Chapter 15 Questions
how and why did england avoid the path of absolutism?
I would say it had something to do with the fact that England was the dominant kingdom on an island. French kings were plagued by overmighty nobles during medieval times, of whom lots threw in their lot with foreign powers, or even became virtually a foreign power (like Burgundy). While English had such troubles as well, they had less to fear of these nobles colluding with foreign powers in an attempt to take over England. Therefore it was more imperative that the powers of these feudal lords were broken in France, than in England. Secondly, England was already a clear entity earlier on. By the time that cities in Europe grew powerful enough that monarchs could rely on them as allies against nobles (as french kings would do), the English nobles already had won their concessions from the monarchy, resulting in the Magna Carta. This tradition of non-absolute rule, partly explained why the English reacted so violently to Charles I.
how did the artistic and literary achievements of this era reflect the political and economic developments of this period?
Stronger political relationships with the Continent were developed, increasing England's exposure to Renaissance culture. Humanism became the most important force in English literary and intellectual life, both in its narrow sense-the study and imitation of the Latin classics-and in its broad sense-the affirmation of the secular, in addition to the otherworldly, concerns of people. These forces produced during the reign (1558-1603) of Elizabeth I one of the most fruitful eras in literary history. The Elizabethan era saw a great flourishing of literature, especially in the field of drama. The activities and literature of the Elizabethans reflected a new nationalism, which expressed itself also in the works of chroniclers, historians, and translators and even in political and religious tracts. A myriad of new genres, themes, and ideas were incorporated into English literature."
Why is the period between 1560 and 1650 in Europe called an age of crisis/
That period in time is that of the religious wars in Europe. The loss of authority of the Catholic Church in the countries that emerged as protestant, removed their censure from artistic life as well. Also, a lot of old art was destroyed by the more radical protestant groups, who saw it as idolatry.
What was the relationship between European overseas expansion and political economic and social development in Europe?
The colonies over seas would provide more land making the country politically more powerful, raw materials which Europe could sell for a profit, and there would be indigenous peoples that Europe felt the need to convert.
What were the main tenets of Lutheranism and Calvinism, and how did they differ from each other and from Catholicism?
The main doctrine of Calvinism is that of PREDESTINATION. This principle of predestination is that God only gives spiritual salvation to the already chosen. Thus if a person wasn't already pre-chosen to go to heaven by God, then they wouldn't go to heaven, and there was nothing you could do about the situation, your destiny has already been predetermined, hence "predestination". Calvinism goes against Catholicism because the catholic church claims one can control their destiny of whether one is going to heaven or hell, this destiny is pre-determined. While on the other hand, LUTHERANISM stresses the concept of FAITH. If one has faith in God then he will be saved. Ultimately, Lutherans believe that humans do have control over their spiritual destiny, while calvinist claim God has all the power over humans destiny and life, and the human has no control.
what was absolutism and what were the main characteristics of the absolute monarchis that emerged in france prussia austria and russia?
The theory of absolute monarchy is basically this: the monarch is the sovereign power of the state, and therefore cannot be limited or checked by any other power, which would diminish its sovereignty. Therefore, the monarch is the supreme executive and lawgiver - and he himself is not subject to any law, apart from, in many cases, that of God and religion (although not the Church) - the only power higher than the king. That is the theory in France, which was often discussed, as there were other theorists in France who believed in a more constitutionalist model - i.e. that France had fundamental laws the monarch should obey too. In Russia, the tsar was always thought to be absolute and subject to no limitations, as that was how things had evolved there. In Prussia, when the absolute monarchy emerged much later, in the 18th century (Prussia had only first become a monarchy in the 17th) it was influenced by enlightenment ideas of rationalism - whereas, in Russia, the tsar was seen as a godlike figure, almost representing God's justice and rule on earth, the Prussian monarchy was absolute in the interests of REASON - a monarchy is absolute not just because of right, but because it is for the benefit of the people to have a strong, rather than a weak, monarchy.
