>>17972948
>monarch had to navigate the web of old privileges and right that might have varied not only from estate to estate but from region to region.
That just means monarchs of that period did not have the force or political capital necessary to have absolute power. Not that they didn't desire it or that their political theory did not support such a desire. The only real limits traditional monarchy placed on a monarch were those areas of life under the control of the Church, and as the reformation proved, the Church didn't really have many practical tools to keep a monarch from ignoring those limits if he wasn't afraid of excommunication. Absolute monarchy was just the end result of monarchs finally getting enough military and political influence to centralize power. And given how precarious their position could be, their lives were often on the line, monarchs have every incentive to seize additional powers or to cut deals with other powerful people to protect their own position. Given a choice between the people and a duke that could have you killed, you are going to do what is best for the duke.
