Budding constitutional or absolute monarchs?

Catherine the Great must watch where she James II Roman Catholicism is getting out of
steps with her suitors or the public will find control, and parliament and the people are wary
out! of how long this will last.
Age old question: Absolute or
Constitutional monarch gets it
done better.

Catherine the Great is considered an absolute monarch because she held all of the political
power in Russia. Catherine managed to make the arts excell and helped encourage people to
pursue them, she also managed to extend the borders of Russia. Catherine could not remarry
because in the public eye, that was considered wrong. So Catherine had many suitors behind
closed doors. Around 12 to be exact. Overall people like Catherine but thought she did not do
well when it came to helping the serfs get out of their awful position.

James II was basically crazy when it came to Roman Catholicism. He is considered a

constitutional monarch because he had parliament to keep him in check, but in the end he got
rid of parliament. So thats awkward. He tried to establish Roman Catholic into England but it
didnt go well. So he passed a few declarations got rid of Parliament then everyone was
upset. Then the glorious revolution happened, and he was kicked out. But parliament was
now important!

They only similarity was it seemed like it was a trip and a half to get to the crown in the first
place. Catherine had to work her way up then marry her way up, and James had to be duke
of to many places. Catherine had a lot more power and a lot less power, but there was also a
lot of unhappy serfs but they had no voice in the matter so it didn't really affect her. While
James made a lot of people unhappy so the started a revolution. Catherine overall did more
for her nation because 1. She wasnt insane. 2. She didnt have much to stand in her way.