Journals
Sunday,Nov 23 2008, 02:11:16 AMEurope’s Long Road to Absolute Rule
Abstract
Absolute rule, to date, is one of the most effective methods of governance. In China, it was established as early as the Shang Dynasty, which existed well before 1500 BCE. In Europe, though there were intermittent cases of imperial rule, they were often interrupted by long periods of anarchy or separatism. Cultural, religious, and philosophical circumstances which founded Chinese absolutism also proved to be the greatest impedance to European absolutism. Even when the glorious day arrived, European absolutism was disrupted by the will of the masses to restore democracy and liberalism.
Europe’s Long Road to Absolute Rule
In 99 BC, Chinese generals Li Ling and Li Guangli, under Emperor Han Wudi’s imperial orders, led an expedition against the barbarians, Xiongnu, north of China. However, logistic problems arose and the Chinese army was defeated, and its two generals captured and detained. Sima Qian, a Grand Scribe of the Han Dynasty (often regarded as the founding father of Chinese historiography with his prized work, the Records of the Grand Historian), defended Li Ling. The emperor, Han Wudi, was enraged by this defense, as he saw this as an insult to his leadership abilities, ordered for the castration of Sima Qian. At around the same time, Sulla and Caesar ruled Rome as dictators, with their powers in check by a senate system and jealous rivals. And though Augustus abolished the Roman Republic and established the Roman Empire and was crowned an emperor, his powers and that of future Roman First Citizens remained obstructed by the senate system. The power to humiliate, dishonor, and dominate a man’s destiny in 99BC was unheard of in the European world; European emperors’ pursuit of such autocracy and absolutism did not come to fruition until nearly 1,600 years later.
China is an interesting civilization in that its dynastic cycles recycle history. Every dynasty in China had endured founding, expansion, success, recession, decline, and collapse. With each dynasty, emperors, both benevolent and tyrannical, ruled. However, all of these emperors shared a common trait; they held absolute power, and dominated every aspect of civilized society. Rewards, appointments, punishments, executions, and military actions were only some of the weapons in the Chinese imperial arsenal. Very little, if any, could stand between the emperor and the exercising of his imperial will. In Europe, a multitude of social and religious circumstances forbade emperors from establishing the same degree of influence as their Chinese counterparts. A more careful examination of these circumstances is necessary to understand why European monarchs embarked upon an unusually long journey to establish authoritarian leadership. However, an observation into Chinese history allows us to normalize what is considered “absolute rule” between China (representative of Asia) and Europe.
China is examined because of its early establishment of centralized, absolute power, and serves as a mirror of what European monarchs desired or lacked until the advent of their own absolutism in the mid-17th century. It must be noted that the differences between European nations and China are innumerate. For a comparison to be made between Europe and China, only selected aspects will be focused. For our purposes, we will evaluate Chinese and European cultural values of the absolute rule, religious influence on ruling power, as well as philosophical views on the ruling class.
A Look at China
The Chinese word Huangdi is the Chinese equivalent of “Emperor” in English. The word itself is in fact the name (Yellow Emperor, translated), of a legendary, mythical Emperor of China. This legendary figure was worshipped throughout the centuries, and eventually became the de-facto linguistic designation of an emperor itself. It is not unwise to say that a degree of worship is dedicated to the legendary Huangdi figure. With his name becoming the vernacular of “Emperor”, the “worship of [Huangdi] transferred over to the worship of an individual figure” (Fairbank and Goldman, 2006). This mentality that one supreme figure holds the respect and obedience of everyone around him is therefore embedded into the minds of the souls in Chinese society. Yellow Emperor (or Huangdi) possibly lived (possibly) between 2497 BC - 2398 BC (Sima, 91 BC). The official inauguration of “HuangDi” as the term for emperor occurred in 221 BCE, and continued until the last of the Chinese dynasties.
