect of the justice and magnificence of the sovereigns towards those who have been so happy as to render them important services. Know ye therefore, that, out of our full power, mere motion, and royal and absolute authority, we have given, yielded, and transferred, as we do give, yield, and transfer by these presents, to our dearest and most well-beloved cousin, Mary Anne de la Trimouille, Princess of Ursini, for herself, her heirs, successors, and assigns, the dutchy, town, and castle of Limbourg, being part of the Spanish Netherlands, with the towns, boroughs, villages, castles, houses, lands, and other appurtenances of the said dutchy, to enjoy the same to herself the said Princess of Ursini, her heirs, successors; or assigns, in full property and perfect sovereignty, without reserving or detaining any part thereof to ourselves and to our successors the Kings of Spain, under any title whatsoever, either of resort or feodality, as also without return or reversion in any case, or at any time, whereof we have exempted the said dutchy of Limbourg, and its dependencies comprehended in the present donation: to which end, so far as is or should be necessary, we have extinguished and suppressed, as we do extinguish and suppress the said rights; willing that the said Princess of Ursini do exercise in her name, all the rights of sovereignty within the said dutchy of Limbourg, the territories and jurisdictions thereto annexed, with the same authority as we exercised and had right to exercise the same before these presents, and that she enjoy there all the revenues, fruits, profits, and emoluments whatsoever, as well ordinary as extraordinary and casual, of what nature foever, either for the collation and patronage of the livings, the provision and destitution of offices, the customs, entries, subsidies, impositions, and other rights, expressed, and not expressed, the defence of the country, and the tranquillity of the people, the railing the revenues of the said dutchy and its dependencies; all which rights and revenues the said Princess of Ursini shall commence to enjoy from the day of these presents; from the reckoning of which, the agents, receivers, clerks, or others appointed to receive the said revenues, shall be accountable, and remit the produce into the hands of the bearers of the powers of the said Princess, and in so doing they shall be duly acquitted and discharged thereof towards us, as by these presents we discharge them thereof; and consequently the said Princess of Ursini shall remain unalterable proprietor of the said dutchy of Limbourg, and its dependencies, as well for the sovereignty, as for all the revenues, as the whole belonging to her, in full, free, and intire property, with power to dispose thereof, by donation between persons alive, or legacy to such person, and with such clauses and conditions, as she shall think fit, and even to treat thereof by exchange or otherwise, and the same rights and powers shall belong successively, after her, to her nearest heir, in case she has not otherwise disposed thereof. To which end we have discharged, absolved, and freed, as by these presents we discharge, absolve, and free the inhabitants of the said dutchy of Limbourg, and its dependencies, of what state, quality, or dignity they are, as well ecclesiastical as secular, political, military, and of what other ranks and conditions they are or may be, and each of them in general and in particular, of the oaths of fidelity, faith, and obedience, promises, obligations, and duties they owed us, as their Lord and sovereign Prince: ordering and enjoining them most expressly that, by virtue of these presents, they do own and acknowledge the said Princess of Ursini, and after her, her heirs, successors, or such as have a right thereto, successively, for their Princes and Sovereign Lords; that they take and swear to her the oaths of fidelity and obedience in the usual manner, and moreover that they pay all homage, reverence, affection, obedience, fidelity, and services, as good and loyal subjects are obliged to do to their Sovereign Lord, and as they have done hitherto to the Kings our predecessors, and to us. And farther, our intention being that the said dutchy of Limbourg and its dependencies should produce at least the effectual and real revenue yearly to the profit of the said Princess of Ursini, her heirs, successors, and assigns, thirty thousand crowns, each crown of eight silver reals, old double money of Castille, deduction being made of local employments, maintenance of places, and officers, that used to be paid and maintained out of the revenues of the said dutchy.

Our will and pleasure is, that during the first year of enjoyment by the said Princess of Ursini, after her having taken possession of the said dutchy of Limbourg, and after the publication of the peace, a state be made of the revenues and employments of the dutchy of Limbourg and its dependencies, in the presence of persons appointed for that purpose, as well on our part, as on that of the said Princess of Ursini, and in case, after deduction is made for the said employments, the revenues for the neat remainder to the profit of the said Princess of Ursini do not amount to the said thirty thousand crowns per annum, whether by reason of the alienations that might have been made of some part of that dutchy, or whether because any of the said rights, revenues, and appurtenances should have been fold, engaged, or charged with some rents, even some debts for sums taken by loan, or anticipation, in this case we ordain, and our will and pleasure is, that the whole be redeemed and disengaged, and the purchasers, mortgagers, tenants, and other creditors, reimbursed, paid, and satisfied out of the produce of the most liquid revenues of the other provinces of the Spanish Netherlands, so as that the said Princess enjoy, fully, really, and without any charge, the said thirty thousand crowns yearly; to which end, and until the full reimbursement for the redeeming the said alienations or engagements, constitutions of rents, anticipations, or other loans whatever they may be, the purchasers of the funds alienated, or mortgagers, tenants, and all other creditors, shall be and remain assigned, as from this time we assign them to receive their arrears or interests of their capitals out of the said revenues of the other provinces of the Spanish Netherlands; and consequently we have from this time yielded and transferred, as we do yield and transfer all and such of our revenues as shall be requisite to the mortgagers and creditors, and until the concurrence of what is due to them for principal interests, to take, have, and receive out of the most liquid and effective part of the said revenues of the said Spanish Netherlands, except those of the said dutchy of Limbourg, to enjoy the same themselves, until they shall be fully reimbursed. And if it should happen, that notwithstanding the said redemption and reimbursement being made or assigned, the revenue of the said dutchy of Limbourg should not amount to the said sum of thirty thousand crowns yearly, all charges deducted, we will, that there be dismembered, as from this time we dismember, from the other countries belonging to us, adjacent or lying convenient to the said dutchy of Limbourg, such other towns, boroughs, villages, and territories, as shall be requisite to make up, by their yearly produce and revenue, what shall be wanting of the said thirty thousand crowns yearly in the dutchy of Limbourg, which towns, boroughs, villages, and territories, together with the revenue and appurtenances, shall remain dismembered from our other lordships, and shall be united and joined for the future, and for ever, to the said dutchy of Limbourg, to be possessed by the said Princess of Ursini, with the same title of sovereignty, jurisdiction, and prerogative before mentioned, and as making part of the said dutchy of Limbourg.

And whereas, by the several proposals that are from time to time made to us, to attain the peace so much desired by us, and other princes and states of Europe engaged in the present war, some of them tend to certain dismembering of the said Spanish Netherlands from the other dominions that make up our monarchy; we declare, that our intention is, that these presents shall not be prejudiced by the treaties of peace that shall be made, and that all the princes and potentates interested in the said proposals do ratify the dismembering we make by these presents of the said dutchy of Limbourg, and the erecting of that in sovereignty, in favour of the Princess of Ursini, so as that she be put and remain in full possession and peaceable enjoyment thereof, within the full extent of these presents, according to their form and tenor, and without any reserve or restriction whatsoever; it being our will, that the present donation be one of the conditions of the treaties that may be made in what shall concern the said Spanish Netherlands, to the end the said Princess of Ursini, her heirs, successors, and assigns, may enjoy the said dutchy of Limbourg and its appurtenances, fully, peaceably, perpetually, and for ever, with the title of sovereignty, without any trouble and hinderance; on the contrary, to effect the same, and to constrain thereto all those whom it shall concern, or that are therefore to be constrained, we have, out of our full power and royal authority, supplied, as we do hereby supply all defects or omissions of right or fact, that might be found or happen in this donation, cession, and conveyance, either by the fault of expression, of the value of the revenues, and of the employments of the said dutchy of Limbourg, that are not therein specified or declared, and that might be requisite by former ordinances, to which, and the derogatories of the derogatories therein contained, we have expressly derogated, as we derogate by these presents; for such is our will and good pleasure: willing that these present letters patents be delivered to the said Princess of Ursini, that she may cause the same to be registered and published where it shall be necessary, and even to cause them to be inserted, with the donation and cession therein contained, in the treaty of peace to be negotiated, therein to be included and acknowledged in the quality of sovereign Princess of the dutchy of Limbourg, and in that quality to exercise the rights thereof, and there to make treaties and alliances with the princes and sovereigns that shall intervene, enjoining the ministers and ambassadors who shall be there on our part, to acknowledge her as such, and all our officers of the said dutchy of Limbourg to obey these presents from the moment they shall be notified to them; and to the end this present donation be firm and lasting for ever, we have signed these present letters with our own hand, and caused our great seal to be affixed to them, willing and ordaining that they be registered in all and every one of our councils and chambers of accompts where it shall belong. Given at our city of Corella, in our kingdom of Navarre, the 28th day of September, in the year of our Lord 1711, and of our reign the eleventh.

And her said Majesty of Great Britain promises, that she will maintain the said Lady Princess of Ursini, or her assigns, in the real, actual, and peaceable possession of the said sovereignty and territory, against all and every one, at any time, and for ever, and that she will not permit that the said Lady Princess be disturbed or molested in the said possession by any body, by right or fact. And whereas the real possession of the sovereignty of the said dutchy of Limbourg, or of the territories as aforesaid to be subrogated, ought, by virtue of the before-mentioned convention, concluded the 27th of March last past, to have been already given to she said Lady Princess, although it is not yet given; therefore her said Royal Majesty of Great Britain, as a farther surety, promises, and engages her Royal word, that she will not yield or remit, nor suffer to be yielded or remitted to any body, the said Spanish Netherlands, but will keep, or cause the same to be kept, not only until the said Lady Princess of Ursini be put in actual and peaceable possession of the said sovereignty, but also, that the said Lady Princess of Ursini be, as aforesaid, acknowledged Sovereign Lady of the said sovereignty, and put in possession thereof by the Prince to whom the said Spanish Netherlands are to be yielded and remitted. This present article shall be ratified, and the exchange of the ratifications shall be made at Utrecht within six weeks, or sooner, if possible.

In witness whereof, we the ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries of her Sacred Royal Majesty of Great Britain, have subscribed this present article, and sealed the same with our seals, at Utrecht the 2/13 of July, in the year of our Lord 1713.

(L. S.) Joh. Bristol, C. P. S.
(L. S.) Duc de Ossuna.
(L. S.) Strafford.
(L. S.) El Marque le Monteleone.

We having seen and considered the said second separate article, have approved and ratified, and by these presents do approve and ratify the same, promising on our Royal word, that we will sincerely and truly do and perform all things which are contained in the said second article. In testimony whereof we have caused our great seal of Great Britain to be affixed to this instrument, which is signed with our Royal hand. Given at our court at Kensington, the thirty-first day of July 1713, and of our reign the twelfth. ANNE R.

ANNE R.

