Why were absolute monarchies more common Eastern Europe than in Western Europe? The Church, which wanted to ban absolute monarchies, lost influence in Eastern Europe. Absolute monarchs in Eastern European countries abolished the feudal system. Eastern European countries were less developed and relied on strong absolute monarchies. Absolute monarchs were wiser and more capable in Eastern Europe than Western Europe
In many respects the rise of absolutism was a natural response to the chaos of the religious wars. The theory of cuius regio, eius religio which evolved from the Peace of Augsburg (1555) was the first step on the road to empowering the monarchy. Absolute monarchs already had a foundation on which to build, the New Monarchs of Europe had created larger territorial states, which required a new, more effective form of government. Ironically philosopher Thomas Hobbes, a strong proponent of absolutism, developed his ideas in England, the least absolute state in Europe! He proposed in his Leviathan (1651) that an absolute monarch could have prevented the chaos of the English Civil War. Hobbes said that life was, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. He went on to suggest that people would only listen if they did not fear the consequences. Therefore, individuals entered into a contract with the ruler – surrendering their rights for protection. French philosopher Jacques Bossuet went even further, claiming that rulers had authority from God. It is important here to note that these rulers were absolute rulers and not arbitrary. When they acted, they often did so out of a feeling of responsibility for the masses. They realized that they, and they alone were responsible for the needs of the people. Yet this is where eastern and western absolutism diverge. Western monarchs understood the necessity of working with advisors such as parlements in France, Cortes in Spain, or Parliament in Britain. Before analyzing the individual countries and the role of the monarchy, perhaps one would be best served to find the characteristics that are common in absolutism. All absolute states benefited from extensive tenure by one dynasty. Such dynastic rule facilitated obvious advantages such as continuance of policies, avoidance of internal competition, increased significance of treaties and marriage alliances. The strength of the absolute state could be seen in the large centralized bureaucracy and the ability to maintain a large standing army to expand policies at home and abroad
The answer is c - eastern european countries were less developed and relied on strong absolute monarchies.
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!