Political Systems Thematic Essay

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

     In addition to his strengths, Louis XIV had weaknesses. After Colbert died, Louis made one mistake that undid all of his work. He revoked Edict of Nantes who protected the religious freedom of the Huguenots. Instead of being imprisoned, more than 200,000 Huguenots fled from France. The country lost many of its skilled workers and business leaders. Louis XIV also fought many costly wars that caused his people great suffering. Many of the wars left France on the brink of bankruptcy.

In 1661 Louis appointed Jean-Baptiste Colbert as controller general of finances. This proved to be very successful in adding to the increase of France’s economy, and it helped Louis achieve his second goal of having “one law.” Colbert’s ideas were similar to that of mercantilism. He insisted on having an economic system that would make France a self-sufficient powerful country where they exported more than they imported. He improved France’s economy through the invention of a merchant marine fleet, the support of industries, the control of tariffs on French goods, and the collection of taxes. All of these gained money for France, which led to the creation of a powerful army. Due to a powerful army, France was able to secure its natural frontiers, even in the North East, which was France’s weakest natural border. While Louis claimed a flaw of his was that, “I loved war too much,” he was able to make a strong French presence in Europe, adding to his idea of “one law.”

Answer: Absolutism hold the supreme or absolute powers and constitutionalism is the head of state and a hereditary or elected monarch. Absolutism is when the King or Queen rules with absolute and total power. Which basically makes them a dictator. A King or Queen of constitutionalism has limited powers since they rule along with a parliament or a governing body. An absolute monarch is entitled to make all the economic and other state-related decisions for the country whereas in the constitutional monarchy, the parliament is responsible for the economic and foreign affairs. A absolute monarch is not legally bound, a constitutional monarch is legally bound by the constitution of their country. The absolute monarch gains powers either from hereditary or from marriage. The constitutional monarch is either elected directly or indirectly.

Louis would make the nobles do many embarrassing things, such as dress him, and even take out his chamber pot after going to the bathroom. Nobles would also be honored to see the king wake up in the morning, and watch him eat, things that had never been seen done by nobles for any other leader in history. By making the nobles do things like this, it made them feel less highly about themselves, less powerful, and less likely to try to overthrow him.

In the latter half of the 1600 's, monarchial systems of both England and France were changing. Three royal figure throughout history who all tried to establish a role of absolutism in their societies all of them had varying factors with the greatest success from least to greatest being Charles I, Louis XIV, and Peter the Great. Absolutism is a form of government where a king or queen rules with unrestricted powers. They are often followed in heredity by passing on the leadership through bloodlines. All over the world these bloodlines still exist except, that most of them only remain as a symbolic figure or a person of fame. A couple of monarchs that still rule are Brunei, Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Swaziland, the emirates comprising the UAE, and Vatican City.

The 16th and 17th centuries brought up the proposition of an absolute monarch, this is a ruler with total power over a country or territory. The idea of kings being chosen by God, or the divine right of kings, lead to absolutism, which was seen throughout Europe. Monarchs could be tyrants, they could take away the rights of their citizens. Monarchs could also be prosperous, improving their country economically, military, or gaining foreign alliances. Europe's absolute monarchs left the 16th and 17th centuries prosperous due to the fewer conflicts, the morals of monarchs, and everybody had an equal chance at upward-mobility.

Once the seventeenth century began, western civilization became based upon bounds. In a structured and shared-power system known as limited monarchy, rulers either became hastened within their bounds or exploded from them. As the British Isles were frustrated in the religious, political, and national voices going unheard, England developed a Protestant-run nation in conjunction with Scotland as a bounded country in 1707. Their Parliament would make their decisions, distribute the country’s wealth, and stand for the rights of individuals. The model of one man who could not be chained to a Parliamentary system was France’s King Louis XIV. His reign begins in 1643 which brings about the genuine definition of an absolute monarchy and it’s faults. Absolutism was a practice built heavily within the Middle Ages, it would include Kings as the primary shareholders of their land, partnerships with nobles and their Churches. It would prove unsatisfactory for most kingdoms as they failed under civil war and invasion until the seventeenth century shines a new importance on superior command. Through the strife of religious reformations and international conflicts, absolutism grants those in kingship unlimited power. King Henry IV had brought France from fifteenth century centralization and the Reformation’s civil war to cleanse the people’s doubt in their King. The Bourbons built a monarchy for the ages with their grandson Louis XIV, and Boy-King in 1643. Utilizing absolutism to accept

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.

Louis XIV was a very generous spender. He put in large amounts of money to finance the royal court, and operated as a supporter of the arts, funding literary and cultural figures. He also kept his army in mind by building military complex known as the Hôtel des Invalides to give a home for officers and soldiers who had served him loyally in the army. The Hôtel des Invalides established new treatments frequently and set a new standard for the rather barbarous hospice treatment styles of the period. To support a Machiavellian tactic, Louis XIV didn?t have any mercenaries or auxiliaries, he controlled his own army, and was a self-sufficient ruler that didn?t rely on the help of others in battle.

Louis hired Jean-Baptiste Colbert, a Swiss banker, to reform France's financial situation. By seeking out people who avoided their taxes (for example, people posing as nobles) and reorganizing the tax collection system (Before Colbert the majority of collected tax never even made it to the treasury), Colbert was able to reduce the loses of the treasury by 30,000,000 liras. This, in conjunction with stimulating the economy by reducing taxes, allowing monopolies, and encouraging immigration of skilled workers, boosted the worth of the French economy, and had a positive influence on the country as a whole.

Although Louis XIV, also known as Louis the Great, brought death and destruction through his wars, there are many positive aspects of his reign, such as the creation of Versailles and the building of France’s national army. He did what had never been done before. He changed the lifestyle and the attitude of France by creating one of the most powerful monarchies ever to be built and at the same time, reassured all the nobility and other wealthy groups of their political and social standings. He made it clear that he was the final decision maker yet he still needed the help of the nobility and other authorities.

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.

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