V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
586 POWER OF THE RUSSIAN MONARCH: ON THE QUESTION OF CIVILIZATIONAL AND CULTURAL IDENTITY OF ITS LEGAL NATURE Georii Shairian1
Abstract: The study analyzes the legal cultural and historical type, which has its nature of the tsar's power as a result of a own unique features that persist today. long civilizational and cultural genesis of the Russian statehood with its source and Keywords: tsar’s power, legal nature, fundamental features. There are four of Russian statehood. them: succession autocracy, legal unlimitedness, tsar’s supremacy and 1. Introduction sanctity. The study of the proposed Modern scientists show growing problem takes into account the opinions interest towards the pre-revolutionary of foreign and Russian authors, who laid state-legal heritage. A complex political the methodological foundations for the and legal phenomenon of supreme study of Russia as a kind of cultural and power, which has developed in Russia historical type with it own unique for a thousand years and kept its features. Each of these features describes traditional statehood from destruction the special aspects of tsar’s power, until 1917, is being studied ever since. preserving it as a whole, since the The Tsar and their power have always diminution of any of its properties leads been the subject of attention of to the loss of understanding the tsar’s publicists, politicians and lawyers who power as a legal phenomenon, lived in the Russian Empire. Foreign significantly different from any other authors are no less active in this regard: versions of the supreme power. The they keep offering their theories and study involves many foreign and Russian expressing their opinions. authors, who formed the methodological Starting from the middle of the basis of research in Russia as a kind of XVI century, for almost four centuries, until 2(15) March 1917, the Russian
1 Interregional Attorney’s Collegium of Moscow, Moscow, Russia
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
587 throne linked together its state body. It Degrees of the Royal Genealogy, the ruled and judged, made laws and formed Approved Letter of 1613, and archives. a dynasty. The Russian crown 2.2. The research uses the works of contributed to the establishment of social medieval authors. They include estates system and created local journalists E. Erasmus, I. S. Peresvetov, governments. It also ruled the church, a Greek-Interpreter, hegumen Joseph military affairs, internal public life, and Volotsky. Among the scientists of the foreign policy. It is almost impossible to mid XIX century - early XX century, find a sphere of activity that would be there are such researchers as I. G. beyond the influence and attention of the Ayvzov, I. S. Aksakov, N. I. sovereigns. Chernyayev, L. A. Tikhomirov, A. Without setting a task to grasp such Belokurov, S. Gorsky, N. E. Danilevsky, difficult legal phenomenon as the throne M. K. Leontiev, M. K. Lyubavsky; of the Russian monarch in all its authors of textbooks and monographs on completeness, this work focuses on its Russian state law (including M. V. separate aspect. However, it is one of the Zyzykin, A. S. Alekseev, B. N. most significant issues: it is the legal Chicherin, V. N. Gessen, N. I. nature of Russian throne essentially Lazarevsky, M. N. Zakharov, P. I. associated with the civilizational and Kazansky, and N. O. Kuplevassky). The cultural identity of the Russian state. opinion of the clergy is represented by the works of Archimandrite Constantine 2. Materials and methods (Zaytsev), Archbishop Ioann 2.1. This paper used normative legal (Maximovich), Metropolitan Ioann acts from the Complete Collection of (Snychev), and Archbishop Seraphim Laws of the Russian Empire (CCL RI), (Sobolev). The study also uses the works the Digest of Laws of the Russian by modern Russian researchers such as Empire (DL RI) as the sources. These L. E. Bolotin, Korob'ina Yu. A., M. V. were regulating the 'essence of the Nemytina, V. A. Tomsinova. Supreme Autocratic Power', establishing More than a dozen foreign authors (G. the rights and prerogatives of the M. Basile, Bendix R. , W. Sunderland, reigning monarch. Other sources were Zhand P. Shakibi, R. E., Martin, D. M. medieval state letters, the Book of
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
588 Wallace, F. F. Sigel, K. A. Wittfogel) sovereigns. This fact was first mentioned featured in this work. in the 'Charter of the Novgorod Prince 2.3. This study the civilizational and Vsevolod Mstislavovich, given to the cultural approach2 instead of the Church of John the Baptist in the Opoki', formational approach in the historical written in the first third of the XII and legal studies of the Russian century. It reads the following: 'It is the statehood. It allowed taking a different great Prince Gavriil, named Vsevolod look at the concept of its evolution. It Mstislavich autocrat...(1103 - 1138)'. came out that in Russia, there is a single This was the way the grandson of legal space formed by its history, Vladimir Monomakh addressed himself religion and geography. It exists between 3. A little later, in 1157, Andrew the West and the East. The Russian Bogolubsky inheriting the right to monarchy is the ancient legal tradition of Vladimir, Rostov and Suzdal autocratic rule as the most important Principality from his father, went against state-canonical element of Russian common notions about the princely identity. traditions of tribal reign and became the 'absolute ruler' and 'Prince-master of the 3. Results house' by this 'preparing the system for 3.1. The emergence of the legal Ivan III, Vasily, Ivan IV'4. The drafters aspect of Russian monarchy and its of the Book of Degrees of the Royal regulatory framework. Genealogy of the XVI century went even The ideas about the supreme power further in their opinions: going deep into in Russia being represented by the Tsar the Russian history of the XX century, continued of the dogma of the Old and they pointed to the old Russian princes New Testaments and the doctrine of the already being autocratic rulers. Fathers of the Church. It was developed Grandson of Saint Olga, Grand Duke by medieval scribes and clergy. As the Vladimir was called by them as 'equal- Russian legislation developed, the throne to-the-apostles of all autocrats...Tsar and became increasingly associated with the Grand Duke', and his 'God-imitating son hereditary autocracy of Russian and heir' Grand Duke in baptism Georgy
2 Nemytina, 2017 4 Korsakov, 1872:106 3 Addition to AAK, 1846:2
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
589 (Yaroslav the Wise) was called 'Pious legal nature and took measures for its autocrat'. In the same way they described practical implementation, was the the reign of 'Autocrat George' (Yuri crowned Russian sovereign and grand Dolgorukov), with whom begins 'the duke, who assumed the royal title7: Ivan fifth degree, the beginning of the IV Vasilyevich. The basic properties of Moscow Kingdom'5. royal power was expressed in various Linking the formation of autocracy documents, including correspondence with the adoption of Christianity, the with the royals of Europe. However, the Approved Charter of 1598, and then the most complete description of these Approved Charter of 1613 used this properties was found in the debates with concept describing the supreme power of a high-ranking imperial liege man - Prince Vladimir, who 'for the sake of Prince Kurbsky. He was 'an open expanding his states called himself an supporter of the old', always ready to Autocrat’6. The further listing of the 'support the legal tribal relations opposite princes and the monarchs ended with to the developing idea of the state'8. mentioning the grandfather of Ivan III, The views of Ivan IV were as who also 'was named an autocrat'. It is follows: the Russian throne was clear that these works and regulations did hereditary in the descending male line not directly reflect existing and from the father to his primogen son. Born established property of the supreme by the will of god, which was its only power of the Russian rulers. It is obvious unearthly source, the royal power was that all of them were mentioned considered as independent of the human retroactively. In law and in practice, the will. Thus, having passed a long way of autocracy was a real reflection of the legislative registration in imperial legal nature of the Russian throne and it decrees and manifestos, its concept was was mentioned only since the mid XVI in detail reflected in the Complete century. Collection of Laws of the Russian The first person who made the most Empire. In accordance with the full formulation of the legal idea of provisions of the first chapter, the royal Russian throne, openly pointed at its power was represented as historically
5 Legend, 1755: 133, 169, 189, 193 7 Lakier,1847:4 6 Approved Charter, 1906:23 8 Gorsky, 1858:78
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
590 developed, justified by religion, legally The normative design of all types of formulated, inherited9 and legally the royal power in Russian monarchy is unlimited10, 'the Supreme Autocratic generally described in the first chapter of Power of the Emperor of All the the Russian Constitution of 1906 entitled Russias'11, and 'Sovereign Emperor'12, 'On the essence of the supreme autocratic 'King and Judge of the Kingdom of all power'23. It was based on understanding the Russias'13, sacred and inviolable14, the legal nature of royal power inherent which also belonged to the legislative in the legislator, the interrelated power15, the power of the Supreme and properties of which revealing its original subordinate administration16, the content. There are four such properties. judiciary17, as well as the power of the The most important is the hereditary head of the church18 and head of the autocracy, which means that the royal dynasty19. In addition, the sovereign has power is inherited. The power was the right of the supreme military indivisible and not delegated, it did not command over all land and sea armed depend on anyone and belonged only to forces of the Russian state20 in its single the reigning monarch, the undivided and indivisible territory21 'to the benefit owner of the state territory, by right of of the people entrusted to Him and to the historically established dynastic glory of God'22. This meant that the inheritance: by right of 'Patrimony and legally irresponsible Russian monarch inherited estate'. Its second property was simultaneously and inseparably legal limitlessness, which had the same personified eight types of hereditary origins that put it above all legal norms royal power. except those that it established and strictly adhered to: 'the Russian Empire 3.2. The legal nature of royal power. is governed on firm grounds of laws issued in accordance with the established
9 CCL RI, Vol. XXIV. 1832: 578 17 Ibid. 10 DL RI, 1832: 1 18 CCL RI, Vol. XXIV. 1832: 578 11 DL RI, 1906:4 19 DL RI, 1906: 17 12 Ibid., 2 20 Ibid., 2 13 Ibid., 4 21 Ibid., 1, 5 14 Ibid., 1 22 Ibid., 5 15 Ibid. 23 DL RI, 1906:1,2 16 Ibid., 2
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
591 procedure'24. The autocratic and dogma of Russian state law'26, was a unlimited power of the hereditary direct consequence of the legal policy of Russian monarch also possessed the the Russian princes, primarily in relation tsarist supremacy, which raised it to an to the legislative regulation of land unattainable height in comparison with relations. Since the mid XVI century, other types of supreme power. A special they played a key role in keeping the feature of the Russian throne was the supreme power in the hands of the sacredness that originated from Christian reigning monarch as the owner of the faith in its divine establishment. It state territory and the 'Owner of the determines the inextricable link between Russian land', which had the the canonical foundations of the tsarist unconditional right to dispose of it and rule and its legislative establishment. all its resources. In other words, These four properties of the Russian understanding the supreme power of the throne are considered fundamental. Russian monarch as autocratic was not Violation of their harmony destroys the only speculative, dictated by the very meaning of the supreme power of historical interests of the princely rule the Russian monarch as the royal power. and the prince's personal desire to keep The first three of them were studied by a hereditary, independent power in their number of pre-revolutionary lawyers. hands. This property was a natural The need to study the sanctity of tsarist consequence of the princely right of power as its legal property was possession of patrimony and public mentioned less often. Only P. E. power over their territories, inherited Kazansky stated that this property as from their ancestors from the time of the well as its unlimitedness, supremacy and specific period. As I. E. Engel'man autocracy characterizes its legal nature in wrote, 'all the fullness of state power as its indivisible fullness25. property belongs to the head of the Hereditary autocracy. Besides the Imperial House, the reigning historical and religious-ideological sovereign'27. A special kind of supreme reasons, which are not studied in this power was born. It combined the features work, the tsarist autocracy, the 'basic of private and public law – this was the
24 Ibid., 6 26 N. I. Chernyaev, 2011:1 25 Kazansky, 2007:468 27 Zakharov, 2002:128
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
592 conclusion of most researchers of the Now the Moscow state and its lands legal nature of the supreme power of belonged to the Russian Tsar on the right Russian princes. According to many of dynastic hereditary possession, researchers in history and legal sciences, becoming part of his throne. This was the the basis of the supreme power of the most important reason that led to the hereditary prince is an inseparable formation of the hereditary autocracy of symbiosis of the right of private the royal power of the Russian monarch, ownership of the land of the hereditary as long as he inseparably combined the patrimony and the right for public rights of the owner and the state ruler and administration. completely disposed of the 'estates of After the final liberation from the individuals'29 with 'all the Horde conquerors at the end of the XV unconditionality of ownership rights'30 in century, the right to publicly rule and all areas of the Tsardom of Muscovy. It inherit the state territory of Russia belonged to him simultaneously for became a sovereign and important being a 'political ruler'31 and as the sole property of the legal nature of the owner, making his power supreme, supreme autocratic power of the reigning autocratic and legally unlimited. Russian monarch. During the reign of In 1897, S. F. Platonov first Ivan III and his son Vasily III, the rights considered and then repeated this idea of the grand duke to the sovereign about the liquidation of patrimonial land disposal of the grand-ducal table and the ownership two years later in 'Essays on entire hereditary mass that accompanied the history of unrest in the Moscow state their replacement, including hereditary XVI–XVII centuries'32. It became one of patrimony on various grounds included the most important conditions of the state in the Moscow state, consolidated. reform, which was carried out by Ivan According to the new rules of land IV. The oprichnina established by him tenure, the patrimony loses the value of not only actually and legislatively fixed the hereditary property28. the restriction of rights to the disposal of land property independent of the state,
28 Korob'in, 1965 31 Lubavsky, 2002: 276 29 Chernyaev, 2011:1 32 Platonov, 1937: 138-139 30 Platonov, 2007: 207
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
