AP European History

Greenwood and Warren East AP European Forum
 
HomeHome  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Chapter 13 Discussion

Go down 
AuthorMessage
Mrs.Gupton
Admin
avatar

Posts : 131
Join date : 2010-07-13

PostSubject: Chapter 13 Discussion   Fri Sep 23, 2011 9:22 am

Chapter 13 is another chapter about monarchies. Which monarchies in Europe were classical absolutism monarchies? What are the classical characteristics of these powers and how do they maintain the rigid formalities of their courts?
Back to top Go down
http://apeuroghs.boardonly.com
ElviraDzafic



Posts : 22
Join date : 2011-06-13
Age : 21

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:25 pm

MINEEEEEEEEEEEE


The classical absolutist monarchies of Europe were France, Russia, and Prussia. Louis XIV, the ruler of France, was rather smart; he used the Palace of Versailles as a home to his nobles, to keep them under check and make sure they’re all good and happy. Living in the palace, they were unaware of what was happening outside; therefore, Louis could do whatever his heart desired. Peter the Great, the ruler of Russia, wanted to use the knowledge that he had gathered from the western world in Russia; this was met with disapproval. The dissenters were killed, which is how Peter kept power over Russia; he kept power by torturing and killing his enemies. Frederick William, the ruler of Prussia, picked potential opponents to be his main administrators, on a local level of course, keeping them happy and trying to halt them from fighting him for kingship. He also reduced taxes on the nobles and allowed them to call upon their serfs for service. All of these men were incredible rulers. They could either impose their will by winning over nobles with bribes, or by torturing and killing them, which was what usually happened!



How did John Law come up to financial management of the kingdom of France? What was his relevance? and how did he affect the later world?
Back to top Go down
Troy Palmer



Posts : 13
Join date : 2011-08-22

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 5:56 pm

Mine.

John Law was, for a time, given control of the finances of the kingdom of France by the duke of Orleans. He believed in the theory that an increase in paper-money supplies would stimulate France's economic recovery (stimulus package? lol! ) Along with establishing a bank that produced this paper money, he created the trading monopoly called the Mississippi Company. This company also took over the management of national debt. Law encouraged speculation in Mississippi Company stock. In 1719, investors, due to the high stock prices, decided to sell. However, there was one problem-- the bank didn't have enough gold to cover the paper money. In February of 1720, gold payments were halted in France. Of course, Law fled the country. This was known as the "Mississippi Bubble." This event caused fear of paper money and speculation in France. Maybe if people studied more history, the Great Depression, the current economic status of the U.S., the pitiful housing market, etc. could all have been avoided, just by reflecting on the aftermath of John Law and the Mississippi Bubble.

Who was Peter the Great and what were his contributions to bringing Russia into international prominence (what he changed/did in Russia)?

Back to top Go down
HunterCooper



Posts : 19
Join date : 2011-08-10

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 6:15 pm

MINE!
Peter the Great's biggest achievement/contribution was his claiming of the land that bordered the Baltic Sea. This secured a warm port fort Russia, giving them trade with the rest of Europe. This put Russia in the loop of trade and established them officially as part of Europe. Before this conquest Russia was still seen as being in the Dark Ages and Peter brought them to the new world of (what was) modern day Europe.

How did Charles XII of Sweden defend his nation against Peter the Great's attacks? What kind of technology did he use?
Back to top Go down
ericspiller



Posts : 12
Join date : 2011-08-10

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 7:27 pm

Mine


After the Thirty Years War the Swedes had complete control over the Baltic Sea. This caused Peter the Great to attack to gain a warm weather port. But Peter the Great had decided to attack at one of the best armies at fighting in cold weather. The Swedes won the first battle of the Great Northern War because of a horrible blizzard and also because of new technology that Charles’ army had. They had special snow shoes that helped them be able to run in thick snow and not sink into it, but unfortunately the Russians did not have that technology.

Why was Poland the only country to not have a centralized government?
Back to top Go down
14hchughes



Posts : 19
Join date : 2011-08-09

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 9:01 pm

Mine.



It was mainly the nobles fault that Poland didn’t have a centralized government. The nobles were not united and didn’t agree with each other. The kings were elected by the nobles and since no one trusted one another the kings were usually foreign. People who were members of the Sejm (the legislative body) were often bribed by foreigners which would cause the body to disband. So, Poland did not have a strong centralized government.



What is the difference between parliamentary monarchy and political absolutism? What is an example of each and why?
Back to top Go down
AmandaMiller



Posts : 22
Join date : 2011-05-21
Age : 22

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 9:23 pm

MINE!!!!!


