Absolutism “means that the king derived his power from God and could exercise it without other constitutional bodies having the right to challenge him.”[1] However, absolutism is a purely retrospective term. Historians have assigned it to classify the style of government employed by Louis IVX during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. In fact, Louis IVX’s power came directly from the fact that others attributed his divine right to rule, believing God had chosen him for the task of governing France. This obviously made Louis the most powerful man in France, however, there were some limits to his power.
While Louis IVX was truly an absolute monarch, that did not mean that he did not have a share of advisors. During Louis IVX rule, he generally had three advisors that would help him with different aspects of governing the country. The main three advisors to the king were Jean-Baptiste Colbert, Michel Le Telier (who was succeeded by his son), and Hughes de Lionne each respectively handling the financial and economic affairs, the military affairs, and foreign affairs of France. However, while he relied heavily on all of his advisors, he was the ultimate decision maker.
Colbert, the most famous of his advisors who held offices ranging from Controller-General of Finances to the Secretary of Navy, knew this very well. Whenever attempting to convince the king in matters of his mercantilist fiscal policies, he took the utmost care in how he worded his messages. “[Colbert] has everything figured out, but he must get Louis to see things his way and induce him to make the right decisions of his own volition.”[2] Within a financial memorandum addressed to the king in 1670, Colbert writes of examining “the state of [His] Majesty’s finances…to find reasons for the changes [Colbert] has observed…so that [Louis] can use [his] great prudence and insight to provide whatever solutions [Louis] deems necessary and appropriate.”[3] By speaking in this manner, Colbert asserts Louis’s authority over him, while managing to present his ideas in a way that will be accepted by Louis.
Colbert’s ideas were modeled after the mercantilist system of England. It was Colbert’s goal to improve the French Economy and increase France’s prestige across Europe. He had many theories about how to best to reform France. It began with his belief that Europe had only a finite amount of wealth within its borders, and in order to gain more wealth, France must adopt a colonialist and expansionist foreign policy. Then, in order to obtain and maintain its colonies France must expand its navy to rival that of Britain’s. The next step is to create monopolistic overseas trading companies modeled after the Dutch and English.
These were not the half of Colbert’s reforms, however, many of them failed. While in theory many of Colbert’s ideas were logical and well thought out, the implementation of them caused problems. The merchants and manufacturers were never on the same page as Colbert. Colbert was not able to snap his fingers, and suddenly the reforms would take effect. The best interests of the country were not always held in the highest regard of profiteering merchants aiming to make a quick buck.
However, many of his projects were still successful, yet they were undermined by Louis’s government spending both on the palace at Versailles and involvement in foreign wars. As king of France Louis could do almost whatever he wished because he was one of the most powerful men in Europe. This power led him to finance many wars fought against France’s “enemies,” such as rival Britain. In fact, during the early part of his reign much of his policy was very successful, until most of the French treasury was consumed by foreign wars and his building projects. With a diminishing treasury, much of Louis initial power was limited by things in and out of his control. The nation was in great need of money, but Louis’s taxing power was severely hindered by the system currently implemented.
The system employed involved trust between Louis and his tax collectors. In many cases people would pay Louis in order to attain the “job” of a tax collector. These people would then proceed to shave off profits of the crown by pocketing some of the money themselves. “Thus the king had the authority to initiate almost any tax, but, practically speaking, he could collect only by negotiating directly or indirectly, with any number of corporative interest groups.”[4] In fact since, is was often a group of people that pooled money together in order to get the “rights” to collect taxes, the initial sum paid would become a simple investment for later income. But, his taxing ability was not just affected by these people, known as “tax farmers,” but also by the fact he was unable to tax many of the nobles and clergy. Louis’s power was severely limited, especially late in his reign, by a treasury lacking in wealth. Furthermore, he was never able to raise taxes in a just and fair manner, and this often propelled the lower class into poverty.
Besides the “tax farmers,” Louis XIV never had a real problem with insubordination, however, bickering between nobles was a common aspect of the French court. As an absolutist king, Louis was constantly receiving advice from many different angles as nobles vied for favor in the eyes of the king. But, he did not just receive advice from these nobles. Often, he found his pockets full of money as members of his court gave him bribes in order to advance themselves or their family’s status. All of these nobles made frequent visits to the royal palace in order to do one or all of the following things: show their support for the crown, offer “gifts” to the crown, or attempt to gain status in the eyes of the crown.[5]
Look at Brulart’s letters to Mazarin, because they give excellent examples of a noble’s supplication to the crow followed by a request of some manner. Brulart begins his first letter speaking of the excellent reforms made by the king so far, “Everywhere [Brulart] went in Burgundy, [he] found transports of joy over the change of governor that is being made.” He offers his praise in this letter and then quickly turns to his real purpose. Brulart discusses the Parliament of Burgundy in a very negative fashion as an institution requiring a new direction. “A reform bringing this Parliament in line with the Parlement of Paris…would be the most important business the king could have in Burgundy…”[6] This is the formula that a noble would use when attempting to get anything done in court. This added to the power of Louis, because Louis knew that each noble, if wishing to gain anything, would have to get it from Louis himself. That was the masterful way that court-life was organized under the reign of Louis XIV.
