Question 1
Evaluate the interpretations in both of the two passages and explain which you think is more
convincing as an explanation of whether Francis I was an absolute monarch.
Passage A
Item removed due to third party copyright restrictions. Pages used: 99-100
Adapted from: G. Woodward, The Development of Early Modern Europe: 1480–1648, published in 1997.
Passage B
The popular, consultative nature of monarchy continued unmodified for the first third of the period from 1421 to 1559, and was only mildly altered thereafter. This view is supported by the fact that parlements did exist and did possess considerable power. On occasions kings were forced to use intimidation, but these were the exception rather than the rule. Far from being an absolute monarch, Francis I created three new parlements during his reign. The King also consulted with his subjects on important matters. The King’s power was limited further by the lack of any uniform law within his kingdom. In the north, customary law operated; in the south, Roman law. No attempt was made in this period to centralise the legal system. Instead, Francis was willing to allow the local nobility considerable power in dispensing law in their own areas. Although the number of office holders increased in this period, local power was firmly in the hands of the nobility. The great noble families still retained considerable power. The failure to achieve greater centralisation is understandable when one considers the size and geography of France and the lack of communications. Also, parts of the French kingdom were not directly under the King’s control. Although Francis I reformed the financial system, he failed to achieve financial independence. The main taxes remained the same. The effects of almost continuous war meant that the monarchy had to borrow heavily from bankers.
Adapted from: D. Murphy, M. Tillbrook, P. Walsh-Atkins, Europe 1450–1661, published in 2000.
[30]
Answer
