DOCSLIB.ORG

A Counterfactual Analysis of the Regime of Permanent Neutrality, 1839–​1914

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Counterfactual Analysis of the Regime of Permanent Neutrality, 1839–​1914 chapter 2 A Counterfactual Analysis of the Regime of Permanent Neutrality, 1839– 1914 Let us first look briefly at permanently neutral Belgium. Virtually all studies that I have read agree that Belgian public and official opinion came to accept obligatory neutrality as Belgium’s normal international condition by 1914. Within a decade of the signing of the treaties of 1839, Belgian diplomats and international lawyers, moreover, came to understand the great- power guaran- tee as one that was both “joint and several”— i.e., requiring the intervention of guarantors individually and not just collectively in the event Belgian neutrality were violated.1 Indeed, from the very beginning, Belgium’s kings, following the example of Leopold I of Saxe- Coburg- Gotha (b. 1790, r. 1831–1865), 2 who, in 1 The British did not finally agree on the legally binding nature of the 1839 guarantee until the crisis of July- August 1914. For a thorough discussion, see Thomas (1984), pp. 44–56, 198– 209, 241– 248, 275– 323, 368– 383, 507– 529. According to Sir Harold Nicolson, 3rd ed. (1963), Chap- ter 10: “Diplomatic Language,” pp. 122– 136, p. 132: “Guarantee, Treaties of. Certain treaties con- tain clauses under which the signatories guarantee their execution and maintenance. Thus under the Treaty of London of 1839 {Great Britain} guaranteed the integrity of Belgium and it was in execution of this pledge that {London} made war in 1914. A great difference exists between a ‘collective guarantee’ and a ‘joint and several guarantee.’ In the former case (as in the case of {Britain’s} guarantee under the 1867 Treaty of Luxemburg integrity) a signatory is only obliged to take action if all the other signatories do the same. Conversely, a ‘joint and several’ guarantee (as, it was contended, had been given to Belgium in 1839) obliges every signatory to take action even if the other signatories evade or violate their obligations.” See also Henri Haag (2009); and William E. Lingelbach (1933). 2 As King of the Belgians, Leopold I was the uncle of Queen Victoria (1837–1901) by virtue of the fact that her mother, Victoire of Saxe- Coburg (1786– 1861), was his sister. See Theo Aron- son (1968). The most recent biography of Belgium’s first king is Gita Deneckere (2011). See also Olivier Defrance (2004). In his counterfactual look at the events of 1830–31 (2014), Tom Verschaffel speculates as to what would have happened had King Willem I of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands (1772– 1843, r. 1815– 40) been assassinated after attending an opera in Brussels on 25 August 1830. According to Verschaffel’s rewrite, the dead king’s eldest son Willem (1792– 1849) is then elected by the States General to succeed him, a choice that has the approval of the Catholic and Liberal reformers in Brussels, who hope that the new monarch, a Free Mason, would protect freedom of the press, lower taxes, agree to the concept of ministerial responsibili- ty, and increase the number of Belgians in the administration. Conservatives in the North, however, seeing King Willem ii as too liberal, throw their support to the new king’s younger brother, Frederick (1797– 1881), who, after a short civil war that leads to the separation of the two countries, is elected King Frederick I of the Netherlands on 28 August 1831. The great © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2019 | DOI:10.1163/9789004395855_003 16 CHAPTER 2 Brussels on 21 July 1831, took the oath to uphold the constitution and protect the territorial integrity of the county, considered Belgian independence as in- separable from neutrality and therefore they pressed continually for military reforms, such as eliminating the system of purchased replacements, and im- proved fortifications to defend both neutrality and independence.3 It was an uphill battle since the forces of antimilitarism in the country were strong, es- pecially on the Catholic right. But, in the end, as the war clouds in Europe gath- ered and efforts to influence opinion by pro-militarisation lobbying groups gained momentum, as Nel de Mûelenaere so effectively demonstrates, the Belgian parliament voted in favour of general conscription by a comfortable majority in late May 1913. The military law of 1913 raised the annual contin- gent to 33,000 and would have provided Belgium with an overall armed force of 340,000 men by 1920 had war not broken out in August 1914.4 It may have been too little too late, but the Belgian decision to resist the German ultima- tum demonstrated that the country’s independence and neutrality would be powers recognise the result, which sees Antwerp remain part of the northern kingdom, while Limburg with Maastricht and the entire Grand Duchy of Luxemburg become part of Belgium. Though the brothers reconcile their differences by 1843, the Netherlands goes on to be governed in an authoritarian manner, while Belgium becomes a stable constitutional monarchy with a strong parliament. Unfortunately, the author does not deal with the con- sequences of Dutch control of the port of Antwerp for the industrialising and trade- based Belgian economy. 3 See Thomas (1984), pp. 389– 423. See also Lieutenant- Général Albert E. Crahay (1987), pp. 25– 115; Nadine Lubelski- Bernard (1981); and Lode Wils (1981). The extent to which Belgian mon- archs, military officials, and governments were conscious of the necessity for robust defences and aware of the geostrategic role that canals, rivers, and railways played in military planning has been analysed in the enormously informative doctoral dissertation by Christophe Bêchet (5 vols., 2012), a work that also examines French and Prussian (German) war- planning and the problem of crossing Belgium, if necessary, before the First World War. 4 On Belgian antimilitarism, see F. Lehouck (1958). Recent research by Nel de Mûelenaere shows (2012) that the militarisation lobby of ex- soldiers and mainly Liberal publicists was not a negligible force in Belgian society after 1870, though it was relatively impotent until the campaign between 1908 and 1913, which culminated in the passage of the law to introduce universal conscription. See also idem (2016); as well as Bram Dierckx and Josephine Hoe- gaerts (2016); Josephine Hoegaerts (2014); and Nel de Mûelenaere and Josephine Hoegaerts (2016). Michael Auwers (2016b) examines the growing tendency towards accepting imperial expansion and general conscription within the Belgian diplomatic corps in the two decades before the outbreak of war in 1914. In their recent analysis (2016, Chapter 6: “Small European Buffer States in Two World Wars,” pp. 91–104), Neal G. Jesse and John R. Dreyer, citing David Stevenson (2007), mention (p. 93) the military law of 1902 and quote him (Stevenson, p. 478) as calling it the “high water of Belgian anti- militarism.” Unmentioned are the facts that the law of 1909 imposed the principle of one son per family and eliminated the system of pur- chasing replacements and that the law of 1913 introduced general conscription..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pre-War Military Planning (Belgium) | International Encyclopedia Of
    Version 1.0 | Last updated 08 January 2017 Pre-war Military Planning (Belgium) By Christophe Bechet Following the Treaty of London in 1839, pre-war planning theories in Belgium oscillated between two positions: secure and defend endangered borders or create a powerful military stronghold in Antwerp. On the eve of the Great War, King Albert I and his chief of staff held opposing strategies for protecting Belgium. The King advocated a concentration of the army on the Meuse, where the Germans had completed fortifications in 1892, but the chief of staff ultimately selected a central position to secure his line of communication with Antwerp. The lack of a determined, standardized doctrine at the highest level of the army led to a mixed, compromised plan adopted hurriedly during initial mobilization in August 1914. Table of Contents 1 Introduction 2 Behind “Protective” Walls 3 Soldiers Without an Official War Plan 4 1914: A “Poor Little” Army 5 Conclusion Notes Selected Bibliography Citation Introduction During World War Two (WWII), German occupants seized archives from the Belgian Ministry of War. 90 percent of these archives concerned World War I (WWI) and the years 1920-1930, but Germans also sent documents from the pre-war period, dating back to 1870 and earlier, to Berlin, where they were in turn taken by the Russians in 1945. In 2002, the “Moscow Archives” were Pre-war Military Planning (Belgium) - 1914-1918-Online 1/13 repatriated to the Royal Museum of the Armed Forces and Military History (MRA) in Brussels. The MRA’s inventories during the last decade remain cursory due to the documents’ haphazard journeys: pre-WWI documents were mixed with papers from the late 1930s.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Great Britain Entered the Great War Norman Simms La Salle University
