Philip II was an absolute monarch for Spain from 1556-1598 and for Portugal from 1580-1598. He used his power as king to do many immoral and illegal acts. He rose to power when his father died; his father was Charles V of Portugal. He had four marriages and one of them, Queen Mary I of Spain, made him king for a period of time till she died of stomach cancer in 1598. During his reign of Spain, the country was at its best. It was extremely rich and large, while having an enormous influence on Europe. He faced the revolt of the Netherlands and successfully crushed the revolt. King Phillip II lost the Invincible Armanda. His methods of government were very popular and some of them are still used today. James II was the first constitutional monarch of England, Scotland, and Ireland from 1685-1688. The Parliament controlled most of the government despite James II’s best efforts. He fought in four companies for the French and would later lead the Spanish armies against the French. He became king when his brother, Charles II died in 1685. During his reign, James II tried to convert the country to absolute Catholicism. Initially James II began replacing all of the …show more content…
Philip II had more power than James II and ruled for much longer. The absolute monarch of Philip II was very beneficial for the most part; while the constitutional monarchy of James II was very controversial and led to him being removed from the throne. James II did not do much for the country during his reign, unlike Philip II who grew Spain and Portugal in size and influence. These two rulers show the great difference between absolute monarchy and constitutional monarchy . In looking at these two rulers, the main difference is in whether or not a ruler has the complete control of the country (absolute), versus having to answer to the public (constitutional) - which can mean a world of difference in what they are able to accomplish on their
Louis XIV and Peter the great were absolute monarchs who created strong armies, and built strong central governments to obtain absolute power. Both absolute monarchs controlled the nobles and did several things to expand their land. Both rulers wanted to limit the power of the nobility and increase the power of monarchs in order to gain absolute power. Louis XIV and Peter had many goals in common and they also had some goals that were different. Even though they had similar goals, they both used different strategies and ways to achieve their goals.
Louis XIV was an absolute monarch in France from 1643 to 1715. His father died when he was just four years old, making Louis XIV the throne’s successor at a very young age. Because of this, he ruled for seventy-two years, which made him “the longest monarch to rule a major country in European history” (Eggert). But it was when he was twenty-three years old when he decided to rule without a prime minister, believing it was his divine right. Translated by Louis de Rouvroy, Duc de Saint-Simon, the author of the book The Memoirs of Louis XIV: His Court and The Regency, King Louis XIV wrote, “The royal power is absolute. The royal throne is not the throne of a man, but the throne of God himself. Kings should be guarded as holy things, and whoever
The role of the king to the public during the reigns of Louis XIV of France and Philip II of Spain were not predetermined, so each king created for himself what he thought monarchy ought to be. Louis XIV and Philip II were both absolutists, and believed that they should be the supreme rulers of France and Spain, respectively. However, Louis XIV did not want to be a national symbol serving no legitimate purpose. He wished to control the military, economy, foreign affairs, and the administration of the kingdom and of justice. He believed that the king of France should be the best that France has to offer- being served by even the most powerful lords of France. Conversely, Philip II thought of himself as Catholic first, and king of Spain second. Opposite to Louis XIV, Philip II preferred to sit in the Escorial and pray, pour over records, and live more as a monk than as Louis XIV’s conception of a king. Philip II never wanted to take much of an active part in the administration of his kingdom, except for the times when he wanted to use some of his various powers. However, after he had used it for a while (waging war, raising taxes, etceteras) he would let it lay dormant and return to his documents. Nor did Philip II ever wish to control most of the Spanish economy. The parts that he did control were ones that directly affected himself or his revenues, so vital in order to keep his army of immense proportions.
Louis XIV (the fourteenth) was an absolute monarch. He was often called "the Sun King," and ruled over France. He devoted himself to helping France achieve economic, political, and cultural prominence. Many historians believe the phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely" mirrors Louis' reign. Louis XIV revoked the Edict on Nantes, changing the economy of France in one motion. By creating the city of Versailles and being a major patron of the arts, Louis was very influential on French culture. He made France go almost bankrupt from his costly wars and failures. Louis was very corrupt in his power, and it shown in all he did to change France; he got what he wanted, when he wanted it.