ANNE, by the grace of God, Queen of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c. To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting. When we had determined to endeavour to put an end to this so long and so pernicious a war, amidst the great cares which we took upon us in restoring the public tranquillity, we turned our thoughts in the first place to the renewal and strengthening of those most strict bands of friendship and correspondence between us and our good brother Philip the Fifth Catholic King of Spain, which had subsisted from the longest date of time between the British and Spanish crowns, to the mutual benefit of both nations: wherefore we were pleased to appoint the same ministers, who had so long, and with so good success, applied themselves in our name to promote and finish the most wholesome work of peace between the Christian princes and states at Utrecht, to conclude and sign terms and conditions, as well of peace and friendship, as of commerce and navigation, between us and the said Catholic King. Know ye therefore, that we reposing very great confidence in the fidelity, industry, and perspicacity and experience, in treating of affairs of the greatest importance, of the Right Reverend Father in God our right trusty and well-beloved counsellor John Lord Bishop of Bristol, keeper of our privy seal, dean of Windsor, and register of our most noble Order of the Garter; and of our right trusty and right well-beloved cousin and counsellor Thomas Earl of Strassford, Viscount Wentworth of Wentworth Woodhoufe, and of Staineborough, Baron of Raby, lieutenant general of our armies, first commissioner of our admiralty, knight of our most noble Order of the Garter, and our ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to the High and Mighty Lords the States General of the United Provinces, have nominated, made, and constituted, as we do by these presents nominate, make, and constitute them our true, certain, and undoubted ambassadors extraordinary, commissaries, procurators, and plenipotentiaries, giving and granting to them, either jointly or separately, all and all manner of power, leave, and authority, and our general as well as special command (provided that our general command shall not derogate from or be contrary to our special command) to meet at Utrecht, or at any other place whatsoever, and have conferences with the ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries, whom the said Catholic King shall depute on his side, and provide with sufficient authorities, and of treating of, agreeing upon, and concluding safe, firm, and honourable conditions of peace and friendship between us and the said Catholic King, and of signing whatsoever shall be so agreed for us, and in our name, and of making, delivering, and receiving reciprocally, all the necessary instruments of the things concluded, how many or whatsoever they are, and in general, of doing and performing all things which they shall judge to be any ways necessary or convenient towards making and establishing conditions of peace and friendship as aforesaid, in as ample manner and form, and with the same force and effect, as we could do and perform the same, if we ourselves were present; promising and engaging our Royal word, that we will approve and ratify all and every one of the articles, which by virtue of these presents shall be transacted, concluded, and signed by our said ambassadors extraordinary, commissaries, procurators, and plenipotentiaries, jointly or separately, in the form and manner wherein they are agreed. For the greater testimony and validity whereof, having signed these presents with our Royal hand, we have commanded our great seal to be affixed thereunto. Given at our palace at St. James's the third day of May, 1713, in the twelfth year of our reign.

DON PHILIP, by the grace of God, King of Castille, Leon, Arragon, the Two Sicilies, Jerusalem, Navarre, Granada, Toledo, Valentia, Galicia, Majorca, Seville, Sardinia, Corduba, Corsica, Murcia, Jaen, the Algarves, Algezira, Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, the East and West Indies, the islands and terra firma of the ocean, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, and Milan, Count of Habspurg, Flanders, Tirol, and Barcelona, Lord of Biscay and Molina, &c. Whereas Europe has, through the unsearchable judgments of God, suffered a more bloody and obstinate war than ever yet was seen, to the ruin of the people and provinces, the rage of which no human means have been able to extinguish, till this present time, when, by the grace of the Divine goodness, manifest signs have been given of a certain disposition to restore peace and quiet so much desired by the whole Christian world, but more especially by us, for the sake of what our dominions have reflectively suffered. And whereas plenipotentiaries have been named by some of the principal powers engaged in the war, with sufficient authority to treat of peace, which is to be entered into with mutual friendship; we therefore being willing on our part to concur in so laudable and glorious a desire, have determined to nominate, as we do, by virtue of these presents, nominate you Don Francisco Maria de Paula, Tellez Giron, Venavides, Carrillo and Toledo, Ponce of Leon, Duke of Ossuna, our cousin, Count of Uzena, Marquis of Pennariel, one of the first nobles of my bed-chamber, and great chamberlain, notary major of my kingdoms of Castille, Clavero mayor and commander of the same order, and of the usagre of the Order of St. James, captain of my royal life-guards; Don John de Browkoven, Count of Bergueych, our counsellor and minister of war, and superintendent general of our finances in Flanders; and Don Isidore Cazade de Rosales, Marquis of Monteleon, our kinsman, and senator in our royal council of the Indies, our ambassadors and plenipotentiaries: Because we know that your persons are adorned with prudence, experience, zeal, and love for our interest, and the high qualities which are chiefly necessary to the direction and disposal of an affair of so great and important a consequence; we therefore charge and command you, that you immediately repair to the congress at Utrecht, which is the place appointed for treating of peace; that you may there, together with the plenipotentiaries appointed by the Kings and Potentates concerned, and provided with sufficient authority and instructions, enter into, and be impowered to enter into conferences or agreements of a particular or general peace; and we do grant full and intire power and authority to you the Duke of Ossuna, the Count of Bergueych, and Marquis de Monteleon, to you all three together, or to two of you, in case of the absence or infirmity of the other, or to one alone, in case of the absence or infirmity of the other two, to enter into, conclude, and sign in our name, a treaty of peace between us and the other Kings and Potentates in war, jointly with them all, or separately with any one of them, and to agree upon, conclude, subscribe, and deliver all instruments necessary on this occasion, and in general to do, promise, and stipulate such acts and declarations as shall be necessary to the exchange of what shall be agreed upon, and all other things whatsoever, which any way conduce or relate to the conclusion or negotiation of peace, although they are not expressed here, and with the same power, authority, and fulness, as we ourselves could do, if we were present; and even in those affairs and acts which may require a more special and express command than is contained in these full powers: and whatsoever you three, or two of you, in case of the absence or sickness of one of you, or one alone, in the like case of the absence or sickness of the other two, as is abovesaid, shall do, treat, promise, conclude, and corroborate with your subscription, we engaging our faith and Royal word, do promise to confirm and ratify, without any diminution, with the oaths and other solemnities requisite and necessary in such a case, within the time which shall be signed reciprocally by the plenipotentiaries at the said congress. In witness whereof, and for the greater force and validity of the same, we have ordered to be dispatched, and have dispatched these presents, signed with our hand, sealed with our privy seal, and countersigned by our underwritten secretary of state. Given at Madrid, the 28th day of December 1711.

I the KING.
Don Manuel of Vadillo and Velasco

1789 Mirabeau sur la banqueroute

2011-12-07T07:27:00.001-08:00

http://www.site-magister.com/sujets8.htm#STP

[Mirabeau, dans un discours devant l'Assemblée des députés, plaide pour que chaque citoyen contribue à combler le déficit du budget de l'État.]

Mes amis, écoutez un mot, un seul mot. Deux siècles de déprédations et de brigandage ont creusé le gouffre où le royaume est près de s'engloutir. II faut le combler ce gouffre effroyable ! eh bien, voici la liste des propriétaires français. Choisissez parmi les plus riches, afin de sacrifier moins de citoyens; mais choisissez; car ne faut-il pas qu'un petit nombre périsse pour sauver la masse du peuple ? Allons, ces deux mille notables possèdent de quoi combler le déficit. Ramenez l'ordre dans vos finances, la paix et la prospérité dans le royaume... Frappez, immolez sans pitié ces tristes victimes ! Précipitez-les dans l'abîme ! il va se refermer... vous reculez d'horreur... Hommes inconséquents ! hommes pusillanimes1 ! Eh ! ne voyez-vous donc pas qu'en décrétant la banqueroute2 ou, ce qui est plus odieux encore, en la rendant inévitable sans la décréter, vous vous souillez d'un acte mille fois plus criminel, car enfin cet horrible sacrifice ferait du moins disparaître le déficit. Mais croyez-vous, parce que vous n'avez pas payé, que vous ne devrez plus rien ? Croyez-vous que les milliers, les millions d'hommes qui perdront en un instant, par l'explosion terrible ou par ses contrecoups, tout ce qui faisait la consolation de leur vie, et peut-être leur unique moyen de la sustenter3, vous laisseront paisiblement jouir de votre crime ?
Contemplateurs stoïques des maux incalculables que cette catastrophe vomira sur la France, impassibles égoïstes qui pensez que ces convulsions du désespoir et de la misère passeront comme tant d'autres, et d'autant plus rapidement qu'elles seront plus violentes, êtes-vous bien sûrs que tant d'hommes sans pain vous laisseront tranquillement savourer les mets dont vous n'aurez voulu diminuer ni le nombre ni fa délicatesse ?... Non, vous périrez, et dans la conflagration universelle que vous ne frémissez pas d'allumer, la perte de votre honneur ne sauvera pas une seule de vos détestables jouissances.
Voilà où nous marchons... J'entends parler de patriotisme, d'élan de patriotisme, d'évocation de patriotisme. Ah ! ne prostituez pas ces mots de patrie et de patriotisme. Il est donc bien magnanime l'effort de donner une portion de son revenu pour sauver tout ce qu'on possède ! Eh ! messieurs, ce n'est là que de la simple arithmétique, et celui qui hésitera ne peut désarmer l'indignation que par le mépris que doit inspirer sa stupidité. Oui, messieurs, c'est la prudence la plus ordinaire, la sagesse la plus triviale, c'est votre intérêt le plus grossier que j'invoque. Je ne vous dis plus, comme autrefois : donnerez-vous les premiers aux nations le spectacle d'un peuple assemblé pour manquer à la foi publique ? Je ne vous dis plus : eh ! quels titres avez-vous à la liberté. quels moyens vous resteront pour la maintenir si, dès votre premier pas, vous surpassez les turpitudes des gouvernements les plus corrompus, si le besoin de votre concours et de votre surveillance n'est pas le garant de votre Constitution ? Je vous dis : Vous serez tous entraînés dans la ruine universelle, et les premiers intéressés au sacrifice que le gouvernement vous demande, c'est vous-mêmes.

1.pusillanimes : qui manquent de courage.
2. banqueroute : faillite financière de l'État.
3. sustenter : alimenter.

1701 Act of Settlement

2011-12-07T07:25:00.002-08:00

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Act_of_Settlement_1701

An Act for the further Limitation of the Crown and better securing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject

[Assented to 1701.]

I. Whereas in the first year of the reign of Your Majesty, and of our late most gracious sovereign lady Queen Mary (of blessed memory), an Act of Parliament was made, entitled, An Act Declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Settling the Succession of the Crown, wherein it was (amongst other things) enacted, established, and declared that the crown and regal government of the Kingdoms of England, France, and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging, should be and continue to Your Majesty and the said late Queen, during the joint lives of Your Majesty and the said Queen, and to the survivor: and that after the decease of Your Majesty and of the said Queen, the said Crown and regal government should be and remain to the heirs of the body of the said late Queen; and for default of such issue, to Her Royal Highness the Princess Anne of Denmark, and the heirs of her body; and for default of such issue to the heirs of the body of Your Majesty. And it was thereby further enacted, that all and every person and persons that then were, or afterwards should be reconciled to, or shall hold communion with the see or Church of Rome, or should profess the popish religion, or marry a papist, should be excluded, and are by that Act made for ever incapable to inherit, possess, or enjoy the Crown and government of this realm, and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging, or any part of the same, or to have, use, or exercise any regal power, authority, or jurisdiction within the same: and in all and every such case and cases the people of these realms shall be and are thereby absolved of their allegiance: and that the said Crown and government shall from time to time descend to and be enjoyed by such person or persons, being Protestants, as should have inherited and enjoyed the same, in case the said person or persons, so reconciled, holding communion, professing or marrying, as aforesaid, were naturally dead: After the making of which statute, and the settlement therein contained, your majesty's good subjects, who were restored to the full and free possession and enjoyment of their religion, rights, and liberties, by the providence of God giving success to your majesty's just undertakings and unwearied endeavours for that purpose, had no greater temporal felicity to hope or wish for, that to see a royal progeny descending from Your Majesty, to whom (under God) they owe their tranquillity, and whose ancestors have for many years been principal assertors of the reformed religion and the liberties of Europe, and from our said most gracious sovereign lady, whose memory will always be precious to the subjects of these realms: and it having since pleased Almighty God to take away our said sovereign Lady, and also the most hopeful Prince William, Duke of Gloucester (the only surviving issue of Her Royal Highness the Princess Anne of Denmark) to the unspeakable grief and sorrow of Your Majesty and your said good subjects, who under such losses being sensibly put in mind, that it standeth wholly in the pleasure of Almighty God to prolong the lives of Your Majesty and of Her Royal Highness, and to grant to Your Majesty, or to Her Royal Highness, such issue as may be inheritable to the Crown and regal government aforesaid, by the respective limitations in the said recited act contained, do constantly implore the divine mercy for those blessings: and Your Majesty's said subjects having daily experience of your royal care and concern for the present and future welfare of these Kingdoms, and particularly recommending from your throne a further provision to be made for the succession of the Crown in the Protestant line, for the happiness of the nation, and the security of our religion; and it being absolutely necessary for the safety, peace, and quiet of this realm, to obviate all doubts and contentions in the same, by reason of any pretended title to the Crown, and to maintain a certainty in the succession thereof, to which your subjects may safely have recourse for their protection, in case the limitations in the said recited act should determine: therefore for a further provision of the succession of the Crown in the Protestant line, we Your Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, do beseech Your Majesty that it may be enacted and declared, and be it enacted and declared by the King's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That the most excellent Princess Sophia, Electress and Duchess Dowager of Hanover, daughter of the most excellent Princess Elizabeth, late Queen of Bohemia, daughter of our late sovereign lord King James the First, of happy memory, be and is hereby declared to be the next in succession, in the Protestant line, to the imperial Crown and dignity of the said Realms of England, France, and Ireland, with the dominions and territories thereunto belonging, after His Majesty, and the Princess Anne of Denmark, and in default of issue of the said Princess Anne, and of His Majesty respectively: and that from and after the deceases of His said Majesty, our now sovereign lord, and of Her Royal Highness the Princess Anne of Denmark, and for default of issue of the said Princess Anne, and of His Majesty respectively, the Crown and regal government of the said Kingdoms of England, France, and Ireland, and of the dominions thereunto belonging, with the royal state and dignity of the said Realms, and all honours, styles, titles, regalities, prerogatives, powers, jurisdictions and authorities, to the same belonging and appertaining, shall be, remain, and continue to the said most excellent Princess Sophia, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants: and thereunto the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, shall and will in the name of all the people of this Realm, most humbly and faithfully submit themselves, their heirs and posterities: and do faithfully promise, that after the deceases of His Majesty, and Her Royal Highness, and the failure of the heirs of their respective bodies, to stand to, maintain, and defend the said Princess Sophia, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants, according to the limitation and succession of the Crown in this act specified and contained, to the utmost of their powers, with their lives and estates, against all persons whatsoever that shall attempt anything to the contrary.

II. Provided always, and be it hereby enacted, That all and every person and persons, who shall or may take or inherit the said Crown, by virtue of the limitation of this present act, and is, are or shall be reconciled to, or shall hold communion with, the See or Church of Rome, or shall profess the popish religion, or shall marry a papist, shall be subject to such incapacities, as in such case or cases are by the said recited act provided, enacted, and established; and that every King and Queen of this Realm, who shall come to and succeed in the imperial Crown of this Kingdom, by virtue of this act, shall have the coronation oath administered to him, her or them, at their respective coronations, according to the act of Parliament made in the first year of the reign of His Majesty, and the said late Queen Mary, intituled, An Act for establishing the Coronation Oath, and shall make, subscribe, and repeat the declaration in the act first above recited mentioned or referred to, in the manner and form thereby prescribed.

III. And whereas it is requisite and necessary that some further provision be made for securing our religion, laws and liberties, from and after the death of His Majesty and the Princess Anne of Denmark, and in default of issue of the body of the said Princess, and of His Majesty respectively; be it enacted by the King's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same,

That whosoever shall hereafter come to the possession of this Crown, shall join in communion with the Church of England, as by law established;

That in case the Crown and imperial dignity of this Realm shall hereafter come to any person, not being a native of this Kingdom of England, this nation be not obliged to engage in any war for the defence of any dominions or territories which do not belong to the Crown of England, without the consent of Parliament;

That no person who shall hereafter come to the possession of this Crown, shall go out of the dominions of England, Scotland, or Ireland, without the consent of Parliament;

That from and after the time that the further limitation by this act shall take effect, all matters and things relating to the well governing of this Kingdom, which are properly cognizable in the Privy Council by the laws and customs of this Realm, shall be translated there, and all resolutions taken thereupon shall be signed by such of the Privy Council as shall advise and consent to the same;

That after the said limitation shall take effect as aforesaid, no person born out of the Kingdoms of England, Scotland, or Ireland, or the dominions thereunto belonging (although he be naturalized or made a denizen, except such as are born of English parents) shall be capable to be of the Privy Council, or a member of either House of Parliament, or to enjoy any office or place of trust, either civil or military, or to have any grant of lands, tenements or hereditaments from the Crown, to himself or to any other or others in trust for him;

That no person who has an office or place of profit under the King, or receives a pension from the Crown, shall be capable of serving as a member of the House of Commons;

That after the said limitation shall take effect as aforesaid, judges commissions be made quamdiu se bene gesserint, and their salaries ascertained and established; but upon the address of both Houses of Parliament it may be lawful to remove them;
That no pardon under the Great Seal of England be pleadable to an impeachment by the Commons in Parliament.

IV. And whereas the laws of England are the birth-right of the people thereof, and all the Kings and Queens, who shall ascend the throne of this Realm, ought to administer the government of the same according to the said laws, and all their officers and ministers ought to serve them respectively according to the same: the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, do therefore further humbly pray, That all the laws and statutes of this Realm for securing the established religion, and the rights and liberties of the people thereof, and all other laws and statutes of the same now in force, may be ratified and confirmed, and the same are by His Majesty, by and with the advice of the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, and by authority of the same, ratified and confirmed accordingly.

1703 Habsburg family pact

2011-12-07T07:25:00.001-08:00

Oryginalny tekst łaciński:

Nos LEOPOLDUS Divinâ favente Clementiâ Electus Romanorum Imperator, semper Augustus, ac Germaniae, Hungariae, Bohemiae, Dalmatiae, Croatiae, Sclavoniae, etc; Rex, Archi-Dux Austriae, Dux Burgundiae, Brabantiae, Styriae, Carinthiae, Carnioliae, Lucemburgi, ac Superioris et Inferioris Silesiae, Wirtembergae et Teckae, Princeps Sueviae, Marchio Sacri Romani Imperij, Burgoviae, Moraviae, Superioris et Inferioris Lusatiae, Comes Habspurgi, Tyrolis, Feretis, Kypurgi et Goritiae, Landgravius Alsatiae, Dominus Marchiae Sclavonicae, Portûs Naonis et Salinarum. Manifestum facimus, et ad futuram memoríam testamur,
[1.] transferentibus Nobis hodiè una cum Dilectissimo Filio Nostro Primogenito Serenissimo Rege Romanorum et Hungariae Josepho in alterum Filium Nostrum Charissimum Serenissimum Archiducem nunc Regem Hispaniarum et Indiarum Carolum tertium Monarchiam Hispanicam morte Serenissimi quondam et Potentissimi Caroli Secundi [,] Hispaniarum Regis pientissimae recordationis[,] ad Nos devolutam, nihil magis in votis esse, quàm vt totius Christiani Orbis bono constans inter omnes Posteros Nostros vtriusque Lineae ex ambobus Filijs Nostris proditurae Concordia nullis controversiarum aut Dissensionum turbinibus convellenda perpetuò conservetur, Nosque saluberrimo huic Scopo obtinendo in primis necessarium duxisse,
quae Nostra omnium circa mutuae Successionis Ordinem mens Semper fùerit et adhuc sit, apertiùs edicere et ad eam jugiter Sequendam Nos Nostramquè Sobolem quàm firmissimè obstringere.
[2.] Id vero acturi non iam vsitatum hactenus in Hispania Successionis modum jmmutabimus, sed eius potiùs jmmutationem ex spontanea Cessione Hispanicae Monarchiae iuxta huius leges post Nos Filio Nostro primogenito Serenissimo Regi Romanorum Josepho ipsiusquè Posteris ante alterum Filium Nostrum Serenissimum Regem Carolum illiusquè Posteros debitae resultantem aliquatenus restringemus, remquè adeò universam ita ordinabimus vt et communibus Europae votis Satisfaciamus, et per aequalem vtrinquè Successionem Filij Nostri primogeniti progeniem ad promptius obsequium faciliùs permoveamus, ac proinde vtramquè lineam arctius vniamus, maximam deniquè ansam, seu occasionem Similium, quibus orbis paenè vniversus et olim Saepè agitatus fuit et nunc concutitur, malorum rursum concitandorum, quantum in Nobis est, radicitùs praecidamus.
[3.] Declaramus igitur Secundùm initam ante Hispanicae Monarchiae Cessionem et in ipsa Cessione vtì primariam conditionem repetitam Conventionem, statuimus, atquè ambobus Serenissimis Filijs Nostris iterùm volentibus, adsentientibus et acceptantibus hanc Deo prosperante in omne aevum valituram legem dictamus,
vt in Hispanicae Ditionis Regnis et Provincijs aequè ac in alijs nostris Regnis et Provincijs haereditarijs Successio marium sangvinis nostri per lineam masculinam ex legitimo Matrimonio progenitorum, non legitimatorum, omnibus foeminis earumquè descendentibus maribus et foeminis, cuiuslibet lineae sint aut gradùs, aeternùm praeferatur, atquè inter Successuros Primogeniturae Ratio perpetim observetur,
initio sic Succedendi in Ditionibus penes Filium Nostrum primogenitum Regem Josepham permanentibus ab Illius Filijs maribus, in ijs verò, quae Secundogenito Nostro Regi Carolo tertio cessae sunt, ab huius prole mascula capiendo, eodemquè ordine, donec per Dei gratiam vtrinque mares per lineam masculinam ex legitimo matrimonio prognati extabunt, in ambabus Lineis continuando.
[4.] Si verò, quod Deus avertat, aut Filius noster Charissimus Rex Caro1us Tertius sine liberis masculis ex legitimo matrimonio procreatis decessurus esset, aut horum Posteri masculi legitimi per Lineam masculinam descendentes, sivè Superstitibus descendentibus foeminis earumve liberis maribus et foeminis, Sive ijs deficientibus [:] quandocunquè extinguerentur, tum tota Monarchia Hispanica, omniaque illi Connexa seu Subiecta Regna et Provinciae ad Nos Filiumquè Nostrum primogenitum, eiusve Superstites Liberos et descendentes legitimos, non legitimatos,
iuxta receptum et nunc denuò Stabilitum in Domo Nostra Augusta Succedendi Ordinem
protinus revertantur, ita tamen, vt si legitimas Foeminas ex Filio Nostro Rege Carolo Tertio eiusve Descendentibus legitimis Superesse contingeret, ijs debito modo prospiciatur, prout in Domo Nostra hactenus moris fint, integro etiam illis jure, quod[,] deficientibus nostrae Stirpis maribus legitimis, et quae eas vbivis Semper praecedunt, Primogeniti Nostri Foeminis, iuxta Primogeniturae ordinem quandocunquè competere poterit.
[5.] Sin contra accideret, quod divina bonitas pariter prohibeat, vt Filius Noster primogenitus Rex Romanorum Josephus sine liberis masculis ex legitimo matrimonio genitis fato fungeretur, vel in Illius Posteris per Lineam masculinam descendentes mares legitimi deficerent, tunc Filius Noster Rex Carolus, aut qui tum Supererunt ex eo per Lineam masculinam prognati legitimi mares, non legitimati, iuxta ordinem Primogeniturae in Omnibus quoque Nostris alijs Regnis et provincijs haereditarijs eo usque à Filio Nostro primogenito Eiusve posteris Maribus legitimis possessis Succedent,
et ratione Foeminarum superstitum id observandum erit, quod in proximo casu Constitutum est,
harum omnium et procedentium ex ijs marium vtriusque stirpis Successione in cunctis Nostris Posterorumque Nostrorum Regnis, Provincijs et Ditionibus quibuscunque post omnes utrinque mares per Lineam masculinam descendentes legitimos, quolibet gradu Sint, aut cuiuscunque Lineae, semper rejectâ.
[6.] Interea vero nec ipse Filius Noster Rex Carolus nec Illius Liberi aut Posteri qualescunque sive appanagij vel alimentorum, sive quovis alio nomine seu Praetextu quicquam aliud sive A Nobis, sive A Filio Nostro primogenito Eiusve posteris petere vel praetendere poterunt aut debebunt, sed amplissimà Monarchiae Hispanicae Cessione et translatione contenti sint, et tam Ille, quàm qui Illi Successuri sunt Reges Filijs et Fratribus Filiabusquè et Sororibus suis ipsi provideant: Idemque de Filio Nostro Rege Josepho eiusque Posteris ratione Monarchiae Hispanicae cessae dictum intelligetur,
[7.] Salvo vbivis Sacri Romani Imperij Romanorumque Imperatorum et Regum in eas, quae ab Imperio Dependent, Provincias, Ditiones el loca notorio Jure.
[8.] Per hoc autem nulli alij Conventioni, Dispositioni, Legi aut Consuetudini inclytae Domus Nostrae, eique Subditorum Regnorum vel Provinciarum, dummodò hodiernae Nostrae Cessioni seu translationi eiusquè, quas posuimus, perpetuis et necessarijs Conditionibus non adversentur, atque propterea eâtenus abolitae sint, ullatenus derogatum esto, sed in alijs Capitibus eiusmodi Conventiones, Dispositiones, Leges et Consuetudines plenum et perfectum Suum robur omninò retinento.
[9.] In horum omnium evidentiorem fidem et validitatem Nos unà cum Serenissimo Romanorum Rege Josepho praesentes hasce paginas simul cum Cessionis Instrumento velut eius principem partem Manibus Nostris Subscriptas Sigillis Nostris verboque Imperiali et Regio, ac jurejurando Corporaliter praestito, pro Nobis omnibusque Posteris Nostris firmavimus, atque Charissimo Filio Nostro Serenissimo Regi Carolo tertio Hispaniarum, recepto ab eo vicissim alio acceptationis Instrumento, cui hae quoque tabulae insertae sunt, tradìdimus vtrinque aeternis temporibus observandas, non obstantibus, sed abrogatis et prohibitis omnibus oppositionibus, exceptionibus et beneficiis contrarijs Pontificijs, Imperialibus, Regiis, Provincialibus et legitimis quibuscunque vbicunque et quomodocunque nunc competentibus aut imposterum emergentibus vel quandocunque movendis seu allegandis.
Actum praesentibus praecipuis Aulae Nostrae Caesareae Proceribus alijsque Consiliarijs Sanctioris Nostri conslij Statùs[,] Viennae Die duodecimâ Mensis Septembris Anno â Nativitate Dominica Supra Millesimum Septingentesimo tertio, Regnorum Nostrorum[:] Romani Quadragesimo Sexto, Hungarici Quadragesimo nono, Bohemici verò Quadragesimo Septimo.
[10.] Et Nos IOSEPHUS DEI gratiâ Romanorum ac Hungariae, Dalmatiae, Croatiae, Sclavoniae, etc; Rex, Archi-Dux Austriae, Dux Burgundiae, Brabantiae, Styriae, Carinthiae, Carnioliae, Lucemburgi, ac Superioris et Inferioris Silesiae, Wirtembergae et Teckae, Princeps Sueviae, Marchio Sacri Romani Imperii, Burgoviae, Moraviae, Superioris et Inferioris Lusatiae, Comes Habspurgi, Tyrolis, Feretis, Kypurgi et Goritiae, Landgravius Alsatiae, Dominus Marchiae Sclavonicae, Portûs Naonis et Salinarum. Profitemur omnia, quae isthoc Jnstrumento continentur, ab Augusto Imperatore Domino et Parente Nostro benignissimo pro Summa Sua prudentia et paterno in gentem Suam
amore Nobis Nostrique Fratre charissimo Serenissimo Rege Carolo Hispaniarum convenientibus, enixeque rogantibus et lubentissimè acquiescentibus disposita esse, ad ea etiam exequenda et propugnanda Nos Posterosque Nostros verbo Regio jureque jurando Corporali et omni firmiori, quo fieri queat, ratione devincimus, adiunctâ seu repetitâ plenissimâ Renuntiatione et abolitione omnium jurium et effugiorum Contrariorum Supra descriptâ vel alias necessariâ; Testimonio harum literarum â Nobis Subscriptarum et Sigillo Nostro munitarum[,] loco, Die et Anno commemoratis.
Leopoldus
Josephus

Praesentes fuêre:
Celsissimi,
• Dominus Ferdinandus Princeps â Schwarzenberg, Aulae Augustae Imperatricis Supremus Praefectus, aurei Velleris Eques.
• Dominus Carolus Otto Theodorus Princeps â Salm, Aulae Serenissimi Regis Romanorum Supremus Praefectus.
• Dominus Antonius Florianus Princeps â Liechtenstein, Aulae Serenissimi Regis Hispaniarum Supremus Praefectus, aurei Velleris Eques.
Illustrissimi et Excellentissimi,
• Dominus Ferdinandus Bonaventura Comes ab Harrach[,] Supremus Aulae Caesareae Praefectus, aurei Velleris Eques.
• Dominus Wolffgangus Comes ab Ötting, Excelsi Consilij Imperialis Aulici Praeses.
• Dominus Joannes Franciscus Comes à Wirben[,] Sacrae Caesareae Majestatis, utì Regis Bohemiae Supremus Cancellarius, aurei Velleris Eques.
• Dominus Henricus Franciscus Princeps de Fundis, Comes à Mansfeld, Supremi Sacri Cubiculi Praepositus, aurei Velleris Eques.
• Don Dominicus Andreas Comes à Kauniz, Sacri Romani Imperij Pro-Cancellarius, aurei Velleris Eques.
• Dominus Julius Fridericus Comes Bucelleni Aulae Caesareae Cancellarius.
• Dominus Joannes Fridericus Liber Baro à Seilern, et
• Dominus Franciscus Moles, Dux de Pereti:
omnes Sacrae Caesarea Majestatis Consiliarij Statûs.
In fidem Veritatis Nomen meum Subscripsi, ac Sigillum meum apposui, Sacrae Caesareae Majestatis Consiliarius Aulicus, Secretarius Statûs et Referendarius, atque Authoritate Caesareâ et Archi-ducali creatus Notarius Publicus, qui omnia haec fieri praesens Audivi et Vidi ego
Joannes Ignatius Albrecht ab Albrechtsburg

Tłumaczenie angielskie:

We LEOPOLD by divine grace elected Emperor of the Romans, always august, king of Germany, Hungary, Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia; archduke of Austria, duke of Burgundy, Brabant, Styria, Carinthia, Carniolia, Luxemburg, and of upper and lower Silesia, Wurttemberg and Teck, prince in Swabia, marquis of the Holy Roman Empire in Burgau, Moravia, upper and Lower Lusatia, count of Habsburg, Tirol, Pfirt, Kyburg and Görz, landgrave in Alsace, lord of the march of Winden, Portenau and Salins, make known and commit for future memory:
Whereas today we have transferred, together with our most beloved first-born son the Most Serene Joseph king of the Romans and of Hungary, to our other dearest son the most serene archduke presently king of Spain and of the Indies Charles III, the Spanish crown devolved to us by the death of the late most Serene and Most Potent Charles II, king of Spain of most pious memory, nothing being most desirable, for the good of all Christendom, that a constant harmony be preserved forever between all our posterity of either line issued from our two sons, and be destroyed by none of the turmoils of dispute and dissension, We have deemed it necessary before all, in order to reach this most healthy goal,
to lay out more openly what our will always was and is at present on all maters relating to the order of mutual succession, and to bind most firmly us and our issue to follow it.
In doing this we will not in change the mode of succession used until now in Spain, but we will somewhat restrict the change resulting from the voluntary cession of the Spanish crown, which, according to its own laws, belonged after us to our first-born son the Most Serene king of the Romans Joseph and his posterity before our other son the Most Serene king Charles and his posterity. And we will settle the whole matter so as to satisfy the common wishes of Europe, and so as to incite more easily to a prompter submission the progeny of our first-born son by an equal succession on both sides, and to unite more closely both lines, and finally cut off at the root, as much as we can, the greatest opportunity or occasion of producing again such woes as have often plagued nearly the whole world and presently afflict it.
Therefore we declare, according to the agreement made before the cession of the Spanish crown and repeated as primary condition in that cession, we have stated and edicted, both our Most Serene sons willing, consenting and accepting it, as law valid forever with the help of God,
that in the realms and provinces of the Spanish sovereignty, and equally in all our other hereditary realms and provinces, the succession of males of our blood in male line born of legitimate marriage and not legitimated, be forever preferred to all females and their descendents male and female of any line or degree, and that between the successors the rule of primogeniture be prepetually observed,
such succession taking effect in the domains remaining with our our first-born son king Joseph, with his sons, and in those ceded to our second-born son king Charles, with his male issue, and the same order continuing in both lines as long as by the grace of God there remain males born in male line in legitimate marriage on both sides.
But if, God forbid, either our dearest son king Charles III were to die without male children born in legitimate marriage, or their legitimate male posterity descended in male line were ever extinguished, whether or not there survived female descendants or their male or female children, then the whole Spanish crown, and all the realms and provinces related or subjected to it shall revert immediately to us and to our first-born son, and his surviving children and legitimate descendents, not legitimated,
according to the order of succession received and now gain established in our August House,
such that, if legitimate females born of our son king Charles III and his legitimate descendants happened to survive, they would be cared for in the appropriate way, as has been the custom in our House until now, and their right would be wholly preserved, to compete eventually according to the right of primogeniture, failing legitimate males of our line, and females of the line of our first-born son, who shall everywhere precede them.
If however the reverse case happened, God forbid, that our first-born son the king of the Romans Joseph were to die without male children born of legitimate marriage, or that legitimate males in male line failed in his posterity, then our son king Charles, or those legitimate males, not legitimated, who shall descend in male line, shall succeed according to the order of primogeniture in all our other hereditary realms and provinces possessed by our first-born son and his male legitimate posterity,
and with respect to surviving females that which was constituted in the previous case shall be observed,
these females and the males issued from them, of either line, being always rejected after all the legitimate males on both sides descended in male line, for the succession to all of our realms, provinces and sovereignties and those of our posterity.
In the meantime neither our son king Charles nor his children or posterity of any kind may or shall demand or make a claim to anything else from us, or our first-born or his posterity, under the name of appanage or alimony or any other name or pretext; but they shall be most fully satisfied with the cession and transfer of the Spanish crown, and he, as well as those who will succeed him as king shall provide for their brothers, children, and sisters; and the same shall apply with respect to the Spanish crown for our son king Joseph and his posterity.
The notorious right of the Holy Roman Empire and the Emperors and kings of the Romans on those provinces, sovereignties and places that are dependent of the Empire, shall be preserved.
By this shall be altered no other convention, disposition, law or custom of our serene House and of the kingdoms and provinces subject to it, inasmuch as they do not conflict with our cession and transfer of today and with its perpetual and necessary conditions which we have laid, and to that extent they shall be repealed, but in all other respects these conventions, dispositions, laws and custom shall retain the full and complete force.
To make the foregoing more plainly trustworthy and authentic, we, along with the Most Serene king of the Romans Joseph, have signed these pages as well as the instrument of cession or the main part thereof, in our own hand, with our seals, and with our word as emperor and king as well as by corpoeral oath we have affirmed for ourselves and all our posterity, and we have delivered them to our dearest son the Most Serene king Charles III of Spain, having received in turn from him the isntrument of acceptation, in which these letters are inserted, to be observed by both sides forever; notwithstanding, but rather rescinded and and forbidden any contrary dispositions, exceptions and privileges, either pontifical, imperial, royal, provincial and legitimate in any place of any manner, arising now or in the future or moved or alleged at any time.
Done in the presence of the principal members of our Imperial Court and other Counsellors of our Council of State, in Vienna the 12th day of September, 1703, the 46th year of our Roman reign, the 49th of our Hungarian reign, and the 47th of our Bohemian reign.
And we, JOSEPH, by the grace of God king of the Romans, and of Hungary, Dalmatia, Slavonia, etc; archduke of Austria, duke of Burgundy, Brabant, Styria, Carinthia, Carniolia, Luxemburg, and of upper and lower Silesia, Wurttemberg and Teck, prince in Swabia, marquis of the Holy Roman Empire in Burgau, Moravia, upper and Lower Lusatia, count of Habsburg, Tirol, Pfirt, Kyburg and Görz, landgrave in Alsace, lord of the march of Winden, Portenau and Salins, acknowledge that everything contained in this instrument, has been arranged by our most kind Lord and Father the August Emperor out of his great prudence and fatherly love for his family, and was acceptable to us and to our dearest Brother the most Serene king of Spain Charles, and was eagerly requested and most willingly accepted by us. And for their execution and protection we bind ourselves and oour posterity with our word as King and by bodily oath and in the firmest manner possible, adding or repeating the fullest renunciation, as described above or any other as required, and abolition of all contrary rights and excuses. In witness thereof these letters are subscribed by us and sealed with our seal. Place, day and year as above.
Leopoldus
Josephus

Were present:
their Hignesses
• Ferdinand prince von Schwarzenberg, Obersthofmeister of her Majesty the Empress, knight of the Golden Fleece [1652-1703]
• Carl Otto Theodor prince von Salm, Obersthofmeister of the Most Serene king of the Romans [1645-1710]
• Anton Florian prince von Liechtenstein, Obersthofmeister of the Most Serene king of Spain, knight of the Golden Fleece [1656-1721]
the Most Illustrious and Excellent
• Ferdinand Bonaventura count Harrach, imperial Obersthofmeister, knight of the Golden Fleece [1637-1706]
• Wolfgang count zu Oettingen-Wallenstein, president of the Reichshofrath [1629-1708]
• Johann Franz count von Würben (Wrbna), high chancelor of the king of Bohemia, knight of the Golden Fleece [d. 1720]
• Johann Heinrich prince von Fondi, count von Mansfeld, high Chamberlain, knight of the Golden Fleece [1646-1715]
• Dominik Andreas count von Kaunitz, vice-chancelor of the Holy Roman Empire, knight of the Golden Fleece [1655-1705]
• Julius Friedrich count von Bucellini, imperial court chancelor [c1639-1712]
• Johann Friedrich baron von Seilern [1646-1715]
• Francisco de Moles, duke of Parete
all councillors of state of his sacred imperial Majesty.
In witness to the truth thereof I, who saw and heard all that happened, have signed my name and affixed my seal, court councillor, secretary and state and referendar, and by imperial and archducal authority made notary public
Johann Ignaz Albrecht von Albrechtsburg

The Family Pact of 12 September 1703
(Source: Turba, Gustav: Die pragmatische Sanktion, authentische Texte samt Erläuterungen und Übersetzungen. Vienna: K-K Schulbücher-Verlage, 1913.)
This text is one of several documents dated 12 September 1703:
1. cession of the Spanish kingdom by Leopold I and archduke Joseph to archduke Charles, signed by 35 witnesses (published by Dumont, 8:1:133) (original in Latin)
2. acceptance of the cession by Charles, signed by the same 35 witnesses (original in Latin and Spanish)
3. secret family pact, signed by Leopold I and Joseph, and by 11 witnesses (original in Latin)
4. acceptance of the cession (1) and the family pact (3) by Charles, signed by the same 11 witnesses (original in Latin and Spanish)
The text of the second, secret acceptance by Charles (document 4) is identical to the public version (document 1), except that the text of the secret family pact (document 3) is inserted word for word immediately following the text of the cession (document 1). The family pact and the secret acceptance were the documents read publicly in 1713.
The complete text of the secret family pact follows. The original is in Latin, the translation into English is mine (Turba translates the text into German). Biographical information on the witnesses from Stefan Sienell: Die Geheime Konferenz unter Kaiser Leopold I.. Frankfurt-am-Main, 2001.

1704 An Account of King's of Spain Arrival at Lisbon

2011-12-07T07:24:00.004-08:00

1704 terms of surrender of the Spanish authorities of Gibraltar

2011-12-07T07:24:00.003-08:00

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Terms_of_surrender_of_the_Spanish_authorities_of_Gibraltar_in_1704

Terms of surrender as signed by the Governor of Gibraltar, Diego de Salinas, on behalf of the City Council

ARTICLE I.

The officers and soldiers shall be allowed to march out with their baggage, and soldiers may take what they can carry with them: the officers, the magistrates, and gentlemen are allowed to take their horses: and for those without baggage who choose to depart by water vessels shall be provided.

ARTICLE II.

Three pieces of brass cannon of different sizes may be carried away, together with twelve rounds of ammunition for each gun.
[edit] ARTICLE III.

A supply of bread, meat, and wine for six days march shall be provided.

ARTICLE IV.

The trunks containing the baggage of officers, magistrates, and gentlemen, shall not be examined. The garrison shall march out within three days: the effects that cannot in that time be removed shall remain in the place to be sent for when convenient, and no obstruction shall be given to carts conveying them.

ARTICLE V.

To the inhabitants, soldiers, and officers who may choose to remain in Gibraltar, shall be conceded the same privileges they had in the time of Charles II; the religion and all tribunals shall remain intact and without alteration, it being understood that the oath of fidelity to HM Charles III as legitimate Lord and King, is to be taken.

ARTICLE VI.

All magazines of powder and of implements of war are to be pointed out —all useless arms, and all provisions that exist in the city.

ARTICLE VII.

From this capitulation the French and all subjects of His Catholic Majesty are excluded. They shall remain prisoners of war, and all their property will be at the disposal of the conquerors.

George, Landgrave of Hesse

1708 Jonathan Swift: An Argument Against Abolishing Christianity

2011-12-07T07:24:00.001-08:00

I am very sensible what a weakness and presumption it is to reason against the general humour and disposition of the world. I remember it was with great justice, and a due regard to the freedom, both of the public and the press, forbidden upon several penalties to write, or discourse, or lay wagers against the — even before it was confirmed by Parliament; because that was looked upon as a design to oppose the current of the people, which, besides the folly of it, is a manifest breach of the fundamental law, that makes this majority of opinions the voice of God. In like manner, and for the very same reasons, it may perhaps be neither safe nor prudent to argue against the abolishing of Christianity, at a juncture when all parties seem so unanimously determined upon the point, as we cannot but allow from their actions, their discourses, and their writings. However, I know not how, whether from the affectation of singularity, or the perverseness of human nature, but so it unhappily falls out, that I cannot be entirely of this opinion. Nay, though I were sure an order were issued for my immediate prosecution by the Attorney-General, I should still confess, that in the present posture of our affairs at home or abroad, I do not yet see the absolute necessity of extirpating the Christian religion from among us.

This perhaps may appear too great a paradox even for our wise and paxodoxical age to endure; therefore I shall handle it with all tenderness, and with the utmost deference to that great and profound majority which is of another sentiment.

And yet the curious may please to observe, how much the genius of a nation is liable to alter in half an age. I have heard it affirmed for certain by some very odd people, that the contrary opinion was even in their memories as much in vogue as the other is now; and that a project for the abolishing of Christianity would then have appeared as singular, and been thought as absurd, as it would be at this time to write or discourse in its defence.

Therefore I freely own, that all appearances are against me. The system of the Gospel, after the fate of other systems, is generally antiquated and exploded, and the mass or body of the common people, among whom it seems to have had its latest credit, are now grown as much ashamed of it as their betters; opinions, like fashions, always descending from those of quality to the middle sort, and thence to the vulgar, where at length they are dropped and vanish.

But here I would not be mistaken, and must therefore be so bold as to borrow a distinction from the writers on the other side, when they make a difference betwixt nominal and real Trinitarians. I hope no reader imagines me so weak to stand up in the defence of real Christianity, such as used in primitive times (if we may believe the authors of those ages) to have an influence upon men’s belief and actions. To offer at the restoring of that, would indeed be a wild project: it would be to dig up foundations; to destroy at one blow all the wit, and half the learning of the kingdom; to break the entire frame and constitution of things; to ruin trade, extinguish arts and sciences, with the professors of them; in short, to turn our courts, exchanges, and shops into deserts; and would be full as absurd as the proposal of Horace, where he advises the Romans, all in a body, to leave their city, and seek a new seat in some remote part of the world, by way of a cure for the corruption of their manners.

Therefore I think this caution was in itself altogether unnecessary (which I have inserted only to prevent all possibility of cavilling), since every candid reader will easily understand my discourse to be intended only in defence of nominal Christianity, the other having been for some time wholly laid aside by general consent, as utterly inconsistent with all our present schemes of wealth and power.

But why we should therefore cut off the name and title of Christians, although the general opinion and resolution be so violent for it, I confess I cannot (with submission) apprehend the consequence necessary. However, since the undertakers propose such wonderful advantages to the nation by this project, and advance many plausible objections against the system of Christianity, I shall briefly consider the strength of both, fairly allow them their greatest weight, and offer such answers as I think most reasonable. After which I will beg leave to show what inconveniences may possibly happen by such an innovation, in the present posture of our affairs.

First, one great advantage proposed by the abolishing of Christianity is, that it would very much enlarge and establish liberty of conscience, that great bulwark of our nation, and of the Protestant religion, which is still too much limited by priestcraft, notwithstanding all the good intentions of the legislature, as we have lately found by a severe instance. For it is confidently reported, that two young gentlemen of real hopes, bright wit, and profound judgment, who, upon a thorough examination of causes and effects, and by the mere force of natural abilities, without the least tincture of learning, having made a discovery that there was no God, and generously communicating their thoughts for the good of the public, were some time ago, by an unparalleled severity, and upon I know not what obsolete law, broke for blasphemy. And as it has been wisely observed, if persecution once begins, no man alive knows how far it may reach, or where it will end.

In answer to all which, with deference to wiser judgments, I think this rather shows the necessity of a nominal religion among us. Great wits love to be free with the highest objects; and if they cannot be allowed a god to revile or renounce, they will speak evil of dignities, abuse the government, and reflect upon the ministry, which I am sure few will deny to be of much more pernicious consequence, according to the saying of Tiberius, DEORUM OFFENSA DIIS CUROE. As to the particular fact related, I think it is not fair to argue from one instance, perhaps another cannot be produced: yet (to the comfort of all those who may be apprehensive of persecution) blasphemy we know is freely spoke a million of times in every coffee-house and tavern, or wherever else good company meet. It must be allowed, indeed, that to break an English free-born officer only for blasphemy was, to speak the gentlest of such an action, a very high strain of absolute power. Little can be said in excuse for the general; perhaps he was afraid it might give offence to the allies, among whom, for aught we know, it may be the custom of the country to believe a God. But if he argued, as some have done, upon a mistaken principle, that an officer who is guilty of speaking blasphemy may, some time or other, proceed so far as to raise a mutiny, the consequence is by no means to be admitted: for surely the commander of an English army is like to be but ill obeyed whose soldiers fear and reverence him as little as they do a Deity.

It is further objected against the Gospel system that it obliges men to the belief of things too difficult for Freethinkers, and such who have shook off the prejudices that usually cling to a confined education. To which I answer, that men should be cautious how they raise objections which reflect upon the wisdom of the nation. Is not everybody freely allowed to believe whatever he pleases, and to publish his belief to the world whenever he thinks fit, especially if it serves to strengthen the party which is in the right? Would any indifferent foreigner, who should read the trumpery lately written by Asgil, Tindal, Toland, Coward, and forty more, imagine the Gospel to be our rule of faith, and to be confirmed by Parliaments? Does any man either believe, or say he believes, or desire to have it thought that he says he believes, one syllable of the matter? And is any man worse received upon that score, or does he find his want of nominal faith a disadvantage to him in the pursuit of any civil or military employment? What if there be an old dormant statute or two against him, are they not now obsolete, to a degree, that Empson and Dudley themselves, if they were now alive, would find it impossible to put them in execution?

It is likewise urged, that there are, by computation, in this kingdom, above ten thousand parsons, whose revenues, added to those of my lords the bishops, would suffice to maintain at least two hundred young gentlemen of wit and pleasure, and free-thinking, enemies to priestcraft, narrow principles, pedantry, and prejudices, who might be an ornament to the court and town: and then again, so a great number of able [bodied] divines might be a recruit to our fleet and armies. This indeed appears to be a consideration of some weight; but then, on the other side, several things deserve to be considered likewise: as, first, whether it may not be thought necessary that in certain tracts of country, like what we call parishes, there should be one man at least of abilities to read and write. Then it seems a wrong computation that the revenues of the Church throughout this island would be large enough to maintain two hundred young gentlemen, or even half that number, after the present refined way of living, that is, to allow each of them such a rent as, in the modern form of speech, would make them easy. But still there is in this project a greater mischief behind; and we ought to beware of the woman’s folly, who killed the hen that every morning laid her a golden egg. For, pray what would become of the race of men in the next age, if we had nothing to trust to beside the scrofulous consumptive production furnished by our men of wit and pleasure, when, having squandered away their vigour, health, and estates, they are forced, by some disagreeable marriage, to piece up their broken fortunes, and entail rottenness and politeness on their posterity? Now, here are ten thousand persons reduced, by the wise regulations of Henry VIII., to the necessity of a low diet, and moderate exercise, who are the only great restorers of our breed, without which the nation would in an age or two become one great hospital.

Another advantage proposed by the abolishing of Christianity is the clear gain of one day in seven, which is now entirely lost, and consequently the kingdom one seventh less considerable in trade, business, and pleasure; besides the loss to the public of so many stately structures now in the hands of the clergy, which might be converted into play-houses, exchanges, market-houses, common dormitories, and other public edifices.

I hope I shall be forgiven a hard word if I call this a perfect cavil. I readily own there hath been an old custom, time out of mind, for people to assemble in the churches every Sunday, and that shops are still frequently shut, in order, as it is conceived, to preserve the memory of that ancient practice; but how this can prove a hindrance to business or pleasure is hard to imagine. What if the men of pleasure are forced, one day in the week, to game at home instead of the chocolate-house? Are not the taverns and coffee-houses open? Can there be a more convenient season for taking a dose of physic? Is not that the chief day for traders to sum up the accounts of the week, and for lawyers to prepare their briefs? But I would fain know how it can be pretended that the churches are misapplied? Where are more appointments and rendezvouses of gallantry? Where more care to appear in the foremost box, with greater advantage of dress? Where more meetings for business? Where more bargains driven of all sorts? And where so many conveniences or incitements to sleep?

There is one advantage greater than any of the foregoing, proposed by the abolishing of Christianity, that it will utterly extinguish parties among us, by removing those factious distinctions of high and low church, of Whig and Tory, Presbyterian and Church of England, which are now so many mutual clogs upon public proceedings, and are apt to prefer the gratifying themselves or depressing their adversaries before the most important interest of the State.

I confess, if it were certain that so great an advantage would redound to the nation by this expedient, I would submit, and be silent; but will any man say, that if the words, whoring, drinking, cheating, lying, stealing, were, by Act of Parliament, ejected out of the English tongue and dictionaries, we should all awake next morning chaste and temperate, honest and just, and lovers of truth? Is this a fair consequence? Or if the physicians would forbid us to pronounce the words pox, gout, rheumatism, and stone, would that expedient serve like so many talismen to destroy the diseases themselves? Are party and faction rooted in men’s hearts no deeper than phrases borrowed from religion, or founded upon no firmer principles? And is our language so poor that we cannot find other terms to express them? Are envy, pride, avarice, and ambition such ill nomenclators, that they cannot furnish appellations for their owners? Will not heydukes and mamalukes, mandarins and patshaws, or any other words formed at pleasure, serve to distinguish those who are in the ministry from others who would be in it if they could? What, for instance, is easier than to vary the form of speech, and instead of the word church, make it a question in politics, whether the monument be in danger? Because religion was nearest at hand to furnish a few convenient phrases, is our invention so barren we can find no other? Suppose, for argument sake, that the Tories favoured Margarita, the Whigs, Mrs. Tofts, and the Trimmers, Valentini, would not Margaritians, Toftians, and Valentinians be very tolerable marks of distinction? The Prasini and Veniti, two most virulent factions in Italy, began, if I remember right, by a distinction of colours in ribbons, which we might do with as good a grace about the dignity of the blue and the green, and serve as properly to divide the Court, the Parliament, and the kingdom between them, as any terms of art whatsoever, borrowed from religion. And therefore I think there is little force in this objection against Christianity, or prospect of so great an advantage as is proposed in the abolishing of it.

It is again objected, as a very absurd, ridiculous custom, that a set of men should be suffered, much less employed and hired, to bawl one day in seven against the lawfulness of those methods most in use towards the pursuit of greatness, riches, and pleasure, which are the constant practice of all men alive on the other six. But this objection is, I think, a little unworthy so refined an age as ours. Let us argue this matter calmly. I appeal to the breast of any polite Free-thinker, whether, in the pursuit of gratifying a pre-dominant passion, he hath not always felt a wonderful incitement, by reflecting it was a thing forbidden; and therefore we see, in order to cultivate this test, the wisdom of the nation hath taken special care that the ladies should be furnished with prohibited silks, and the men with prohibited wine. And indeed it were to be wished that some other prohibitions were promoted, in order to improve the pleasures of the town, which, for want of such expedients, begin already, as I am told, to flag and grow languid, giving way daily to cruel inroads from the spleen.

’Tis likewise proposed, as a great advantage to the public, that if we once discard the system of the Gospel, all religion will of course be banished for ever, and consequently along with it those grievous prejudices of education which, under the names of conscience, honour, justice, and the like, are so apt to disturb the peace of human minds, and the notions whereof are so hard to be eradicated by right reason or free-thinking, sometimes during the whole course of our lives.

Here first I observe how difficult it is to get rid of a phrase which the world has once grown fond of, though the occasion that first produced it be entirely taken away. For some years past, if a man had but an ill-favoured nose, the deep thinkers of the age would, some way or other contrive to impute the cause to the prejudice of his education. From this fountain were said to be derived all our foolish notions of justice, piety, love of our country; all our opinions of God or a future state, heaven, hell, and the like; and there might formerly perhaps have been some pretence for this charge. But so effectual care hath been since taken to remove those prejudices, by an entire change in the methods of education, that (with honour I mention it to our polite innovators) the young gentlemen, who are now on the scene, seem to have not the least tincture left of those infusions, or string of those weeds, and by consequence the reason for abolishing nominal Christianity upon that pretext is wholly ceased.

For the rest, it may perhaps admit a controversy, whether the banishing all notions of religion whatsoever would be inconvenient for the vulgar. Not that I am in the least of opinion with those who hold religion to have been the invention of politicians, to keep the lower part of the world in awe by the fear of invisible powers; unless mankind were then very different from what it is now; for I look upon the mass or body of our people here in England to be as Freethinkers, that is to say, as staunch unbelievers, as any of the highest rank. But I conceive some scattered notions about a superior power to be of singular use for the common people, as furnishing excellent materials to keep children quiet when they grow peevish, and providing topics of amusement in a tedious winter night.

Lastly, it is proposed, as a singular advantage, that the abolishing of Christianity will very much contribute to the uniting of Protestants, by enlarging the terms of communion, so as to take in all sorts of Dissenters, who are now shut out of the pale upon account of a few ceremonies, which all sides confess to be things indifferent. That this alone will effectually answer the great ends of a scheme for comprehension, by opening a large noble gate, at which all bodies may enter; whereas the chaffering with Dissenters, and dodging about this or t’other ceremony, is but like opening a few wickets, and leaving them at jar, by which no more than one can get in at a time, and that not without stooping, and sideling, and squeezing his body.

To all this I answer, that there is one darling inclination of mankind which usually affects to be a retainer to religion, though she be neither its parent, its godmother, nor its friend. I mean the spirit of opposition, that lived long before Christianity, and can easily subsist without it. Let us, for instance, examine wherein the opposition of sectaries among us consists. We shall find Christianity to have no share in it at all. Does the Gospel anywhere prescribe a starched, squeezed countenance, a stiff formal gait, a singularity of manners and habit, or any affected forms and modes of speech different from the reasonable part of mankind? Yet, if Christianity did not lend its name to stand in the gap, and to employ or divert these humours, they must of necessity be spent in contraventions to the laws of the land, and disturbance of the public peace. There is a portion of enthusiasm assigned to every nation, which, if it hath not proper objects to work on, will burst out, and set all into a flame. If the quiet of a State can be bought by only flinging men a few ceremonies to devour, it is a purchase no wise man would refuse. Let the mastiffs amuse themselves about a sheep’s skin stuffed with hay, provided it will keep them from worrying the flock. The institution of convents abroad seems in one point a strain of great wisdom, there being few irregularities in human passions which may not have recourse to vent themselves in some of those orders, which are so many retreats for the speculative, the melancholy, the proud, the silent, the politic, and the morose, to spend themselves, and evaporate the noxious particles; for each of whom we in this island are forced to provide a several sect of religion to keep them quiet; and whenever Christianity shall be abolished, the Legislature must find some other expedient to employ and entertain them. For what imports it how large a gate you open, if there will be always left a number who place a pride and a merit in not coming in?

Having thus considered the most important objections against Christianity, and the chief advantages proposed by the abolishing thereof, I shall now, with equal deference and submission to wiser judgments, as before, proceed to mention a few inconveniences that may happen if the Gospel should be repealed, which, perhaps, the projectors may not have sufficiently considered.

And first, I am very sensible how much the gentlemen of wit and pleasure are apt to murmur, and be choked at the sight of so many daggle-tailed parsons that happen to fall in their way, and offend their eyes; but at the same time, these wise reformers do not consider what an advantage and felicity it is for great wits to be always provided with objects of scorn and contempt, in order to exercise and improve their talents, and divert their spleen from falling on each other, or on themselves, especially when all this may be done without the least imaginable danger to their persons.

And to urge another argument of a parallel nature: if Christianity were once abolished, how could the Freethinkers, the strong reasoners, and the men of profound learning be able to find another subject so calculated in all points whereon to display their abilities? What wonderful productions of wit should we be deprived of from those whose genius, by continual practice, hath been wholly turned upon raillery and invectives against religion, and would therefore never be able to shine or distinguish themselves upon any other subject? We are daily complaining of the great decline of wit among as, and would we take away the greatest, perhaps the only topic we have left? Who would ever have suspected Asgil for a wit, or Toland for a philosopher, if the inexhaustible stock of Christianity had not been at hand to provide them with materials? What other subject through all art or nature could have produced Tindal for a profound author, or furnished him with readers? It is the wise choice of the subject that alone adorns and distinguishes the writer. For had a hundred such pens as these been employed on the side of religion, they would have immediately sunk into silence and oblivion.

Nor do I think it wholly groundless, or my fears altogether imaginary, that the abolishing of Christianity may perhaps bring the Church in danger, or at least put the Senate to the trouble of another securing vote. I desire I may not be mistaken; I am far from presuming to affirm or think that the Church is in danger at present, or as things now stand; but we know not how soon it may be so when the Christian religion is repealed. As plausible as this project seems, there may be a dangerous design lurk under it. Nothing can be more notorious than that the Atheists, Deists, Socinians, Anti-Trinitarians, and other subdivisions of Freethinkers, are persons of little zeal for the present ecclesiastical establishment: their declared opinion is for repealing the sacramental test; they are very indifferent with regard to ceremonies; nor do they hold the JUS DIVINUM of episcopacy: therefore they may be intended as one politic step towards altering the constitution of the Church established, and setting up Presbytery in the stead, which I leave to be further considered by those at the helm.

In the last place, I think nothing can be more plain, than that by this expedient we shall run into the evil we chiefly pretend to avoid; and that the abolishment of the Christian religion will be the readiest course we can take to introduce Popery. And I am the more inclined to this opinion because we know it has been the constant practice of the Jesuits to send over emissaries, with instructions to personate themselves members of the several prevailing sects amongst us. So it is recorded that they have at sundry times appeared in the guise of Presbyterians, Anabaptists, Independents, and Quakers, according as any of these were most in credit; so, since the fashion hath been taken up of exploding religion, the Popish missionaries have not been wanting to mix with the Freethinkers; among whom Toland, the great oracle of the Anti-Christians, is an Irish priest, the son of an Irish priest; and the most learned and ingenious author of a book called the “Rights of the Christian Church,” was in a proper juncture reconciled to the Romish faith, whose true son, as appears by a hundred passages in his treatise, he still continues. Perhaps I could add some others to the number; but the fact is beyond dispute, and the reasoning they proceed by is right: for supposing Christianity to be extinguished the people will never he at ease till they find out some other method of worship, which will as infallibly produce superstition as this will end in Popery.

And therefore, if, notwithstanding all I have said, it still be thought necessary to have a Bill brought in for repealing Christianity, I would humbly offer an amendment, that instead of the word Christianity may be put religion in general, which I conceive will much better answer all the good ends proposed by the projectors of it. For as long as we leave in being a God and His Providence, with all the necessary consequences which curious and inquisitive men will be apt to draw from such promises, we do not strike at the root of the evil, though we should ever so effectually annihilate the present scheme of the Gospel; for of what use is freedom of thought if it will not produce freedom of action, which is the sole end, how remote soever in appearance, of all objections against Christianity? and therefore, the Freethinkers consider it as a sort of edifice, wherein all the parts have such a mutual dependence on each other, that if you happen to pull out one single nail, the whole fabric must fall to the ground. This was happily expressed by him who had heard of a text brought for proof of the Trinity, which in an ancient manuscript was differently read; he thereupon immediately took the hint, and by a sudden deduction of a long Sorites, most logically concluded: why, if it be as you say, I may safely drink on, and defy the parson. From which, and many the like instances easy to be produced, I think nothing can be more manifest than that the quarrel is not against any particular points of hard digestion in the Christian system, but against religion in general, which, by laying restraints on human nature, is supposed the great enemy to the freedom of thought and action.

Upon the whole, if it shall still be thought for the benefit of Church and State that Christianity be abolished, I conceive, however, it may be more convenient to defer the execution to a time of peace, and not venture in this conjuncture to disoblige our allies, who, as it falls out, are all Christians, and many of them, by the prejudices of their education, so bigoted as to place a sort of pride in the appellation. If, upon being rejected by them, we are to trust to an alliance with the Turk, we shall find ourselves much deceived; for, as he is too remote, and generally engaged in war with the Persian emperor, so his people would be more scandalised at our infidelity than our Christian neighbours. For they are not only strict observers of religions worship, but what is worse, believe a God; which is more than is required of us, even while we preserve the name of Christians.

To conclude, whatever some may think of the great advantages to trade by this favourite scheme, I do very much apprehend that in six months’ time after the Act is passed for the extirpation of the Gospel, the Bank and East India stock may fall at least one per cent. And since that is fifty times more than ever the wisdom of our age thought fit to venture for the preservation of Christianity, there is no reason we should be at so great a loss merely for the sake of destroying it.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/An_Argument_Against_Abolishing_Christianity

1709 Queen Anne of Great Britain: The Copyright Act

2011-12-07T07:23:00.004-08:00

Anno Octavo
Annæ Reginæ.

An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by Vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or Purchasers of such Copies, during the Times therein mentioned.

Whereas Printers, Booksellers, and other Persons, have of late frequently taken the Liberty of Printing, Reprinting, and Publishing, or causing to be Printed, Reprinted, and Published Books, and other Writings, without the Con sent of the Authors or Proprietors of such Books and Writings, to their very great Detriment, and too often to the Ruin of them and their Families: For Preventing therefore such Practices for the future, and for the Encouragement of Learned Men to Compose and Write useful Books; May it please Your Majesty, that it may be Enacted, and be it Enacted by the Queens most Excellent Majesty, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons in this present Parliament Assembled, and by the Authority of the same, That from and after the Tenth Day of April, One thousand seven hundred and ten, the Author of any Book or Books already Printed, who hath not Transferred to any other the Copy or Copies of such Book or Books, Share or Shares thereof, or the Bookseller or Booksellers, Printer or Printers, or other Person or Persons, who hath or have Purchased or Acquired the Copy or Copies of any Book or Books, in order to Print or Reprint the same, shall have the sole Right and Liberty of Printing such Book and Books for the Term of One and twenty Years, to Commence from the said Tenth Day of April, and no longer; and that the Author of any Book or Books already Composed and not Printed and Published, or that shall hereafter be Composed, and his Assignee, or Assigns, shall have the sole Liberty of Printing and Reprinting such Book and Books for the Term of four-teen Years, to Commence from the Day of the First Publishing the same, and no longer; And that if any other Bookseller, Printer, or other Person whatsoever, from and after the Tenth Day of April, One thousand seven hundred and ten, within the times Granted and Limited by this Act, as aforesaid, shall Print, Reprint, or Import, or cause to be Printed, Reprinted, or Imported any such Book or Books, without the Consent of the Proprietor or Proprietors thereof first had and obtained in Writing, Signed in the Presence of Two or more Credible Witnesses; or knowing the same to be so Printed or Reprinted, without the Consent of the Proprietors, shall Sell, Publish, or Expose to Sale, or cause to be Sold, Published, or Exposed to Sale, any such Book or Books, without such Consent first had and obtained, as aforesaid, Then such Offender or Offenders shall Forfeit such Book or Books, and all and every Sheet or Sheets, being part of such Book or Books, to the Proprietor or Proprietors of the Copy thereof, who shall forthwith Damask and make Waste-Paper of them: And further, That every such Offender or Offenders, shall Forfeit One Peny for every sheet which shall be found in his, her, or their Custody, either Printed or Printing, Published or Exposed to Sale, contrary to the true intent and meaning of this Act, the one Moiety thereof to the Queens [sic] most Excellent Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, and the other Moiety thereof to any Person or Persons that shall Sue for the same, to be Recovered in any of Her Majesties Courts of Record at Westminster, by Action of Debt, Bill, Plaint, or Information, in which no Wager of Law, Essoign, Privilege, or Protection, or more than one Imparlance, shall be allowed.

And whereas many Persons may through Ignorance Offend against this Act, unless some Provision be made whereby the Property in every such Book, as is intended by this Act to be Secured to the proprietor or Proprietors thereof, may be ascertained, as likewise the Consent of such Proprietor or Proprietors for the Printing or Reprinting of such Book or Books may from time to time be known; Be it therefore further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid, That nothing in this Act contained shall be construed to extend to subject any Bookseller, Printer, or other Person whatsoever, to the Forfeitures or Penalties therein mentioned, for or by reason of the Printing or Reprinting of any Book or Books without such Consent, as aforesaid, unless the Title to the Copy of such Book or Books hereafter Published shall, before such Publication be Entred, in the Register-Book of the Company of Stationers, in such manner as hath been usual, which Register-Book shall at all times be kept at the Hall of the said Company, and unless such Consent of the Proprietor or Proprietors be in like manner Entred [sic], as aforesaid, for every of which several Entries, Six Pence shall be Paid, and no more; which said Register-Book may, at all Seasonable [sic; should be: Reasonable] and Convenient times, be Resorted to, and Inspected by any Bookseller, Printer, or other Person, for the Purposes before mentioned, without any Fee or Reward; and the Clerk of the said Company of Stationers, shall, when and as often as thereunto required, give a Certificate under his Hand of such Entry or Entries, and for every such Certificate, may take a Fee not exceeding Six Pence.

Provided nevertheless, That if the Clerk of the said Company of Stationers, for the time being shall Refuse or Neglect to Register, or make such Entry or Entries, or to give such Certificate, being thereunto Required by the Author or Proprietor of such Copy or Copies, in the Presence of Two or more Credible Witnesses, That then such Person and Persons so refusing, Notice being first duly given of such Refusal, by an Advertisement in the Gazette, shall have the like Benefit, as if such Entry or Entries, Certificate or Certificates had been duly made and given; and that the Clerks so refusing, shall, for any such Offence, Forfeit to the Proprietor of such Copy or Copies the Sum of Twenty Pounds, to be Recovered in any of Her Majesties Courts of Record at Westminster, by Action of Debt, Bill, Plaint, or Information, in which no Wager of Law, Essoign, Privilege or Protection, or more than one Imparlance shall be allowed.

