How Quintessentially Absolutistic Was Louis Xiv's Reign?

The question of this investigation is “How quintessentially absolutistic was Louis XIV’s reign?” This investigation is significant because it explores the extent to which Louis XIV was an absolute ruler through assessment of the validity of conflicting evidence in support of Louis XIV as a despotic ruler, a collaborative ruler, and an absolute ruler. As Louis XIV is a historical figure who is often used to exemplify an absolute ruler, this investigation has historical significance because it questions the accuracy of this classification.

Louis XIV is not the only ruler to have established an absolutistic reign. Throughout history, a plethora of monarchs have believed that they were limited only by divine law. Thus, a true absolute ruler can be defined as one that abides by the belief that it is their right to define and decide the law. Because of his profound impact on France during his own reign, historians often point to Louis XIV as an example of this absolutism. Known as the Sun King, Louis XIV ruled over France from 1643-1715. However, Louis XIV was unable to take full control of France until 1661 when Mazarin, Louis XIV’s chief minister, died (Wolf 133).

After Mazarin’s death, Louis XIV rose to power and became known for an aggressive foreign policy as his absolutistic rule reshaped France in accordance to his will and visions.

Throughout his reign—one of the longest reigns amongst all european sovereigns—Louis XIV revolutionized the monarchy. He established both France’s dominance and his own dominance while simultaneously presiding over the Palace of Versailles and generating a “golden age” of literature and art (Eggert 212). In the later half of Louis XIV’s reign, France’s resources were greatly drained due to national conflict. Additionally, after Louis XIV’s revocation of the Edict of Nantes, France was met with the departure of a large portion of its Protestant

population.
Such national and sometimes detrimental instances were results of Louis XIV’s absolutistic rulings. However, several historians question the delivery of those rulings. This investigation explores three major views: the revisionist arguments that Louis XIV was a despotic ruler and that he was a collaborative ruler, as well as the traditional argument that Louis XIV was an absolutistic ruler. The three sources most relevant to this investigation are “French Historians and the Challenge to Louis XIV's Absolutism,” by academic historian Phyllis Leffler, “The Absolutism of Louis XIV as Social Collaboration,” an academic journal by William Beik, and “Louis XIV and the Theories of Absolutism and Divine Right,” an academic journal by Paul Fox. The academic work by Leffler provides insight towards the ways in which Louis XIV’s rulings were not wholly absolutistic. Beik’s study is relevant to this investigation because it examines how Louis XIV’s was inherently collaborative with his subjects. The academic work by Paul Fox is significant because it relays a perception of Louis XIV’s reign as truly absolute.
After addressing and analyzing each of these different historiographies, as well as a multitude of supporting secondary sources, an answer to the research question can be proposed. Although some historians argue that Louis XIV’s policies were collaborative or equivocally despotic, Louis XIV is rightfully perceived as a quintessential, absolutistic ruler; Louis XIV exemplifies what was expected of an “absolute ruler” as he pushed the limits of divine right and greatly impacted France throughout the years of his reign.