The symbol of absolutism
“The state is me,” said Louis XIV. However, these words are also attributed to other monarchs. And in essence, it doesn't matter who the author of this statement is, the main thing is that it accurately characterizes the essence of absolutism.
And if we look in the encyclopedic dictionary, we will find the following more detailed definition of absolutism: “Absolutism (from the Latin absolutus - independent, unlimited), absolute monarchy. Absolutism is characterized by the fact that the head of state, monarch, seen as the main source of legislative and executive power, which is carried out by a device dependent on it; he sets taxes and manages public finances. Under absolutism, the greatest degree of state centralization is achieved, a ramified bureaucratic apparatus (judicial, tax, etc.), a large standing army and police are created; the activity of the bodies of estate representation, typical of the estate monarchy, either ceases or loses its former significance. The social support of absolutism is the nobility. "
Absolutism as a common phenomenon for European countries
Symbols of absolute monarchy
Under absolutism, the entire completeness of state (legislative, executive, judicial) and sometimes spiritual (religious) power is legally and in fact in the hands of the monarch.
Absolute monarchy was characteristic of almost all European countries until the 18th century, except for San Marino and some cantons of Switzerland, which were always republics. Some historians consider absolutism even as a natural phase of historical development.
In the era of the Enlightenment, this form of government was ideologically justified and reinforced for the first time: they recall the Roman jurists who recognized the absolute power of the ancient Roman emperors for the sovereigns, and accept the theological idea of the divine origin of the supreme power.
After the Great French Revolution, a process of gradual democratization and limitation of the power of the monarch takes place. But this process was uneven: for example, the flourishing of absolutism in the countries of Western Europe occurred in the 17th-18th centuries, while in Russia the absolute monarchy existed until the 20th century.
Under absolutism, the state reaches the highest degree of centralization, a ramified bureaucratic apparatus, a standing army and police are created; the activity of the bodies of estate representation, as a rule, continues.
The social support of absolutism is the nobility... The magnificent and sophisticated palace etiquette served to exalt the person of the sovereign. At the first stage, absolutism was progressive: it united the state with uniform laws and eliminated feudal fragmentation. An absolute monarchy is characterized by a policy of protectionism and mercantilism, which promoted the development of the national economy, trade and industry. The military power of the state is strengthened for the possibility of waging wars of conquest. These are the features of an absolute monarchy common to all countries.
But in each country the peculiarities of absolutism were determined by the balance of forces between the nobility and the bourgeoisie.
Absolutism in Russia
In Russia, the system of power created by Peter I is usually called absolutism. You can read about the absolutism of Peter I on our website:. And although the flourishing of absolutism as a type of state power in Russia took place in the 18th century, the prerequisites for its formation appeared in the reign of Ivan the Terrible (second half of the 16th century), and the fall - in 1917.
P. Delaroche "Portrait of Peter I"
Ivan the Terrible showed features of autocracy. He wrote to Andrei Kurbsky: "The sovereign commands his will to do from God to his guilty slaves," "We are free to grant our servants, but we are free to execute them." Russian statehood during the time of Grozny had many features of the system of eastern despotism. Despotism- the possibility of arbitrariness of the supreme bearer of power, not limited by any laws and based directly on force. The place of a person in society was determined not by nobility and wealth, but by closeness to the monarch. Social status and wealth came from power. All were equal before the monarch, in fact being in a state of slavery.
But there were also objective prerequisites for this: the country's historical and geographical conditions, a short agricultural cycle, the riskiness of agriculture, a low surplus product. Under these conditions, a rigid mechanism was created for the forced withdrawal of that share of the total surplus product that went to the needs of the state itself - this is one of the determining factors of the tradition of despotic power.
Bank of Russia coin "Historical Series": "Window to Europe. Acts of Peter I "
Another factor is the existence of the community's collective land ownership. The eastern coloration of state power was stimulated not by objective, but by subjective reasons, the main of which was the Horde yoke. The government remained weak and infinitely cruel.
The formation of absolutism in Russia began already in the middle of the 17th century, during the reign of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich:
- Zemsky Councils were called less frequently;
- the role of the boyar Duma decreased and the importance of the Near Duma and the order bureaucracy (clerks and clerks) increased;
- the basic principle of feudal service (localism) outlived its usefulness; the number of soldier and reitar regiments of a foreign system, the harbingers of the regular army, increased;
- the role of secular culture increased;
- joining the anti-Turkish coalition, Russia tried to enter the system of European states.
