De l’émergence des stations balnéaires au tourisme sportif

Bodin, Dominique; Javerlhiac, Sophie; Héas, Stéphane; Robène, Luc

doi:10.7202/1024804ar

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…40 In Crisis of the Aristocracy, Stone briefly described multiple cases of wards' marriages, mainly highlighting their negative impact upon the individuals involved and the frequent abuses which arose due to the "notorious" system. 41 Hurstfield has examined more fully the effects of wardship, wards' marriages, and widows' marriages upon men and women, demonstrating that they acted as a fundsgenerating system for the crown, one which turned minor heirs, their lands and 34 For examples see RM,1,6,61,[68][69][70][71][72][73][74][337][338]354,[356][357][363][364]vol. 1,[226][227].…”

Section: Plural Prerogativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…69 James's ideas on monarchical powers versus laws corresponded with Bodin's view that a ruler was not compelled to follow laws in the same sense as his subjects, rather his moral obligation and sense of honour ensured compliance. 70 In this sense, the monarch could claim primacy of position and moral judgement as secured by divine right, engaging the possibility of law evasion because he or she was not strictly bound by it.…”

Section: The Royal Prerogativementioning

confidence: 99%

“…69 Lady Jane was granted a lease on Brancepeth Park and received an annual sum of £200. 70 A royal commission investigating the countess's involvement in the rebellion found her not guilty 71 despite accusations of her participation and incitement of the earls. 72 In 1577, her per annum was increased to £300 for the upkeep of her daughters.…”

Section: Elizabethan Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Doran has commented, the threat of Lady Katherine's marriage "stemmed from her influence on the succession debate," because it had the potential to disrupt Elizabeth's plan to support the claim of Mary, queen of Scots. 70 Similarly, Simon Adams has noted, "There is no evidence that she [Elizabeth] Whitelock, 82, 58;CSPR, 1558CSPR, -1571CSPSp, 1558-1567, 296. 73 CSPSp, 1558-1567 74 Lettenhove, vol.…”

Section: Elizabethan Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Somersets remained in the Tower until 1622 and never returned to favour. 70 The termination of a patron-client bond, other than due to death, represented an "imbalance in reciprocity:" services had not been rewarded, responsibilities had been ignored. 71 Broken patron-client ties also indicated a "collapse of trust."…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Royal Opportunity: Noble Marriages in the Reigns of Elizabeth I and James VI/I, 1558-1625

Kay¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>This thesis explores Queen Elizabeth I’s and King James VI/I’s management of and involvement in noble marriages from 1558 to 1625 by merging two methodologies: an analysis of an extensive, custom-made database of 380 noble marriages with an examination of primary sources like state papers, personal correspondence, diaries, and ambassadorial reports. This study demonstrates that “noble-marriage management” was a single but efficient method for the implementation of many facets of early modern rule—this made it an important apparatus of the monarchical office and a significant conduit of power. Illuminated within this thesis are Queen Elizabeth’s and King James’s tactics for handling noble marital alliances which included participation and support, avoidance and opposition. They applied their exclusive crown privileges like plural prerogatives of wards’ and widows’ marriages and in loco parentis rights in attempts to control marital unions and they inaugurated new monarch-noble bonds through their patronage of weddings. They communicated religious, succession, and Anglo-Scottish union policies, brought peace, and cultivated a crown-supportive aristocracy by means of their noble marriage involvement. Both monarchs employed multiple aspects of the royal prerogative to manage marriages which, at times, involved manipulating courts, bypassing Parliament, and prolonging punishments. Elizabeth and James also used the royal prerogative to forge their respective legacies of a Protestant kingdom and a unified England and Scotland. By utilising their exclusive privileges, both monarchs secured the freedom and power to intervene in noble marital alliances which preserved the hierarchical system of monarchy, achieving a pro-monarch balance of power and internal stability. In particular, it was through supportive involvement in marriages that Elizabeth and James perpetuated the patronage system and established all-important monarch-noble connections which upheld royal authority. Monarch-noble links became especially important as parliamentary debates on the legitimacy and use of crown privileges increased in the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods, exposing both monarchs’ absolutist tendencies.</p>

show abstract

Section: Plural Prerogativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Royal Prerogativementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Elizabethan Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Elizabethan Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations