The King and the State Monarchy has been an institution that has influenced history and changed over the course of its pervasiveness, including changes about the role of a monarch within the governed society. If the role of the monarch changes, that means that the role or style of the government can change as well. Such as in the 17th century, when the ideals of having a core monarchy and a strong central state were coming to the forefront of the ideological stage. This is very evident with the French Cardinal Richelieu’s work, “The Role of the King”. His work is a proponent and outline of the ideals of a strong and absolute monarchy, and the desire for statebuilding, that became very prevalent in the 17th century and beyond. “The Role of …show more content…
Richelieu states, “apply yourself to the matters of greatest importance to your country, disdaining the little ones as beneath your thought and interest.” This illustrates the desire for strong governmental organization, obviously with the king being the highest power. The way Richelieu explains the organization here also allows for ‘servants’ under the king to help the government run smoothly in his name. Conveniently, by encouraging the organization in this way, Richelieu also carves out an indispensable place for himself among the king’s ‘servants’, ensuring that his services are always necessary in order to keep the smaller things in check while the king deals with the most important issues. This also shows the emergence of the organization of the government into an an apparatus of the state, not just an apparatus of the …show more content…
He was one of the closest men to the king, and served for a time as co-regent until the king reached majority. He also experienced his own share of unpopularity during that time, though he did survive to continue advising the king. With that in mind, Richelieu wanted to protect himself and his high rank. Therefore, when he cautions the king not to bother himself with “matters so small that no one in advance would suspect they might trouble you…” he is insisting that someone besides the king must deal with those matters. By telling the king that he should only trouble himself with the larger issues, Richelieu’s advice leaves smaller jobs open for himself, thus securing his p of the least qualities a great king should have.” Again, Richelieu is carving out his place, as well as the place of other politicians, and even encourages the king to “never insult his subordinates since they too are relatively weak.” Obviously the roles of advisor or diplomat were not new and revolutionary, but Richelieu is attempting to reinvent the types of governmental roles that could be played under the king, while at the same time attempting to convince the king just how important and valuable those roles
Louis XIV is considered the “perfect absolutist” and he has been said to have been one of the greatest rulers in France’s history. He came up with several different strategic plans to gain absolute
Machiavelli’s, “The Prince” is the ideal book for individuals intending to both govern and maintain a strong nation. Filled with practical advice, he includes numerous religious references to support his claims. He devotes a chapter within the book to speak about the ancient founders of states. In the chapter called, “On new principalities that are acquired by one’s own arms and by virtue”, Machiavelli discussed the importance of a prince to have their own talent in governing a nation, rather than having relied on fortune to rule. The latter is a risk no leader should take and he cited past leaders as a guide for both the current and future princes.
He moved his court because he did not feel safe in Paris and could watch over his court officials due to living so close to one another. This piece certainly provides evidence of what Louis himself valued, but perhaps these attributes are needed to effectively rule with absolutism. Throughout this entire document, the author is implying how great Louis is as a person and an effective ruler. He even goes to list his issues: “All his faults were produced by his surroundings...soon found out his weak point, namely, his love of hearing his own praises” (Saint-Simon). Louis cared deeply regarding his personal image and these weaknesses do not seem that drastic, but according to him, “It was this love of praise which made it easy for Louvois to engage him in serious wars” (Saint-Simon). The text gives historians information about Louis’ love-affair with Mademoiselle de la Valliere, compelling his courtiers to spend more than they earned creating a dependency, and other interesting details regarding his life that are excluded in textbooks. Overall, this document provides a deeper insight to King Louis XIV personality and justifications for why he chose the actions he did. Duc de Saint-Simon, someone that resided at the Palace of Versailles, can provide information about a man that ruled with an iron fist over his
Machiavelli wrote that a ruler should be both like “a lion and a fox” (The Prince, Chapter XVIII). By this Machiavelli means that a ruler should be like a lion to keep away the wolves that can get to the fox who finds the traps that the lion could get into. Essentially, a ruler should be cunning and powerful. Elizabeth I of England and Louis XIV of France fit these characteristics. Louis XIV acted as a lion in such ways as the Edict of Fontainebleau which took away the power of the Huguenots. Elizabeth I of England was like a lion because she married her country, not a man, therefore keeping all power to herself and frightening away the “wolves.” Louis XIV acted as a fox by getting away from the “traps” of the nobility by heavily taxing them because he did not want to relive the Fronde, a civil war where he was humiliated by nobles (Tom Richey, Louis XIV Rap 0:27-0:31). Elizabeth acted as a fox because she was religiously tolerant and kept England away from “traps” that could lead to wars.
