Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The impact of Enlightenment ideas in Europe
Enlightenment ideas french revolution
Enlightenment ideas french revolution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The impact of Enlightenment ideas in Europe
Analyze English and French Monarchs The English and French monarchies prior to their major revolutions experienced what one could call turbulence throughout their rulings. The corruption, political and serious economic issues strained the monarchs relations with the people, leading to future problems. The tense relations soon bubbled over into radical and violent revolutions that completely engulfed the countries. Louis XIV's successful rule as an absolute monarch, and Charles I of England's attempted rule as an absolute monarch did not sit well with the people, as they felt their voices were not being heard and their rights were being impeded upon. Charles I's exclusion of Parliament, Louis XIV's absolute monarchy and …show more content…
His talent for distracting the noble class with lavish parties and events they felt obligated to attend left them too busy to deal with the affairs of the state, providing him the perfect chance to make all the decisions on his own accord and effectively allowed him to rule as an absolute monarch. Louis XIV managed to make it a necessity to attend his festivities, where nobles who were absent were looked down upon and question on their loyalty to the king. Louis himself, however, would only attend his parties for thirty minutes to an hour before going off and making important political decisions. Louis XIV also managed to reduce the nobles power while they were busy partying, which would soon prove disastrous during the rule of his great-grandson Louis XVI. Louis also acquired a large debt for France with the construction of the Palace of Versailles. The ridiculous price Versailles cost, and it's gift of debt to France only created more tension. When Louis XVI would take over the throne, the situation would only continue to sororal downward. His self-esteem issues and inability to take action in what he believed in fueled the fire in the French people. The Third Estate argued over its unfair treatment in the Estates General and its lack of representation, and while Louis XVI himself was inclined to the Enlightenment ideals of the time and wanted to help his people, he simply did not have the back bone to go against the nobles and clergy like his great-grandfather. Not only this, but Louis XVI also created quite a bit of debt for himself. His decision to assist America in their war for independence, or the American Revolution, was slightly costly for France. This is especially considering the conditions that were now taking over as famine began to spread over the land and more French died of starvation because they could not afford food. Ironically, the American Revolution would
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
Differently, England failed at absolutism as a result of unstable, unpowerful, and differently minded kings and their failure at overpowering the nobles. France was able to gain more royal power than England, leaving them with complete control over their country, and left Europe without complete control. Learning how countries gained an absolute monarchy is important in the modern world because from this, people learned how to develop modern governments. Afterwards, countries started to decide whether it would be in their best interest for sovereigns to be under the law, rather than above the law. The old need for an absolute monarchy turned into a need for a government that was right for the
Charles I was the second born son to King James I, who had also reigned under a constitutional monarchy, but large disagreement between Parliament and James I led to an essentially absolutist approach to governance. Likewise, Charles I disagreed with the Parliament on many factors. Charles was far from the contemporary model of a figurehead monarchy we see in today’s world, and his political reach extended throughout the English empire, even to the New World. Infact, I claim, he practiced a more absolutist form of monarchy than did the Czars of Russia; he dissolved Parliament three times. This unprecedented power led to (other than corruption) a strict contradiction of the principles of republicanism which most constitutional monarchies agreed on. And while many were in favor of an overlooking Parliament, his unopposed voice led the voyage to the New World as well as the charter for the Massachussets Bay Colony, and he fostered many internal improvements throughout England, which further benifetted the economy. Unfortunately, Charles began to push his limits as a monarch, and many became upset (including New Worlders from Massachussets) to the point of abdicating him and executing him for treason. Nevertheless, his positive effects on society and political rennovations persist in today’s
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.
Duc de Saint-Simon lived in the Palace of Versailles with King Louis XIV of France during the late seventeenth century. Louis did not move his court to Versailles until 1682, so it can be assumed that this document was written after. In his memoirs, he took detailed notes describing Louis’ attributes overwhelmingly positive, but seemingly accurate. This author creates a somewhat skewed look for the king of France with the immense positivity. Louis ruled with an absolute monarchy, Saint-Simon seems to be composing this to please the king and also for later to understand what life was truly like in the court and life at Versailles.
