On Whether the Emperor Should Make an Agreement with the Italian States or the King of France

This chapter considers where the Holy Roman Emperor's allegiances might sway. In a triangular relationship involving the Emperor, France, and the Italians, everybody was sitting simultaneously at two tables, trying both to prevent the other two from joining their forces and to extract as many concessions as possible from each of them. It was Charles who had the upper hand in the game. With his usual lucidity, Guicciardini captures the essence of the situation in a few lines: ‘and nothing [was] more easy to [Charles] than by feeding the French with hopes to divert them from the thoughts of taking up arms, and by this artfulness to keep the Italians in suspense, so that they should not venture to take new resolutions’.

2010 ◽  
Vol 76 (16) ◽  
pp. 5639-5643 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dajun Qiu ◽  
Liangmin Huang ◽  
Hui Huang ◽  
Jianhui Yang ◽  
Senjie Lin

ABSTRACT We detected and characterized two distinct scuticociliate ciliates inside Acropora corals in the South China Sea. One, voraciously foraging on Symbiodinium, resembled the brown band disease of ciliates. The other, which is closely related to Paranophrys magna, grazed on detritus instead of Symbiodinium. These two ciliates may serve contrasting functions (competitor versus “cleaner”) in the coral-ciliate-Symbiodinium triangular relationship.


This chapter follows up on the previous debate, as the Venetians consider the fate of King Francis, who had been previously captured in a sensational battle at Pavia, where the French army had been overwhelmed. One side of the debate argues that the king of France be set free upon congenial terms, with no attempt made to take advantage of his situation. The other side, on the other hand, argued that this victory must be taken advantage of, and Francis would soon find himself with rather harsh conditions upon which he would be set free: among other things, he was to give up all his claims to Italy, Flanders and Artois, and restore to Charles Burgundy and all the dominions that had been annexed by the French crown in 1477.


This chapter considers how, once again, the Venetians had found themselves under steady pressure from two sides — this time between the new king of France, Francis I, and Charles of Habsburg, the king of Spain as well as the Holy Roman Emperor. Although they had not come to a clear rupture with the Emperor, the Venetians had dutifully performed their role in the war on the French side, and were now rather at sea as to what they should do next. On the one hand, Francis incited them to hold on, for he would soon send another army into Italy; on the other hand, Charles was trying to detach them from the French alliance with various reassurances and offers.


2015 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 485-491

Brief in which King Henry III recalls that as there are people who might perhaps convey to the lord pope and cardinals certain business which has recently been transacted by him as a result of the advice of his magnates and vassals, who may put a malicious interpretation on it, and as the affair might be a potential hindrance to him, he (so the recipients are better prepared to argue against the cunning deceits of such men) is minded to explain here the whole sequence of certain of his affairs, so that they may not be uninformed about what has passed, on which it may happen that they or others might otherwise be deceived. [2] So they are to be aware that whereas, at the time when the bishop of Norwich was legate (1218–1221), the earl Marshal still occupied the castles of Marlborough and Ludgershall, and was proposing to marry the sister of Count Robert of Dreux, and there were also other magnates in England who were endeavouring to distance him from the king by injurious alliances, the idea of betrothing the earl to one of the king's sisters was discussed between the legate, his justiciar and certain other magnates, partly because the political alliance with foreigners was thought alarming should the earl marry the sister of the count of Dreux – so as not to render England more accessible to foreigners, especially since Richard Marshal, the brother of the earl, might obtain all the Marshal lands in Normandy – and partly because of fear of the malice of those people who endeavoured to seduce the earl's allegiance from the king; and indeed because the castles of Marlborough and Ludgershall ought to be returned to him (which many times the earl promised) so that the other magnates might the more readily be persuaded likewise to return to the king his castles which they also held. [3] Because of his tender years and the fragile state of his kingdom, one of the king's sisters was destined for the said Marshal, by the authority of the legate and the counsel of certain magnates. The said Marshal swore to marry her, if it pleased the king and the magnates of the realm. The justiciar swore to hand her over to the Marshal, if the magnates of the kingdom agreed. The legate, the justiciar and others who were present faithfully promised that they would approach this matter conscientiously. The said castles were handed back to the legate, so that if the contract were not fulfilled within a space of time long now expired, they should be given back promptly to the Marshal. [4] Further to this, when these matters were communicated to other magnates, notably to the earl of Chester who at that point returned from the Holy Land (July 1220) – the earl strongly approved the match and many others agreed, with no dissenters. But afterwards, when certain dissensions had emerged, some people demurred, claiming – just as indeed was said on their behalf in the papal curia – that the king should have no greater an aid for his own marriage as for his sisters, as a result of which his sisters’ marriage arrangements would be impeded, about which he was negotiating a considerable treaty in foreign parts, and so at that time the Marshal arrangement remained unfulfilled. [5] But when recently (June 1222) the same Marshal obtained a papal mandate addressed to the archbishop of Canterbury and bishop of Salisbury, that either they should cause him to be entirely absolved from the conditions of the oath, or the marriage contract be confirmed, the Marshal insisted vociferously that one of those options should be followed, since he cared for nothing other than that he be married. So now as before it is a worry that Marshal – a man of great power in England as much as Ireland – might marry the sister of the said count of Dreux or a daughter of the duke of Brabant, who was likewise offered to him – which on account of the matters already alluded to would assist the king in no way – or even the sister of the king of Scots, where similarly no small danger might arise, for by how much nearer Scotland is to Ireland and the Marshal lands, so much the more dangerous would the marriage be to the king. [6] So having considered the energy and power of the said Marshal, as well as the faithful service he has openly and strenuously performed for the king especially in the region of Wales – his castles which Llywelyn prince of Gwynedd held which Marshal vigorously reclaimed (in April 1223) would scarcely have been taken without his capacity and hard work – and also bearing in mind the example of Philip, the late king of France (died 14 July 1223) – who for a long time freely married off his daughters, sisters, and nieces to the likes of the counts of Namur and Ponthieu and others of his men rather than to foreigners, just as the current king of France recently married off his niece, the daughter of Guichard de Beaujeu to the count of Champagne (after August 1223); because of all these precedents and the great things which are hoped for from the Marshal, it should not be objectionable to the king and his council – all things considered – that he may at some time permit him to marry his sister to his advantage and honour. The king, on the advice of such and such men, having discussed this business extensively, conceded the Marshal his younger sister, without lessening of his lands, castles or money. [September 1223 × January 1224]A= Kew, National Archives (PRO), SC1/2/109.Printed, Royal Letters, 1: 244–246; Diplomatic Documents, 95–97.