593 but also made one more important step Moscow, who took the royal title and on the way to deprive the imperial united the vast hereditary patrimonial opposition of its material force and possessions, a number of lands of other political zeal. They became the physical owners and conquered territories, replacement of the large holders of land acquired a previously unknown plots and change of the legal status of exclusive state canonical legal status of landowners by 'busting' of the land, the autocratic monarch. The new title breaking the existing old land ownership, had both the dynastic right to inherit the the withdrawal of old and ‘reoffment’ of state territory and the right to the new sovereign's servants’33. The unchallenged supremacy over the rights to land belonging to the Moscow Kingdom and then the Russian representatives of the ancient boyar Empire. clans, which gave them the best income Legal unlimitedness. Compared to and significant political capital, were autocracy, this property of the legal transferred to the service class men of nature of the Russian monarchy is not Ivan IV (including those who formed the original, since any supreme power is not armed force of oprichniks personally limited in all states35. The difference can subordinate to the Tsar). In the titles of be found only in the understanding of the the Russian monarchy from the first Tsar source of power and competence of its of the Romanov family to Nicholas II, supreme body, which for the Russian there emerged a special declarative Empire was the autocratic monarch who norm: 'By the grace of God Great came to the throne. According to Sovereign Tsar and Grand Prince Christian teaching on royal power Mikhail Fedorovich, Autocrat of all borrowed in the law of the Muscovite Russia and many countries the Ruler and state and Russian Empire, the source of Possessor'34. power of the ruling emperor was divinely The autocracy of the Tsar has created institution36. It seems that the become one of the fundamental difference in the understanding of the properties of its legal nature, which have source of supreme power should not be no foreign analogues. The grand duke of decisive for determining the essence of
33 Sadikov,1950: 25 35 Alekseev, 1892: 173 34 Berch, 1832:145 36 DL RI, 1832:1; 1906:1
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
594 legal limitlessness. However, due to Thus, the legal unlimitedless of the Christianity and the legislation in force ruling sovereign had well-established at that time, it was wrong. The Russian religious and moral limits and the autocrat could not exercise supreme canonical basis, limiting the human will power, which did not take into account of the Russian monarch to rule, to the norms of religious morality, legislate, and judge without regard to canonical regulations and dogmas of the Church doctrine and established in Orthodox Christianity with its connection with this centuries-old evangelical commandments. It was due practice of the supreme autocratic power. to the peculiarities of the Orthodox Any royal will, whatever form it has, as Christianity, and the Russian Tsar could noted by Dzh. M. Bazili, had always not but belong to the Orthodox Catholic been above the law40. At the same time, Greek-Russian church by law37. On the if the king's will came into conflict with one hand, he was legally unlimited and faith and historical practices neither his legally and actually irresponsible to his law nor his decree could become a subjects. On the other hand, the emperor condition of long-term law enforcement had the duty of royal service, the practice. Charter 1722 'On the legacy of meaning of which was formulated in the throne'41, adopted by Peter I in article 58 of the Russian Constitution of violation of the established right 1906. The monarch-to-be was to reign 'to tradition of dynastic succession with its the benefits of people awarded to him inherent primacy as the main condition and for the glory of God, for thou and in for the emergence of the right to the the Day of Judgment He will repay him throne, can be quite a good example. The the word blamelessly'38. As noted by the charter did not last long and was the drafters of the church textbook 'the law subject of sharp dynastic disputes and the is intended to be a manifestation of a source of a number of coups. single divine law of the universe in the This study does not contain the social and political sphere'39. debated whether there has been actual and sustained restriction of royal power
37 DL RI, 1906:5 40 Bazili, 2014:71 38 DL RI, 1906:4 41 CCL RI Vol. VI, 1830:497 39 Righteous Jurisprudence, 2008:4
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
595 in the history of Russian statehood and Kingdom. The restriction of his rights what has been the legal and political was planned to be carried out by consequences of such attempts42. Note convening councils45 on the most that they always ended either with a important issues of state life with the quick return to the original state of legal simultaneous signing of conditions for unlimitedness of the Tsar's power or his acceptance of Orthodoxy, the resulting from well-established preservation of the Orthodox debatable views in the historiography of Christianity in Russia, church property, the Russian state. land, etc. Vladislaw refused to change It is known that Russian history his faith and was not crowned Tsar. knows only a few unsuccessful attempts The third attempt to limit the to legally restrict the supreme power. supreme power of the Tsar was in 1730. One of them was due to Vasily Shuisky's This was the time when they invited accession to the throne, the condition of Anna Ioannovna to reign the country which was his oath to adhere to the with a condition of signing the meaning of the cross oath record43. This 'Conditions' made by members of the record was a specially prepared Supreme Privy Council (SPC). The text normative document that limited the of the 'Conditions' put the law and the Tsar's rights to the sole royal court. collective right of the members of the According to the chronicler, it caused SPC above the will of the reigning mass discontent because 'it shouldn't sovereign, and the refusal to implement happen in the Moscow state'44. The brief them in the future provided for an four-year reign of Vasily Shuisky ended unprecedented sanction for Russia: in 1609 with his forcible taking the vows deprivation of the 'Russian crown'46. and his imminent death in a Polish These conditions violated both the prison. canonical foundations of the Tsar's The second attempt was made in power and completely changed its legal 1610 during the call of the Polish king's nature, since "the imperial power in son Vladislaw to reign the Russian Russia, suggested by the 'Conditions' of
42 Shairian, 2018: 186-196 45 Myakotin, 1894:501 43 CSL and D, Vol. II: 299-300 46 RGADA, F. 3 44 Solov'ev, 1993, Vol. VIII:804
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
596 the Supreme Privy Council, was representative of the authorities, which therefore not autocratic and not made decisions binding on the reign of imperial’47. Moreover, the oligarchic the monarch. Hence, it was conclude form of government was incompatible about the form of government existing with the views of a large group of before the Russian Empire, which was nobles48. At their request, the empress called class-representative monarchy. A turned down the 'Conditions', and similar situation is observed in the study mentioned her title in the Manifesto of of the period of the early XX century, Accession to the Throne dated February when the legal limitation of the Tsar's 28, 1730: 'Anna Empress and Autocrat of power, according to many researchers, All the Russias'. She also stated that 'We was legally established by the are who accepted the autocracy'49. The Fundamental laws of the Russian Empire external reasons for the unsuccessful in 1906. However, in the prism of attempts to put the royal power under the civilizational and cultural approaches, control of the interested persons were neither the first nor the second example obviously not the main ones. The crucial look scientifically justified. Rather, it is role belonged to understanding the legal a tribute to the Soviet historiographical nature of the Tsar's power as autocratic school based on the Marxist approach to and legally unlimited, personified the linear-formational understanding of exclusively in the person of Tsar, which the historical process and its was ingrained in the consciousness of the corresponding assessments of the legal Russian people. phenomena of the national state. The fact that the established Thus, the councils that date back to historiography does not always allow the reign of Ivan IV, have been a obtaining a correct assessment of the temporary law-making institution crea- historical facts and the legal phenomena ted by the Tsar's will. They were of the past centuries can be exemplified convened by the monarch; he also by the fact that much of the scientific regulated the issues brought to their literature believe that the councils of consideration and approved or rejected XVI - XVII centuries were a the decisions on these issues. Dzh. M.
47 Tomsinov, 2009: XXXVII 49 Manifesto, 1730. Karelian Research Centre of 48 Manshteyn, 1875: 25 RAS, F. 1
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
597 Bazili assumed that the legislative power regained the tsarist autocracy lost in the of the first Russian monarch 'was never Troubled times in its entirety. This fact burdened by any intermediate bodies'50. justified that the Russian public life in This observation should be attributed to the power of the centuries-old tradition both the XVI and later XVII-century gravitated to other forms of government councils, which sought to 'restore rather and they were rejected. than limit autocratic domination'51, since The modernized repetition of the it was the king, by virtue of traditional councils of the XVI - XVII centuries was paternalistic notions of his role, who was reproduced in Russia in the early XX perceived and acted as an arbiter century at the establishment of the state between different groups, 'preventing Duma and giving it and the state Council exploitation and guaranteeing the the functions of legislative bodies. In highest truth and justice'52. In general, terms of law, the difference was only in the Assembly of the Land and clergy the fact that representative bodies of the state councils, through which the church early XX century operated on a supported the autocratic aspirations of continuous basis, and the procedure for Russian princes53, was multifunctional the adoption of legislative decisions representative institutions for the became strictly regulated. The royal implementation of the power of the legislator determined their convocation autocratic monarch and the resolution of by his decree54 and established the the most important issues of state, church duration of sessions and breaks55. By and public life. The Council of 1598 virtue of article 86 of Russian confirmed the need for the Tsar's Constitution of 1906, no law could 'be autocracy as a form of government for followed without the approval of the Russia, offering Boris Godunov state Council and the state Duma and to unlimited supreme power of the reigning perceive the power without the approval sovereign. The Council of 1613, acting of the emperor'56. The procedure for in the conditions of the interregnum, adoption of laws and the formal
50 Bazili, 2014:71 54 DL RI, 1906:7 51 Bendix, 1980: 338 55 Ibid. 52 Shakibi, 2006:442 56 Ibid., 6. 53 Vallas, 1914:47
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
598 elimination the unlimitedness of the monarch, which was formulated by the supreme power of the monarch from the legislator in article 4 of the Russian text of the Constitution of 1906 informed Constitution of 1906: 'Emperor of all the a number of well-known lawyers and Russias has the Supreme Autocratic liberal politicians that the bestowed power'58. As for the autocracy and legal constitution that asserted the supremacy unboundedness, Tsar's supremacy had its of the law and legal unlimitedness of ideological theological justification in royal persons and their autocracy was the Christian doctrine and 'was put by the adopted in Russia. law in dependence of god'59. As well as In fact, the legal nature of the autocracy and legal unlimitedness, royal Russian monarch's power remained the supremacy could be carried out only by same. For various reasons, many lawyers a person who had the exclusive state- and politicians ignored the most canonical legal status of the crowned and important fact that the emperor was anointed monarch, who possessed eight entitled to independently publish any types of power. P. E. Kazansky wrote in manifestos, decrees, rescripts and other his work: 'Adjective “supreme” is used normative acts regardless of the opinion by our laws to refer to a special property of the representative authorities, same as of the Imperial Power' because it refers before. All of them had the same legal to the legislative regulation of the force as the laws. The emperor used the supreme state administration, which is right to supreme autocratic power directly carried out by the reigning established by article 4 of the Russian monarch and belongs to him in all Constitution of 1906, including the case manifestations of his state power. The of early dissolution of the II state Duma, manifestation include: 1) legislative accompanied by a change in the provisions; 2) 'the right of extreme provision on elections to the state Duma decisions', which the monarch takes in of June 3, 190757. 'case of great danger to the state'; 3) the Royal supremacy. By virtue of the right of 'extraordinary supra-legal law, the royal supremacy was considered decisions, i.e. decisions in cases when as an integral property of the Russian the usual order established to meet the
57 Anthology, 1990:328-330 59 Ayvazov, 1907:10 58 DL RI, 1906:1
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
599 needs of the state does not achieved the state as the common family and the goal'; 4) the right of 'the last decisions in sovereign's patrimony headed by its the state affairs when 'the final decision sovereign master. is granted to the supreme power'; 5) the The meaning of the Tsar's supremacy right of 'the highest decisions, or, as the did not change after the introduction of language of laws and state acts says, the the Russian Constitution of 1906: highest, such will, to which all subjects changes in the order of lawmaking and authorities must obey'60. 'without changing the essence of our In addition, the difference of the historical supreme power...put in order royal supremacy, which was 'the main the state system, seeking to harmonize and quite indisputable beginning of the old principles with the improved Russian state law'61, was that its methods of power...'63. Considering it autocratic bearer subordinates not only possible to exclude the term 'unlimited' the highest state power, but also extends from the definition of tsarist power, the the royal supremacy to the tsarist church legislator, however, left the and dynastic relations. As a result, the characteristic of its essence unchanged, power of the Russian autocrat had a since the predicate ‘Supreme higher status than the usual supreme Autocratic...power’ was preserved in power of the ruling sovereign62. relation to the Russian monarch's It should be noted that the legislative power64. In other words, it is power that norms regulating the right of the reigning can not be fundamentally limited neither monarch to personal supreme control by its source nor by its legal nature. were not only the fruit of the In fact, the royal supremacy of the development of positive law, but a autocratic monarch still had no natural consequence of the national legislative limits. Even the law on patrimonial view of the hereditary nature succession to the throne, which of the power of the Russian Tsar and his established the order of reception of the paternalistic role of the father of a large tsarist power among the members of the family-the state. It traditionally saw the royal family and was considered by most
60 Kazansky, 2007: 343-348 63 Zakharov, 2002:57 61 Sokol'sky, 1890: 63 64 DL RI, 1906:1 62 Bolotin, 2011
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
