Divine Right of Kings: Theory & Definition

An error occurred trying to load this video.

Try refreshing the page, or contact customer support.

Coming up next: John of Gaunt, First Duke of Lancaster: Biography & Family Tree

You're on a roll. Keep up the good work!

Take Quiz Watch Next Lesson
Your next lesson will play in 10 seconds
  • 0:00 Definition of Divine Right
  • 0:25 Origin of Divine Right
  • 3:10 History of Divine Right
  • 4:35 Key Writers of Divine Right
  • 7:05 Lesson Summary
Add to Add to Add to

Want to watch this again later?

Log in or sign up to add this lesson to a Custom Course.

Login or Sign up

Create an account to start this course today
Try it free for 5 days!
Create An Account

Recommended Lessons and Courses for You

Lesson Transcript
Instructor: Daniel Julich

Daniel has taught college/university courses in European history, World history, and the history of science and has a PhD in history.

The rule of kings was neither inevitable nor without reason. In this lesson, learn about the divine right of kings, one way that the absolute rulers of Europe justified their authority and responsibility.

Definition of Divine Right

Divine right of kings was a way of justifying monarchies, particularly in Europe during the 16th to the 18th centuries. The idea is that the king is given his authority directly by God. Because of this, he had the 'right' to rule completely and totally, with no need for approval from the people or any representative body such as a parliament.

Early modern king crowned from heaven
Portrait of Charles I

Origin of Divine Right

It is fairly clear that the theory of the divine right of kings in Europe must be traced back to the Bible. Romans, chapter 13 begins in this way:

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.
(Revised Standard Version)

So what the Apostle Paul is saying in the letter to the Romans is that there are two types of authority for human beings. On the one hand, human beings are to be subject to God. On the other hand, they are also bound to obey kings and rulers, because these are seen as being set in place by God. This is, again, grounded on ideas in the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament). The book of the prophet Daniel states that God 'removes kings and sets them up,' which makes it clear that the deity has a hand in who rules in government (Daniel 2.21, Revised Standard Version).

To put it more simply, let's use an illustration from everyday life. Imagine a parent who has a commitment that means that they have to hire a babysitter to watch over their child. The parent gives the babysitter instructions and then turns care of their child over to the babysitter. On the way out the door, the parent says to his eight-year-old, who sometimes tends to push the limits: 'Listen to your babysitter, or there will be consequences tomorrow!' Once the parent leaves, authority for the child is turned over to the babysitter.

Despite some of the points of legal dispute about responsibility for the child by the babysitter, this is still a good way to understand how Europeans came to view kings during the early modern period in Europe. Three things can be seen about divine right in this illustration:

  1. The king is appointed at the discretion of God, just as the babysitter is hired using the best judgment of the parent. Furthermore, it may be that it is a really busy night for babysitters, and so babysitters may be in short supply. So the babysitter may not be the best one possible, just as the king may not be the ideal king, but still is appointed and given authority by God.
  2. The babysitter acts on behalf of the parent while the parent is away. In the same way, the king is considered God's regent on earth, and his decisions are not subject to disapproval from the people (or in the case of the babysitter, the child).
  3. The babysitter is ultimately responsible to the parent. Likewise, divine right theory still insisted that a king is responsible to follow the ways of God in his actions and his carrying out of justice. In the end, when it comes time to pay the babysitter (or to schedule another job), the parent has the final say.

History of Divine Right

Historically, there were cases of divine justification for rule during the Middle Ages. Prior to their conversion to Christianity, some rulers, like the family of kings known as the Merovingians in what is now France, appealed to a blood relationship to a deity (the Merovingians claimed that they came from the line of Merovech, who had been fathered by a river-god).

More to the point, though, were events such as the famous coronation of Charlemagne by the pope on Christmas Day in 800. The act itself was not necessarily seen as the conferring of authority on the king, but more of a confirmation of what already existed. What this demonstrates most strongly, though, is that there was an idea that the ultimate root of kingly authority was spiritual.

During the 16th and 17th centuries, European rulers consolidated power in a number of ways, ending in some places with the establishment of a type of rule now often called absolutism. In this type of rule, the king or queen was seen as the sole source of unquestioned power in the state. Ultimately, the justification for this kind of rule came down to the notion of divine right. The king or queen could rule absolutely because they were essentially 'god on earth.' While they were subject to God's divine judgment, they were not subject to the people in any way, for that would undermine the normal order of things.

Key Writers of Divine Right

Two of the most important individuals to consider this connection between God and the king were King James VI of Scotland and Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet, the court preacher of Louis XIV. Both of these individuals emphasized the similarity between kings and God, using metaphors that highlighted the parallels. Because of this, they both also stressed absolute obedience by subjects.

To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member.
Create your account

Register for a free trial

Are you a student or a teacher?
I am a teacher

Unlock Your Education

See for yourself why 30 million people use Study.com

Become a Study.com member and start learning now.
Become a Member  Back

Earning College Credit

Did you know… We have over 95 college courses that prepare you to earn credit by exam that is accepted by over 2,000 colleges and universities. You can test out of the first two years of college and save thousands off your degree. Anyone can earn credit-by-exam regardless of age or education level.

To learn more, visit our Earning Credit Page

Transferring credit to the school of your choice

Not sure what college you want to attend yet? Study.com has thousands of articles about every imaginable degree, area of study and career path that can help you find the school that's right for you.

Create an account to start this course today
Try it free for 5 days!
Create An Account