This worship of a legendary figure was also the predecessor of religion. Imperial rule became parallel to divine rights and religious practices. Emperors of China harnessed this belief in their legendary status as an empowerment from the supernatural, citing the heaven’s support for their will and accomplishments. In the early Shang dynasties (c. 1600 BCE to 1050 BCE (Ebrey, 93)), emperors often foretold coming disasters through divination processes (the scribing of holy text on animal bones and fossils, later known as “Oracle Bones”). This practice allowed rulers of China to take advantage of religion and the human belief in the supernatural to their advantage. This process continued for six centuries until the Zhou dynasty (c. 1122BC to 256BC (Ebrey, Walthall & Palais, 2006)), when this type of religious practice ended. It was replaced, instead, by the Mandate of Heaven. This ancient philosophical concept believed that the Heaven (in this case, a sentient, powerful supernatural) would bless the authority of a just ruler. The first era name of the Qing Dynasty, nearly 2700 years later, would also be named Mandate of Heaven. Religion therefore seldom left the side of despotic rule. With the supposed supernatural on their side, emperors of China garnered supports from their subjects and executed their will with the Mandate of Heaven as their guise, and their desires became important for the well being of the land.
As time progressed, the tribal foolery of divine right dwindled. Although religion faded from the center stage of autocratic guise, its spot would soon be replaced by the advent of schools of philosophy. Perhaps because of tradition, Chinese philosophical schools, such as Confucianism and Legalism, placed emphasis on the virtues of the leader rather than the concerns of the collective masses. Confucianism believed that the leaders must show virtues to gain the trust of his subjects, while Legalism believed in absolute government control in all aspects of civilian life. Chinese emperors seized this opportunity and absorbed philosophical ideas which benefited their bureaucracy and statecraft; the earliest dynasty of unified China, the Qin dynasty, pursued harsh Legalist reforms, while later dynasties required the studies of Confucian literatures for all of their officials.
In addition, new religious beliefs, such as Buddhism, spreading to China during the 9th century (Fairbank and Goldman, 2006), were diluted by existing Chinese beliefs to adopt piety to the emperor. Buddhist monasteries were rumored to have taught Confucianism in their establishments to their own disciples (Fairbank and Goldman, 2006). This type of imperial grasp on existing beliefs snowballed, and any new concepts would be assimilated to suit the absolutist hunger of the emperors.
Philosophy is considered a society’s expression. Religion is considered a society’s supplement to overcome its insecurities. Culture is considered a society`s values. With his hands firmly wrapped around a society`s fundamental pillars, the Chinese emperor continued on generations of lavishness and unparalleled power.
A Look at Europe
Those same fundamental values which caused the Chinese civilization to soar in its pursuit of absolute power impeded the European civilizations in every regard. Historically, Greek and Ancient Rome held democratic ideals, extending well into the modern times. Ancient Greeks, especially Athenians, held democratic debates over various civil affairs, and the Romans had developed a system of senatorial elections which promoted democracy from its inception (Shelton, 1997). Though rulers such as Caesar established absolute dictatorship, his untimely death proved the overwhelming desire for a republic or democracy. Democracy had a much stronger foothold in European souls than it did Chinese – the Chinese form of democracy was not a gathering to peacefully debate an arbitrary law as much as it was open rebellions to overthrow an existing government.
Lexicology and etymology, in a subtle way, are good ways to observe history as well - The word “democracy” derived from Greek – ‘demo’, meaning the mass, and ‘kratia’, meaning rule. In the earliest Chinese dictionary, the KangXi Dictionary published in 1710, there was no equivalent of the word ‘democracy” in any context. This is by no means a statement of satire, and does not mean that democracy did not exist; it was a concept which existed, but perhaps has not yet been practiced comprehensively enough for it to become a concrete, expressible concept. It was not until the19th century did intellects studying in France or England, where nationalistic concepts were most widespread, did the word “democracy” come into existence in Chinese (Goff, Moss, Terry, and Upshur, 2008).