In Europe, the classical forms of absolute monarchy emerged during a period of relative "equilibrium" between the forces of the bourgeoisie and the nobility. This was not the case in Russia: capitalism and the bourgeoisie had not yet formed. That is why Russian absolutism was different from Western absolutism. Having support primarily in the nobility, like the European, in the social sense, he represented the dictatorship of the feudal nobility... The protection of the feudal-serf system was an important task of the state at this stage, although along with this, vital national tasks were also solved: overcoming backwardness and creating security for the state. This required the mobilization of all material and spiritual resources, total control over the subjects. Therefore, in Russia, the absolutist regime, as it were, stood above society and forced all estates to serve itself, pettyly regulated all manifestations of social life. Peter's reforms were carried out on a large scale and harshly. This is explained solely by the peculiarity of the character of the emperor, but they often do not take into account the fact that it was impossible to conduct them in a different way in this country and at this time. Resistance to Peter's reforms was observed in various circles of society, including among some of the clergy and boyars, who rallied around the son of Peter from the first wife (E. Lopukhina) of Tsarevich Alexei. The true plans of the prince are still not clear. There is an opinion that he was not opposed to reforms in general, but intended to implement them in a more evolutionary way, without breaking old traditions. Due to disagreements with his father, he was forced to flee abroad, but in 1717 he was returned to Russia and after the investigation was executed.
In connection with the case of Tsarevich Alexei in 1722, Peter announced a decree on the inheritance of the throne, which gave the Tsar the right to appoint a successor to himself at his discretion.
Forced shaving of beards. Lubok 18th century
But why was there such resistance? Everything new was implanted by harsh methods: the duties of the peasantry and the townspeople increased, numerous emergency taxes and duties were introduced, tens of thousands of people died in the construction of roads, canals, fortresses, cities. Fugitives, Old Believers, opponents of the transformation were persecuted. The state with the help of a regular army suppressed the unrest and uprisings of the people, which took place mainly in the first half of the reign of Peter 1 (1698-1715).
One of the manifestations of Russian absolutism was the desire for complete regulation of all manifestations of society's activities.
In addition, the features of Russian absolutism were formed under the influence personality traits rulers. The personality of Peter I was of great importance. The tsar not only realized the crisis, but also completely denied the old Moscow, traditional way of life. From childhood and adolescence, seeing the rifle riots, Peter carried a charge of hatred towards the boyars, archers, the old way of life, which became an important psychological stimulus in his activities. The trip abroad reinforced Peter's aversion to Russian traditional life. He considered "old times" not only dangerous and hostile to him personally, but also a dead end for Russia. The Western model of life in all its diversity became for him the model according to which he was remaking his country. Peter did not receive the Orthodox education traditional for Russian tsars, was completely illiterate, until the end of his life he did not know the spelling rules and wrote many words according to the phonetic principle. The main thing is that Peter did not master the aggregate system of values inherent in traditional Russian culture. Peter was attracted by the typically Protestant model of living in a real, pragmatic world of competition and personal success. Peter followed this model in many respects in his activities. He turned to the experience of France, Denmark, especially Sweden. But foreign models could not always be adapted to Russian reality and Russian custom.
After Peter's reforms, Russia became the Russian empire that, with some changes, existed for almost 200 years.
After PeterI
Absolutism continued to gain ground, finding broad support from the nobility. 60-80 years of the eighteenth century. passed under the sign of "enlightened absolutism" of Catherine II. Under her, the "geographical argument" became popular, justifying autocracy as the only acceptable form of government for a country of such a scale as Russia. She managed to adapt the ideas of the enlighteners to the conditions of Russia. She created the "Order of the Commission on the compilation of a new Code". It was written by the empress herself in 1764-1766, but it was a talented compilation of the works of legal scholars and philosophers of the eighteenth century. Thanks to the Order, the legal regulation of autocracy was implemented in Russia.
D. Levitsky "Catherine II - the legislator in the temple of Justice"
The main task of Catherine II was the development of a set of legal norms that substantiated the fact that the monarch is "the source of all state power." The idea of enlightening people in general, the idea of progress as a movement from savagery to civilization turned into the idea of educating a "new breed of people", enlightening society, the subjects of an enlightened monarch.
Catherine believed that the law was not written for the monarch. The only limitation of his power may be his own high moral qualities and education. An enlightened monarch cannot act like an uncouth tyrant or a capricious despot.
