No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis contends that the monarch-centred view of the masque, which has prevailed since the publication in the 1960s and 1970s of Stephen Orgel's seminal works on the genre, needs to be challenged in the light of recent scholarship on the cultural agency of other members of the royal family. In my introduction I argue that while the New Historicism has been crucial in elucidating the theatricalization of power in the early Stuart court, its insistence on the inevitability of the collusion between art and sovereign power needs to be questioned. The masque has long been seen as a monolithic and univocal celebration of monarchical power, despite the fact that it was promoted at court not by King James but by other members of the royal family. Adopting a loosely chronological approach, this thesis retells the story of the 'Jacobean' court masque by recovering the role played in the commissioning and performance of masques by James's wife, his children, and his male favourites. The chapters set out to hear voices other than that of the King, and discover that, while panegyric was part of each masque, it was rarely as unequivocal as traditional criticism has suggested. On the contrary, the annual masques were frequently appropriated to express the oppositional agendas of factions at court, and above all, of members of James's own family. I argue that Queen Anne set a precedent for the disruptive use of the masque which she exploited to present herself as independent from the King, and to emphasise her importance as the mother of the royal children. Prince Henry, and later Prince Charles, both used the masque to contest the pacifist policies of the King, while Buckingham's success as a favourite was linked to his skilful exploitation of the masques as an integral part of his self-fashioning. Above all by shifting the focus away from King James to consider the more active participation in the masque of other members of the royal family, this thesis offers a possibility of moving beyond the current impasse of the subversion / containment debate to a more nuanced reading of the culture of the early Stuart court which recognises the delicate process of negotiation and accommodation in which the masquers and their audiences were engaged.

No description available.

No description available.

Some composite states, notably Poland-Lithuania and the Holy Roman Empire, outlived the Peace of Westphalia by over one hundred years. This is puzzling for the study of international politics because good theoretical reasons expect the multiple countervailing pressures acting on these states to have brought about a rapid decline and dissolution. In this dissertation, I propose a theoretical approach that satisfactorily accounts for why some composite states survived until the dawn of the Napoleonic Wars. The theory of dynasticism and dynastic deterrence argues that dynastic intermarriage and proximate kinship ties between dynastic rulers created deterrent effects that led to stability on the level of sovereign control. The most direct consequence of this theory is that hereditary monarchs with dynastic aims will tend to avoid waging wars of absolute conquest against each other, though wars of limited gains are not precluded. Given the inability of competing explanations—a reconstructed early modern realism and intergenerational leadership learning—to account for both the manner of survival and demise of composite states that lived till old age, it can be strongly inferred that dynastic deterrent effects ensured longevity by protecting such polities from facing conquest-attempts from other monarchs, the most serious existential threat these composite states could have faced. The reason that dynastic deterrence holds is because dynastic wives and families of origin play the role of hostages. The parental house of the dynastic wife will tend to avoid wars of conquest against the kingdoms wherein reside their daughters, and similarly dynastic husbands will avoid conquering the birth-dynasty of their wives. In addition, wars of conquest damage the reputation of the dynastic house of a monarch, and this in turn harms the marriage chances of dynastic heirs. Wars of conquest, then, act at cross-purposes with the ubiquitous motive of dynastic aggrandizement, which aims to uplift the power and prestige of the dynastic house, and were largely disdained (with some exceptions) by the rulers of ancien régime Europe. It should be noted that this dynamic did not hold in the colonies, but I do not attempt in this dissertation to answer the question of why. In the empirical case analyses, I use this theoretical framework to explain the early dissolution of two composite states (England-Scotland and the Iberian Union) when juxtaposed with other composite states that survived for longer in their same regions, and the longevity and eventual demise of two further composite states (Poland-Lithuania and the Holy Roman Empire) after weathering some near-death crises. Oft mentioned but rarely studied directly, dynasticism and dynastic intermarriage have been largely ignored by the field of International Relations. This is unfortunate, as the ties of marriage and kinship between early modern dynastic rulers represent a fertile source of theoretical insights and empirical material for testing contemporary theories and deriving puzzles. I hope this study will stimulate further research into this fascinating area.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Georgia State University, 2005. / Ttitle from title screen. Tanya Caldwell, committee chair; Malinda G. Snow, Stephen B. Dobranski, committee members. 333 p. [numbered vi, 325]. Description based on contents viewed Feb. 26, 2007. Includes bibliographical references (p. 318-325).

This thesis examines the traditional role of a monarchy in processes of democratization. This thesis evaluates this theory by examining the case of the democratization process in Thailand and the role of the current King in that process.

Konstitucinė monarchija – tai tokia valstybės valdymo forma, kuri atspindi konstituciškai reglamentuotą valstybės valdžių sistemos organizaciją, kurioje valdovo institutas netenka ne tik įstatymų leidžiamosios, bet ir daugumos vykdomosios bei teisminės valdžios funkcijų ir valstybės valdyme lyderio poziciją užleidžia visuomenės atstovaujamajai institucijai – parlamentui. Šiame baigiamajame darbe atskleidžiami konstitucinių monarchijų Danijoje, Norvegijoje ir Švedijoje ypatumai. Konstitucinių monarchijų bruožai išskiriami analizuojant monarchijų rūšis, monarchijos valdymo formos įtvirtinimą Konstitucijoje, sosto užėmimo tradicijas, monarcho įgaliojimų kilmę ir trukmę ir monarcho prerogatyvas valdžios pasidalijimo mechanizme. Nors Skandinavijos šalys Danija, Norvegija ir Švedija yra labai giminingos, jas sieja bendra istorija ir kultūrinės tradicijos, jų konstitucinės monarchijos turi esminių skirtumų. Kaip antai, skirtingai nuo Danijos ir Norvegijos, įgaliojimai, kurie liko Švedijos monarchui yra išskirtinai reprezentaciniai ir ceremonialiniai. Monarchijos institutas šiuolaikiniame moderniame pasaulyje išlieka, todėl kad savo konstitucine realizavimo forma tapo dar vienu valstybės vadovo instituto formavimo išraiškos variantu. Visa tai galima paaiškinti nacionalinių valstybių teisinių, kultūrinių tradicijų ypatybėmis, kurios sąlygojo būtent tokį valstybės vadovo instituto sudarymo būdą Skandinavijos šalyse. / A constitutional monarchy - is a form of state government which reflects constitutionally organised system of state powers, where monarch reigns with limits to legislative and most of executive powers along with a governing body – parlament. This final research work describes characteristics of constitutional monarchies in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Features of constitutional monarchy are disclosed analizing the types of monarchies, implementation a form of monarchical government in Constitution, traditions of accession to the Throne, origin of monarch powers and monarch prerogatives in the system of separation of powers. Although Skandinavian countries Denmark, Norway and Sweden are so close to each other, they have common history and similar cultural traditions, their constitutional monarchies have substancial differences. For example, differently from Denmark and Norway, the prerogatives left for Swedish monarch are exceptionally only representative and ceremonial. Institute of monarchy survive in today’s modern world, because became one more way to realize the institute of head of state. In attempting to find an answer we must turn to history, because traditions in Scandinavian countries, as they are learned and perceived, create attitudes, which in turn lead to actions.