The Divine right of the Tsar and the "unity of Heaven and the Emperor" — the concept of the "Holy Sovereign" in Russian and Chinese political cultures

Van Jiehan PhD in Cultural Studies Postgraduate student, Department of Regional Studies, Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1 wjie8160@gmail.com

The topic of basic concepts in Russia and China is relevant and widely studied. In the field of comparative analysis of language systems, many studies have been conducted that analyze various language models of the world. It is worth noting the works of such authors as Pereslegina, E.R.^[9], Shakhbanova, A. R. ^[13], and Gak, V. G.^[3] The cycle of research performed by Golovanivskaya, M.K. and Efimenko, N.A. is also noteworthy..^[4][5][6][7], dedicated to the basic concepts of the language models of the world in Russian, Chinese and French.

The monarchy has played an important role in the history of the Russian and Chinese states and has had a profound impact on their culture. The Sovereign, as the central political figure of the state, is certainly widely reflected in the mentalities of both peoples. In autocratic Russia and China, the ruler was considered holy and great, whose power and authority were bestowed from above and provided by a "higher power".

The first full-fledged cultural images of Russian rulers appeared after the baptism of Rus in 988. In ancient Russian literature, the ruler (prince) was depicted as a God-chosen one and defender of the Orthodox faith and the church ^{[8, p.104]}. As an example, Alexander Nevsky, who was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church (hereinafter referred to as the ROC), can be named a saint.

According to O. A. Platonov, the head of the Russian state was "the anointed of God, the representative of God on earth, standing above all estates" ^{[10, p.14]}. In the minds of the people of the autocratic Russian state, the image of the tsar is inseparably linked with the glory of God.

Subsequently, already in the era of the tsars, the importance of the sanctity of the ruler's power continued to grow. The tsar becomes not only the defender of the Orthodox faith, but also the one chosen by God himself to rule the country. Each king is anointed with myrrh or oil, which symbolizes the transfer to him of the gifts of the Holy Spirit necessary for governing the country. This strengthened his authority in the eyes of the believing people ^{[1, p.104]}.

In the XV century, St. Joseph of Volotsky clearly formulated the close connection between the tsar and God: "The tsar is like all man by nature, and is like the supreme god by power" ^{[12, p. 184]}. The whole nation should "work for him according to all his will and his command, as the Lord works, and not as a man" ^{[2, p.89]}. Russian Russian tsar's words guaranteed the possession of supreme power and thus emphasized the sacred and inviolable image of the sovereign on Russian soil.

Monk Philotheus, a contemporary of Joseph Volotsky, expanded the concept of the "holy king". Describing the theory of the "Third Rome", he deepened the concept of the authority of the Russian tsar, who was not only the head of Moscow Russia, but also of the entire united kingdom of Orthodoxy: "you are one Christian tsar in the whole celestial empire" ^{[11, pp.358-359]}. As a result, the image of the tsar was more closely tied to the Orthodox god, which, of course, more ensured the strength and elevation of the sovereign in the national mentality.

On the other hand, such a strong correlation between the royal power and the will of God actually limited the sovereign's rule to an absolute degree, since in such a context, the king, despite the fact that he received the right to lead the people, was only the "manager" of the state, and not the owner. The glory of God always shines above his name. The monk Philotheus writes: "It is fitting for you, the tsar, to hold this with the fear of God; fear God, who gave you this..." ^{[5, p. 359]}, that is, the sovereign actually simply "replaces" the position of governing the country, but only secular affairs, because the inner world of the people is the sphere of influence of the church. In this case, autocracy is not an end in itself, but simply a means by which one can achieve the real goal — to protect and strengthen the Orthodox faith. The ruler of the state, of course, is not the owner of the land, but represents an agent of God. Everything he does is just God's will, especially good deeds. The proverb "Whom God has mercy on, the tsar favors," for example, very well reflects the limited power of the Russian sovereign, who cannot act of his own free will, but only at the request of a higher power — God. The sanctity of the image of the king is presented as a projection of an ideal, supreme being in the world, nothing more.

The special role of the God-chosen prince and the sanctity of his power is, of course, due to political reasons. The Orthodox faith played a huge role in uniting the disparate ancient Russian principalities, and also historically acted as a kind of mental core of the Russian people: a single faith served as the basis for consolidating society during military conflicts and other significant historical events. At the same time, the Orthodox religion also served as an extremely important political tool that allowed the princes to strengthen the authority of their government, using the image of a defender of the Orthodox faith and a unifier of Orthodox people.

In ancient China, the image of the sovereign, when compared with the tsar in the traditional Russian mentality, was more associated with superhuman strength. The first leaders of the country were gods in themselves, they had superhuman strength or facial features. For example, the Empress Nyuva () appears as the creator of mankind and is depicted as a figure with the body of a snake, but with the head and hands of a man. The emperor Huang di is said to have had four faces ^{[22, p.47] [26, p.83-84]}. Thus, in ancient times in the Chinese state, the sovereigns had deified images, they were gods in themselves, who had the power to control the natural environment and, of course, people's lives.

Yin-Shang^[1] is the earliest dynasty in the history of China, the reality of whose existence is confirmed by archaeological finds. The cult of nature and primitive paganism in prehistoric times were preserved and formed the basis of the Yin Shan culture. The worship of non-human "natural" forces, such as gods and spirits, was deeply and widely accepted by the Chinese people.

The sanctity of the sovereign's power during the Yin Shang was based on the foundation of the cult of nature and the cult of ancestors. The ancestral gods and the gods of nature directed their affairs, they had the same status ^{[15, p.112]}, therefore, according to the then Chinese worldview, there was no single supreme God.

In addition, according to the content of the "Shang Hymn" ^{[28, p.547]}, Jian Di, a woman from the Yusong tribe, was bathing in the river when a black divine bird flew in the sky. A bird laid an egg in the sky, and Jian Di mistakenly ate it, and when she returned home, she became pregnant and gave birth to Zuci. In other words, Zuqi was born from an egg, and his father was actually a divine bird who sent him to earth to found and lead the state of Yin Shan. The totem of the Shang Dynasty was precisely Xuan-nao, that is, the black bird. This also confirms that the Shang people considered the black bird to be the god of their tribe's ancestors, therefore the sovereign in the Yin-Shang dynasty, who, like the Russian tsar, received the legitimacy and authority of his power from a higher power, included different "semantics" from the point of view of political culture.

Firstly, the concept of "deity" in Chinese culture was perceived as a combination of ancestral gods and nature. In this respect, the political culture of ancient China differs from the Russian one, which emphasized the "exclusivity" of the image of God.

Secondly, in the Russian mentality, the tsar was considered an anointed man. The ancient Chinese viewed the sovereign as an inhuman being with divine blood. This actually meant the deification of the ruler of the state, which not only continued throughout the entire Yin-Shang dynasty, but also influenced the subsequent history of China.

After Yin Shang, the Zhou Dynasty began to rule. As humanity's awareness of nature and procreation deepened, the genetic relationship of the rulers with the gods was destroyed. Consequently, the Chinese sovereign needed new theories to justify the divine legitimacy of his power and status. It was during this period that a new, very important concept for Chinese culture was formed — the Sky.

The Zhou people worshipped the Sky. They understood Heaven as the supreme power that really exists and governs everything in the world. The sovereign of the Zhou Dynasty was called "the Son of Heaven", that is, "The Son of Heaven". This term, the Son of Heaven, is found in inscriptions from the time of Zhou Kang—wang, the third ruler of the Zhou dynasty ^{[27, p.276]}. The Son of Heaven was different from the sovereign of the Yin-Shang dynasty, he did not possess superhuman abilities or facial features. He is commanded to do the will of Heaven on earth — to rule the nations.

