![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnI'm trying to use my other account at least occasionally so I posted about my Yuletide gifts there, including the salon-relevant 12k fic that features Fritz, Heinrich, Voltaire, Fredersdorf, Saint Germain, Caroline Daum (Fredersdorf's wife), and Groundhog Day tropes! (Don't need to know canon.)
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 2
Date: 2023-01-22 08:04 pm (UTC)Voltaire's take?
At that point, Innocent XI wanted to get rid of two very costly privileges which envoys enjoyed - they could extend the right of franchise and asylum through a great distance (i.e. if someone had killed someone, they just could cry "diplomatic immunity! I work for envoy X!"), and anything brought into Rome under the name of an envoy couldln't be taxed.
Interesting, I remember the taxation part (envoys were basically smugglers with a loophole) but thought diplomatic immunity came later. Wikipedia says we're both right: Britain first granted diplomatic immunity in 1709 due to an incident I'm familiar with from my Whitworth reading (he was tangentially involved), but the concept was evolving in the 17th century in Western Europe and gradually taking the form that we know. Ah, yes, even the Whitworth bio, which says that the 1709 act was very significant to the development of diplomatic immunity, says that "The quesetion of the immunity of diplomats, and their subordinates, from civil and criminal proceedings had been a matter of concern from the seventeenth century."
Voltaire: Not a Jacobite.
I feel like I've seen at least one beautifully snarky comment from him, but alas! I'm blanking. Will update if I think of it.
Also remarkable: Voltaire is aware of global consequences and is not a fan of colonialism, to put it mildly
A hundred years later, Macaulay: If colonialism meant Europeans were bringing wars to other continents, it was all Fritz's fault! You know, the guy without any colonies. Definitely no responsibility falls on us Brits!
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 2
Date: 2023-01-23 07:21 am (UTC)Indeed. I just saw I substituted "Richelieu" for "Voltaire" more than once. Neither of them would be amused. :)
"The quesetion of the immunity of diplomats, and their subordinates, from civil and criminal proceedings had been a matter of concern from the seventeenth century."
Voltaire presents is specifically in the Roman context and doesn't say it happened this way anywhere else. I do know that even a century later, when Goethe and several other German writers were there, Rome the city was infamous for the way criminals could get away with just about every crime, though in the 18th century this isn't blamed on envoys extending diplomatic immunity but on the criminals claiming church sanctuary.
Anyway, Louis saying that he doesn't follow other examples, everyone else should follow his example is just about the most Louis XIV statement ever, which was my main reason for including the story.
A hundred years later, Macaulay: If colonialism meant Europeans were bringing wars to other continents, it was all Fritz's fault! You know, the guy without any colonies. Definitely no responsibility falls on us Brits!
Talk about things developing backwards.:) More seriously, the relative lack of national bias and corresponding ability to see how everyone else is impacted is one of the qualities Orieux points out as a Voltairian virtue. and he does say even in the age of the Enlightenment, it's more the exception than the rule. I would add that of course the last third of the 18th century, after Voltaire's death, gives birth not just to revolutions but in the long term modern style nationalism, and so it's no wonder that late 19th century man (and politician) Macauly pulls something like this.
Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 2
Date: 2023-01-24 10:56 pm (UTC)Whereas we are greatly amused! :D
Voltaire presents is specifically in the Roman context and doesn't say it happened this way anywhere else.
Yeah, fair, I also have this impression of Rome.
Anyway, Louis saying that he doesn't follow other examples, everyone else should follow his example is just about the most Louis XIV statement ever, which was my main reason for including the story.
This is very true! It reminds me of the story I shared a while back:
Riva was almost in tears as he said that the good king had thought to provide him not only with a horse but an extra pair of riding boots. From Lauzun's perspective, on the other hand, it was just like James II to have nothing better to do at a time like this. Since James's cousin Louis XIV was of an entirely different caliber. He went walking in the rain, while being the only one allowed to wear a hat, because of his rank, and he asked his companions if it wasn't unpleasant, having to go without a hat in the rain. And precisely because of that attitude, France was now the greatest power in Europe.
It's good to be the (Sun) King.
long term modern style nationalism, and so it's no wonder that late 19th century man (and politician) Macauly pulls something like this.
Yes, indeed.