Question

Constitutional monarchy was a concept that emerged from the political revolutions of the Age of Enlightenment. Why did the kings of Europe usually resist this idea and work to prevent it from affecting their kingdoms?

Constitutional monarchies required kings to follow the same laws as others--and most kings felt they were above the laws of the land.

Kings in Europe tended to look for fights wherever they could find them--after all, that's how they became kings.

Kings in Europe were afraid that a constitution would require them to give away all of their wealth to support the kingdom's poor.

Kings in Europe did not care about the problems of merchants or anyone else in their kingdoms--they just liked having power.

Answer 1

The first option is the best answer.

Why: constitutional monarchy limits a king’s personal power and subjects him to laws, institutions, and checks (parliaments, courts). Most European monarchs claimed sovereign rights (often divine right) and depended on personal control of taxation, appointments, the military and justice. A written constitution or powerful representative body threatened that authority, privileges and the patronage networks that kept rulers and elites in power — so they resisted.

Why the others are wrong or misleading:
- “Looking for fights…that’s how they became kings” is a caricature; warfare was important for states, but resisting constitutionalism was about losing power, not a love of fighting.
- “Afraid they’d have to give away all their wealth to the poor” is exaggerated. The concern was control over revenue and spending, not literally dispossessing the monarch.
- “They didn’t care about merchants…just liked power” is simplistic. Many rulers supported merchants when it served state interests; the core issue was preservation of monarchical authority and prerogatives.