Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The image of the sovereign reflects the attitude of the people towards the ruler of the country, which is an important aspect of the study of political culture. This article is devoted to a comprehensive study of the sanctity of the image of the ruler in Russian and Chinese political cultures. The analysis of the origin and specificity of the holy image of the sovereign in the mentalities of both peoples is carried out. The main differences in the process of consecration of the ruler in Russian and Chinese stories are highlighted. In the autocratic Russian and Chinese states, a common understanding of the indisputable authority of the sovereign was at the center of ideology. To ensure the legitimacy and competence of his rights, the Russian tsar turned to Orthodox Christianity for support, and the Chinese emperor turned to Heaven. As a result, since the history of Russia, the power of the sovereign from the very beginning to the end has been limited by the powers of the deity and the authority of the Orthodox Church. In ancient China, the sovereign had "absolute power", since there had never been a so-called "official religion" in Chinese history. Although the monarchical period in both countries has already ended, its duration and stability indicate that the concept of "holy sovereign" as one of the main features of the Russian and Chinese mentality can regulate relations between social groups in the countries. Although the monarchical period in both countries has already ended, its duration and stability indicate that the concept of "holy sovereign" as one of the main features of the Russian and Chinese mentality can regulate relations between social groups in the countries. Such power is of great importance in the modern era.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiehan Wang (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: