Monarchy In Early Modern Europe

This religious aspect to these absolute monarchs caused the people to have respect for their rulers. People thought “Fear God, Honor the King.” (Document 5) It meant that people should have faith in their Kings and fear the course that God has set for them. They believed that monarchs were sent to do the good deeds of god and that using their power for evil was a horrible sin.

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.

The European monarchs and rulers of the 17th and 18th centuries wanted to increase their power both domestically and globally by adding to their territories and populations so they used the three features of state-building: control, extraction, and integration. In the late 1700s, both the Industrial revolution and French revolution of 1789 strengthened the idea that Europeans were different from the rest of the world. It also strengthened that “Europeans were “progressing” rapidly while the rest of the world appeared to be stagnating, that Europeans were somehow exceptional—better--, even than the rest” as Robert Marks puts it in his words. (Robert Marks, Origins of the world, p-4).

During the 1600s and 1700s a new type of monarch emerged known as an absolute ruler. Some of these rulers were Louis XIV, the Fredericks of Prussia, and Peter the Great. These rulers believed that a monarch had a divine right to rule and should only listen to God. All these rulers had characteristics that defined them as absolutists. Louis XIV was constantly at war during his reign which resulted in a powerful army.

Absolutism is a name given to a system where all the responsibilities are given to just one person. All the decisions are made by the monarch. Therefore, it means that an absolute monarch governs alone and is not controlled by anyone. An absolute monarch has control over administration, taxes, foreign policy etc. Under the control of a monarchy there is less corruption. It was believed that the authority and the power to rule the whole country came directly from god. In other words they were considered as representatives of earth. Absolute monarchs are not judged by the society and also there are higher chances of rebel. Another characteristic is that the ruler rules until his dies, and the throne is passed to their next generation. An

Governments are incredibly intricate machines and rely on the fluidity of all involved organizations to function properly. The failure of even one portion of the governing body to function with autonomy causes the entire system to suffer due to lack of synchronization. However, as seen in much of history, a very influential loss of autonomy is spawned by the use of divine right to reinforce the ruling elite. Such a claim was usually a play to maintain the familial dominance

"We behold kings seated upon the throne of the Lord, bearing in their hand the sword which God himself has given them" (Document 5). If God himself sent these rulers to lead, why wouldn 't they be prosperous? This is the question many from this time period asked. Absolutism was good for them because their God put the monarchs in charge and gave them his power. Absolute monarchs came into

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, people started to question the logic of having a single all-powerful ruler. Naturally, the monarchy fought this challenge to their authority by parading divine right and the issues of constitutionalism. However, constitutionalism eliminates the danger of having a bad king and the issue of divine right while also maintaining order. Absolutism lacks constitutionalism’s validity as a form of government. In a constitutional government, every citizen must follow a set of laws, even the king.

The Primary objective of all leaders should be to control citizens. A society that allows authority to be challenged will never succeed. This source depicts an authoritarian or totalitarian view of what a governing body should look like. The author suggests that the primary objective of government should be the “control of the citizens”, and therefore that the individuals should entirely obey said government.

However, when it is practiced, it is unfair and not applicable to the situation anymore. King spent his life “expressing the very highest respect for the law.” Therefore, he had faith in the government and was hoping it could be just one

Louis XIV was the best example of an absolute monarch. Louis XIV ruled in France from 1643 until 1715. During his reign, he ensured that he was in absolute power, and control the whole time. Louis XIV thought that the world should revolve around him. Louis XIV did not do anything for the good of France, he would only do things that benefited him, and he treated the people of France very poorly.

This excerpt is giving a sturdy explanation on the topic of tyranny,and how it gave us a clarification on how tyranny is being stopped by overpowering the king. Critics also argued that the king or queen could create laws that applied to only some people and not others, and that unelected officials could make decisions that negatively affected citizens. The people were exhausted and started to realize that they wanted to overthrow the king themselves. Critics of the monarch read and discussed what tyranny meant in order to argue for their notion of the rule of law.

He justifies the need for democracy, aristocracy and monarchy depending on location. The three philosophers use their judgment and prior knowledge on each other’s work to validate an ideal society, especially for the uprising continent of America. Governments are an established institution in every society. Though there are multiple types of governments, their purpose is fundamental to determining the influence on a civilization.

Many people debate over which form of government is best. In his In Praise of the Emperor Constantine, Eusebius Pamphilus argues that monarchy is the superior. Monarchy reflects God’s created order. There is one God, not two or three, and thus there ought to be one ruler (WH: 357, 27). Eusebius argues that because God is divine and perfect and holly, and because He (God) created humans in His own image, humans ought to emulate God and His order (WH: 358, 11).

A saying for a king to understand is “Furthermore, since each part is ordered to the whole as imperfect to perfect, and since each single man is a part of the perfect community, law necessarily concerns itself particularly with communal happiness” (Aquinas). Kings unfortunately lost power and this caused confusion and ruckus in the part of leadership in the Middle