Provided nevertheless, and it is hereby further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid, That if any Bookseller or Booksellers, Printer or Printers, shall, after the said Five and twentieth Day of March, One thousand seven hundred and ten, set a Price upon, or Sell or Expose to Sale, any Book or Books at such a Price or Rate as shall be Conceived by any Person or Persons to be High and Unreasonable; It shall and may be Lawful for any Person or Persons to make Complaint thereof to the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury for the time being; the Lord Chancellor, or Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of Great Britain for the time being; the Lord Bishop of London for the time being; the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Queens [sic] Bench, the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, the Lord Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, for the time being; the Vice-Chancellors of the Two Universities for the time being, in that part of Great Britain called England; the Lord President of the Sessions for the time being; the Lord Justice General for the time being; the Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer for the time being; the Rector of the College of Edinburgh for the time being, in that part of Great Britain called Scotland; who, or any one of them, shall and have hereby full Power and Authority from time to time, to Send for, Summon, or Call before him or them such Bookseller or Booksellers, Printer or Printers, and to Examine and Enquire of the reason of the Dearness and Inhauncement of the Price or Value of such Book or Books by him or them so Sold or Exposed to Sale; and if upon such Enquiry and Examination it shall be found, that the Price of such Book or Books is Inhaunced, or any wise too High or Unreasonable, Then and in such case, the said Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Chancellor or Lord Keeper, Bishop of London, two Chief Justices, Chief Baron, Vice Chancellors of the Universities, in that part of Great Britain called England, and the said Lord President of the Sessions, Lord Justice General, Lord Chief Baron, and Rector of the College of Edinburgh, in that part of Great Britain called Scotland, or any one or more of them, so Enquiring and Examining, have hereby full Power and Authority to Reform and Redress the same, and to Limit and Settle the Price of every such Printed Book and Books, from time to time, according to the best of their Judgements, and as to them shall seem Just and Reasonable; and in case of Alteration of the Rate or Price from what was Set or Demanded by such Bookseller or Booksellers, Printer or Printers, to Award and Order such Bookseller and Booksellers, Printer and Printers, to Pay all the Costs and Charges that the Person or Persons so Complaining shall be put unto, by reason of such Complaint, and of the causing such Rate or Price to be so Limited and Settled; all which shall be done by the said Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Chancellor, or Lord Keeper, Bishop of London, two Chief Justices, Chief Baron, Vice Chancellors of the Two Universities, in that part of Great Britain called England, and the said Lord President of the Sessions, Lord Justice General, Lord Chief Baron, and Rector of the College of Edinburgh, in that part of Great Britain called Scotland, or any one of them, by Writing under their Hands and Seals, and thereof Publick Notice shall be forthwith given by the said Bookseller or Booksellers, Printer or Printers, by an Advertisement in the Gazette; and if any Bookseller or Booksellers, Printer or Printers, shall, after such Settlement made of the said Rate and Price, Sell, or expose to Sale any Book or Books, at a higher or greater Price than what shall have been so Limited and Settled, as aforesaid, then and in every such case such Bookseller and Booksellers, Printer and Printers, shall Forfeit the Sum of Five Pounds for every such Book so by him, her, or them Sold or Exposed to Sale; One Moiety thereof to the Queens most Excellent Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, and the other Moiety to any Person or Persons that shall Sue for the same, to be Recovered, with Costs of Suit, in any of Her Majesties [sic] Courts of Record at Westminster, by Action of Debt, Bill, Plaint or Information, in which no Wager of Law, Essoign, Privilege or Protection, or more than one Imparlance, shall be allowed.

Provided always, and it is hereby Enacted, That Nine Copies of each Book or Books, upon the best Paper, that from and after the said Tenth Day of April, One thousand seven hundred and ten, shall be Printed and Published, as aforesaid, or Reprinted and Published with Additions, shall, by the Printer and Printers thereof, be Delivered to the Warehouse-Keeper of the said Company of Stationers for the time being, at the Hall of the said Company, before such Publication made, for the Use of the Royal Library, the Libraries of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, the Libraries of the Four Universities in Scotland, the Library of Sion College in London, and the Library commonly called the Library belonging to the Faculty of Advocates at Edinburgh respectively; which said Warehouse-Keeper, is hereby required, within Ten Days after Demand by the Keepers of the respective Libraries, or any Person or Persons by them or any of them Authorised to Demand the said Copy, to Deliver the same, for the Use of the aforesaid Libraries; and if any Proprietor, Bookseller or Printer, or the said Warehouse-Keeper of the said Company of Stationers, shall not observe the Direction of this Act therein, That then he and they, so making Default in not Delivering the said Printed Copies, as aforesaid, shall Forfeit, besides the value of the said Printed Copies, the sum of Five Pounds for every Copy not so Delivered, as also the value of the said Printed Copy not so Delivered, the same to be Recovered by the Queens [sic] Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, and by the Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of any of the said Universities, and by the President and Fellows of Sion College, and the said Faculty of Advocates at Edinburgh, with their full Costs respectively.

Provided always, and be it further Enacted, That if any Person or Persons incur the Penalties contained in this Act, in that part of Great Britain called Scotland, they shall be recoverable by any Action before the Court of Session there.

Provided, That nothing in this Act contained do extend, or shall be construed to extend, to Prohibit the Importation, Vending, or Selling of any Books in Greek, Latin, or any other Foreign Language Printed beyond the Seas; Any thing in this Act contained to the contrary notwithstanding.

And be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid, That if any Action or Suit shall be Commenced or Brought against any Person or Persons whatsoever, for doing or causing to be done any thing in pursuance of this Act, the Defendants in such Action may Plead the General Issue, and give the Special Matter in Evidence; and if upon such Action a Verdict be given for the Defendant, or the Plaintiff become Nonsuited, or Discontinue his Action, then the Defendant shall have and recover his full Costs, for which he shall have the same Remedy as a Defendant in any case by Law hath.

Provided, That nothing in this Act contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, either to Prejudice or Confirm any Right that the said Universities, or any of them, or any Person or Persons have, or claim to have, to the Printing or Reprinting any Book or Copy already Printed, or hereafter to be Printed.

Provided nevertheless, That all Actions, Suits, Bills, Indictments, or Informations for any Offence that shall be Committed against this Act, shall be Brought, Sued, and Commenced within Three Months next after such Offence Committed, or else the same shall be Void and of none Effect.

Provided always, That after the Expiration of the said Term of Fourteen Years, the sole Right of Printing or Disposing of Copies shall return to the Authors thereof, if they are then Living, for another Term of Fourteen Years.
FINIS.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_1709

1711 Joseph Addison The Spectator - Westminster Abbey

2011-12-07T07:23:00.003-08:00

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Westminster_Abbey_%28Addison%29

[Westminster Abbey] Spectator No 26. FRIDAY, MARCH 30, 1711.
by Joseph Addison

Pallida mors æquo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas
Regumque turres, O beate Sexti,
Vitæ summa brevis spem nos vetat inchoare longam:
Jam te premet nox, fabulæque manes,
Et domus exilis Plutonia.—HOR. i. 4. 13.[1]

When[2] I am in a serious humour, I very often walk by myself in Westminster Abbey, where the gloominess of the place, and the use to which it is applied, with the solemnity of the building, and the condition of the people who lie in it, are apt to fill the mind with a kind of melancholy, or rather thoughtfulness, that is not disagreeable. I yesterday passed a whole afternoon in the churchyard, the cloisters, and the church, amusing myself with the tombstones and inscriptions that I met with in those several regions of the dead. Most of them recorded nothing else of the buried person, but that he was born upon one day, and died upon another: the whole history of his life being comprehended in those two circumstances, that are common to all mankind. I could not but look upon these registers of existence, whether of brass or marble, as a kind of satire upon the departed persons; who had left no other memorial of them, but that they were born and that they died. They put me in mind of several persons mentioned in the battles of heroic poems, who have sounding names given them, for no other reason but that they may be killed, and are celebrated for nothing but being knocked on the head.

[Greek] Glaukon te, Medonta te, Thersilochon te. HOM. IL. P.216.

Glaucumque, Medontaque, Thersilochumque.VIRG. Aen. vi. 483.[3]

The life of these men is finely described in Holy Writ by “the path of an arrow,” which is immediately closed up and lost.

Upon my going into the church, I entertained myself with the digging of a grave; and saw in every shovelful of it that was thrown up, the fragment of a bone or skull intermixt with a kind of fresh mouldering earth, that some time or other had a place in the composition of a human body. Upon this, I began to consider with myself what innumerable multitudes of people lay confused together under the pavement of that ancient cathedral; how men and women, friends and enemies, priests and soldiers, monks and prebendaries, were crumbled amongst one another, and blended together in the same common mass; how beauty, strength, and youth, with old age, weakness and deformity, lay undistinguished in the same promiscuous heap of matter.

After having thus surveyed this great magazine of mortality, as it were, in the lump; I examined it more particularly by the accounts which I found on several of the monuments which are raised in every quarter of that ancient fabric. Some of them were covered with such extravagant epitaphs, that, if it were possible for the dead person to be acquainted with them, he would blush at the praises which his friends have bestowed upon him. There are others so excessively modest, that they deliver the character of the person departed in Greek or Hebrew, and by that means are not understood once in a twelve month. In the poetical quarter, I found there were poets who had no monuments, and monuments which had no poets. I observed indeed that the present war had filled the church with many of these uninhabited monuments, which had been erected to the memory of persons whose bodies were perhaps buried in the plains of Blenheim, or in the bosom of the ocean.

I could not but be very much delighted with several modern epitaphs, which are written with great elegance of expression and justness of thought, and therefore do honour to the living as well as to the dead. As a foreigner is very apt to conceive an idea of the ignorance or politeness of a nation, from the turn of their public monuments and inscriptions, they should be submitted to the perusal of men of learning and genius, before they are put in execution. Sir Cloudesly Shovel’s monument has very often given me great offence: instead of the brave rough English Admiral, which was the distinguishing character of that plain gallant man, he is represented on his tomb by the figure of a beau, dressed in a long periwig, and reposing himself upon velvet cushions under a canopy of state. The inscription is answerable to the monument; for instead of celebrating the many remarkable actions he had performed in the service of his country, it acquaints us only with the manner of his death, in which it was impossible for him to reap any honour. The Dutch, whom we are apt to despise for want of genius, show an infinitely greater taste of antiquity and politeness in their buildings and works of this nature, than what we meet with in those of our own country. The monuments of their admirals, which have been erected at the public expense, represent them like themselves; and are adorned with rostral crowns and naval ornaments, with beautiful festoons of seaweed, shells, and coral.

But to return to our subject. I have left the repository of our English kings for the contemplation of another day, when I shall find my mind disposed for so serious an amusement. I know that entertainments of this nature are apt to raise dark and dismal thoughts in timorous minds, and gloomy imaginations; but for my own part, though I am always serious, I do not know what it is to be melancholy; and can therefore take a view of nature in her deep and solemn scenes, with the same pleasure as in her most gay and delightful ones. By this means I can improve myself with those objects, which others consider with terror. When I look upon the tombs of the great, every emotion of envy dies in me; when I read the epitaphs of the beautiful, every inordinate desire goes out; when I meet with the grief of parents upon a tombstone, my heart melts with compassion; when I see the tomb of the parents themselves, I consider the vanity of grieving for those whom we must quickly follow; when I see kings lying by those who deposed them, when I consider rival wits placed side by side, or the holy men that divided the world with their contests and disputes, I reflect with sorrow and astonishment on the little competitions, factions and debates of mankind. When I read the several dates of the tombs, of some that died yesterday, and some six hundred years ago, I consider that great day when we shall all of us be contemporaries, and make our appearance together.