Comparing Absolutism In France And Spain

Kenomes reid
During the time period absolutism and absolutism were helping nations develop but in very different ways, resulting in the following nations to adapt very different ways of thinking and keeping control of their nation. Differences such as England and Netherlands having much more success commercial than France and Spain. These two systems both had areas they succeeded greatly in but also areas that they failed in. Within that scenario the opposing model (constitutional or absolutism) would usually succeed. Absolutism is the idea that a kings power and the ideals enforced are absolute and not to be disregarded by the people. A form of government driven from monarchs, ran on the idea of absolutism helped develop nation states.
Absolutism fit a more tyrannical ruler. With this ideology kings gave centralized their power to themselves negating all other possible shared or otherwise separated power that was so common in that time. Leaders such as king Lui xiv, peter the great, and most other kings and princes favored this.
Absolutism was the signature way of leading in that time. With this kings attempted to control the nobility and his people through various techniques. King Lui belittled his nobility and bankrupted them to the point that there was no return. He over priced clothing and got the nobility to dress him. Peter the great forcibly modernized his nobility by cutting their beards and changing their clothing. For a single monarch his main path was most likely going to be war. Medieval representative assemblies were discontinued. Monarchs supported the use of English, French, Spanish etc, to adopt a common identity and Armies and tax collection for war was the back bone of monarchies. Anything that threatened royal power was restrained, remade or destroyed. The work of absolutism was in some cases undone by
religion. Constitutionalism gave power to the merchants and was much more spread out and less centralized. Nations under this ideal excelled in trade. It was a much less common concept. Protestant elites loaned money to the cities for a national debt finance by citizens to create the first national bonds. Mercantile elites mad it so that power was distributed between t the monarchy and parliament. Unlike its counterpart princes that ruled under constitutionalism succeeded in the ability to evolve fairly quickly while princes with this centralized thought process failed to evolve. Conditions were smoother and more suitable for business expansion which mostly occurred with english countries associated with constitutionalism. Considering how the youngest son would go on to make a fortune and further expand business in england. France and Spain still had guilds or somewhat guilds carried over from the medieval ages which made up a good portion of their business and commerce. France benefited in commercial and industrial expansion but in a way that differed between the two nations. Spain fails to take opportunities presented by the price revolution. Spain gained an enormous amount of silver along with a substantial population growth which would create extreme demand within the country. Spain did not seize the moment but instead left the opportunity behind. France's kings had adopted the idea of divine right and used it to control feudal lords. Within assemblies there were elites that consisted of multiple roles, such as, the clergy, the nobility, and the leadership of estates. The religion within in france was inforced by a very influential power-the pope.The pope allowed the king to elect or otherwise appoint a man into the role of bishop. Protestant reformation would undo the current centralization of the french state. The absolutism they favored so greatly was threatened by religious and political rivals and soon was brought to an end with the new reign of Henry II. Lui xiv brought france back to being an abolitionist state making it the main outlet of power. Lui XIV was the reason for the steadily increasing monarchical authority. Lui’s policy further centralized the power, weakening the nobility every chance he had.Lui had no church to keep a leash on him. Spain was a mainly catholic empire that was not known to be kind. The catholic kings reformed the church church in order to make it benefit them and not receive outside criticism. Jews were either expelled from spain or converged and baptised.France experienced the inquisition that revealed its darkness and would leave a mark for years to come.Spain now became dominant in the new world. The catholic church was a key player in the prevention of Spain's decline England and Netherlands seized every opportunity they received.
England traded woolens, raw wool, guns, ships. The king granted the ability to have monopolies in trade and manufacture. England was expanding their trade greatly, increasing markets and expanding stocks for the grown of the nation. The navigation actt was passed and allowed countries to export goods to any place they desire, making the cost of the goods cheaper in return, allowing for the purchase of a larger quantity. Through both england and france among many other nations protestantism was the dominant way to cause change for political movement. England was able to achieve national unity pretty early on, compared to most other countries. Parliament soon became a permanent aspect of government. England later evolved into a constitutional monarchy and common law provided unification. The parliament gave reformation a greater role.England's final revolution took down royal absolution for good, later political freedom in england increased. The bill of rights was created and all protestants were now tolerant. The british were now a sort of role model for other forms of government throughout europe. Europe accomplished much greater things with and essentially less centralized form of government but much more successful based on the very fast expansion rate of england due to their trade. England developed in a much more positive way although it had its pros and cons. According to leviathan when you have
state ran by absolutism individual men will not have the power to revolt alone but when others share his afflictions they combine and unify so that they can possibly make a difference.This will benefit the man and the larger cause. Man without out a controlling power is always in the midst of conflict, although state is not required for order. All that is required is a ruling authority to maintain control. Without a demanding power it's every man for himself. Absolutism is a much different way of running things than constitutionalism, though abslutionalism usually uses things such as fear and focuses more on war due to nations trying to gain control in order to centralize their power. Constitutionalism reaps more benefits depending on what you see beneficial, it's much more widespread. Kings and princes that ruled by absolutism mostly had the goal of control whether it's taking states back by force or just manipulating and depowering the nobility rather than constitutionalism where the king lacks complete control and merchants are really important driving forces of society and economy.

Citations
Thomas hobbes “leviathan”
Marvin perry “western civilizations”
Perry pages 347-380