Powers Of The Monarch Summary

APPARTS (The Powers of the Monarch)

Author: The author, or rather the speaker of this excerpt, was James I of England. James I was the first Stuart king to preside over the English, and therefore was met with some untrustworthy followers. During his reign, he tried to practice absolutist values, however, was stopped habitually by the British parliament.

Place and Time: This speech was delivered in 1610, in England.

Prior Knowledge: During this time, France was still in the process of becoming an absolutist monarchy. Louis XIV not born yet meant that France had not become an authentic absolutist state, however France was still dwindling with the idea of divine right. England was in the process of becoming an absolutist state, using the mechanisms of the New Monarchies, James I lowered the power of the nobility, and raised the power of the middle class, and he published the “Trew Law of Free Monarchy,” which was a book in support of divine right. The roadblock in his attempt for absolute power was the parliament. In a forced signing in 1215, the Magna Carta granted higher power to aristocrats to limit the power of the king. One of these provisions was that tax laws had to go through parliament with a majority vote. This meant that if the King needed money for his

lavish lifestyle, or war, the parliament would have to consent to it. This was the major setback to James’ reign. On top of this, since James was of Scottish heritage, he was scorned upon by many people, leading to the Guy Fawkes gunpowder plot. Guy Fawkes was found in 1604 with 36 barrels of gunpowder in the basement of the parliament.
Audience: Most likely, his intended audience would be the public. As James I was a man who struggled with public opinion, and his aspirations to become a supreme leader, it is suggested that this speech may have been delivered to try to make people understand the concept of divine right. However, while his intended audience may have been the public, it can be understood that perhaps James was trying to appeal to the parliament to gain more money. In his speech, he declares that as a King, he should have the same power of a God, meaning that he was perhaps trying to not only strike fear in his parliament, but also make himself seem insubordinate to none.
Reason: As mentioned above, the purpose of his speech would likely be to declare his right of divine right. As James I was in a power struggle with the parliament, he needed a way to make himself seem superior to all, and above that to make himself feared. As he was seen as a slightly weak leader, it was essential for him to improve his image. As such, he needed to prepare a speech that would make himself seem to be the true leader. However, as history would tell, this was unsuccessful, as he would later have problems with the parliament, and dismiss it all together.
The Main Idea: The main idea presented here is the concept of divine right.

The concept that the only person suited to have power was the King, as he was directly chosen by God. It was seen successfully through Louis XIV; however, James lacked the charisma to make it work. Seen in his writing, James mentions that as Kings are called Gods in the Bible, it is compulsory that they treat him the same way that they would treat a God. It is mentioned that they should give him the power to “make and unmake their subjects; raising or casting down [his subjects]; of life and death; and yet accomptable to none but God only.” Although these were his ideals, they would sadly (not really), never truly come into

effect.
The Significance: The significance is that it shows the work required to instigate a truly absolute government. While people like Louis XIV, and Peter the Great make it seem effortless, and almost graceful. There were many who would come to find deep problems rooted in absolutism. Charles I and Louis XVI especially found it difficult to cope with the strenuous effort required to make one absolute. Therefore, the significance of this speech is to show the failing attempt for absolutism. As James I was a weak leader, he could not muster up the charisma to be an absolutist leader.