Reference no: EM131080980

History Essay

Directions: This assignment is for a formal paper, meaning that you should present a complete argument using clean, controlled prose. The formal requirements are the following:

• Your essay directly answers the prompt (alternately, if you choose to write against the grain, you must explain why you are doing so)

• Your essay will use evidence to explain reasons that substantiate your claim (which should be a historical interpretation in answer to the prompt)

• Sources will be cited using a recognized citation system (MLA, APA are acceptable, Chicago is preferred). Information about proper citation can be found in the writer's guide from EN 101/2 or at the Purdue Online Writing Lab (search Purdue OWL).

• The paper should be 500-700 words in length with minimal grammar, spelling, syntax, or other language errors.

• Papers are due as uploaded Word files by the end of Saturday 6/4.

Preamble: During the early modern period, countries, kingdoms, and states fought against each other in an on-again, off-again fashion for power and territory. In these centuries, two models of government came to the fore: parliament and absolute monarchy. Following the explanation of the Palmer, Colton, Kramer text, the reason for the success of these two kinds of government was their ability to provide stability on the domestic front while supporting the wars that expanded territory and power. There are some striking similarities between the two models of government - both were capable of generating revenues, both could support competent bureaucracies, both placed decision-making responsibility on stable, rational individuals. Yet there were also striking differences, particularly in terms of the reasons that each form of government considered itself legitimate and in the role that non-nobles played in government.

Prompt: Using both John Locke's Second Treatise on Government and the documents in the "Absolutist Documents" packet (i.e. the excerpt from Bossuet's defense of monarchy, Louis XIV's letter to the Dauphin, and Richelieu's description of royal authority), explain the strengths and weaknesses of parliaments and absolute monarchies in the early modern era (for this essay, Britain will stand in for parliamentary government even though it was a mixed system with a monarch as the executive branch). Given the circumstances of the era, in 1800 which form of government looked like it should win out over the other?