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. Both in merging their power internally and expanding their power externally, they employed 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 “succeeding” promptly while the rest of the world seemed to be declining, that Europeans were somehow extraordinary and better than the rest.” (Robert Marks page 10).
However, even though the west was expanding in the
…show more content…
An avid admirer of Peter the Great, she created her version of Peter the Great’s decrees known as The Grand Instructions in 1768 even though she never really put these ideas into practice. Catherine the Great tightened her control on serfs and peasants through the creation of the Decree of Serfs. This decree stated that serfs and peasants must submit to their landlords in all matters or they face arrest. They were banned from sending petitions complaining about their landlords. This allowed the monarchy to control serfs and peasants in the prevention of any uprising or revolts in the future which also favored the nobles. Ironically, Catherine claimed to believe in “the liberal rhetoric of the Enlightenment” (Catherine 2nd Proposals and Decree on Serfs) however, she evidently ruled Russia with a tight rein. By putting the nobility on such a high pedestal she was ensuring that she had the support and backing of the nobility to maintain her government in Russia. After all, no monarchies in 17th and 18th centuries were secure never without the beloved
During Peter the Great’s reign a major problem in Russia was serfdom. Serfs were peasants that were forced to work on a noble’s land and were basically slaves. Serfdom was a major organization in Russia up until 1723 when Peter converted the household slaves into house serfs. Unfortunately, conversion to serf status and the later ban of the sale of serfs without land did not stop the trade in household slaves, it simply changed its name. Peter the Great was generally well liked by his nobles, even though he taxed them for absurd things like beards, beehives or corners in a house. The fact that the nobles still sided with Peter on everything after being taxed for ridiculous things showed their loyalty. However, Louis XIV had economic difficulties. To help fix this he hired Jean-Baptiste Colbert who invented Mercantilism, an economic system where exports exceed imports to maximize profit and create a self-sufficient state--great for an absolute monarch. However Colbert did not address Louis’ real issue which was him not taxing the nobles. The nobles refused to pay taxes and also did not like Louis; they just couldn’t do anything about it. Since, Louis could not sufficiently tax his nobles instead he relied on the bourgeoisie and peasants to pay excessive taxes. As you can see,
During the reigns of King Louis XIV of France and King Peter I of Russia, also known as Peter the Great, the nobility was under strict control to limit its power and status in society and government. Both autocrats, or absolute rulers, put the nobles in an area separate from the rest of society to keep them under close watch. The kings’ opinion in religion also impacted the status and power of the nobility because most of them were skilled Protestants. This would prove itself as a problem in the long run for Louis XIV. Overall, Peter the Great and Louis XIV despised the nobility and their power in the government and went to many measures to subdue them.
In the mid 18th century many different powers in Europe were trying to spread their influence and gain global power. However, this was not without difficulty. There were many regional issues that these powers needed to overcome such as economic complications, struggles with native and conquered peoples, and competing with other European powers.
She tried to bring about political and social reforms by compiling a document called “Nakaz” which contained advice on how legislature should function and pushed for capital punishment and torture to be outlawed and everyone be declared equal. She focused the early years of her reign on the promotion of administrative efficiency and expansion of educational opportunities. Under Catherine reign, the Assignation Bank started issuing the government paper in 1768, having the Government Issue paper money. Ands lastly, during Catherine made substantial gains in Poland and gave the parts of Poland to Prussia and Austria, while taking the eastern region for herself. Catherine worst blunders were that she did not allow dissenters to build chapels and she suppressed religious dissent after the French revolution. Catherine ruled through corruption, scandal, and her failed attempts at reforms. Lastly, 95% of Russia did not benefit directly from Catherine’s reign, and she did not consider the blood and sweat of the people who help grow the economy during this
Catherine II was motivated by the ideals of enlightened absolutism because she read the works of enlightenment writers and believed that certain reforms would ensure the well-being of her subjects. Catherine’s first major reform involved Russia’s legal system, which was based on the inefficient Code of Laws. Catherine's legal reform was documented to be the ideal government for Russia. The Empress called for a progressive legal system which focused on granting equal protection under law to all persons and emphasizing prevention of criminal acts rather than the imposing of harsh punishment. Catherine also reformed domestic matters after a series of threatening events. For security reasons, she reorganized provincial administration to favor the nobility. Catherine even reformed educational facilities by increasing the number of elementary and secondary schools. She also gave attention to the arts and science, making St. Petersburg one of the most cultural place in Europe during her reign. The reforms that were influenced by enlightened absolutism were appealing to Catherine II because it would bring peace and stability to Russia and its people. This made her favorable among her people, thus making her more
While taking the class of Early Modern European History there was two states that really stuck out and peaked my interest the most. They were the Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe. If you compare and contrast both the Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe during the 16th Century through the 18th Century, you will see that there are a number of similarities as well as differences when you look at the expansion of the states. You will also see many of these contrasts as well when you look in terms of each states military and commerce. Although the Ottoman Empire existed before the 16th century and continued to exist past the 18th century and in great decline until the early 20th century, when looking at the state as a whole the time period of 1500’s through the 1700’s is a period of growth and strength. It is perhaps even known as a golden era for the state, when taking in to comparison the Early Modern Europeans where the same time period marks a change in how society thought and how people were treated.
