2004
Volume 127, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 0040-7518
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1163

Abstract

Abstract

This article focuses on the repression following the Brussels revolt of 1717-19, and reflects upon the sphere of action of early modern governments in composite monarchies. This insurrection has often been presented as a personal struggle between guild dean Anneessens and Minister Plenipotentiary Prié. I argue that in order to understand the curbing of the disorders, many more (f)actors have to be taken into account. Prié could not prosecute the rioters without the cooperation of other office-holders and institutions. Moreover the actions of the government can be assessed only if the distance between Brussels and Vienna and the communication problems between both cities are considered. I conclude that Prié was not and could not have been a vindictive tyrant as has long been asserted in the Belgian-nationalistic myth concerning the Brussels revolt.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVGESCH2014.3.GELD
2014-09-01
2021-10-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/00407518/127/3/s1.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TVGESCH2014.3.GELD&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TVGESCH2014.3.GELD
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TVGESCH2014.3.GELD
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error