1970 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Trainor

When Joseph Chamberlain launched his striking tariff reform campaign in 1903 he was contributing to a very old debate. At the centre of the discussion had usually been the triangular relationship between free trade, protection and imperial unity. Were preferential tariffs compatible with British free trade? Was imperial preference necessary to maintain imperial unity? Could an empire divided against itself on tariff questions stand? Questions of that type became increasingly pertinent in the last decades of the nineteenth century. Entry for British exports into continental markets had become more difficult in the 'eighties, not only because of the tariff barriers which were more prominent but also because Britain found herself with few bargaining counters in the European tariff negotiations. The Anglo-French commercial treaty of 1860 had provided that neither party would, in its own country, subject the produce of the other party to higher duties than similar produce from other countries. This Most-Favoured-Nation clause had been the basis of a series of commercial treaties linking the European nations. The new network which arose in the ’eighties, covering Europe and the Americas, was negotiated largely without British intervention and the classification and rates were not designed to favour Britain. Britain sometimes even had difficulty in securing renewal of her M.F.N. agreements.


1954 ◽  
Vol 34 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 38-43
Author(s):  
Blaise de Montesquiou-Fezensac

The engravings devoted to the Trésor in Dom Félibien's history of the abbey of Saint-Denis, in spite of their inaccuracy, are a precious source of information about the pieces, some extremely ancient, that composed that celebrated ensemble, unfortunately dispersed at the Revolution. On the plate by Nicolas Guérard, dealing with the third armoire, is pictured a reliquary consisting of two oval rock crystals, placed one above the other, in a rich gold setting (Fig. I). The crystal situated beneath, which is the larger one, is engraved with a representation of Christ on the Cross between the Virgin and St. John the Evangelist. We learn from Dom Félibien that in his time—his book was printed in 1706—this reliquary enclosed some remnants of the clothes of St. Louis, king of France.


