|Statement||by J. Neville Figgis.|
|Series||Cambridge historical essays ;, no. IX, Cambridge historical essays ;, no. 9.|
|LC Classifications||JC389 .F5|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||xiv, , 304 p.|
|Number of Pages||304|
|LC Control Number||03001927|
Page - The most high and sacred order of kings is of divine right, being the ordinance of God himself, founded in the prime laws of nature, and clearly established by express texts both of the Old and New Testaments. Page - England, the Imperial Crown of the realm of England, and of all the kingdoms, dominions. A key work in the history of political thought, Figgis's book revived the subject of the divine right of kings after it had been effectively destroyed by Locke in the seventeenth century. It displays his astonishingly wide reading and his, at the time, ground-breaking method of stressing the importance of historical setting/5(8). The theory of the Divine Right of Kings is indeed one which it is difficult nowadays to take seriously. It has been described as absurd, irrational, preposterous, and no doubt much of it is by present standards. Equally obviously, however, the matter ought not to be left to rest with simple condemnation of this kind. Divine right of kings theory is an old theory of sate. In those days people were not civilized and did not have much knowledge. In those days people were .
M-t JMl ^g$*" 4rf^m^f fg?yi? aoS^FIW-f^r^ M *l^ eW-!'.i^'&fe,1 CornellUniversityLibrary JCF Thedivinerightofkings olin 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. Divine right of kings, political doctrine in defense of monarchical absolutism, which asserted that kings derived their authority from God and could not therefore be held accountable for their actions by any earthly authority such as a parliament. Originating in Europe, the divine-right theory can be traced to. Book digitized by Google from the library of Harvard University and uploaded to the Internet Archive by user tpb. The theory of the divine right of kings Item Preview remove-circle Book digitized by Google from the library of Harvard University and uploaded to the Internet Archive by user tpb. Prince consort dissertation, "List of Pages:
Sir Robert Filmer () was a strong advocate of the theory of the divine right of kings in the 17th century. His book Patriarcha provoked John Locke into penning a critique. Titles: Author: Patriarcha, or the Natural Power of Kings; Quotations: Robert Filmer thought that the idea of the “consent of the governed” would inevitably lead. First edition appeared in under title The theory of the divine right of kings, being an enlargement of the author's Prince consort dissertation, Skip to main content This banner text can have markup. The greatest problem of James' reign (and that of his son, Charles) was that he believed in the Divine Right of Kings. This had been a commonly held view since the Middle Ages. Kings were appointed by God from above and had supernatural powers. If anyone dared to question a king then he was questioning God: This amounted, in fact, to blasphemy. When the king aired his theory of Divine Right and pronounced that they had no rights at all except by the king's grace, they replied that if he thought that was the case in England, he had been "misinformed.".