History Main / DivineRightOfKings

For most of history, in most of the world, people were subjects of TheKingdom, governed by a King and his Royal Family. Across history, wars were fought between Kings, some became Emperors, but in most cases, the people remained governed and lived in TheKingdom, excepting of course the oases of self-governments in small city-states scattered here and there. It wasn't long before people asked questions why some were born Kings, and why people needed Kings, and how do Kings rule.

The most popular and common idea is The Divine Right of Kings. The idea that God appointed Kings, Queens and Emperors as his earthly representatives, therefore defying them is defying God's will. TheKingdom and TheEmpire exists because God willed it as the ideal earthly form of government. Most royal bloodlines used some variant of this rule to justify their power. This concept was especially prevalent in European nations where rulers in France, England, Russia and other nations were deeply invested with their respective religious organizations, and obeisance for royalty was invoked as part of the religious ceremonies. In history, the divine right evolved over a period of contentious exchanges between Church and State. The Church formerly exercised all rights to legitimize the authority of kingdoms in Western Europe, driving many to seek favour and leverage over the Pope. The Kings gradually eroded the power of the Church to enforce their decrees. The Divine Right was the final contract between crown and church, designed to eternally validate the other in the eyes of the people and for all its ancient sounding name, it was specifically a product of the Early Modern Era: between UsefulNotes/TheRenaissance and UsefulNotes/TheEnlightenment. It was first promulgated by [[UsefulNotes/TheHouseOfStuart King James I of England]] and later UsefulNotes/LouisXIV of France.

In other nations, such as UsefulNotes/ImperialJapan, the Emperor was regarded as a God in the Shinto religions, while in UsefulNotes/TheRomanEmpire and Ancient Egypt, rulers, their family and other favorites were deified after their deaths. The Divine Right of Kings has a parallel concept called "Mandate of Heaven" in Chinese culture, where TheKingdom was born because the king mastered his circumstances and convinced his peers of his skills and abilities. The word "mandate" imposes on the ruler an obligation of duty and responsibility, and unlike the European Divine Right of Kings, a ruler can lose this mandate and the mandate of his dynasty if he failed in his obligation.

''Franchise/AvatarTheLastAirbender'':

* ''WesternAnimation/AvatarTheLastAirbender'': Azula references this, claiming that the reason Long Feng lost to her in the bid for control of Ba-Sing Sei is because she was born to rule, while he was not. Of course, there are no gods in this 'verse, (save for Vaatu and Raava, but only few knew of them until the [[WesternAnimation/TheLegendOfKorra sequel series]]) so it's not exactly clear what divine right she is referencing.
* ''WesternAnimation/TheLegendOfKorra'': Amon claims that the divine right granted to the Avatar by the spirits has been rescinded, and that he has the new right to bring balance to the world by destroying all benders. He then proves it by [[DePower removing the bending powers of a number of criminal captives]]. [[spoiler:He's actually an incredibly powerful waterbender combining bloodbending with chi-blocking to essentially surgically block a bender's chi permanently. Whether he believes his claims about bending being evil or not, the spirits have nothing to do with it]].

* ''ComicBook/BlackPanther'' rules Wakanda by dynastic inheritance and divine right and serves as EmperorScientist. In the 2016 series by Ta-Nehisi Coates and Brian Stelfreeze, they explore whether a modern technologically advanced state can coexist with Divine Right, as the people of Wakanda lose confidence in the ability of their King to protect them.

* ''Webcomic/GirlGenius'': The novels poke fun at this, noting that all the royals are really just descendants of cutthroats and brigands, who are now annoyed that (with the industrial revolution and the rise of the [[MadScientist Spark]]), their power is significantly less meaningful than it once was.

* ''WesternAnimation/AvatarTheLastAirbender'': Azula references this, claiming that the reason Long Feng lost to her in the bid for control of Ba-Sing Sei is because she was born to rule, while he was not. Of course, there are no gods in this 'verse, so it's not exactly clear what divine right she is referencing.

* In the aptly named ''TabletopGame/{{Birthright}}'' setting, the blood of the deities killed during the battle at Mount Deismaar, several millennia ago. The blood of those deities granted divine blood to the mortal followers witnessing, and they passed it on to their descendants via potent abilities called Bloodlines. Since then, Blooded mortals who carry this small trace of divinity have been the rulers of Cerilia (and most of the upper class) more often than not.

** The ridiculous nature of the Disc's approach to kings is best demonstrated in ''Discworld/FeetOfClay'', when Nobby (a [[AmbiguouslyHuman possibly human]] degenerate who is generally described as "common as muck") is "discovered" to be Earl of Ankh-Morpork as part of a ploy to put him on the throne as an easily-manipulated stooge. Everyone who meets him goes from being disgusted to being awed the moment they find out he is the Earl, and bow and scrape every chance they get. Thankfully, the plan is derailed when Nobby himself finds out about it, as he quickly realizes that Vimes would never allow him to take the throne. When the nobles point out Nobby could have him killed, Nobby decides that would just makes Vimes angrier, and runs as fast as he can without ever looking back.

** ''Literature/MistbornTheOriginalTrilogy'': The Steel Ministry teaches that when [[GodEmperor the Lord Ruler]] used his divine powers to take over the world, only his closest friends stood by him. These friends and their descendants were granted Allomancy and noble titles, while everyone else was enslaved as the skaa. For a thousand years, the nobles ruled over the skaa with absolute authority, allowed to rape and murder (even ''required'' to murder in some cases) with impunity. Even the skaa rebels fighting to overthrow the government occasionally wonder if it is ''right'' that they do so, since the Lord Ruler is God, and he determines what is right. It should be noted that the Lord Ruler doesn't actually care if anyone believes in his religion or not; [[PhysicalGod he is fully capable of killing literally every person in the world by himself by need be]]. He only cares that they obey.

* Parodied in ''Literature/TenSixtySixAndAllThat'', in which the Divine Right of Kings, as explained by UsefulNotes/CharlesI, said that:
-->(a) He was King, and that was right.
-->(b) Kings were divine, and that was right.
-->(c) Kings were right, and that was right.
-->(d) Everything was all right.
* In ''Literature/AConfederacyOfDunces'', in which arch-reactionary Ignatius J. Reilly, who [[BornInTheWrongCentury pines for medieval Europe despite living in 1960s New Orleans]], is challenged by his [[OppositesAttract arch-leftist]] girlfriend Myrna Minkoff to come up with a means of becoming politically involved. He comes up with an idea to elect a president by divine right.

* ''Webcomic/{{Blindsprings}}'': The Orphics, a WitchSpecies, claimed that they needed to be in charge to satisfy the spirits and keep both the land and the magic alive. All this is true. Unfortunately, only Orphics can see spirits, so the common people assumed that they were just lying to justify their rule. It certainly didn't help that the ruling family was caring less and less for their kingdom as time went on, instead amusing themselves with trinkets made by the new academic magic. The first academist eventually used these trinkets to overthrow and execute all of them except one, who escaped with the spirits.

* In ''Film/RobinHood2010'', Robin Longstride and England's barons make a deal with King John that they'll follow him into battle against a French invasion if he agrees to sign a charter limiting his power as king. After the battle, John goes back on his word, invoking divine right, and declares Robin an outlaw for impersonating a nobleman.

The most popular and common idea is The Divine Right of Kings. The idea that God appointed Kings, Queens and Emperors as his earthly representatives, therefore defying them is defying God's will. TheKingdom and TheEmpire exists because God willed it as the ideal earthly form of government. Most royal bloodlines used some variant of this rule to justify their power. This concept was especially prevalent in European nations where rulers in France, England, Russia and other nations were deeply invested with their respective religious organizations, and obeisance for royalty was invoked as part of the religious ceremonies. In history, the divine right evolved over a period of contentious exchanges between Church and State. The Church formerly exercised all rights to legitimize the authority of kingdoms in Western Europe, driving many to seek favour and leverage over the Pope. The Kings gradually eroded the power of the Church to enforce their decrees. The Divine Right was the final contract between crown and church, designed to eternally validate the other in the eyes of the people and for all its ancient sounding name, it was specifically a product of the Early Modern Era: between UsefulNotes/TheRenaissance and UsefulNotes/TheEnlightenment. It was first promulgated by [[UsefulNotes/TheHouseOfStart King James I of England]] and later UsefulNotes/LouisXIV of France.

