Flahaut partition plan for Belgium: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:33, 24 September 2021

The Flahaut partition plan for Belgium was a proposal developed in 1830 at the London Conference of 1830 by the French diplomat Charles de Flahaut, to partition Belgium. The proposal was immediately rejected by the French Foreign Ministry upon Charles Maurice de Talleyrand's insistence.^[1]^[2]

Although according to some sources the French insistence on partioning Belgium might have been invented by Talleyrand himself to show himself as a skilled statesman by maintaining Belgian independence.^[3]^[4]

Background

Despite increasing popular demands for independence, major European powers were divided over the future of Belgium; stalling the negotiations at the London Conference of 1830.^[5] In early November 1830, the National Congress of Belgium voted to adopt a monarchy. Prince Louis, Duke of Nemours, the son of Louis Philippe I of France emerged as a popular candidate for the throne, however Louis Philippe rejected the candidacy after being urged to do so by Charles Maurice de Talleyrand. While placing the duke on the Belgian throne would have benefited France, Talleyrand argued that such a decision would offend the British and displace the balance of power in Europe.^[6]^[7]

Plan

The Belgians outright refused to consider a candidate from the Dutch House of Nassau. In lieu of the stalemate, French diplomat Charles de Flahaut (a son of Talleyrand) proposed partitioning Belgium. Belgium was to be split between the Netherlands, France and Prussia; with the largest part going to France. Britain on the other hand was to receive the city of Antwerp along with its port:^[6] Britain was seen as likely to accept receiving this seemingly small possession as Antwerp was the largest port located close to the British isles in the continent which made it an ideal staging point for any power planning an invasion of Britain (Calais on France was even closer but it was smaller in size, although the British had already in the past sought the demilitarization of Calais by the French).^[8]

Aftermath

Talleyrand was briefly tempted by the prospect of partitioning Belgium,^[9] a proposal he had briefly toyed with before;^[10] however, he quickly changed his mind and rejected the Flahaut plan as absurd, exclaiming that "he would rather cut off his arm than sign the document". Talleyrand argued that providing Britain with a base on the continent after France fought numerous wars to prevent such an event was unacceptable. The creation of a direct border with the Kingdom of Prussia was likewise seen as problematic. Talleyrand ordered Flahaut to carry a letter outlining his objections to the proposal to the French Foreign Minister Sébastiani. Sébastiani heeded Talleyrand's warnings and did not pursue the implementation of the plan.^[11] It should be noted though, that it has been argued that Britain would have been likely to reject such a partition of Belgium mostly for the same reasons as having to defend a new land border of such a small size and so exposed sandwiched between two adversaries (France and Germany) would have been too expensive and problematic and it would have been much cheaper to just keep a powerful navy to prevent landings on the British isles.^[8]^[12]

The Belgian Congress set 28 January as the final date for the election of the new king. The popularity of Auguste, Duke of Leuchtenberg a Bonapartist candidate prompted Flahaut to resurrect his plan. Flahaut argued that in the case of the election of Leuchtenberg or any another candidate deemed unacceptable by France, partition would be the only available option. Talleyrand once again rebuffed Flahaut by repeating his previous arguments in a new letter to Sebastiani. On 3 February, the Belgians offered the crown to the Duke of Nemours. On 7 February, the powers issued an official statement refusing to recognize any election that would grant Leuchtenberg the throne. On 17 February, Louis Philippe formally renounced his dynasty's claim to the Belgian throne. Having secured the exclusion of the two leading candidates from the election process, Talleyrand continued to vigorously campaign behind the scenes for the election of Leopold of Saxe-Coburg. On 4 June, the Belgian Congress elected Leopold of Saxe-Coburg as the King of the Belgians with the support of the conference.^[13]^[1]

A minority on the Belgian political spectrum continue to support the partition of Belgium to this day, with the proportion of separatists in the country remaining stable throughout the years.^[14]^[15]

Footnotes

^ ^a ^b Schmidt, Daniel Paul (1 August 1976). "IV. France's second intervention in Belgium: An intervention designed to resolve the Belgian problem" (PDF). The foreign policy of Louis Philippe 1830-32: A study in interventionist policy (PDF). Marquette University Faculty of the Graduate School (PhD (Doctor of Philosophy)). ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States of America: Marquette University. p. 93-130. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via ProQuest.
^ Dard, Émile (15 July 1939). Chaumeix, André (ed.). "Trois générations: Tayllerand, Flahaut, Morny. I." Revue des Deux Mondes (in French). 46 (2). Paris, Ile de France, France: Société de la Revue des Deux Mondes: 341–365. ISSN 0035-1962. JSTOR 44850143. OCLC 476419311.
^ Smit, C. (1949). "VIII. Franse annexatie- en verdelingsplannen België's neutraliteit". In Brill, E.J. (ed.). De conferentie van Londen: Het vredesverdrag tussen Nederland en Belgié van 19 April 1839 (in Dutch). Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands: Brill Archive. p. 83. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via Google Books.
^ Sked, Alan (15 October 2006). McKercher, B.J.C.; Goldstein, Erik; Maurer, John; Otte, Thomas; Colman, Jonathan; Trenta, Luca (eds.). "Talleyrand and England, 1792–1838: A Reinterpretation". Diplomacy & Statecraft. 17 (4). Abingdon-on-Thames, England, United Kingdom of Great Britain: Routledge (Taylor & Francis): 647–664. doi:10.1080/09592290600942793. ISSN 0959-2296. OCLC 22548326. Retrieved 23 September 2021.
^ Gavin, Catherine Irvine (31 May 1931). "V. The Entente Cordiale". Louis philippe, king of the french, 1830-1848 (PDF). Aberdeen Postgraduate Research School (PhD (Doctor of Philosophy)). ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom of Great Britain: University of Aberdeen. OCLC 921229907. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via ProQuest.
^ ^a ^b Bernard 1973, p. 550-551, Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834).
^ Dhondt, Frederik (1 January 2018). Piret, Bérengère; Bousmar, Éric; de Broux, Pierre-Olivier; Desmette, Philippe; Ruelle, Annette; Tousignant, Nathalie; Ngongo, Enika (eds.). "La neutralité permanente de la Belgique et l'histoire du droit international: Quelques jalons pour la recherche" (PDF). Cahiers: Centre de Recherches en Histoire du Droit et des Institutions (in French). 41 (1). Brussels, Belgium: Centre de Recherches en Histoire du Droit, des Institutions et de la Société (Université Saint-Louis – Bruxelles). doi:10.25518/1370-2262.614. ISSN 1370-2262. Retrieved 23 September 2021.
^ ^a ^b Pine, Alan Stanley (1 June 1972). "IV. The Whigs, Palmerston, and the London Conference". The motivations and conduct of British foreign policy in the Belgian crisis, 1830-1839 (PDF). NYU Department of History of the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (PhD (Doctor of Philosophy)). ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. New York City, New York, United States of America: New York University (NYU). pp. 63–89. Retrieved 23 September 2021 – via ProQuest.
^ Kelly 2017, p. 63, 7. French Troops in Belgium!.
^ Kelly 2017, p. 64, 7. French Troops in Belgium!.
^ Bernard 1973, p. 551-552, Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834).
^ Sked, Alan (13 September 2013) [2008]. "3. Talleyrand and England, 1792-1838: A Reinterpretation". In Stone, Glyn; Otte, Thomas G. (eds.). Anglo-French Relations since the Late Eighteenth Century (3rd ed.). Abingdon-on-Thames, England, United Kingdom of Great Britain: Routledge (Taylor & Francis). pp. 13–30. ISBN 978-0-415-39578-6 – via Google Books.
^ Bernard 1973, p. 562-565, Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834).
^ Dy, B. (8 January 2020). Delvaux, Béatrice (ed.). "Seuls 16% des électeurs flamands veulent la scission du pays". Le Soir (in French). Brussels, Belgium: Rossel & Cie. S.A. Archived from the original on 9 January 2020.
^ De Standaard editorial staff (9 November 2007). Verhoeven, Karel (ed.). "België moet blijven, maar niet zoals nu". De Standaard (in Dutch). Brussels, Belgium: Mediahuis. ISSN 0779-3847. OCLC 900938528. Archived from the original on 21 January 2016. Retrieved 23 September 2021.

References

Bernard, Jack F. (1973). Tayllerand: A Biography. New York City, New York, United States of America: Putnam. ISBN 9780399110221. LCCN 72085242. OCLC 622019 – via Internet Archive.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{short description|diplomatic proposal}}
-The '''Flahaut partition plan for Belgium''' was a proposal developed in 1830 at the [[London Conference of 1830]] by the French diplomat [[Charles Joseph, comte de Flahaut|Charles de Flahaut]], to partition [[History of Belgium|Belgium]]. The proposal was immediately rejected by the French Foreign Ministry upon [[Charles Maurice de Talleyrand]]'s insistence.
+The '''Flahaut partition plan for Belgium''' was a proposal developed in 1830 at the [[London Conference of 1830]] by the French diplomat [[Charles Joseph, comte de Flahaut|Charles de Flahaut]], to partition [[History of Belgium|Belgium]]. The proposal was immediately rejected by the French Foreign Ministry upon [[Charles Maurice de Talleyrand]]'s insistence.<ref name="thes">{{cite thesis |first=Daniel Paul |last=Schmidt |title=The foreign policy of Louis Philippe 1830-32: A study in interventionist policy |publication-place=[[Milwaukee]], [[Wisconsin]], United States of America |type=PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) |publisher=[[Marquette University]] |department=Marquette University Faculty of the Graduate School |via=[[ProQuest]] |date=1 August 1976 |access-date=23 September 2021 |url=https://www.proquest.com/openview/bfec9cab829e3dc0a72a7e7001ff9981/1.pdf |format=PDF |series=ProQuest Dissertations Publishing |chapter=IV. France's second intervention in Belgium: An intervention designed to resolve the Belgian problem |page=93-130 |chapter-url=https://www.proquest.com/openview/bfec9cab829e3dc0a72a7e7001ff9981/93.pdf }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |title=Trois générations: Tayllerand, Flahaut, Morny. I. |first=Émile |last=Dard |journal=[[Revue des Deux Mondes]] |oclc=476419311 |publisher=Société de la Revue des Deux Mondes |issue=2 |volume=46 |date=15 July 1939 |pages=341-365 |jstor=44850143 |language=French |url=https://www.revuedesdeuxmondes.fr/article-revue/trois-generations-talleyrand-flahaut-morny-i |issn=00351962 |publication-place=[[Paris]], [[Ile de France]], [[France]] |editor1-first=André |editor1-last=Chaumeix |editor1-link=André Chaumeix }}</ref>
-Although according to some sources the French insistence on partioning Belgium might have been invented by Talleyrand himself to show himself as a skilled statesman by maintaining Belgian independence.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Smit|first=C.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=seMUAAAAIAAJ&q=talleyrand+flahaut+belgie&pg=PA83|title=De conferentie van Londen: het vredesverdrag tussen Nederland en Belgié van 19 April 1839|date=1949|publisher=Brill Archive|language=nl}}</ref>
+Although according to some sources the French insistence on partioning Belgium might have been invented by Talleyrand himself to show himself as a skilled statesman by maintaining Belgian independence.<ref>{{Cite book |chapter=VIII. Franse annexatie- en verdelingsplannen België's neutraliteit |page=83 |chapter-url=https://books.google.be/books?id=seMUAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA83 |via=[[Google Books]] |first=C. |last=Smit |title=De conferentie van Londen: Het vredesverdrag tussen Nederland en Belgié van 19 April 1839 |year=1949 |url=https://books.google.be/books?id=seMUAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover |publisher=Brill Archive |editor1-first=E.J. |editor1-last=Brill |publication-place=[[Leiden]], [[South Holland]], [[Netherlands]] |language=Dutch |access-date=23 September 2021 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |first=Alan |last=Sked |title=Talleyrand and England, 1792–1838: A Reinterpretation |journal=Diplomacy & Statecraft |volume=17 |issue=4 |doi=10.1080/09592290600942793 |pages=647-664 |issn=0959-2296 |publisher=[[Routledge]] ([[Taylor & Francis]]) |editor1-first=B.J.C. |editor1-last=McKercher |editor2-first=Erik |editor2-last=Goldstein |editor3-first=John |editor3-last=Maurer |editor4-first=Thomas |editor4-last=Otte |publication-place=[[Abingdon-on-Thames]], [[England]], United Kingdom of Great Britain |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09592290600942793 |date=15 October 2006 |access-date=23 September 2021 |oclc=22548326 |editor5-first=Jonathan |editor5-last=Colman |editor6-first=Luca |editor6-last=Trenta }}</ref>
 ==Background==
-Despite increasing popular demands for independence, major European powers were divided over the future of Belgium; stalling the negotiations at the [[London Conference of 1830]]. In early November 1830, the [[National Congress of Belgium]] voted to adopt a [[monarchy]]. [[Prince Louis, Duke of Nemours]], the son of [[Louis Philippe I]] of France emerged as a popular candidate for the throne, however Louis Philippe rejected the candidacy after being urged to do so by [[Charles Maurice de Talleyrand]]. While placing the duke on the Belgian throne would have benefited France, Talleyrand argued that such a decision would offend the British and displace the balance of power in Europe.<ref>Bernard, J.F. (1973), pp. 550-551</ref>
+Despite increasing popular demands for independence, major European powers were divided over the future of Belgium; stalling the negotiations at the [[London Conference of 1830]].<ref>{{cite thesis |title=Louis philippe, king of the french, 1830-1848 |first=Catherine Irvine |last=Gavin |publisher=[[University of Aberdeen]] |publication-place=[[Aberdeen]], [[Scotland]], United Kingdom of Great Britain |date=31 May 1931 |via=[[ProQuest]] |format=PDF |series=ProQuest Dissertations Publishing |type=PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) |access-date=23 September 2021 |url=https://www.proquest.com/openview/dd9c56f23075bd2d09caf4b7cfea58b6/1 |oclc=921229907 |department=Aberdeen Postgraduate Research School |chapter=V. The Entente Cordiale }}</ref> In early November 1830, the [[National Congress of Belgium]] voted to adopt a [[monarchy]]. [[Prince Louis, Duke of Nemours]], the son of [[Louis Philippe I]] of France emerged as a popular candidate for the throne, however Louis Philippe rejected the candidacy after being urged to do so by [[Charles Maurice de Talleyrand]]. While placing the duke on the Belgian throne would have benefited France, Talleyrand argued that such a decision would offend the British and displace the balance of power in Europe.{{sfn|Bernard|1973|loc=[https://www.archive.org/details/talleyrand00jack/page/550 Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834)]|p=550-551}}<ref>{{cite journal |title=La neutralité permanente de la Belgique et l’histoire du droit international: Quelques jalons pour la recherche |first=Frederik |last=Dhondt |volume=41 |issn=1370-2262 |journal=C@hiers du CRHiDI. Histoire, droit, institutions, société |date=1 January 2018 |access-date=23 September 2021 |issue=1 |publication-place=[[Brussels]], [[Belgium]] |editor1-first=Bérengère |editor1-last=Piret |editor2-first=Éric |editor2-last=Bousmar |editor3-first=Pierre-Olivier |editor3-last=de Broux |editor4-first=Philippe |editor4-last=Desmette |editor5-first=Annette |editor5-last=Ruelle |editor6-first=Nathalie |editor6-last=Tousignant |editor7-first=Enika |editor7-last=Ngongo |publisher=Centre de Recherches en Histoire du Droit, des Institutions et de la Société ([[Saint-Louis University, Brussels|Université Saint-Louis – Bruxelles]]) |language=French |journal=Cahiers: Centre de Recherches en Histoire du Droit et des Institutions |url=https://popups.uliege.be/1370-2262/pdf.php?id=614 |format=PDF |doi=10.25518/1370-2262.614 }}</ref>
 ==Plan==
-The Belgians outright refused to consider a candidate from the Dutch [[House of Nassau]]. In lieu of the stalemate, French diplomat [[Charles Joseph, comte de Flahaut|Charles de Flahaut]] (a son of Talleyrand) proposed partitioning Belgium. Belgium was to be split between the Netherlands, France and [[Kingdom of Prussia|Prussia]]; with the largest part going to France. Britain on the other hand was to receive the city of [[Antwerp]] along with its port.<ref>Bernard, J.F. (1973), pp. 550-551</ref>
+The Belgians outright refused to consider a candidate from the Dutch [[House of Nassau]]. In lieu of the stalemate, French diplomat [[Charles Joseph, comte de Flahaut|Charles de Flahaut]] (a son of Talleyrand) proposed partitioning Belgium. Belgium was to be split between the Netherlands, France and [[Kingdom of Prussia|Prussia]]; with the largest part going to France. Britain on the other hand was to receive the city of [[Antwerp]] along with its port:{{sfn|Bernard|1973|loc=[https://www.archive.org/details/talleyrand00jack/page/550 Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834)]|p=550-551}} Britain was seen as likely to accept receiving this seemingly small possession as Antwerp was the largest port located close to the British isles in the continent which made it an ideal staging point for any power planning an invasion of Britain ([[Calais]] on France was even closer but it was smaller in size, although the British had already in the past sought the demilitarization of Calais by the French).<ref name="thes2" />
 ==Aftermath==
-Talleyrand immediately rejected the Flahaut plan as absurd, exclaiming that "he would rather cut off his arm than sign the document". Talleyrand argued that providing Britain with a base on the continent after France fought numerous wars to prevent such an event was unacceptable. The creation of a direct border with the [[Kingdom of Prussia]] was likewise seen as problematic. Talleyrand ordered Flahaut to carry a letter outlining his objections to the proposal to the French Foreign Minister [[Horace François Bastien Sébastiani de La Porta|Sébastiani]]. Sébastiani heeded Talleyrand's warnings and did not pursue the implementation of the plan.<ref>Bernard, J.F. (1973), pp. 551-552</ref>
+Talleyrand was briefly tempted by the prospect of partitioning Belgium,{{sfn|Kelly|2017|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=TBOMDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA63 7. French Troops in Belgium!]|p=63}} a proposal he had briefly toyed with before;{{sfn|Kelly|2017|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=TBOMDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA64 7. French Troops in Belgium!]|p=64}} however, he quickly changed his mind and rejected the Flahaut plan as absurd, exclaiming that "he would rather cut off his arm than sign the document". Talleyrand argued that providing Britain with a base on the continent after France fought numerous wars to prevent such an event was unacceptable. The creation of a direct border with the [[Kingdom of Prussia]] was likewise seen as problematic. Talleyrand ordered Flahaut to carry a letter outlining his objections to the proposal to the French Foreign Minister [[Horace François Bastien Sébastiani de La Porta|Sébastiani]]. Sébastiani heeded Talleyrand's warnings and did not pursue the implementation of the plan.{{sfn|Bernard|1973|loc=[https://www.archive.org/details/talleyrand00jack/page/551 Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834)]|p=551-552}} It should be noted though, that it has been argued that Britain would have been likely to reject such a partition of Belgium mostly for the same reasons as having to defend a new land border of such a small size and so exposed sandwiched between two adversaries (France and Germany) would have been too expensive and problematic and it would have been much cheaper to just keep a powerful navy to prevent landings on the British isles.<ref name="thes2">{{cite thesis |title=The motivations and conduct of British foreign policy in the Belgian crisis, 1830-1839 |first=Alan Stanley |last=Pine |via=[[ProQuest]] |type=PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) |publisher=[[New York University|New York University (NYU)]] |department=NYU Department of History of the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences |date=1 June 1972 |format=PDF |access-date=23 September 2021 |url=https://www.proquest.com/openview/af6abc343e1d78f5b7c8d7251c749e08/1 |publication-place=[[New York City]], [[New York (state)|New York]], United States of America |series=ProQuest Dissertations Publishing |chapter=IV. The Whigs, Palmerston, and the London Conference |pages=63-89 |chapter-url=https://www.proquest.com/openview/af6abc343e1d78f5b7c8d7251c749e08/63 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |chapter=3. Talleyrand and England, 1792-1838: A Reinterpretation |first=Alan |last=Sked |pages=13-30 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?&id=scTaAAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP13 |via=[[Google Books]] |editor1-first=Glyn |editor1-last=Stone |editor2-first=Thomas G. |editor2-last=Otte |title=Anglo-French Relations since the Late Eighteenth Century |edition=3rd |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=scTaAAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover |publisher=[[Routledge]] ([[Taylor & Francis]]) |date=13 September 2013 |orig-year=2008 |isbn=978-0-415-39578-6 |publication-place=[[Abingdon-on-Thames]], [[England]], United Kingdom of Great Britain }}</ref>
-The Belgian Congress set 28 January as the final date for the election of the new king. The popularity of [[Auguste, Duke of Leuchtenberg]] a [[Bonapartism|Bonapartist]] candidate prompted Flahaut to resurrect his plan. Flahaut argued that in the case of the election of Leuchtenberg or any another candidate deemed unacceptable by France, partition would be the only available option. Talleyrand once again rebuffed Flahaut by repeating his previous arguments in a new letter to Sebastiani. On 3 February, the Belgians offered the crown to the Duke of Nemours. On 7 February, the powers issued an official statement refusing to recognize any election that would grant Leuchtenberg the throne. On 17 February, Louis Philippe formally renounced his dynasty's claim to the Belgian throne. Having secured the exclusion of the two leading candidates from the election process, Talleyrand continued to vigorously campaign behind the scenes for the election of [[Leopold I of Belgium|Leopold of Saxe-Coburg]]. On 4 June, the Belgian Congress elected Leopold of Saxe-Coburg as the King of the Belgians with the support of the conference.<ref>Bernard, J.F. (1973), pp. 562-565</ref>
+The Belgian Congress set 28 January as the final date for the election of the new king. The popularity of [[Auguste, Duke of Leuchtenberg]] a [[Bonapartism|Bonapartist]] candidate prompted Flahaut to resurrect his plan. Flahaut argued that in the case of the election of Leuchtenberg or any another candidate deemed unacceptable by France, partition would be the only available option. Talleyrand once again rebuffed Flahaut by repeating his previous arguments in a new letter to Sebastiani. On 3 February, the Belgians offered the crown to the Duke of Nemours. On 7 February, the powers issued an official statement refusing to recognize any election that would grant Leuchtenberg the throne. On 17 February, Louis Philippe formally renounced his dynasty's claim to the Belgian throne. Having secured the exclusion of the two leading candidates from the election process, Talleyrand continued to vigorously campaign behind the scenes for the election of [[Leopold I of Belgium|Leopold of Saxe-Coburg]]. On 4 June, the Belgian Congress elected Leopold of Saxe-Coburg as the King of the Belgians with the support of the conference.{{sfn|Bernard|1973|loc=[https://www.archive.org/details/talleyrand00jack/page/562 Part Six: The London Embassy (1830-1834)]|p=562-565}}<ref name="thes" />
-A minority on the Belgian political spectrum continue to support the [[partition of Belgium]] to this day, with the proportion of separatists in the country remaining stable throughout the years.<ref>{{cite news|title=Seuls 16% des électeurs flamands veulent la scission du pays |date=8 January 2020 |newspaper=[[Le Soir]] |url=https://www.lesoir.be/271516/article/2020-01-08/seuls-16-des-electeurs-flamands-veulent-la-scission-du-pays |language=fr}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf09112007_060 |date=9 November 2007 |title=België moet blijven, maar niet zoals nu |newspaper=[[De Standaard]] |language=nl}}</ref>
+A minority on the Belgian political spectrum continue to support the [[partition of Belgium]] to this day, with the proportion of separatists in the country remaining stable throughout the years.<ref>{{cite web |first=B. |last=Dy |archive-date=9 January 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200109163008/https://www.lesoir.be/271516/article/2020-01-08/seuls-16-des-electeurs-flamands-veulent-la-scission-du-pays |publisher=[[Rossel (company)|Rossel & Cie. S.A.]] |publication-place=[[Brussels]], [[Belgium]] |editor1-first=Béatrice |editor1-last=Delvaux |work=[[Le Soir]] |language=French |title=Seuls 16% des électeurs flamands veulent la scission du pays |url=https://www.lesoir.be/271516/article/2020-01-08/seuls-16-des-electeurs-flamands-veulent-la-scission-du-pays |date=8 January 2020 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |archive-date=21 April 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121223002/https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf09112007_060 |url=https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf09112007_060 |language=Dutch |title=België moet blijven, maar niet zoals nu |date=9 November 2007 |access-date=23 September 2021 |work=[[De Standaard]] |publisher=[[Mediahuis]] |publication-place=[[Brussels]], [[Belgium]] |editor1-first=Karel |editor1-last=Verhoeven |issn=0779-3847 |oclc=900938528 |archive-date=21 January 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121223002/https://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf09112007_060 |author=De Standaard editorial staff }}</ref>
 ==Footnotes==
@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 ==References==
-* {{cite book | author=Bernard, Jack F. | title=Talleyrand: A Biography | publisher=Putnam | location=New York | year=1973 | isbn=0-399-11022-4 | url=https://archive.org/details/talleyrand00jack}}
+* {{cite book |first=Jack F. |last=Bernard |lccn=72085242 |oclc=622019 |isbn=9780399110221 |title=Tayllerand: A Biography |publisher=Putnam |publication-place=[[New York City]], [[New York (state)|New York]], United States of America |year=1973 |url=https://www.archive.org/details/talleyrand00jack |via=[[Internet Archive]] }}
 ==Further reading==
+* {{cite journal |journal=Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis |title=The London Conference of 1830 |first=J.S. |last=Fishman |pages=418-428 |volume=84 |issue=3 |issn=0040-7518 |language=Dutch |editor1-last=H.A. Enno |editor1-last=van Gelder |editor2-first=A. Th. |editor2-last=van Deursen |editor3-first=J.A.F. |editor3-last=De Jongste |editor4-first=C. |editor4-last=van de Kieft |editor5-first=W. |editor5-last=Prevenier |editor6-first=I. |editor6-last=Schöffer |editor7-first=E. |editor7-last=Scholliers |editor8-first=R. |editor8-last=De Schryver |editor9-first=B.H. |editor9-last=Stolte |editor10-first=Th. |editor10-last=Van Tikn |publication-place=[[Groningen]], [[Groningen (province)|Groningen]], [[Netherlands]] |publisher=Wolters-Noordhoff NV |url=http://resources.huygens.knaw.nl/retroboeken/tvg/#page=418&accessor=thumbnails&view=imagePane&source=84&accessor_href=http%3A%2F%2Fresources.huygens.knaw.nl%2Fretroboeken%2Ftvg%2Fthumbnails%2Findex_html%3Fpage%3D4%26source%3D84%26id%3Dthumbnails |via=[[Huygens Institute for the History of the Netherlands|Huygens ING]] ([[Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences|Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen]]) }}
-* Fishman, J. S. "The London Conference of 1830," ''Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis'' (1971) 84#3 pp 418–428.
-* {{cite book | first =Linda |last = Kelly | title = Talleyrand in London: The Master Diplomat's Last Mission | location = London | publisher = I. B. Tauris | year = 2017 | isbn = 978-1-78453-781-4}}
+* {{cite book |first=Linda |last=Kelly |publication-place=[[London]], [[England]], United Kingdom of Great Britain |publisher=I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd |isbn=9781784537814 |title=Talleyrand in London: The Master Diplomat's Last Mission |date=31 May 2017 |via=[[Google Books]] |oclc=978626385 |edition=1st |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TBOMDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover |access-date=23 September 2021 }}
 [[Category:Belgian Revolution]]