Essay Absolute Monarchism

In this letter, he disapproved of the reduction of his royal powers and personal wealth, which affected his lifestyle and authority. He denounced the Revolution, National Assembly, and its constitution. Copies of the letter circulated in public and revealed to people that “Louis had lied to the French” when he swore an oath “before God and the nation to uphold the constitution” (102). Not only did he leave behind his people but his flight would have led to a civil war between revolutionaries and loyalists aided by foreigners. On top of that, deputies of the National Assembly dealt with the aftermath of a missing king: paranoid Parisians suspecting a conspiracy, people storming the palace, and palace servants being accused of treason. This added to the “profound sense of desertion and betrayal” by a king that people saw as a “good father” (222). Out of disgust, they denounced Louis: calling him all sorts of names, took down portraits of him, and covered “in black the word royal” on signs, buildings, and other public places (110). The “myth of the kingship had been shattered” because nobody knew what to do with Louis at this time (104, 108). Some wanted exile or imprisonment whereas others suggested reinstating him as only a figurehead, and some thought about a “republic without a king” (108). Either way, they no longer

Of all the absolute rulers in Europe, by far the best example of one, and the most powerful, was Louis XIV of France. Although Louis had some failures, he also had many successes. He controlled France’s money and had many different ways to get, as well as keep his power, and he knew how to delegate jobs to smart, but loyal people.

In the year of 1787, delegates met in Philadelphia to write the Constitution. Tyranny, a type of government with an absolute ruler was a fear. James Madison realized the fear that people had and understood so he wrote a article in the ”Federalist Paper” in 1788. In it he described how he believed if we had a three branch government system that could perform checks and balances on each other it would prevent tyranny in the colonies( Document A).

Would you want to live in a country of Tyranny? The Constitution helped prevent the United States tyranny. The Constitution was written in Philadelphia in May 1787. The purpose of the Constitution was to form a better government and to get rid of the Articles of Confederation. How did the United States prevent tyranny? Tyranny is a country ruled by a dictator, king, or a strong group of people. It is the result of when a ruler or rules have too much power. The Constitution guarded against tyranny in four ways which were Federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and the large and small states both treated equally or also known as equal representation.

Tyranny is displayed from multiple points of view. In 1787 our founding fathers met in Philadelphia to talk about a dilemma, The Articles of Confederation were failing. So after a long dispute, they settled on a decision, to write a completely new Constitution and throw out The Articles of Confederation. The new Constitution will begin a new period of government. The new Constitution will be consist of Federalism, Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, and adjusting power between the Small and Large States.

In Early Modern Era Europe, a move towards centralization resulted in the expansion of governments, particularly monarchies (CITE). With the rise in monarchs came the widespread acceptance of Divine Right, the belief that the emperor/king has sole power provided from God/the Heavens. While the basic meaning of Divine Right was constant across cultures, how a ruler expressed his power was not. Records from this period show us these differences in ruling technique and the unique governing styles they resulted in, such as The Turkish Letters description of the Ottoman Empire and French King Louis XIV’s Memoirs.(CITE) The Turkish Letters, written by Austrian Empire diplomat Busbecq during his visit with the Ottoman Empire ruler Suleiman I, provide insight on the empire’s effective ruling system that led to some of the most successful years for the Ottoman Empire(CITE).

Louis XIV, the ruler of France from the late seventeenth century to the early eighteenth century, claimed, “I am the state.” He considered this to be absolutism. His goal, also acquainted with absolutism, was, “one king, one law, one faith;” Furthermore, Louis wanted to promote religious unity, royal dignity, and security of the state. In order to achieve this goal, he had to rule with a firm hand, laying down the law for all to see. Louis XIV’s absolutism fostered in four major parts: the building of Versailles to control the nobility, the breeding of a strong military, the improvement of France’s economy, and, while quite harsh, the brutal extinction of religious toleration.

An absolute monarch is a ruler by divine right who has control over every portion of his kingdom. The most famous absolute monarch, Louis XIV, had the longest reign of any of the French kings. Louis achieved this as a result of his reformed laws, foreign policy, a smart economic advisor, and his decision to deny power to the nobility. Although some of these ideas could be viewed as having a negative impacting on France, overall Louis XIV's absolute government was beneficial to the development of his country.

