Divine Right Kings Quotes
This is one of the passages of the Bible that Christian Kings cited in expecting obedience. Most of the monarchs took this passage to mean that God had selected and appointed them to rule.
This and many other statements have been used to refute the allegation made by some that the Japanese Emperor and Commander in Chief had no influence and control over the military and thus was not responsible for any war crimes.
He was stating for France what the English King James I had said a few decades earlier. See {616307}.
The political control technique of establishing a religion where by God himself ordains the ruler was not unique to the Christians and Muslims. The technique was also used in the Inca Empire of Peru. The first Inca who came up with this creative theocratic concept did so in about 1200.
The Visigoth king was, like other kings all powerful but within certain traditions. Whereas other kings were crowned with a concept of Divine Right, the Visigoth king’s reign was formally contingent on his performance.
There is a striking similarity of speech between Menelik and the monarchs of Europe with respect to his Divine right of rule and dependence on God. Ethiopia, in contrast to the rest of Africa, was a Christian kingdom and had been so for centuries. Menelik mobilized his people and produced a humiliating defeat for the Italians at Adowa in 1896 who never forgot and returned to conquer Ethiopia in the early part of World War II.
The modern Islamic interpretation of this statement is no corrupt sovereign can be removed without a divine edict -- in other words, he ceases to rule only upon his death, because he does not abandon his palace unless he is on his way to the grave. The result is that many Muslims do not countenance revolution.
The early human idea that human rulers must somehow divine and/or designated and supported by the deity was present over many cultures and geographies.
The King assumed the role of head of the Church of England.
In 1848 a number of revolutions flared throughout Europe with a call for democracy rather than monarchy. The Prussian king was one of those who really believed that he was selected by God to rule, was very frightened and tried to enlist the Queen and England to present a united front against the revolutionaries. England, which had already had a strong functioning parliament and extensive voting suffrage, protected most of the rights of its citizens and was a Constitutional Monarchy where there were limits to the power of the monarch. Further, Victoria was extremely popular and in many ways was far ahead of the electorate in terms of modern democratic reforms. So she was not in the panic of many of the other crowned heads of Europe were in. Somewhat following the example of England, King William IV allowed a parliament and minimized the strong military role that characterized Prussia. Most of the 1848 revolutions failed to sieze governments but, as with Prussia, forced reforms in what was a long movement to European democracy that would take another 150 years. Note also the logic about religion. Since the revolutionists did not believe in the divine right of kings, they opposed God’s will on earth. Therefore, they opposed God and must be atheists. Almost all counter revolutionary accusations included the claim—often not true—that the revolutionaries were atheists.
