CHAPTER ONE: ABSOLUTISM


Last Unit, we traced the beginning of the age of European global influence and the resulting spread of European political power, economic control, and many elements of Western culture. European influence intensified over the ensuing centuries. One significant consequence of this global presence was that events taking place in Europe were felt all over the globe.  And between the 16th and 19th centuries, European societies experienced several revolutionary changes; in fact this era (the 1500's - 1800's) is termed the "Age of Revolution". These revolutions transformed European societies and echoed throughout the world, with ripple effects still evident today.  So, even though we spend the next few weeks looking at events which initially took place in Europe, recognize, the consequences of episodes such as the Scientific Revolution, the Enlightenment, the French Revolution and especially the Industrial Revolution were (and continue to be) truly global.

Before we can discuss the turbulent and sometimes bloody waves of change about to wash over Europe, we must first outline the background and roots of Europe's Age of Revolution. We start with an overview of existing conditions in Europe on the eve of the 17th century, just prior to the series of revolutions that shook Europe. Only then can we address the reasons for, and the significance of, revolutionary challenges that followed.

The conditions for most Europeans during the 16th - 18th centuries were rooted in the dominant political and social system - absolutism.  Absolutist power and traditions determined political, social and economic conditions for European societies during the early Modern period.  Most European states between the 1500's - 1700's were ruled by absolutist monarchies; societies such as France, Spain, Austria, Prussia and Russia were deeply influenced by the structures and legacies of an absolutist society. 

An absolutist state was based on an extremely repressive political system; key features were the almost unlimited power of the monarch and deep social/economic inequality.  Absolutism enabled tremendous state power through control of money and troops.  In many cases an absolutist system did create stability through repression; however, it was a hated system which spawned violent protest and revolt.  The inherent flaws and problems of absolutist states in fact sowed the seeds of the "Age of Revolution" - the profoundly revolutionary ideas of equality and liberty emerged in direct response and as challenges to the abuses and oppression of European absolutism. To understand the Age of Revolution, therefore, you must start with the realities and problems of absolutist societies.


ABSOLUTISM


We cannot detail the political and social experience of each absolutist European state; that is the focus of a European History course. We can, however, outline in broad strokes the characteristics of an absolutist state.  The harsh realities of living in an absolutist society were the bitter experience for the majority of Europeans, millions of people, for centuries.  There were several defining features of an absolutist state:

UNLIMITED POWER

First of all, in an absolutist state, the monarch had no institutional or structural limits. There were no civil laws that s(he) was bound by, no constitution checked the power of the ruler. With the exception of religious strictures enforced by the Church, the absolutist ruler was above the law.  Since there were no legal limits or constitutional guarantees, subjects in an absolutist society had no protected rights; without an established and supreme law to guarantee protections and liberties, rights are given - and usually taken away - at the will of the monarch.

An absolutist monarch did not share power and thus was not limited by the input of other voices in the society.  In a truly absolutist state, there were no powerful representative assemblies; if assembles did exist - they were weak and easily ignored. The dominant Church in an absolutist state (whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant) did not have independent power. The state church was subservient to the monarch, for example the Russian Orthodox Church was totally obedient to the wishes of the Tzar. In some societies, the dominant Church formed an alliance with the state. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, closely cooperated with the French and Austrian monarchs in return for protection and privileges.  The Church did not have independent power and did not share or compete with the monarch; the power of the monarchy was unchecked.

The aristocracy in an absolutist state, which would seem the most likely group to oppose and check the power of the monarch, was kept away from real power -- usually the aristocracy was bought off.   In return for special privileges, the aristocracy supported and did not challenge the monarch. Some of the privileges secured by an obedient noble class included:
 
* tax immunities - thus increased wealth for the aristocracy
* legal immunities - elites were not bound by the same laws as the common folks
* exclusive right to certain professions  - for example, only aristocrats could be officers in the military or have high Church positions.

In short, in return for secured wealth, and obvious social and legal privileges, aristocrats in countries such as France and Austria accepted a weak, subservient political role, leaving real power in the hands of the monarch.

The groups who suffered the most in an absolutist state were the middle class and the poor (both urban poor and the peasantry.)  These lower classes had no rights and no power and no privileges. In fact, the lower classes bore the triple burden of a repressive monarchy, a heavier tax burden (since they were the only ones paying) and suffered from being socially subordinate to a protected state church and a privileged aristocracy; these elite paid few taxes, monopolized status and job opportunities, and escaped legal accountability. The growing frustrations of lower classes, not surprisingly, finally led to forceful challenges and fueled often violent revolutionary movements.

ECONOMIC CONTROL

An absolutist ruler had economic control over his/her subjects in two ways. The first was, of course, heavy taxation and sole decision-making power over how to spend state revenues. The other form of economic control was the policy of mercantilismMercantilism was based on the belief that the monarch had the right, and even the duty, to direct and intrude on the economy for the good of the state. Monarchs enforced state priorities in the economy through regulation and direction of economic production, for example state funding or control of commercial enterprises.  An absolutist state had a heavy-handed role in the economic affairs of its people. Those who bore the greatest tax burden and suffered from misdirected and meddlesome state intervention were the middle class and the poor.  Frustrations grew over the centuries.

