Age Of Absolutism Analysis

The Age of Absolutism was a time where a strong centralized government was created, and the ruler of a nation dominated over both upper and lower classes as well as the Church. But although the rulers were able to enjoy their unlimited power, they neglected the rest of their responsibilities as a monarch to pursue their own self-centered desires instead. By depending on the whims of a single person, it places the general good of everyone and everything at risk. Through the French, English, and Russian Age of Absolutism, religious dilemmas, financial and social crises, and aggression plagued these countries and jeopardized the happiness of the people and the prosperity of the nation itself.

Absolute rulers were considered God’s representatives

and their right to reign was seen as sacred and legit because of the divine right they claimed to possess. However, due to the constant fluctuation of Catholicism and Protestantism because of the transitions of authority and the remaining restlessness from previous religious conflicts, these absolute monarchs’ decisions about religion cause many problems within France, England, and Russia.

Louis XIV of France was the role model for absolutism, and since he was absolute, nobody could question his laws. He was a devout Catholic, so he undid his grandfather, Henry of Navarre’s, work by revoking the Edict of Nantes that legalized Protestantism, and this prominently displays his inflexibility and inability to compromise. He restricted Protestant rights and took down Protestant churches and schools; he completely disregarded his people in the process and instead focused on fulfilling his own desires. England, however, was much worse. Although Elizabeth created peace between Catholics and Protestants, her successors created a rift instead. Although the majority of the population was Protestant, including Parliament, Elizabeth’s successors, the Stuarts, were all pro-French and therefore,

pro-Catholic. James I clashed with Puritans, Charles I attempted to convert England into a Catholic nation, and Jame II openly practiced Catholicism. They did nothing to appease the people or benefit the nation and instead angered them greatly, which shows how much these absolute rulers abuse their power. Peter the Great of Russia also goes against his people when he takes over the clergy and the Russian Orthodox Church itself. His people were opposed to this, and he lost support after his act of gaining more power. Absolute monarchs failed in their duty when they decided to sacrifice the rights of the people, and in some cases the wellbeing of the state, in order to attain their own selfish goals.
Although religion attributes significantly to the negative outlook of absolutism, the
financial or social problems France, England, and Russia endured during the time also exposed the destructiveness of absolutism. The Sun King, King Louis XIV, was famous for his opulent lifestyle. Every meal he ate was a feast; every morning he had a grand awakening ceremony, and everyday he lived at the magnificent palace of Versailles. As a result of his unnecessary luxurious living and the disastrous wars he fought, he consumed all of the royal revenue and taxed his subjects heavily. His dismissal of his people’s needs caused resentment over the demanding taxation grew. When Louis died, many rejoiced, but he left his successors with a large burden--France was deeply in debt. Louis’s actions eventually would plague future generations eventually leading up to the chaos of the French Revolution where the food and money would be scarce portraying the detrimental effects an absolute ruler could provoke. England’s many absolute monarchs have not escaped from these financial problems either. Whereas one monarch, Elizabeth, compromised with Parliaments, her many future absolute successors did not do so which lead to many disagreements about money. The Stuart kings have been continuously increasing the taxation, trying to take money from Parliament to suppress rebellions and supply for war, and using money for their own selfishness.Their actions ultimately lead to the creation of a constitutional monarchy which proves the need for leaders with limited power and for the disposal of absolute leaders who had no boundaries to what they could do and made disadvantageous decisions because of it. Although Russia’s financial condition was improved for some, the peasants were still greatly impoverished and Peter the Great only furthered the divide between the peasants and the Boyars, which were the nobles of Russia. Not only did Peter enhance the bhoyar’s control over the peasants, but he forced thousands of serfs to put their blood, sweat, and tears into the construction of his symbol of power--St. Petersburg. 100,000 peasants died from the terrible working conditions and disease in the first year alone, and Peter used his authority for the destruction of his people in both a social and physical aspect. Therefore, these absolute rulers of France, England, and Russia not only took the rights of his people away by taking away their freedom of religion, but they also wronged the nation by provoking and perpetuating the financial or social problems their subjects endured.
However destructive the religious differences and financial or social crises were to France, England, and Russia, the aggression that dominated throughout these nations during the Age of Absolutism was far more destructive.

Louis XIV was an ambitious, but inefficient king. Although he was the first modern military power with a large army and advanced training and weaponry, he failed spectacularly in his disastrous wars. The fact that his army was so progressive only accentuates his failures in war and the impact they had. His selfishness blinded him to the domestic affairs that plagued France, and in the end, his wars were a great source of suffering for the people. The nation was already weakened by poor harvests, which meant less food for everyone, and these wars further bankrupted the country not only because they were expensive, but also because France was forced to lose some possessions, which meant higher taxes for the peasants. He would pay whatever the cost may be to satisfy his need for more land and power, even if the price was the wellness of the lives he was supposed to protect. However, Louis was not the only absolute monarch to do this; the English monarchs also did the same. Not only were there foreign rebellions but there was also a civil war, which shows that these absolute monarchs were unfit for the responsibility of being king. Under the regime of most of these leaders, revolts were common, and this obviously portrays the neglect the people felt from

their leaders. Charles I, in particular, refused to relinquish his power for the better of the nation; instead, he sparked the English Civil War that eventually lead to the beheading of Charles. The death of Charles shows that absolism did not benefit anybody, and he serves as an example for future kings about the danger of unlimited power. Peter the Great’s unlimited power allowed him to do anything he wished, and he was unafraid of using terror to obtain his goals. He was well known for his temperamental attitude and beating his officials with a stick. If anybody opposed him, he had them killed, and he even had his eldest son killed. Although his subjects were forced to obey, it did not mean they admired Peter or the way he ruled. Therefore, the aggressive behavior and method of ruling of these absolute monarchs proves that they did not care for their people, and were only driven by the motivation of power expansion.
The Age of Absolutism was, in reality, a period solely dedicated for monarchs to do what was best for themselves, not for the people or the state. They were egotistical beings who brought about unfavorable characteristics into the country including religious issues, financial or social calamities, and unrelenting aggression. Each absolute ruler from France, England, and Russia deviated from the goals of their subjects, who were the true representatives of the nation, and of the nation itself to accomplish their own agenda insead. They forced their own religion upon the people, bankrupted the nation or caused a rift between the nobles and peasants, fought hopeless wars to attain their greedy ambitions, and ruled brutally. The actions of these absolute rulers accurately paints them in a negative light because of the consequences the people had to pay as a result of the infinite power these antagonistic rulers obtained and maintained to fulfill their desires.