Absolute Monarchs were eithere kings or queens who controlled the complete way of life in the country they ruled. Absolutism is the rule of one person over any given thing. The two rulers that showed absolutism in the documents are Louis 14th and Peter the Great. They were both absolute monarchs and both ruled over large territories.…
Louis XVI’s rule was defiantly not similar to the Rule of Napoleons rule when you get down to the basics. Louis XVI and Napoleon Bonaparte were two of the most significant rulers in French history for many different reasons. Being so young the inexperienced Louis XVI led France into the beginning of a bloody French Revolution. Napoleon on the other hand launched France to the top in Europe shortly after. Louis XVI and Napoleon differed in three main categories including: qualifications, domestic policy, and foreign policy.…
European monarchy was in full force between 1400 and 1800, in a variety of nations and ways. Phillip II of Spain and Fredrick William the 1st of Prussia were monarchs with similar approaches in terms of absolutist reign accompanied by a strong military, yet they differed on foreign policy, economics, and religion.…
Louis XIV believed that one king should have power and control over the country of France. To do this he reorganized the army and was exceptionally…
The Enlightenment is touted by modern historians as a time of intellectual and social advancement, an era of optimism and freedom unheard of in earlier times. The era of absolutism is seen as a time of mounting liberty that contributed to the rise of democracy in the Americas and elsewhere. In reality, the "Enlightened Despotism" of the absolutist leaders was more in keeping with the tyrannical rulers of the pre-reformation Holy Roman Empire than with the democratic republic of modern America. Three of the most prominent absolutist leaders were Catherine the Great of Russia, Frederick the Great of Prussia and Louis XIV of France - these three leaders are perfect examples of the avarice, tyranny and lust for power that characterizes the Enlightened Despots.…
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.…
Both men, Frederick and Peter, possessed great military knowledge, and used that knowledge to defeat their opponents. Each brought his country from ruin, and placed it upon the top ranks of world powers. However, there are also many differences. For example, Frederick the Great focused more on physical actions, discipline, and honor, while Peter the great looked more to advancement in technology, education, and knowledge. Frederick the Great promoted religious freedom throughout all of Prussia. Russia however, under Peter the Great, was entirely devoted toward the Eastern Orthodox…
William Jefferson Clinton was one of the greatest presidents to govern the United States as opposed to the Bush's. Clinton proved to the world our preeminence by way of control, economic growth, and policies ranging from Israel to social security. The Bush's proved to the world that they won the election. Louis XIV and the Stuart Kings also compare in similar ways. Louis XIV was a sound leader whose foresight and character led to the greatness of France, along with delegating authority to great economic and military leaders. The Stuart Kings possessed no foresight or character, many thought of them as stupid and stubborn, and the way they governed their country was reckless. Louis XIV prospered through absolute control, economic growth, and military reform. Where as, the Stuart Kings failure was due to no real control, economic turmoil, and civil war. The most important factor in the success of Louis XIV and the failure of the Stuart Kings was control.…
King Frederick the Great of Prussia displayed similarities throughout his rule to the Russian King, Peter with his military tactics and taxation. During his reign, King Frederick established a great standing army and financed his army by imposing permanent taxation (Wallbank). A strong army was needed to protect the Prussian land and King Frederick built the best standing army in Europe, consisting of 80,000 men. In order to fund his military, Frederick continued permanent taxation on his people. Similarly, King Peter modernized his army of 200,000 men and levied heavy taxes to support his large army (Wallbank). Under his rule, Peter I made the position of a soldier a lifetime job, contributing to his substantial army. As a result to constructing an immense military, Peter enforced an onerous tax on the people. Likewise, both rulers developed large militia and instituted taxes to asset their armies.…
They had the same ideas but they took different approach. Both of them wanted their kingdoms to be modernized. The first thing they did was to build a better army. With a better army they will be able to have more power and land. Peter was different, because he first traveled and learned the life style of western Europe and then brought it to Russia. He brought people from Europe to educate Russia’s people and teach them the new technologies. He wanted Russia to catch up with the rest of the world. His main focus was education; with this people would learn and practice new ways. Peter the great of Russia modernized Russia, gave people an education, and build a better army. Frederick in the other hand focused more on acquiring Land, Uniting Prussia, building an army, educating people. He encouraged people to educate themselves. He gave them more freedoms; that people liked and will love him…
The Enlightenment is touted by modern historians as a time of intellectual and social advancement, an era of optimism and freedom unheard of in earlier times. The era of absolutism is seen as a time of mounting liberty that contributed to the rise of democracy in the Americas and elsewhere. In reality, the "Enlightened Despotism" of the absolutist leaders was more in keeping with the tyrannical rulers of the pre-reformation Holy Roman Empire than with the democratic republic of modern America. Three of the most prominent absolutist leaders were Catherine the Great of Russia, Frederick the Great of Prussia and Louis XIV of France - these three leaders are perfect examples of the avarice, tyranny and lust for power that characterizes the Enlightened Despots.…
Louis and Peter had similar goals such as to establish a large professional army within their empires. These armies differed from armies in previous centuries because they contained highly trained men with advanced and mature technology, as opposed to the armies from earlier times that were composed of peasants and low technology artillery. Although each monarch had a large professional army, the reasons for why these armies were so important to each empire differed. Louis needed a strong army to protect his borders from enemies. Since France is in the center of Europe, and is bordered by major empires such as England and Spain, it was essential to have an army that could protect France from these threatening neighbors. Peter needed an army in order to expand his young growing empire. Louis came to power with an already developed empire, which had already conquered many lands; whereas Peter had to start from scratch and begin to conquer new lands. A large army was crucial for Peter so that he could invade and conquer new territories for Russia. Without a strong and powerful army, Russia would not be able to grow and…
The common definition for the term “great” consists of being considerably above average or above normal. Normal can mean different things to different cultures and societies. For example, in the early years, having kings, the power to rule, and killing several thousands to accomplish this was normal to some, as was being a peasant, working on the farm and having nothing in your name to others. Both Philip II of Macedon and Alexander III of Macedon were above average and above normal in the sense that they achieved far more greatness than most in their time. This father/son duo ruled the Macedonian Empire and conquered a vast amount of surrounding land between 360-323 B.C. (1). Before Philip came to rule, the Macedonian empire was disintegrating and divided. The two men used different tactics both physically and…
He set blueprints to a school of Science that was built to catch up with the other western countries who were excelling in Science and Technology. A quote by a European historian said: “Education also had to be modernised if Russia was going to survive as a power in Europe.” This proves how much being intelligent and up to date on your technology helps become a world power. Peter was religious and taunted secular schools that conflicted with his religious ideals. Peter did something amazing for Russia, he had the first newspaper called “Vedomosti” printed, this was a big thing because many of the things printed were bibles.…
When you think of Peter I or Peter the Great, as he gave himself that name, one thinks of Russia and the many Tsars that ruled this interesting part of the world. To learn of Peter the Great is to explore his life during 1682 . Peter was responsible for bringing Russia out of darkness and into a more civilized country in hopes that Russia, the Motherland, would gain the respect of the rest of the European theatre and become a great power. To do this required many changes and reforms which Peter the Great was responsible for. Although not completely successful in his reforms, Peter the Great had the attitude that he could never fail. Russia, considered by other countries as primitive, was at no point prepared to expand its territory or even be considered a threat by others with all the internal conflicts happening in the diverse land. Peter the Great was the answer to the lack of respect by the Western world, as he was raised differently than any other tsars or family that came before him. This upbringing will show the attitude and demeanor with which Peter the Great was able to meet the needs of the state. Previous to Peter the Great, the state had never…