The natural aristocracy is a concept developed by Thomas Jefferson
in 1813 which describes a hypothetical political elite that derives its
power from talent and virtue (or merit). He distinguishes this from
traditional aristocracies, which he refers to as the artificial aristocracy,
a ruling elite that derives its power solely from inherited status, or
wealth and birth. Jefferson considers the natural aristocracy to be
superior to the artificial aristocracy, and he believes the ideal ruler
must come from the natural aristocracy. The natural aristocracy has been
interpreted as being related to the concept of meritocracy.
Precursors
Similar conceptions were developed in Ancient Greece, where both Plato and Aristotle advocated a form of government where only the wisest should rule.
Natural and artificial aristocracy
The concept originated in 1813 during a correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams,
who were both friends but also political rivals who held conflicting
views on the proper role of government. Jefferson founded the liberal
and populist Democratic-Republican Party, while Adams was a member of the conservative Federalist Party,
which favored the interests of wealthy merchants and bankers and
advocated for a more powerful national government. The two men were
having a debate regarding the nature of aristocracy.
Both despised the hereditary nobility found in traditional European
monarchies, but they also agreed that there exists a naturally superior
elite of people who are the most worthy to rule society.
Adams believed the best rulers have great wealth, birth, genius,
virtue, and beauty. He justifies this claim by arguing that people
throughout history have always preferred these traits.
Jefferson agrees with Adams that only the best people should rule
society, but he makes a distinction between rulers who belong to the
natural aristocracy and rulers who belong to the artificial aristocracy.
According to Jefferson, members of the natural aristocracy possess
virtue and talents, while members of the artificial aristocracy only
possess wealth and birth. He considers members of the natural
aristocracy to be the most ideal rulers, and he believes the talents of a
natural aristocrat can improve over time:
I agree with you that there is a
natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and
talents. Formerly bodily powers gave place among the aristoi. But since
the invention of gunpowder has armed the weak as well as the strong with
missile death, bodily strength, like beauty, good humor, politeness and
other accomplishments, has become but an auxiliary ground of
distinction. There is also an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth
and birth, without either virtue or talents; for with these it would
belong to the first class. The natural aristocracy I consider as the
most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and
government of society.
Jefferson suggests that God created the natural aristocracy, and that the best governments allow the best men to rule:
And indeed it would have been
inconsistent in creation to have formed man for the social state, and
not to have provided virtue and wisdom enough to manage the concerns of
the society. May we not even say that that form of government is the
best which provides the most effectually for a pure selection of these
natural aristoi into the offices of government? The artificial
aristocracy is a mischievous ingredient in government, and provision
should be made to prevent its ascendancy.
However, Adams argued that natural aristocracy corrupts into artificial aristocracy, stating:
Your
distinction between natural and artificial Aristocracy does not appear
to me well founded. Birth and Wealth are conferred on Some Men, as
imperiously by Nature, as Genius, Strength or Beauty. The Heir to
honours and Riches, and power has often no more merit in procuring these
Advantages, than he has in obtaining an handsome face or an elegant
figure. When Aristocracies, are established by human Laws and honour
Wealth and Power are made hereditary by municipal Laws and political
Institutions, then I acknowledge artificial Aristocracy to commence: but
this never commences, till Corruption in Elections becomes dominant and
uncontroulable. But this artificial Aristocracy can never last. The
everlasting Envys, Jealousies, Rivalries and quarrells among them, their
cruel rapacities upon the poor ignorant People their followers, compell
these to Sett up Cæsar, a Demagogue to be a Monarch and Master, pour
mettre chacun a sa place. Here you have the origin of all artificial
Aristocracy, which is the origin of all Monarchy. And both artificial
Aristocracy, and Monarchy, and civil, military, political and
hierarchical Despotism, have all grown out of the natural Aristocracy of
"Virtues and Talents." We, to be Sure, are far remote from this. Many
hundred years must roll away before We Shall be corrupted.
Adams argued that "Education, wealth, strength, beauty, stature,
birth, marriage, graceful attitudes and motions, gait, air, complexion,
physiognomy, are talents, as well as genius and science and learning"
and that even the most educated members of society would elect members
for reasons other than true merit. He also thought that even the best
men would succumb to temptation. Therefore, a good constitution must
have protocols in place (such as checks and balances) to prevent rulers
from becoming corrupted.
