If you could choose whether to have an honest and others-oriented ruler or an untrustworthy and selfish ruler which one would you choose? I would personally choose an honest and others-oriented ruler. The only way I would know that a ruler could possess those qualities is if he followed the divine right of kings. I know that he would be led by God, and would make the right choices to lead his people in the right path.
There would be no worries for the people on punishing their ruler because they would know that God would take care of it. Also, voting wouldn't be difficult because if he was meant to be the chosen one, God would get him to where he needs to be. For example, King Louis XIV believed that he was supposed to be king of France by divine right. He even became famous throughout Europe for the magnificence of his court. His palace of Versailles was also regarded as being magnificent that eventually later rulers of Europe tried to copy his achievements. His entire reign has also been marked as complete peace.
In the contrary to King Louis XIV, King William III was an average commander. Some people even doubted his work ethic. He also took ownership of certain levels of government because he did not trust others. King William eventually got rid of
…show more content…
the people who had helped him get to where he was, and he brought in the people who had once opposed him. Later on in the years he switched the people back again. The main reason why I agree with the divine right of kings is because before it was created the government would punish the people who wouldn't obey them.
The people were punished by getting burned, being decapitated, or being hanged. These methods were usually used in order to show the public the consequences of being disobedient. Since the people saw this they would try to refrain from disobeying the government. The divine right of kings was then created, trying to explain why all social ranks were religiously and morally obligated to obey their government. It was directed to try and convince the literate and wealthy groups to serve as royal officials and not try to seize power for
themselves. In my opinion, I think that the ruler would possess the best qualities if he followed the divine right of kings because he would know what is morally wrong and right. Therefore, the ruler would avoid many conflicts during his reign. It is also stated in the bible "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well ." In the contrary, if a ruler didn't possess godly virtues he would lead his people in the wrong path. He wouldn't know what is morally wrong and right. Also, if the ruler were to be selfish, he would encounter many challenges with the people because of their different views.
William the Conqueror and his Patronage William I, better known as William the Conqueror, began his medieval and political career at a young age when his father left him to go on a crusade. Effectively William became the Duke of Normandy. He had to fight against other members of the Norman royalty who desired William's land and treasure. William learned at an early age that the men who ruled Europe during the middle ages were primarily interested in their own greed at the expense of all else, including the concepts chivalry and honor. He soon became a feared military commander, conquering all in Normandy who would oppose his interests.
In the Age of Absolutism, both England and France had strong absolute monarchies and leaders. Though Louis XIV, monarch of France, and Charles I, leader of Britain, both served as their country’s king and served in this role in different ways.
The Palace of Versailles is located about 10 miles outside of Paris. It is in the town of Versailles which at the time when the palace was constructed; the town was very small and later grew to a larger size of about 60,000 people. Originally the palace grounds were purchased by Louis XIII for hunting, at the time when the land was bought it was un-developed. The land was perfect a habitat for animals. Later when Louis XIV assumed the throne he began changing the land. In the time of Louis XIV's rule he changed the grounds drastically. While he was in control he made many enhancements to the grounds; he added a palace the consisted of a north and south wing, gardens and pressurized fountains. Another one of his enhancements included a mile long canal that was used for naval demonstrations. After the French government moved into the Palace of Versailles the king believed his work load became too much. To eliminate stress the King built himself a retreat about a mile away from the main palace called Grand Trianon. Once his
Of all the absolute rulers in Europe, by far the best example of one, and the most powerful, was Louis XIV of France. Although Louis had some failures, he also had many successes. He controlled France’s money and had many different ways to get, as well as keep his power, and he knew how to delegate jobs to smart, but loyal people.
Absolutism describes a form of monarchical power that is unrestrained by all other institutions, such as churches, legislatures, or social elites. To achieve absolutism one must first promote oneself as being powerful and authoritative, then the individual must take control of anyone who might stand in the way of absolute power. The Palace of Versailles helped King Louis XIV fulfill both of those objectives. Versailles used propaganda by promoting Louis with its grandiosity and generous portraits that all exuded a sense of supremacy. Versailles also helped Louis take control of the nobility by providing enough space to keep them under his watchful eye. The Palace of Versailles supported absolutism during King Louis XIV’s reign through propaganda, and control of nobility.
O: Rage and revolt can describe the country of France at the time of the Revolution faced because of turmoil and struggle they faced. Different estates were formed based on what you did and your class in society. The people of society wanted more say in the government and decisions that King Louis XVI made. The public didn't approve with much of what King Louis did. His lack of ability to be a strong king and leader affected his reputation to the public eye. King Louis was tried for committing treason to the country of France. Treason is the attempt to kill a sovereign and overthrow the government. Some of the reasons were his attempt to flee to Varennes, living in Versailles which was not in Paris, and reforms he passed as a ruler. These actions performed by King Louis isn’t what a King does, but that doesn’t prove any
It is often debated whether or not the reign of King Louis XIV had a positive or negative effect on France. Although there were improvements during his reign in transportation, culture, and national defense, there were far more negative aspects. He depleted the national treasury with his liberal spending on personal luxuries and massive monuments. His extreme fear of the loss of power led to poor decision making, which caused the court to be of lower quality. King Louis XIV’s disastrous rule brought about a series of effects that influenced the French Revolution in the following century.