Author(s):  
Christian Leuprecht

This chapter historicizes, contextualizes, and theorizes the triangular relationship among governments, intelligence agencies, and democratic citizens in light of the observations and comparisons in this book. It posits accountability as a means to reconcile the apparent contradictions between the openness and transparency of democratic first principles on the one hand, and the power and secrecy of state intelligence on the other. Democracies constantly have to demonstrate their steadfast commitment to playing by the same rules they claim to value and defend as this practice ultimately sets them apart from authoritarianism. Intelligence accountability thus emerges as a quintessentially social process that is both integral and existential to democracy. Accountability tethers intelligence and security communities to the democratic society they serve and the rules, authorizations, and limitations it has imposed. In response to global threats and technological change, however, intelligence now coalesces as an epistemic community that cooperates across agencies, departments, and jurisdictions. Domestic, international, and supranational coordination and collaboration within intelligence communities and across the Five Eyes, other allies, partners, and beyond, vastly complicate the seemingly straightforward task of holding any one intelligence agency or community accountable. Accountability lags changing and expanded intelligence powers and capabilities, which can have deleterious consequences for public trust and support under which intelligence operates in a democratic society. Ergo, the lessons in the comparative study of intelligence are as much about reconciling intelligence and democracy as they are about innovation and adaptation in defending democracy as hostile state and non-state threat actors and vectors proliferate.


2012 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Friedrich W. De Wet

In hierdie artikel word die kommunikatiewe driehoeksverhouding tussen die Bybelse teks, die hoorders en die prediker homileties verken. Die probleemstelling waarmee gewerk word handel oor potensiële versteurings wat kan plaasvind in hierdie driehoeksverhouding wanneer die hoorders en die prediker in hulle menslike beperktheid in verbinding gebring word met die ewige Woord van God soos dit in die Bybelse teks na vore kom. In die loop van die artikel word die volgende aspekte verken: ’n Ideale tipering van die verhouding tussen die teks, hoorders en prediker waarin al drie faktore ’n regmatige plek het; die maniere waarop die kommunikatiewe driehoek in die spanningsveld tussen teks, hoorders en prediker kan skeeftrek; en pneumatologiese verankering van die kommunikatiewe driehoek in die kragveld van die verbondsruimte, waarin Jesus Christus versoenend (integrerend) teenwoordig is. Die gevolgtrekking waartoe gekom word, is dat die prediker in die kragveld van die verbond in staat gestel word om getrou te bly aan die teks (waarin God aan die Woord kom), aan die hoorders (as mededeelgenote in die genade van God sowel as – in missionêre konteks – mense wat geroep word om deelgenote in hierdie genade te word) en aan hom- of haarself (as nuwe mens in Christus) sonder dat die verbintenis aan een element in die  kommunikatiewe driehoek die verbintenis aan die ander versteur of laat disintegreer.Reckoning with the force field of the covenant in aligning the communicative triangle between text, listener and preacher. In this article the communicative triangular relationship between the Biblical text, the listeners and the preacher is reflected upon from a homiletic point of view. The problem statement deals with potential distortions in this triangular relationship when the listeners and preacher (in their human finitude) are brought into contact with the eternal Word of God as it proceeds from the Biblical text. In the course of the article the following aspects are considered: An ideal establishment of the relationship between text, listeners and preacher – giving all three factors their due place; an exploration of situations in which the communicative triangle can possibly be distorted in the tension field between text, listeners and preacher; and anchoring the communicative triangle in the force field of the covenant, where Christ’s atoning (integrative) presence is felt. It is concluded that the preacher is enabled by Christ’s presence in the force field of the covenant to remain faithful to the text (through which God speaks), to the listener (as partakers in the grace of God as well as – in missionary context – people called to became partakers in this grace) and to himself (as a new man in Christ). This faithfulness entails that commitment to one element in the communicative triangle is not disturbed or disintegrated by commitment to the other elements.


Author(s):  
Vogenauer Stefan

This commentary focuses on Article 5.2.1 of the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (PICC) concerning contracts in favour of third parties. Art 5.2.1 stipulates that the parties to a contract can validly agree to benefit a third party, and that it is possible that the third party acquires a right from such an agreement. It also introduces a particular terminology for denominating the parties in the triangular relationship. There are two original parties (‘the parties’) whose agreement contains the promise of one of them (‘the promisor’) to the other (‘the promisee’) to benefit a third person (‘a third party’). This commentary discusses the ‘relativity’ or ‘privity’ of contracts, validity of contracts in favour of third parties, power of the promisor and the promisee to create third party rights, content of the beneficiary's right, rights of the promisee, and implications of invalidity of contracts for third parties.


Archaeologia ◽  
1945 ◽  
Vol 91 ◽  
pp. 137-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. H. St. J. O'Neil

For some years before 1538 the politics of western Europe had been dominated by the mutual jealousy of the Emperor Charles V and Francis I, king of France. Henry VIII's diplomacy had often tended to increase the tension between them, since it was clearly in England's interest to divide her potential enemies. The Pope on the other hand sought to reconcile them, and in June 1538 he succeeded so far as to negotiate a truce for ten years between the rivals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document