Catherine II tried to combine the idea of autocracy with the idea of estates. By the time of Catherine's reign, the process of the formation of estates was under way. To create an estate system in Russia, to link it with the autocracy - this was the task Catherine set herself at the beginning of her reign. These ideas were supposed to be realized with the help of the only lever - the state.
Order of Catherine II
But in Catherine's time, as the empire expanded to the west and south, this policy became imperial: it reflected a stable complex of imperial ideas of rule over other peoples. This is not about politics directed to the outside world, but about politics within a multinational empire. Three principles become its essence: Russification, centralization and unification, as well as the violent spread of Orthodoxy.
All of Russia received a unified system of local government, built on the basis of strict centralism and bureaucratization. With great religious tolerance, Orthodoxy was the state religion.
In the first half of the nineteenth century. Russian absolutism was distinguished by a frequent change of internal political courses, parallelism in the conduct of conservative and liberal measures, frequent reorganizations of various parts of the state apparatus, and the legal justification of the serfdom. By the middle of the 40s of the XIX century. it became clear that these attempts were ineffective. Tsarism, having carried out reforms 60-70. XIX century. extended its existence. In the post-reform period, absolutism retained many features of the organization and activity of the state apparatus of the feudal era. The changes mainly affected the composition of the bureaucracy.
Absolutism in Russia was liquidated on March 2, 1918 as a result of the February Revolution and the abdication of Nicholas II.
By the way…
Currently, there are only five states left in the world, the form of government in which can be called an absolute monarchy: Vatican, Brunei, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar. In them, the power belongs to the monarch.
The United Arab Emirates is a federal state consisting of seven emirates - absolute monarchies.
For a long time, there has been a discussion about the conditions and timing of the emergence of an absolute monarchy in the West, its attitude to social classes, in particular to the bourgeoisie, about different stages of its development, about the similarities and differences between the Russian autocracy and Western absolutism, as well as about its historical significance.
Absolutism (from the Latin word "absolutus" - "unlimited", "independent"), or - the last form of the feudal state that arose during the emergence of capitalism and the disintegration of feudal relations.
The features of absolutism are as follows. The head of state is considered the main source of legislative and executive power (the latter is exercised by an apparatus subordinate to him). The monarch manages the state treasury, sets taxes.
Other main features of the policy of absolutism are the greatest degree of centralization of the state under the conditions of feudalism, a developed bureaucratic apparatus (tax, judicial, etc.). The latter also includes the police and a large active army. A characteristic feature of absolutism is the following: the activity of the characteristic organs in its conditions loses its significance and stops.
Absolute monarchs, in contrast to the feudal landowners, considered the service nobility to be their main social support. However, in order to ensure independence from this class as a whole, they did not neglect the support of the bourgeoisie that was still emerging at that time, which did not claim power, but was economically strong and capable of opposing the interests of the feudal lords with their own.
The meaning of absolutism
The role of absolutism in history is difficult to assess. At a certain stage, the kings began to fight the separatism of the feudal nobility, destroyed the remnants of the former political fragmentation, subordinated the church to the state, promoted the development of capitalist relations and the country's unity in the economic sphere, the process of forming national states and nations. The policy of mercantilism was carried out, trade wars were fought, a new class was supported - the bourgeoisie.
However, according to some researchers, absolutism acted for the benefit of the bourgeoisie only as long as it was in the interests of the nobility, which received income from the economic development of the state in the form of taxes that increased greatly, as well as from the revitalization of economic life in general. But the increase in resources and economic opportunities was mainly used to strengthen the military power of countries. This was necessary in order to suppress the large-scale that arose at that time, as well as for external military expansion.
Features of absolutism in France
The features of absolutism, characteristic of most European countries (with various modifications), were most vividly embodied in France. Here at the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th centuries. the first elements of this form of state appeared. During the reign of Richelieu (in the period from 1624 to 1642), who was the first minister of the king and especially Louis XIV (1643-1715), the absolute monarchy reached its peak. King Louis XIV expressed the essence of this form of government in the following simple definition: "The state is me!"
Absolutism in other countries
Specific features of absolutism in England (in its classical period, that is, during the reign of Elizabeth Tudor, 1558-1603) are the preservation of the current parliament, the absence of a standing army and the weakness of the local bureaucracy.
In Spain, where elements of bourgeois relations could not develop in the 16th century, the main features gradually degenerated into despotism.
