Absolute monarchy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series of articles on

Monarchy

Central concepts[show]

Types[show]

History[show]

Related topics[show]

Politics portal

Part of the Politics series

Basic forms of government

Power structure

Separation

Associated state

Dominion

Chiefdom

Federalism

Federation

Confederation

Devolution
Integration

Empire
Hegemony

Unitary state

Power source

Democracy
power of many

Direct
Representative

Semi

others
Oligarchy
power of few

Aristocracy
Military junta

Plutocracy

Stratocracy

Timocracy

Theocracy

Kritarchy

Particracy
Autocracy
power of one

Despotism

Illiberal democracy

Semi-authoritarian

Dictatorship
Hybrids

Anocracy

Power ideology

Monarchy vs. Republic

socio-political ideologies

Absolute

Constitutional

Directorial

Legalist

Parliamentary

Presidential

Authoritarian vs. Libertarian

socio-economic ideologies

Capitalism

Colonialism

Communism

Distributism

Feudalism

Socialism
Anarchism vs. Statism
civil-liberties ideologies

Anarchy

Minarchy

Totalitarianism
Global vs. Local
geo-cultural ideologies

Central
City-state

National unity

World

Politics portal

Absolute monarchy or despotic monarchy[1][2] is a monarchical form of government in which

the monarch has absolute power among his or her people. An absolute monarch wields
unrestricted political power over the sovereign state and its people. Absolute monarchies are
often hereditary but other means of transmission of power are attested. Absolute monarchy differs
from constitutional monarchy, in which a monarch's authority in a constitutional monarchy is legally
bounded or restricted by a constitution.[3]
In theory, the absolute monarch exercises total power over the land, yet in practice the monarchy is
counterbalanced by political groups from among the social classes and castes of the realm, such as
the aristocracy, clergy, and middle and lower classes.
Some monarchies have weak or symbolic legislatures and other governmental bodies that the
monarch can alter or dissolve at will. Countries where the monarch still maintains absolute power
are Brunei,[4] Qatar,[5] Oman,[6] Saudi Arabia,[7] the individual emirates composing the United Arab
Emirates,[8] Swaziland,[9] and Vatican City.[10]
Contents
[hide]

1Historical examples
o

1.1Outside Europe

1.2Europe

1.2.1France

1.2.2Denmark-Norway

1.2.3Prussia

1.2.4Russia

1.2.5Sweden
2Contemporary monarchies

2.1Saudi Arabia

3Scholarship

4See also

5References

6Further reading

Historical examples[edit]

Outside Europe[edit]
In Ancient Egypt, the Pharaoh wielded absolute power over the country and was considered a living
god by his people. In ancient Mesopotamia, many rulers of Assyria, Babylonia and Sumeria were
absolute monarchs as well. In ancient and medieval India, rulers of
the Maurya, Satahavana, Gupta and Chalukya Empires, as well as other major and minor empires,
were considered absolute monarchs. In the Khmer Empire, the kings were called "Devaraja" and
"Chakravartin" (King of the world), and exercised absolute power over the empire and people.
Throughout Chinese history, many emperors and one empress wielded absolute power through
the Mandate of Heaven. In pre-Columbian America, the Inca Empire was ruled by a Sapa Inca, who
was considered the son of Inti, the sun god and absolute ruler over the people and nation.

Europe[edit]
Throughout much of European history, the divine right of kings was the theological justification for
absolute monarchy. Many European monarchs, such as those of Russia, claimed supreme
autocratic power by divine right, and that their subjects had no rights to limit their power. James
VI of Scotland (later also James I of England) and his son Charles I of Scotland and England tried to
import this principle. Charles I's attempt to enforce episcopal polity on the Church of Scotland led to
rebellion by the Covenanters and the Bishops' Wars, then fears that Charles I was attempting to
establish absolutist government along European lines was a major cause of the English Civil War,
despite the fact that he did rule this way for 11 years starting in 1629, after dissolving the Parliament
of England for a time. By the 19th century, the Divine Right was regarded as an obsolete theory in
most countries in the Western world, except in Russia where it was still given credence as the official
justification for the Czar's power.
There is a considerable variety of opinion by historians on the extent of absolutism among European
monarchs. Some, such as Perry Anderson, argue that quite a few monarchs achieved levels of
absolutist control over their states, while historians such as Roger Mettam dispute the very concept
of absolutism.[11] In general, historians who disagree with the appellation of absolutism argue that
most monarchs labeled as absolutist exerted no greater power over their subjects than any
other non-absolutist rulers, and these historians tend to emphasize the differences between the
absolutist rhetoric of monarchs and the realities of the effective use of power by these absolute
monarchs. Renaissance historian William Bouwsma summed up this contradiction:
Nothing so clearly indicates the limits of royal power as the fact that governments were perennially in
financial trouble, unable to tap the wealth of those most able to pay, and likely to stir up a costly
revolt whenever they attempted to develop an adequate income.[12]
William Bouwsma
France[edit]
Further information: Absolute monarchy in France