It resembles the image of the tsar in Russian culture — the executor of God's will. Nevertheless, in the Zhou culture there was no clear indication of the undivine nature of the sovereign. On the contrary, at that time the ruler was considered, if not a god, then still a wonderful being. According to the Sheng Ming verses, the ancestors of the Zhou Dynasty were Hou-ji and his mother Jiang Yuan. One day, while playing in the field, she accidentally discovered the giant's footprints. Thinking that this was very interesting, Jiang Yuan ran in the giant's footsteps. She then became pregnant and gave birth to Hou-ji ten months later. It is obvious that in the early Zhou period there was an idea of the sovereign as in the Yin-Shang dynasty, that is, of superhuman beings who descended to earth thanks to the power of the gods. This is not at all like the image of the Russian tsar as an "anointed man." As society developed in the Zhou Dynasty, they simply stopped explicitly emphasizing the divinity of the ruler.

 In the Zhou dynasty, the Son of Heaven, the sovereign, was the only person in the world who could establish a connection with Heaven, that is, with a higher power. This became the most important justification for his absolute power, which was unlimited and religious. In Russian culture, the Orthodox Church has always had an undeniable influence on both the secular authorities and the spiritual world of the people.

At the same time, since the concept of Heaven in Chinese culture is completely abstract and metaphysical, unlike God, who has a face and a word, the Son of Heaven actually had more power than the Russian tsar — he was more free to interpret and use the will of a higher power.

Since the era of Chunqiu and Zhanguo, the concept of "Heaven" has become more ambiguous. Confucianism, Taoism, Legalism and other philosophical schools have put forward their theories about Heaven. On the one hand, this was due to the development of productivity, which increased a person's cognitive abilities and level. On the other hand, it is the result of the collapse of the unified Zhou state. As the power of the princes grew, who possessed more lands, population and army than the Son of Heaven, they began to strive for the position of supreme ruler. In order to rationalize and legitimize their criminal rule, the princes needed to find a theoretical justification for their political actions. This gave rise to many philosophical schools that put forward various theories and views on the strategy of governing the country and belonging to domination. The two most important of these schools were Confucianism and Legalism.

Confucianism emphasized the theories of "a common sovereign for the whole state" and "the state belongs to the whole people." The theory of "a common sovereign for the whole state" means that the state should be governed by a single supreme sovereign. However, this sovereign was not the owner of the country and even more so the "slave owner of the whole people", he only had the right to manage the affairs of the country. This right to rule, unlike what was perceived during the Yin-Shang periods, was not given by the gods (Confucius at one time clearly stated his rejection of the divine source of the sovereign's power, arguing that a noble person should not pay attention to superhuman strength ^{[18, p. 72]}), but by the people. People grant the sovereign the right to rule out of recognition of his moral qualities. The people have the right to recognize and support the rule of the gracious sovereign and the right to overthrow tyranny ^{[19, p.202] [25, p.118]}. Therefore, the ideal sovereign according to Confucianism is a "", that is, a "benevolent ruler" whose legitimacy of power lies in his high moral character and personal upbringing.

Confucianism embodied a pronounced humanistic flavor.

Firstly, within its framework, the deification of the sovereign was destroyed, it was emphasized that the ruler is not a superhuman being and pointed out the direct connection between the power of the sovereign and his moral qualities and abilities.

Secondly, Confucianism put forward the idea of "the people are more important than the ruler", which resembles the equality of the ruler and subjects in a democracy. To a certain extent, this already went beyond the perception of the image of the sovereign in the context of feudal politics.

Legalism, despite the fact that it recognized the demythologization of the sovereign, appreciates the rank system. Philosophers of this trend believe that there is a natural difference in status between the ruler and the commoners. For example, Han Fei-tzu stated that "the so-called reason lies in the difference in status between the sovereign and the subject" ^{[9, p.188]}. At the same time, he advocated that all power should belong to a single central government, and that the power of the central government should be controlled only by the sovereign, especially legislative and judicial. He emphasized that the monarch should have sole power and should never share power with his subjects, otherwise the sovereign risks losing his country and the state will decline ^{[9, p.59]}. This is a draft version of the autocratic centralism of ancient China.