Jefferson believed this disagreement was the main purpose of his discussion with Adams, ending the debate with:
I have thus stated my opinion on a
point on which we differ, not with a view to controversy, for we are
both too old to change opinions which are the result of a long life of
inquiry and reflection; but on the suggestion of a former letter of
yours, that we ought not to die before we have explained ourselves to
each other. We acted in perfect harmony thro' a long and perilous contest for our liberty and independence. A constitution
has been acquired which, tho neither of us think perfect, yet both
consider as competent to render our fellow-citizens the happiest and the
securest on whom the sun has ever shone. If we do not think exactly
alike as to its imperfections, it matters little to our country which,
after devoting to it long lives of disinterested labor, we have
delivered over to our successors in life, who will be able to take care
of it, and of themselves.
Identifying natural aristocrats
Jefferson
believed a successful republic must identify natural aristocrats and
train them to govern. He believed the "best geniuses" must be "raked
from the rubbish annually" in educational institutions that nurture
their talents. Examples of natural aristocrats include Alexander Hamilton and Benjamin Franklin, two Founding Fathers of the United States
who came from impoverished and unprivileged backgrounds, yet through
their own merit, were able to rise to become highly influential leaders
in the American Revolution and the development of the United States.
Jefferson's fondness for knowledge and education led him to establishing the University of Virginia in 1819. The development of IQ and SAT tests in the mid-20th century created an interest in objectively measuring the "talent" required of natural aristocrats.
Harvard University president James B. Conant
heavily popularized SAT tests, believing they could help create what he
called "Jefferson's ideal" by allowing universities to transition
towards a meritocratic admission system that would admit a
socioeconomically diverse group of students from the natural aristocracy
rather than favoring students on the basis of wealth and privilege.
In his 1903 essay titled The Talented Tenth, African-American sociologist and civil rights activist W.E.B. Du Bois
argued that the African-American community could be uplifted by a
natural aristocracy of African-Americans, which he referred to as the Talented Tenth. The "Talented Tenth" refers to the 10 percent of Black men that have cultivated the ability to become leaders by acquiring a classical education at colleges, and becoming directly involved in social change. He argued that "Negro colleges" would serve as institutions of "natural selection" that would allow the most talented few African-Americans to rise above the rest. In The Talented Tenth,
Du Bois argues that these college-educated African-American men should
sacrifice their personal interests and use their education to lead and
better the African-American community.
He states in his essay:
The Negro race, like all races, is
going to be saved by its exceptional men. The problem of education,
then, among Negroes must first of all deal with the Talented Tenth; it
is the problem of developing the Best of this race that they may guide
the Mass away from the contamination and death of the Worst.
Absolute monarchy is a form of monarchy in which the sovereign is the sole source of political power, unconstrained by constitutions, legislatures or other checks on their authority.
The absolutist system of government saw its high point in Europe during the 16th and 17th century, associated with a form of rule unconstrained by the former checks of feudalism, embodied by figures such as Louis XIV of France, the "Sun King". Attempting to establish an absolutist government along continental lines, Charles I of England viewed Parliament as unnecessary, which would ultimately lead to the English Civil War (1642–51) and his execution. Absolutism declined substantially, first following the French Revolution, and later after World War I, both of which led to the popularization of modes of government based on the notion of popular sovereignty.
Nonetheless, it provided an ideological foundation for the newer
political theories and movements that emerged to oppose liberal
democracy, such as Legitimism and Carlism in the early 19th century, or "integral nationalism" in the early 20th century.
World's states coloured by systems of government: Parliamentary systems: Head of government is elected or nominated by and accountable to the legislature
Presidential system: Head of government (president) is popularly elected and independent of the legislature
Presidential republic
Hybrid systems:
Semi-presidential republic:
Executive president is independent of the legislature; head of
government is appointed by the president and is accountable to the
legislature
Assembly-independent republic: Head of government (president or directory) is elected by the legislature, but is not accountable to it
Dependent territories and places without governments
Note: this chart represent de jure systems of government, not the de facto degree of democracy.
Outside Europe
In the Ottoman Empire, the Sultan wielded absolute power over the state and was considered a Padishah
meaning "Great King" by his people. Many sultans wielded absolute power
through heavenly mandates reflected in their title, such as "Shadow of
God on Earth". In ancient Mesopotamia, many rulers of Assyria, Babylonia and Sumer were absolute monarchs as well.
Throughout much of European history, the divine right of kings was the theological justification for absolute monarchy. Many European monarchs claimed supreme autocratic power by divine right, and that their subjects had no rights to limit their power.
Throughout the Age of Enlightenment, the concept of the divine right to power and democratic ideals were given serious merit.
The Revolutions of 1848, known in some countries as the Springtime of the Peoples or the Springtime of Nations, were a series of political upheavals throughout Europe in 1848. It remains the most widespread revolutionary wave in European history. By the 19th century, divine right was regarded as an obsolete theory in most countries in the Western world, except in Russia where it was still given credence as the official justification for the Tsar's power until February Revolution in 1917 and in the Vatican City where it remains today.
Absolutism was underpinned by a written constitution for the first time in Europe in 1665 Kongeloven, 'King's Law' of Denmark–Norway, which ordered that the Monarch:
...shall
from this day forth be revered and considered the most perfect and
supreme person on the Earth by all his subjects, standing above all
human laws and having no judge above his person, neither in spiritual
nor temporal matters, except God alone.
This law consequently authorized the king to abolish all other centers of power. Most important was the abolition of the Council of the Realm in Denmark. Absolute monarchy lasted until 1814 in Norway, and 1848 in Denmark.
The House of Habsburg is currently extinct in its male line, due to the death of the childless Charles II of Spain in 1700. However, the House of Habsburg-Lorraine still carries the female line of the House of Habsburg.
Louis XIV of France (1638–1715) is often falsely said to have proclaimed L'état, c'est moi!, 'I am the State!'. Although often criticized for his extravagances, such as the Palace of Versailles, he reigned over France for a long period, some historians consider him an absolute monarch, while some other historians
have questioned whether Louis' reign should be considered 'absolute',
given the reality of the balance of power between the monarch and the
nobility, as well as parliaments.
The king of France concentrated legislative, executive, and
judicial powers in his person. He was the supreme judicial authority. He
could condemn people to death without the right of appeal. It was both
his duty to punish offenses and stop them from being committed. From his
judicial authority followed his power both to make laws and to annul
them.
In Brandenburg-Prussia,
the concept of absolute monarch took a notable turn from the above with
its emphasis on the monarch as the "first servant of the state", but it
also echoed many of the important characteristics of absolutism.
Prussia was ruled by the House of Hohenzollern as a feudal monarchy from 1525 to 1701 and an absolute monarchy from 1701 to 1848, after which it became a federalsemi-constitutional monarchy from 1848 to 1918 until the monarchy was abolished during the German Revolution.
Frederick I was the first King in Prussia, beginning his reign on 18 January 1701. King Frederick the Great adopted the title King of Prussia in 1772, the same year he annexed most of Royal Prussia in the First Partition of Poland, and practiced enlightened absolutism
until his death in 1786. He introduced a general civil code, abolished
torture and established the principle that the Crown would not interfere
in matters of justice. He also promoted an advanced secondary education, the forerunner of today's German gymnasium (grammar school) system, which prepares the brightest pupils for university studies. The Prussian education system was emulated in various countries, including the United States.
Until 1905, the Tsars and Emperors of Russia governed as absolute monarchs. Ivan the Terrible was known for his reign of terror through oprichnina. Peter I the Great reduced the power of the Russian nobility and strengthened the central power of the monarch, establishing a bureaucracy. This tradition of absolutism, known as Tsarist autocracy, was expanded by Catherine II the Great and her descendants. Although Alexander II
made some reforms and established an independent judicial system,
Russia did not have a representative assembly or a constitution until
the 1905 Revolution. However, the concept of absolutism was so ingrained in Russia that the Russian Constitution of 1906 still described the monarch as an autocrat.
The form of government instituted in Sweden under King Charles XI and passed on to his son, Charles XII is commonly referred to as absolute monarchy; however, the Swedish monarch was never absolute in the sense of wielding arbitrary power. The monarch still ruled under the law and could only legislate in agreement with the Riksdag of the Estates; rather, the absolutism introduced was the monarch's ability to run the government unfettered by the privy council,
contrary to earlier practice. The absolute rule of Charles XI was
instituted by the crown and the Riksdag in order to carry out the Great Reduction which would have been made impossible by the privy council which comprised the high nobility.
After the death of Charles XII in 1718, the system of absolute rule was largely blamed for the ruination of the realm in the Great Northern War, and the reaction tipped the balance of power to the other extreme end of the spectrum, ushering in the Age of Liberty. After half a century of largely unrestricted parliamentary rule proved just as ruinous, King Gustav III seized back royal power in the coup d'état of 1772, and later once again abolished the privy council under the Union and Security Act in 1789, which, in turn, was rendered void in 1809 when Gustav IV Adolf was deposed in a coup and the constitution of 1809 was put in its place. The years between 1789 and 1809, then, are also referred to as a period of absolute monarchy.
