Absolutism in Seventeenth Century Europe

Absolutism in Seventeenth Century Europe

Many historians regard the growth of the absolute monarchy as the origin of the modern state (Hooker pp). Europe experienced the gradual erosion of local power and the autonomy and rise of national legislation and civil bureaucracies, thus this age in European history is generally referred to as the Age of Absolutism, and begins during the reign of Louis XIV and ends with the French Revolution (Hooker pp).

Absolutism was largely motivated by the tragedies and crises of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, such as the Reformation which led to a series of violent and cruel wars of religions as civil wars erupted and thousands of innocents died (Hooker pp). Absolute monarchies were originally proposed as a solution to the crises, and the majority of Europeans welcomed local autonomy in exchange for peace and security (Hooker pp). To achieve stability, absolutists asserted that certain key elements of the national government, such as the military, tax collection, and the judicial system, should be the sole responsibility of the monarch (Hooker pp). Since these were powers normally enjoyed by the aristocracy and local gentry, a national civil bureaucracy whose officials were answerable only to the king was needed and to stand against the most powerful institutional forces opposed to the king, notably the nobility, the church, the representative legislative bodies, and autonomous regions (Hooker pp).

From appearance of nation-states in Europe during the middle of the millennium until the latter half of the twentieth century is, it seemed probably that some form of absolutism would be the dominant pattern for the most powerful and successful of those states (Marshall pp). The triumph of societies based upon limited forms of government over their absolutist rivals is one of the most surprising and significant developments of the millennium (Marshall pp). By 1715, Paris had become one of the greatest cities in Europe, whereas a century before, it was still very much a medieval town (Corey pp). Orest Ranum argues in his book, "Paris in the Age of Absolutism: An Essay," that the Wars of Religion during the late sixteenth century "fueled a drive for order that, in part, set the foundations of absolute monarchy and of modern Paris" (Corey pp). However, the fledgling public spirit that appeared so promising in the early decades of the seventeenth century ultimately failed to take hold as the century came to a close (Corey pp).

Historical sociologist, Norbert Elias, argues that French Absolutism, as practiced under Louis XIV, created an "environment in which the nobility competed with one another for the privilege of serving the king in honorable functions" (Rise pp). According to Elias, this competition was powered by civilizing norms of behavior, "which were internalized by the nobles and then trickled down to become the behavioral standards and even the emotional barometer for members of modern western society" (Rise pp).

During the seventeenth century, monarchs attained power and authority that was unprecedented, leading historians to use the term "absolutism" to describe these political systems, while other historians argue that the term is misleading because neither the ambitions of the monarchs nor the results constituted political absolutism (Durand pp). However, Louis XIV established such a powerful monarchy in France, that when he famously declared, "L'etat c'est moi" ("I am the state"), it began an "association of state power with the person wielding it that culminated in the cult of personality of a Hitler, Stalin, or Mao" in the twentieth century (Marshall pp).

Some historians believe that the general climate of absolutism offered the monarch no more than the opportunity to deliberate on matters of state without being affected by intrigue and pressure, and ensure the judicial process followed his wishes and directives (Durand pp). Therefore, as an actual political system, absolutism is a myth, for the monarchs never regarded themselves as absolute, "except in the case of the autocrats of Russia, where the lack of fundamental laws of established custoins and corporate orders within the state allowed the growth of a dictatorial form of government" (Durand pp).