    The Histories Volume 4 | Issue 2 Article 5 2019 Why Great Britain Entered the Great War Norman Simms La Salle University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lasalle.edu/the_histories Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Simms, Norman (2019) "Why Great Britain Entered the Great War," The Histories: Vol. 4 : Iss. 2 , Article 5. Available at: https://digitalcommons.lasalle.edu/the_histories/vol4/iss2/5 This Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Scholarship at La Salle University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The iH stories by an authorized editor of La Salle University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Histories, Volume 4, Number 2 28 IV Why Great Britain Entered the Great War By Norman Simms Throughout the Twentieth Century and into the Twenty-First, many causes have been proposed for why Great Britain entered World War I (the Great War) on the side of France and Russia. Extensive research has indicated that the three most probable causes were the naval arms race, the German atrocities committed in occupied territories, and the violation of Belgium neutrality. Of these three, the violation of Belgium neutrality is most strongly supported as the ultimate reason why England committed itself militarily to the Entente. The book, “Twenty-Five Years” was written by Sir Edward Grey (official title: Viscount Grey of Fallodon, K.G.) who served as Secretary of Foreign Relations of Great Britain from 1892 tol895, again from 1905 to 1916, and died in 1933. Grey’s two- volume autobiography was first published in 1925 and focuses on the political and diplomatic aspects of the war.
    [Show full text]
  • Obligation and Self-Interest in the Defence of Belgian Neutrality, 1830-1870
    CONTEXTUAL RESEARCH IN LAW CORE VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL Working Papers No. 2017-2 (August) Permanent Neutrality or Permanent Insecurity? Obligation and Self-Interest in the Defence of Belgian Neutrality, 1830-1870 Frederik Dhondt Please do not cite without prior permission from the author The complete working paper series is available online at http://www.vub.ac.be/CORE/wp Permanent Neutrality or Permanent Insecurity? Obligation and Self-Interest in the Defence of Belgian Neutrality, 1830-1870 Frederik Dhondt1 Introduction ‘we are less complacent than the Swiss, and would not take treaty violations so lightly.’ Baron de Vrière to Sylvain Van de Weyer, Brussels, 28 June 18592 Neutrality is one of the most controversial issues in public international law3 and international relations history.4 Its remoteness from the United Nations system of collective security has rendered its discussion less topical.5 The significance of contemporary self-proclaimed ‘permanent neutrality’ is limited. 6 Recent scholarship has taken up the theme as a general narrative of nineteenth century international relations: between the Congress of Vienna and the Great War, neutrality was the rule, rather than the exception.7 In intellectual history, Belgium’s neutral status is seen as linked to the rise of the ‘Gentle Civilizer of Nations’ at the end of the nineteenth century.8 International lawyers’ and politicians’ activism brought three Noble Peace Prizes (August Beernaert, International Law Institute, Henri La Fontaine). The present contribution focuses on the permanent or compulsory nature of Belgian neutrality in nineteenth century diplomacy, from the country’s inception (1830-1839)9 to the Franco- 1 Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), University of Antwerp, Ghent University/Research Foundation Flanders.