600 researchers of Russian state law as believers in Christ royal subjects: the unchangeable, was not and could not be achievement of the Kingdom of Heaven. a limitation of its supreme power. By The task of choosing the most favorable virtue of the inherent autocracy of the conditions for this state life is a priority reigning monarch, the monarch had the for the reigning Orthodox monarch. The formal right to change this law, but did success of cultural development, not, because after the ascension to the economic prosperity, military and throne and sacring according to Article political achievements are done in order 39 of the Russian Constitution of 1906, to resolve this task. he gave an oath to 'observe the above It is obvious that in comparison with mentioned laws on the heritage of the other properties of the legal nature of the throne’65. royal power, the sanctity certainly Sanctity. It is the fourth fundamental correlates with the Christian doctrine of property, the study of which reveals the the state and the king, and with Russian legal nature of the Tsar's power in the state law, because the tsarist government fullness of its civilizational and cultural itself 'is an institution not only of state identity as the supreme and autocratic but also of church law66. This fact led to power. This power is also legally the disposition of a number of legislative unlimited and irresponsible. The law norms regulating medieval state life, recognizes the divine institution as its including the relations between the Tsar source. and the church. The nature and legal The study of this property also semantics of the regulation of these reveals the closest historical and relations was then transferred to the ideological connection between the legislation of the Imperial period. A religious legal consciousness of single view of the religious and legal medieval Russia and Imperial Russia and nature of the Tsar's power as to sacred the legislative embodiment of the idea of significantly legitimized the rights and a Christian state as a necessary prerogatives of the reigning monarch, organizational tool for the supporting the people's confidence in implementation of the main goal of their justice and hereditary dynastic
65Ibid., 3 66 Zyzykin, 1924:174
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
601 legality. At the same time, it established allegiance in the perception of the the religious and moral limits of his will, hereditary throne. consistent with the spirit of Christian The sanctity of the Tsar's power gave morality and the Orthodox Christianity the legal status of the Russian monarch for the royal legislator. the exclusive state canonical Basically, until the early XX century, characteristic, which united in the person the supreme autocratic power was of the reigning monarch the secular and believed to be divinely instituted. On the spiritual power. This status could belong one hand, this circumstance significantly only to the person at the same time contributed to the legitimization of state named by virtue of the law the head of laws, supporting their legal disposition church and possessing imperial with religious sanction, and vice versa, advantage of the crowned sovereign over did not support it if it was inconsistent whom the church ceremony established with church canons. On the other hand, by the law as the head of the fifth Russian the sacredness of the power of the Constitution of 1906 ('On the holy reigning sovereign gave his highest legal coronation and sacring'67). In other dictates a special mandatory nature. Any words, the state law gave 'a sanction to normative act adopted by the royal the existing church rule of holy legislator became not only legally coronation and sacring, without which binding, but was also considered as an the royal power loses its basis and its indication of the person clothed with the meaning, because without them there is royal dignity by god himself. The legal no royal power as a sacred rank, but only duty to execute the state law was thus a simple human power, no different from supplemented by faith in its justice and, any other human power'68. at the same time, became a religious The church rank of holy coronation duty. The disobedience to the legislative and sacring had a direct legal regulations was considered to be the significance for establishing the limits of same as perjury before the emperor and supreme power, when in the prayer the Lord’s Anointed, who was sworn established by law69, 'the Autocrat solemnly declared that He was limited by
67 DL RI, 1906:4 69 DL RI, 1906:4 68 Zyzykin, 1924: 6864
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
602 the Law of God', and not by human law. Constitution of 1906. This article All this indicates the legal feature of the determined that 'the emperor, as a royal power 'as it was developed by the Christian sovereign, is the supreme thousand-year Russian history' (Zaytsev, defender and guardian of the dogmas of Archimandrite Constantine). the dominant religion, and the guardian This rite was served for the of the faith and everyone in the church of legitimation of the supreme autocratic the holy deanery. 1721 Jan. 25 (3718) P. power of the person who took the I, introduction. – In this sense, the hereditary Russian hhrone as it was a) emperor, in the act of succession to the publicly affirmed the right of the Throne of 1797 April 5 (17910) is called monarch on his perception from the the head of the church. – 1906 Apr. 23, church, b) indicated the voluntary nature collection of decrees, 603, article 24'72. of performing the act, and c) specified The early XX century started with his person. As a result, any doubts in the the reform of the order of lawmaking. personality of the sovereign coming to The views of lawyers on the preservation the throne and his religious affiliation as of the sacredness of the tsarist a sacred and inviolable person were government divided. The convinced excluded70. The coronation of the supporters of constitutionalism holders of the royal throne by virtue of immediately declared that article 4 of the the rules established by the act of Russian Constitution of 1906, which succession in 1797 played the role of a contained the justification of the legal regulator of dynastic relations, supreme autocratic power as divinely since 'the religious sacred nature of instituted ('god himself commands') lost power mainly determined the succession its legal meaning73. Some lawyers of the ruler'71. The exclusive state continued to defend the sacred character canonical status of the sovereign as a of the Tsar's power as a consequence of sacred person predetermined their rights its divine source and the unsurpassed to regulate the relations between the Tsar supremacy, established by the force of and the church within the limits law and 'the Christian, Orthodox established by article 64 of the Russian Catholic faith of the Eastern confession
70 Ibid., 1 72 DL RI, 1906:5 71 Omel'chenko, 2000 73 Lazarevsky, 1913:279
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
