Enlightened and Other
Approaches to Power

Explore how 18th-century rulers selectively adopted Enlightenment ideas to strengthen their states while others clung to traditional absolutism or faced revolution.

AP European History

What Was Enlightened Absolutism?

Enlightened absolutism describes a form of governance in which monarchs retained full political authority but justified their rule through reason and reform rather than divine right alone. These rulers adopted selected Enlightenment principles: religious toleration, legal codification, and expanded education: without surrendering power to elected bodies.

Intellectual Foundations of Reform

Voltaire

Advocated religious toleration and freedom of speech; corresponded with Frederick the Great and Catherine the Great.

Montesquieu

Proposed separation of powers; influenced constitutionalists more than absolutists, but monarchs took note of checks on tyranny.

Beccaria

Argued against torture and capital punishment; his ideas shaped penal reforms under Joseph II and Catherine II.

Why Does This Matter for AP Euro?

1

Continuity and Change: Enlightened absolutism bridges the old regime and the revolutionary era: reform from above versus revolution from below.

2

Comparison questions: The AP exam frequently asks you to compare rulers' approaches: Frederick II, Catherine II, Joseph II, and Louis XVI.

3

Causation: Understanding the limits of top-down reform helps explain why France erupted into revolution while Prussia and Austria did not.

The Spectrum of Power

Frederick II of Prussia

Reforms

Religious toleration for Catholics and Jews; abolished torture in most cases; expanded primary education; codified Prussian law.

Limits

Preserved the Junker nobility's privileges; serfdom continued; no representative assembly was created; expanded the military relentlessly.

Catherine II of Russia

Reforms

Issued the Nakaz (legislative guidelines inspired by Beccaria and Montesquieu); promoted education and the arts; expanded Russia's territory significantly.

Limits

Pugachev's Rebellion (1773-75) led her to strengthen noble control over serfs; the Charter to the Nobility (1785) expanded aristocratic privilege.

Joseph II of Austria

1

Abolished serfdom in the Habsburg lands (1781): the most radical agrarian reform by any enlightened monarch.

2

Patent of Toleration (1781): granted Protestants, Orthodox Christians, and Jews limited rights of worship.

3

Centralized administration: imposed German as the official language, provoking backlash from Hungarian and Czech nobility.

4

Overreach and failure: Many reforms were reversed after his death. His epitaph reportedly read: "Here lies Joseph II, who failed in all he undertook."

Enlightened vs. Traditional Absolutism

	Enlightened Absolutism	Traditional Absolutism
Justification	Reason and service to the state	Divine right of kings
Religion	Toleration (limited)	State-enforced orthodoxy
Legal system	Codified, reformed law codes	Arbitrary royal decree
Nobility	Cooperated with but sometimes challenged	Relied upon for administration
Serfdom	Some reforms (Joseph II abolished)	Maintained without question
Legislature	None (reform from above)	None (command from above)

France: From Absolutism to Revolution

1643

Louis XIV takes power

Epitome of divine-right absolutism: "L'etat, c'est moi."

1685

Revocation of the Edict of Nantes

Ended religious toleration for Huguenots: the opposite of Enlightened policy.

1774

Louis XVI ascends the throne

Attempted fiscal reform (Turgot, Necker) but could not overcome noble resistance.

1789

French Revolution begins

Failure of reform from above led to revolution from below.

Britain: A Parliamentary Alternative

Britain developed neither traditional absolutism nor enlightened despotism. Instead, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 established parliamentary sovereignty and constitutional monarchy: a fundamentally different model.

Bill of Rights (1689)

Limited royal power; guaranteed parliamentary consent for taxation and standing armies.

Cabinet Government

By the 18th century, the Prime Minister governed through Parliament, not by royal decree.

How to Analyze Approaches to Power

1

Identify the source of legitimacy: Does the ruler claim divine right, rational duty, or popular consent?

2

Examine specific policies: Look at religious toleration, legal codification, serfdom, and education.

3

Assess the role of the nobility: Were aristocratic privileges challenged or reinforced?

