James I and Frederick William

James I believed he should hold all power as king.
His justification stems from his experience as King of Scotland before becoming King of England.
The Magna Carta does not apply to Scotland, showcasing a different power dynamic.
Parliament's agreement with James' view of absolute power was considered very low.
Example: His son, Charles I, shared these absolutist views, leading to the English Civil War.

Charles I's attempts to exert control over Parliament were met with resistance.
The struggle for power culminated in Charles losing his head, famously executed due to his refusal to cooperate with Parliament.

There was a division in the seventeenth century regarding the power dynamics of monarchs.
While some monarchs gained power (e.g., French, Russian, Spanish), English monarchs were notably losing their power.
Contrast with the rising influence of other monarchies:
- French, Russian, and Spanish monarchs strengthened their positions.
- The concept of absolutism involved centralization, which was less applicable in England.

James I's religious inclination to Anglicanism placed him in conflict with the predominantly Protestant Parliament.
Divine Right of Kings: This concept asserts that monarchs derive their authority directly from God and are not accountable to their subjects (Parliament in this case).
The Catholic Monarchs generally had more assurance of loyalty from their subjects compared to Protestant monarchs, which created a friction point.
- Protestantism promotes individual interpretation of the scriptures and challenges authority, making it textbook difficult for Protestant monarchs like James I and Charles I to assert their divine right.

A key difference between Catholics and Protestants:
- Catholics are expected to respect the authority of the monarch as God’s representative, while Protestants might resist it.
Parliament's Composition: Approximately 75% of members were Protestant.

Frederick William, known for his effective governance strategies, maintained control by forming beneficial alliances with influential nobles (e.g., Junkers).
His strategies included:
- Granting military positions in exchange for control over budgets and foreign policy.
- Accepting diverse groups (including Jews and Protestants) for their economic benefits, showing a contrast to the exclusionary policies of James I.
Economic Adaptations:
- Unlike Spain and France, Prussia did not adhere strictly to mercantilism due to geographical fragmentation.
- Relying more on trade than on internal tariffs given their lack of territorial cohesion.

The Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) significantly reshaped European politics and territories, affecting power structures.
Resulted in the Peace of Westphalia, leading to a redistribution of land among various powers.

Frederick William's governance emphasized trade and relations with neighboring states rather than isolationist mercantilism.
The contrasting approach of James I led to escalating conflicts typically rooted in power struggles with Parliament.
The ending of James I’s reign marked a historical shift that encouraged power-sharing arrangements rather than absolute monarchies.

Louis XIV and Catholic Absolutism: Demonstrated the strength of absolute monarchy and reflection of powerful religious influence, in contrast to parliamentary governance styles.
The English Civil War establishes a direct example of the consequences of monarchal authority versus parliamentary power.

Comparative power dynamics between monarchies like England under James I and France under Louis XIV illustrate crucial differences.
The rise of Prussia under Frederick William stands in significant contrast to the stagnation and eventual downfall of the Spanish Empire.