View Single Post
  #37 (permalink)     Quote this post in a PM
Old Monday, January 31st, 2005
Perun's Avatar
Perun Perun is offline
Inactive Member
 
Last Online: 6 Days Ago 19:09
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 935
Perun is considered wise by the elders.Perun is considered wise by the elders.Perun is considered wise by the elders.Perun is considered wise by the elders.Perun is considered wise by the elders.Perun is considered wise by the elders.
Default Re: Republic or Monarchy?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mynydd
Perun, it would be interesting to see how they implemented that system in Kieven Rus and Muscovy, and how it worked.
Well heres the basic outline of that system:

“Kieven political institutions were of three kinds, autocratic, aristocratic and democratic, existing side by side in a curious and varying mixture. The autocratic element was of course represented by the office of the local prince, whose prime responsibilities were in the administration of justice and defense of the frontiers. The aristocratic element consisted of a council of advisors to the prince called the duma. The chief military retainers of the prince were the original members of the duma, but eventually it came to include wealthy merchants and important landholders, who were known collectively by as boyars…The boyar council was almost invariably consulted on important matters during the Kieven period, and it could occasionally veto the prince’s suggestions. The democratic element was respresented by the veche, or town assembly, which all free men could attend. In principle, any free man could convene the veche simply by ringing the municipal bell.”
--Robert Wallace Rise of Russia pg.35

And the concept of the veche was later expanded to the whole nation with the Zemsky Sobor; which were first convened by Ivan III and Ivan IV. They were like a parliament, although not exactly in the way familiar to the British or other West Europeans. It sought to increase the bond between the autocratic Prince/Tsar and the common people. There were times (especially after the Time of Troubles) the Zemsky Sobor even voted on the successor to the throne and could veto candidates. Reiving this pratice was a top issue for the Russian nationalist Black Hundreds in the early 20th century.

The autocratic/democratic balance differed from city to city. Moscow for example leaned more towards autocracy while Novgorod leaned more towards direct democracy. The balance between autocracy and democracy worked pretty well during the reign of Yaraslov the Wise.
Reply With Quote