Louis XIV (the fourteenth) was an absolute monarch. He was often called "the Sun King," and ruled over France. He devoted himself to helping France achieve economic, political, and cultural prominence. Many historians believe the phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely" mirrors Louis' reign. Louis XIV revoked the Edict on Nantes, changing the economy of France in one motion. By creating the city of Versailles and being a major patron of the arts, Louis was very influential on French culture. He made France go almost bankrupt from his costly wars and failures. Louis was very corrupt in his power, and it shown in all he did to change France; he got what he wanted, when he wanted it.
There are 282 laws which include harsh laws, where punishment was severe. Most of the laws were punishable by death. These laws regulate the organization of the society. Even if a judge makes a stupid or careless mistake, he will be expelled for lifetime and heavily fined. Also, the witness who testifies falsely shall be killed. A good example is the “An eye for an eye”, it states that if a man put out the eye of another man, his eyeball shall be put out. If a person was caught stealing he shall be put to death. Some laws, even with children were dealt very brutally. If a son strikes his father, his forehead shall be cut off. If a slave says to his master, you are not my master my master if they convict him, his master shall cut off his ear. If ...
William had a youth of clean life and of much natural piety, while the years of storm and stress through which he passed gave him an endurance of character which lasted to his life's end. During the time of anarchy in Normandy he became a skilled military leader and defeated his enemies, uniting his duchy. Once he began fighting, rumor has it that he never lost a battle. In 1047 a serious rebellion of nobles occurred, and William with the aid of King Henry of France, gained a great victory at Val-ès-Dunes, near Caen.
Frightfully stimulated as a child from a home intrusion by Parisians during an aristocratic revolt in 1651, Louis XIV realized his rule would be decisive, militant, and absolute (458). His lengthy reign as Frances’ king and how he ruled would be the example that many countries throughout Europe would model their own regimes under. With this great authority also came greater challenges of finance and colonization. In the 17th century, the era of absolute monarchs were the means to restore European life (458).
Power- something so potent, yet so easy to misuse. Not everyone can obtain power, however those who possess it often acquire arrogance. Louis XIV held total control of France, abusing his dominance. Louis called himself ‘the Sun King’, believing that everything revolved around him. His pompousness led him to making foolish decisions, as he considered himself to be superior. If you don’t use your brain, you will ultimately lose it, as Louis was beheaded by the determined citizens of France. Likewise, in Antigone, King Creon is the ruler of Thebes. Creon makes an arbitrary ruling, swearing the ‘disloyal’ Polyneices should never be buried. When Antigone goes against this, Creon is infuriated. Creon lets his arrogance take over, and continuously makes unwise decisions. Power simply creates narcissism, as Creon’s pride causes him to commit foolish actions.
William I was put into the spotlight from a very early age. He became the Duke of Normandy at the ripe age of eight years old, and pandemonium ensued almost immediately. Throughout his early years of power, a “breakout of authority” occurred all throughout Normandy, leading to many future problems that William would handily deal with (William I 2). Although he had many people seeking to overthrow him, William had support on his side, and was able to use the adversity he faced to his advantage. At a very young age, William was learning the tricks of the trade, and became very logical and rational in making decisions whether they be military or political based. Without his troubled upbringing, it is questionable whether or not he would have been as great of a leader as he turned out to be.
A great leader is someone who possesses confidence, determination, and quick thinking skills. An exceptional leader was a man named Henry V. Henry V took his place in rule at the age of 26 as the king of England. He is very well known due to a famous play which was written by William Shakespeare. During his rule, Henry V was primarily fixated on conquering the French lands for England. The king had excellent determination to push through battles even when faced with an illness. He had great fighting tactics which allowed him to prosper in battles and sieges. With such skillful tactics and strategies, King Henry established strict discipline among his troops. With these traits as well as skills Henry V was a successful leader.
The government of ancient Egypt was similarly autocratic. The pharaohs were both god and king and the religion taught the people to trust that their king would rule according to maat with concern for the welfare of the common man. In return for the building and maintenance of great temples the gods preserved the absolute power of the pharaoh and ensured the duration of the state. These temples, the Great Pyramids, and the Sphinx as well were created and built by the will of the elite through the labor of the people. Again we see the absolute subjugation of the people to the indisputable, god-like authority of the ruler.