603 that prevailed and dominated in the about the ideological justification of Russian Empire'74. P. E. Kazansky Russia's existence and its messianic task referred to the norms of art. 4, 10 of the known in Russian and foreign Russian Constitution of 1906 and wrote historiography called 'Moscow is the that the doctrine of the unlimited Third Rome'. Continuing the idea of imperial power could not be considered medieval authors on an independent path full without taking into account its sacred of Russian development, in 1869 N. Ya. nature. Comparing different editions of Danilevsky scientifically substantiated the Constitution, he complained that the Russia's key place in the unique Slavic name of the first section in the 1832 civilization76. This approach allowed K. edition (‘On the sacred rights and N. Leontiev (the author of the benefits of the supreme autocratic monograph 'Byzantism and Slavdom') to power') was changed, although 'all the conclude about the identity of the state articles that gave the power of the structure of medieval Russia and its form Emperor sacred character, remained, and of government. In this regard, he wrote in the eyes of the Russian people it was that 'we have a generic hereditary Tsarist still sacred...'75. government that is so strong that aristocratic beginning has adopted its 4. Discussion service, semi-clannish, mildly clannish, 4.1. The disputes among Russian much more of the state than feudal, but authors on the source, the legal nature, absolutely not a municipal character'77. I. rights and prerogatives, and also limits of A. Sikorsky developed the idea of N. Ya. the supreme autocratic power of the Danilevsky on the cultural and historical Russian monarch never ceased. They types of peoples and their inherent have always been more or less connected ethnographic features. On the basis of with understanding the Russia's place in established racial and anthropological the world, viewing it as a state with its differences of peoples, he put forward special geopolitical position between the special features of the psychology of the West and the East that dictated it a special independent role. They also were
74 DL RI, 1906:5 76 Danilevsky, 2011:114 75 Kazansky, 2007:468 77 Leont'ev, 1884: 18
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
604 Slavs78, which affected the choice of a ignore all the features of our single-power government. It existed in Constitution'81. In Soviet times, despite the period from the late IX century to the strong resistance, the question of the mid XVI century and differed in legal uniqueness of the origin and evolution of limitation of princely supremacy up to the Russian state of mobilization type achievement of the state sovereignty of arose on a communal basis, where Russia in 1480 and internal political 'public power began to be personified in omnipotence of the Russian monks the prince and the militia'82. Today established as a result of the state Russian identity and the nature of the reforms of Ivan IV. supreme power are only gaining The question of the Tsar's autocracy momentum, increasingly often turning to as an integral part of Russian historical the study of the origins of Russian life and the state was supported by the history and Russian law. Slavophiles79. Following the scientists in 4.2. Foreign researchers have made a other fields, the idea of the uniqueness of significant contribution to the the Russian state power was supported understanding of Russia and the nature by well-known pre-revolutionary of its supreme power. Some of them lawyers P. E. Kazansky80 and N. A. prefer the socio-cultural approach in Zakharov. The latter argued with his their research838485. Other authors opponents by stating that 'Our state has preferred the civilizational existed for more than 1,000 years; it approach868788. At the same time, some seems that we should have any right, any of them believe that Russia has a basis of power that needs to be studied, thousand-year historical and legal and not just their criticism and praise...a experience of statehood based on the 'old number of our well-known lawyers Russian elements'89 and in response to including Lazarevsky, Gessen, Shalladn, the strong pressure of the West and the Kokoshkin, and others in their works East, it has managed to preserve its
78 Sikorsky, 1895 84 T. Parsons, 1949 79 Aksakov, 1887: 149 85 R. K. Merton, 1968 80 Kazansky, 2007 86 O. Shpengler, 2003 81 Zakharov, 2002:34 87 Toynbi,1987 82 Froyanov, 2008: 377 88 S. Khantington, 1994 83 P. Sorokin, 2000 89 M. Rassel
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
605 traditional identity and carry it through correspondence of Ivan IV with prince the centuries to the present time despite Kurbsky, the Queen of England, and the external forms of 'being European' kings of Sweden and Poland. The and flirting with its Eastern relations in law between the Tsar and the neighbors909192. Others believe that this church were first regulated by law in the is not the case, that Russia is focused on resolution of the Council of 1551 by a marginal Eastern civilization93, even if introducing into it the text of the sixth it is closer to Europe than to Asia than to novel of the Byzantine emperor Justinian the 'Muslim world or Confucianism'94. It as their basis and the development of is widely believed that the clash of special norms fixed in this act. The views European (Romano-German) of the Russian emperors on hereditary civilization with Russia is embedded in autocracy were expressed in the charter the very idea of a conflict of of 1922 by Peter I 'On the succession of civilizations9596. It is often noted that the the throne', Paul I in his act of succession geopolitical features of the development in 1797, in a number of decrees and of the Russian state had a strong manifestos of Russian emperors, the influence on the formation of ideas and texts of which were included in the practices of the organization of supreme Complete Collection of Laws of the power of Russian princes, which was Russian Empire, becoming the basic directly involved by Byzantium9798 and rules for the preparation of Fundamental the church99100. laws in the editions of 1832 - 1906. 4.3. The most important role in the 4.4. Understanding the essence of the development of the legal idea of the power of the Russian monarch, its Tsar's power as unlimited and autocratic historical and legal uniqueness, and was played by normative acts and works ideological connection with the of Russian sovereigns. A special place canonical institutions that reveal its among them is intentionally disclosed source is impossible without referring to
90 P. D'yukes, 1998 96 Toynbi, 1987 91 I. Madariaga, 1983 97 F. Dvornik, 1956 92 M. Bassin, 2015 98 Khanak, 2014 93 K. Vittfogel', 1957 99 M. Janet, 2007 94 D. Liven, 1999 100 D. Sivel, 2012 95 Khantington, 1994
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
606 the works of clergy. They start from the cultural identity has yet to be fully messages of the monk Philotheus, the assessed, which will obviously entail a author of the concept of 'Moscow-the scientific reassessment of many ideas Third Rome'101, higumen I. Volotsky about the genesis of Russian statehood. with his teachings about the attitude to An attempt to study the legal nature of the Royal lords102, publicists E. Erazm the Tsar's power with its fundamental (40-60s of the XVI century) and I. S. properties (autocracy, legal Peresvetov (XVI century), St. John of limitlessness, royal supremacy and Tobolsk (1708), and Metropolitan sanctity) is the first step in this direction. Filaret103. The latter summed up the All these properties emerged from views of the spiritual fathers of the ancient Russia and the Christian Orthodox church in his work 'Christian worldview of the Russian people and are doctrine of Tsar's power and the duties of inextricably linked with each other and the faithful'. The ideas of their with the sole power of Russian princes, predecessors about the spiritual view of who combined the right to public power power in its historical and legal and hereditary possession of patrimonial manifestations were developed by territories in one person. All the archbishop Seraphim104, archbishop properties of the Tsar's power are Ioann of Shanghai105, archimandrite ideologically based on divine revelation, Constantine106, and metropolitan Ioann establishing its unearthly source. The of Ladoga107. legislative framework is formed by numerous regulations of Russian 5. Conclusion monarchs, codified in the first third of The middle of the XVI century was the XIX century. It can be argued that the marked by the emergence of a new legal Fundamental laws of the Russian Empire phenomenon for the development of as amended in 1832 and in 1906 resulted medieval Russia: the power of the from centuries of legal practices Russian monarch. Its civilizational and reflected in the current legislation of the