Louis XIV of France

A widely held story about Louis XIV of France (16381715) is that he proclaimed "L'tat, c'est moi"
("I am the State!"). What Louis did say was: "The interests of the state come first. When one gives
these priority, one labors for one's own good. These advantages to the state redounds to one's
glory." Although often criticized for his extravagances, such as the Palace of Versailles, he reigned
over France for a long period, and some historians consider him a successful absolute monarch.
More recently, revisionist historians have questioned whether Louis' reign should be considered
'absolute', given the reality of the balance of power between the monarch and the nobility.[13]
The King of France concentrated in his person legislative, executive, and judicial powers. He was
the supreme judicial authority. He could condemn men to death without the right of appeal. It was
both his duty to punish offenses and stop them from being committed. From his judicial authority
followed his power both to make laws and to annul them.[14]
One of his steps in creating an absolute monarchy in France was to build the Palace of Versailles,
where he lived with many of his nobles and other important people, in order to control and watch
over them.[15]
Denmark-Norway[edit]
Absolutism was underpinned by a written constitution for the first time in Europe in the
1665 Kongeloven ("King's Law") ofDenmark-Norway, who ordered that the Monarch shall from this
day forth be revered and considered the most perfect and supreme person on the Earth by all his
subjects, standing above all human laws and having no judge above his person, neither in spiritual
nor temporal matters, except God alone.[16][17] This law consequently authorized the king to abolish all
other centers of power. Most important was the abolition of the Council of the Realm.
Prussia[edit]
In Brandenburg-Prussia, the concept of absolute monarch took a notable turn from the above with its
emphasis on the monarch as the "first servant of the state", but it also echoed many of the important
characteristics of Absolutism. Frederick William (r. 16401688), known as the Great Elector, used
the uncertainties of the final stages of the Thirty Years' War[citation needed] to consolidate his territories into
the dominant kingdom in northern Germany, whilst increasing his power over his subjects. His
actions largely originated the militaristic streak of the Hohenzollern.

In 1653 the Diet of Brandenburg met for the last time and gave Frederick William the power to raise
taxes without its consent, a strong indicator of absolutism. Frederick William enjoyed support from
the nobles, who enabled the Great Elector to undermine the Diet and other representative
assemblies. The leading families saw their future in cooperation with the central government and
worked to establish absolutist power.
The most significant indicator of the nobles' success was the establishment of two tax rates one for
the cities and the other for the countryside to the great advantage of the latter, which the nobles
ruled. The nobles served in the upper levels of the elector's army and bureaucracy, but they also
won new prosperity for themselves. The support of the Elector enabled the imposition of serfdom
and the consolidation of land holdings into vast estates which provided for their wealth.
They became known as Junkers (from the German for young lord, junger Herr). Frederick William
faced resistance from representative assemblies and long-independent cities in his realm. City
leaders often revolted at the imposition of Electorate authority. The last notable effort was the
uprising of the city of Knigsbergwhich allied with the Estates General of Prussia to refuse to pay
taxes. Frederick William crushed this revolt in 1662, by marching into the city with thousands of
troops. A similar approach was used with the towns of Cleves.[18]
Russia[edit]
Until 1905 the Tsars of Russia governed as absolute monarchs. Peter I the Great reduced the power
of the Russian nobility and strengthened the central power of the Czars, establishing a bureaucracy
and a police state. This tradition of absolutism, known as Tsarist autocracy, was expanded
by Catherine II the Great and her descendants. Although Alexander II made some reforms and
established an independent judicial system, Russia did not have a representative assembly or a
constitution until the 1905 Revolution. However, the concept of absolutism was so ingrained in
Russia that the Russian Constitution of 1906 still described the Czar as an autocrat. Russia became
the last European country (excluding Vatican City) to abolish absolutism. The only one to do so as
late as the 20th century (theOttoman Empire drafted its first constitution in 1877).
Sweden[edit]
The form of government instituted in Sweden under King Charles XI and passed on to his
son, Charles XII is commonly referred to as absolute monarchy; however, the Swedish monarch was
never absolute in the sense that he wielded arbitrary power. The monarch still ruled under the law
and could only legislate in agreement with the Riksdag of the Estates; rather, the absolutism
introduced was the monarch's ability to run the government unfettered by the privy council, contrary
to earlier practice. The absolute rule of Charles XI was instituted by the crown and the Riksdag in
order to carry out the Great Reduction which would have been made impossible by the privy council
which comprised the high nobility. After the death of Charles XII in 1718, the system of absolute rule
was largely blamed for the ruination of the realm in the Great Northern War, and the reaction tipped
the balance of power to the other extreme end of the spectrum, ushering in the Age of Liberty. After
half a century of largely unrestricted parliamentary rule proved just as ruinous, King Gustav III seized
back royal power in the coup d'tat of 1772, and later once again abolished the privy council under
the Union and Security Act in 1789, which, in turn, was rendered void in 1809 when Gustav IV
Adolf was deposed in a coup and the constitution of 1809 was put in its place. The years between
1789 and 1809, then, are also referred to as a period of absolute monarchy.

