Friday, October 31, 2014

Louis XIV Wars + Decline of Spanish Absolutism

*Louis XIV and his wars*

Louis XIV appointed marquis de Louvois, who created a professional army. However, an absolutist by nature, Louis took command himself and directly supervised all aspects of military affairs. Louvois recruited troops by dragooning (men taken off the streets), conscription, and the lottery. These soldiers were shaped into tough, obedient, military machines. The military was supported by high taxes, which eventually led to revolts in some areas of France on part of the over-taxed lower/middle classes.

Louis XIV made territorial gains in the Low Countries until his armies could not fight anymore. After William of Orange became king of England, Louis could not compete against the Bank of Amsterdam and the Bank of England. 



Louis' wars left France in economic despair. Minister of finance, Le Peletier, resorted to the devaluation of currency, selling offices, tax exemptions, and nobility titles. The controller general of finance, Pontchartrain, eventually imposed the capitation, which required everybody paid taxes (so that the entire population supported war efforts). He believed that the poor would be more willing to pay taxes if the upper class men were also paying taxes.

* The War of the Spanish Succession *

King Charles II of Spain died in 1700 with no heir, posing the question, "who's going to be king?" As Gyarn says, it is (or was) a common fact that Charles was impotent.


Charles left the throne to Louis XIV's grandson Philip of Anjou. Other European powers (England, Holland, Austria, Prussia) united against France to keep Philip from taking the throne, because if he did, France could become too strong and powerful. This war was basically an issue of balance -- England and the other countries wanted to preserve the balance of power and keep French expansion (to the Americas, Asia, and Africa) in check. No one wanted one country to be too dominant.

The Peace of Utrecht ended the war. Philip remained the king of Spain, but the French and Spanish never united. The Peace of Utrecht represents the balance of power principle in operation -- it set limits on the extent to which any single power could expand. 

Results -- Spain declines from its position as a great power, British Empire is expanded, French expansionist policy is ended

* Decline of absolutist Spain *

Spain had been, until this point, the leading European power, with its excellent programs of exploration and impressive income from the New world. The decline of Spain as a great power began with the defeat of the Spanish Armada by the British navy. Of course, other factors generated this downfall. Spanish lacked a middle class after the Reconquista, expulsion of Moors and Jews. Without a strong middle class, the country had a poor internal economic basis, and agricultural crisis and population decline were present. When the Treaty of Pyrenees ended the French-Spanish wars in the Thirty Years' War, Spain lost its extensive territories to France. 


( Defeat of the Spanish Armada by the English Navy) 

Furthermore, the Spanish-Atlantic economy decreased as other European powers (especially the English) began to participate in the Atlantic economy and settle in the New World. Spanish crown and upper class were essentially resting on their laurels (national Roman Catholic faith, military glory, economic prosperity) while the Spanish middle class failed to exist, lower class suffered, and the rest of Europe was quickly catching up to and surpassing its success. 


Don Quixote  is a novel mocking Spanish nobility -- obsessed with their wealth, status, and past success, the Spanish powers were blind to their downfall until it was too late.



Wednesday, October 29, 2014

The Sun King and the Administrators


In today's blog post, we will learn about four important people: 

Sorry I meant: 


Lets start with Sully. Sully was a French administrator during Henry IV's reign. Sully supported the revival of trade in France and therefore he lowered taxes but made up the lost revenue in trade. He subsidized the Company for Trade with the Indies and started a country wide highway system.

Following Sully was Richelieu. Richelieu wanted the total  subordination of all groups and institutions to the French Monarchy. He divided France into districts which were run by a royal attendant. Furthermore, the attendant was from a different area to over corrupt. Richelieu's domestic policy was centered around raison d'etat which means reason of the state. The basic principle was as long as an action is in the best interest of the state God will forgive you. He used raison d'etat to support himself going against the Hapsburgs who were Catholic which meant he should support them. But instead he supported their enemies. Like Sully, Richelieu also supported trade. However, he was not as effective as Sully. He spend more than he made but realized the importance of money. He stated, “I have always said that fiancés are the sinews of the state” That pretty much means you need strong fiancés for a strong state. 




Next is Colbert. His big policy was mercantilism which meant exporting more than importing. He was like Colbert but more extreme because he wanted no importation at add. He wanted France to be totally self-sufficient and rely on exports to make money. Therefore, he was a big supporter of French industries and created high foreign tariffs. Colbert also wanted to make Canada part of the French empire and shipped 4000 peasants to Quebec. 

