Absolute monarchy
|
States under absolute monarchies are shown in purple |
Absolute monarchy is a
monarchical form of government where the ruler has the power to rule his or her land or
country and its citizens freely, with no
laws or legally-organized direct opposition in force. Although some religious authority may be able to discourage the monarch from some acts and the sovereign is expected to act according to custom, in an absolute monarchy there is no
constitution or body of law above what is decreed by the
sovereign (
king or
queen). As a theory of
civics, absolute monarchy puts total trust in well-
bred and well-trained monarchs raised for the role from birth.
In theory, an absolute monarch has total power over his or her people and land, including the
aristocracy and sometimes the
clergy (see
caesaropapism). In practice, absolute monarchs have often found their power limited.
Some
monarchies have powerless or symbolic parliaments and other governmental bodies that the monarch can alter or dissolve at will. Despite effectively being absolute monarchies, they are technically
constitutional monarchies due to the existence of a constitution and national canon of law.
True absolute monarchies
The remaining states that are
technical absolute monarchies in the modern world are
Bhutan,
Brunei,
Oman,
Saudi Arabia,
Swaziland, and the
United Arab Emirates. One might also add that the
Vatican City state, headed by an
elected monarch who has
absolute power, is also an absolute monarchy. The King of Bhutan,
Jigme Singye Wangchuk, has voluntarily announced reforms which would usher in constitutional monarchy and a two-party
democracy by 2008. It is not clear how much power King Wangchuk or his successor Prince
Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck would retain in the new system.
Constitutional monarchies with powerful monarchs
In
Jordan and
Tonga, the monarch, although not absolute, retains considerable power.
Nepal was run by King
Gyanendra as an absolute monarchy from 2002 but following the 2006
Loktantra Andolan democracy has been restored. In
Liechtenstein, nearly two-thirds of the tiny principality's electorate have agreed to give
Prince Hans Adam veto power he asked for. Although this does not make Hans Adam an absolute monarch, it makes him closer to being an absolute monarch than almost all other royals in Europe since the Tsar.
In theory, Queen
Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is one of the most powerful heads of state in the world despite being a constitutional monarch because she has the right at anytime to use her executive power and
Royal Prerogative which include the dismissal of ministers, dissolution of parliament and declaring war and peace, which also gives her the power of leading her armed forces. Thus making her the most powerful monarch in Europe, even more so than
Prince Hans Adam. So in theory her powers are vast but she rarely has any need to use them.
Many of the nations in the
Middle East, such as
Qatar and
Kuwait, are said to be absolute monarchies, as their monarchs continue to hold great power under their
constitutions. However, in these cases there are also
parliaments and other bodies that advise and have the power to curtail the monarch.
The
theory of absolute monarchy developed in the late
Middle Ages from
feudalism during which monarchs were still very much first among equals among the
nobility. With the creation of centralized administrations and standing armies backed by expensive artillery, the power of the monarch gradually increased relative to the nobles, and from this was created the theory of absolute monarchy.
Divine rights
Early Absolutists advocated the theory of
Divine Right of Kings to justify their position. In the
16th century, monarchs took advantage of the clergy's weakness during the
Reformation to impose their will. They declared to have the ability to decide the religion of their subjects.
Henry VIII of England seized the property of the Catholic church while France claimed "Gallican liberties". These new monarchs claimed to be responsible solely to God. They attempted to eliminate or marginalize customs, institutions, and laws that held their predecessors in check. They believed that God gave them the right to supreme rule and sovereignty over their land. Those that claimed to have the divine right of kings often ruled in an unfair and egotistical manner, much like a modern
dictator, and many were overthrown. One of the most famous examples of a monarch claiming his divine right to rule was
Louis XIV of France.
Thomas Hobbes
Hobbes theorized that all the people should invest their power and rights in a "sovereign", in what was a seminal work of
social contract theory,
Leviathan. Without a sovereign, man lived in a
state of nature which was governed by the passions of man, which manifested themselves in an all-against-all state of war; life in this state of nature was, for Hobbes,
"solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short". Through contract, each individual would give up his natural rights in order to be under the protection of the sovereign, who would secure the peace and defence of each individual. By surrendering one's rights to the sovereign, one gave up any right to rebel, and indeed, could not logically rebel, as the individual was a constituent part of the sovereign, and one's rights could not be separated from it. The sovereign, thus, by definition only acted in the interest of the subject. The contract could only be broken when the sovereign could no longer provide for the peace and defence of the subject; without its raison d'etre, the sovereign simply ceased to exist; man reverted to the state of nature until a new contract could be made.
While the "sovereign" is assumed to always be a monarch, it merely indicates an absolute government, which could take the form of a republic or even a democracy. Hobbes himself favoured a hereditary monarch for reasons of stability.
The leviathan state, and most importantly the absolute monarchy, would later be criticised by
John Locke in the
Two Treatises of Government. Locke's conception of the
state of nature vastly differed from Hobbes, as did his conclusion on the rights of the governed. Despite these differences, both works were later viewed by some scholars (most notably
C. B. Macpherson) as seminal examples of
possessive individualism, with the function of the state being to provide a secure environment in which individuals can enjoy property rights.
Enlightened despotism
During
the Enlightenment, the theory of absolute monarchy was supported by many French
philosophes as a form of
enlightened despotism. The philosophers argued that only an enlightened monarch can introduce progressive reforms to curtail feudalism and reactionary clergy. However, it must be pointed out that while
Louis XV and
Louis XVI were absolute monarchs in theory, they had to contend with many private interests, some of which opposed reforms, such as the great
nobility and the
parlements. Enlightened despotism was discredited with the fall of
Napoleon.
The popularity of the notion of absolute monarchy declined substantially after the
French Revolution and
American Revolution, which promoted theories of government based on
popular sovereignty.
One of the best-known historical examples of an absolute monarch was
Louis XIV of
France (as stated above - see "divine rights")). His famous statement,
L'état, c'est moi (I am the state), summarises the fundamental principle of absolute monarchy (sovereignty being vested in one individual). Although often criticised for his extravagance (his great legacy is the huge
Palace of Versailles), he reigned over France for a long period, and some historians consider him a successful absolute monarch.
Until 1905, the Tsars of
Russia also governed as absolute monarchs.
Peter the Great reduced the power of the
nobility and strengthened the central power of the
Tsar, establishing a bureaucracy and a
police state. This tradition of absolutism was built on by
Catherine the Great and other later Tsars. 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.
Throughout much of history, the
Divine Right of Kings was the theological justification for absolute monarchy. Many European kings, such as the Tsars of Russia, claimed that they held supreme autocratic power by divine right, and that their subjects had no right to limit their power.
James I and
Charles I of
England tried to import this principle into England; Charles I's attempts at establishing absolutist government along European lines was a major cause of the
English Civil War. By the 19th century, the Divine Right was regarded as an obsolete theory in most countries, except in
Russia where it was still given credence as the official justification for the Tsar's power.
*
Constitutional Monarchy*
Thomas Hobbes*
Democracy
