Sacred royalty

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The sacred kingship describes a thesis according to which the king has a special close relationship with God or the divine. This manifested itself in premodern times, among other things, in the idea that the ruler had miraculous powers. The research into this religious concept goes back to the socio-historically oriented Medieval Studies of the Annales School . The thesis is controversially discussed in science, especially on the basis of ancient and early medieval cultures in Europe such as those of the Celts and Teutons . In addition, the term is applied to other cultures of antiquity and extends into the early modern period in the form of a sacred kingship . In historical research, the military kingship is the counter-construct to the sacred salvation of the king .

History of ideas

Pre-Christian sacral rule

According to the historian Franz-Reiner Erkens , social systems were unthinkable in the premodern without sacred legitimation. Politics and religion were not yet independent spheres. The ruler himself could be viewed as a god like the pharaoh in ancient Egypt . A sacred king could also be worshiped as the son or successor of a god. For example, Alexander the Great was portrayed as the "son of Zeus ". The sacred ruler could be the head or protector of religious rituals and cults and he could ensure the continued existence of the religious and social order.

Old Egypt

In ancient Egypt, it was not the person of the king who was considered divine, but only the office he held. Egyptologists therefore differentiate between the “identitary” and “representative divinity” of the Egyptian king. The Pharaoh consequently stepped back behind the full-fledged gods. After his death, like every mortal, he had to answer to the judge of the afterlife, Osiris . The hieroglyphs also do not hide the fact that the Pharaoh could perish by murder (as in the case of Amenemhet ). According to ancient Egyptian belief, the sun god Amun withdrew to heaven after he created the world and ruled it together with the other gods. Amun transferred earthly rule to the pharaohs, who were regarded as his sons. In this act, the pharaohs are said to have been given the task of enforcing ma'at or justice internally through justice and sacrifices for the gods . Externally, they were supposed to guarantee the defense of the country. In several temples of the 2nd millennium BC Chr. Inscriptions proclaim the following wording:

"Amun installed the king on the earth of the living forever and ever, in order to judge people, to please the gods, to let justice arise, to destroy sin."

The Pharaoh owed his outstanding social position to his birth. Egyptian temples such as the temple of Amenhotep III. show depictions of Amun assuming the human form of the later pharaoh and begetting the king with an earthly woman. As the son of Amun or Re, as the sun god was still called in the Old Kingdom , the ruler was obliged to build temples to the gods. They should demonstrate his closeness to the gods and his “supernatural powers”, for example through battle scenes in which the Pharaoh kills enemies.

Mesopotamia

In Mesopotamia , unlike in Egypt, the kings were only valid during the early phase or before the 18th century BC. As gods. Thereafter the idea of ​​their divine vicariousness prevailed. For the 7th century BC The following sentence is passed down from the coronation ritual: " Assyrian himself is king". In this way, the ruler should be reminded when taking office that he was only a servant of the Assyrian empire god Assyr and owed him an account. The organization of the cult of the gods, that is, the supply of the gods through animal sacrifices, took an even more important place as the king's field of activity than the judiciary and military defense. In his capacity as the highest priest, the Assyrian king guaranteed the welfare of the people. The following praise has been received from the later phase of the Assyrians:

“If the king performs the cult correctly, the harvest will flourish and Assurbanipal (an Assyrian king) could proclaim at his own price: Ever since the gods benevolently let me sit on the throne of my father, my producer, Adad let his downpours go Ea opened his springs, the grain rose five cubits in its ears ..., the fruit plants brought the fruit to abundant development, the cattle had succeeded in giving birth. During my government abundance oozed; during my years abundance was accumulated. "

Germanic sacred kingdom

In research it has been discussed for a long time whether one can assume a sacred kingdom among the Teutons without a general consensus being able to be reached so far. An assessment is made more difficult, among other things, by the source situation and methodological problems, including the ideas of older research that seem questionable today (which were often strongly nationally conservative and, above all, pursued methodologically unjustifiable approaches during the time of National Socialism ) and the difficulty of transferring ethnological ones Models.

Otto Höfler emphatically emphasized the existence of a Germanic sacred kingdom, which was quite powerful. In his publications on the Germanic religious history, Höfler assumed a sacred Germanic kingship; the salvation of kings was an expression of the supposedly divine descent of the Germanic kings, whereby the king is not God, but a part of the divine is present in him. However, his research approach is now viewed very critically, as he used Scandinavian sources created later and projected the knowledge gained from them onto the earlier period of the Germanic tribes, which is methodologically hardly tenable.

In the more recent research, sometimes sharp criticism of the older explanatory models has been made. On the other hand, sacred elements have always played a role in the legitimation of rule. In this sense, recent research emphasizes the difference between these sacred elements of rulership and the older explanatory models. In this context, different explanatory approaches from an ethnological and archaeological (e.g. with regard to the interpretation of grave finds) perspective can be considered.

European Middle Ages

Coronation image of Henry II from the Regensburg sacramentary : Depiction of the emperor as a mediator between heaven and earth (the emperor protruding into the mandorla , in which Christ is enthroned and puts the crown on the emperor)

According to the historian Franz-Reiner Erkens , the sacred kingdom in the European Middle Ages was linked to three central aspects. The first aspect is the so-called divine right, that is, the idea that “the kingdom was created by God and its bearer was chosen by God”. The second aspect is rooted in the idea that the ruler is God's earthly representative. The third aspect is that the king has a “priest-like responsibility towards the society entrusted to him”.

Regional differences in the sacred kingdom

In high medieval France and England a special form of the sacred kingdom appeared; the supposed ability of the monarch to heal scrofula , a skin disease, by the laying on of hands. However, this ability cannot be observed in the Roman-German king or the kings of the Iberian Peninsula . Therefore, according to Erkens, the ruler's ability to heal cannot have been of decisive importance for the European sacred kingdom. The outdated idea that the rulers of the Middle Ages had the task of walking past sick people who had traveled for hours and touching them goes back to the French historian Marc Bloch , who approached the rulers of the Middle Ages with his work "The Miraculous Kings" in 1924 Medicine men stylized.

Today the regional differences of the sacred kingdom within Europe are emphasized more. Unlike in France, there was only temporary anointing on the Iberian Peninsula. Such a practice was indispensable in France, as the king only entered the transcendent-divine sphere with the anointing. Only after the anointing was he able to participate in the divine power and was confirmed as ruler. In the Holy Roman Empire, "imperial references" to the Roman Empire were particularly present.

Differentiation of the sacred ruler from the holy ruler

According to the Christian understanding, a person is canonized if he is particularly characterized by “asceticism, martyrdom, the support of those in need or a turning away from the world”. Therefore, a number of medieval rulers are considered holy by the Catholic Church, such as Emperor Heinrich II from the Ottonen dynasty. A holy ruler was automatically considered a sacred ruler, while a sacred ruler was not necessarily canonized. A sacred but not holy ruler was only characterized by his divine institution, his divine representation on earth and his associated responsibility before God for society.

European modern times

The " scrofula healing " practiced by the laying on of hands in England until 1714 and in France until 1825 ( Charles X ) was used as evidence of the continued belief in the salvation of the king. In fact, numerous sacred elements can be identified in Christianly legitimized kings. The French king has been considered the “most Christian king” ( rex christianissimus ) since the High Middle Ages , and the aforementioned “miraculous powers” ​​were ascribed to him. Even in the early modern monarchies, sacred ideas were an integral part of the sovereign self-image, although this is by no means unproblematic from a historical-methodological perspective.

African sacred royalty

According to African ideas, the supernatural powers and the moral way of life of the sacred ruler were responsible for the well-being of a society (e.g. the success of the harvest, prosperity and military success) - a concept that historians have in part also transferred to premodern Europe has been. In many cases it is said to have been customary in Africa to murder the ruler either in the event of poor harvests or military defeats or after a certain period of time (cf. Regizid ) in order to ensure lasting social success through a new ruler. This model of African religious rule is based on the ideas of the British ethnologist James George Frazer and is highly controversial in research. Unequivocal indications of historically practiced regicides in African society have not yet been proven.

