Written by Harry Fry
1. Introduction.
Our existing concept of the wheel of fortune originates from political historians writing on dictators, notably Volker Ullrich on Hitler and Stephen Kotkin on Stalin. This theory cements scrutiny around leaders throughout history, being that their close advisors can fall in and out of favour with the leader suddenly; emphasising the often dangerous and erratic personalities of dictators. The study of how those close to a leader rise into popularity, only to be eventually cast away, has taken up much of scholarly consideration upon the turn of the past century, yet the specific efforts made by those attempting to remain in power is rarely viewed as an isolated theme of research. This essay will oversee instances when those surrounding a leader uplifted their chief, and often his family, to a version of immortality. In centralising the leaders themselves, one can weave through the dual yet opposing power dynamics between a leader and his closest advisors. On one hand, advisors are marked as voluntarily painting their chief through the frame of longevity, as if their obsession towards him is the basis of their desire to do so. On the other hand, advisors were perhaps the ‘pawns’ of their master’s hegemonic manipulation that traditionalist scholars depict them to be. This study, using the examples of the Roman Emperor Trajan, the Tudor King Henry VIII, and the Chinese Chairman Mao Zedong, can ultimately determine which of these two more frequently existed.
2. ‘Your humanity and accessibility are such that anyone may approach you with confidence’.
In this letter by Pliny the Younger, Trajan is depicted by one of his contemporaries as virtually one of them, yet this source also implies that his ‘humanity’ is different to others’. Trajan oversaw Rome’s imperialism at its height, as head of an empire which was largely seen to be unthinkable to grow to the extent it did. This sense of mystery surrounding Rome’s power, mirrors the position of its Emperors. To a contemporary Greek outsider, Aelius Aristides, Roman Emperors held an ‘awe universally instilled of the mighty ruler who presides over the whole’ (Oration 26.31-32). To those across the empire, the Emperor was above all else. Despite the unparalleled importance of this title, it still largely remains unclear how an individual was ordained to become an Emperor, which simultaneously meant they became a God upon their death, unless damned. Ergo, Trajan was memorialised and a sense of his being remained in existence across the empire. For instance, he was engraved as a Pharoah at the Dendera Temple complex, deifying him amongst a historic line of Egyptian rulers. Following what was deemed as societal expectation, the Empire’s population developed a wreath of glorification around Trajan.
This feeds into the imperial cult, an informal framework which made the Emperor and his family divine beings. An aura consequently surrounded whoever these people were at any given time in the Roman Empire’s history, and people followed this habit as if the Empire’s stability required it – a natural societal expectation towards viewing the Emperor’s bloodline as higher than the rest of humanity. What seems to be the reality is the continuous recognition of an Emperor as unique to the rest of his people: Princeps, a paradoxical title, reads as the Emperor being ‘equal’, against the true reality that they irrevocably stood ‘first’ amongst all in the Empire. Therefore, they were immediately superior upon their promotion, despite Emperors frequently being created in incredibly rapid succession. Decorating late Emperors as Gods seemed to follow the natural order of Roman society. This is significant given how many Emperors were appointed; different to later instances, this ancient example shows much less of an artificial creation of glory surrounding a ruler.
3. ‘By the grace of God, King of England’.
As argued by this slogan, commonly used to present coronated monarchs, Henry VIII began his reign as the model of an early modern European King: a competent leader with an imposing appearance, as if a sense of kingship existed in all images around him. As he aged and his presence drastically altered, he fell out of sync with the ideal example of a monarch. However, his people did not allow this new Henry to reflect a different presentation of him, as this would mean he did not embody the stable and powerful Tudor dynasty that Henry’s closest advisors consistently fought to illustrate. Such can be seen when Anne of Cleves is promised one of the most sought after Kings in Europe, when in fact she is manipulated into creating an alliance with a husband she is repelled by. The use of visual representation in portraying the Tudor family widens themes of immortality to more than just Henry, as The Family of Henry VIII portrait shows Prince Edward standing next to his mother, Jane Seymour, when she died shortly after his birth.
Ultimately, all those who crafted images of the Tudor family aimed to portray everything surrounding Henry with unremitting continuity, making his kingship seem entirely unfailing. Despite these attempts, in retrospect we view the frameworks they created as forced – Henry is designed artificially. Traditionalists present Henry as the master controlling his noblemen, yet revisionists have regularly overturned this perspective to instead argue these factions crafted Henry’s kingship and he was dominant in name alone. Finding a middle line between these two polarised views is necessary, as Henry explicitly forced loyalty as King through executing advisors at random, even when it appeared irrational, yet his men appear to have decided a portraiture of longevity as a core route in uplifting him.
4. ‘The commander is responsible for everything… this is the only way to command’.
In speaking these words, Mao confirmed his presence as the domineering chief of China, resting all of his nation’s course of progression on himself. Mao’s people, especially those close to him, mirrored this declaration: the Red Guards would chant “Long Live Chairman Mao!” and his loyal Gang of Four urged “Mao Zedong’s legacy is immortal… The Teachings of Mao Zedong continue to illuminate our path forward”. The sentiments of longevity concerning Mao’s presence were extreme, but also regarding his thoughts. Leading scholars on Maoism, notably Julia Lovell, convey the complex legacy persisting in his memory. Globally, his rule is heavily critiqued: marking aggressive cycles of famine and gross misuse of resources as well as the population, under a brutal despot. To contrast, though, the effects of China continuously restricting knowledge and discussion of this reality within the nation prevents widespread comprehension of the truth. The reason behind the latter originates from the repeating habit of glorifying Mao, at the expense of all else. During his rule, leading groups such as the Red Guards, The Gang of Four, and youth groups all decorated Maoism as the purest ideology for China to be led by. Upon his death, The Gang of Four, Mao’s core political faction, unfalteringly attempted to preserve Mao’s worship, eventually receiving the blame for their late ruler’s oppressive decisions. Even today, to critique Mao in China goes against the historical legacy invented by his party.
Being perpetually glorified, the idea of Mao taking on blame for China’s era of failure remains widely unthinkable. Tyrants commonly make their nation reach a point of tyranny where the people have nothing to cling onto but following propaganda. Even upon on his death and without risk of punishment, Mao’s factions seem to cling tighter to him, as if they cannot handle their nation without his guidance.
5. Conclusion.
When unable to locate how to survive, those within a ruler’s cult may seem entirely voluntary towards worshiping their master, attempting to navigate his potential viciousness. In understanding the route towards depicting longevity, one can perceive supporters’ highest level of obsession towards their chief.
Bibliography
Boer, W. D. “TRAJAN’S DEIFICATION AND HADRIAN’S SUCCESSION.” Ancient Society 6 (1975).
Charlton, A. A. hypothesis: King Henry VIII’s (1491-1547) personality change: A case of lead poisoning?. J Med Biogr. 2017; 25 (2).
Fears, J. R. Rome : The Ideology of Imperial Power, Thought: Fordham University Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 216, (March 1980).
Keith, R. C. Review of History, Contradiction, and the Apotheosis of Mao Zedong, by Anita M. Andrew, John A. Rapp, Timothy Cheek, Mao Zedong, and Melissa Schrift. China Review International 11, no. 1 (2004).
Klos, N. Y. Ph.D. “Mini-Majesty: Dynasty and Succession in the Portraiture of Henry VIII and Edward VI.” King Henry VIII. 27 Oct. 2013. Web. 1 Aug. 2014.
Luqiu, L.R. The Reappearance of the Cult of Personality in China. East Asia 33, 289–307 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-016-9262-x.
Featured image credit: “Advance Courageously Under the Guidance of the Red Flag of Mao Zedong Thought (在毛泽东思想红旗指引下, 奋勇前进 / ZAI MAO ZE DONG SI XIANG HONG QI ZHI YIN XIA, FEN YONG QIAN JIN)” by Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, UofT is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Retrospect Journal 