MONARCHY: Absolute vs. Constitutional

During the middle ages, strong monarchs were require who could marshal military force to defend the country. The feudal outline supported the rule of monarchs through the economic backing of lords. In the 15th and 16th centuries, absolute monarchs like King enthalpy VIII and King Louis cardinal ruled England and France respectively. The words of Louis XIV demonstrate the breadth of big businessman of an absolute monarch, "You secretaries and ministers of state bequeath assist me with your counsels when I ask for them. I request and pose you to seal no orders except by my command?I order you not to sign anything, not even a passport without my command; to render account to me personally apiece day and to favor no one" (Spielvogel 524). However, abuse of power, gamy taxation, popular discontent and other factors led to a course of sentiment opposed to absolute monarchy, and in the 17th and eighteenth centuries, major revolutions would prove the contain power for such a ruler against the masses of large number.

A natural monarchy is one that fundamentally has a monarch as its figure-head, like Britain, but the parliament, pick out by the people rule the country. In other words, the people choose who runs the country and the monarch's rights and duties are outlined in a constitution. One cleverness say Hammurabi in 18th one C BC with his code of laws was a pri

In part, the intrusion of parliaments and increasing constitutional provisions helped gnaw the power of absolute monarchy. In addition, revolutions like the French renewal and Glorious Revolution in England helped fray the concept and power of absolute monarchy. During the Glorious Revolution, James II was driven from the privy and replaced by William of Orange.

After this time parliament became the supreme constituent in government and social order. As societies developed the qualify from absolute monarchy to constitutional monarchy became complete, once parliaments enacted laws, many which often limited the power and scope of the ruling monarch. In a aesthesis, the breach signified that no one, not even the monarch, was above the open up laws of the society. Further, the ancient concept of rule by divine right, which had a renewal of vitality during the middle ages in Europe, continued to erode as societies became more secular in origin.

mitive form of constitutional monarchy in that each person in society might know the laws and what was expected of them. It limited Hammurabi's power in the sense that it was already absolutely written what a man could and could not do, so Hammurabi had to follow that code when administering justice. This would be a rattling loosely limited form of absolute monarchy. In the thirteenth century the Magna Carta o
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.