Can someone explain the difference between these two to me?
Centenarius
Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
Can someone explain the difference between these two to me?
Remember to smile
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
Scratch that, lets make it simple:
I see Dual-Monarchy as an advanced form of Personal Union. Like an add-on. I can't think of anything consistent with the two words, but there seems to be an emphasise toward some general distinctions:
Personal Union is loose. Each Kingdom are technically independent states, who can shake the boat of the union. Each Kingdom typically hold quite independent laws, military, etc. and trade typically flows more freely. However, their political forus on the outside is reserved for the head of that Union(i.e. monarch).
Dual-Monarchy is primarily used for Austria-Hungary, thus you can filter out the perks of a general Personal Union. My interpitation is when Dual Monarchy is applied, the kingdoms will merge more: A single army, a single political capital, a more centralised government, etc. Thus enforcing a regime which focus on one central culture. It can still formally be known as a Personal Union, but I consider that is more of a formal tradition of old.
To some extent, I would equate a Personal Union to EU vs a Dual-Monarchy to USA. Autonomy is held higher in a PU for country's like Ireland, but larger individual decisions are only practically feasible for Germany/France. The state of Texas serves zero autonomy in comparison, not even formally representated in politics with the outside where DC hold absolute control. To conclude, the cohesion and effectiveness is much higher in a PU with D-M, then with just PU's more "fragile" nature.
PS: for those who use wikipedia, well it's not consistent in it's examples. It's a shock, I know.
~Wille
Last edited by Kjertesvein; November 24, 2010 at 06:32 PM.
Thorolf was thus armed. Then Thorolf became so furious that he cast his shield on his back, and, grasping his halberd with both hands, bounded forward dealing cut and thrust on either side. Men sprang away from him both ways, but he slew many. Thus he cleared the way forward to earl Hring's standard, and then nothing could stop him. He slew the man who bore the earl's standard, and cut down the standard-pole. After that he lunged with his halberd at the earl's breast, driving it right through mail and body, so that it came out at the shoulders; and he lifted him up on the halberd over his head, and planted the butt-end in the ground. There on the weapon the earl breathed out his life in sight of all, both friends and foes. [...] 53, Egil's Saga- The pranks played on the knight Jean de Joinville, 1249, 7th crusade.I must tell you here of some amusing tricks the Comte d'Eu played on us. I had made a sort of house for myself in which my knights and I used to eat, sitting so as to get the light from the door, which, as it happened, faced the Comte d'Eu's quarters. The count, who was a very ingenious fellow, had rigged up a miniature ballistic machine with which he could throw stones into my tent. He would watch us as we were having our meal, adjust his machine to suit the length of our table, and then let fly at us, breaking our pots and glasses.
http://imgur.com/a/DMm19
Originally Posted by Finn
Praefectus
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
Personal Union means two completely separate states happen to have the same Head of State (Monarch).
Dual Monarchy means a state that functions externally as one state and internally as two states.
Protector Domesticus
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
So would Denmark-Norway come under a personal union or dual monarchy I wonder?
"You have a decent ear for notes
but you can't yet appreciate harmony."
Campidoctor
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
Denmark eventually tried to annex Norway so thats a bad example.
lol
Centenarius
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
Why does what happened after the event make it a bad example?
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
A distinction which exists purely so nationalists can feel as though their monarch is their own.
Tro og Håb
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
That would be a dual monarchy (a term used by some historians), although despite the fact that Norway had its own army, laws and industries everything was directed from Copenhagen. This is a rather simplified answer though.So would Denmark-Norway come under a personal union or dual monarchy I wonder?
Granted Lettre de Marque by King Henry V - Spurs given by imb39
Сканија је Данска
عیسی پسر مریم گفت :' جهان است پل ، عبور بیش از آن است ، اما هیچ ساخت خانه بر آن او امیدوار است که برای یک روز ، ممکن است برای ابدیت امیدواریم ، اما ماندگار جهان اما ساعت آن را صرف در دعا و نماز برای استراحت است نهان
All of the Balkans is not worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier.
Otto von Bismarck
Remember to smile
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
Who changed our laws? Who changed our army? Who kicked out the Norwegian Riksrådet?Tyranny of the monarch I'll call it. I don't say the monarch treated Danes any better, but it was more 'Kingdom of Denmark and a half
. Spade is a spade.
This continued, to some extent till 1905 when we could finally rule our own foreign politics with army. 1 world war with a danish monarch in the front seat, until the 1930's when the fascist regime of Labour held monopole on our politics for 60 years to come. Today, US-foreign politics, UN rankings and EU-regulations have taken complete control, as all their demands are funnelled under our public noses - straight into our law code. That is the modern history of Norwegian politicsno joke. Well, perhaps it is
~Wille
Thorolf was thus armed. Then Thorolf became so furious that he cast his shield on his back, and, grasping his halberd with both hands, bounded forward dealing cut and thrust on either side. Men sprang away from him both ways, but he slew many. Thus he cleared the way forward to earl Hring's standard, and then nothing could stop him. He slew the man who bore the earl's standard, and cut down the standard-pole. After that he lunged with his halberd at the earl's breast, driving it right through mail and body, so that it came out at the shoulders; and he lifted him up on the halberd over his head, and planted the butt-end in the ground. There on the weapon the earl breathed out his life in sight of all, both friends and foes. [...] 53, Egil's Saga- The pranks played on the knight Jean de Joinville, 1249, 7th crusade.I must tell you here of some amusing tricks the Comte d'Eu played on us. I had made a sort of house for myself in which my knights and I used to eat, sitting so as to get the light from the door, which, as it happened, faced the Comte d'Eu's quarters. The count, who was a very ingenious fellow, had rigged up a miniature ballistic machine with which he could throw stones into my tent. He would watch us as we were having our meal, adjust his machine to suit the length of our table, and then let fly at us, breaking our pots and glasses.
http://imgur.com/a/DMm19
Centenarius
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
How so?
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
Take the Commonwealth, where the fact that the Queen of the UK is Queen of most Commonwealth nations is simply a "coincidence," and where say the monarch is Queen of Canada, Australia, etc., she actually spends very little of her time being actual Queen of these countries, and visits her realms even less than a jet-setter.
Primicerius
Re: Dual Monarchy vs Personal Union
ill take union
Leave it to the modder to perfect the works of the paid developers for no profit at all.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
