Absolutism is defined as political power that concentrated to one person or a group and opposing or shared power doesn’t exist and reigning over the country. It’s opposite of constitutional government, therefore it lacks constitution and parliamentary system and political responsibilities doesn’t exist. In my opinion, absolute ruler should have a strong military power, have a wisdom and knowledge, and enlighten his/her country. The best monarch that fits to all these condition is Frederick the Great, who was King of Prussia. First reason is Frederick the Great had a great military power.
The renaissance was a time period of renewal for Europe that resulted in the elaborate culture filled with detailed art t that we know today. However this was not a spontaneous spurt of creation, it was a result of the plague. The plague was a contagious disease that resulted in the death of many people. Moreover this created jobs opening to different people despite their profession because of the decrease in workers. This social mobility that was created was very different from the prior social emphasis on hierarchy that had little mobility during the middle ages.
The Age of Absolutism describes a period of European history in which monarchs successfully gathered the wealth and power of the state to themselves. Louis XIV is the poster image of the absolute monarch. When he said "L 'etat c 'est moi" (I am the state) he was to a great extent correct. France was powerful and prosperous and represented that which all European monarchs aspired to.
Absolutism during the 16th and 17th century in Europe would be in both cases a time of prosperity and tyranny, it depends on how you look at it and who and where you where from back in time. Absolutism is the ideology that the king has total power over everything in the country he/she rules over. Back in the 16th and 17th century it was a period where there were kings and queens ruling a country and each one would have been a fair and just ruler, or they could have been a unfair and unjust ruler. Most of the monarchs at the time were cruel, greedy, and unfair, most believed that they had been picked or chosen by god that they had the divine right to rule over the land which gave then justification to do what ever they wanted (stated in Document 2 : source King James of England).
European monarchies came to dominate early modern Europe in the 15th through 18th century. Monarchies ruled many different nations: Spain, France, England, Austria, Prussia, and Russia. Although the abstract governmental structures were similar, each nation had unique elements that separated their monarchy from the rest. Thus, the European monarchies differed from each other in three distinct facets: political, geographical, and economic traits.
Revolutions have made many significant changes to the political landscape of the entire world and revolutions will continue to constantly change political spectrum. According to the website www.Dictionary.com, the definition of Revolution is “an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed,” and these revolutions are either non-violent or violent to different degrees. There are consequences of both types of revolution and each revolution has a different course and different driving factors.
Absolute monarchies had all the power in Europe. Their kingdoms were powerful and accomplished. Although absolute monarchies empowered and enriched their kingdoms, they were still largely detrimental because of King Louis XIV of France, debt, Frederick the Great’s seizure of Silesia, and the city of St. Petersburg. King Louis XIV of France was an absolute monarch.
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries many kings of many different kingdoms ruled in a different way from each other, but as for the information stated in the documents given it seems like Absolutism was most effective for ruling kingdoms and civilizations back in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Many Rulers during that time period used Absolutism as a form of government to govern their own people. As stated in document one by Niccolo Machiavelli “Any prince,trusting only in their works and having no preparation made, will fall to ruin, for friendships that are bought at a price and not by the greatness and nobility of soul are paid for indeed, but they are not owned and cannot be called upon in in time of need… as men are
The difference between forms of the national administrations lies in the difference between limitations of the ruling powers and the difference in the subjects in which those administrations’ powers are engendered. In an absolutism alluding to any sort of tyrannical authorities, such as the Absolute Monarchy or the political system run by Adolf Hitler, the whole nation is managed by solely one person with lack of laws limiting his or her rules. Tired and frustrated with this kind of government, the principles of democracy is given birth to this world by the rebellious groups defying the Absolutism, and the government in this situation derives its limited powers from the citizens. In other words, in a democratic country, the citizens are the
Most of Europe in the past two thousand years has been ruled by monarchies, with some states having active monarchs up until the 20th century C.E. In this stretch of time, different kingdoms in Europe saw the rise and fall of absolute monarchy, which refers to a ruler having total control over his or her kingdom, free from the restrictions of legislature and customs. The rise of absolute monarchy gives credit to two features which radically transformed governance in these kingdoms, and mainly those of England and France. The feature of mercantilism allowed further involvement of the ruler in the economic sphere of his kingdom, namely in trade and production, as compared to his previous role in simply collecting revenue. Further, the king used