    [Show full text]
  • Death of an Institution: the End for Western European Union, a Future
    DEATH OF AN INSTITUTION The end for Western European Union, a future for European defence? EGMONT PAPER 46 DEATH OF AN INSTITUTION The end for Western European Union, a future for European defence? ALYSON JK BAILES AND GRAHAM MESSERVY-WHITING May 2011 The Egmont Papers are published by Academia Press for Egmont – The Royal Institute for International Relations. Founded in 1947 by eminent Belgian political leaders, Egmont is an independent think-tank based in Brussels. Its interdisciplinary research is conducted in a spirit of total academic freedom. A platform of quality information, a forum for debate and analysis, a melting pot of ideas in the field of international politics, Egmont’s ambition – through its publications, seminars and recommendations – is to make a useful contribution to the decision- making process. *** President: Viscount Etienne DAVIGNON Director-General: Marc TRENTESEAU Series Editor: Prof. Dr. Sven BISCOP *** Egmont – The Royal Institute for International Relations Address Naamsestraat / Rue de Namur 69, 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone 00-32-(0)2.223.41.14 Fax 00-32-(0)2.223.41.16 E-mail [email protected] Website: www.egmontinstitute.be © Academia Press Eekhout 2 9000 Gent Tel. 09/233 80 88 Fax 09/233 14 09 [email protected] www.academiapress.be J. Story-Scientia NV Wetenschappelijke Boekhandel Sint-Kwintensberg 87 B-9000 Gent Tel. 09/225 57 57 Fax 09/233 14 09 [email protected] www.story.be All authors write in a personal capacity. Lay-out: proxess.be ISBN 978 90 382 1785 7 D/2011/4804/136 U 1612 NUR1 754 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.“Freemasonry As a Patriotic Society? the 1830 Belgian Revolution”
    REHMLAC. Revista de Estudios Históricos de la Masonería Latinoamericana y Caribeña E-ISSN: 1659-4223 [email protected] Universidad de Costa Rica Costa Rica Maes, Anaïs “Freemasonry as a Patriotic Society? The 1830 Belgian Revolution” REHMLAC. Revista de Estudios Históricos de la Masonería Latinoamericana y Caribeña, vol. 2, núm. 2, -diciembre, 2010, pp. 1-17 Universidad de Costa Rica San José, Costa Rica Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=369537359001 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative “Freemasonry as a Patriotic Society? The 1830 Belgian Revolution” Anaïs Maes Consejo Científico: José Antonio Ferrer Benimeli (Universidad de Zaragoza), Miguel Guzmán-Stein (Universidad de Costa Rica), Eduardo Torres-Cuevas (Universidad de La Habana), Andreas Önnerfors (University of Leiden), María Eugenia Vázquez Semadeni (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México), Roberto Valdés Valle (Universidad Centroamericana “José Simeón Cañas”), Carlos Martínez Moreno (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México), Céline Sala (Université de Perpignan) Editor: Yván Pozuelo Andrés (IES Universidad Laboral de Gijón) Director: Ricardo Martínez Esquivel (Universidad de Costa Rica) Dirección web: http://rehmlac.com/main.html Correo electrónico: [email protected] Apartado postal: 243-2300 San José, Costa Rica REHMLAC ISSN 1659-4223 2 Vol. 2, Nº 2, Diciembre 2010-Abril 2011 Fecha de recibido: 12 junio 2010 – Fecha de aceptación: 3 agosto 2010 Palabras clave Masonería, patriotismo, nacionalismo, revolución, Bélgica Keywords Freemasonry, patriotism, nationalism, revolution, Belgium Resumen Al cuestionar la masonería y el patriotismo, tenemos que conceptualizar el análisis de la evolución de la identidad patriótica.
    [Show full text]
  • Compare and Contrast Congress of Vienna and Treaty of Versailles
    Compare And Contrast Congress Of Vienna And Treaty Of Versailles Lazar still sketch specifically while altern Marco cross-dresses that E-boat. When Wallace catenated his herplug Langton asphyxiated bitingly, not butplainly bulging enough, Waite is menstruateDennis dumfounding? unthoughtfully Sometimes or overtopped Rosicrucian acrimoniously. Purcell quacks Commenting on foreign relations between executive session of neuilly symbolised the president in its forms part diplomacy existed of treaty and american history to treaty subject to the age In the 127 Treaty of London the three powers agreed to reason their. Paris Peace Treaties failed to transcend a secure legal and. This worksheet encourages students to mean about the Congress of Vienna. In 1919 the powerful Four day in Paris to grieve the Treaty Lloyd George of Britain Vittorio Emanuele Orlando of Italy Georges Clemenceau of France and. Maintain peace and stability on the European continent known a the Congress of Vienna. Congress of Vienna several cities and boatmen's associations pressed claims for fool of. To sign it is required by congress and contrast of vienna. He went deranged. Of the Congress of Vienna signed by these major powers of Europe brought formal end worth the. Conventions like the London Protocol of 130 and the Berlin Congress of 17 would. This treaty termination accompanied by congress and vienna convention on transmittal to peace, only english lore, tablet or executive branch. AP European History Worthington Schools. The major powers Jean-Baptiste Duroselle during the Congress of Vienna in. PDF Comparison of Treaty of Versailles and congress. The bridge War Evaluating the intelligence of Versailles NEH.