Contemporary monarchies[edit]
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this
article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and
removed. (May 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The popularity of the notion of absolute monarchy declined substantially after the French Revolution,
which promoted theories of government based on popular sovereignty.
Many nations formerly with absolute monarchies, such as Jordan, Kuwait and Morocco, have moved
towards constitutional monarchy, although in some cases the monarch retains tremendous power, to
the point that the parliament's influence on political life is negligible.
In Bhutan, the government moved from absolute monarchy to constitutional monarchy following
planned parliamentary elections to the Tshogdu in 2003, and the election of a National Assembly in
2008. Nepal had several swings between constitutional rule and direct rule related to the Nepalese
Civil War, the Maoist insurgency, and the 2001 Nepalese royal massacre, with the Nepalese
monarchy being abolished on May 28, 2008. In Tonga, the king had majority control of the
parliament until 2010.
On the other hand, Liechtenstein has moved towards expanding the power of the monarch:
the Prince of Liechtenstein was given expanded powers after areferendum amending
the Constitution of Liechtenstein in 2003, which led the BBC to describe the prince as an "absolute
monarch again".Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help

page). |- |

Brunei Darussalam |

48 years, 335 days|| |- |

Sultanate of Oman |

||HM Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah|4 October 1967||

||HM Sultan Qaboos bin Said |23

July 1970||46 years, 42 days||Hereditary||[19][20]|- |

State of Qatar |
||HH Emir Tamim
[21]
bin Hamad |25 June 2013||3 years, 70 days|| Hereditary|| |- |
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia |

||CTHM King Salman bin Abdulaziz |23 January 2015||1 year, 224 days|| Hereditary

and elective||[22] |- |

Kingdom of Swaziland |

||HM King Mswati III |25 April 1986||

30 years, 131 days||Hereditary and elective||[23] |- |

Vatican City State |
||
[24]
HH Pope Francis|13 March 2013||3 years, 174 days||Ex officio|| |- |
United Arab Emirates |

||HH President Khalifa bin Zayed |3 November 2004||11 years, 305 days||Elective
and hereditary||[25] |- |}
Saudi Arabia[edit]

Salman, King of Saudi Arabia and Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques.

Main article: Politics of Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy,[7] although, according to the Basic Law of Saudi
Arabia adopted by royal decree in 1992, the king must comply with Shari'a (Islamic law) and
the Qur'an. The Qur'an and the corpus of Sunnah (traditions of the ProphetMuhammad) are declared
to be the Kingdom's constitution, but no written modern constitution has ever been written for Saudi
Arabia, which remains one of two Arab nations where no national elections have ever taken place
since its founding,[26] the other being Qatar. No political parties or national elections are
permitted[7] and according to The Economist's 2010 Democracy Index, the Saudi government is the
seventh most authoritarian regime from among the 167 countries rated. [27]

Scholarship[edit]

Anthropology, sociology, and ethology as well as various other disciplines such as political
science attempt to explain the rise of absolute monarchy ranging from extrapolation generally, to
certain Marxist explanations in terms of the class struggle as the underlying dynamic of human
historical development generally and absolute monarchy in particular.
In the 17th century, French legal theorist Jean Domat defended the concept of absolute monarchy in
works such as "On Social Order and Absolute Monarchy", citing absolute monarchy as preserving
natural order as God intended.[28]
According to Norbert Elias's The Civilizing Process (1939), monarchs such as Louis XIV could enjoy
such great power because of the structure of the societies at that time: more precisely, they could
play off against each other two rival classes, namely the rising bourgeoisie, who grew wealthy from
commerce and industrial production, and the nobility, who lived off the land and administrative
functions.