A Throne in Brussels: Britain, the Saxe-Coburgs and the Belgianisation of Europe [Paperback]

Paul Belien (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: February 1, 2006 | ISBN-10: 1845400658 | ISBN-13: 978-1845400651

In 1817 the great powers installed Leopold of Saxe- Coburg as king of Belgium ? a new, artificial state inhabited by Catholic Dutch in the North, and French- speaking Walloons in the South. Belgium is often compared to multilingual Switzerland, but whereas Switzerland grew organically, Belgium is an artificial state, in which two peoples were forced to live together and where no national consciousness developed. It could fall apart in the next ten years. Paul Belien argues that the pan-European super-state currently in the making will resemble a ?Greater-Belgium? rather than a ?Greater-Switzerland?, since Europe will also be an artificial construct. Belgium has infected EU political attitudes and acts as a model for the EU ? a failed attempt to ?construct a nation? out of different peoples with separate languages and traditions. To learn what the EU as a single state might be like, take up this highly readable mix of history, analysis and warning.

Product Details

• Paperback: 384 pages
• Publisher: Imprint Academic (February 1, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1845400658
• ISBN-13: 978-1845400651
• Product Dimensions: 8.1 x 5.4 x 1.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,633,567 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Will make you understand Belgium at last, January 25, 2011

By 

maximusone "maximusone" (Brussels) - See all my reviews

This review is from: A Throne in Brussels: Britain, the Saxe-Coburgs and the Belgianisation of Europe (Paperback)

Belien has written a portrait of Belgium as a mirror image of its royals. This portrait is highly opinionated - he is highly critical of each monarch and his influence on Belgium - , but the book is a lively read. Belien's thesis is that you can only understand Belgium, and why it has become such a political mess, if you understand its kings. - I thought he did a really good job except for the last chapter - on the current king - where there is a bit too much guilt by association. Not much is said about the Belgianisation of Europe though.

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Great read, but what's with the silly subtitle?, March 5, 2011

By 

Judith Loriente (Melbourne, Australia) - See all my reviews

This review is from: A Throne in Brussels: Britain, the Saxe-Coburgs and the Belgianisation of Europe (Paperback)

I wish I'd read this book earlier, and I would have if it hadn't been for the subtitle. It came up on a website when I was looking at other books on the subject some time ago, but the subtitle led me to believe it was about modern Britain, Belgium and the EU. In fact, it's better described as an updated version of Theo Aronson's 1968 Defiant Dynasty: The Coburgs of Belgium, with all sorts of scandalous stories that Aronson either left out or, more likely, hadn't discovered back then. A much better title would have been `A Throne in Brussels: A Warts-and-all History of the Coburgs of Belgium'.

The information, mentioned in reviews on Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk, that the author is a member of a right-wing political party that wants Flanders to separate from Belgium naturally made me wonder whether the book would be shamelessly biased. But I'm interested in the subject, so I read it anyway. I read a lot of history, and I actually found it no more biased than the average work of popular or even academic history. If it had been a poorly-researched political rant full of factual errors, it might be dismissible as nothing more than a propaganda piece, but it didn't come across as that at all. I've read quite a bit on this subject, and I don't recall noticing a single factual error. That doesn't mean there aren't any, and the salacious stories about the Coburgs' marital and extra-marital upheavals also can't necessarily all be substantiated. But just because scandalous stories can't be substantiated, that doesn't guarantee they aren't true, or that they won't be proven true later on. My preference is to treat them as possibilities rather than certainties, and keep an open mind. Though as for Belien's claim that Leopold I was probably the biological father of his nephew Prince Albert, that's not even exceptional - Richard Sotnick's recent The Coburg Conspiracy: Royal Plots and Manoeuvres is devoted to proving Albert's illegitimacy, and he concludes that Leopold is one of the candidates. And, as I mentioned in my review of The Coburg Conspiracy, Sotnick doesn't seem to be aware that David Duff put forward this theory as far back as 1972, in Albert and Victoria. Neither does Belien.

This book isn't the final word on its subject, and one written from the perspective of a French-speaking citizen of Belgium would doubtless have a very different emphasis. But then, it is popular history, and as it states on the back cover, it's the only English-language popular history of Belgium. Whatever its flaws, I'm glad it was written, and in spite of its bias I enjoyed reading it.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Not a review--only pointing out error of fact in book description, January 5, 2012

By 

batavicus - See all my reviews

This review is from: A Throne in Brussels: Britain, the Saxe-Coburgs and the Belgianisation of Europe (Paperback)

The book description above says that Leopold of Saxe-Coburg was installed by the great powers in 1817. In reality, it was 1831. King William I of the Netherlands ruled from 1815 (one could argue 1814) until the revolution of 1830, and the treaty regarding the final disposition of Belgium, including Dutch recognition of its independence, was signed in 1839.

I have not read the book (though I plan to). Again, my intent is not to review but to correct.