Due To Hobbes: King Louis XIV Of France

713 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Hobbes theory of government

Throughout the seventeenth century, political strife dominated each European country’s respective leadership. From the monarch’s perspective, he or she was entitled due to divine right, the worthiness to rule directly from the will of God. Instances of this could be seen through James I’s rejection of the Petition of Right, a major English constitutional document that sets out specific liberties of the subject that the king is prohibited from infringing, in 1628 before the English Civil War, or when King Louis XIV of France dominated his political domain through the weakening of nobles after replacing them with intendants, high-ranking officials who did not have the power to challenge the monarch. Concurrently, King James I stripped the …show more content…

Capturing Hobbes’ outlook on the importance of a single ruler, the frontispiece to his book Leviathan depicts one king controlling his empire below. In one hand the king holds a sword, indicating his militaristic power, and in the other a scepter, highlighting his God given right to rule over all the land. Above the king’s head is a Latin phrase. When translated to English, it says, “there is no power on the earth that can be compared” (Document 3). Alluding to Hobbes’ beliefs, both the phrase and the emphasis on the monarch’s strength demonstrate how he saw an absolute government is imperative. Moreover, after looking into the book, Hobbes further clarifies this stance. He explains, the only way to end the state of nature’s incessant chaos is if individuals, “...confer all their power and strength upon one man... there can happen no breach of covenant on the part of the sovereign” (Document 4). When considering the current state of Europe at the time, it becomes more clear as to why Hobbes thought people needed to submit to a greater power, and why an absolute monarchy was necessary. Just as Hobbes published Leviathan in 1651, Great Britain was in the midst of the English Civil War--a conflict in which the Charles I’s head had been cut off in 1649. Consequently, because of the englishman's unwarranted amount of violence and brutish behavior, Hobbes saw no other …show more content…

In Cardinal Richelieu’s The Political Testament, such a stance is substantiated. Trying to explain the necessity to remain loyal to the crown, he states, “Those nobles who fail to serve the crown constantly and courageously with both their swords and their lives... deserve the loss of the privileges of their birth and should be reduced to sharing the burdens of the common people“ (Document 2). When Richelieu says this, he is suggesting that all nobles must submit to divine authority and do anything to please said King or Queen. Those who do not are therefore not deserving of their social advantage and must join the abject, unworthy common people. Furthermore, the reason why the people needed to stay loyal is because God bestowed the power of leadership to only the crown. Making this point more clear, Jacqeus-Benigne Bossuet, Bishop of Condom, explained, “The prince as prince is not regarded as an individual; he is a public personage” (Document 5). Therefore, royalty was on a higher level than any of the common people. Thus, through this perspective, religious leaders extrapolated on Hobbes’ idea of an absolute monarchy being proper form of

Show More
Related

  • The Influence of Locke and Hobbes on Government

    1741 Words  | 4 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes believes that the optimal form of authority is one that has absolute power over its people, consisting of just one person who will retain the exclusive ability to oversee and decide on all of society’s issues. This Sovereign will be constituted by a social contract with the people. With that, the Sovereign will hold all of the citizens’ rights, and will be permitted to act in whichever way he or she deems necessary. The philosopher comes to this conclusion with deductive reasoning, utilizing a scientific method with straightforward arguments to prove his point.

    Read More

  • Women in the Enlightenment

    1393 Words  | 3 Pages

    “Leslie Stephen described it (the eighteenth century) as ‘the century of cold common sense and growing toleration and of steady social and industrial improvement.’” Before the Enlightenment, the belief of the Divine Right of Kings was central to every nation. Kings were believed to be chosen by God and answerable to the divine alone, citizens could not question their King because in theory they would be questioning God. During the eighteenth century there was a shift in the public opinion of nobles and lords. Philosophes, or critics, began to openly object the way the government ran the people, even poking fun at the choices made. Kings were no longer feared. As people turned away from the restraints of government, a rise in individualism formed. ...

    Read More

  • To What Extent Was Parliament To Blame For The English Civil War

    1894 Words  | 4 Pages

    During the rule of King Charles I, the Parliament had limited powers, and were not entitled to govern independently as a Parliament should. This is shown through King Charles’ power to veto their decisions, and his dissolving of the Parliament three times between 1625-1629. Consequently, the Parliament became frustrated with their minute role, and responded in attempt to control the King’s power, to maintain their control. This is clearly depicted in their refusal to grant tax raising and revenue for Charles’ increased expenditure, including the abolishment of the ‘ship tax’ which had been previously collected illegally. Following on from this was the enactment of legislation through the Petition of Right in 1928, after MP’s had been called back by Charles in his third parliament. The Petition of Right demanded that Charles could not imprison anyone without being found guilty in a court of law, that no tax could be implemented without Parliamentary consent, and soldiers could not be billeted against their will. Furthermore, the Parliament also abolished the Court of High Commission and the Star Chamber, disallowing for Charles to continue the arbitrary punishment of opposers to his reforms. The Parliament’s pressure on Charles through these reforms was largely driven by

    Read More

  • Politique Rulers

    1520 Words  | 4 Pages

    As with any new monarch in Europe came with them profound changes on the policies and governing of that time period. This was especially true following the birth of the Protestant Reformation and religion. Rulers of the time period were pressed to follow the old ways of religion in Catholicism or embrace the revolutionary Lutheranism or Protestantism movements. A few intelligent, humane leaders decided to be neutral on this issue, and they were defined as the politiques. Elizabeth I, Henry of Navarre and William the Silent were all extraordinary rulers of their respective monarchies. Their tolerance of religion was revolutionary for the time period, and is how they all relate to the singular word, politique. Each had their own degree of tolerance for the opposing religion. Elizabeth I created her tolerant state by symbolic notions, Henry of Navarre was a boisterous ruler always looking to make his policies of tolerance known to his people, and William the Silent took the quiet approach with his inaction to religious persecution. Each of these rulers manifested a politique not only through their toleration of religion, but their varying degrees of tolerance.

    Read More

  • Louis XIV

    782 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the seventeenth century there were different types of leaders in Europe. The classic monarchial rule was giving way to absolutist rule. Absolute kings claimed to be ruling directly from God, therefore having divine rule that could not be interfered with. In 1643 Louis XIV began his reign over France as an absolute king.

    Read More

  • Civil War In Thomas Hobbes Leviathan

    1805 Words  | 4 Pages

    In The Leviathan Thomas Hobbes argues for the establishment of a society that does not contain the elements of its own demise. Hobbes views civil war as a society’s ultimate demise, and the only way to avoid it is for the citizens initially to submit to an absolute political authority. For Hobbes, civil war is inevitable in every type of government except an absolute government. In order to sustain this absolute government, the citizens not only must submit to the absolute political authority, but they must also not partake in activities that actively undermine the absolute political authority’s power. For these reasons, it is clear that Hobbes believes in political obedience and its ability to influence the peace of a society. Furthermore,

    Read More

  • Political Testament of Cardinal Richelieu

    780 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Political Testament, Cardinal Richelieu explains that the nobility is something to be used as a tool, a perpetual game of appeasement and request of services. He understood that the nobility could be a nuisance and a body of dissent against the King, but that they were necessary to the crown to provide military aid and money. Richelieu explains that one must know how to manage and manipulate them: “To take away the lives of these persons, who expose their lives every day for a pure fancy of honor, is much less than taking away their honor and leaving them a life which would be a perpetual anguish for them. All means must be used to maintain the nobility in the true virtue of their fathers, and one must also omit nothing to preserve the advantages they inherited.” ...

    Read More

  • Louis XIV

    967 Words  | 2 Pages

    (*1) “At the same time he regarded himself as God's deputy in France and would

    Read More

  • Hobbes's Theory Of Political Nature And The Theories Of Human Nature

    1286 Words  | 3 Pages

    In sophisticated prose, Hobbes manages to conclude that human beings are all equal in their ability to harm each other, and furthermore that they are all capable of rendering void at will the covenants they had previously made with other human beings. An absolutist government, according to Hobbes, would result in a in a society that is not entirely focused on self-preservation, but rather a society that flourishes under the auspices of peace, unity, and security. Of all the arguably great philosophical discourses, Hobbes in particular provides one of the surest and most secure ways to live under a sovereign that protects the natural liberties of man. The sovereign government is built upon the idea of stability and security, which makes it a very intriguing and unique government indeed. The aforementioned laudation of Hobbes and his assertions only helps to cement his political theories at the forefront of the modern

    Read More

  • The State of Nature: Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury

    1681 Words  | 4 Pages

    Hobbes explanation of the state and the sovereign arises from what he calls “the State of Nature”. The State of Nature is the absence of political authority. There is no ruler, no laws and Hobbes believes that this is the natural condition of humanity (Hobbes 1839-45, 72). In the State of Nature there is equality. By this, Hobbes means, that there is a rough equality of power. This is because anyone has the power to kill anyone (Hobbes 1839-45, 71). Hobbes argues that the State of Nature is a violent, continuous war between every person. He claims that the State of nature is a state of w...

