Machiavelli wrote that a ruler should be both like “a lion and a fox” (The Prince, Chapter XVIII). By this Machiavelli means that a ruler should be like a lion to keep away the wolves that can get to the fox who finds the traps that the lion could get into. Essentially, a ruler should be cunning and powerful. Elizabeth I of England and Louis XIV of France fit these characteristics. Louis XIV acted as a lion in such ways as the Edict of Fontainebleau which took away the power of the Huguenots. Elizabeth I of England was like a lion because she married her country, not a man, therefore keeping all power to herself and frightening away the “wolves.” Louis XIV acted as a fox by getting away from the “traps” of the nobility by heavily taxing them because he did not want to relive the Fronde, a civil war where he was humiliated by nobles (Tom Richey, Louis XIV Rap 0:27-0:31). Elizabeth acted as a fox because she was religiously tolerant and kept England away from “traps” that could lead to wars.
Naming yourself a great leader isn't the same as establishing the respect of a great leader from the people you rule, for example, Queen Nzinga was able to rule sufficiently and protect her kingdom from, slavery, constant wars, famine, and bankruptcy, whereas Louis XIV, although creating a new society failed at providing such fortifications. In 1663, when Louis XIII had passed away, five year old Louis XIV had to take up the throne, and although he made immature and unreasonable decisions, he later made his mind up to make a more centralized state. For this reason there were constant wars with foreign countries and domestic civil strife. Louis XIV’s most acknowledged decision was the employing of John Baptiste Colbert as Minister of Finance, under whom the French economy flourished, hence creating a centralized and fortified state for the first half of his reign. However, later in his reign, due to extravagant wars, and continuous financial problems, Louis XIV’s new society collapsed. Similarly, Queen Nzinga took over the throne after the death of her brother in 1623, fought many battles and wars, however, was able to keep up a strong centralized and government, and was able to protect her people from the Portuguese for as long as she lived.
During the Reformation, both Martin Luther and King Henry VIII desired to reform the Church, but in substantially different ways, and for very different reasons. While Martin Luther wanted reform in order to achieve freedom from the Roman Catholic Church, Henry VIII solely wanted reform for personal reasons and to gain power. Luther acted towards the good of all and Henry VIII acted towards the good of himself.
During the reigns of King Louis XIV of France and King Peter I of Russia, also known as Peter the Great, the nobility was under strict control to limit its power and status in society and government. Both autocrats, or absolute rulers, put the nobles in an area separate from the rest of society to keep them under close watch. The kings’ opinion in religion also impacted the status and power of the nobility because most of them were skilled Protestants. This would prove itself as a problem in the long run for Louis XIV. Overall, Peter the Great and Louis XIV despised the nobility and their power in the government and went to many measures to subdue them.
nation. In order to become a true absolute ruler Louis xiv needed to make sure
The bravery and strength of the lion will not be enough to empower the ruler to escape the snares set by his enemies for and the slyness of the fox is also needed. “The lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves.” (The Prince) It is not possible for the citizens to love and fear a prince, but being feared is much safer than being loved.“Since love and fear can hardly exist together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than loved” (The Prince) Everything a prince says must be filled with these five qualities: being merciful,being trustworthy, religious,kind, honest. Machiavelli defines virtues as qualities that are praised by others, such as generosity, compassion, and piety. He argues that a prince should always try to appear virtuous, but it is more important for the prince to be practical than it is for him to be morally good. The government that is built of this foundation it
It has been shown again and again throughout history and literature that if there is a perfect human he is not also the perfect ruler. Those traits which we hold as good, such as the following of some sort of moral code, interfere with the necessity of detachment in a ruler. In both Henry IV and Richard II, Shakespeare explores what properties must be present in a good ruler. Those who are imperfect morally, who take into account only self-interest and not honor or what is appropriate, rise to rule, and stay in power.
In the Age of Absolutism, both England and France had strong absolute monarchies and leaders. Though Louis XIV, monarch of France, and Charles I, leader of Britain, both served as their country’s king and served in this role in different ways.
When Louis the XIV began his rule in 1643, his actions immediately began to suggest and absolute dictatorship. Because of the misery he had previously suffered, one of the first things he did was to decrease the power of the nobility. He withdrew himself from the rich upper class, doing everything secretly. The wealth had no connection to Louis, and therefore all power they previously had was gone. He had complete control over the nobles, spying, going through mail, and a secret police force made sure that Louis had absolute power. Louis appointed all of his officials, middle class men who served him without wanting any power. Louis wanted it clear that none of his power would be shared. He wanted "people to know by the rank of the men who served him that he had no intention of sharing power with them." If Louis XIV appointed advisors from the upper classes, they would expect to gain power, and Louis was not willing to give it to them. The way Louis XIV ruled, the sole powerful leader, made him an absolute ruler. He had divine rule, and did not want to give any power to anyone other than himself. These beliefs made him an absolute ruler.
The palace of Versailles was built by King Louis XIV of France and the Escorial was built by King Philip II of Spain. The two kings each had their differences about their beliefs on how to rule, yet there are some similarities. Louis XIV believed in showing off his power and being open. Philip II was a simplistic guy devoted to Catholicism. They both had military to spread their beliefs and ideas. Despite the kings’ beliefs, their palaces reflected their ideals.
During the 16th and 17th centuries a new type of ruling emerged as a result of unorganized government called royal absolutism. This type of government was seen in many European countries including France and Russia where King Louis XIV and Peter the Great ruled respectively. Both had ways of ruling that were similar to each other and different to each other. Politically, economically and socially both Louis XIV and Peter the Great were similar to and different from how they ruled and what their reign resulted.
Frightfully stimulated as a child from a home intrusion by Parisians during an aristocratic revolt in 1651, Louis XIV realized his rule would be decisive, militant, and absolute (458). His lengthy reign as Frances’ king and how he ruled would be the example that many countries throughout Europe would model their own regimes under. With this great authority also came greater challenges of finance and colonization. In the 17th century, the era of absolute monarchs was the means to restore European life (458). Louis XIV exemplified absolutism, and his ruling set the example for other monarchs throughout Europe.
Louis XIV is considered the “perfect absolutist” and he has been said to have been one of the greatest rulers in France’s history. He came up with several different strategic plans to gain absolute
There were many negative comments and many positive comments about Louis XIV and his court. In Louis XIV’s court, the closer a person was to the king, or the more he did for a person, the more that person likes him. The more distant you were from the king, the more you disliked him.
Of all the absolute rulers in Europe, by far the best example of one, and the most powerful, was Louis XIV of France. Although Louis had some failures, he also had many successes. He controlled France’s money and had many different ways to get, as well as keep his power, and he knew how to delegate jobs to smart, but loyal people.
These types of decisions define why Louis XIII is an important example of the primacy of the king over all other sources of political and governmental power in the 17th century. Certainly, Louis XIII’s rise to power defines the lack of checks and balances that would typically be a part of a lesser monarchy in which the aristocracy could have an influence on governmental decisions. However, this was not the case with Louis XIII, since he had gained complete control over the government through military might and the wealth of the royal family. This historical example defines the primacy of the absolute monarch within the context of the king’s role in governing in 17th century