Lastly is the Sun-King, himself, King Louis XIV. Some believe his policies were influenced by a traumatic childhood experience. When King Louis XIV was a child, a mob broke into his bedchamber to see if he was there.
 No wonder he was distrustful of nobles. They probably traumatized him


King Louis was an absolutist. He did not trust nobles and therefore worked to take power away from them. One way he did this was by agreeing to not to tax nobility and only commoners. By doing this, he pleased the nobles but also took away their power because they could not choose how the money was spent. Louis realized he had to cooperate with the nobles but he did it in such away that they were like his pets. When they cooperated with his projects, Louis rewarded them with social status and special privileges. The nobility was like a dog receiving treats for doing good and being happy though it does not realize it has power. (look I made a metaphor!)

King Louis also used architecture to impress people. The Palace of Versailles was so impressive, many foreign monarchs were influenced by it. Furthermore, many years later Pokemon would base their game off it.


"King Louis wanted to be the very best. The best there ever was. To impress them was his real test. To train nobles, his cause!"

Though his projects were impressive, they left France being heavily taxed (especially commoners because nobility were not being taxed) and in a lot of debt. This would eventually lead to a very troubled future.

Monday, October 27, 2014

Can absolutism save France?

Will absolutism stabilize France? Let’s find out. 

First we must ask what is absolutism? and How is it different from what the medieval kings were doing?
Medieval Kings were ruled by the grace of God. This means the law was given by God, kings discovered the law, and they are the mediators between God and the people. 



Absolutist kings ruled by divine right. This means the king made the law; the king was the state; and the king was responsible to God alone. 
As a result absolutist kings were stronger than medieval kings.




If you don't understand this reference 1. Why 2. The good looking guy believes he has divine power but he still has to answer to the big guy. 

Despite the differences, being stronger, absolutist kings still had the same issue: nobles
“Absolute kings also secured the cooperation of the one class that historically had posed the greatest threat to monarchy, the nobility” The nobles were a lot like teenagers. They wanted more power, but the power resides on the adult/king. They tried to sneak around the parent, sometimes it worked sometimes it didn't. Ultimately, they had to answer to the king. 



Did the absolutists have complete control?
No. Kat and Becky are totalitarian but the absolutists lacked the tools (money and technology) to be a completely totalitarian regime. 
They're smiling because they know and we don't. 
What were the foundations that French absolutism were built upon?
French absolutists decided to lay their regime on top of sand. However, they did not see that no matter how much they suppress it, the sand will slip and move when a storm comes. The people are the sand. A government must rely on its people in order for the state to function. However, the french were constantly rebelling. Peasants were taxed instead of the nobles and so they refused to pay taxes. Now the government has no support and no money.

I'm so punny 



People who tried to make it work.

Sully and Henry IV:
Henry IV was a byproduct of the French civil war, which caused a lot of disorder. Henry IV and his administrator Sully tried to stabilize the chaos. Sully followed the mercantilist policy of exporting more than you import. As a result, trade was revived and there was less need for taxes. Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes, which he intended to be a stabilizing factor. It allowed specific regions to have a certain religion. As a result, regions of France were divided by religion, rather than religion being intermixed. Louis XIII then revoked the Edict of Nantes because it created “states within a state.” So despite trying, Henry IV failed at stabilizing and uniting France, instead, he drew the lines to where it was divided. 

Richelieu:
Richelieu believed in total subordination of all groups to the French monarchy. Intendents, or local governments, were given the power of carrying out the king’s wishes. Intendents could not be natives to the districts where they held authority to avoid bias and to ensure the laws of the king were carried out. Did people listen to these men? Of course not. If you make the monarch a distant power, the people will believe they can revolt. 

They did not make it work. Tim is disappointed. 


What all these people needed to realize was that absolutism cannot work if it involves the suppression of people’s power and freedom. Like Kat aka Hitler aka Kat Tweed said, you have to make the people believe they have power, but you can’t give them too much of real power or they will overthrow you.There needs to be a balance. Every force has an opposite and equal reaction. If a government pushes down its people, they will push and revolt right back. 


I'd like to take this time to celebrate this blog's 100th post. WOOOOOO