MILITARY POWER

The absolutist state was supported by a large army - a standing (permanent) army. The standing army of the state vividly represented the repressive and aggressive nature of the state; it was a force that on short notice could be sent to crush peasant rebellions and carry out the aggressive agenda of a monarch. There were, however, two major problems that resulted from a standing army:

1) it was very expensive (thus requiring exhaustive and unpopular taxes from citizens);

2) a monarch with a big, expensive standing army was tempted to use it - thus leading to constant wars of aggression and territorial expansion.  These wars were costly in terms of lives and money (and again, hit the lower classes hardest.)
 

REPRESSION

An absolutist state also used social/intellectual control to prevent rebellion and cultivate loyal and submissive subjects.   Although the technology of the 16th - 18th centuries limited the degree to which the state could "watch" citizens, absolutist states such as France and Russia did build up extensive spy networks; they freely used censorship, as well as brutal imprisonment, torture and execution to stamp out dangerous ideas and silence opposition or challenges.

COSTS OF ABSOLUTISM

In an absolutist state, the justification for all of this power was simple - the state was more important than the individual, and the monarch WAS the state monarch. In the famous words attributed to France's monarch Louis XIV ... "L'etat, c'est moi!" ("The state, it is I".)  All these characteristics of an absolutist society are implied when historians refer to these absolutists systems - often called the "Old Order" or "Ancient Regime".   Absolutism did produce, for a while, a visibly powerful state. However, the costs and problems created by absolutism included constant warfare, severe inequality and injustices, and deeply-rooted fiscal problems.  Ultimately, these inherent problems produced violent revolution.

An absolutist state was fiscally unstable. It was very expensive to maintain a standing army, and the lifestyle of the absolutist monarch - those palaces and treasures that tourists now flock to see.  Yet, those with the least amount of wealth were supporting these expenses. The elite classes who actually controlled most of the country's wealth enjoyed the privilege of paying little in taxes. This meant squeezing all the money needed for the expensive state from the poor and increasingly frustrated middle class. In the short term, this meant chronic peasant uprisings and an angry middle class. Ultimately, it meant wholesale revolution.

An absolutist state was built on repression - with no room for evolutionary or gradual change. For those unhappy with the system, there were no institutional opportunities to be heard or change the system. Real reform of political repression or social inequalities was impossible; moderate reforms were impossible.  Instead, brewing dissent and complaints about political, social and economic injustices were simply crushed or suppressed by the force of the state.  Change, then, will take place in the only way possible - through dramatic, escalating violent upheaval and revolution.

EXAMPLES

Your textbook describes the most famous examples of the absolutist system, including the most influential states of France and Russia.  Although French and Russian monarchs acquired their power through different paths, both states exemplified the power and expansion that absolutism enabled AND the problems mentioned above.  For example, the French state, under absolutist Louis XIV the "Sun-King (1643-1715) was impressive. France ruled a global empire and was expanding into Central Europe.  Wealthy and powerful, France became the cultural heart of Europe - the most brilliant displays of art and literature were to be found in Paris.  French became the "universal" language of Europe. France's prominence represented a shift from the cultural dominance Renaissance Italy had enjoyed.  By the 16th and 18th centuries, France was the center of Europe, and the absolutist monarch was the center of France.  (As a popular saying expressed "...when Louis (XIV) sneezed, all Europe caught cold.")  The luxuries and power centered around the court life at the Palace of Versailles ; these epitomized the glories and flaunted wealth of absolutism.  And yet, the glow of absolutist France was built on the shaky foundations of repression, severe inequalities, and the crushing poverty of the peasants. By the end of the 18th century, France - which represented the height of absolutism - was the first of the absolutist systems to collapse in the cataclysmic upheaval of the French Revolution.

Far to the East, Russian monarchs built their absolutist rule based on the historical precedent and foundations of ancient Byzantine emperors, two centuries of Mongol repression, and the brutal policies of the early Russian rulers like Ivan the Terrible (1547-1584). The cost for the Russian people was immense suffering.  Russian Tzars (a Slavic word for Caesar) ruled over an extremely repressive absolutist empire in which the Russian Orthodox Church functioned as an arm of the state and aristocrats were nothing more than glorified civil servants (with wealth and privilege but no real power.) There was virtually no growth of a middle class, and Russian peasants were the most brutalized and exploited in all of Europe.  In fact in Russia, millions were still serfs - tied to the land and treated as chattel - until the middle of the 1800's!  Well into the 19th and even early 20th centuries, even as other absolutist monarchs faltered or fell, the Tzars held tight to their repressive power until finally the explosive and globally transforming Russian Revolution of 1917!

SUMMARY

During the "Age of Absolutism", absolutist European states built-up armed might, expanded empires throughout the globe, and achieved great wealth and cultural glory.  However, these achievements were built on the backs of peasants and serfs, and at the expense of an increasingly angry middle class.  In hindsight, the revolutions and dramatic upheaval that were to come were inevitable.

Before launching the Age of Revolution, however, we must recognize that while absolutism was the norm for most of Western, Central and Eastern Europe, there was an alternative political model emerging in Europe between the 16th - 18th centuries - constitutional government.  Although only at first only seen in a few European countries, constitutionalism played a critical role in paving the way for revolutionary challenges to absolutism and ultimately, enabling revolutionary change.


Interesting Related Web Sites

ABSOLUTISM
INTERNET MOD.
HISTORY SOURCEBOOK:  ABSOLUTISM


GO TO CHAPTER TWO
BACK TO UNIT THREE PAGE