Parliamentary Monarchy is when the country's leader actually uses and confides in Parliament. Political Absolutism, on the other hand, is when the king completely ignores Parliament. He usually craves power and it's his way or the highway. For example, James I was an Absolutionist. He got to the point where he didn't even acknowledge that there was a Parliament. He created impositions to replace parliamentary approved revenues.





Why wouldn't Parliament fund war with Spain during the reign of Charles I? What caused them to later change their minds? What was their one condition if they were to fund the war?
Back to top Go down
Molly.Swack



Posts : 29
Join date : 2011-08-09

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 10:21 pm

MINE!
Back to top Go down
Molly.Swack



Posts : 29
Join date : 2011-08-09

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 10:32 pm

Parliament actually favored the war, but didn't want to support it because the members of Parliament basically had no trust in the monarchy. They, later on, changed their mind after they encouraged Charles I to recognize the Petition Of Right. Then, Charles finally agreed to the petition. But Charles was known for not following through. He, later on had dissolved Parliament.


What made Peter the Great so interesting? Why was he so jealous of his son, Aleksei? How did Aleksei die, and why?
Back to top Go down
ehook4



Posts : 4
Join date : 2011-08-10

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Thu Sep 29, 2011 11:47 pm

this ones mine!!

Peter the Great was interesting because he was hands on; he fought with his men in battle. He also built things with his own hands, he was especially interested in learning how to build ships. He even made a trip to western Europe disguised as a commoner, to try to learn about modern technology and other things that he could bring back to Russia, which had been stuck in the dark ages bacause of it's isolation. Peter the Great was jealous of his son Aleksei because he had never demonstrated strong intelligence or ambition. During a six-month investigation concerning a conspiracy organized by Aleksei and Charles VI, Aleksei was condemned to death. He ended up dying under mysterious causes on June 26th, 1718.

What is jansenism and when did it start? Who's teachings did Jansenists adhere too, and what did they believe?
Back to top Go down
sumi5

avatar

Posts : 15
Join date : 2011-08-12

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:36 am

I got this Smile

Jansenism is a Roman Catholic movement that took place in the 1630’s. They were caused due to opposition to the theology and political influence of the Jesuits. Cornelius Jansen was the Flemish theologian and bishop of Ypres that taught the Jansenits. They believed that original sin corrupted humankind and that individuals could not contribute to their own salvation no matter what they did.

Why did the English king and Parliament come into conflict in the 1640's? Which side bears more responsibility for the war?
Back to top Go down
Katie L



Posts : 22
Join date : 2011-08-09

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:11 pm

I'll take this one.

Charles I and Parliament came into conflict in the 1640s because Charles’s religious policies had caused a war with the Scots. He tried to suppress the Puritans and Presbyterians, but the Scottish rebelled. With not enough funds for a war, he called Parliament but they could not agree on a solution. They wanted him to change his political and religious policies. He refused and dissolved parliament. Later after the English under Charles were defeated, Parliament again convened and war soon broke out between the Roundheads (Parliament) and the Cavaliers (King’s supporters). The main causes for the English Civil War were religious, although Charles’s problems working with Parliament didn’t help either. It was both Parliament’s and Charles’s fault because Parliament couldn’t tolerate Catholics and Charles couldn’t tolerate Puritans and Presbyterians. Charles was more to blame though because he was the first to actually attack.

Question: What factors contributed to the decline of the Netherlands and why was England more successful long term?
Back to top Go down
Leah Armstrong



Posts : 9
Join date : 2011-08-13

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:38 pm

Got it

The Dutch had several factors that led to their decline. The death of their Stadtholder William III of Britain. They didn't have a strong enough Stadtholder after him. So united leadership in these provinces failed. Also the fishing industry declined and they lost their superiority in shipbuilding to the British. But what made the British more successful was their use of a parliamentary monarchy. This was were the king was the ruler but there was a council-like body called parliament that shared power and restricted the king.

Question: Who was Oliver Cromwell and what two systems did he use to rule England?


Last edited by Leah Armstrong on Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Jessica_Johnson



Posts : 13
Join date : 2011-08-16

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:39 pm

i got this

oliver cromwell (1599-1658) was an english military leader who helped overthrow english monarchy and temporarily turned england into a puritan republic. he served as lord protector of england, scotland, and ireland, two factors eventually led to parliaments victory. the first was the alliance with scotland in 1643 which committed parliament to a Presbyterian system of church government. the last was the reorganization of the parliamentary army under cromwell. they defeated the royalists by june 1645, but charles I and his army continued to try to take advantages of divisions within parliament. but cromwells army did not allow this. charles was executed as a public criminal. parliament also abolished monarchy, the house of lords, and the anglican church. england was a puritan republic from 1649-1660.

question: why was peter the great such a revolutionary tsar for russia? what are some things that he did?


Last edited by Jessica_Johnson on Fri Sep 30, 2011 7:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Ashten2014



Posts : 26
Join date : 2011-08-04

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Fri Sep 30, 2011 7:11 pm

I got this one!


Peter the great changed Russia forever he created the first newspaper, school, hopitals, and first modernized navy. Peter the great had everyone change their apperence to fit into the modern world, he would even rip off their beards becuase he thought they were to old. He created st. petersburg and had a crown made for him that was much like ones in other european countries. Peter the Great traveled (as one of the first to do so ) outside of Russia and althoughout the rest of Europe learning as much as he could to modernize Russia. Peter the great Changed Russia forever in one generation and without him Russia might not have turned into a major empire.



what factors helped Peter the Great win wars and what was he willing to do to help his country out of the dark?


Last edited by Ashten2014 on Fri Sep 30, 2011 7:27 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
MariahMoeyM



Posts : 15
Join date : 2011-09-30

PostSubject: Got it! :)   Fri Sep 30, 2011 7:20 pm

Peter the Great won wars because he was a brillant military strategist and often once loosing a battle often retreated only to come back more wise of his enemy and to win the war. Peter made Russia modern power by traveling all over western Europe and learning many new trades from shipbuilding to medicine and forced reforms upon his nobility, transplanting them to his new capital of St Petersburg and even forceably cutting their beards and robes.
Question: What was Prussia's signifigance?
Back to top Go down
kara.england



Posts : 15
Join date : 2011-08-16

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Fri Sep 30, 2011 8:02 pm

got it!

Prussia was very significant. The Hohenzollern family had ruled since 1417. They had acquired new land, including the duchy of Cleves, the counties of Mark and Ravensburg, East Prussia, and Pomerania. These additions increased Prussia's size, putting them second only to the Hapsburgs, and spreading their land across Europe. Frederick the Elector built up Prussia's army, making Prussia a valuable ally. Frederick I allowed Leopold I to use his army, and in return became King of Prussia. Prussia built up a huge, powerful army, spreadig its influence across Europe.

The Netherlands amazed the rest of Europe with their unique ways of ruling and their strong economy. What made the Netherlands so different from the rest of Europe?
Back to top Go down
Colleen.Billhartz



Posts : 9
Join date : 2011-08-19

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Fri Sep 30, 2011 11:48 pm

got it!

The main thing that caused the Netherlands to be different from the rest of Europe was their government. Other major nations pursued strong central governments, monarchies, or a strong parliamentary system. The Dutch, though, was a republic. Each province retained some authority and the central government still had negotiations with the provinces. Another thing that caused the Netherlands to be different was economic prosperity. They had more people living in cities than anywhere else in Europe. They secured their place in the Spice Island trade routes above everyone else and improved many things from agriculture to shipping.

Why was Charles ll a better ruler than his father?
Back to top Go down
Alexander Smith



Posts : 17
Join date : 2011-08-02

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:13 pm

mine.
Back to top Go down
Alexander Smith



Posts : 17
Join date : 2011-08-02

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:33 pm

Charles II was a better king than his father because of all his ability to run the kingdom. For example Charles I was constantly struggling for power with parliament and went against the will of his people and in the end Charles I was executed by his subjects and was anti- Machiavellian where as his son Charles II was very Machiavellian and worked with parliament to get what he wanted he also even made a secret deal with king Louis of France that he would convert to Catholicism if Louis would help fund his Anglo-Dutch war.

Question: How did the declarations of indulgences weaken or strengthen England as a whole.
Back to top Go down
14hjsewell



Posts : 24
Join date : 2011-08-08

PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   Mon Oct 10, 2011 8:53 pm

Well the Declaration of Indulgences allowed all the other religions to come in to England. It was mainly done to allow Charles to gain favor with Louis XIV by taking away the laws restricting Catholic worship in England but ended up giving non-Anglican Protestants the same freedoms. This would disunite England who was all "Anglican". Now the critics of the Anglican church could go back to their own religion and therefore allowed the other religions to grow. This was also big because the Catholics now saw the freedom to accept the Pope back as head of the Church where Charles was the head of the Anglican church.

Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Chapter 13 Discussion   

Back to top Go down
 
Chapter 13 Discussion
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
AP European History :: AP European History :: Chapter Discussion-
Jump to: