Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
05.02 The Enlightenment and Revolutions: Constitutional vs. Absolute Monarchies.
Transcript of 05.02 The Enlightenment and Revolutions: Constitutional vs. Absolute Monarchies.
Absolute and Constitutional Monarchy are similar because they both have power but yet very different. what makes them different is that a constitutional monarchy is limited that's why it is know as the limited monarchy. A absolute monarchy is not held back by laws of constitution it has much more power. They both can make their country fail or successful but it depends on the ruler.
Absolute vs. Constitutional Monarchy
Absolute & Constitutional Monarchs
<-To your left is Catherine
the Great of Russia.
To your right is Charles I
Catherine the great was an absolute monarchy
which means that she had complete control and
power over her people. she rose to power but changing Russia for ever. she changed the out look
on education in Russia and had girls all across the country going to boarding schools. she faced many obstacles but overcame them. she earned everything she did and had.
Charles l was and constitutional monarchy because he was head of the state. he first was the king of Scotland then became the king of England working his way up. he made many accomplishments like bringing peace into multiple countries and becoming the bishop wars. like any ruler he had his ups and downs for example he had to end his monarchy. but he made an impact on England that would go down in the history books for ever.