Name: Enlightened Monarchs: Crash Course European History #19
Uploaded: 2022-06-04T00:50:05.000Z
Duration: 13 min 41 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

Hi I'm John Green and this is Crash Course European History. So last week we discussed

関係詞節（制限と非制限）

the Enlightenment philosophers who challenged the idea that kings and nobles were qualified

to be elites simply because of the families into which they were born into.

But still, monarchs were also interested in Enlightenment ideals, and also understood

they needed to effectively adapt to the Enlightenment, as they had adapted to previous changes in

theology and philosophy. For instance, Catherine II (or Catherine “the

Great”) of Russia corresponded often and enthusiastically with Voltaire, even though

he criticized despotic rule. And she also offered to print Diderot's Encyclopedia

in Russia when France censored it. We use the term “Enlightened Monarchs”

to refer to the rulers who supported and applauded Enlightenment thinkers. But were they in fact

Enlightened, or did they remain absolutist despots? The answer will surprise you, unless

you have even a passing familiarity with despots. [Intro]

First let's review what the philosophes criticized in the practices of rulers and

aristocratic leaders. They singled out torture, censorship, and their arrogance and capriciousness.

Like, kings and their nobility could have ordinary people thrown into prison for just

about any reason—large or small. And in general most of the Enlightenment thinkers

believed that nobles, and the system that supported them, were despotic from top to

bottom. French theorist Montesquieu, whom we met in

the previous episode as the author of the satiric Persian Letters, also published The

Spirit of Laws in 1748. In it, he discussed customs and types of government as they were

influenced by climate, and topography, and other variables.

To him, there was no God-given standard of divine right rule. Instead, Montesquieu focused

on three basic types of government: democracies, suitable for very small states; monarchies

that ruled mid-sized kingdoms; and despotic states such as empires that were governed

with an iron hand. Voltaire and other philosophes elaborated

on these theories: and many preferred Britain's post-Glorious Revolution type of law-based

monarchy, where courts and a parliament were separate from the monarch's power and a

Bill of Rights ensured certain protections to citizens.

All of this--the enshrining of rights, independent courts, parliamentary representation--meant

that power was balanced among multiple institutions. Also, the multiplicity of religions in Britain

was seen as another assurance; it prevented a despotic religious institution from gaining

control of the government. Now, we've seen from examples like Poland-Lithuania

that distributed power and diversity of belief sometimes means internal conflict and political

gridlock that weakens a state, but in Britain, Enlightenment philosophers saw an example

of a state that was strong without being despotic. And in part because they had an example to

point to, the Enlightenment philosophers were difficult for those in the upper echelons

of government and society to ignore. Let's go to the Thought Bubble.

1. King Frederick the Great of Prussia was renowned for his love of refinement and his

2. Like his friend Voltaire, Frederick the Great collected Chinese porcelain.

3. He also wrote an opera about the Aztec emperor Monteczuma,

4. which praised Monteczuma for religious toleration

5. and seemed to agree with Enlightenment activists who fought against religious bigotry

and torture. 6. And Frederick also welcomed religious exiles

from less tolerant regimes as a way of building the Prussian population

7. —again a policy in line with Enlightenment. He called himself “a servant of the people.”

8. But all that said, Frederick built a massive standing army,

9. increasing the armed forces to 200,000 men from his father's army of 80,000ish.

10. And he also forced the aristocracy to serve the state,

11. either in the army or in the administration of the kingdom.

12. And while like a good Enlightenment thinker he lightened the burden of serfs working his

13. he also rewarded loyal aristocrats by increasing their control over the serfs living

14. further disenfranchising the most vulnerable of his subjects.

15. These increasingly empowered landed aristocrats, or Junkers to use the German term, that Frederick

16. were the very type that Voltaire and other philosophes lambasted in their writings for

the aristrocrats' pride and highhandedness.

17. Frederick even blocked talented commoners from achieving high positions in either the

18. entrenching aristocratic power still further. Thanks, Thought Bubble. At any rate, as a

result of the supposedly enlightened Frederick the Great's policies, men of aristocratic

pedigree in Prussia continued to have a major say in politics and the army into World War

I and even beyond. And then there was another of Voltaire's

friends, the aforementioned Catherine the Great of Russia. For someone who disliked

absolutism, Voltaire sure was pals with a lot of absolutists.

As Czar, Catherine sought to create standardized codes of laws and regulations, which had an

Enlightenment-ish tinge, but was mostly an attempt to ease the struggle between all the

groups that wanted to shape royal policy like how new monarchs were selected.

The people who fought over these decisions included clans, factions of the Royal Guard,

groups of influential clergy, and cliques among commercial traders and ordinary citizens.

So, Catherine summoned representatives from all social groups for their input.

And she found that each only thought about bettering their own privileges or lot in life—the

serfs seemed to have the most need for help, while merchants wanted the right to own serfs,

and the nobility wanted more of everything. Ultimately, Catherine failed in getting representatives

to think first and foremost of the needs of the empire as a whole.

Now, like other enlightened monarchs, her policies did aim to be rational, but this

was especially true when it came to consolidating state power, which of course benefited her

office. So one could argue she was also focused on

her interests over those of the empire, but, like other enlightened monarchs and like Peter

the Great before her, Catherine did emphasize education. She even founded schools for girls,

who were generally seen as not needing an education. The empress also created the first

Russian dictionary and appointed a woman to head the project.

She undertook the building of roads and the fostering of trade to bring economic unity

to Russia. But, like some other Enlightened monarchs,

Catherine also boosted the importance of the aristocracy and she consolidated their privileges.

She professed to want to improve the status of the serf population, again bowing to the

philosophes' humanitarian concerns, while imposing taxes that affected ordinary people

the most. Most of these monarchs wanted a more streamlined

and efficient royal administration, but not necessarily for philosophical reasons.

They benefited from well run armies. and they really benefited from taxes. During this age

of ever-improving weaponry and higher costs for larger standing armies, taxes needed to

be increased and also collected more efficiently. In other words, governments needed to operate

rationally--not according to the whims of fate or individuals, but according to the

needs of the state. In 1770, for instance, Habsburg empress Maria

Theresa, who despite that portrait was not twin sisters with Catherine the Great, deployed

soldiers to renumber the addresses of urban housing and standardize them across culturally

diverse groups who didn't even speak the same language.

The soldiers were told to count the empire's subjects but also to listen to their individual

字幕リスト動画再生

Enlightened Monarchs: Crash Course European History #19

massive

term

instance

poverty