Wikis
Quiz
Map
A personal union is the combination by which two or more different states are governed by the same monarch while their boundaries, their laws and their interests remain distinct.[1][2] It should not be confused with a federation which is internationally considered a single state. Nor is it to be confused with dynastic union, where the union can be under a dynasty.
Personal unions can arise for very different reasons, ranging from near coincidence (a princess who is already married to a king becomes queen regnant, and their child inherits the crown of both countries) to virtual annexation (where a personal union sometimes was seen as a means of preventing uprisings). They can also be codified (i.e., the constitutions of the states clearly express that they shall share the same person as head of state) or non-codified, in which case they can easily be broken (e.g., by the death of the monarch when the two states have different succession laws).
Because presidents of republics are ordinarily chosen from within the citizens of the state in question, personal unions are almost entirely a phenomenon of monarchies, the unique exception nowadays being the Principality of Andorra in which one of the two co-princes is the President of France. Sometimes the term dual monarchy is used to signify a personal union between two monarchies.
There is a somewhat grey area between personal unions and federations, and the first has regularly grown into the second.
Following a prose introduction, here are some notes on personal unions through history, organized by country. With the exception of the sixteen Commonwealth realms, such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand[3], and of France and Andorra (where the union is partial), there are no longer any personal unions in today's world.[2]
The term personal union is also used to describe the bureaucratic device used in Nazi Germany to combine high level state positions with equivalent positions in the National Socialist Party.[4] The same bureaucratic device is also used by other governments, such as in the People's Republic of China. It is similar to the persona designata scheme by which judicial officers can be appointed to non-judicial or quasi-judicial functions under common law systems.
In 1162 Alfonso II of Aragon was the first person to bear the titles of King of Aragon and Count of Barcelona, ruling what was called later Crown of Aragon. James I of Aragon later created and added the Kingdom of Majorca and the Kingdom of Valencia to the Crown. Later, Charles of Ghent — Charles I of Spain, Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire— would join Aragon and Castile in a personal union that would become Spain.
The conception of a personal union was suggested to keep the Irish Free State as a Commonwealth Realm.[5]
The phrase personal union appears in some discussion about the early Commonwealth of Nations,[6] though its application to Commonwealth was refuted by others.[7] They fit the classical definition, but whether they are in personal union is doubted because of a) the functional unimportance of the monarch in today's Commonwealth governments,[citation needed] and b) the term being seen as an anachronism. Also it could be questioned whether a shared monarchy falls under the definition of a personal union, as the Crowns of the countries involved aren't entirely separate.[citation needed]
According to another theory, Kingdom of Croatia and Kingdom of Hungary formed a personal union of two kingdoms in 1102, united under the Hungarian king.[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] In c.1102, when the Croatian dynasty died out, the Croats joined the Hungarians in a personal union, but the Croatian State kept its political individuality with its ban and its assembly.[17] King Coloman established the personal union of the Kingdom of Croatia and the Kingdom of Hungary by an agreement called Pacta conventa.[18] After King Koloman was crowned as a Croatian king in Biograd, Croatian nobility retained strong powers.[19] Although, the precise time and terms of Pacta Conventa later became a matter of dispute; nonetheless there was at least a non-written agreement that regulated the relations between Hungary and Croatia in approximately the same way.[20]
In the union with Hungary, institutions of separate Croatian statehood were maintained through the Sabor (an assembly of Croatian nobles) and the ban (viceroy). In addition, the Croatian nobles retained their lands and titles.[21] Coloman retained the institution of the Sabor and relieved the Croatians of taxes on their land.[citation needed] Coloman's successors continued to crown themselves as Kings of Croatia separately in Biograd na Moru until the time of Bela IV.[22] In the 14th century a new term arose to describe the collection of de jure independent states under the rule of the Hungarian King: Archiregnum Hungaricum (Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen).[23]
Medieval Hungary and Croatia were (in terms of public international law) allied by means of personal union until the Battle of Mohács in 1526.[citation needed] On January 1, 1527, the Croatian nobles at Cetin unanimously elected Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria, as their king, and confirmed the succession to him and his heirs.[24] However, officially the Hungarian-Croatian state existed until the beginning of the 20th century and the Treaty of Trianon.[14][15][16]
According to a theory, Croatia was subjugated and incorporated into Hungary[25]. The alleged document of the personal union, the so-called Pacta Conventa is most likely a forgery from centuries later.[26][27][28][22][29][30][19]
The Pacta Conventa, the alleged document under which Croatians became vassals of Hungarians never existed, but the story about it was important for the Croatian position in the Habsburg Empire during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when the Croats claimed their right for statehood on the basis of that agreement[19]. Although Croatia ceased to exist as an independent state when King Coloman of Hungary defeated the last Croatian king, the Croatian nobility retained some powers.[19]
According to the Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress, the Croats enjoyed their own medieval kingdom for several centuries before a long period of Hungarian rule from 1102 to 1918.[31] Most Croats lived under Hungarian kings until 1526 and under Habsburg monarchs thereafter[31]; the Croats of Bosnia and Hercegovina and Slavonia lived under Ottoman rule for several hundred years; and the Croats of Dalmatia passed from Hungarian to Venetian to Austrian rule.[31] With the help of Roman Catholic clerics, the Croats maintained a strong collective memory of their former statehood despite their centuries of foreign domination.[31]
The actual nature of the relationship is inexplicable in modern terms because it varied from time to time.[32] Sometimes Croatia acted as an independent agent and at other times as a vassal of Hungary.[32] However, Croatia retained a large degree of internal independence.[32] The degree of Croatian autonomy fluctuated throughout the centuries as did its borders.[33]
Note: The point at issue in the War of the Spanish Succession was the fear that the succession to the Spanish throne dictated by Spanish law, which would devolve on Louis, le Grand Dauphin — already heir to the throne of France — would create a personal union that would upset the European balance of power (France had the most powerful military in Europe at the time, and Spain the largest empire).
The duchies of Saxe-Weimar and Saxe-Eisenach were in personal union from 1741, when the ruling house of Saxe-Eisenach died out, until 1809, when they were merged into the single duchy of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach.
Duchies with peculiar rules for succession.
The duchies of Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt and Schwarzburg-Sondershausen were in personal union from 1909, when Prince Günther of Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt succeeded also to the throne of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen, until 1918, when he (and all the other rulers of German monarchies) abdicated.
A personal union is a relationship of two or more sovereign states, which, through law, share the same person as their head of state.
Personal unions can begin for very different reasons. The case that a princess who is already married to a king becomes pregnant, and their child inherits the crown of both countries is a rather common cause. But a personal union sometimes was seen as a means against uprisings if a state wants an annexation of an other state. These unions can be written down in a constitution that clearly expresses that both states shall share the same person as head of state, but that is not always the case. Under these circumstances a personal union can easily be broken.
The actual situation was slightly more complex with the Dutch provinces Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Gelderland and Overijssel entering into personal union in 1689 and Drenthe in 1696. Only 2 Dutch provinces never entered into the personal union: Friesland and Groningen.
   | The End of Dominion Status - JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie |
| | The Status of the British Commonwealth in International Law - JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie |
| | online version - Lalor, Cyclopaedia of Political Science, V.3, Entry 51, PERSONAL UNION | Library of Economics and Liberty |
|
|
Search