Reunion policy
Reunionspolitik (from French réunion 'union') describes the policy of the French king in the second half of the 17th century, which aimed at the annexation of those areas of the Holy Roman Empire which, according to the French view , were legally linked to certain territories under French sovereignty and therefore "these again should be united." In the course of the reunion policy, France waged the so-called reunion wars :
- the war of devolution of 1667/68 against Spain,
- the Dutch War from 1672 to 1679 against the Netherlands,
- the Reunion War from 1683 to 1684, especially against Spain, and
- the Palatinate War of Succession from 1688 to 1697 against the Augsburg Alliance .
Development overview
In 1679, at the suggestion of Colbert de Croissy, Louis XIV set up so-called reunion chambers in Metz , Breisach , Besançon and Tournai , which were supposed to judge the alleged historical affiliation of certain areas with the help of old contracts (mostly based on medieval fiefdoms ). These legal proceedings served to give the expansionist goals of Louis XIV legal legitimation. They were based on questionable foundations and were controversial as early as the 17th century and even within France. The starting point of the argument were those territories of the Holy Roman Empire that came under the rule of the French king in the Peace of Westphalia of 1648 and in the Treaties of Nijmegen 1678/79 with recognition of the empire, namely the three dioceses of Metz , Toul and Verdun , which ten imperial cities of Alsace and Sundgau , Franche-Comté and other countries.
According to the French view, with these assignments, all areas that had at one time been subject to feudal dependence on these territories were subject to the sovereignty of the French king as "dependencies and pertinence pieces". To enforce this claim, the legal means of reunification lawsuits were used, with which the owner of a property in the old law could take action against its division, for example by heirs, and demand its “reunification” if there was a prohibition of dismemberment (prohibition of division). The reunion policy was based on the constitutional structure of feudal law and used the (supposed) rights of the titles of power acquired by the French king between 1648 and 1679 as a lever. However, it did not claim that the areas to be annexed were once French.
The specially created chambers of reunion, of course, consistently pronounced the judgments in the spirit of the French king. The affected princes or cities were then asked to submit to French sovereignty and were occupied by the military.
In this way, large parts of Alsace , Luxembourg , the Palatinate and today's Saarland were incorporated into the French state by 1688 , since the Holy Roman Empire was unable to offer military resistance (not least because of the simultaneous Turkish war ). At the same time, areas for which an alleged historical affiliation could not be reconstructed were annexed by France, such as the city of Strasbourg in 1681 . Because of the Turkish war, the emperor and empire in the Regensburg standstill in 1684 allowed Louis XIV to do nothing militarily and politically against the reunions for 20 years, provided the Sun King was satisfied with what had been acquired so far.
After France invaded the Electoral Palatinate in 1688 in order to unite this territory with France, the empire decided to go to war to reverse the reunions ( War of the Palatinate Succession ).
In 1697 the Holy Roman Empire had to recognize the French reunions in Alsace in the Peace of Rijswijk ; however, the Electoral Palatinate, Luxembourg, Lorraine and the areas in the Palatinate and Saarland were returned to their rulers and remained with the empire.
literature
- Guido Braun: From the political to the cultural hegemony of France. 1648–1789 (= German-French history. 4). Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 2008, ISBN 978-3-534-14702-1 , p. 38 ff. (With further literature).
- Martin Wrede : Louis XIV. The warlord from Versailles. Theiss, Darmstadt 2015, ISBN 978-3-8062-3160-1 , p. 150 ff.