> Christianity does not provide any ability for kings to rule as "voice of the gods".
"Divine right of kings."
Look it up.
> Norse religion, OTOH, is and arbitrary and filled with superstition. Human sacrfice seems to have been common.
Yes, as with many other religions, like Christianity. Before you go all ballistic, imagine how burning a witch looks to non-Christians. Looks a hell of a lot like a human sacrifice.
> So, it was from the bottom up?
By Charlemagnes time? Nope. Top-down, by the link *you* yourself provided. Were it bottom-up, he'd hardly have to fight wars of aggression to force his neighbors to convert. Christianity was the religion of the rulers by this point... the "Old Ways" survived for centuries more among the peasant classes.
The divine right of kings was a perversion of Christianity. And still kings did not rule as a "voice of the gods." Further, it was not until the early modern era (17th Century) that the notion became extensively used as a primarily political mechanism, i.e. for increasing the power of kings within centralized monarchies
Yes, as with many other religions, like Christianity. Before you go all ballistic, imagine how burning a witch looks to non-Christians. Looks a hell of a lot like a human sacrifice.
Or an execution. I can tell you why human sacrifice is wrong. Can you tell me why witch burning is wrong?
So, it was from the bottom up? . . . By Charlemagnes time?
So where did the power-base come from?