Balancing the Constitution: Bicameralism in Post-revolutionary France, 1814–31

After the defeat of Napoleon, representative institutions were introduced in many European states. In France, as in other countries, this new institution was modelled on the English example: a bicameral legislature with an elective and a hereditary chamber. However, the Chamber of Peers failed to live up to its model: it soon became clear that it did not behave as an independent, aristocratic chamber capable of holding the balance between the king and the popular Chamber. Restoration liberals concluded on the basis of this failure that the English political model was simply unsuitable for a levelled society such as that in post-revolutionary France. In 1831, the hereditary Chamber of Peers was abolished. The experience of the French with the Chamber of Peers therefore seems to confirm the idea of a French ‘Sonderweg’ developed by historians such as François Furet and Pierre Rosanvallon. However, it should be noted that even after 1831 the idea of a balance as such did not disappear from French political culture. French publicists suggested that the balanced constitution of the English could be imitated in France in different ways, without necessitating the creation of an aristocratic institution. Thus, the example of the French Chamber of Peers shows that institutional transfers had an important impact on French political culture.

résumé: Après la défaite de Napoléon, des institutions représentatives furent introduites dans beaucoup d'états européens. En France comme dans d'autres pays, la nouvelle institution fut modelée sur le modèle britannique du bicaméralisme avec une chambre élue et une chambre héréditaire. Cependant la chambre des pairs ne réussit pas à imiter son modèle. Il devint rapidement évident qu'elle ne représentait pas une aristocratie indépendante capable de servir de lien entre la chambre et le roi. Les libéraux de la restauration conclurent de cet échec que le modèle britannique ne correspondait pas à une société nivelée comme la France post-révolutionnaire. En 1831 la chambre des pairs hereditaire fut abolie. Cette expérience de la chambre des pairs semble confirmer l'idée d'une exception française telle que François Furet et Pierre Rosanvallon la décrive. Cependant l'idée ne disparut pas et cette notion d'équilibre resta dans le discours politique français. Les publicistes Français suggérèrent qu'une constitution équilibrée puisse être imitée sans une institution aristocratique. Cet exemple montre à quel point les transferts institutionnels eurent un impact dans la culture politique française.     

Early military industry in Denmark-Norway, 1500–1814

From the 16th to the 18th centuries, the Danish-Norwegian state sponsored the development of military industry essentially capable of covering all needs of the army and navy. Most establishments continued into the 20th century. This industry was concentrated in Denmark, despite the generally more favourable industrial environment in Norway. The military industry was, however, tightly integrated with the military itself and thus located within reach of the main base in Copenhagen. Despite the importance of private management and, increasingly, private ownership, the industry existed as a spinoff, dependent on the expertise of officers as well as the custom of the army and navy.     

The future of Poland, 1914–1917: France and Great Britain in the Triple Entente

Abstract

THE POLISH QUESTION — whether, and if so how and in what form, to recreate an independent Polish state — was one of the most vexing problems that faced European diplomats during the First World War. Believing that aroused Polish patriotism could be a powerful weapon against the Central Powers, yet fearing that support for Polish national aspirations would alienate their Russian ally and fracture the Triple Entente, British and French statesmen had to decide whether they could include the recreation of Poland among their war aims without jeopardizing the Entente, and hence the chances of victory. Given their different strategic priorities, the French and the British gave different answers.     

The House of Nassau between France and Independence, 1795–1814: Lesser Powers,Strategies of Conflict Resolution,Dynastic Networks

The historical agency of the small- and medium-sized historical actors, the so-called Lesser Powers, remains much neglected in the historiography of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic period. The reason for this is that hitherto historians have failed to develop a historical perspective that does justice to the particularities of Lesser Power agency. This article explores the historical agency of two Lesser Powers, Nassau and the Netherlands, in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic era, though with a particular emphasis on the era of the reconstruction of the post-Napoleonic international order, the years 1812–15. By viewing the agency of these historical actors through the prism of the dynastic network of the House of Nassau, rather than through the prism of its component parts, the Walramian Nassaus of Weilburg, Usingen and Saarbrücken and the Ottonian Nassaus, commonly referred to as the House of Orange-Nassau, the ruling dynasty of the Dutch Republic, this article offers a new approach to researching Lesser Power strategies of international conflict resolution, thereby hopefully contributing to the creation of a much-needed historical narrative of Lesser Powers.