Contemporary trends
Many nations formerly with absolute monarchies, such as Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco and Qatar, have de jure moved towards a constitutional monarchy.
However, in these cases, the monarch still retains tremendous powers,
even to the extent that by some measures, parliament's influence on
political life is viewed as negligible or merely consultative.
Liechtenstein has moved towards expanding the power of the monarch — the Prince of Liechtenstein was given vast expanded powers after a referendum to amend the Constitution of Liechtenstein in 2003, which led BBC News to describe the prince as an "absolute monarch again". The referendum granted the monarch the powers to dismiss the government, nominate judges and veto legislation, among others. Just prior to the referendum, the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe
published a comprehensive report analysing the amendments, opining that
they were not compatible with the European standards of democracy,
effectively making Liechtenstein a de facto absolute monarchy. Prince Hans-Adam II
had also previously threatened to leave the country and move his assets
out of Liechtenstein if voters had chosen to restrict his powers.
As governed by the Holy See, Vatican City State is an sacerdotal-monarchical state ruled by the Pope, who is the bishop of Rome and head of the Catholic Church. Unlike citizenship of other states, which is based either on jus sanguinis or jus soli, citizenship of Vatican City is granted on jus officii,
namely on the grounds of appointment to work in a certain capacity in
the service of the Holy See. It usually ceases upon cessation of the
appointment. Citizenship is also extended to the spouse and children of a
citizen, provided they are living together in the city.
Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy, and according to the Basic Law of Saudi Arabia adopted by Royal Decree in 1992, the King must comply with Shari'a (Islamic law) and the Qur'an. The Qur'an and the body of the Sunnah (traditions of the Islamic prophet, Muhammad)
are declared to be the Kingdom's Constitution, but no written modern
constitution has ever been promulgated for Saudi Arabia, which remains
the only Arab nation where no national elections have ever taken place
since its founding.No political parties or national elections are permitted. The Saudi government is the world's most authoritarian regime in 2023 measured by the electoral democracy score of the V-Dem Democracy indices.
Scholarship
There is a considerable variety of opinion by historians on the extent of absolutism among European monarchs. Some, such as Perry Anderson,
argue that quite a few monarchs achieved levels of absolutist control
over their states, while historians such as Roger Mettam dispute the
very concept of absolutism. In general, historians who disagree with the appellation of absolutism argue that most monarchs labeled as absolutist exerted no greater power over their subjects than any other non-absolutist rulers, and these historians tend to emphasize the differences between the absolutist rhetoric of monarchs and the realities of the effective use of power by these absolute monarchs. Renaissance historian William Bouwsma summed up this contradiction:
Nothing so clearly indicates the
limits of royal power as the fact that governments were perennially in
financial trouble, unable to tap the wealth of those ablest to pay, and
likely to stir up a costly revolt whenever they attempted to develop an
adequate income.
— William Bouwsma
Anthropology, sociology, and ethology as well as various other disciplines such as political science attempt to explain the rise of absolute monarchy ranging from extrapolation generally, to certain Marxist explanations in terms of the class struggle as the underlying dynamic of human historical development generally and absolute monarchy in particular.
In the 17th century, French legal theorist Jean Domat defended the concept of absolute monarchy in works such as "On Social Order and Absolute Monarchy", citing absolute monarchy as preserving natural order as God intended. Other intellectual figures who supported absolute monarchy include Thomas Hobbes and Charles Maurras.
The philosopher king is a hypothetical ruler in whom political
skill is combined with philosophical knowledge. The concept of a
city-state ruled by philosophers is first explored in Plato's Republic,
written around 375 BC. Plato argued that the ideal state – one which
ensured the maximum possible happiness for all its citizens – could only
be brought into being by a ruler possessed of absolute knowledge,
obtained through philosophical study. From the Middle Ages onwards, Islamic and Jewish authors expanded on the theory, adapting it to suit their own conceptions of the perfect ruler.
Several historical figures, including Alexander the Great and Marcus Aurelius, have been described by ancient and modern writers as embodying the philosopher king ideal.
In the Republic
The Republic is a Socratic dialogue. In the first two books, Socrates is challenged to give a definition of justice,
which he proposes to accomplish by imagining how an ideal city-state
would function. He suggests that the ideal state would be ruled over by a
specially trained Guardian class, in whom a spirited nature would be
combined with a philosophic disposition.
