Question

Why did constitutional monarchy develop in England while absolute monarchy continued in Russia?

Russia was less economically developed than England and relied on a strong monarch to address the nation’s issues.

Russian monarchs like Peter the Great increased the power of the nobility, while English monarchs like Elizabeth I refused to consult with the English Parliament.

Russian monarchs deeply resented the intrusion of religious authorities into affairs of state, while English monarchs believed they owed allegiance to the head of the Church.

Russia thrived economically under absolute monarchs, while England relied on Parliament to rebuild after the English Civil War.

Answer 1

A- England was more economically developed than Russia and didn’t rely on a strong monarch to address the nation’s issues.

Step-by-step explanation:

I took the quiz

Answer 2

The best and most correct answer among the choices provided by the question is the first choice "Russia was less economically developed than England and relied on a strong monarch to address the nation’s issues."


In Britain, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 led to a constitutional monarchy restricted by laws such as the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701, although limits on the power of the monarch ('A Limited Monarchy') are much older than that, as seen in our Magna Carta.

I hope my answer has come to your help. God bless and have a nice day ahead!