Louis XIV of France used his grand and gaudy Palace of Versailles as a “pleasure prison” for the nobles, while Peter the Great sent all of his nobles to St. Petersburg – both of these actions made it difficult for nobles to rebel. In France, Louis XIV ridiculed the nobility by sending them to the Palace of Versailles and busying them with silly little jobs and knit-picky rituals. He gave them these useless jobs to prevent them from banding together, to overthrow him, and to keep all of them on constant watch.
The French revolted due to political, economic, and social injustices. Politically, the government was a mess. An absolute ruler can only be beneficial to the people if they cater to
This oppression of the Third Estate along with the financial problems that fell on the common people would lead to the French Revolution. Overall, the people of France revolted against the monarchy because of the unsuccessful estate system and the inequality it led to, because of the new enlightenment ideas that inspired them, and because of the failures of the monarchy.
A Comparison of the Characteristics of the Absolutist Rule of Charles I of England and Louis XIV of France
In order to gain the power he desired as an absolute monarch, Louis used a few key techniques that were very successful. His first and most necessary step to get all control was to take all of the nobles’ power, and make it so they were completely under his control. He first did this by taking the nobles’ positions of power, and either getting rid of them by doing it himself, or giving the jobs to loyal middleclass or some nobles who were completely loyal and under his control. Louis had very simple reasoning for doing this, which was that if the nobles had any power or control, they would have a better chance of overthrowing him, and that since there can only be so much total power, the more they had, the less ...
... move, defunding any revolts they might plan, and preoccupying their time with petty social matters instead of matters of the state. If Louis’ reign was not supported by the enabling qualities of the Palace of Versailles, his reign would certainly not be as absolute as it was.
When Louis the XIV began his rule in 1643, his actions immediately began to suggest and absolute dictatorship. Because of the misery he had previously suffered, one of the first things he did was to decrease the power of the nobility. He withdrew himself from the rich upper class, doing everything secretly. The wealth had no connection to Louis, and therefore all power they previously had was gone. He had complete control over the nobles, spying, going through mail, and a secret police force made sure that Louis had absolute power. Louis appointed all of his officials, middle class men who served him without wanting any power. Louis wanted it clear that none of his power would be shared. He wanted "people to know by the rank of the men who served him that he had no intention of sharing power with them." If Louis XIV appointed advisors from the upper classes, they would expect to gain power, and Louis was not willing to give it to them. The way Louis XIV ruled, the sole powerful leader, made him an absolute ruler. He had divine rule, and did not want to give any power to anyone other than himself. These beliefs made him an absolute ruler.
The aim of absolute monarchy was to provide ‘stability, prosperity, and order’ for our territories (458). The way Louis XIV set forth to accomplish this was to claim complete sovereignty, to make laws, sanction justice, declare wars, and implement taxes on its subjects. This was all done without the approval of any government or Parliament, as monarchs were to govern ‘by divine right, just as fathers ruled their households’ (458). In Bishop Jacques-Benigne Bossuet’s Politics Drawn from the Very Words of Holy Scripture, he described that absolution was one of the four characteristics imperative to royal authority, “Without this absolute authority, he can do neither good nor suppress evil; his power must be such that no one can hope to escape him” (460). This was epitomized when Louis XIV sought to control the legal system as well as the funding of the financial resources through a centralized bureaucracy for the monarchy.
...wn the monarchy because “World History,” states that, “Louis was well-intentioned and sincerely wanted to improve the lives of the common people.” (Beck Roger, Black Linda, Krieger, Larry, Naylor Phillip, Shabaka Dahia, 653) However, King Louis XVI lacked the conviction and initiative to carry out any of his plans to truly improve the lives of the French citizens. Proof of this was that the French citizens were desperate enough to riot the streets of France and storm the prison of Bastille. After all that has been said, it is clear that the citizens were indeed justified to overthrow the monarch.
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