In Germany, which was at that time fragmented, it took shape not on the scale of the state, but within specific territories of various principalities (princely absolutism).
The main features of enlightened absolutism, characteristic of some European countries in the second half of the 18th century, are discussed below. This form of government was not generally homogeneous. The peculiarities and features of absolutism in Europe depended largely on the balance of forces between the bourgeoisie and the nobility, on the degree of influence of the bourgeois elements on the politics. So, in Russia, the Austrian monarchy, Germany, the position of the bourgeois elements was significantly lower than in France and England.
Absolutism in our country
The formation of absolutism in Russia was going on in a very interesting way. Some researchers believe that the constitution adopted in 1993 endowed the president with powers that can be compared with the power of an absolute monarch, and call the current form of government a democratic autocracy. What are the main features of absolutism, and you will be convinced that such thoughts are not unfounded. Although, perhaps, there is some exaggeration here.
Russian absolutism did not arise on the same social basis as in Western Europe. Since at the turn of the 17-18 centuries (when the signs of absolute monarchy were finally strengthened) bourgeois relations in Russia were undeveloped, there was no balance between the nobility and the bourgeoisie.
The formation of absolutism in Russia began largely due to the foreign policy factor, and therefore only one nobility was its support. This is an important characteristic feature of absolutism in our country. The external threat constantly looming over Russia required a strong centralized power and quick important decisions. However, at the same time, there was a restrictive tendency. Boyarstvo (landed aristocracy), possessing strong economic positions, sought to influence the adoption of certain political decisions, as well as, if possible, participate in this process itself.
It is necessary to note one more feature of absolutism in Russia. The veche traditions (that is, democracy) continued to operate in the country, the roots of which can be found even during the existence of the Novgorod Republic and the Old Russian state. They found their expression in the activities of the Zemsky Sobors (from 1549 to 1653).
The period from the second half of the 16th to the first half of the 17th century passed under the sign of the struggle between these two tendencies that existed in our country. For a long time, the result of this confrontation was unclear, since the victory was won alternately by one side, then the other. Under Tsar Ivan the Terrible, as well as during the reign of Boris Godunov, it would seem that it was possessed by an absolutist tendency, according to which the monarch had maximum power prerogatives. But during the Time of Troubles and the reign of Mikhail Romanov (1613-1645), a restrictive tendency prevailed, the influence of the Zemsky Sobors and the Boyar Duma increased, without the support of which Mikhail Romanov did not issue a single law.
Serfdom and absolutism
The establishment of serfdom, which finally took shape in 1649, was a turning point, thanks to which the absolutist tendency won out. After it was finally legally consolidated, the nobility turned out to be completely dependent on the central authority, which was represented by the monarch. She alone was able to ensure the rule of the nobles over the peasants, to keep the latter in obedience.
But in exchange for this, the nobility was forced to abandon claims for personal participation in the government and recognized themselves as a servant of the monarch. This was the payment for services from the authorities. The nobles received permanent income and power over the peasants in exchange for giving up their claims to government. Therefore, it is not surprising that almost immediately after the legal registration of serfdom, the convocations of Zemsky Sobors ceased. In full force, the last of them took place in 1653.
Thus, the choice was made, and for the sake of economic interests, the nobles sacrificed political ones. The absolutist tendency won out. The registration of serfdom led to another important consequence: since there were no conditions for development (for example, the free labor market disappeared), the formation of bourgeois relations was sharply slowed down. For a long time, the bourgeoisie in the country therefore did not form a separate social class, and, consequently, the social support of absolutism could only be of the nobility.
Attitude towards law and law in Russia
Another striking feature of the absolute monarchy in the state was its attitude to law and law. The choice in the ratio of non-legal and legal means was made unambiguously in favor of the former. The personal arbitrariness of the monarch and his inner circle became the main method of government. This began back in the reign of Ivan the Terrible, and in the 17th century, after the final transition to absolute monarchy took place, little has changed.
You can, of course, argue that there was a code of laws - the Cathedral Code. However, in practice, the monarch (Peter I, Alexei Mikhailovich and others) and senior government officials were not guided in their actions by the requirements of the laws, did not consider themselves bound by them.
