Judgment Day In Politics Derived from the Holy Writ, Jacquest Benigne Bousset endorses absolute monarchy, insisting that it is both scripturally mandated and historically justified. His treatise describes both the rights and responsibilities of monarchs who, according to divine right theory, have been sent to carry out God's will on earth. In many ways the French king Louis XIV serves as a living example of Bousset's divine right king, but he fell short of a perfect embodiment of this monarch because, while he certainly accepted the rights of "God's lieutenant," he did not fully embrace the responsibilities of restraint required of the divine right king. Louis clearly understands Bousset's mandate that the king demand conformity and obedience. In the third paragraph of our excerpt, Bousset states that "the person of the king is sacred, and .
Louis XIII (1601-1643) and Louis XIV (1638-1718) was a father son pair of kings for the French, who both believed to rule by divine right, but they differed in how they used their religious factor in their country and how they managed their kingdoms finances. Louis XIII relied on his Cardinal who helped him rule and manage the kingdom. While Louis XIV trusted only himself to rule his Monarchy. This led to different outcomes in their monarchies. Louis XIII and Louis XIV both claimed to rule by divine right.
Henry VIII’s foreign policy between the years of 1509 – 1529 revolved around his fantasy of becoming a famous “warrior King.” His main aim was to conquer France, as he believed that the French crown was rightfully his, he was not however successful in this aim, despite capturing obscure towns in France such as Tournai. Henry went through three phases of foreign policy during these years: Initial aggression in his first French war between ending in 1514, the following a rather unsuccessful French campaign, entered a stage of diplomacy where he attempted to gain allies and achieve European peace through the treaty of London, 1518. But it can be argued that little success came from this period either with very few significant agreements made in the Treaty of London or the Field of the Cloth of gold except for minor prestige for Henry and England, but at huge costs. As well as this, any hopes of finally conquering France in Henry’s second aggressive phase were crushed due to financial and political obstacles. Henry was aware that the current French king, Louis XII was dying and wished to avoid war at all costs, as he would not be able to guide his country in his old, weak age, Henry realised that this was the ideal situation in which for him to launch an attack, he also had the support of the nobility, who were raring to have a fight.
The sources do suggest that Scotland was a threat towards Henry VIII’s ambitions in France , however only to some extent. Sources 1 and 3 refer to Scotland’s potential to destroy Henrys campaigns in France through invasion and stop him achieving his aim in taking back the regions of Terrain and Thoraine. Source 2 on the otherhand shows us that Henrys troops were strong enough to prevent a Scottish invasion even in his absence, and that he had the support of his first wife Catherine of Aragon. who is acting as regent in henry’s absence, Catherin would have wanted to please henry to keep his moral high as he was also in a battle in France at the time. source 2 shows us that the Scottish had lost in the battle of Flodden in 1513, at a time when henry was absent form his country in France.
In order to keep the Huguenots peaceful, Henry knew he would have to settle them in a way that tackled their demands. Finally, one thing that Henry was always desperate for was the loyalty of all his people, united as one. The phrase, ‘One king, one faith, one law’ was particularly popular in France at the time, and a saying that Henry wished to use in his own methods of ruling. To conclude, Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes in 1598 so as to help the ordinary people living in France at the time whose lives had been completely twisted upside down as a result of the religious wars. He also wanted to keep peace with the
The King being the most important figure in England assumed he had all authority within England as he firmly believed in the ‘Divine Rights of Kings’ which is the belief that God has given the King his authority and so the King lives through God’s ‘legacy’. However, little did he know that his life would soon be very different to how it was. Charles’ army had been dissolved, and you would think that Charles should just compromise with Parliament as it would make everything a whole lot easier, but he knew there were divisions between Parliament which he then exploited. Being defated from Parliament and a superior New Model Army, the King thought he could surrender to Scotland and even that didn’t work out as he planned. ‘’In fact, the Scots took advantage of Charles and sold him to Parliament for £400,000 in January 1647’’.
Henry needed the money for power so that he could then build a stronger army and fight more wars. This would then show that he was a powerful king. Money is not the most important reason but it is an important reason. Another reason he broke from the Roman Church is because he wanted power and control over his people. Henry wanted to make sure that he was in total control of England so he needed to get rid of anyone that might threaten his position including the pope.
Both the American Revolution and French Revolution were started in order to fight against their respective political leaders in order to end monarchial rule and start republican governments. The need to set up a stable and balanced government that protected the natural rights of its citizens was the basis of these wars. Following the end of the American Revolution and the failure of the Articles of Confederation, the Americans wrote the modern Constitution of the United States, heavily based off of Montesquieu’s idea of a divided government. The French Revolution began similarly in that some members of its government believed that they were not equally represented. After the French Revolution though, the republic slowly began shifting to a totalitarian regime, first under the Committee of Public Safety and then completely under Napoleon Bonaparte .The facts show that the American Revolution was more successful in establishing a stable and long-lasting republican government that started a precedent for Europe, while the French Revolution’s republic failed to last, being turned into a totalitarian regime.
The evidence suggests that the most important reason was Henry’s desire for a male heir to his throne. This is because he would keep the family name running throughout generations. Subsequent to this, they would gain power and control over the country to have a higher social status. The desire for a son was more important than the State of the Church, power, need for money or Anne Boleyn because his need for a son would have enabled him to have more power and Henry would have gained money by having the power over the monasteries. By having power, Henry would have control of the Church, enabling him to correct the State of the Church as rules were not being obeyed.
Ironically, Edmund Burke sympathized with the colonists in North America during the period of turmoil there, but he did not support the complete social revolution which took place in France during the last years of the 1700s. Thomas Paine, on the other hand, supported both the French and American revolutions. Paine’s writings are often credited with inspiring many of the American colonists to rebel against their mother country. The colonists, in turn, were said to have been a source of inspiration for the French lower classes. Burke simply did not believe in overthrowing the social order or existing French monarchy.