From Monarchy of Self-Holding- Zemesky to Self-Containing-Burocatic: Question of Russian Statehood Evolution in Early New Time

In this study, authors considered evolution of Russian statehood, the political regime, and relations of power, and society in the early new times, using the heuristic potential of concepts of "composite state" and "military revolution". Authors showed the need of external expansion in poverty conditions of Russian state which led to transform Russian monarchy from the autocratic-Zemstvo (where effective work of the state mechanism was ensured by cooperation of supreme power and local self-government) to the autocratic-bureaucratic monarchy (where supreme power rested primarily on bureaucracy and violence, reducing local government to a supporting role in public administration)

The state and the church in Russia in the early new age: custom and law

The article is devoted to the analysis of the peculiarities of the system of relations that were formed between the Orthodox Church and the authority of the Russian state in the early modern perio

Tsar and his people: power and society in Moscow state during the second half of the 16th century

The article raises the issue about the nature of the relationship between the supreme power and society of the early Russian state. The authors of the article show that this unwritten contract, which was well understood by both parties, who participated in it, functioned well in Russia during the 16th - 17th centuries, and its existence refutes convincingly the Herberstein's passage, who failed to understand the Russian political realities of the early Modern Ag

Czar e seu povo: poder e sociedade no estado de Moscou durante a segunda metade do século XVI

The article raises the issue about the nature of the relationship between the supreme power and society of the early Russian state. The article proceeded from the well-known phrase of the imperial diplomat S. Herberstein, who wrote about the “slave essence” of Russians in the middle of the XVIth century. The authors of the article argue that this erroneous opinion was based on incorrect and wrongly interpreted official relations, which constituted one of the cornerstones of the Moscow political system and which was quite clear. Meanwhile, according to the authors, there was also a different, “internal” level of interrelations, based on unwritten “contract” between the supreme power and society, involving mutual obligations between the “contract” parties. The authors of the article show that this unwritten contract, which was well understood by both parties, who participated in it, functioned well in Russia during the 16th — 17th centuries, and its existence refutes convincingly the Herberstein's passage, who failed to understand the Russian political realities of the early Modern Age.El artículo plantea el problema sobre la naturaleza de la relación entre el poder supremo y la sociedad del estado ruso primitivo. El artículo procede de la conocida frase del diplomático imperial S. Herberstein, quien escribió sobre la "esencia de esclavo" de los rusos a mediados del siglo XVI. Los autores del artículo argumentan que esta opinión errónea se basaba en relaciones oficiales incorrectas e interpretadas erróneamente, que constituían una de las piedras angulares del sistema político de Moscú y que era bastante clara. Mientras tanto, según los autores, también hubo un nivel diferente, "interno" de interrelaciones, basado en el "contrato" no escrito entre el poder supremo y la sociedad, que involucra obligaciones mutuas entre las partes del "contrato". Los autores del artículo muestran que este contrato no escrito, que fue bien comprendido por ambas partes, que participaron en él, funcionó bien en Rusia durante los siglos XVI a XVII, y su existencia refuta convincentemente el pasaje de Herberstein, que no entendió el ruso. Realidades políticas de la temprana Edad Moderna.O artigo levanta a questão sobre a natureza da relação entre o poder supremo e a sociedade do estado russo primitivo. O artigo procede da conhecida frase do diplomata imperial S. Herberstein, que escreveu sobre a “essência escrava” dos russos em meados do século XVI. Os autores do artigo argumentam que essa opinião errônea foi baseada em relações oficiais incorretas e mal interpretadas, o que constituiu uma das pedras angulares do sistema político de Moscou e que ficou bastante claro. Enquanto isso, segundo os autores, havia também um nível de inter-relações “interno” diferente, baseado em “contrato” não escrito entre o poder supremo e a sociedade, envolvendo obrigações mútuas entre as partes “contratuais”. Os autores do artigo mostram que este contrato não escrito, que foi bem compreendido pelos dois partidos, que nele participaram, funcionou bem na Rússia durante os séculos XVI e XVII, e sua existência refuta convincentemente a passagem de Herberstein, que não conseguiu entender o russo. realidades políticas do início da Idade Moderna

La opinión del pueblo y del poder supremo: sobre la naturaleza de la relación entre el soberano y sus ciudadanos en Rusia a mediados del siglo XVI

According to the authors, the effectiveness of the work of the Moscow state machine was largely determined by the extent of feedback channels within the supreme power. In the summer of 1547, the passivity of the supreme power in investigating the facts of abuse of governors, eliminating the consequences of the fire, coupled with the growth of taxes and crop failures and subsequent rise in the price of bread led to the rebellion of citizens in Moscow and forcing Ivan IV to dialogue and satisfy their demand

The problems of single legal field development in Russia of the early modern times (the end of the XV - the beginning of the XVII century)

The article deals with the problems associated with the peculiarities of a single legal field development in the Russian state during the epoch of the early modern era (traditionally associated in Russian historiography with the times of a single centralized state formation and development and the emergence of autocracy as a kind of early absolutism

The Orthodox Church in the political system of the Russian state

This article examines the evolution of the relationship between the Russian Orthodox Church and authority in the Russian state in the early modern period via comparative qualitative research methods. As a result, the hierarchs of the Russian church had the moral right to appeal directly to the monarch and, pointing out to him that his actions did not correspond to church canons and dogmas. The authors conclude that it would be premature and unfounded to speak of the Church as internal to and dependent on the political system of the young Russian state in the early modern perio

