Hymnus Nationalis: God Save The Queen ("Deus servet reginam") http://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britanniarum_Regnum By the way, if you get into older coins, you will come across that "D.G." abbreviation fairly often. Pretty much every crowned head of state in Europe then believed or stated that s/he was king "by the grace of God" ... Christian
Both are correct...Mine uses the vocative (so it is God! Save the queen!) and yours is a more literal translation..
Hehe, I learned some Latin at school but my translation was not actually mine. I just find that Latin Wikipedia cool but have so few occasions to bring it up ... Christian
The Gods' King or the King's God? I have an enormous interest in linguistics. Here is something I thought of reading this thread. Nothing more than a philosophical thought. Depending on ones philosophical relation to monarchy and theism, I think Dei Gratia Rex or Regina, could have different meanings. My understanding of the Latin could also be wrong, so stop me if it is. A tyrant could say that God has made him king because he is superior to his subjects, and that his word is the word of God. A peoples-favorite, like Haakon VII of Norway, may feel he is equal to his subjects in every way, and is king not by right, but only with God's blessing, which could be revoked. ~
neither trees, by the grace of God they reign is what it is supposed to mean (IMHO). I don't believe that it is declaring a preference by God, but rather that they are reigning DUE to God's provenance.
More Rhetoric O sorry, I meant to say those were the two extremes. I was just responding to what Christian had said about most crowned heads of Europe believing they ruled by the grace of God. My point was that different leaders could have a different eisegesis, or interpretation, of the phrase. That's all. My two examples weren't supposed to be the only two possibilities.
I think royalty thought they were chosen by god to rule...along with this came a sense of entitlement that comes with being gods chosen...
the things we say My point is, some using the phrase may have felt entitled, some may not have. It's just a theoretical linguistic argument, not a comment on reality.
I agree, how each one felt about the concept of divine right to rule is less relevant than the concepts actual purpose. It is less important for the king to believe than it is for the people to accept the idea. The main purpose for coinage other than a system of exchange is a vehicle for propaganda. That is what the phrase is...some form of this concept has been used since coinage was first minted. Associating the ruler with god (or gods).
Good point Oh, that is so true. I recall what you mean now. I remember from from college art history that roman politicians would have their statuary depict them in the same style used for the gods. It was just a linguistic fantasy; nothing to do with coins, but I really like what you said.
