nobles/princes Flashcards
The nobles of early modern Europe became engaged in rivalry with the princes of the increasing ? state
absolutist
confronted their rulers with powerful ideologies and practical weapons
what was the central impetus for resistance? which translated into political conflict as early modern Kings such as Philip II exercised suppressive authority which was interpreted as a deliberate affront to noble authority
religion
early princes became ? in internal politics and ? in Econ handlings
aloof
irresponsible
THUS EMPOWERING the nobilities of Spain and France
The only uniting factor between the nobility and princes of early modern Europe was
fiscal greed, and each exploited one another to further their ecclesiastical, judicial, and seigneurial desires which resulted in ‘rivalry
time of changing ideas about what royalty meant which increased the distance between
crown and court, as kings like Phillip II adopted a sacrosanct belief in his divine rulership
the nobles took ? matters into their own hands and visibly exercised localised and expansive power independent from the prince, as seen in the Netherlands under Phillip
fiscal
Yet ? was the ultimate exercise of autonomy despite the debility and fragility of early modern monarchs,
sovereignty
relationship between nobles and princes described as one of
rivalry
weakened relatio due 2 background of 1
Econ problems
ECON difficulties resulted from two linked developments which severed noble loyalties to the Crown 1
1) The Price Revolution of the 16th century created problems for the lower nobility whose income fell behind the rapidly rising price
ECON difficulties resulted from two linked developments which severed noble loyalties to the Crown 2
this was exacerbated by the income based primarily on rents from long-term leases which witnessed sequential difficulties
period of expansion ended in the decades around 1600, marked by a nobility struggling to
‘keep their heads above water’ during a phase of recession and contraction as a result of falling prices, unstable markets and a general slowdown in the economy
who struggled uniquely Econ wise
uniquely true of families in the lower and middle noble ranks who lacked the access to the monarchical court and thus its patronage and opportunities which eclipsed the higher nobility of this economic strife
There was no motive for the monarchies of early modern Europe to widen the membership of the nobility who experienced the privileges of Royal court
protection and high culture diffused by the Crown
how did higher lineages also experienced financial drawbacks which severed monarchical alliances
Increased complex and expensive warfare in early modern Europe forced monarchs to find new financial sources to fund competitive military developments such as gunpowder technology, which subsequently required better training, and new systems of fortification
?WHO? striking example of a monarch who created certain noble rivalries as a result of his failure to cover military expenditure, thus declaring state bankruptcies in ?
Phillip II
1557, 1560, 1576 and 1596
As his reign continued, following a short ‘honeymoon’ phase of noble support, Phillip amassed a debt of
85.5 million ducats (almost nine times the average annual income)
Phillip proceeded to impose a system of taxation on his noble subjects ‘on a new scale’ – both in terms of
tax value and the deviation from the tradition of exemption
HIGHER LINEAGE ECON -
triggered widespread noble discontent as seen by the Spanish Count of Benavente, whose income fell by one-fifth from 1638–1643, at the outset of the mid-century economic hardship as a result of high prices and tax.
detrimental to the nobility who were responsible for the cultural and material developments of the Renaissance, bearing the costs of the more opulent lifestyle
NOBLES WERE at once ‘forced up by conspicuous consumption’ by their expectations to build expensive country residences and town palaces
whilst also anchored by their financial limitations moulded by the crown
Despite a spiralling level of debt that charged resistance and often fury at the early modern princes, the nobility also channelled a resilience to such treatment.
The nobility became empowered by political and economic alliances with absolutist monarchs, but also by the
‘new offices that appeared everywhere’ external from crown intervention.
Early modern European Kings tended to select their principal advisors from the nobility, and whilst not strictly an ‘alliance’, relationships were formed that were
transactional and mutually advantageous
examples of members from the high nobility who formed propitious connections with princes
employments of Richelieu in France, Strafford in England, Olivares in Spain and Oxenstierna in Sweden
nobles connected to princes became rich through state service despite it
detracting from traditional ‘noble’ duties of a military nature, and they became allies to some extent in the sense that they contributed to early 17th century absolutism as subordinates to their princes
They succeeded in gaining substantial shares in state civil offices and in Spain, France, and the Netherlands each nobility dominated the army of the court
Charles V controlled Vienna as an autocrat, or at least desirably, but he allowed a select nobility few official
positions in government
far narrower enterprise than Phillip II, who employed a vast number of Spanish nobles in the Dutch government such as Albert VII
state developments often united the crown and nobility, with certain privileges as a result working directly to the noble’s benefit
supplying them with new forms of power, dignity and wealth – and even rule for Archduke Albert VII of Austria in the Spanish Netherlands
this did not occur without the suppression of forms of political action for many nobles – but for those who gained Royal privileges and protections, the benefits of membership in strong government surpassed its costs
The consolidation of the social elite and an extension of monarchical authority were synonymous and worked to ally the aristocracy in a way of
‘styled absolutism’
where was the principal source from which Trained specialists were demanded in increasing numbers to supply the enlarged military forces and to staff the agencies of central and local government
the traditional nobility
nobles can be considered as prominent rivals in terms of
local dominance; all domains of life orbited around the nobility in small towns and villages who exercised their own regulations as in the Low Countries in early modern Europe
Rural populaces, covering the largest geographical area in Europe, were controlled by
nobles or statesmen who had the freedom to pursue their own interests and beliefs – and thus in a very localised way they serve as serious competitors, or ‘rivals’ to the monarchies
Control over more distant territories was accomplished primarily by winning over and cooperating with the local elite, and this was something that the prince could not compete with.
monarchical authority depended in the seventeenth century on
partnership with the social elite – although ‘partnership’ was often a loose concept and defined only the employment of the noble to the prince and nothing in-between
Phillip II’s royal court which was
‘full of envy, impiety and ambition’ Ronald G. Asch, Adolf M. Birke, Princes, Patronage and their Nobility
nobles such as his own son Carlos and his half-brother John of Austria sought to challenge him violently as a result of his continuous absence and narrowed consultative process
consolidation of the social elite explains exigency why the sale of offices
flourished during these decades, subsequently extending localised autonomy to larger directorates
most formalised in Bourbon France which led to a vast expansion of the robe nobility who held judicial and administrative posts
were also found in the Netherlands as a reaction against Phillip II’s Spanish administration in the Dutch government - The States-General strengthened the bonds of Dutch interest in opposition to Phillip’s rule – a crucial ‘rivalry’ between nobles and prince
Monarchs possessed the resources, abundant available land and the effective monopoly on the
the provision of titles to endow the aristocracy, and they did so without choice in the case of bankruptcies in France and Spain, and by choice in local administrative employment
17th century rulers established powerful and enduring aristocracies upon and they became co-dependent
more allies?
Despite the nobility possessing freedoms in localised administration, sovereignty ultimately dictated the constitutional, religious and judicial order of their offices
they gained powerful governmental positions exercised in subordination king, gaining wealth, status and power as well as freedoms a bureaucratic sense.
of religion, pursuit of power was witnessed by nobilities against the prince in early modern Europe – and thus a rivalry for
religious dominance was observed
Religious pluralism failed to co-exist in the early modern state, and thus a unified Crown and state which was translated into
seen best??
civil conflict
the Spanish – Netherlands, where Dutch nobles with Protestant leanings resisted the Catholic force of Phillip II
In 1565 Phillip’s Council of State directed Inquisition officials to enforce
anti-heresy laws, which triggered fury with the nobility as they interpreted the heretical allegations as an affront against their authority
Both the high and low nobles resisted his religious policies, isolating Phillip from his support base –
religious rivalry was real, yet Phillip was weak and his threat to the Dutch was met with firm and impressive resistance.
The lower nobles possessing Protestant leanings acted at Culemborg forming the
Compromise of the Nobility with the express intention of forcing Margaret of Parma to change the heresy law.
By April 1566 400 nobles supported the Compromise and assembled at Brussels and Phillip’s religious motivations were hushed under the fever pitch of
Protestantism
Iconoclasm of the summer was widespread and hit
Antwerp, Ghent, Amsterdam, Leiden and Utrecht, and The Beggars raised troops in opposition to the government – by no means was religious unity possible
Phillip took military measures against the Calvinists, executing Count Egmont and Count Hoorne, marking a conclusive separation between
crown and government which fated Phillip’s reign
Even Catholics loyal to Phillip took to defensive arrangements against his Spanish troops during the
Third Revolt in 1576 and heresy laws were suspended
. Thus religious divisions severed prince from nobility, reflective of the Europe-wide tensions – or ‘rivalries’ between
Catholicism and Protestantism.
Rivalry became a response to the early modern monarchical belief about the significance of
royalty
Whilst being cautious about disparities and complex nuances, the early modern King attached increasing grandeur to the monarchy to at once stress the
holiness of their functions and the extended distance from his aristocratic subjects
In France, Louis XIV emphasised that all rewards came from him which
riled the nobility who believed that it was by their merit that they received gifts and privileges
The transformed fashions and images of prosperity and luxury that are associated with early modern Europe reflects the primacy of monarchical competition against other
rulers and ones’ own nobility
The portrait of Phillip II by Titian (1551) reveals the majestic and mighty self-perception of the early modern monarchs, reflective of
the sacrosanct ideas of royalty that transcend and belittle the nobility
also publicly visible in early modern ceremonies and parades which would mark the King or prince as the superior and the nobility physically and symbolically below as the servant. This separation can be observed in
Juan de la Corte’s Procession for the imperial coronation of Charles V in Bologna [on 24th February 1530] – depicting him under a royal canopy carried by all magnates, soldiers and dukes, whilst he ‘seeds money’ as a display of his magnificence. This is akin to the ritual of Louis XIV at Versailles who would eat only alone ‘separated by railings and servants’, which reflects a transformed belief about the significance of royalty, as his father Henry IV who would dine ‘with his friends’, arguably the nobility
This princely distance from ‘other mortals’ carried deep political undertones signifying the king’s commitment to superseding all rights of his subjects. In this way a ‘rivalry’ becomes an inaccurate term as competition for the superiority of the princely divine position was impossible, translated in the attitude of Louis XIV who
‘permitted no one to feel such likeness’ .
yet many nobles governed localised powerbases thus rivals of a certain degree to the princes. Although this in itself was a means of consolidating the ‘composite’ royal power, as rulers were
very aware of the importance of sustaining local identities and accepting regional differences’
GREENGRASS - CONQUEST AND COALESCENCE
something that Charles V sought to achieve when he opened the Burgundian Order of the Golden Fleece to aristocrats from the various kingdoms of his composite monarchy, in order to manipulate local nobilities into enjoying a measure of self-government ‘which left them without any urgent need to challenge the status’
Thus the prince ‘as the fount of distributive justice, bestowing honours and profits upon those nobles whose services rendered them worthy’ at once
strengthened and ruptured alliances with the nobility. This depended on the degree to which ‘he rendered them worthy’ The origins of the Modern European State 1450-1725, Shennan, J. H. // also increasingly, the degree to which the nobles rendered the prince worthy of their money and support
Nobles built up a powerful ‘dynastic memory’ in their localised powers, which paved the way for the dynasty to develop its own identities outside the
centralized royal hubs – and in this way, the nobles were more rivals than allies of princely prerogative
Dynastic Identity in Early Modern Europe: Rulers, Aristocrats and the Formation of Identities, Liesbeth Geevers, Mirella Marini
The relations between the nobles and princes of early modern Europe were marked by hostility and conflict in terms of religion and economics, and thus the empowered nobles sought to combat their threatened positions by
pursuing competition with princes.