    [Show full text]
  • A Short History of Holland, Belgium and Luxembourg
    A Short History of Holland, Belgium and Luxembourg Foreword ............................................................................2 Chapter 1. The Low Countries until A.D.200 : Celts, Batavians, Frisians, Romans, Franks. ........................................3 Chapter 2. The Empire of the Franks. ........................................5 Chapter 3. The Feudal Period (10th to 14th Centuries): The Flanders Cloth Industry. .......................................................7 Chapter 4. The Burgundian Period (1384-1477): Belgium’s “Golden Age”......................................................................9 Chapter 5. The Habsburgs: The Empire of Charles V: The Reformation: Calvinism..........................................10 Chapter 6. The Rise of the Dutch Republic................................12 Chapter 7. Holland’s “Golden Age” ..........................................15 Chapter 8. A Period of Wars: 1650 to 1713. .............................17 Chapter 9. The 18th Century. ..................................................20 Chapter 10. The Napoleonic Interlude: The Union of Holland and Belgium. ..............................................................22 Chapter 11. Belgium Becomes Independent ...............................24 Chapter 13. Foreign Affairs 1839-19 .........................................29 Chapter 14. Between the Two World Wars. ................................31 Chapter 15. The Second World War...........................................33 Chapter 16. Since the Second World War: European Co-operation:
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation-Tolerant Weapons, Regulation-Resistant Weapons and the Law of War
    Regulation-Tolerant Weapons, Regulation-Resistant Weapons and the Law of War Sean Watts 91 INT’L L. STUD. 540 (2015) Volume 91 2015 Published by the Stockton Center for the Study of International Law International Law Studies 2015 Regulation-Tolerant Weapons, Regulation- Resistant Weapons and the Law of War Sean Watts∗ CONTENTS I. Introduction ................................................................................................. 541 II. Weapons and Law of War Principles and General Limitations ............ 543 A. Unnecessary Suffering ......................................................................... 545 B. Discrimination ...................................................................................... 551 C. Honor .................................................................................................... 554 D. The Martens Clause ............................................................................. 556 E. Environmental Effects ........................................................................ 559 III. Specific Regulations and Prohibitions ..................................................... 561 A. Poison .................................................................................................... 562 B. Crossbow ............................................................................................... 566 C. Firearms and Bullets ............................................................................ 568 D. Submarines ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Great European Treaties of the Nineteenth Century
    JBRART Of 9AN DIEGO OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY EDITED BY SIR AUGUSTUS OAKES, CB. LATELY OF THE FOREIGN OFFICE AND R. B. MOWAT, M.A. FELLOW AND ASSISTANT TUTOR OF CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE, OXFORD WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY SIR H. ERLE RICHARDS K. C.S.I., K.C., B.C.L., M.A. FELLOW OF ALL SOULS COLLEGE AWD CHICHELE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND DIPLOMACY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD ASSOCIATE OF THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AMEN HOUSE, E.C. 4 LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW LEIPZIG NEW YORK TORONTO MELBOURNE CAPETOWN BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRAS SHANGHAI HUMPHREY MILFORD PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY Impression of 1930 First edition, 1918 Printed in Great Britain INTRODUCTION IT is now generally accepted that the substantial basis on which International Law rests is the usage and practice of nations. And this makes it of the first importance that the facts from which that usage and practice are to be deduced should be correctly appre- ciated, and in particular that the great treaties which have regulated the status and territorial rights of nations should be studied from the point of view of history and international law. It is the object of this book to present materials for that study in an accessible form. The scope of the book is limited, and wisely limited, to treaties between the nations of Europe, and to treaties between those nations from 1815 onwards. To include all treaties affecting all nations would require volumes nor is it for the many ; necessary, purpose of obtaining a sufficient insight into the history and usage of European States on such matters as those to which these treaties relate, to go further back than the settlement which resulted from the Napoleonic wars.
