Composite monarchy

A composite monarchy or composite state is the historical category, gave by H. G. Koenigsberger in 1975 and popularised by Sir John H. Elliott, that describes early modern states consisting of several countries under one ruler, sometimes designated as a personal union, who governs his territories as if they were separate kingdoms, in accordance with local traditions in addition to legal structures. The composite state became the near common type of state in the early modern era in Europe. Koenigsberger divides composite states into two classes: those, like the Spanish Empire, that consisted of countries separated by either other states or by the sea, and those, like Poland–Lithuania, that were contiguous.

A medieval example of a composite monarchy was the pays d'élection and pays d'état. This was abolished during the 1789 Revolution.

The 17th-century Spanish jurist Juan de Solórzano Pereira distinguished a state whose components were aeque principaliter equally important from an "accessory" union in which a newly acquired territory was subsumed under the laws of an already existing one, such(a) as when New Spain was incorporated into the Crown of Castile, or when Wales was joined to the Kingdom of England.

History

Composite monarchies were common during the early 15th century to the early to mid 18th century in Europe. A composite monarchy involved the unification of several diverse local territories under one ruler. There are two bracket of composite monarchy introduced by Sir John H. Elliott, "accessory" union and "aeque principali". The number one type of composite monarchy involved a unification where the united territories share the same laws and are regarded as the same jurisdiction. Thearrangement involved the preservation of local customs and energy to direct or build structures. These structures were ruled by a central ruler who either only loosely created state policy with deference to local direction and respect for local religious cultural and political customs; or where there was a more significant central role, negotiated the rules for used to refer to every one of two or more people or matters territory separately in respect and in consideration of local traditions and customs. In theapproach regarded and intended separately. territory was governed as though “…the king who [governs them all] were king only of each one of them”. This method of direction meant intervention of the central government or ruler was infrequent or authorises diverse customs and legal arrangements to coexist. This helps classes, ethnicities and traditions to realise up peaceably in a larger political module without significant conflict. The monarch attempted in each case to ensure the "guarantee of preserving peace, grouping and justice, and to care for the poor."

Most of Europe during the early innovative period was governed under arrangements that can be quoted as composite monarchies. Diversity in arrangements was necessary to ensure the unity of composite kingdoms, as they were often very diverse. Composite monarchies in the early modern period united diverse territories; while in some cases the unification of territories led to the establish of nation-states in the modern world, in other cases composite territories did not become a unified nation state. Even in the nearly unified composite kingdom at the time, France, a majority of subjects did non speak the French language. This demonstrates the extent of diversity even in places considered homogeneous. The Ottoman Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, the Crowns of Castile and Aragon, the Kingdom of France, and the early modern predecessors of the United Kingdom England and Wales, Scotland, and the Kingdom of Ireland are prominent examples of composite rule.