Charlemagne, also known as Charles the Great, ruled the Franks from 768–814 A.D. He was a kindhearted man, who also a merciless warrior. Charlemagne was resolved to expand his kingdom to a grandiose empire, which he completed especially well. He also converted the nation to Christianity and the nation’s customary language to Latin. People thought he ruled with the sword and with the cross.
Absolute monarchs centralize their absolute power. Louis XIV and Peter the Great are exceptional examples of an absolute monarch. Louis ruled in France from 1638 – 1715 and Peter ruled in Russia, but he was not liked by many people. They both had all four characteristics of an absolute monarch. Louis centralized his power by keeping nobles busy with court life, he increased revenue by supporting the arts and literature and reformed taxation with the help of Jean Baptiste Colbert.
In times of trouble, monarchs must make tough decisions that will directly impact their nation and their legacy. Frederick the Great and Peter the Great took different approaches when they saw their countries falling behind. Peter improved Russia by abandoning certain traditions and focusing on westernizing the county, while Frederick took the opposite approach and attempted to strengthen German culture and heritage. They were both autocratic in their leadership style, and lead their countries into wars for power. The three best points for comparing Frederick the Great and Peter the Great's leadership styles are their handling of social issues, domination attempts, and the rise to power.
It takes a while to build your reputation, but it can be broken within second. Louis and Peter use their reputations to persuade others of why they would make suitable leaders. Along with their statuses they use a variety of tactics to lure in followers. Louis relied on a more aggressive and controlling method, whereas Peter went with a passive aggressive effort. Louis XIV and Peter the Great ruled their countries similarly using PERSIA categories, but overall there impact of that control are different.
Due to its failure to establish an executive branch and a judiciary branch, an imbalance of power was created within the government itself. The notion of forming a “more perfect union” was a practical
During the 17th century, the American colonies declared their independence from Great Britain. They waged war for eight years to obtain their independence, but soon came to a dilemma. The generals and political leaders behind the Revolutionary War were now in charge of thirteen different colonies without a form of government to keep law and order. They were going to have General George Washington become their new leader, however they soon realized that was just like the British monarchy they just seceded from. The Fathers gathered in Pennsylvania to sit together a write a formal government.
Therefore, he called for a salutary Constitution, where integrity and consideration take over the despotic behaviors of those in
The Articles of Confederation were a major improvement over the past government of England, in which the power only belongs to a few people, the king and parliament. The Articles of Confederation allowed each individual state to have its own power. Congress could not require any state to pay taxes, nor could they require to build a national army. Preventing tyranny was a major idea and a major goal that the Articles of Confederation produced. One other improvement that the Articles of Confederation instituted was the idea of not only reducing the power of the king, but increasing the power of the people.
He believes that loyalty should be dedicated and given to the state and the state only. He strives for power and loyalty from his citizens. He believes that no one individual has the right to be put above the state than himself. “And whoever places a friend above the good of his own country, he is nothing: I have no use for him.” (Sophocles, 203-204).
During the 1600s and 1700s a new type of monarch emerged known as an absolute ruler. Some of these rulers were Louis XIV, the Fredericks of Prussia, and Peter the Great. These rulers believed that a monarch had a divine right to rule and should only listen to God. All these rulers had characteristics that defined them as absolutists. Louis XIV was constantly at war during his reign which resulted in a powerful army.
‘Legitimacy’ was one of the principles that the Congress based upon. Therefore, all of the rulers that were
Peter the Great and Louis XIV were both the greatest rulers of their times. Both of them were autocrats having unlimited power and on the contrary both of them were absolutists. Louis XIV was the ruler of France and nicknamed “The Sun King” and Peter the Great was the ruler of Russia. Although Peter the Great and Louis XIV has some different successes, they had several noticeable similarities such as power, buildings, and armies/economical growths. Peter the Great and Louis XIV had similar successes in their famous buildings.
He also categorized humanity into two categories. Those who want power, and those who are suspicious of the ones who want power. No matter how expertly a prince may utilize prudence, the people will always be suspicious of the Prince. Suspicious people will never be fully obedient. The Prince never has full control and power over their people.
‘Julius Caesar’ and ‘Henry V’ are plays whose themes are reflective of their respective contextual climates. They were both written in the time of renaissance theatre under the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, who was an avid supporter of Shakespeare’s work. The plays were written consecutively, and they both present historical figures that were greatly idolised in the period in which they were composed. Both history plays convey how, on political scenery, deceit is omnipresent. In Julius Caesar, it is used to bring down the monarchial rule and to ultimately implant a new democratic government, while in Henry V, the King makes use of multiple facets of his personality among which is deceitful behavior in order to conquer France and win over
A regime can be judged by no other criteria nor be assigned any other functions, than those proper to the lawful order as such. " He opposed "democracy," which at his time meant direct democracy, believing that majority rule posed a threat to individual liberty. He stated, "...democracy is, properly speaking, necessarily a despotism, because it establishes an executive power in which 'all ' decide for or even against one who does not agree; that is, 'all, ' who are not quite all, decide, and this is a contradiction of the general will with itself and with freedom." As with most writers at the time, he distinguished three forms of government i.e. democracy, aristocracy, and monarchy with mixed government as the most