Socrates goes on to discuss various aspects of life within the
state. In the fifth book, Socrates' interlocutors ask him whether the
state he is describing could ever exist in reality. He replies that this
could only happen on one condition:
Until philosophers are kings, or
the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of
philosophy ... cities will never have rest from their evils,—no, nor the
human race, as I believe,—and then only will this our State have a
possibility of life and behold the light of day.
Socrates clarifies this comment by distinguishing between true and
false philosophers. The true philosopher (or "lover of wisdom") is one
who loves "the truth in each thing", as opposed to those who only love
the things themselves. This is a reference to Plato's belief that all particular things are only shadows of eternal Forms.
Only the philosopher, therefore, is qualified to rule, as only the
philosopher has knowledge of the absolute truth and is able to apply
this knowledge for the good of the state.
Socrates next outlines the qualities which the ideal philosopher
must possess, including truthfulness, temperance, justice, and a good
memory.
It is observed, however, that this ideal is in sharp contrast to
reality, as many philosophers are "utter rogues", and the best of them
are generally considered to be useless. Socrates explains the poor
reputation of philosophers through the metaphor of the Ship of State, in which he compares Athenian democracy
to a group of mutinous sailors vying with one another for control of
the helm of a ship. The sailors, having themselves no knowledge of the
art of navigation, deny that this is a necessary qualification for a
pilot, and heap abuse on anyone who does not help them to achieve their
goals.
Socrates then acknowledges that many philosophers are indeed corrupt,
but attributes this to the fact that they are brought up in a corrupt
society. Only in the ideal state will a philosopher be able to achieve
his full potential, "and be the saviour of his country, as well as of
himself".
Having returned to the subject of the ideal state, Socrates
elaborates on the way in which his Guardians would be educated, in order
to lead them to a full and total knowledge of the Forms. This education
will last thirty-five years, and prospective Guardians must then spend a
further fifteen years occupying lesser offices, in order to gain
experience of life. At the age of fifty, they will be qualified to rule.
As philosophers, however, they will have no desire to engage in
politics; they will do so only from a sense of duty.
Socrates concludes this portion of the dialogue by reaffirming
that the ideal state is capable of being realised, but only if one or
more philosophers were to somehow come to power in a city. He further
suggests that if this were to happen, the quickest way for a philosopher
king to bring the perfect state into existence would be to send away
every inhabitant over the age of ten, so as to be able to bring up the
younger generation in accordance with philosophic principles.
History of interpretation
Aristotle, in his Politics,
criticises many aspects of Plato's political theory, and sets out his
own ideas about how a perfect city should be governed. Rather than
proposing, as Plato does, the establishment of a ruling class, Aristotle
argues that all citizens should take an equal share in the
administration of the city. However, in one passage (book 3, ch. 13),
Aristotle does write that if one or more people happened to be found who
far excelled their fellow citizens in virtue, it would be against the
natural order for such people to be subject to the rule of their
inferiors, and they should therefore be made "kings in their state for
life". While Aristotle here comes close to endorsing the
philosopher-king ideal, he does not expressly state that this virtuous
leader should be skilled in philosophy, and his writings more usually
draw a sharp distinction between the theoretical wisdom of a philosopher
and the political wisdom of a ruler.
When the Politics was translated into Latin in the
thirteenth century, it became the foundational text for political
philosophy in the Christian world, and Plato's ideas were marginalised
in favour of an Aristotelian separation of temporal and spiritual
authority. Islamic scholars, on the other hand, were heavily influenced
by Plato's Republic, finding in the philosopher king a counterpart to the traditional figure of the "lawgiver-prophet". Al-Farabi,
for example, followed Plato closely, writing that the ideal state was
that which most carefully attended to the spiritual education of its
citizens, and that its ruler must therefore have a highly developed
understanding of the purpose of human existence. Where Al-Farabi
departed from Plato was in asserting that the founder of the perfect
state must not only be a philosopher but also a prophet, as the perfect
law could only come from God. The founder's successors need not be
prophets, but they must still be philosophers, able to correctly
interpret and apply the received law.
Medieval Islamic philosophers had many opportunities to put their
political theories into practice, as they often held positions in the
royal court, with many even serving as viziers.
Despite their belief in the philosopher king ideal, no Islamic
philosophers are known to have attempted to seize power for themselves,
apparently being contented with a subservient position. Al-Farabi makes a
concession to this state of affairs when he writes that, since rulers
possessed of all the necessary virtues are rare, it is possible for the
kingship of the ideal state to be shared between two people, "one of
whom is a philosopher and the other fulfils the remaining conditions".
The translation into Hebrew of the works of Al-Farabi and Averroes saw the concept of the philosopher king enter into Jewish political thought. Biblical figures such as Moses, Abraham and Solomon
were held up as examples of ideal rulers, with Plato's theory
undergoing further distortions in order to meet the needs of Jewish
philosophers. The popularity of the idea finally declined during the
seventeenth century, as influential authors such as Baruch Spinoza began to formulate more secular political philosophies modelled on the works of Machiavelli.
Real-world examples
Dionysius and Dion
It appears from the Republic that Plato did not think it impossible for his ideal state to be established in reality, and he did make one notable attempt to educate a ruler in the principles of philosophy. In 367 BC, Dionysius II came to power in Syracuse, Sicily, under the supervision of his uncle Dion,
who was a friend and disciple of Plato. Dion invited Plato to Syracuse
to serve as an advisor to Dionysius, and Plato accepted. However, he
probably hoped for nothing more than to exercise a moderating influence
on the tyrant; he is unlikely to have believed that he could transform
Dionysius into a true philosopher king. In the event, Dionysius proved
an unwilling student, and nothing came of the endeavor.
Later, Dion attempted to seize power for himself, and was ultimately assassinated. In his possibly spurious Seventh Letter, Plato regretted Dion's death, and wrote that:
...if he had got the supreme power,...
he would then by every means in his power have ordered aright the lives
of his fellow-citizens by suitable and excellent laws; and the thing
next in order, which he would have set his heart to accomplish, was to
found again all the States of Sicily and make them free from the
barbarians... If these things had been
accomplished by a man who was just and brave and temperate and a
philosopher, the same belief with regard to virtue would have been
established among the majority which, if Dionysios had been won over,
would have been established, I might almost say, among all mankind and
would have given them salvation.
Other examples
Many other historical figures have been put forward as potential examples of philosopher kings. According to W. K. C. Guthrie and others, Plato's friend Archytas may have been the original inspiration behind the concept. Not only was Archytas a distinguished Pythagorean philosopher, he was also a skilled military general and a popular political leader, serving seven terms as strategos in the city of Tarentum, Italy.
Alexander the Great, as a student of Aristotle, has often been described as a philosopher king. His contemporary Onesicritus spoke of him as a "philosopher in arms", and the 1st-century Platonist Plutarch
wrote in laudatory terms of his wisdom, generosity, temperance and
courage. Plutarch's justification for calling Alexander a philosopher
was that he had actualised principles which had previously only been
spoken of as ideals and had "changed the brutish customs of countless
nations".
However, Alexander remains a controversial figure, as various
historians have portrayed him very differently even into the modern day.
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius is also frequently cited as a fulfilment of the philosopher king ideal. Ancient sources such as the Historia Augusta call him "the philosopher" and praise him for the clemency of his reign, while his Stoic tome Meditations is still revered as a literary monument to a philosophy of service and duty.
Further examples include:
Ashoka (268–232 BCE), Buddhist Emperor of Maurya dynasty, India
Julian (330–363), Roman emperor and Platonic philosopher, best known for renouncing Christianity and reviving Greco-Roman religion
Khosrow I (c. 512–579), ruler of Iran, admired in Persia and elsewhere for his character, virtues, and knowledge of Greek philosophy.
Frederick II
(1194-1250), Holy Roman Emperor and King of Sicily famous as a polymath
and polyglot, a statesman and lawgiver, as well as a philosopher, poet,
scientist, and mathematician, who patronized a vibrantly sophisticated
and cosmopolitan court in 13th century Italy.
Matthias Corvinus (1443–1490), king of Hungary and Croatia, who was influenced by the Italian Renaissance and strongly endeavored to follow in practice the model and ideas of the philosopher king as described in the Republic.
Akbar (1542–1605), Mughal emperor who was known for his patronage of culture, learning, religion, and philosophy and the founder of the religion Din-i Ilahi
Lee Kuan Yew (1923–2015), Prime Minister of Singapore,
who oversaw the country's transformation from a poor country into a
developed country with a high-income economy within a single generation
through his leadership style of benevolent dictatorship.
Nayib Bukele (1981–present), self-proclaimed philosopher king and current President of El Salvador.
_(cropped).jpg)
_(cropped).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
