Preview

Absolutism and Democracy: the Two Types of Government in 17th and 18th Century

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
429 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Absolutism and Democracy: the Two Types of Government in 17th and 18th Century
Absolutism and Democracy
During 17th and 18th centuries, there has been two types of government; absolutism, which gave unlimited power to the monarchs, and democracy, which gave power to the people. However, in my opinion, absolutism was still the most effective form of government during this period. There were numerous absolute monarchs such as King James I, Machiavelli and King Louis XIV renowned for their cruel use of power as a monarch. People in this time were not as educated as people in the modern society today and it was easy for them to just follow the words of the absolute monarch. On the other hand, in the 19th and 20th century, I assume than ideas of democracy surely surpassed the ideas of absolutism, due to the ideas of the enlightenment thinkers, as known as philosophes.

One reason why absolute monarchy was effective is because the decisions were made quickly. Rather than having whole groups of people trying to share their ideas, it was much easier to just have one head, deciding what he/she thinks is the best idea. This idea was supported by King Louis XIV, a French monarch. According to Louis XIV, “The head alone has the right to deliberate and decide, and the functions of all the other members consist only in carrying out the commands given to them... The interest of the state must come first...” (Document 3). Although his ideas were unsupported by some philosophes such as Montesquieu, who believed in executive, legislative, and judicial powers, people in the 17th and 18th century did not have enough time to think deeply, they preferred to rather survive than die trying to make new laws (Document 6).

In addition, the way the absolute monarch governed was fairly liked by the citizens in this time period since the monarch provided the people with their needs, such as roads, and public buildings. Absolute monarch was beneficial for the people and that is why no one really tried to revolt in 17th and 18th centuries. However, later in the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The 17th and 18th centuries were a period filled with nation building and expansion across the globe as extensive, and often overseas, holdings became an indicator of a strong and wealthy country in this politically competitive era. However, the extent of a ruler's control was not their only concern. Many monarchs throughout Europe took great initiative to consolidate and increase their power, building absolute monarchies in which they held absolute power. The pursuit of political absolutism frequently stemmed from past conflict involving the various monarchs and included practices such as increasing the authority and control over the nobility, building standing armies, and independently collecting funds, the manner of which were similar between many rulers. An increase in the subjugation and control of nobles is most evident in the reigns of Louis XIV of France as well as…

    • 2606 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Louis Xiv Dbq Analysis

    • 1168 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In 17th-18th century Europe, the age of absolutism, absolute monarchs ruled most of Europe in countries such as Prussia, France, and the Holy Roman Empire. Absolute monarchs are rulers that have complete control over the government and its people. They claimed to rule by “divine right,” where their authority comes from God and they were above the law. The views of being a proper role as an absolute monarch differed very much between rulers and their subjects. Certain rulers had ideas that both the people and ruler should be united, some abused their power with no sympathy towards the people they rule, and the subjects that suffered from the rulings of the monarch had a completely different perspective than the rulers that were in power.…

    • 1168 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Louis XIV was the epitome of an absolute monarch. Through his endless wars, extreme extravagance, and absolute control over taxes and the economy, he set the example for other European powers. His absolute rule brought about both positives and negatives. By building a large army to defend and expand his borders, he alienated other empires and created enemies. Placing political power and faith in the nobility helped him rule a vast kingdom but displaced him from the common man. His obsession with being a great conqueror expanded France to its largest in history, but nearly bankrupted the country and resulted in losing more territory than he gained. Although Louis XIV brought many improvements to France, as well as western society, his insatiable lust for war and extravagance caused more harm than good to the French Empire.…

    • 750 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Can you believe that in the past the governments were very different compared to today’s government? The English government was very different compared to the French government, they both had their different ways. Besides the limited government of the English and the absolute government of the French they both have their weaknesses and strengths. I personally believe that the French form of absolutism was the more efficient form because of its strong stability, acceptable rights to the people, and able to make overall progress.…

    • 817 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the later portion of the 1600’s, the monarchial systems of both England and France were changing. England strayed away from an absolute monarch and ran toward a mightier parliament instead. The opposite was occurring in France as Louis XIV strengthened his own office while weakening the general assembly of France, the Estates General. Absolutism, the political situation in which a monarch controls makes all political, social, economic, and cultural decisions in a government without checks or balances, had been introduced by Charles I and James I. However, it never took hold. In France, Louis XIV took absolutism to extremes, claiming to be a servant of God. A limited monarch, England’s monarchial system, is a government in which a monarch…