101 Philotheus, XVI 105 Maksimovich, 1936 102 Volotsky, 1547 106 Zaitsev, 1970 103 Drozdov, 1886 107 Snychev, 1995 104 Sobolev, 1939
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
607 Russian historical view of the supreme unexplored sides of such a complex legal power, its nature, objectives and legal phenomenon as the Tsar's power. The capabilities of its hereditary successor. conclusions are drawn from the The simultaneous combination and civilizational and cultural approach to sole application of the rights of the the study of Russian state law, which hereditary owner of state territory and previously remained unclaimed or were state power by the crowned monarch has simply impossible. As a result, the no analogues either in the history of the scientific knowledge has emerged that Western countries or in the history of the can be involved in the improvement of East. This is the legal uniqueness of the the modern model of Russian statehood, supreme autocratic power of the which clearly needs modernization. crowned Russian sovereign. Repeated attempts of its legal restriction, belittling References th e royal supremacy and sanctity during Ayvazov, Religioznaya pravda russkogo almost four hundred years of its samoderzhaviya [The religious truth of existence were doomed to failure the Russian autocracy] (Kharkov: because they caused a negative reaction Tipografiya Gubernskogo Pravleniya, of the people's Christian sense of justice 1907). and legal understanding. Only in March Aksakov, ‘V russkom samoderzhavii 1917б the traditional form of dlya nas zalog istinnoy grazhdanskoy i government in Russia was forcibly sotsial'noy svobody [In the Russian abolished, the Russian monarch was autocracy we have the guarantee of true deprived of the right to the throne and civil and social freedom]’, In then killed. Gosudarstvennyy i Zemskiy vopros. The increase in the number of Stat'i o nekotorykh istoricheskikh scientific works about the historical past sobytiyakh. 1860-1886 (Moscow: of the Russian monarchy indicates that Tipografiya M.G. Volchaninova, 1887). interest grows from year to year. New Alekseev, Russian state law [Russkoe sources are found, new historiographical gosudarstvennoe pravo] (Moscow: facts are established, which are Tipografiya A.A. Gatsuka, 1892). considered from a different angle. Bolotin, ‘Expression of the idea of the Attention is drawn to previously Autocracy, as well as the ideology of
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
608 Christian statehood in the Approved Zaytsev, The miracle of Russian history: Charter and other documents of the collected articles revealing the Moscow Council in 1598 [Vyrazhenie commercial significance of historical idei Samoderzhaviya, a takzhe ideologii Russia, published in foreign Russia over Khristianskoy gosudarstvennosti v the past twenty years [Chudo russkoy Utverzhdennoy Gramote i drugikh istorii: sbornik statey, sobornykh dokumentakh Moskovskogo raskryvayushchikh promyslitel'noe sobora 1598g.]’ 2011, available at: znachenie istoricheskoy Rossii, http://www.keliya.org/States/Bolotin.ht opublikovannykh v zarubezhnoy Rossii m za poslednee dvadtsatiletie] Gorsky, Life and historical significance (Jordanville: Holly Trinity monastery, of Prince Andrei Mikhailovich Kurbsky 1970}. [Zhizn' i istoricheskoe znachenie Zaytsev, ‘In memory of the last Tsar knyazya Andreya Mikhaylovicha [Pamyati poslednego Tsarya]’, available Kurbskogo] (Kazan': Izdaniye at: knigoprodavtsa Ivana Dubrovina, 1858). https://www.odigitria.by/2016/07/19/pa Danilevsky, Russia and Europe. A look myati-poslednego-carya-arximandrit- at the cultural and political relations of konstantin-zajcev-2/ the Slavic world to the German-Roman Zakharov, The system of Russian state one [Rossiya i Evropa. Vzglyad na power [Sistema russkoy kul'turnye i politicheskie otnosheniya gosudarstvennoy vlasti] slavyanskogo mira k germano- (Novocherkassk, 1912). romanskomu] (Moscow: Institut russkoy Zyzykin, Imperial power and the law of tsivilizatsii, 2011). succession in Russia [Tsarskaya vlast' i Erazm, ‘Thus will be a ruler, the ruler of zakon o prestolonasledii v Rossii] (Sofia: the king and land surveying Tipografiya ‘Novaya zhizn', 1924). [Pravitel'nitsa. Ashche voskhotyat, Ioann, Feotron (Tyumen: Russkaya tsarem pravitel'nitsa i zemlemerie]’, nedelya, 2017). available at: Ioann, Cathedral Russia. Essays on http://lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.asp Christian Statehood [Rus' sobornaya. x?tabid=5116 Ocherki khristian. gosudarstvennosti] (Saint Petersburg: Tsarskoe delo, 1995).
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
609 Iosif, The Enlightener, or the conviction Rossii]’, Zhurn. M-va nar. Pros. of the heresy of the Judaizers. The (Moscow: 1847). creation of our venerable father Iosif, Леонтьев К. Н. Дополнение к двум hegumen Volotsky [Prosvetitel', ili статьям о панславизме. // Восток, oblichenie eresi zhidovstvuyushchikh. Россия и Славянство. Сборник статей. Tvorenie prepodobnogo ottsa nashego Т. I. М.: Типолитография Н.Н. Iosifa, igumena Volotskogo] (Moscow: Кушнерева и К0, 1885. 323 с. Iosifo-Volotskiy monastyr', 2008). Любавский М.К. Лекции по древней Kazansky, Power of the All-Russian русской истории до конца XVI века. Emperor [Vlast' Vserossiyskogo СПб: Издательство «Лань», 2002. 480 Imperatora] (Moscow: IV Fond, 2007). с. Korob'in, ‘On feudalism in general and Манифест «О вступлении на in Russia in particular [O feodalizme Российский Престол Ее voobshche i v Rossii v chastnosti]’. Императорского Величества 1965, available at: Государыни Императрицы Анны http://www.domarchive.ru/reading- Иоанновны, о восприятии room/korobin_art/4287. Самодержавия и об учинении вновь Korsakov, Merya and the Principality of присяги» от 28 февраля 1730 г. // Rostov. Essays from the history of the Законодательство императрицы Анны Rostov-Suzdal land [Merya i Rostovskoe Иоанновны. М.: Зерцало, 2009. 238 с. knyazhestvo. Ocherki iz istorii Rostovo- Манштейн Х.Г. Записки о России Suzdal'skoy zemli] (Kazan': генерала Манштейна 1727-1744. СПб, Universitetskaya tipografiya, 1872). 1875. 399 с. Lazarevsky, Russian state law. In 2 vols. Мякотин В. Земские соборы // Vol. 1. Constitutional law. 3rd ed. Энциклопедический словарь. Т. XII [Russkoe gosudarstvennoe pravo. V 2-kh СПб.: Типо-Литография И.А. Ефрона, t. T. 1. Konstitutsionnoe pravo. Izd. 3-e] 1894. 495 с. (Saint Petersburg: Tipografiya Немытина М.В. Цивилизационно- Aktsionernogo obshchestva ‘Slovo’, культурный подход в правоведении // 1913). Вестник университета им. О.Е. Lakier, ‘History of the title of sovereigns Кутафина (МГЮА). 2017. № 4 (37). С. of Russia [Istoriya titula gosudarey 28–40.
