In the English-speaking world, a new generation of modernists believes that the "absolutist" image of the "Revisionists" - Beik, Campbell, Collins, Hamscher, Kettering, Mettam, Parrott, et alia - is the current paradigm. A few of them, at least in North America, want to build a new paradigm to account for absolutism (Breen, Chapman, Dee and many others). In the UK, no one speaks of "absolutism" any more: Guy Rowlands, for example, insists on "dynastic monarchy". In France, on the other hand, specialists have never abandoned the paradigm of "absolute monarchy" or even "absolutism". Can these three models of the Bourbon monarchy be reconciled?