The Move From Aristocracy To Bureaucracy — страница 6

  • Просмотров 584
  • Скачиваний 6
  • Размер файла 34

previous plentiful treasury.? In order to raise funds, the devshirme stopped supplying candidates for certain posts, and Moslem boys were admitted to the devshirme.? By the 1630s, the Civil Service was actually less well educated than previously, and an aristocracy had developed.? Admiralties and Vizierships were held in families for generations, despite there not being an official principle of hereditary ownership outside the House of Osman in the Empire. To conclude, in the west, this era saw the growth of professionals as an elite class.? Both warfare and administration reached levels of complication at which it was necessary to have specific training and experience in order to function. Fed by the new universities, a new elite sprung up and established itself in positions

once held by the old families, in some cases with a greater degree of entrenchment.? Despite this new egalitarianism, this was no social revolution and was certainly the start of no ?New Monarchy? as Elton claimed. This era merely saw the aristocracy augmented by a new class of professional administrators.? In effect, a new educated element was allowed accession to the aristocracy.? Social mobility was marginally increased, but there was no real bureaucracy anywhere.? The idea of professional civil services was some way off. In the east, stagnation occurred, and countries failing to keep up with the modernisation of government soon fell behind.? Sweden and Turkey in particular would have a hard time repeating the successes of Osman, Suleiman and Gustavus Adophus unless they

reformed quickly. This question assumes much about the nature of an aristocracy in a Europe that saw countries such as Turkey where, until around 1570, the aristocracy was almost negligible to Russia, where the boyars of Ivan IV are believed by some to have replaced the Tsar himself. In a continent of such diversity, there is bound to be a different reasoning for each form of aristocracy and the development of each state.? The schism is particularly strong between Western and Eastern Europe.In the fifteenth century, the Papal schism, the accession of such characters as Charles VI of France, the repeated minorities in Scotland and the limited constitutional power of the Holy Roman Emperor lent western rulers a dependence on their nobles who started the period as the best educated

large class of lay people reliable for use at court, but this would soon change, aided by the growth of educational institutes, founded on the spur of the Renaissance and the Reformation.? The death of the feudal army or fyrd was vital in decreasing the importance of the nobility.? Experienced mercenaries were hired across Europe with their experienced veteran captains.? Henry VIII hired ?Scots, Spaniards, Gascons, Portuguese, Italians, Albanians, Greeks, Tatars, Germans, Burgundians and Flemings? according to one contemporary whilst Michael Romanov kept 17,400 mercenaries in his service.? His son, Alexis, employed 60,000 by 1663.? Until the Treaty of Cateau-Cambresis, the French border along the Spanish Road was guarded by 10,000 Swiss pikemen.? Removing the need to rely on the

aristocracy as one?s source of military power removed a vital part of the nobility?s hold on the monarchy and took away all of their power to insist on political influence.? The destruction of nobility in battle, such as that of the Scots at Flodden not only reinforced the need for professional soldiers but reaffirmed the decline of the soldier-noble as a class, and set the tone for an era of downsizing and demoting the old noblesse d?epee.? The muzzling of the aristocracy and the power to patronise the lower nobility increased the power of monarchies through this age . Bodin wrote that the only ?truly royal? states in Early Modern Europe were England, Spain and France, and it is with these category of states that we will start. France was a strongly monarchical state that, from

the reign of Francis I, openly held venal offices.? The growth of offices throughout the period and of the office-holding class was more advanced in the French kingdom than elsewhere. Between 1515 and 1665, the number of venal offices rose from 4,000 to 46,000 and the amount of revenue they produced was reckoned to be about 419 million livres ? five times the annual royal budget.? As a result of ennoblement through these channels, the noblesse de robe emerged to challenge the three ancient estates (leading some historians to suggest, probably mistakenly, that the gentry wished to form a fourth estate), and in line with the increase in the sale of offices, they increased the power of their class. Whereas Henri II and Francois I had courts filled with princes of the blood, dukes,