Hallowed be Thy Overlord
Sacral Kingship in Christian Europe
Sacral Kingship: A Potent Social Cohesive
In an earlier article, I wrote about the evolutionary limitations placed on the growth of human social organizations, along with humankind’s innovative construction of larger societies designed to surpass them. The development of social structures from tribal confederations to nation-states, empires, and global superpowers necessitated several social modifications that drew from both the depths of our primal psychology to our unique capacity for practical organization. One of the most common and potent adaptations lending itself to the growth and power of a mechanistic organization is the phenomenon of sacral kingship.
Religio: “That which Binds”
Sacral Kingship is the practice of ascribing divinity, divine powers, or divine favor and authority to the leaders of a social unit. Its earliest examples are found in prehistory, where a community’s chiefs, shamans, and medicine men were thought to possess supernatural powers related to fertility and good fortune.[1] The tendency for religious belief among humans, along with the indistinguishability of the religious and the political in early human social life, is hypothesized to have laid the groundwork for this practice, which has manifested cross-culturally throughout human history.[2]
This phenomenon has proven itself throughout history as a potent, and possibly indispensable social adhesive. It reinforces social solidarity, inspires loyalty and obedience, and motivates tribalist zeal and fanaticism far beyond the bounds of natural human inclinations. Thanks to the ubiquity of this phenomenon, case studies can be drawn from any number of histories over the globe. In this article, I will focus on the evolution of sacral kingship in the context of Christian Europe.
The Roots of Sacral Kingship in Christian Europe
The history of sacral kingship in Christian Europe was shaped by religious synchronization and practical political processes. The blend of religious traditions from various European, Mediterranean, and Near Eastern cultures produced the resilient foundation from which the evolution of this construct proceeded until its collapse in the face of the Enlightenment in the 18th and 19th centuries. This history demonstrates how sacral kingship greatly boosts claims of legitimacy, ensuring social cohesion and common identity, inspiring obedient subordination, and facilitating the expansion of cultures and empires.
Pre-Christian Traditions
The form of sacral kingship that took shape in Christian Europe is the result of the convergence of religious and political traditions spread throughout European and Near Eastern antiquity. The practice of revering the King as the “son of god”, can be found throughout the globe, from Incan Peru to Imperial Japan. This form of sacral kingship also manifested in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Canaan, cultures with close and regular contact to European polities. This practice made its way to Hellenic Greece through Alexander the Great, who actively pursued recognition as a demi-god and eventually secured the title of “the son of god.” As stated in Putarch’s On the Fortune or Virtue of Alexander, he also believed that he was, “‘a heaven-sent governor to all.’, an agent of God’s (or the gods’) will on Earth.”[3] The Roman Empire later adopted this tradition in the form of Imperial Cults.[4]
The specific process from which this practice proceeds is fairly simple. Those with some background knowledge about the Christian faith are also sure to pick on some familiar concepts. The first king of a dynasty attains recognition as a god of their people. The son, upon taking the throne, is himself then considered a god. The queen becomes “the mother of god”. Various societies have also associated “unusual natural phenomena” such as an exceptionally bright star with the birth of a divine king. Another manifestation of this practice is the posthumous deification of the king, which is itself a very old and widespread practice. The Hittite phrase, “The king becomes a god”, meant the king had died.[5] The origin of divine agency also found a place in Greece, although its existence was predated, and possibly directly adopted, from the Hebrews.
Hebrew Traditions
Distinct among these nations and cultures were the Hebrew Israelites. Due to their central approximation among many of the above-mentioned peoples, they were no doubt familiar with the above-stated practices. However, their own version of delegating sacred authority was much different. Largely due to their mono-lateral, and later monotheistic belief system, their God, Yahweh, never deigned to take on human form to assume rulership of his people. This is possibly due to the sociopolitical structure of the Hebrew people. Rather than being a centralized people, the Israelites were a confederation of twelve tribes bound together by common religious and ethnic practices, beliefs, and values. For some time, their religion precluded the appointment of a king, as sovereignty was reserved for Yahweh himself. In fact, some Biblical scholarship suggests that the appointment of a monarchy was incompatible with God’s plan for the Israelites, even to the extent that appointing one was seen as an act of betraying God.[6] Instead, Hebrew politics was arbitrated by a clerical caste, led by “judges”. The direct deification of rulers seems to fit best in unitary political structures such as empires, where power was already centralized into a single governing body. The twelve tribes of Israel bore no such characteristics, and thus the concept was initially resisted on both political and religious grounds.
Yet, support for the establishment of a kingship gained traction as a response to persistent invasions by foreigners such as the Philistines. According to the Bible, the Israelite judges finally acquiesced to the rising popular demand for a king. King Saul was anointed by the judge and prophet Samuel around 1020 B.C. This practice of anointing represented a form of sacral kingship distinct from those found among Israel’s neighbors. Saul was never considered a god or even imbued with divine powers. Moreover, his authority, while extensive, was not absolute. His role was essentially that of a warlord tasked with defending Israel’s borders. Responsibilities and prerogatives outside of that scope remained with the clerical judges.[7]
The Israelite monarchy was a unique institution in the company of its neighbors. However, it was rather short-lived. The territories soon split into two nations, with Israel in the north, and Judea in the south before being conquered by neighboring empires shortly thereafter. Israel was seized by the Assyrians in 720 B.C.[8] Babylon conquered Judea shortly after, expunging their royal dynasty, and destroying their temple in Jerusalem.[9] They also sent the Jews into exile, which lasted until the Persian King Cyrus the Great conquered the Babylonians and permitted the Jews to re-enter their homeland. This did not lead to Jewish independence, however, as they remained in the hands of Persian overlords. Over the next six hundred years, the Israelites were dominated by a series of empires, until the Romans finally expelled them from their homeland in 76 A.D.
During this lengthy tenure under foreign rule and ultimate diaspora, the Jewish people lacked a king. Did the absence of an anointed champion chosen by God to defend them from the onslaught of foreign enemies mark them forsaken? They didn’t think so. Instead, sacral kingship evolved. Backed by the foretelling of major prophets during this era, the Jewish people put their faith in a “Messiah”, a leader who would rise from King David’s bloodline to deliver them from bondage and restore them as a free people.[10]
The Deification of Jesus of Nazareth
The ascendence of Jesus of Nazareth to the status of not only the Messiah but God himself is attributed to the synthesis of traditions throughout the Greco-Roman world, of which Judea was included at this time. In terms of Jewish traditions, the writers of the Gospel asserted that Jesus descended from the line of King David and that he is stated to be the redeemer of the people per Jewish prophecy.
Non-Jewish traditions were also integrated into Christian claims of the divinity of Jesus, which surely resonated with Judea’s gentile neighbors and played an important part in spreading Christianity well beyond the Jewish world. For one, in Luke 4:41, Jesus is revealed as the Son of God by demons that he had just cast out.[11] In John 11:27, Martha backs this claim, stating, “Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world.”[12] This goes further when Jesus himself alludes to his status as God himself, stating that “I and the Father are one.” (John, 10:30), and “I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:58). The latter passage is a direct reference to another verse in Exodus 3:14, where God refers to himself as “I AM”. Thomas the disciple swears his allegiance to Jesus, calling him, “My Lord and my God.” (John 20:28). Jesus makes no attempt to correct him. As stated before, this practice was widespread throughout the ancient Greco-Roman world and would have resonated well with prospective converts as Christianity spread.
In the Council of Ephesus in 431, Mary is formally recognized as “the mother of God”, further crystallizing the perception of Jesus as God.[13] The accepted belief that Mary bore Jesus as a virgin falls in line with already entrenched pagan Hellenic beliefs about immaculate conception.[14] The performance of miracles was also a longstanding sign of divinity in the Greek world – Pythagoras Empedocles, Epimenides, Pherecydes were all said to have performed them. Lastly, the Gospels state that the birth of Jesus was heralded by a bright star, a phenomenon also reminiscent of earlier traditions.
The Legacy of Christ and the Rise of the Catholic Church
Of course, according to Christian belief, Christ did not continue to reincarnate throughout history, (as the Dalai Llama does) but rather anointed his followers with his authority. In Catholic traditions, he granted St. Peter the role of the Pope or heir of his sovereignty on Earth. This falls in line with Hebrew traditions where leaders are designated Agents of the Sacred rather than inheriting divinity themselves. From the fall of the Western Roman Empire to the Reformation, the Pope’s authority remained a binding force in Christendom, as he was seen as the chosen agent of Christ’s will on Earth. The Pontiff had the power to both anoint and excommunicate kings and lords throughout Christendom, and while he possessed little direct power, his religious clout was enormous, as demonstrated by events such as the Crusades, and the Inquisitions that solidified authority both within and beyond the borders of Christendom.
