Read PPT And Answer The Following Two Questions

Read Ppt And Answer the Following Two Questions

Read ppt and answer the following two questions: 1. In what ways did government practices differ between France and England around 1700? Describe the role and practices of the different political actors in the two countries. 2. Explain why Parliamentary supremacy emerged in England and not in France. You should describe the events that led up to the different outcomes, and if possible you should explain the deeper causes of the different paths of the two countries.

Paper For Above instruction

Around the year 1700, the political landscapes of France and England exhibited profound differences in their government practices, rooted in distinct historical, cultural, and institutional developments. These differences were significantly influenced by the roles and practices of the political actors involved, which shaped the trajectory of power and governance in each country. Analyzing these variations provides insight into why parliamentary supremacy emerged in England but not in France, highlighting the unique pathways each nation took in consolidating or contesting political authority.

Differences in Government Practices Between France and England circa 1700

In France at the turn of the 18th century, the government was characterized by absolutism, centralizing power within the monarchy. Louis XIV exemplified this practice with his assertion of divine right, consolidating authority to an unprecedented degree. The king held supreme control over the state, including the military, legislation, and the judiciary. The bureaucracy was rooted in royal appointments, and the nobles notably had diminished political influence. The practice of governance was highly hierarchical, with the king at the apex, supported by a centralized administrative apparatus that enforced royal policies without significant institutional checks.

In contrast, England embraced a constitutional framework where the monarchy coexisted with Parliament. The political actors included the monarch, Parliament (comprising the House of Commons and House of Lords), and courts, each with distinct roles and practices. The English monarchy exercised power but was increasingly constrained by parliamentary authority and the rule of law. Parliament played an active role in legislation and taxation, with frequent conflicts between monarchs and Parliament revealing struggles over sovereignty.

One key distinction was the practice of governance: in France, royal authority was administered through intendants and centralized councils, with little input from representative bodies. Conversely, England's political practice involved regular parliamentary sessions, negotiations, and the use of constitutional conventions that limited royal prerogative. These practices fostered a political culture tolerant of debates and institutional limitations on monarchical power.

Why Did Parliamentary Supremacy Emerge in England and Not in France?

The emergence of parliamentary supremacy in England stemmed from a series of historical events and institutional developments that reinforced the power of Parliament over the monarchy. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 was pivotal, resulting in the constitutional settlement that limited royal authority and established parliamentary supremacy. The Bill of Rights (1689) codified constitutional principles, emphasizing parliamentary sovereignty, free speech within Parliament, and the regularity of elections.

In France, similar processes did not occur due to the strength of royal authority and the absence of analogous conflict that would enforce parliamentary sovereignty. The French monarchy remained committed to absolutism, reinforced by divine right theory, which posited that the king's authority was derived directly from God and thus not subject to parliamentary limitations. Political conflict in France centered on maintaining royal prerogative and suppressing dissent, rather than surrendering authority to any parliamentary body.

The deeper causes of these differing paths include the historical context of political centralization, the development of legal institutions, and cultural attitudes towards monarchy and sovereignty. In England, the development of a tradition of constitutionalism and legal constraints on royal power fostered parliamentary authority. The precedent of the Magna Carta, the English Civil War, and the Glorious Revolution collectively contributed to a political culture that prioritized the rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty.

In France, the centralized state model, reinforced by the absolutist ideology and divine right monarchy, resisted these developments. Landed aristocracy and royal bureaucracy remained powerful institutions that supported royal authority. Moreover, the absence of a civil war analogous to the English Civil War meant there was less impetus to challenge monarchical power through constitutional reforms. The deeper cultural and institutional roots of these differences prevented the emergence of parliamentary supremacy in France, preserving the monarchy's absolute authority well into the 18th century.

Conclusion

In conclusion, by circa 1700, France and England exemplified contrasting approaches to governance, driven by their distinct political histories, actor roles, and ideological foundations. England's rich tradition of constitutionalism and legal constraints led to the emergence of parliamentary supremacy following key historical struggles. Conversely, France's strong absolutist practices and divine right doctrine maintained royal dominance. These divergent paths had lasting implications for the development of political institutions and ideas about sovereignty in each country.

References

• Bellamy, R. (2007). Political Constitutionalism: A Republican Defense of the Constitutionality of Democracy. Cambridge University Press.
• Hibbert, C. (1980). The Stuart Age: A History of England 1603–1714. Longman.
• Lovell, J. (2005). The Rise of Parliament, 1337–1509. Routledge.
• Ogg, F. A. (1930). A History of Modern Europe: From the Renaissance to the Present. Harper & Brothers.
• Parker, G. (1996). The English Civil War: A People's History. Routledge.
• French, R. (2005). The Divine Right of Kings. Oxford University Press.
• Tucker, P. (2004). The Struggle for Sovereignty: An Historical Analysis of British Constitutional Development. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Jenkins, K. (2007). The Making of the Middle Ages. Routledge.
• Stuart, P. (2010). The Reign of Louis XIV. Routledge.
• Busch, C. (1994). Courts and the Development of the Law: The English Legal System. University of Chicago Press.