In addition, Chinese legalists advocated governing the state through harsh laws and harsh punishments that would increase the effectiveness of government, increasing the inclination to obey the people. On the other hand, harsh laws and torture can blur the emotional connection between people (friendship, even kinship, etc.), as a result, people will naturally gravitate to the monarch for emotional support, since he has the final judicial right. Thus, within the framework of legalism, the monarch really had unconditional authority, but his holiness did not come from God, but from the estate to which he belonged and from the power he possessed. In this case, the sovereign was not so much a "saint" as an "authoritative" one.

Confucianism was too idealized, so it was not widely recognized by the ruling class during the Chunqiu and Zhanguo periods, and Legalism's approach to governing the country was too harsh and could easily cause popular discontent. Thus, starting from the Qin and Han dynasties, when China re-entered the era of the Great unification, Chinese rulers gradually created a new political philosophy that contained positive aspects. In this kind of political culture, the image of the sovereign was understood as:

1) a person with status and power from birth;

2) a kind and wise "giver";

3) the holder of absolute state power.

At the same time, in order to strengthen their authority, the Chinese sovereigns never completely abandoned the ancient method of action — to deify themselves with the help of birth legends. Such myths are widely represented in the official annals of the Chinese state. According to Wang Jian's calculations, more than 80 legends about the birth of Chinese emperors were found in historical materials from the Han Dynasty to the Qing ^{[24, p.48]}.

All these myths have similar plots:

1)        The emperor's mother became pregnant by touching holy things during pregnancy or in a dream, saw wonderful objects, which are often a dragon ^{[27, p.783]}, the sun ^{[14, p.3946]}, etc.;

2)        At the birth of the sovereigns, holy extraordinary phenomena of nature appeared: for example, a red light shone in the room ^{[10, p.1]}, the room was full of a wonderful aroma that did not fade for a long time ^{[23, p.2]}.

Such myths are widespread in official histories. They were one of the key means by which feudal monarchs strengthened their supreme authority and indisputable power. This suggests that the deification of the sovereign, which, although it was refuted by Confucius back in the 5th century BC, existed for a long time in Chinese culture, practically throughout the entire history of feudal China.

Ultimately, Chinese culture crystallized its own political "philosophy" — the unity of Heaven and human traits in the sovereign, according to which the emperor at first glance was a man, not a superman. At the same time, he possessed undivided power, which is directly provided by Heaven, the Highest power in the world.

In the popular culture of Russia, the image of the sovereign-tsar was religious, evangelical. He had all the power because he was God's anointed one. Everything he did was God's will. Therefore, the Russian tsar was great, but not supreme. In Chinese culture, the sovereign was initially God himself, and the deification of his image continued throughout autocratic history. Thus, the sovereign in ancient China possessed more unregulated power than the Russian tsar.

Secondly, in Russian culture, the "higher power" that guides the human world was clearly considered God, and in Chinese culture — Heaven, which can be much more abstract and metaphysical. The influential state religion, of course, helped to achieve the ideological unity of the whole people, it in turn had the right to vote. As a result, the church sometimes prevented the tsar from using his rights. The tsar assumed the responsibility not only to govern the state, but also to strengthen Orthodoxy. Due to the lack of an "official religion" in ancient China, the sovereign received almost absolute power (if such a power really exists in human society).  The Russian mentality always reflects the desire for perfection in the spiritual world on a national scale and on a personal level. Traditional Chinese political culture is completely focused on the affairs of worldly life.

So, despite the degree of freedom of the sovereign's power and his role in the earthly life and spiritual world of the people, autocracy in Russia and China was created on the basis of the understanding and recognition of the masses. Based on this, the political systems in the ancient Russian and Chinese states differ from Caesar's autocracy, which is an autocracy in the context of Western European political culture.

^[1] The state of Yin-Shan (Chinese: ) was an early kingdom that existed from 1554 to 1046 BC in the lands north of the outlet of the Yellow River to the Great Chinese Plain.

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.