The Reformation and the Emergence of Divine Right
Following the weakening of Papal authority precipitated by the Reformation of the 16th century, the concept of Divine Right came to the forefront, whereby kings were believed to be selected for their positions by God himself. Although the idea was that kings were chosen as the political leaders of God, by the 16th and 17th centuries, monarchs were asserting their sovereignty in matters of both church and state. This concept tapped into the rising belief in predetermination, whereby the quality of one’s fortune and social status was viewed as a marker of the caliber of their soul and God’s favor. Since regal ascription was viewed as the jackpot of medieval society, it followed that those born into royal homes were hand-picked by God for their superior souls to rule over their dominions. They were thus deemed to be both divinely appointed and inspired, rendering both their legitimacy and conduct above dispute. Interestingly, also the predeterminism upon which the reasoning for divine right rested had its sources in Protestant Calvinist doctrine, the practice was happily adopted by Catholic Kings across Europe. Thus, the power vacuum created by the erosion of Papal authority was sufficiently filled until the 18th and 19th Centuries, when the power of divine right was extinguished by the American and French Revolutions and the Napoleonic Wars.
Conclusion
The evolution of sacral kingship in Europe from the time of Jesus of Nazareth to the Enlightenment is a truly fascinating process and a testament to the adaptive capacity of the practice. It exemplifies the synchronistic nature of historical processes, whereby practices from various cultures integrate into one another while adapting to changing historical imperatives. In the case of Europe, the sacral legitimacy ultimately originated in Jesus Christ, whose own recognized status as God and Messiah is backed by various religious beliefs and traditions drawn from both Judea and the rest of the Greco-Roman world. The Jewish practice of anointing Agents of God continued in the Christian tradition, whereby the Papacy was established upon the appointment of St. Peter by Christ himself. Popes in turn delegated sacred authority to various kings and other agents throughout the following centuries. The fracture of Christian unity and the diminishment of Papal hegemony following the Reformation catalyzed the predominance of the Doctrine of Divine Right until the Enlightenment of the 18th and 19th centuries. This reflects both the resilience of sacral authority and the willingness of subject populations to accept it.
Yet, have the rising tides of secular rationality swallowed the last vestiges of sacral authority? Or has it simply evolved again, taking on the form of secular dogmas? This question, I believe, is a prime candidate for further research and evaluation. For now, though, I leave it up to you, the reader, to ask yourself that same question.
[1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/sacred-kingship/The-king-as-priest-and-seer
[2] https://www.britannica.com/topic/sacred-kingship
[3] https://digitalcommons.bowdoin.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1253&context=honorsprojects
[4] The ubiquity of this type of sacral kingship suggests the theory that there is an evolutionary drive to venerate leaders to this extent. The success demonstrated by those societies that adopt it likewise implies the evolutionary advantage of this belief.
[5] https://www.britannica.com/topic/sacred-kingship
[6] https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/theses/203/
[7] https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saul-king-of-Israel
[8] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-student-manual-kings-malachi/enrichment-d?lang=eng
[9] https://www.britannica.com/event/Babylonian-Captivity
[10] https://www.britannica.com/topic/messiah-religion
[11] https://www.bibleref.com/Luke/4/Luke-4-41.html#:~:text=ESV%20And%20demons%20also%20came,the%20Son%20of%20God!'
[12] https://www.bibleref.com/John/11/John-11-27.html#:~:text=ESV%20She%20said%20to%20him,'
[13] https://www.bpl.org/blogs/post/the-origins-and-practices-of-holidays-mary-mother-of-god-new-years-day-and-oshogatsu/#:~:text=The%20honoring%20of%20Mary%20as,replace%20the%20feast%20honoring%20Mary.
[14] https://www.ancient-origins.net/myths-legends/virgin-mothers-and-miracle-babies-ancient-history-miraculous-conceptions-005017