Belgium -- History; World War, 1914-1918 -- Belgium
Such a centralization of the national institutions was quite necessary
if the danger of being dominated by France was to be avoided. France
was rapidly becoming united under the leadership of its kings, who
possessed a permanent army, the right to impose a perpetual _taille_,
and the exercise of sovereign justice. In the face of this united and
powerful monarchy, the Burgundian state could not remain separated. The
Belgian provinces could no longer remain isolated from each other and
limit themselves to an individualistic and egotistic policy. It was
seen that everything ought to be concentrated in the hands of a strong
prince. That was the new idea that was introduced into the constitution
of the Belgian principalities, an idea that had never appeared prior to
the fifteenth century. Throughout the Middle Ages the antiquated idea
of the state as a collective person distinct from its members never
clearly appears. The concept of sovereignty--absolute power subject to
no control--was also lacking. The individual life dominated the life of
the community. Little by little the renascence of the study of Roman
law introduced other concepts, namely, those of state and sovereignty.
The students of Roman law, the “legists,” stood for a government that
would be one, indivisible, strong, absolute, and active. They believed
that all that tended to limit the complete exercise of public authority
should be discarded: the state was held to be impersonal and almighty.
That new concept of the state was embodied in the politics of the
Burgundian dukes during the fifteenth century. Centralization and the
absolute power of the prince took the place of the former personal
and collective privileges. This idea triumphed, not only because the
Burgundian dukes were strong, but also because it was in accordance
with the needs of the time and the wishes of the majority of the people.
Of course, the dukes, when they tried to realize their political
centralization, met with some resistance on the part of the powerful
communes. But Philip the Good cleverly avoided any open fight. He
simply tried to subject the cities to his control--to prevent them from
being a state within the state. He took part in the appointment of the
magistrates, ordered their accounts to be examined by his officers,
forbade advantage to be taken of the small cities and the peasantry,
and made the judgments of their tribunals subject to review by his own
councils of justice. Flanders endeavored to evade the results of that
policy. There were serious revolts in Bruges (1436-47) and in Ghent
(1450-53), and the cities of Brabant, particularly Malines, seemed
unwilling to adapt themselves to the new situation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account