In another letter Brulart writes about the early approval of Condé, the new governor of the Burgundy area, but pleads that Bouchu is not a acceptable choice for intendant of the region. He wrote, “I must report to Your Eminence that it is very important for the success of royal affairs that you send here [7] He continues on about why the king knows best – his atonement of supplication – and then continues to say he believes the Bouchu is much too hated to become a suitable intendant for the region.
Brulart’s letters are perfect examples of rivalries being formed between different nobles in France, each fighting for more power, influence, or wealth within Louis’s kingdom. Similarly to Brulart, Bouchu attempts to win support from the high member’s of Louis’s court by writing letters explaining the fiscal situation of France, and why he is often disliked by those around him. Concerning the debts facing Louis’s government, he writes, “The misfortunes of war certainly caused part of them, but poor administration for the past thirty years”[8] are the real reason France is in debt. He barely glazes over Louis’s wars and lays the blame strictly on pre-Louis administrators. Later he speaks of “the exposing all the irregularities…encountered, which involve the most powerful individuals.” In this fashion, he claims the reason he is hated is because he is fighting the corruption of prominent members of French society.
Bouchu’s rivalry with Brulart is an excellent example of where Louis gained the most power, but also lost a little as a consequence. Louis could play the two off of each other, in order to create to supplicating subjects, while still receiving input from different viewpoints on what actions to take on certain issues. Further, he would never have to worry about the nobles uniting to overthrow him, so long as they were always squabbling between themselves. But, therein lies the consequence to having a guarantee of safety in office. When you have squabbling subjects, often the micromanagement of certain affairs of France were in disarray. For example, in a letter written by Brulart, he explains, “None of this is bringing the conclusion of the affair any closer…They [the members of parliament] become blinded by their own interests.” He continues, noting that they do not always seem to be acting as subjects as a king, but rather as rulers of their respective domains. In this manner, not only does Brulart attempt to win favor by lowering his beers below himself using a standard of loyalty, but also, his letter is an excellent example of how parliamentary procedures often took much more time than actually needed to decide anything.
While this bureaucratic bickering sometimes hindered Louis IVX’s ability to govern effectively, he still managed to build an image for himself that has survived time. The goal of Louis and those surrounding him in office, most notably Colbert, was to glorify Louis beyond the stature of a normal king. He gained the title of Sun King, and surely did shine brightly over other French monarchs, as he is the most well remembered of them all, save except Napoleon Bonaparte. A grand equestrian statue was erected in honor of the conquests of Flanders and Franche-Comté. It was a statue worthy of “the best craftsmen in the kingdom”[9] and set off a chain event of more arches and equestrian statues dedicated to the king. Part of his greatness is derived from his memoirs written to help his son, the Dauphin, to rule in his wake. He writes, “be humble…But…boldly assume as much loftiness of heart and spirit as you can.”[10] Louis is warning his son not to get too caught up in his image as king, but use that image when needed in order to get things done.
Therein is the key to ruling a country with an absolutist king. One’s subjects will always be supplicating to the king, or at least his image, in order to gain status within the realm. If the king can use that image to lord over his nobles and control them, he will rule effectively, so long he does not let his image take control of his wits. It is the king’s duty to his country to uphold justice, like for instance what Louis did with the Grands Jours d’Avuvergn.
An absolutist king has all the power regarding everything from fiscal matters to foreign policy. However, when unable to control one’s subjects that power evaporates instantly. That is why an excellent absolutist king will never be thrown out of office. If an absolutist king does his job well, then absolutism becomes the most efficient style of government. However, if the king’s subjects begin to work too hard to thwart their rival nobles, then the efficiency of the government may be called into question. Thus, the success of an absolutist king is evident when the people and nobles accept his divine right to rule completely and without question, because that instills the idea that he and only he was meant to king.
[1] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism: A Brief Study with Documents. (New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000), 1.
[2] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 92.
[3] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 92.
[4] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 96
[5] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 124
[6] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 125
[7] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 125
[8] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 131
[9] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 204
[10] William Beik, Louis XIV and Absolutism, 218
