Absolute monarchy is a form ofmonarchy in which the sovereign is the sole source of political power, unconstrained byconstitutions,legislatures or other checks on their authority.[1][2] Throughout history, there have been many examples of absolute monarchs, with some famous examples includingLouis XIV andFrederick the Great.[3][4]
Though absolute monarchies are sometimes supported by legal documents (such as theKing's Law ofDenmark-Norway), they are distinct fromconstitutional monarchies, in which the authority of the monarch is restricted (e.g. by legislature or unwritten customs) or balanced by that of other officials, such as aprime minister, as is in the case of theUnited Kingdom, or theNordic countries.[1]
World's states colored by systems ofgovernment:Parliamentary systems: Head of government is elected or nominated by and accountable to the legislature.
Presidential system: Head of government (president) is popularly elected and independent of the legislature.
Presidential republic
Hybrid systems:
Semi-presidential republic: Executive president is independent of the legislature; head of government is appointed by the president and is accountable to the legislature.
Assembly-independent republic: Head of government (president or directory) is elected by the legislature, but is not accountable to it.
Other systems:
Theocratic republic: Supreme Leader is both head of state and faith and holds significant executive and legislative power
Semi-constitutional monarchy: Monarch holds significant executive or legislative power but is still restricted by the constitution.
In theOttoman Empire, theSultan wielded absolute power over the state and was considered aPadishah, meaning "Great King" by his people. Many sultans wielded absolute power through heavenly mandates reflected in their titles, such as "Shadow of God on Earth". Inancient Mesopotamia, many rulers ofAssyria,Babylonia andSumer were absolute monarchs as well.[citation needed]
Throughout much of European history, thedivine right of kings was the theological justification for absolute monarchy. Many European monarchs claimedsupreme autocratic power by divine right, and that their subjects had no rights to limit their power.[8]
Absolutism was underpinned by a written constitution for the first time in Europe in 1665Kongeloven,'King's Law' ofDenmark–Norway, which ordered that the Monarch:
...shall from this day forth be revered and considered the most perfect and supreme person on the Earth by all his subjects, standing above all human laws and having no judge above his person, neither in spiritual nor temporal matters, except God alone.[10][11]
This law consequently authorized the king to abolish all other centers of power. Most important was the abolition of theCouncil of the Realm in Denmark. Absolute monarchy lasted until1814 in Norway, and1848 in Denmark.
The king of France concentrated legislative, executive, and judicial powers in his person. He was the supreme judicial authority. He could condemn people to death without the right of appeal. It was both his duty to punish offenses and stop them from being committed. From his judicial authority followed his power both to make laws and to annul them.[14]
InBrandenburg-Prussia, the concept of absolute monarch took a notable turn from the above with its emphasis on the monarch as the "first servant of the state", but it also echoed many of the important characteristics of absolutism. Prussia was ruled by theHouse of Hohenzollern as afeudal monarchy from 1525 to 1701 and an absolute monarchy from 1701 to 1848, after which it became afederalsemi-constitutional monarchy from 1848 to 1918 until the monarchy was abolished during theGerman Revolution.[15]
Frederick I was the firstKing in Prussia, beginning his reign on 18 January 1701.[16] KingFrederick the Great adopted the titleKing of Prussia in 1772, the same year he annexed most of Royal Prussia in theFirst Partition of Poland, and practicedenlightened absolutism until his death in 1786. He introduced a general civil code, abolished torture and established the principle that the Crown would not interfere in matters of justice.[17] He also promoted an advanced secondary education, the forerunner of today's Germangymnasium (grammar school) system, which prepares high achieving students for university studies. ThePrussian education system was emulated in various countries, including the United States.
Until 1905, thetsars andemperors of Russia governed as absolute monarchs.Ivan IV ("the Terrible") was known for his reign of terror through theoprichnina. Following theTime of Troubles in the early 17th century, the traditional alliance of autocratic monarchy, the church, and the aristocracy was widely seen as the only basis for preserving the social order and Russian statehood, which legitimized the rule of theRomanov dynasty.[18]Peter I ("the Great") reduced the power of theRussian nobility and strengthened the central power of the monarch, establishing a bureaucracy. This tradition of absolutism was expanded byCatherine II and her descendants.
Many nations formerly with absolute monarchies, such asJordan,Kuwait,Morocco andQatar, havede jure moved towards aconstitutional monarchy. However, in these cases, the monarch still retains tremendous powers, even to the extent that by some measures, parliament's influence on political life is viewed as negligible or merely consultative.[a][22][23]
Liechtenstein has moved towards expanding the power of the monarch—thePrince of Liechtenstein was given vast expanded powers after areferendum to amend theConstitution of Liechtenstein in 2003, which ledBBC News to describe the prince as an "absolute monarch again".[26] The referendum granted the monarch the powers to dismiss the government, nominate judges andveto legislation, among others.[27] Just prior to the referendum, theVenice Commission of theCouncil of Europe published a comprehensive report analysing the amendments, opining that they were not compatible with the European standards of democracy, effectively making Liechtenstein ade facto absolute monarchy.[28]Prince Hans-Adam II had also previously threatened to leave the country and move his assets out of Liechtenstein if voters had chosen to restrict his powers.[26]
Vatican City continues to be an absolute monarchy, but is unique because it is also amicrostate,ecclesiastical jurisdiction, andelective monarchy. As of 2023, Vatican City has a population of 764 residents (regardless of citizenship). It is the smallest state in the worldboth by area andby population. ThePope is the absolute monarch of Vatican City, and is elected by apapal conclave with a two-thirds supermajority.[29][30]
As governed by the Holy See, Vatican City State is ansacerdotal-monarchical state ruled by the Pope, who is thebishop of Rome and head of theCatholic Church.[31] Unlikecitizenship of other states, which is based either onjus sanguinis orjus soli, citizenship of Vatican City is granted onjus officii, namely on the grounds of appointment to work in a certain capacity in the service of the Holy See. It usually ceases upon cessation of the appointment. Citizenship is also extended to the spouse and children of a citizen, provided they are living together in the city.[32]
Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy, and according to theBasic Law of Saudi Arabia adopted by Royal Decree in 1992, the King must comply withSharia (Islamic law) and theQuran.[40] The Quran and the body of theSunnah (traditions of the Islamicprophet,Muhammad) are declared to be the Kingdom's Constitution, but no written modern constitution has ever been promulgated for Saudi Arabia, which remains the only Arab nation where no national elections have ever taken place since its founding.[41][42] No political parties or national elections are permitted.[43][40] The Saudi government is the world's most authoritarian regime in 2023 measured by the electoral democracy score of theV-Dem Democracy indices.[44]
There is a considerable variety of opinion by historians on the extent of absolutism among European monarchs. Some, such asPerry Anderson, argue that quite a few monarchs achieved levels of absolutist control over their states, while historians such as Roger Mettam dispute the very concept of absolutism.[46] In general, historians who disagree with the appellation ofabsolutism argue that most monarchs labeled asabsolutist exerted no greater power over their subjects than any othernon-absolutist rulers, and these historians tend to emphasize the differences between the absolutistrhetoric of monarchs and the realities of the effective use of power by these absolute monarchs. Renaissance historianWilliam Bouwsma summed up this contradiction:
Nothing so clearly indicates the limits of royal power as the fact that governments were perennially in financial trouble, unable to tap the wealth of those ablest to pay, and likely to stir up a costly revolt whenever they attempted to develop an adequate income.[47]
— William Bouwsma
Anthropology,sociology, andethology as well as various other disciplines such aspolitical science attempt to explain the rise of absolute monarchy ranging from extrapolation generally, to certainMarxist explanations in terms of theclass struggle as the underlying dynamic of human historical development generally and absolute monarchy in particular.
In the 17th century, French legal theoristJean Domat defended the concept of absolute monarchy in works such as"On Social Order and Absolute Monarchy", citing absolute monarchy as preserving natural order asGod intended.[48] Other intellectual figures who supported absolute monarchy includeThomas Hobbes andCharles Maurras.
^"By 1985 the legislature appeared to have become more firmly established and recognized as a body in which notables representing authentic forces in the political spectrum could address national issues and problems. But it had not gained real autonomy or a direct role in the shaping of government policies." [...] "In spite of its formally defined role in the lawmaking and budgetary processes, the parliament had not established itself as an independent branch of government, owing to the restrictions on its constitutional authority and the dominating influence of the king. The fact that the king has been able to govern for long periods byzahir after dissolving the legislative body has further underscored the marginality of the chamber." — J.R. Tartter (1986)[21]
^A partial English translation of the law can be found in Ekman, Ernst (1957). "The Danish Royal Law of 1665".The Journal of Modern History.29 (2):102–107.doi:10.1086/237987.S2CID145652129.
^Merriman, John (1996).A History of Modern Europe: From the French Revolution to the present. p. 715.
^Tartter, Jean R. (1986). "Government and politics". In Nelson, Harold D. (ed.).Morocco, a country study. Area Handbook. United States Government Printing Office. pp. 246–247.OCLC12749718. Retrieved2022-03-25.
^Government of Brunei."Prime Minister".The Royal Ark. Office of the Prime Minister. Archived fromthe original on 7 October 2011. Retrieved12 November 2011.
^abcdefgWalters, Timothy; Barwind, Jack A. (January 2004). "Media and Modernity in the United Arab Emirates: Searching for the Beat of a Different Drummer".Free Speech Yearbook.41 (1):151–163.doi:10.1080/08997225.2004.10556311.S2CID108530356.Seven absolute monarchs exercise political power over a federation established in 1971.
^Simelane, H.S. (2005), "Swaziland: Mswati III, Reign of", in Shillington, Kevin (ed.),Encyclopedia of African history, vol. 3, Fitzroy Dearborn, pp. 1528–30, 9781579584559
^Sultan Qaboos Centre for Islamic Culture."About H.M the Sultan". Government of Oman, Diwan of the Royal Court. Archived fromthe original on 18 January 2012. Retrieved12 November 2011.
^Mettam, Roger.Power and Faction in Louis XIV's France, 1991.
^Bouwsma, William J., in Kimmel, Michael S.Absolutism and Its Discontents: State and Society in Seventeenth-Century France and England. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1988, 15
Kimmel, Michael S. (1988).Absolutism and Its Discontents: State and society in seventeenth-century France and England. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Méttam, Roger. (1988).Power and Faction in Louis XIV's France. New York: Blackwell Publishers.
Miller, John (ed.) (1990).Absolutism in Seventeenth-Century Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wilson, Peter H. (2000).Absolutism in Central Europe. New York: Routledge.
Zmohra, Hillay. (2001).Monarchy, Aristocracy, and the State in Europe – 1300–1800. New York: Routledge.
_(cropped).jpg)
.svg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_(cropped).jpg)
.jpg)
_(cropped).jpg)
_(cropped).jpg)
.jpg)