The main method of governing the country is military force and brutal coercion. It cannot be denied that during the reign of Peter I quite a lot of laws were adopted concerning almost all spheres of government (Table of Ranks, Military Article, regulations of colleges, General Regulations). But they were nevertheless intended exclusively for subjects, the sovereign himself did not consider himself bound by these laws. In fact, the practice of making decisions under this tsar was not much different from that under the rule of Ivan the Terrible. The only source of power was still the will of the monarch.
Relationship to law and law in other countries
This is not to say that in this Russia was so different from Western countries (name the features of absolutism, and you will be convinced of this). Louis XIV in France (he is considered the classic absolute monarch) also used voluntarism and arbitrariness.
But for all the contradictions, absolutism in Western Europe nevertheless followed the path of active involvement of legal means in the regulation of various social relations. Between the law and personal arbitrariness, the ratio gradually began to shift in favor of the former. This was facilitated by a number of factors, the most important of which was the realization by the tsars that it was much easier to govern the country when as many spheres as possible were regulated by legal norms.
In addition, the use of voluntarism in governing the state implies that the monarch has high personal qualities: intellectual level, energy, willpower, determination. However, most of the rulers of that time had little resemblance in their qualities to Peter I, Frederick II or Louis XIV. That is, they could not successfully apply personal arbitrariness in governing the country.
Having followed the path of increasing application of the law as the main instrument of state administration, the absolutism of Western Europe entered the path of a protracted crisis, and then completely ceased to exist. Indeed, in its essence, he assumed the unrestricted legally power of the sovereign, and the use of legal controls led to the emergence of an idea (which was formulated by the leaders of the Enlightenment) about the rule of law and law, and not the will of the king.
Enlightened absolutism
Traits in our country were embodied in the policy of Catherine II. In many European countries, in the second half of the 18th century, the idea of an "alliance of sovereigns and philosophers", expressed by French philosophers-enlighteners, became popular. At this time, abstract categories are transferred to the sphere of concrete politics. The reign of the "wise man on the throne", the benefactor of the nation, the patron of the arts was supposed. The enlightened monarchs were the Prussian King Frederick II and the Swedish Gustav III, the Austrian Emperor Joseph II, and the Russian Empress Catherine II.
The main features of enlightened absolutism
The main features of enlightened absolutism in the policies of these rulers were expressed in the implementation of reforms in the spirit of various ideas of the Enlightenment. The head of state, the monarch, must be capable of transforming social life in the country on a new, reasonable basis.
The main features of enlightened absolutism in different states were common. At the time under review, reforms were carried out that did not affect the foundations of the existing feudal-absolutist system; this was the time when governments liberally flirted with writers and philosophers. in France destroyed this form of state and the features of French absolutism, put an end to it throughout Europe.
The hard way of absolute monarchy
The fate of absolutism was different. Since the main task of this form of state is to preserve the existing foundations of the feudal system, it inevitably lost the progressive features of absolutism and was a brake on the development of capitalist relations.
During the first bourgeois revolutions of the 17th and 18th centuries, the absolute monarchy was swept away in France and England. In countries with a slower capitalist development, the transformation of the feudal-absolutist into the bourgeois-landlord monarchy was observed. The semi-absolutist system in Germany, for example, existed until the November bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1918. The February revolution of 1917 put an end to absolutism in Russia.
1. What is the essence of absolutism?
Under absolutism, all power (legislative, executive and judicial) is in the hands of the monarch. However, it differs from the Eastern despotism. First, the absolute monarch most often was not at the same time the head of the church. Secondly, despite his absolute power, the monarch had to take into account certain rights of the estates (for example, the nobility), as well as other restrictions, formally confirmed by documents on behalf of the monarch himself (for example, in France, special ordinances of the king confirmed many norms of local law).
2. What are the reasons for the transition of European countries to absolutism? What prerequisites for strengthening the central government have developed in the countries of Western Europe?
Reasons and prerequisites:
In conditions of religious wars, the church could no longer be a factor of stability, only the central government could become such, especially since it was often required to unite adherents of different confessions;
The increased efficiency of the regular armies weakened the influence of the feudal militia, and hence the local nobility;
Many strata of society that had already gained influence were interested in strengthening the central power (the petty nobility, including the younger branches of noble families, merchants and other financial elite);
The growth of colonial trade and the politics of mercantilism provided the monarchs with significant financial support;
The influx of precious metals and other valuables from the New World also financed the activities of certain monarchs.