    Read More

  • The Absolute Monarchy Of France In The 17th Century

    731 Words  | 2 Pages

    These types of decisions define why Louis XIII is an important example of the primacy of the king over all other sources of political and governmental power in the 17th century. Certainly, Louis XIII’s rise to power defines the lack of checks and balances that would typically be a part of a lesser monarchy in which the aristocracy could have an influence on governmental decisions. However, this was not the case with Louis XIII, since he had gained complete control over the government through military might and the wealth of the royal family. This historical example defines the primacy of the absolute monarch within the context of the king’s role in governing in 17th century

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan and John Locke's Second Treatise of Government

    3013 Words  | 7 Pages

    Hobbes’ Leviathan and Locke’s Second Treatise of Government comprise critical works in the lexicon of political science theory. Both works expound on the origins and purpose of civil society and government. Hobbes’ and Locke’s writings center on the definition of the “state of nature” and the best means by which a society develops a systemic format from this beginning. The authors hold opposing views as to how man fits into the state of nature and the means by which a government should be formed and what type of government constitutes the best. This difference arises from different conceptions about human nature and “the state of nature”, a condition in which the human race finds itself prior to uniting into civil society. Hobbes’ Leviathan goes on to propose a system of power that rests with an absolute or omnipotent sovereign, while Locke, in his Treatise, provides for a government responsible to its citizenry with limitations on the ruler’s powers.

    Read More

  • Mill’s Liberty vs. Hobbes’ Authority

    1344 Words  | 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes and John Stuart Mill have completely differing views on affairs consisting of liberty and authority. Hobbes believing that man is inherently unable to govern themselves and emphasizes that all people are selfish and evil; the lack of governmental structure is what results in a state of chaos, only to be resolved by an authority figure, leading him to be in favor of authority. Throughout “On Liberty” Mill believes that authority, used to subvert one’s liberty, is only acceptable in protecting one from harm. In Leviathan Hobbes uses the Leviathan as a metaphor for the state, made up of its inhabitants, with the head of the Leviathan being the sovereign and having sovereignty as the soul of the Leviathan. Hobbes’ believes that man needs the absolute direction of the sovereign for society to properly function, deeming liberty practically irrelevant due to authority, as the government’s power is the only thing that allows society to go anywhere. The views that Mill has on liberty are not simply more applicable in modern and ancient society, but the outcome of his views are far more beneficial on society as a whole compared to Hobbes’ who’s views are far too black and white to be applied in outside of a theoretical situation and would not truly work in real world scenarios.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes' Social Contract Theory

    891 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hobbes wrote the Leviathan during the civil war where he had experienced horrendous visions of violence. “Thomas Hobbes lived during some of the most tumultuous times in European history -- consequently, it should be no surprise that his theories were thoroughly pessimistic regarding human nature.” This may support his view that he would rather have any higher authority rather than none no matter how corrupted the government actually is. He wrote that the people “should respect and obey their government because without it society would descend into a civil war ‘of every man against every man’.” However, this may have been the cause for a bias view. To elaborate, a war is an extreme depiction of the potential volatility in human nature. Therefore making one aspect of humanity seems pre-dominant.

    Read More

  • The Royal Prerogative

    2051 Words  | 5 Pages

    The challenges to the power of the Monarch was by the reign of James I (1603-25) the monarch was faced with an increasing effective Parliament, culminating in the temporary abolition of the monarchy in (1625). Consequently, the monarchy’s powers were eroded by both revolution and by legal challenges, which included the case of Proclamations (1611) , the monarchy could not change the law by proclamation. The law of the land, which required that the law be made by Parliament, limited the prerogative. In the case of Prohibitions Del Roy (1607) the Monarch had no right to act as a judge, and in the case of the Ship Money Case (1637), although th...

    Read More

More about Due To Hobbes: King Louis XIV Of France

Open Document