![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
"Depend upon it; there is no such place."
Aug. 5th, 2005 12:58 pmCurrently I'm reading Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell. A remarkable book, especially the numerous footnotes, that give the book an air of non-fiction, what I like.
It is but an air of non-fiction because what does my eye spy on page 430? We are in 1815 (June). Napoleon has returned from Elba and wishes to regain his power and "is sure to begin by invading Belgium" being such a little country and all. Sure someone has her dates mixed up here. This year Belgium exists 175 years. A little math tells us that this means the country became independent in 1830. What would Napoleon start invading a non-existent country for? He wasn't that deluded, was he?
What does exist in 1815 are the Belgian provinces, part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This was an outcome of the Treaty of Vienna that drew the map of Europe after Napoleon. Before that these parts were made up of counties and provinces and whatever that paid tribute to whatever lord who seemed fit to call this part of Europe his own, being the French king, a German prince, a Spanish king, an Austrian emperor... We just kept going quite fine, managing our cabbages, our beer and our farm animals.
It wasn't until the start of the nineteenth cenutry with the upsurge of nationalism that something of a "Belgian nationality" came to be. After 1815 the French speaking nobility didn't like the Dutch king very much, so decided to found their own country. Historically speaking we never had much to do with the Dutch kingdom anyway and most people on this side of the border are Catholic, whereas most Dutch people are protestant. Come 1830 the Belgian provinces declare their independance from the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The Dutch king doesn't like this very much. There's a bit of a struggle and Belgium doesn't get recognised by the Dutch until 1839. England and France agree with it though, on the sole condition Belgium will be neutral in further European conflict (which it is, until World War 1).
Funny thing is that, although Belgium became independent in 1830 we didn't have a king before 1831. This was partly because it had to be decided first this country should have a king and not a president and second because they couldn't find a willing king at first. A Greek fellow was asked, but he didn't want to because he declared the Belgian constitution a constitution for a republic and he couldn't live with that. The second fellow that eventually said yes was a German guy who was previously married to some British girl that might inherit the British throne, hadn't she died. So if you can't rule the British empire, go for Belgium, that's what I always say!
What's even more funny is that by using the name of Belgium this kingdom ties a bond with some long forgotten Celtic tribe that lived here during the Roman invasions by Julius Ceasar. Remember the line in De Bello Gallico that goes like this: "The fiercest among these tribes are the Belgians." Unfortunately the Belgians have long since gone. All Celtic tribes have been chased away during Germanic invasions at the end of the Roman rule. Belgica is the name the Romans gave to these parts and it stuck, but historically speaking these Belgians aren't living here anymore.
I don't mind Susanna Clarke uses a wrong date. This is actually the second time I'm confronted with this mistake. It makes me wonder if abroad "Belgium" is used more general to talk about the Belgian provinces and not as the country per se. Hey, Belgium might have come into existence following the treaty of Vienna. Maybe it was on the table, but considered too small to be a significant threat to keep the French expansion at bay. In Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell's universe the proposal probably made it.
It is but an air of non-fiction because what does my eye spy on page 430? We are in 1815 (June). Napoleon has returned from Elba and wishes to regain his power and "is sure to begin by invading Belgium" being such a little country and all. Sure someone has her dates mixed up here. This year Belgium exists 175 years. A little math tells us that this means the country became independent in 1830. What would Napoleon start invading a non-existent country for? He wasn't that deluded, was he?
What does exist in 1815 are the Belgian provinces, part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This was an outcome of the Treaty of Vienna that drew the map of Europe after Napoleon. Before that these parts were made up of counties and provinces and whatever that paid tribute to whatever lord who seemed fit to call this part of Europe his own, being the French king, a German prince, a Spanish king, an Austrian emperor... We just kept going quite fine, managing our cabbages, our beer and our farm animals.
It wasn't until the start of the nineteenth cenutry with the upsurge of nationalism that something of a "Belgian nationality" came to be. After 1815 the French speaking nobility didn't like the Dutch king very much, so decided to found their own country. Historically speaking we never had much to do with the Dutch kingdom anyway and most people on this side of the border are Catholic, whereas most Dutch people are protestant. Come 1830 the Belgian provinces declare their independance from the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The Dutch king doesn't like this very much. There's a bit of a struggle and Belgium doesn't get recognised by the Dutch until 1839. England and France agree with it though, on the sole condition Belgium will be neutral in further European conflict (which it is, until World War 1).
Funny thing is that, although Belgium became independent in 1830 we didn't have a king before 1831. This was partly because it had to be decided first this country should have a king and not a president and second because they couldn't find a willing king at first. A Greek fellow was asked, but he didn't want to because he declared the Belgian constitution a constitution for a republic and he couldn't live with that. The second fellow that eventually said yes was a German guy who was previously married to some British girl that might inherit the British throne, hadn't she died. So if you can't rule the British empire, go for Belgium, that's what I always say!
What's even more funny is that by using the name of Belgium this kingdom ties a bond with some long forgotten Celtic tribe that lived here during the Roman invasions by Julius Ceasar. Remember the line in De Bello Gallico that goes like this: "The fiercest among these tribes are the Belgians." Unfortunately the Belgians have long since gone. All Celtic tribes have been chased away during Germanic invasions at the end of the Roman rule. Belgica is the name the Romans gave to these parts and it stuck, but historically speaking these Belgians aren't living here anymore.
I don't mind Susanna Clarke uses a wrong date. This is actually the second time I'm confronted with this mistake. It makes me wonder if abroad "Belgium" is used more general to talk about the Belgian provinces and not as the country per se. Hey, Belgium might have come into existence following the treaty of Vienna. Maybe it was on the table, but considered too small to be a significant threat to keep the French expansion at bay. In Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell's universe the proposal probably made it.