Sacred royalty among Ottonians and Salians

Although the sacred kingdom had already gained in importance in the Carolingian Franconian Empire , it only reached its climax in the late Tonic and early Salian times. The sacred element of royal rule also served to justify the so-called investiture (that is, the appointment of bishops to their office by the king). The chronicler Thietmar von Merseburg resolutely rejected the fact that Duke Arnulf of Bavaria had appointed bishops. In his view, this right could only be exercised by those who “stand above all mortals through the glory of consecration and the crown”. According to Thietmar, only the king or emperor of the empire, but by no means the dukes, were appointed to this task by Jesus Christ. Until the middle of the 11th century, on the eve of the investiture controversy, the royal right to investiture actually remained unchallenged. The essence of sacred rulership, however, did not only affect the practice of investiture. The understanding of the law was also reshaped. The right balance between legal rigor and Christian grace or forgiveness became the central aspect of royal authority. By reinstating convicts in their old position, the ruler was able to create a balance between the aristocratic and ecclesiastical parties to the conflict. The unilateral punishment of a powerful prince was associated with the risk of a power vacuum that could provoke armed conflicts. The system of “rule by grace”, according to Stefan Weinfurter , was therefore also a realpolitical instrument of the medieval sacred kingdom. At the same time the king was obliged to enforce the divine commandments with the gospels. As God's representative, he was not allowed to show forbearance or mercy. The ruthlessness in the procedure brought Heinrich III. the accusation of always moving away from Christian justice. In autumn 1043 the legal understanding culminated in the fact that Heinrich III. during a synod in Constance called on the assembly to allow peace to rule and to “grant forgiveness” to his opponents. Even after a military victory over the Hungarians in 1044, Henry III knelt. and his army down in front of a relic to symbolically thank God for the success.

literature

  • Hans H. Anton, Heinrich Beck , Alexander P. Bronisch, Max.Maximilian Diesberger, Franz-Reiner Erkens , Andreas Goltz, Ulrich Köhler, Ludger Körntgen , Lutz E. von Padberg , Alexandra Pesch, Walter Pohl , Heiko Steuer , Olof Sundqvist: Sacred royalty. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde . Volume 26: Hall donation. Edited by Heinrich Beck, Dieter Geuenich , Heiko Steuer. 2nd, completely revised and greatly expanded edition. de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2004, ISBN 3-11-017734-X , pp. 179ff.
  • Ronald G. Asch : Sacral Kingship Between Disenchantment and Re-enchantment. The French and English Monarchies 1587–1688 (= Studies in British and Imperial History. Vol. 2). Berghahn, New York 2014, ISBN 978-1-78238-356-7 .
  • Marc Bloch : The miraculous kings. Foreword by Jacques Le Goff . Beck, Munich 1998, ISBN 3-406-44053-3 .
  • Lennart Ejerfeldt: Germanic religion. In: Jes Peter Asmussen, Jorgen Laessoe (Hrsg.): Handbuch der Religionsgeschichte. Volume 1. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1971, ISBN 3-525-50158-7 , pp. 277-342.
  • Otto Höfler : The sacred character of the Germanic kingdom. In: Constance Working Group for Medieval History (ed.): The Kingship. Its intellectual and legal basis. Mainau lectures 1954 (= Institute for State Historical Research of the Lake Constance area in Konstanz. Lectures and research. Vol. 3, ISSN  0452-490X ). Thorbecke, Lindau et al. 1956, pp. 75-104.
  • Otto Höfler: Germanic sacred kingdom. Volume 1: The rune stone from Rök and the Germanic individual consecration. Niemeyer et al., Tübingen et al. 1952.
  • Walther Kienast : Germanic loyalty and "royal salvation". In: Historical magazine. Vol. 227, 1978, pp. 265-324.
  • Eve Picard: Germanic sacred kingdom? Source-critical studies on the Germania of Tacitus and the Old Norse tradition (= Scandinavian works. Vol. 12). Carl Winter Universitätsverlag, Heidelberg 1991, ISBN 3-533-04418-1 (also: Frankfurt am Main, Univ., Diss., 1989/90).
  • Walter Schlesinger : The army kingship. In: The Kingship. Its intellectual and legal basis. Mainau lectures 1954 (= Institute for Historical Research of the Lake Constance Area in Konstanz. Lectures and Research. Vol. 3). Thorbecke, Lindau et al. 1956, pp. 105-142.
  • Klaus von See : Continuity theory and sacred theory in Germanic research. Answer to Otto Höfler. Athenäum-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1972, ISBN 3-7610-7171-X .

Web links

Remarks

  1. ^ Franz-Reiner Erkens: Rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages. From the beginning to the investiture dispute. Kohlhammer Publishing House. Stuttgart 2006. p. 30. ISBN 978-3170172425
  2. ↑ Dietrich Wildung: The Pharaohs. A cultural-historical overview In: Ramses. Divine ruler on the Nile. Michael Imhof Publishing House. Karlsruhe 2017. p. 30.
  3. ↑ Jan Assmann: Sacred royalty and community art. The ancient Orient and the political. Bielefeld 2008. p. 365
  4. ^ Franz-Reiner Erkens: rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages: from the beginnings to the investiture dispute. Kohlhammer Publishing House. Stuttgart 2006. p. 30. ISBN 978-3170172425
  5. ^ Franz-Reiner Erkens: rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages: from the beginnings to the investiture dispute. P. 36
  6. ↑ Dietrich Wildung: The Pharaohs. A cultural-historical overview In: Ramses. Divine ruler on the Nile. Michael Imhof Publishing House. Karlsruhe 2017. p. 30.
  7. ^ Franz-Reiner Erkens: rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages: from the beginnings to the investiture dispute . Stuttgart 2006, p. 36 .
  8. ^ Rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages: from the beginnings to the investiture dispute. P. 36
  9. ↑ For the history of research, see article Sacred Kingdom. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde . Volume 26. Berlin / New York 2004, pp. 207ff.
  10. ↑ Basic overview with exhaustive references in the article Sacred King. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Volume 26. Berlin / New York 2004, pp. 179ff. Cf. also Matthias Becher : “Dominion” in the transition from late antiquity to the early Middle Ages. From Rome to the Franks. In: Theo Kölzer , Rudolf Schieffer (ed.): From late antiquity to the early Middle Ages. Continuities and breaks, conceptions and findings. Ostfildern 2009, pp. 163–188; Stefanie Dick: The myth of the "Germanic" royalty. Studies on the organization of rule among the Germanic barbarians up to the beginning of the migration period. Berlin 2008; Herwig Wolfram : Early royalty. In: Franz-Reiner Erkens (Ed.): The early medieval monarchy. Idea and religious foundations. Berlin 2005, pp. 42-64.
  11. ↑ See above all Otto Höfler: The sacral character of the Germanic kingdom. In: Theodor Mayer (Ed.): The Kingship. Its intellectual and legal basis. Lindau et al. 1956, pp. 75-104, here pp. 82f.
  12. ↑ Eve Picard: Germanic sacral kingdom? Source-critical studies on the Germania of Tacitus and the Norse tradition. Heidelberg 1991; see. also Stefanie Dick: The myth of the “Germanic” royalty. Studies on the organization of rule among the Germanic barbarians up to the beginning of the migration period. Berlin 2008, p. 29ff.
  13. ↑ Summarizing article Sacral Kingdom. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Volume 26. Berlin / New York 2004, pp. 216-219. Cf. also Stefanie Dick: The myth of the “Germanic” royalty. Studies on the organization of rule among the Germanic barbarians up to the beginning of the migration period. Berlin 2008, p. 27ff.
  14. ↑ Article Sacred Kingdom. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Volume 26. Berlin / New York 2004, pp. 179f.
  15. ↑ Article Sacred Kingdom. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Volume 26. Berlin / New York 2004, pp. 181-183.
  16. ↑ Article Sacred Kingdom. In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Volume 26. Berlin / New York 2004, pp. 183-207.
  17. ↑ Franz-Reiner Erkens: Rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages - From the beginnings to the investiture dispute . Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2006, p. 29 .
  18. ↑ Franz-Reiner Erkens: Rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages - From the beginnings to the investiture dispute . Stuttgart 2006, p. 30 .
  19. ↑ Review by Marc Bloch The Miraculous Kings .
  20. ↑ Franz-Reiner Erkens: Rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages - From the beginnings to the investiture dispute . Stuttgart 2006, p. 30 .
  21. ↑ Franz-Reiner Erkens: Rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages - From the beginnings to the investiture dispute . Stuttgart 2006, p. 26 .
  22. ↑ Marc Bloch: The miraculous kings. Munich 1998.
  23. ↑ Franz-Reiner Erkens: Sacrally legitimized rule in the change of times and spaces. An attempt at an overview. In: Franz-Reiner Erkens (Ed.): The sacrality of rule. Legitimation of power in the change of times and spaces. Berlin 2002, pp. 7–32.
  24. ↑ Franz-Reiner Erkens: Rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages - From the beginnings to the investiture dispute . Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2006, p. 32 .
  25. ^ Franz-Rainer Erkens: The rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages. From the beginning to the investiture dispute . Stuttgart 2006, p. 157 .
  26. ^ Gerd Tellenbach: The western church from the 10th to the early 12th century . S. 45 .
  27. ↑ Stefan Weinfurter: Rule through grace The authority of the king in the early 11th century. January 27, 2009, accessed October 30, 2017 .
  28. ^ Franz-Rainer Erkens: The rulers' sacredness in the Middle Ages. From the beginning to the investiture dispute . Stuttgart 2006, p. 159 .