King Louis Xiv Dbq

They should feel their wrath, and their stability to be powerful. The amount of power a monarch can take has

The 17th century of European history, colloquially known as the “Age of Crisis”, gave rise to a new form of government: absolutism. Religious wars, economic troubles, inflation, and new agricultural challenges such as the Little Ice Age wracked the nations of Europe and caused tremendous fear and uncertainty among the masses. Thus, as many felt that life itself was endangered, they were willing to accept the rise of a strong, independent ruler who might lead them from the darkness. In this way, absolutism emerged- a new form of monarchy based on a hereditary ruler with complete authority. Perhaps the most well known example of an absolute monarch in European history is Louis XIV, the ruler of France from 1643 to 1715.

Louis XIV is one of the most famous examples of an absolute ruler. Louis had a complete control over his country. Louis’s father had died leaving France in a civil war. Louis XIV obtained power after his father died and through hatred over the nobility that threatened his life and his mothers, though Cardinal Mazarin ruled until Louis XIV took power after Mazarin’s death. He vowed he would never be so weak that he could not have power. Louis XIV was an absolute ruler of France he centralized government, military powers, taxation, and further weakened aristocracy to become a more powerful ruler.

The seventeenth century saw the evolution of two new types of government mainly because of the instability that was caused by religious wars. One type of government was a constitutional monarchy in which rulers were confined to the laws of the state, giving the people some liberties, best exemplified by William and Mary during the Stuart monarchial rule. Constitutional monarchy was successful in mainly in England because of the Magna Carta, which kept the king’s power in check. The other type was absolute monarchy, in which the king has power over everything, shown by the French under Louis XIV. Although these two

During the 16th century to the 18th century, Monarchs in Europe used absolutism. Monarchs such as King Louis and Peter The Great used absolute tactics because they wanted to consolidate power from the nobility. They wanted to consolidate power from the nobility because they wanted to take the power they lost during the middle ages. King Louis and Peter the Great used all multiple means to reclaim power. They used their power to glorify themselves and their country. The practice of absolutism can be argued to have both positive and negative effects.

According to the text book, an absolute monarch is a king or queen who has unlimited power and seeks to control all aspects of society (McDougall little, 1045). In more simple terms, it is a ruler who can do just about anything without having to get permission from anyone, or having to worry about the repercussions. This was a trend that started in the 1600’s by European leaders who were rich, and didn’t

It was widely believed that kings had the power to enforce God's works and messages in the country that he ruled. As expressed by King James the First of England,"...kings are...God's lieutenants on earth..."(Document B). Kings are meant to act as God's second in command on earth and enforce God's mission on the people that he rules. According to Bishop Jaques Bousset's Political Treatise,"... the king is sacred, and that to attack him in any way is sacrilege"(Document F). Kings were believed to be sent by God to rule and, therefore, should not be questioned. This belief allowed absolute monarchies to take hold in countries throughout Europe. The rule of these powerful governments allowed prosperity to take hold in

Almost all governments during the 16th and 17th centuries were absolute monarchies. These monarchs caused a lot of controversy because the people they were residing over believed that it was unfair for them to not have a say in the government. This caused many people to look at at absolute monarchs as tyrannical because they did not like the way that they chose to rule. This period of absolutism caused people to look at monarchs as tyrannical because the people believed that they saw themselves as equal to God, did not listen to their people, and because they thought only they knew how to lead.

After the European expansion to the American continent at the end of the fifteenth century, many monarchs began to become absolute rulers. In between the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, absolute powers began a rise in mainly Western Europe; while Eastern Europe experienced absolutism in the mid eighteenth century. But during the absolute monarchs rise to power, the population of each sovereign state had an abundance of diverse attitudes towards sovereignty. These diverse opinions arose for acknowledgement of different urgencies for an absolute monarch to attend to; these groups were sovereign monarchs, peasants, and nobility. One of the main views that dominated the growth of absolute power was the monarch’s.

     According to Jacques-Benigne Bousset, a preacher and tutor to Louis the fourteenth’s son, there were four characteristics to royal authority. The first of being, royal authority is sacred. Second, royal authority is paternal. Third, it is absolute. Fourth, All power comes from God. (Text 596) To summarize Bousset he believes that, like God, a king is a father figure. To be idolized, respected and loved. So if God is the father of earth then his sons are the fathers of people, or kings. This makes a king both divine and undisputable, as a descendant of God. “Royal authority is absolute…The prince need account to no one for what he ordains…without this absolute authority, he can do no good nor suppress evil…” (Text 596).

England’s lengthy history of hereditary monarchs and abusive absolutists has led to the system of constitutionalism in 17th century English government. The encouragement of these absolutism practices triggered the need to search for a new way to govern. The reigns of the Stuart monarchy led to the shift from absolutism to constitutionalism during 17th century England. After witnessing the success of Louis XIV's of France establishment of absolutism, England would soon see that James I, and his son Charles I, will fail at establishing absolutism in England and see a constitutional government established.

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.

During the late 17th and early 18th century, many European nations such as France and Russia were absolute monarchies. Even countries such as England had kings who at least attempted to implement absolutism. Indeed the concept of absolutism, where the monarch is the unquestionably highest authority and absolute ruler of every element in the realm, is certainly appealing to any sovereign. However, this unrestricted power was abused, and by the end of the 18th century, absolutism was gone. Absolutism failed because the monarchs' mistreatment of the population caused the people to revolt against their rule and policies. There are many factors which caused this discontent. For one, there was a great loss of human lives. Louis XIV of France

King James I, Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes strongly believed in the idea of Absolute government. They believed that King's were "God's Lieutenant's" and they were in power simply because God sent them there. These men believed in divine power upon earth, and that "God hath power to create or destroy, make or unmake at his pleasure, to give life or sent death, to judge all and to be judged nor accountable to none, to raise low things, and to make high things low at his pleasure…and the like power have Kings…" as quoted from doc. 2 of King James I. Being how King James I was a King, it is a conventional belief that Kings had divine rights. In one of Machiavelli's works "The Prince" Machiavelli writes "Men have less hesitation in offending a man who is loved than one who is feared."(Doc.1) Consequently Machiavelli believes in having a fear in your ruler, because if you fear your ruler, you will not hesitate to obey him, for you are afraid of the punishment. Where as, if you love your ruler, you are more lenient to challenge your ruler's authority.

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