    • 949 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    However I cannot deny that some absolute monarchs did create a sense of tyranny at their time as the absolute monarch in Western Europe . Like I said each king or queen has the choice on how they wanted to rule and not all of them choice the positive ways I have talked about . For example King James I . In document 2 or the ideas expressed by the king himself , he says “monarchy is the supreme thing upon earth ; for kings are not only God’s lieutenants on earth , and sit upon God’s throne , but even by God himself are called God’s.” he uses this statement to put himself and other monarchs equal to God ,so he doesn't have to follow the church , and has more power than the church .I am not saying he was bad leader of his country i just see him as more of a tyrant than a positive absolute monarch…

    • 975 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Absolutism Dbq Analysis

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages

    During the 16th and 17th century Europe, political views on the government varied in Europe. After the Catholic Church’s downfall, absolute monarchs dominated Europe. An analysis of the documents clearly shows that mostly kings favored absolutism and have superiority over their people. On the other hand, some viewed absolutism as a power that made people inferior to the government.…

    • 875 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Absolutism Dbq Analysis

    • 447 Words
    • 2 Pages

    One of the more common forms of government was absolutism. Rulers believed they should have complete control over the country. An excerpt in document 1 states that Prince Machiavelli believed the best way to rule was to be aggressive and feared and thought that the only way the citizen would follow his rule was if he emulated his power and social status. He thought that if he showed kindness and generosity that he would be overthrown. Most of the monarchs believed in divine right, this meant that they thought that they were chosen by God to rule. One of rulers that believed in divine right was King James 1st, his ideas were expressed in document 2 one of his quotes: “….God has the power…

    • 447 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In years past, the majority of governmental ideas were based on a ruler with absolute power, such as the king or queen of a country. The common belief of the ruling class during the pre enlightenment period was that humans were born dirty, unhealthy, and were generally unable to govern themselves. With a “caring” and “fair” ruler they could be saved from the burden of their own judgement. In contrast, Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke, Baron De Montesquieu, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau thought that people were born pure and only were bad from the “corruption of society”, thus they should have a say in…

    • 496 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Absolutism has a great power that monarch, monarchy is the type of country that tends to be reported to the awe and respect.…

    • 240 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Dbq Absolute Government

    • 695 Words
    • 3 Pages

    A monarch's authority to govern should be absolute because then there would be less conflict between differing parties. In Document 3, Bossuet writes that the prince need render no account to anyone for the orders he gives. Instead of having to discuss why a decision was made or discussing what decisions should be made, an absolute ruler can make a decision and no one would question him. John Locke believes that if the commands of a prince were opposed it would unhinge and overturn all politics, and instead of government and order, leave nothing but anarchy and confusion (Document 4). Differing parties are not only government officials but also the people being governed. In an absolute government the people should not oppose the ruler. Bousett believes men must obey princes as they obey justice itself, without which there can be no order or purpose in things (Document 3). The authority of a monarch should be absolute because there would be less conflict between differing…

    • 695 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Which form of government was most effective during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries? Absolutism or Democracy?…

    • 924 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In a democracy, people choose their leaders by voting, and everyone is treated equally. Democracy revolves around rule by the majority. In my opinion, colonial America was on its way to democracy, but far from being a true democratic society. Only a small portion of the people were able to make the decisions, so government did not revolve around the majority.…

    • 294 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    dbq essay

    • 308 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Age of Democracy and the Age of Absolutism were two different periods of time. The age of Enlightenment had new ideas spreading throughout the world about government and human rights. The enlightenment was a great period of establishment of democracy .A democracy is when the common people are considered as the primary source of political power. Throughout the enlightenment there were philosophers who believed greatly in a democratic government. Some of the most familiar philosophers were Voltaire, John Locke, and Montesquieu. Each one of these philosophers was humanists and believed in natural rights. The Age of Absolutism was a time of absolute monarchs who had total control of everything. They made laws as they went along and if they didn’t like what the people said the monarchs would throw the people into jail and or put them to death. The Age of democracy is a response or answer to the Age of Absolutism by the new ideas that spread throughout the world. Although democracy and absolutism had advantages and disadvantages, democracy was a more effective type of government for it limited royal power and protected the rights of the people socially, politically, and economically. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, tension arose between the two different types of governments, the democracy and absolute monarchs.…

    • 308 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The events and sentiments that ran through 17th century England were perhaps as paradoxical as Charles the 1st’s head being sewn back to his body after his execution. This era saw a polarization of thought, action and outcome in regards to several events, people and institutions. The height of this polarization existed between the monarchy and the parliament, as questions arose in regards to the extent of power the king could wield, and the extent of power Parliament was willing to allow the king to wield. The two ends of the power spectrum were absolute monarchy , which gave the king unlimited powers, or “royal prerogatives” according to the Stuarts due to their “divine right” to exercise it, and the other a constitutional monarchy , where…

    • 823 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays