For a long time there has been a discussion about the conditions and time of the emergence of absolute monarchy in the West, its attitude to social classes, in particular to the bourgeoisie, about the different stages of its development, about the similarities and differences between Russian autocracy and Western absolutism, as well as about its historical significance.
Absolutism (from the Latin word "absolutus" - "unlimited", "independent"), or absolute monarchy - the last form of the feudal state that arose during the period of the birth of capitalism and the decomposition of feudal relations.
Features of absolutism can be identified as follows. The head of state is considered the main source of legislative and executive power (the latter is exercised by the apparatus subordinate to him). The monarch manages the state treasury, sets taxes.
Other main features of the policy of absolutism are the greatest degree of centralization of the state under feudalism, a developed bureaucracy (tax, judicial, etc.). The latter also includes the police and a large active army. Characteristic feature of absolutismis as follows: the activity of the representative bodies characteristic of the estate monarchy in its conditions loses its significance and ceases.
Absolute monarchs, as opposed to feudal landowners, considered the service nobility as their main social support. However, in order to ensure independence from this class as a whole, they did not neglect the support of the bourgeoisie, which was still emerging at that time, did not claim power, but was economically strong and capable of opposing the interests of the feudal lords with their own.
The Meaning of Absolutism
The role of absolutism in history is not easy to assess. At a certain stage, the kings began to fight the separatism of the feudal nobility, destroyed the remnants of the former political fragmentation, subordinated the church to the state, contributed to the development of capitalist relations and the country's unity in the economic sphere, the process of formation of national states and nations. A policy of mercantilism was carried out, trade wars were waged, a new class was supported - the bourgeoisie.
However, according to some researchers, absolutism acted for the benefit of the bourgeoisie only as long as it was in the interests of the nobility, which received income from the economic development of the state in the form of taxes (feudal rent), greatly increased, as well as from revitalization of economic life in general. But the increase in resources and economic opportunities was mainly used to strengthen the military power of countries. This was necessary in order to suppress the large-scale popularmovement, as well as for external military expansion.
Features of absolutism in France
Characteristic for most European countries (with various modifications) features of absolutism most clearly embodied in France. Here in the late XV - early XVI centuries. the first elements of this form of state appeared. In the time of Richelieu (between 1624 and 1642), who was the first minister of King Louis XIII, and especially of Louis XIV (1643-1715), absolute monarchy reached its peak. King Louis XIV expressed the essence of this form of government with the following simple definition: "The State is me!".
Absolutism in other countries
Specific features of absolutism in England (in its classical period, that is, during the reign of Elizabeth Tudor, 1558-1603) - the preservation of the current parliament, the absence of a standing army and the weakness of the bureaucracy in the field.
In Spain, where elements of bourgeois relations could not develop in the 16th century, the main features of the policy of enlightened absolutism gradually degenerated into despotism.
In Germany, which was fragmented at that time, it took shape not on a national scale, but within specific territories of various principalities (princely absolutism).
The main features of enlightened absolutism, characteristic of some European countries duringsecond half of the 18th century, discussed below. This form of government as a whole was not homogeneous. The features and traits of absolutism in Europe depended largely on the correlation of forces between the bourgeoisie and the nobility, on the degree of influence on politics by bourgeois elements. Thus, in Russia, the Austrian monarchy, Germany, the position of bourgeois elements was significantly lower than in France and England.
Absolutism in our country
The formation of absolutism in Russia was very interesting. Some researchers believe that the constitution adopted in 1993 endowed the president with powers that can be compared with the power of an absolute monarch, and call the current form of government democratic autocracy. Name the main features of absolutism, and you will see that such thoughts are not unfounded. Although this may be a bit of an exaggeration.
Russian absolutism did not arise on the same social basis as in Western Europe. Since at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries (when the signs of absolute monarchy finally took hold) bourgeois relations were undeveloped in Russia, there was no balance between the nobility and the bourgeoisie.
The formation of absolutism in Russia began largely due to the foreign policy factor, and therefore only one nobility was its support. This is an important characteristic feature of absolutism in our country. The external danger constantly looming over Russia required a strong centralized authority and the rapid adoption of important decisions. However, there was also a restrictive trend. Boyars (land aristocracy),having a strong economic position, it sought to exert its influence on the adoption of certain political decisions, as well as, if possible, participate in this process itself.
It is necessary to note one more feature of absolutism in Russia. Veche traditions continued to operate in the country (that is, democracy), the roots of which can be found even during the existence of the Novgorod Republic and the Old Russian state. They found their expression in the activities of Zemsky Sobors (from 1549 to 1653).
The period from the second half of the 16th to the first half of the 17th century was marked by the struggle of these two trends that existed in our country. For a long time, the result of this confrontation was unclear, since the victory was alternately won by one side, then the other. Under Tsar Ivan the Terrible, as well as during the reign of Boris Godunov, it would seem that it was won by an absolutist tendency, according to which the maximum power prerogatives were in the hands of the monarch. But during the Time of Troubles and the reign of Mikhail Romanov (1613-1645), the restrictive tendency prevailed, the influence of the Zemsky Sobors and the Boyar Duma increased, without the support of which Mikhail Romanov did not issue a single law.
Serfdom and absolutism
The establishment of serfdom, which finally took shape in 1649, was a turning point, thanks to which the absolutist tendency won. After it was finally legally fixed, the nobility became completely dependent on the central authority, which was represented by the monarch. She alone was ableensure the dominance of the nobles over the peasants, keep the latter in obedience.
But in exchange for this, the nobility was forced to renounce their claims to personal participation in government and recognized themselves as a servant of the monarch. This was the payment for services from the authorities. The nobles received permanent income and power over the peasants in exchange for giving up their claims in state administration. Therefore, it is not surprising that almost immediately after the legal registration of serfdom, the convocations of Zemsky Sobors ceased. In full force, the last of them took place in 1653.
Thus, the choice was made, and for the sake of economic interests, the nobles sacrificed political ones. The absolutist tendency won. The registration of serfdom led to another important consequence: since there were no conditions for development (for example, the market for free labor force disappeared), the formation of bourgeois relations was sharply slowed down. Therefore, the bourgeoisie in the country for a long time did not develop into a separate social class, and, consequently, the social support of absolutism could only be of the nobility.
Attitude towards law and law in Russia
Another striking feature of the absolute monarchy in the state was the attitude towards law and law. The choice in the ratio of non-legal and legal means was made unambiguously in favor of the former. The personal arbitrariness of the monarch and his inner circle became the main method of government. This began as early as the reign of Ivan the Terrible, and in the 17th century, after the final transition to absolute monarchy, there was littlechanged.
One can, of course, object that there was a code of laws - the Cathedral Code. However, in practice, the monarch (Peter I, Alexei Mikhailovich and others) and senior government officials were not guided in their actions by the requirements of laws, did not consider themselves bound by them.
The main method of governing the country is military force and brute coercion. It is impossible to deny the fact that during the reign of Peter I, quite a lot of laws were adopted relating to almost all areas of government of the country (Table of Ranks, Military Article, regulations of the colleges, General Regulations). But they were nevertheless intended exclusively for subjects, the sovereign himself did not consider himself bound by these laws. In fact, the practice of decision-making under this tsar was not much different from that under the reign of Ivan the Terrible. The only source of power was still the will of the monarch.
Attitude towards law and law in other countries
One cannot say that in this Russia was so different from the Western countries (name the features of absolutism, and you will be convinced of this). Louis XIV of France (considered a classic absolute monarch) also used voluntarism and arbitrariness.
But with all the contradictions, absolutism in Western Europe nevertheless took the path of actively involving legal means in regulating various social relations. Between the law and personal arbitrariness, the ratio gradually began to shift in favor of the first. This was facilitated by a number of factors, the most important of which was the realization by the kings that it is much easier to govern the country when legal normsregulate as many areas as possible.
In addition, the use of voluntarism in governing the state implies that the monarch has high personal qualities: intellectual level, energy, willpower, purposefulness. However, most of the rulers of that time had little in their qualities to resemble Peter I, Frederick II or Louis XIV. That is, they could not successfully use personal arbitrariness in governing the country.
Following the path of increasing application of the law as the main instrument of government, the absolutism of Western Europe entered the path of a protracted crisis, and then completely ceased to exist. Indeed, in its essence, it assumed the legally unlimited power of the sovereign, and the use of legal means of control led to the emergence of the idea (which was formulated by the Enlightenment) about the rule of law and law, and not the will of the king.
Enlightened Absolutism
Features of enlightened absolutism in our country were embodied in the policy of Catherine II. In many European countries in the second half of the 18th century, the idea of an "alliance of sovereigns and philosophers", expressed by French philosophers of the Enlightenment, became popular. At this time, abstract categories are transferred to the sphere of concrete politics. The rule of the "wise man on the throne", the benefactor of the nation, the patron of the arts was supposed to rule. The Prussian King Frederick II and the Swedish Gustav III, the Austrian Emperor Joseph II, and the Russian Empress Catherine acted as enlightened monarchs. II.
The main features of enlightened absolutism
The main signs of enlightened absolutism in the policy of these rulers were expressed in the implementation of reforms in the spirit of various ideas of the Enlightenment. The head of state, the monarch, must be able to transform public life in the country on new, reasonable grounds.
The main features of enlightened absolutism in various states were common. At the time in question, reforms were carried out that did not affect the foundations of the existing feudal-absolutist system, it was a time when governments flirted liberally with writers and philosophers. The bourgeois revolution in France destroyed this form of state and the traits of French absolutism, put an end to it throughout Europe.
The difficult path of absolute monarchy
The fate of absolutism was different. Since the main task of this form of state is to preserve the existing foundations of the feudal system, it inevitably lost the progressive features of absolutism and was a brake on the development of capitalist relations.
During the first bourgeois revolutions of the 17th and 18th centuries, absolute monarchy was swept away in France and England. In countries with slower capitalist development, the feudal-absolutist monarchy was transformed into a bourgeois-landlord monarchy. The semi-absolutist system in Germany, for example, lasted until the November bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1918. The February revolution of 1917 put an end to absolutism in Russia.