3. Name the features of absolutism in England and France. Why did the resistance to him take on religious forms?
Peculiarities:
All real power was concentrated in the hands of authorities completely controlled by the king (in England - the Privy Council and the Star Chamber, in France - the Grand Royal Council);
The main opposition to absolutism was the large feudal nobility;
Bodies of estate representation continued to meet, but did not play the same role;
The kings did not want to resort to the help of the estate authorities, therefore they looked for alternative means of replenishing the treasury, relied widely on financial circles and, in general, pursued a policy of mercantilism;
During the formation of absolutism, there were persecutions of the royal power against the large feudal nobility, many of whose representatives were subjected to executions, exile and other punishments with confiscation of property.
Resistance to absolutism took on religious forms because the religious doctrine of the Middle Ages already contained an ideological justification for the struggle against power. Even according to the teachings of F. Aquinas, an unrighteously ruling monarch was deprived of the right to the throne. The same position was included in their doctrine and Protestants from their first speech against Charles V, using in fact a ready-made Catholic model.
4. Tell us about the essence of the Edict of Nantes. Did he ensure real equality of rights for Catholics and Huguenots? What consequences did it have?
The Edict of Nantes in 1598 equalized the rights of Catholics and Protestants in France. He even left the latter with some autonomy, which included control of some fortresses. However, in the conditions of absolutism, the policy of the monarch plays the main role. The actions of subsequent rulers were aimed at actually revising the provisions of the edict until its complete abolition in 1685.
5. List the contradictions in European politics at the beginning of the 17th century. Which ones were the most important?
Contradictions:
Struggle against the hegemony of the Habsburgs in Europe;
Confessional conflict in Europe.
The most significant was the religious conflict between Catholics and Protestants. Orthodox Russia participated in this contradiction as a third force, but its actions were limited to neighboring Rzeczpospolita and Sweden. By this time, European countries abandoned the idea of a broad coalition against the threat of the Ottoman Empire with the involvement of Russia as an ally (this idea was periodically returned to later), because this knot of conflicts remained on the periphery.
The main conflict remained between Catholics and Protestants, because it included many contradictions as early as the 16th century, and also continued to divide not only states, but subjects of one monarch (for example, the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation), served as the reason for the disobedience of subjects to the monarch.
6. What are the main stages of the Thirty Years War. What were the results of the Thirty Years War?
Bohemian-Palatinate period (1618-1624);
Danish period (1625-1629);
Swedish period (1630-1635);
Franco-Swedish period (1635-1648).
The second part of the question is the same as the next question.
7. What were the results of the Thirty Years War?
Confessional affiliation has almost ceased to be a factor in European politics;
The economy began to play a larger than before role in European politics along with dynastic interests;
The principle of the sovereignty of the state was finally established, also in the religious question;
A new system of international relations has taken shape - the Westphalian;
The Habsburgs retained most of their lands, but their position in Europe weakened;
France received a number of lands along the Rhine;
Sweden received land on the southern coast of the Baltic Sea;
Protestantism in the Czech Republic was completely destroyed, but Germany continued to be divided along confessional lines;
The lands of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation, where most of the hostilities took place, were completely devastated by the war, and the empire for a long time ceased to play an important role in economics, politics, etc.
8. What were the features of the Westphalian system of international relations? Are its principles still valid today?
The Westphalian peace system aimed to end the decades-long conflict. Many of its mechanisms were aimed at minimizing confessional conflicts. They are not relevant today in a secular society. But some of the principles enshrined then are still in effect, for example, the sovereignty of the government of an independent state.
Absolute monarchy is explained by modern scientists most often as the unlimited power of the sole ruler - the monarch. At the same time, the philosophical, historical and state-legal foundations of this concept are much broader.
The philosophical content of absolutism
From the point of view of philosophy, the absolute is considered to be that which is perfect and not subject to any doubt. This concept is found in ontology, and in epistemology, and in many other sections of this science. Everywhere the term "absolute" implies the highest manifestation of a process or phenomenon, as well as a certain final stage of development. The state-legal meaning of this concept is not an exception from this series.
The historical background of absolute monarchy
Absolute monarchy is a historically established form of government, the basis of which is the almost unlimited power of the ruler. It is a logical continuation of the estate-representative monarchy, when the supreme power in society, along with the king, tsar or grand duke, was represented by any legislative body, which included representatives of the highest nobility.
