Absolutism Case studies Mark Knights What does absolutism
Absolutism Case studies Mark Knights
What does absolutism signify? • Unfettered royal power, usually monarchy by divine right • The centralisation of decision-making • The king as above the law • The erosion of the rights of the people and their representative assemblies • The loss of liberty • No right of resistance • Personified by Louis XIV of France (1643 -1715)
Myth or Reality? Peter H. Wilson, in Absolutism in Central Europe (2000) ‘absolutism was a reality which characterised central European political development between the mid- seventeenth and very late eighteenth centuries … it pushed monarchical rule in a significantly new direction; one which justifies the use of a specific term to distinguish it’ It arose out of an early C 17 th revitalised sense of monarchy that rejected most forms of formal consultation and limitations After the 30 Years War (1618 -48), and as a reaction to crisis (moral and intellectual; international and military; socioeconomic), it was distinguished by a personification and sacralisation of power; rise of nation state/fiscal-military state.
• Perry Anderson – Marxist interpretation (1974) Eastern model: monarchies reacted to threats from Swedish expansion and western capitalism by a compact between monarchies and aristocracies - whereby the latter surrendered political power in return for the imposition of serfdom eg 1653 Brandenburg Recess between Elector Frederick William and the estates that allowed FW to raise a large army
But …Absolutism is a disputed concept Nicolas Henshall, The Myth of Absolutism (1992) ‘The edifice of ‘absolutism’ is cracking. The building still stands but few seem to have noticed that it is hanging in mid-air. No one has assembled the materials for demolition, but nor has the case been made for a preservation order’ [Nicolas Henshall in History Today 42. 6 (1992), p. 40] No ‘ism’ – an early C 19 th term that is anachronistic Not only did Louis XIV or his emulators in Europe fail to deliver an absolutist agenda, but they never had such pretensions They worked with representative assemblies; monarchy was also limited by practical constraints; not despotic; localism prevailed not central bureaucracy
- Slides: 5