    [Show full text]
  • ICRP Calendar
    The notions of International Relations (IR) in capital letters and international relations (ir) in lowercase letters have two different meanings. The first refers to a scholarly discipline while the second one means a set of contemporary events with historical importance, which influences global-politics. In order to make observations, formulate theories and describe patterns within the framework of ‘IR’, one needs to fully comprehend specific events related to ‘ir’. It is why the Institute for Cultural Relations Policy (ICRP) believes that a timeline on which all the significant events of international relations are identified might be beneficial for students, scholars or professors who deal with International Relations. In the following document all the momentous wars, treaties, pacts and other happenings are enlisted with a monthly division, which had considerable impact on world-politics. January 1800 | Nationalisation of the Dutch East Indies The Dutch East Indies was a Dutch colony that became modern Indonesia following World War II. It was formed 01 from the nationalised colonies of the Dutch East India Company, which came under the administration of the Dutch government in 1800. 1801 | Establishment of the United Kingdom On 1 January 1801, the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland united to form the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Most of Ireland left the union as the Irish Free State in 1922, leading to the remaining state being renamed as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 1927. 1804 | Haiti independence declared The independence of Haiti was recognized by France on 17 April 1825.
    [Show full text]
  • British Foreign Policy Under Canning
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2008 British Foreign Policy Under Canning Andrew Montgomery Endorf The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Endorf, Andrew Montgomery, "British Foreign Policy Under Canning" (2008). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 160. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/160 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY UNDER CANNING By Andrew Montgomery Endorf B.A., University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, 2004 Thesis presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In History The University of Montana Missoula, MT Summer 2008 Approved by: Perry Brown Associate Provost for Graduate Studies Dr. John Eglin, Chair History Dr. Linda Frey History Dr. Louis Hayes Political Science i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE – CANNING THE POLITICIAN 12 Biography 12 Domestic Politics 16 CHAPTER TWO – REVOLUTION ON THE IBERIAN PENNINSULA 24 Spain 24 Portugal 36 CHAPTER THREE – LATIN AMERICA AND RECOGNITION 44 North America 48 Latin America 52 CHAPTER FOUR – GREECE AND THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE 66 Stalemate and Neutrality 68 Shifting Alliances and Intervention 77 CONCLUSION 86 BIBLIOGRAPHY 99 ii Endorf, Andrew, M.A., Summer 2008 History British Foreign Policy Under Canning Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • About... the History of Luxembourg
    Grand Duchy of Luxembourg ABOUT … the History of Luxembourg Despite its small size – 2,586 km2 and home to 590,700 in- CAPITAL: habitants – the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg is a sovereign LUXEMBOURG state with a rich history. Nestled between France, Belgium NEIGHBOURING and Germany in the heart of Europe, it has been involved COUNTRIES: in the great European developments. The turbulent past GERMANY of the Grand Duchy is a true mirror of European history. BELGIUM During the Middle Ages, its princes wore the crown of the FRANCE Holy Roman Empire. In Early Modern Times, its fortress was AREA: a major bone of contention in the battle between the great 2,586 KM2 powers. Before obtaining its independence during the 19th century, Luxembourg lived under successive Burgundian, POPULATION: Spanish, French, Austrian and Dutch sovereignty. During 590,700 INHABITANTS, the 20th century, this wealthy and dynamic country acted INCLUDING 281,500 FOREIGNERS as a catalyst in the unification of Europe. FORM OF GOVERNMENT: CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY Grand Duchy of Luxembourg ABOUT … the History of Luxembourg Despite its small size – 2,586 km2 and home to 590,700 in- CAPITAL: habitants – the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg is a sovereign LUXEMBOURG state with a rich history. Nestled between France, Belgium NEIGHBOURING and Germany in the heart of Europe, it has been involved COUNTRIES: in the great European developments. The turbulent past GERMANY of the Grand Duchy is a true mirror of European history. BELGIUM During the Middle Ages, its princes wore the crown of the FRANCE Holy Roman Empire. In Early Modern Times, its fortress was AREA: a major bone of contention in the battle between the great 2,586 KM2 powers.
    [Show full text]