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
610 Новая повесть о преславном Садиков П.А. Очерки по истории Российском царстве // Библиотека опричнины. Л.: 2-я типо-лит. литературы Древней Руси. Т. 14. Гидрометеоиздата, 1950. 594 с. РГАДА. Ф. 3. Оп. 1. Д. 6. Л. 12б. СЗРИ Т. I. Раздел I, 1857. Свод Омельченко О.А. Всеобщая история Основных государственных законов. государства и права. Учебник в 2-х т. Санктпетербургъ: Типография Т. 1. М.: ТОН – Остожье, 2000. 582 с. Второго Отделения Собственной Его Пересветов И.С. Большая челобитная. Императорского Величества // Сайт ИРЛИ РАН. Режим доступа: Канцелярии. 1857. 1026 с. lib.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabi СЗРИ Т. I. Раздел I, 1906. Свод d=5115 Основных государственных законов. Платонов С.Ф. Очерки по истории С.- ПЕТЕРБУРГ: Русское Книжное смуты в Московском государстве Товарищество «Деятель», 1912. XVI–XVII вв. (Опыт изучения XVI+440+XIII с. общественного строя и сословных Сикорский И.А. Черты из психологии отношений в смутное время). М., славян. Речь, произнесенная проф. 1937. 642 с. И.А. Сикорским, в торжественном Платонов С.Ф. Полный курс лекций заседании Славянского по русской истории. M.: ООО «Фирма благотворительного общества 14 мая СТД», 2007. 832 с. 1895 года. Киев: тип. И.И. Чоколова, Повесть о белом клобуке. Послание 1895. 15 с. Дмитрия грека Толмача Сказание о святом благочестии новгородскому архиепископу русских началодержец и семени их Геннадию // Памятники литературы святого и прочих // Степенная книга Древней Руси. Середина XVI века. М.: царского родословия. ПСРЛ. Т. XXI. «Художественная литература», 1985. Изд. 1-е. Половина 1-я. СПб., 1908. 638 с. 350 с. Правое правоведение. М.: ООО Серафим (Соболев), архиепископ. «Сподвижник», 2008. 1333 с. Русская идеология. София:[б. и.], ПСЗИ–I. Т.VI. 1720-1722. № 3893. 1939 - 180 с. Устав 1722 г. «О наследии Престола» Серафим (Соболев), архиепископ. Об от 5 февраля 1722. СПб, 1830. 817 с. истинном монархическом ми-
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
611 росозерцании. М.; СПб.: Лъствица, Дополнения к Актам историческим, 2002. 543 с. собранные и изданные Собрание государственных грамот и археологической комиссией. В 12-ти договоров, часть вторая, М.: томах. Т. I. СПб.: Тип. II Отделения Типография Селивановского, 1819. Собственной Е.И.В. Канцелярии, 610 с. 1846. 446 с. Сокольский В.В. Краткий учебник Утвержденная грамота об избрании русского государственного права. на Московское государство Михаила Одесса: Экономическая типография Федоровича Романова. «Одесского вестника», 1890. 334, Х с. Воспроизведена Имп. Обществом Соловьев С.М. История России с истории и древностей российских при древнейших времен. Кн. вторая. Изд. Московском университете под 2-е. Т. VIII. М.: Голос, 1993. 768 с. наблюдением С. А. Белокурова. М. : Сорокин П.А. Социальная и Синодальная тип., 1904. 30 с. культурная динамика / пер. с англ., Хантингтон С. «Столкновение вст. статья и комментарии В.В. цивилизаций?» // Полис. 1994. № 1. С. Сапова. М.: Астрель, 2006. 1176 с. 33-48. Тихомиров Л. А. Монархическая Хрестоматия по истории СССР. 1861- государственность. М.: 1917. М.: Просвещение, 1990. 416 с. Университетская типография на Христианское учение о царской Страстном бульваре, в 3-х томах. Ч. 3. власти и об обязанностях 1905. 223 с. верноподданных: мысли, вкратце Томсинов В.А. Междуцарствие 1730 извлеченныя из проповедей года в России и восшествие Анны Филарета, митрополита Московскаго Иоанновны на императорский / Собрал Порфирий Кременецкий. М.: Престол // Законодательство Издание Афонскаго рус. императрицы Анны Иоанновны. М.: Пантелеймонова монастыря, 1888: Зерцало. 2009. 238 с. Тип. И. Ефимова. 51 с. Уставная грамота Новогородского Черняев Н.И. О русском князя Всеволода Мстиславовича, самодержавии. М.: Институт русской данная церкви Иоанна Предтечи на цивилизации, 2011. 864 с. Опокахъ». Около 1134-1135. //
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
612 Шпенглер О. Закат Европы: В 2-х York : Cambridge univ. press, 2007. томах. Т.2. / Пер. с нем. И.И. 127-157 р. Маханькова.М.: Айрис-пресс, 2003. Dominic Lieven. Dilemmas of Empire 624 с. 1850-1918. Power, Territory, Identity. Шпенглер О. Закат Европы: В 2-х Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. томах. Т.1. / Пер. с нем. И.И. 34, No. 2. Аpr., 1999. 486 р. Маханькова. М.: Айрис-пресс, 2003. Isabel de Madariaga. Autocracy and 528 с. Sovereignty, Vol. 16, Issue 3-4 Тempe, Giovanni M. Basile. Law and power. 1983. Р. 369 –387. The idea of sovereignty in 16th century Merton Robert K. Social Theory and Russia // Despotism and resistance to Social Structure New York: The Free Russian history. 2014. 65-79. Press, 1949. 423 р. Mark Bassin. Geographies of imperial Parsons T. The Structure of Social identity// Imperial Russia, 1689–1917. Action. Glencoe, ILinois. 1949. 434 р. Cambridge history of Russia. Vol. II. Р. Toynbee, 1987 – Toynbee A.J. A Study 51. 2015 г. 806 р. of History, Vol. 1: Abridgement of Bendix R. Kings Or People: Power and Volumes I-VI. USA: Oxford University the Mandate to Rule. University of Press, 1987. 640 p. California Press, 1980. 704 р. Russell E. Martin. Law, Succession, and Dukes Paul. A history of Russia : the 18th Century Refounding of the Medieval, mod., contemporary c. 882- Romanov Dynasty. С. 19. Режим 1996. Basingstoke (Hants.) London : доступа: Macmillan press, 1998. 430 р. http://www.russianlegitimist.org/new- Francis Dvornik. Byzantine Political page-1/. Ideas in Kievan Russia. Dumbarton Oaks David Siewell. The Riurikid Dynasty’s Papers. Vol. 9/10. 1956. Р. 73-12. Relationship with the Orthodox Hanak W.K. The nature and the image of Christian Church in Kievan Rus. History grand princely in Kievan Russia: 980- Department Western Oregon University. 1054. Leiden- Boston. 2014. 223 р. Senior Seminar (HST 499W) June 11, Martin Janet. Medieval Russia: 980- 2012. 34 р. 1584. 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK ; New Donald M. Wallace. A Short History of Russia and the Balkan States. The
V. 01 - Nº 01 - Ano 2020 – Special Edition
613 Encyclopaedia Britannica Company, ltd., 1914. 479 р. Karl A. Wittfogel. Oriental Despotism. A comparative study of total power. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 1957. 556 р. Zhand P. Shakibi. Central government // Imperial Russia, 1689–1917. Cambridge history of Russia. Vol. II. 2006. 448 р