Cardinal Richelieu?

Question

I'm looking for a few points to start off a paper, which has the purpose of proving that Cardinal Richelieu was actually the first absolute ruler.

Any quick ideas?

Thanks.

Answer 1

The Cardinal de Richelieu was often known by the title of the King's "Chief Minister" or "First Minister". As a result, he is sometimes considered to be the world's first Prime Minister, in the modern sense of the term. He sought to consolidate royal power and crush domestic factions. By restraining the power of the nobility, he transformed France into a strong, centralized state.

Richelieu's tenure was a crucial period of reform for France. Earlier, the nation's political structure was largely feudal, with powerful nobles and a wide variety of laws in different regions. Parts of the nobility periodically conspired against the King, raised private armies, and allied themselves with foreign powers. This system gave way to centralized power under Richelieu.

Richelieu's successes were extremely important to Louis XIII's successor, King Louis XIV. He continued Richelieu's work of creating an absolute monarchy, and enacted policies that further suppressed the once-mighty aristocracy. Thus, Richelieu's policies were the requisite prelude to Louis XIV becoming the most powerful monarch, and France the most powerful nation, in all of Europe during the late seventeenth century.

Answer 2

The siege of La Rochele , and his leadership of the french navy and forces  to create a blockade against the protestants who following persecution fled to La Rochelle . His political intrigue in bringing about one the bloodiest persecutions in history , that of the protestants .

Answer 3

You might want to define your terms.

Absolute -- without any other party having any appeal power.

Ruler -- This one could be a problem. If, by ruler, you mean the person who by title has rule over a principality, such as a prince, baron, king, etc., then you would need to demonstrate that a Cardinal R was a ruler. As a cardinal, he was definitely subordinate to the Church.

Perhaps what you really want to say is that Richelieu was the first prime minister of France. He was never the ruler, and he certainly never enjoyed absolute power, nor could anyone say he was the first absolute ruler.

Absolute? I very seriously doubt you could support that. Very few rulers were absolute rulers.

Virtually nobody in Europe enjoyed that distinction. almost everyone had to answer to various other power blocks. John tried to do it, but the nobles checked him, quite easily, actually, and the result was Magna Carta.

You can have enormous power and not be an absolute ruler.

There were lots of smaller domains earlier on, and in those very early times, you might find more absolute rulers.

Answer 4

Richelieu never was an "absolute ruler".

He may have been given the freedom to act, take initiatives, and govern the country as an absolute ruler would, but had Louis XIII ever disapproved of him or his actions, the plug could have been pulled at any time, and Richelieu would have turned overnight into a prelate fallen out of grace with both his king, and the church at large, as his involvement in secular politics had led him to neglect his religyous duties.

and anyway, the Red Eminence had a grey eminentce pulling HIS strings and giving him ideas. (I'm referring to Father François Leclerc du Tremblay, Richelieu's personal cousellor)