And in many nations, feodal and post-feodal autonomies where nominally, and often really, given by a central authority. Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
My larger point is that nations as confederations of smaller unit is not a given : France never was a union of region, but the kingdom of the strongest noble among the Franks, who decided to give autonomy and take it back ; and who conquered , lost and divided among sons, his land Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
Also, during feudalism, local fiefdoms often had more de-facto autonomy than modern confederated states (see again Burgundy), in France, it was done away with progressively only after the 100 Years War (peaking in Louis XIV's de-facto taking hostage of aristocracy by binding them in his own court). *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
And Burgundy wasn't autonomous, it was pretty much independent until the middle of the second millenia, if I'm not mistaken. Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
You say "Choosing one of the points of centralisation of power as the formation of the French State is a bit abusive", but I thought that's my point! You are trying to connect the different past centres of power centralisation into a single coherent timeline.
Burgundy started out similarly to Aquitania: a duchy that made its own politics while nominally under the French king.
Duchy of Burgundy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
From these counties would emerge both the Duchy of Burgundy and the County of Burgundy, aided by the collapse of Carolingian centralism, and the division of the Frankish domains brought about by the Partition of Verdun in 843. In the midst of this confusion, Guerin, Count of Macon, attached himself to Charles the Bald... Guerin was rewarded for his services by the King ... by being granted the administration of the Counties of Chalon and Nevers, in which he was by custom expected to appoint Viscounts to rule as his deputies. As a vital military defender of the West Frankish border, Guerin was sometimes known by the Latin term for 'leader' - Dux, or Duke.
...Robert the Pious gave the territory to his younger son and namesake, Robert; and when Henry I, acceding in difficult circumstances, found it necessary to secure the loyalty of Robert of Burgundy, his brother, he further heightened the rights given to his brother. Robert was to be Duke of Burgundy; as ruler of the Duchy, he would "enjoy the freehold thereof", and have the right "to pass it on to his heirs"; the Duke would owe allegiance only to the crown of France...
...Finally, in the final months of John the Good's reign, Philip the Bold was established as Duke of Burgundy: the King secretly created his son as Duke on 6 September 1363 (in his dual role as Duke giving his own title to his child and as King sanctioning this change in leadership)...
By 1405, ... Burgundy - to follow the custom of giving the name of the Duchy to the much wider agglomeration assembled by the Dukes - stood less as a French fief, more as an independent state, and a major political player in European politics.
...The last two Dukes to directly rule the Duchy, Philip the Good and Charles the Bold, attempted to secure the independence of their Duchy from the French crown. The endeavour failed however; when Charles the Bold died in battle without sons, Louis XI of France declared the Duchy to have become extinct, and absorbed the territory into the French crown...
Had history turned out a little bit different, today Dijon would be a 'Burgundian'-speaking metropolis and Paris would speak English. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
And the problems with the English and the Burgundian was the same indeed, nobles becoming sovereigns in provinces not part of France. Dual homage was a major instability of feudal organisation.
There is a coherent time line for "Kingdom of the French" since at least Hugues Capet at least - the kingdom stayed in the same family ! That's the France "beyond the Rhone and Escaut" that indeed started with Charles the Bald, and which included the Duchy of Burgundy.
At no single points did the French provinces decide to join and form a French state ; the centralisation was imposed from the center, or from the outside in the case of the Roman Empire. I believe few states appeared thanks to actual voluntary delegations from their constituents ; centralisation was mostly forced from the center through political pressure or force of arms... Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
