Absolute monarchy

[3] The absolutist system of government saw its high point in Europe during the 16th and 17th century, associated with a form of rule unconstrained by the former checks of feudalism, embodied by figures such as Louis XIV of France, the "Sun King".

Attempting to establish an absolutist government along continental lines, Charles I of England viewed Parliament as unnecessary, which would ultimately lead to the English Civil War (1642–1651) and his execution.

[3] In the Ottoman Empire, the Sultan wielded absolute power over the state and was considered a Padishah meaning "Great King" by his people.

By the 19th century, divine right was regarded as an obsolete theory in most countries in the Western world, except in Russia where it was still given credence as the official justification for the Tsar's power until February Revolution in 1917 and in the Vatican City where it remains today.

Charles I's attempt to enforce episcopal polity on the Church of Scotland led to rebellion by the Covenanters and the Bishops' Wars, then fears that Charles I was attempting to establish absolutist government along European lines was a major cause of the English Civil War, although he did rule this way for 11 years starting in 1629, after dissolving the Parliament of England for a time.

Charles I was the last Emperor of Austria and abdicated on 12 November 1918 due to Austria-Hungary losing World War I. Louis XIV of France (1638–1715) is said to have proclaimed L'état, c'est moi!, 'I am the State!'.

[20] He also promoted an advanced secondary education, the forerunner of today's German gymnasium (grammar school) system, which prepares the brightest pupils for university studies.

Following the Time 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 the Romanov dynasty.

Although Alexander II made some reforms and established an independent judicial system, Russia did not have a representative assembly or a constitution until the 1905 Revolution.

Russia became the last European country (excluding Vatican City) to abolish absolutism, and it was the only one to do so as late as the 20th century (the Ottoman Empire drafted its first constitution in 1876).

The absolute rule of Charles XI was instituted by the crown and the Riksdag in order to carry out the Great Reduction which would have been made impossible by the privy council which comprised the high nobility.

After the death of Charles XII in 1718, the system of absolute rule was largely blamed for the ruination of the realm in the Great Northern War, and the reaction tipped the balance of power to the other extreme end of the spectrum, ushering in the Age of Liberty.

After half a century of largely unrestricted parliamentary rule proved just as ruinous, King Gustav III seized back royal power in the coup d'état of 1772, and later once again abolished the privy council under the Union and Security Act in 1789, which, in turn, was rendered void in 1809 when Gustav IV Adolf was deposed in a coup and the constitution of 1809 was put in its place.

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.

[29] Just prior to the referendum, the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe published a comprehensive report analysing the amendments, opining that they were not compatible with the European standards of democracy, effectively making Liechtenstein a de facto absolute monarchy.

[30] 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.

Some, such as Perry 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.

Renaissance historian William 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.