In the upcoming United States Presidential Election it is possible to see a woman become elected as President. This would be a first for the United States and also for most of the world. Throughout the world different types of governments have survived, faulted, or have been altered. Many of these governments came from early European countries. Two of the most popular types of governments to come from Europe are Constitutional Monarchy and Absolutism. Traces of Constitutional Monarchy and Absolutism are still seen today in different parts of the world. Constitutional Monarchy and Absolutism have its roots set in England and France respectively. Much of original regulations that have been put in place by these governments have

During the late 1400s and 1500s, many rulers took great measures to centralize political power and place it in their own hands. This lead to the occurrence of absolute monarchies, some of which I thought were overall very effective. In absolute monarchies, theoretically the monarch is all-powerful, with no legal limitations to his or her authority. Absolutism in Europe was characteristically justified by the doctrine of divine right, according to which the monarch reigns all-powerfully by the will of God. The intention of absolute monarchs is to utilize his or her power in an effective, better-organized way, despite its weaknesses or negative consequences; and from my perspective, I would have to say

Towards the end of his reign, Louis began to lose much of the mystique and influence he had previously held, as his lack of financial resources and inability to adequately tax the nobility began to catch up to him. Document 6, a letter from French nobleman Francois Fenelon, criticizes Louis for his reckless warfare, warning, “God will one day lift the veil that covers your eyes… you will become a Christian only through humiliation.” As an educated nobleman, Fenelon likely held resentment towards the crown for its subjugation of his class. Additionally, Louis’ frequent, frivolous war campaigns caused great struggle in France as the nation struggled to supply the efforts; even Louis, by the end of his life, stated that “I have gone to war too lightly and pursued it for vanity’s sake.” However, regardless of the fact that sustained warfare drove France into debt and ruin, Louis’ ability to go to war based off of nothing more than his own will is even more evidence that supports his power as an absolute ruler, whether or not Fenelon agrees with his policy.

The church and the state had to contend with the growing influence of the Enlightenment and the need to strike a new balance with religion, a more utilitarian balance determined in large part by its own political rationalism. Power was held within the monarchy and the church. The monarchy of France and the Catholic Church were allies that were unbreakable. The King was the master of the temporal realm, while the Church under his protection ruled the spiritual realm. Kings derived their authority from God and stood immediately below him in rank. The monarchy had the support of the church and the church had the support of the monarchy. Power was based on morality and the church thrived on positive morality and the monarchy was proof of this morality. The balance between these two powers in France was equivalent to one another. The whole system

He said, "Fifty . . . bishops paid by England lead the French clergy today. Their influence must be destroyed. For this we need the authority of the Pope." Through the concordat, the Catholic church was able to gain back authority that it had lost during the revolution, however, it was never allowed to recover its former autonomy or power. Napoleon kept the French church in his pocket. He paid the clergy directly, and he made them financially dependent on his treasury. As a child of the enlightenment, Napoleon used cold authority and calculation to wield one of the most powerful weapons in the world—religion—and he did it successfully.

Some people think that King Louis XIV did more harm to France than good. They cite his lack of moderation in managing his money. They also point out that Louis denied religious liberties to the Protestants of France and tightened control over his Roman Catholic subjects by revoking the Edict of Nantes. They also claim Louis’ war efforts were very costly and drained the treasury of France. Some say his arrogance, including his emblem of the “Sun King”, turned “his” people away from him. They think that Louis only cared about himself and what he wanted and didn’t think about future France.

After being ruled by a prime minister for so long, France needed some changes. That is exactly what Louis the XIV would bring to France. In an age of separation, Louis wanted to start a unification process. He started this by giving himself sole power and also only having one religion for the country. The king is always the center of attention good or bad. Louis was prepared to take the good with the bad, and handled it well. He emphasized the king as the center of attention. While some see him as egotistical and greedy, Louis was one king who knew how to make improvements.