The reasons for the formation of absolutism in Western Europe
Chronologically absolute monarchy in Europe appears at the end of the Renaissance, when the necessary socio-economic and ideological foundations were formed for this. On the one hand, the entire society, especially the nascent bourgeoisie, was interested in strong royal power in order to overcome the internal fragmentation of the country, and on the other hand, it was at this time that the authority of the dominant Catholic Church was sharply weakened, which also leads to an increase in the influence of the central government. This is how the absolute monarchy was established in England, France, Spain and other European states.
Absolute monarchy to protect the interests of all segments of the population
Another important precondition for the emergence and further functioning of the unlimited power of the monarch was the fact that it was a strong central power that became a symbol of protecting the interests of the state both within the country and in foreign policy. The absolute monarchy, in contrast to the estate-representative, set itself the goal of developing those that correspond to the interests of the widest possible layers of the population.
The main signs of absolutism
Like any other social and political phenomenon, the unlimited power of the ruler has certain characteristics. First, an absolute monarchy is inconceivable without a developed bureaucratic apparatus, which forms the basis for promoting all decisions of the ruler, as well as for exercising control over the population. Secondly, this form of government presupposes a uniform fiscal, tax and judicial system for the entire territory of the country and unified legislation. Finally, thirdly, the development of the institutions of absolutism leads to a weakening of the influence of the Church, which is gradually losing its socio-economic and ideological significance.
Causes of the decline of absolutism in Europe
Absolute monarchy in Europe reached its peak in the 18th century, but it was then that its gradual decline began. This is due both to the activities of the French enlighteners, who strongly opposed the arbitrariness of individual people, and to the economic development of countries, when the bourgeoisie, feeling its economic power, began to demand substantial political rights.
In a quarter of a century, the 18th century, which was not as rapid as the 19th and even more so the 20th, Peter I turned Russia into a great power, not inferior in its industrial and military power to the developed European countries of that time. Peter the Great introduced Russia to the progressive achievements of Western culture, opened an outlet to the Baltic Sea, which the Moscow rulers wanted to achieve since the 16th century. The country not only entered the "threshold" of Europe, but also became the leading country in the east and north of the continent. Most of Peter's innovations have demonstrated amazing vitality. State institutions created by Peter I functioned throughout the 18th century, and some even further. Recruitment kits, introduced under Peter the Great, existed in Russia until 1874, and the Senate, Synod, Prosecutor's Office, Table of Ranks, like the Russian Empire itself, until 1917.
The Russian Empire was created:
1) with the further strengthening of serfdom, which suspended the formation of capitalist relations;
2) with the strongest tax pressure on the population. October 22, 1721 during the celebration of the Peace of Nystad (the celebrations lasted for several weeks), the Senate awarded Peter I the titles of the Great Emperor of All Russia and "Father of the Fatherland." Along with the adoption by Peter I of the title of emperor, Russia becomes an empire. The increased international prestige of the state was reflected in the fact that it was recognized as an empire by European countries: Prussia, Holland, Sweden, Denmark in 1722–1724, England and Austria in 1742, France in 1744. And later all the Russian Empire was recognized by Poland - in 1764
The reforms of Peter I marked the absolute monarchy: 1) the tsar got the opportunity to rule the country without limit and uncontrollably with the help of officials completely dependent on him; 2) the unlimited power of the monarch found legislative expression in the 20th article of the Military Regulations and the Spiritual Regulations, namely, "the power of monarchs is autocratic, which God himself commands to obey"; 3) the external expression of absolutism that has taken root in Russia is the adoption in 1721 by Peter I of the title of emperor and the name "Great"; 4) there was a bureaucratization of the administrative apparatus and its centralization; 5) the reforms of the central and local government created an outwardly harmonious hierarchy of institutions from the Senate in the center to the provincial office in the counties.
Absolutism- This is the highest form of feudal monarchy.
Typical signs of absolutism:
1) its emergence presupposes a certain level of monetary relations and large-scale industry;
2) monetary relations create the prerequisites for financing the expanded military and civil bureaucracy;
3) the emergence of large-scale industry formed the material basis for the construction of a regular army and navy;
4) the absolute monarchy represents primarily the interests of the nobility.
The difference between Russian absolutism and classical Western European:
1) it did not arise under the influence of the genesis of capitalism, the balancing of the monarch between the feudal lords and the third estate;
2) Russian absolutism was formed on a Christian-noble basis;
3) its formation was facilitated by:
- traditions of autocracy;
- strengthening the centralization of power;
- tense international situation;
- the experience of Western European absolutism.
Loading ...