Tuesday, January 15, 2019
Absolutism in the 17th century Essay
It is said that Louis fourteen proclaim I am the state Whether or not he really said it is debat open, only the meaning of such a statement is clear. by the course of the 17th Century various regimes across Europe began to exercise their states of off the rattling theme of I am the state, that is, the monarch personified and had authoritative realise over his nation. Prior to the 17th Century such impregnable control precluded this absolutism. By the time of the 17th Century, however, the conditions were in place for monarchs to walk out arrogant control to shape their nations. The conditions and forces that do absolutism a wanted form of establishment were the necessity of centralized control, the governmental instability of the time, and the jump off of single sovereignty over a country.Before one goes into what causes states to watch absolutism, one must understand it. monocracy is defined as a form of government where sovereignty is embodied in the person of the formula. The monarch felt that he had a prognosticate Right, that is he was responsible to just God, and though he may respect the natural law of where he governed, by and large the Monarch attempted to place his realm under absolute control. Measures included elimination of certain freedoms, centralization of agent, and the creation of a bureaucracy loyal to the Monarch to help oversee the country. Through these measures, the Monarch was able to control the nobility that always flagellumened. The Monarch became much and to a greater extent t wind upinous as he or she began to assert power and institute absolutism.The archetypical reason why absolutism looked to be a desirable government form was the necessity of centralized power. War was a constant threat to a nation and its people. In a country dual-lane into kingdoms and realms govern by individual nobles and dukes, mobilization for war was a intemperate and lengthy task. To better prepare a state for war a country demand a single ruler with the absolute power. another(prenominal) cause was the need for efficiently raising revenue. A monarch needed absolute control to effectively lecture revenue for the cost of maintaining the state. The nation-state became more and more expensive to run during this time due to the increase frequence of wars, the costs of trade and exploration, and to support the burgeoning bureaucracy.A country divided and ruled by umteen different people would be unable to raise sufficient revenue. On the other hand, a country ruled a by a single strong ruler could more slowly control and manage finances. In profit, because of the nature of the time, warfare and politics became very personal. Monarchs considered countries an extension of themselves, as exemplified by Louis cardinals supposed take note I am the state To achieve this, Monarchs effectively eliminated all arguing to their power, that is the nobles and the church. In the era of the Post-Reformation, it was all too easy for Monarchs to seize power from church and nobility, and this further contributed to their power.Another force at play that made absolutism seem desirable was the semipolitical instability of the time, both intimate and external. France is a paragon poser for this. There were many peasant revolts surrounded by 1624 and 1648, and Nobles and Parlements took advantage of peasant revolts and the Regency to protest their loss of ancient privileges and levels of taxation. Barricades set up in Paris and the mob burst into the nances bedroom. King Louis XIII was powerless to stop these insurrections against his rule. Louis XIV soon came to power, and began to assert his august authority. He put down these peasant revolts, reorganized government, and placed himself at its head. Loyal advisors were installed, and a deal with nobility which surrendered their authority in comparison to the Crown in return for authority over their lands.In addition, the sizing of the military increased, and France began to engage in wars to help solve domestic problems. These wars were generally successful and contributed to an even higher growth in Royal authority. The successes of Louis XIV encouraged other European Monarchs to follow his example. The problems of instability seemed to be yet able to fixed with a steady, but iron fist. Absolutism seemed to crack this, as the king would have authority to maintain control without ruffle from a constitution or a law making body. Finally, the political instability forced Monarchs to take measures that otherwise they would not wanted to take, i.e. levying level-headed taxes. When the benefits of these measures came in, Monarchs often looked beyond their ideals to permanently install absolutism. To sum up, the basic political instability of the 17th Century, i.e. wars, peasant revolts, etc. paved the way for Monarchs seize absolute control to stabilize their nations.The final cause for absolutism was the mounti ng of single sovereignty over a country. In the times of feudalism, more than one person could have sovereignty over an area of a country. Dukes, Counts, and others may claim title to a land in addition to the Monarchs. However the decline of feudalism brought an end to this. Kings began to assert that there could be only one sovereign to a land, and that was the King. Many parvenu political and legal theories supported the Monarchs absolute control over land. Jacques-Benigne Bossuet (1627-1704) adapted the medieval concept of kingship in his theory of the Divine Right of Kings, which argued that the king ruled absolutely by will of God, and that to correspond the king in effect constituted rebellion against God.Although people should be excluded from power, Gods purpose in instituting absolute monarchy was to protect and adopt society. Coming from a covereous approach, Thomas Hobbes argued that a strong ruler could best control and protect a society. Further justifying absolu tism, Monarchs pointed out that it seemed to end Europes religious wars and had brought social and political peace. King Louis XIV believed that such absolute rule over a people was the profession of a Monarch, and anything else was failing the people. Essentially, Monarchs based their absolute sovereignty on moral and political justifications.In conclusion, the conditions of the 17th Century made Absolutism seem to be a desirable choice for government, and rightly so. Following the example of France, many countries tried to centralize power. Yet, not all were to be as successful as France. For example, Oliver Cromwell instituted a dictatorship with many absolutist qualities, but this failed as soon as he died. But it is difficult to get across that absolutism was a powerful force in the 17th Century. Absolutism may seem harsh to people of the 21st Century, but for the many of those who experienced it, it was at least beneficial. The political instability of the time, the need to centralize, and the increasing sovereignty of Monarchs all were driving forces in making Absolutism popular and helpful. Despite its problems, absolutism eventually led Europe down the right path.