During the fifteenth to nineteenth century, there were several leaders from different countries, who abused their powers as absolute monarchs. The misuse of their powers led to downfall of their country. An example of an absolute monarch who abused their powers is Louis XIV. He is a very important figure in history because he would make decisions and everyone would be under his power and control. For example, he controlled all the taxations, military power and justice. Furthermore, he did not set a list of defined rules. What this meant was that whatever he wanted to do at the time became the law and he could change it anytime. Louis built the Palace of Versailles which demonstrated the wealth and power of the monarch. The expenses for building the palace ended up with peasants unable to pay the increased tax. The country was enraged, countless suffered from poverty and famine. The proposition of a revolution was spread and Louis divine rights were being stripped away. The inevitable failure of absolute monarchy led to the uprising of the Reign of Terror and Napoleon Bonaparte. After the beheading of the King and Queen, France ...
Charles I and the Establishment of Royal Absolutism. Royal absolutism is a state of government whereby the monarch rules. supreme, with virtually no legislative power placed in other. organisations such as Parliament.
Why do Philip’s classmates think that he is guilty? They know that Philip was wrong. Even though they didn’t have support or evidence they knew that Philip was wrong. These are some main reasons. Philip’s rights weren’t violated because he was causing a disturbance in the school environment, he wasn’t trying to be patriotic, and laws protect teacher’s rights.
Philip II became king in 359 BCE. He took on a series of reform to strengthen and expand his kingdom. Under his leadership, a weak, backward country with an ineffective undisciplined army became am efficient military force. Philip II was able to take over many territories around Macedonia. Philip II used bribery, warfare, and threat to protect his kingdom. Over the next twenty-three years, Philip II took his soldiers and a cavalry and fought through Thebes, Corinth, Athens, and many other smaller poleis, gathering new forces and wealth (Acrobatiq,2014.) King Philip II’s insight and determination set the platform for his son Alexander. In 336 BCE, King Philip II was assassinated by a Macedonian and his son Alexander the Great became
James from the Stuart House was the son of Henry VII and Mary Queen of Scots, who was executed by Elizabeth I because Mary supported the Catholics, England's enemies. After Queen Mary's death King James was raised as a Protestant and when he became old enough he was of age James VI, King of Scotland. Queen Elizabeth did not have any natural descendants, and James VI became James I of England after she died. The population hoped James would support the Catholics like his mother did, but this did not happen for his Pro...
The kings of Aragon were given a very small amount of power despite being in the highest position. His job was to be a leader and protector of the people rather than their ruler. He didn’t even have to ability to choose a successor for the throne! Kings were elected by the people, though a current king could give
... be set at fair prices and therefore successful trading. Also, through commercialization, the Japanese were able to expand on their own lives and embellish their lives more.
The prevailing government of Europe from 1900-century back was absolute monarchism, this form of government worked very well considering the belief of all people in god and the teaching. Monarchist use this belief to justify this rule in. if they could make the people believe that they were ordained position by god then they had no worries because the people belief in god was so prevailing that it was not mentionable in private to go against it. Napoleon and Louis XIV were the ideal rules to use this type of ruling. Napoleon and Louis XIV were the same type of rulers by using the divine right monarchy to control the people of their country, which was France. Napoleon and Louis way of ruling and other similarity were so alike that they could have traded their period when they sat at the throne and the people would have not noticed
While the two kings had many differences their militaries were surprisingly similar. They both had military troops that guarded and walked around the palace. The kings’ military was not only used for protection but also for spreading their beliefs and ideals. Their military was alert and ready to protect if there was to be an attack on the palace. King Louis XIV and Philip II both would have enough troops to go to war and express their thoughts but also enough to protect the palace.
According to the text book, an absolute monarch is a king or queen who has unlimited power and seeks to control all aspects of society (McDougall little, 1045). In more simple terms, it is a ruler who can do just about anything without having to get permission from anyone, or having to worry about the repercussions. This was a trend that started in the 1600’s by European leaders who were rich, and didn’t like to be told what to do. These conflicts arose with the States-General in France, or Parliament in England who had substantial control. The first countries to have absolute rulers were the traditionally strong countries, such as England, Spain, and of course Louis XIV’s France.
There were several events that contributed to the Revolution of 1688. King Charles I attempted to create an absolute monarchy in 1630’s by dismissing the sitting Parliament. His actions resulted in the English Civil War, where Charles was easily overpowered by Parliament and was consequently captured by Cromwell and executed for treason. After the removal of Charles I, England entered a period of a “republic” where it was ruled by Oliver Cromwell, also known as the Lord Protector. Parliament offered Cromwell the position of king, but he refused in order to distance England from another monarchy. Soon after Oliver’s death, the Commonwealth attempted to name Cromwell’s son, Richard as his predecessor, but the people refused arguing that a theocracy would not be an improvement from the monarchial times. Charles II, the son of Charles was brought back from exile and appointed king in 1660.