In the 17th and 18th centuries, with the development of capitalism, the power of the
Before Peter the Great took control of Russia, it differed drastically from the states and societies that lye further west. During the seventeenth century, Russia was a highly firm and restricted society; one in which people did not have rights and/or control of their own lives. Around the area of Moscow, Peter inherited a huge territorial aggregation. At the time, Western Europe was sparsely populated, and the level of economic development was too low for European standards. It was practically impossible to give an accurate approximation of what the population in Russia actually was, but it was estimated to be around 10 to 12 million during the late seventeenth century. The government prior to Peter the Great was in effect of promising the landlords a secure supply of peasants by the extension of serfdom.
After the crippling defeat in the Crimean War, Alexander II knew that Russia could not be allowed to lag behind the Western world any longer if it was to maintain its independence. The reform of the state had been advisable for a long time, but for Alexander III it was necessary. He knew that before any real changes could be achieved, the main problem had to be solved: the problem of serfdom. However many limits and imperfections his edict of Emancipation carried with it, most importantly it allowed for further modernizing reforms in the legal, government, education and military spheres.
The Rise in Political Power of 17th Century England and France In the seventeenth century, the political power of the Parliament in England, and the Monarchy in France increased greatly. These conditions were inspired by three major changes: the aftermath of the reformation, the need for an increased governmental financing, and the reorganizing of central governments. These three points were each resolved in a different way in both England and in France. The first major point which eventually increased political power was
Henry implemented many methods in order to control the nobility with varying success. Henry sought to limit the power of the nobles as he was acutely aware the dangers of over mighty subjects with too much power and little love for the crown or just wanted a change like Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick who deposed two kings to replace them. Also Henry’s own rise to the throne was helped by nobles dislike towards Richard III. By restricting the nobles Henry wanted to reduce the power of the nobles and possible threats against him and return the nobles from their quasi king status to leaders in their local areas but under the power of the crown.
An Analysis of the Absolute Monarchy of France in the 17th Century This historical study will define the absolute monarchy as it was defied through the French government in the 17th century. The term ‘absolute” is defined I the monarchy through the absolute control over the people through the king and the royal family. All matters of civic, financial, and political governance was controlled through the king’s sole power as the monarchical ruler of the French people. In France, Louis XIII is an important example of the absolute monarchy, which controlled all facts of military and economic power through a single ruler. Udder Louis XIII’s reign, the consolidation of power away from the Edicts of Nantes to dominant local politics and sovereignty
Mann, M. (1993). The sources of social power: The rise of classes and nation-states, 1760-1914 (Vol. 2). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Dominant powers exerting control over weaker nations is not a historical anomaly, as it occurred before the rise of the Romans, but new imperialism’s intensity, due to the Second Industrial Revolution and competition, marks a pronounced time in history. When countries began gaining significantly from taking the natural resources from others, they developed new technology. These technological progresses strengthened Western expansionism more, as the production of rifles and maxim guns increased. These technological progresses strengthened Western expansionism, as the production of Maxim guns increased, further boosting the strength of New Imperialism. This typhonic, overseas expansion of nationalism had a considerable amount of consequences and even directly led to the first World War. New Imperialism equated to the destruction of a continent–leaving it in shambles. Very minimal to no positive aspects resulted from this 1890’s form of
Also, if the new widened franchise had not been so inexperienced, the revolutionaries would have had an easier time replacing the old regimes, which had in fact not been that strong to start with. The reactionary regimes regained power so quickly because of all of these reasons and although the 1848 Revolutions had emphasised the “ineptitude and impotence”8 of the old sovereigns and governments, they brought with them too many resentments, grudges and radical changes, for which Europe was not yet ready.