Louis XIV was an absolute monarch in France from 1643 to 1715. His father died when he was just four years old, making Louis XIV the throne’s successor at a very young age. Because of this, he ruled for seventy-two years, which made him “the longest monarch to rule a major country in European history” (Eggert). But it was when he was twenty-three years old when he decided to rule without a prime minister, believing it was his divine right. Translated by Louis de Rouvroy, Duc de Saint-Simon, the author of the book The Memoirs of Louis XIV: His Court and The Regency, King Louis XIV wrote, “The royal power is absolute. The royal throne is not the throne of a man, but the throne of God himself. Kings should be guarded as holy things, and whoever
1. What is King’s thesis? He talks about three possible ways to fight against oppression. He suggests the nonviolent way as the best option for the oppressed in order to resist. 2.
...e clear that Richelieu was firmly on the side of the monarchy. This taints his advice to some degree: he does not take the complaints of the nobility into account and presents a decidedly one sided view of what makes a good king. This proves to be limiting; perhaps some of the unrest could have been avoided if reconciliation had been pursued instead of a power struggle. Richelieu’s Political Testament is an interesting case study in the political theory of the 17th century, and clearly served as a model for many kingships to come.
In Tartuffe, the nobility (mostly Orgon and his mother) is depicted as being fools because of the way they are easily tricked by the “holy impostor”. When Madame Pernelle praises Tartuffe for being a good holy man, her grandson Damis says “No, look you, madame, neither father nor anything else can oblige me to have any regard for him. I should belie my heart to tell you otherwise. To me his actions are perfectly odious; and I foresee that, one time or other, matters will come to extremity between that wretch and me” (Act 1, Scene 1). This representation of the nobility places them exactly where Louis intended. Spielvogel says that Louis removed the nobles from the royal council and lured them to be part of his court as a way to keep them occupied with trivial matters and out of important roles in politics
The government within the monarchical society was populated by the aristocracy. It was they who were depended upon for directing the course of governmental affairs. The controls of all co...
King Louis XIV's 72 year reign was incredibly influential in shaping French history. King Louis XIV’s childhood was traumatic because of “La Fronde” which was a noble rebellion against the monarchy. This experience taught King Louis XIV to distrust the nobles. It was for this reason that he eventually excluded nobility from the council and surrounded himself with loyal ministers whom he could control. He also separated the aristocracy from the people of France by moving the court to the Palace of Versailles. One of the most notable of King Louis XIV’s decisions was that he refused to appoint another Prime Minister after the death of Prime Minister Mazarin. Every decision, from the declaration of war to the approval of a passport, went through him personally. During his reign as king, France participated in several wars including the War of Devolution, in Anglo-Dutch War, and the War of the Spanish Succession. Another major action he took was the proclamation of the Edict of Fontainebleau, which revoked the Edict of Nantes, imposing religious uniformity through Catholi...
In the novel, later, Mme. de Clèves asks for further explanation for the love between a woman and the king with “several other lovers” (1039). This passion forms the “political and social effects” (1039) that change the norms in the court. The court mixes this false “event into its own structure, so that the implausible now becomes the norm for the entire court” (1039). This incident drives to the extent of passions, “political ambitions and social events”, that utilize M. de Clève’s passion. Hence, the power of Duchesse de Valentinois doubles “the power of the monarch” (1039).
In seeing interests too varied, a ruler or executive is forced to impose domination onto the people he is supposed to serve (Montesquieu 140). This not only once again corrupts the principles of democracy, but it also weakens the entire collective of states. Such domination incites the people to rise up against those that govern them and to expel them and challenge their ability to govern and lead a free people – much as Shay’s rebellion demonstrates. Montesquieu is wise here to realize that the only way to govern large swaths of land is only through monarchy and despotism – that of which we have only so recently freed ourselves from (142). When large amounts of territory are placed under a single government, the only way it can govern itself is through coercion and force. In a mid-sized territory, failure to do so leads to the rise of an aristocracy that will, much like the aforementioned wealthy man, will see the oppression of their fellow man as the means necessary to advance their own wealth (Montesquieu 141). In a large territory, despotic command becomes necessary to ensure that the laws and powers of the government are followed quickly and immediately so that the territory can be adequately governed (Montesquieu 142). Both of these would lead to violence and the destruction of liberty and
Is the purpose of government today, similar to that of philosophers of the past, or has there been a shift in political thought? This essay will argue that according to Machiavelli’s The Prince, the purpose of government is to ensure the stability of the state as well as the preservation of the established ruler’s control, and that the best form of government should take the form of an oligarchy. In contrast, in his book, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes argues that the purpose of government should be to preserve the peace and security of men and, that the best form of government would be an absolute monarchy which would sanction such conditions. This essay will utilize themes of glory, material advantage, peace and stability to illustrate
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).
contributed to the execution of King Louis XVI so that French citizens might find a better existence under honest rule. To keep citizens focused on the revolution, he established a