Dynastic State Project Review There were many ideas presented during the presentations, but most of them centered around main themes. In keeping with the project assignment, all of the states were ruled by a single monarch who has supreme power but is backed by a group of advisors. The groups both (I only know of 1 presentation other than mine) had similar views on religion. It was thought that the best way to keep the people happy, but still maintain control was by giving people free choice of religion. This freedom of religion could me controlled to a degree, if the people became unruly. It was thought that if the peasants' choice of religion was not directly offensive to the government, then the government should not interfere. This view on religious affairs is similar to the main view on social matters. Both groups believed that the government should be fairly removed from social matters, and let the peasants go along as they choose. This was also thought to have the best effect on life in the country, as the people would not feel trapped or controlled by the government. Once again, though, if the people seemed to generate a negative view about the government then actions could be taken to try to raise the people's view of the government. The groups all believed that the country should be supported by a very strong military. There were different ideas as to how this military would be formed, by volunteer or by government command. The consensus was that this military was needed to be very strong and active to protect against other European powers. The groups also thought that the country should not have too many alliances, if any at all. This was thought so that the new state would not be dependant upon other countries to fight its battles or defend its own borders. On the issue of trade, both groups thought that the new state should try to control trade and not rely on trade alliances. By controlling trade around the new state, it would be more self-sufficient and would be able to fend for itself in an economic crisis. The groups also believed that the new state should try and control specific pieces of land in order to regulate trade throughout Europe. If specific points could be controlled, then the new state could impose any tariffs that it wanted to gain revenue. Both groups thought that mastery was an achievable goal for the state, if certain goals of the military and trade could be met. My group specifically thought that the new state would have to control vast amounts of land before this goal was feasible. Within my group, I explained the military goals and the interactions of the peasant social matters and the government. I also discussed the subject of mastery, and whether it was a feasible and achievable goal. Our group worked together fairly well, although Matt seemed somewhat flustered because he missed the first day of explanation and work on the project. Overall this project was fairly successful.