4

Evaluate outcomes: Did reforms last? Did they strengthen or destabilize the state?

5

Compare across states: Place the ruler on the spectrum from traditional absolutism to constitutional governance.

Example: Was Frederick II Truly Enlightened?

Apply the five-step framework to Frederick the Great of Prussia:

1

Legitimacy: Called himself "first servant of the state": rational duty, not divine right.

2

Policies: Religious toleration ✓, abolished torture ✓, serfdom continued ✕.

3

Nobility: Junker privileges preserved: they remained the backbone of the officer corps.

4

Outcomes: Prussia became a major European power; reforms lasted because they served state efficiency.

Comparing Joseph II and Catherine II

	Joseph II (Austria)	Catherine II (Russia)
Serfdom	Abolished (1781)	Strengthened after Pugachev
Religion	Patent of Toleration	Limited toleration in practice
Nobility	Challenged (provoked backlash)	Empowered (Charter of 1785)
Legacy	Most reforms reversed after death	Territorial expansion endured

France: Why Reform Failed

Common Mistakes to Avoid

✕ "Enlightened = Democratic"

Enlightened despots never created representative assemblies. They reformed by decree, not by consent.

✕ Treating All Monarchs the Same

Frederick, Catherine, and Joseph had very different policies. Always cite specific evidence when comparing.

✕ Ignoring Noble Resistance

Reforms did not happen in a vacuum. The nobility's reaction often determined whether policies survived.

Question 1 of 5

Which phrase best captures the central paradox of enlightened absolutism?

Enlightened absolutism's defining feature was top-down reform: monarchs adopted Enlightenment ideas (toleration, legal reform) while retaining absolute authority. They never created representative institutions.

Question 2 of 5

Joseph II's abolition of serfdom (1781) is historically significant primarily because it:

Joseph II went further than any other enlightened monarch in challenging the social order. However, his reforms provoked such noble resistance that most were reversed by his successor Leopold II: illustrating the limits of top-down change.

Question 3 of 5

How did Pugachev's Rebellion (1773-1775) affect Catherine the Great's approach to governance?

The massive serf uprising under Pugachev frightened Catherine into abandoning further social reform. She issued the Charter to the Nobility (1785), which expanded aristocratic privileges: a clear retreat from Enlightenment ideals when her power was threatened.

Question 4 of 5

Which factor most directly distinguishes Britain's 18th-century political system from both enlightened and traditional absolutism on the continent?

The Glorious Revolution (1688) and the Bill of Rights (1689) created a system in which Parliament, not the monarch, held supreme authority. This institutional framework made Britain fundamentally different from continental absolutism of any variety.

Question 5 of 5

Historian A: "The enlightened despots, particularly Frederick and Catherine, were little more than skilled propagandists. They corresponded with philosophes to burnish their reputations abroad while maintaining oppressive systems at home. Their 'reforms' served state power, not human freedom."

Historian B: "While imperfect, enlightened absolutism represented a genuine shift in how rulers conceived of their obligations. Legal codification, religious toleration, and educational expansion had real consequences for millions of subjects, even if the monarchs' motives were mixed."

▼ Tap to read passage

Which statement best describes the point at issue between the two historians?

Historian A argues the reforms were propaganda for state power; Historian B argues they produced genuine improvements despite mixed motives. The central disagreement is about whether enlightened absolutism was substantive reform or rhetorical cover.

Enlightened and OtherApproaches to Power

What Was Enlightened Absolutism?

Intellectual Foundations of Reform

Why Does This Matter for AP Euro?

The Spectrum of Power

Frederick II of Prussia

Catherine II of Russia

Joseph II of Austria

Enlightened vs. Traditional Absolutism

France: From Absolutism to Revolution

Britain: A Parliamentary Alternative

How to Analyze Approaches to Power

Example: Was Frederick II Truly Enlightened?

Comparing Joseph II and Catherine II

France: Why Reform Failed

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Question 1 of 5

Question 2 of 5

Question 3 of 5

Question 4 of 5

Question 5 of 5

Enlightened and Other
Approaches to Power