In fantasy works, this right can overlap with RoyaltySuperpower, with actual gods and other supernatural entities granting royals their favor. That doesn't mean the royals are immune to corruption or poor decisions, however. See also BlueBlood. Compare/contrast GodEmperor, where the monarch claims or is attributed the whole package of divinity. TheKingslayer is what happens when someone kills a king (and this is treated as a horrific thing because of his divine right) and {{Tryrannicide}} revolves around the conditions when one can legally revolt and topple a King.

* As mentioned in the description, the idea of divine legitimacy is one that countless civilizations used to justify the rule of a monarch, the most notable cases being China and Europe. In the case of Europe, however, the rise of scientific thought during the Enlightenment led to an intense questioning of this concept, effectively rendering the crown far more vulnerable to opposition.
* The inherent conflict between the concept of divine right as a justification for authoritarianism, espoused by King UsefulNotes/CharlesI Stuart, versus the concept of rule by consent of the governed and a limited monarchy, was one of the factors that led to the UsefulNotes/EnglishCivilWar in the mid-1600s.

For most of history, in most of the world, people were subjects of TheKingdom, governed by a King and his Royal Family. Across history, wars were fought between Kings, some Kings became Emperor, but in most cases, the people remained governed and lived in TheKingdom, excepting of course the oases of self-governments in small city-states scattered here and there. It wasn't long before people asked questions why some were born Kings, and why people needed Kings, and how do Kings rule.

The most popular and common idea is The Divine Right of Kings. The idea that God appointed Kings, Queens and Emperors as his earthly representatives, therefore defying them is defying God's will. TheKingdom and TheEmpire exists because God willed it as the ideal earthly form of government. Most royal bloodlines used some variant of this rule to justify their power. This concept was especially prevalent in European nations where rulers in France, England, Russia and other nations were deeply invested with their respective religious organizations, and obeisance for royalty was invoked as part of the religious ceremonies.

In fantasy works, this right can overlap with RoyaltySuperpower, with actual gods and other supernatural entities granting royals their favor. That doesn't mean the royals are immune to corruption or poor decisions, however. See also BlueBlood. Compare/contrast GodEmperor, where the monarch claims or is attributed the whole package of divinity. TheKingslayer is what happens when someone kills a king (and this is treated as a horrific thing because of his divine right).

The Divine Right of Kings, called the "Mandate of Heaven" in China, is the idea that God intentionally placed all royals in power, and therefore defying them is defying God's will. Most royal lines used some variant of this rule to justify their power. In China, the idea was that the Mandate only remained valid while the ruler was just, and they could be removed from power if they were not. In Europe, this caveat did not exist--kings were supposed to be obeyed, no matter what.

In fantasy works, this right can be far more justified, with actual gods and other supernatural entities granting royals their favor. That doesn't mean the royals are immune to corruption or poor decisions, however.

See also BlueBlood. Compare/contrast GodEmperor, where the monarch claims or is attributed the whole package of divinity. TheKingslayer is what happens when someone kills a king (and this is treated as a horrific thing because of his divine right).

Called the MandateOfHeaven in China, the Divine Right is the idea that God intentionally placed all royals in power, and therefore defying them is defying God's will. Most royal lines used some variant of this rule to justify their power. In China, the idea was that the Mandate only remained valid while the ruler was just, and they could be removed from power if they were not. In Europe, this caveat did not exist--kings were supposed to be obeyed, no matter what.

Called the MandateOfHeaven in Asian cultures, the Divine Right is the idea that God intentionally placed all royals in power, and therefore defying them is defying God's will. Most royal lines used some variant of this rule to justify their power. In Asia, the idea was that the Mandate only remained valid while the ruler was just, and they could be removed from power if they were not. In Europe, this caveat did not exist--kings were supposed to be obeyed, no matter what.