Sun King Louis Xiv Dbq

1280 Words3 Pages

Louis XIV, also known as the Sun King, was an absolutist monarch of France who sought to heavily suppress the power of novels while simultaneously promoting the ideals of a “divine right monarchy”. A man notorious for his incredible spending on various personal ventures, such as the extremely costly construction of a new palace at Versailles, Louis XIV was often the subject of criticism and mockery, especially from the nobles who hoped to discredit him and his absolutist regime. Overall, Louis XIV did predominantly act in a manner with his own personal agenda in mind, as seen through his Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, occurring as a result of his desire to have his country fall in line with his own beliefs, his unrelenting expenditures …show more content…

The Edict of Nantes had given Protestants, or Huguenots, in France the ability to practice their religion without fear of violence or persecution. Enacted in the late 1500s in an effort to resemble France after the destruction of the French Wars of Religion, the Edict of Nantes served as a means to unite the French population and end the violence that often accompanied religious persecution. Louis’ decision to revoke such a peace-promoting edict, in an effort to homogenize his country and align his subjects with his own beliefs, clearly illustrates his giving of priority to his own agenda, as opposed to that which would best benefit his country. However, while the claim that the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes was detrimental to French society, seems to be disproven by Doc 6, which essentially asserts that the king’s revocation has resulted in the rapid conversion of “whole towns” and describes the king as “the invincible hero destined to… destroy the terrible monster of heresy”, the author’s inherently biased point of view must be addressed. This description, which could be used as evidence to support the fact that Louis did act in interest of the state, must be taken with a grain of salt as the author himself, a member of the Assembly of the Clergy, does not even have the best interest of the state in mind; rather, he is …show more content…

One of the most notable of which would be his decision to completely reconstruct a new palace at Versailles. Such a great expenditure is blatantly criticized in Doc 7 where the Duc de Saint-Simon states, “the foundations and groves have buried more money than could ever appear”. Such expenditures, undoubtedly funded by taxpayer dollars expose Louis’ extremely self-serving distribution of funds when it came to matters of his own comfort. However, it is important to realize that Doc 7, written by a noble, must also be read with a watchful eye. The Duc de Saint-Simon’s assertions could possibly, though construction of a new palace would likely cost a tremendous amount of capital, be riddled by bias as a result of the absolutist King’s extreme suppression of nobility perks and privileges. The idea that Louis acted in his own interest in terms of capital distribution may be explained away by such bias had it not been for the evidence presented in Doc 4. Though on the surface it seems to show the public’s appreciation for the King, one must acknowledge the fact that an ‘inscription on a ceremonial arch of great architectural importance in Tournai’ was most likely commissioned by the King, and again funded by taxpayer dollars. Such a commission would expose the fact that the words stated in the inscription is not the point of view of the French people, but rather the desired

Open Document