The arrival of Abrahamic religions in European areas further removed focus from the ruling class and taught the masses the importance of worshipping a supernatural. European leaders not only vied against religions for attention, but they also submitted to a superior supernatural in order to garner the support of their religious subjects. The later Roman emperors lost support when they fell out of favor with religious leaders, who in turn held the loyalty of the masses. The formation and the gradual accumulation of power of religious institutions, particularly the Catholic Church, continued to erode and chip away the foundations of an absolute, central monarch until the religious leader, the Pope, held more influence and power than regional leaders. The Chinese emperors had used religion as an instrument to secure more power, while the unfortunate circumstances in Europe caused monarchial powers to compete with an overwhelming enemy.
European philosophy was influenced by religion to an extent – It was not focused on the rulers, but focused more on people, society, and their suffering. European schools of philosophy dealt mostly with the self or the man, and that any form of power should be consolidated to serve the needs of the members of society. Philosophy publications as early as Plato (428 BC – 348 BC) entertained especially the supplementary role of justice and ruling class on society. Later philosophers, such as Locke (1632 – 1704), advocated much for freedom and liberalism. Though other philosophers, such as Hobbes (1588 – 1679), existed and advocated for Legalist-like government, the viewpoint which they express the similar belief was focused more on human nature (Skinner, 1978) rather than the necessity for government power (Chinese Legalism).
The Mirror Images
It was known that Chinese emperors had wives and concubines in the hundreds and thousands (Fairbank and Goldman, 2006). Chinese emperors often had veteran imperial armed forces, as well as the support of an entire army. These elite rulers had the right to appoint or expel any official positions. And at their mercy were the lives of every man in his nation. Yet in Europe, until well into the 16th century, feudalism fragmented imperial power. Kings often “married to [garner power] rather than for pleasure” (Bonney, 1991). Their military might was weak and relied heavily on nobles for further military dedication. Appointment of officials was left to the decisions of regional nobles. The Catholic Church further diminished the effectiveness of central power by forcibly succumbing all of Europe to gain favors with the Pope. In essence, European kings held power only in nominative regards.
Louis XIV of France was most commonly attributed to successful absolutism in Europe. His statement, “L'état, c'est moi (I am the state)”, symbolized the fundamental principles of vesting absolute sovereignty in one individual. In reality, nobles, despite being imprisoned in his grand palace of Versailles, still held influence and power. One begins to question the extent of “absolute” in Louis XIV’s absolute rule. At the same time, nobles in China were born and raised in the imperial palace all of their lives, and held little, if any, influence outside of the palace walls. Huang Taiji (1592 – 1643) who ruled China roughly the same time as Louis XIV was leading a capable combat force of ethnic minorities and expanding his empire into China. Nobles of his family dared not to oppose him due to his intelligence and power. While Louis forcibly controlled his nobles through recent, Taiji took advantage of authoritarian (and to a small extent, charismatic) leadership embedded in Chinese tradition and securely ruled as a supreme leader.
Cultural, religious, and philosophical developments in China and Europe contributed to the resulting styles of leadership. In China, a pre-conceived perfect being merged with religion and assimilated philosophy to harness supreme power. If the end purpose was to achieve absolutism, China would be considered lucky and blessed by the combination of cultural development and social evolution which enabled its absolute regimes. Europeans, however, did not share the same fortune as their Chinese counterparts: Precedential existence of democracy caused the masses to lean favorably towards expressing their ideals in a legal environment; a power-hungry religion struggled for and ultimately won influence from all those appraising it; and the humanist schools of philosophy, more concerned with the well-being of mankind than the glory of an arbitrary ruler, all contributed to the hindering of the path to absolutism in Europe.
Absolute rule, by far, is one of the most efficient methods for governing. In the hands of the corrupt, it may destroy empires. But in the hands of the benevolent, it may bring prosperity and glory much quicker than any other styles of government. Marco Polo’s travels to China in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries generated tales of unfathomable interest in the technological and intellectual advancements in China. Perhaps the reason why China fared so well at this time, while the rest of Europe stood in the shadows of underdevelopment, was because of its absolute regimes, able to effectively mobilize an entire nation to spearhead its advancements.