Os problemas do desenvolvimento do campo legal na Rússia dos primeiros tempos recentes (finais de XV - o comienzo del siglo XVII)

The article deals with the problems associated with the peculiarities of a single legal field development in the Russian state during the epoch of the early modern era (traditionally associated in Russian historiography with the times of a single centralized state formation and development and the emergence of autocracy as a kind of early absolutism). Using a number of provisions of modern concepts for the development of early modern states in Europe, the authors of the article put forward the thesis of a single legal field development in the Russian state during the period under consideration based on the analysis of Russian law monuments at the end of the XVth century (The Code of Law of Ivan III in 1497) and the 16th century (first of all, the code of law by Ivan IV, as well as a number of other legislative and legal acts) and judicial practice. In their opinion, this incompleteness was related with the following circumstances. First of all, the development of political and legal institutions in the early modern Russian state was of an evolutionary nature and, therefore, denied radical changes. Secondly, the poverty of the state caused the relative weakness and a slow development of "sinews of power" and, therefore, prevented the establishment of a more stringent administrative and legal control by the supreme power over the actions of local authorities. Finally, the weakness of the mentioned "sinews of power" conditioned the need of cooperation mode establishment between the supreme authority and local elites, while retaining the access to the exercise of power functions on the ground - also through the preservation of the old legal customs and traditions. Naturally, all this contributed to the preservation and the reproduction of the legal "antiquity" and, consequently, the incompleteness of legal centralization process and the formation of a single legal field throughout the country. The legal field, in the opinion of the authors of the article, had at least 2-level character all this time, the fragmented nature and the dispersion at the low-rank level.El artículo trata los problemas asociados con las peculiaridades de un desarrollo de campo legal único en el estado ruso durante la época moderna temprana (tradicionalmente asociado en la historiografía rusa con los tiempos de una formación y desarrollo estatal centralizado único y el surgimiento de la autocracia como una especie de absolutismo temprano). Usando una serie de disposiciones de conceptos modernos para el desarrollo de los estados modernos tempranos en Europa, los autores del artículo presentaron la tesis de un desarrollo de campo legal único en el estado ruso durante el período bajo consideración basado en el análisis de monumentos de derecho rusos a fines del siglo XV (El Código de Derecho de Iván III en 1497) y el siglo XVI (ante todo, el código de leyes de Iván IV, así como una serie de otros actos legislativos y jurídicos) y la práctica judicial . En su opinión, este estado incompleto estaba relacionado con las siguientes circunstancias. En primer lugar, el desarrollo de las instituciones políticas y legales en el estado ruso moderno temprano fue de naturaleza evolutiva y, por lo tanto, negó los cambios radicales. En segundo lugar, la pobreza del estado causó la debilidad relativa y un lento desarrollo de "tendones de poder" y, por lo tanto, impidió el establecimiento de un control administrativo y legal más estricto por parte del poder supremo sobre las acciones de las autoridades locales. Finalmente, la debilidad de los mencionados "nervios de poder" condicionó la necesidad del establecimiento del modo de cooperación entre la autoridad suprema y las elites locales, mientras se mantiene el acceso al ejercicio de las funciones de poder sobre el terreno, también a través de la preservación de las viejas costumbres legales y tradiciones Naturalmente, todo esto contribuyó a la preservación y reproducción de la "antigüedad" legal y, en consecuencia, a la incompletitud del proceso de centralización legal y la formación de un solo campo legal en todo el país. El campo legal, en opinión de los autores del artículo, tenía al menos un carácter de dos niveles todo este tiempo, la naturaleza fragmentada y la dispersión en el nivel de bajo rango. O artigo trata os problemas associados com as peculiaridades de um curso de campo legal no estado ruso durante a época moderna temático (tradicionalmente associado à historiografia rusa com os tempos de uma formação e desenvolvimento estatal centralizado único e o surgimento da autocracia como una especie de absolutismo temprano). Using una serie de disposiciones de conceptos modernes para o desenvolvimento dos estados modernos templos na Europa, os autores do artigo apresentando a tese de um curso de campo legal no estado do ruso durante o período considerado de base na análise de pontos de vista ruses a fins del siglo XV (O código de direito de Iván III em 1497) e o século XVI (ante, o código de leyes de Iván IV, como uma série de atos legislativos e jurídicos) e a prática judicial. Em sua opinião, este estado incompleto está relacionado com as circunstâncias circunstanciadas. Em primeiro lugar, o desenvolvimento das instituições políticas e jurídicas no estado atual temprano naturalidade evolutiva e, por isso, os dois cambios radicais. Em segundo lugar, a pobreza do estado causou a debilidade relativa e um lento desenvolvimento de "tendões de poder" e, por que tanto, impiedoso o estabelecimento de um controle administrativo e jurídico mais estrito por parte do poder supremo sobre as ações das autoridades locales. Finalmente, a debilidad das perdas "nervos de poder" é a necessidade do estabelecimento do modo de cooperação entre a supremacia e as elites locais, mientras se mantém o acceso ao exercicio das funções de poder sobre o terreno, tambem a través de la preservación de las viejas costumbres legales y tradiciones Naturalmente, todo esto contribuído a la preservación y reproducción de la "antigüedad" legal y, en consecuencia, a incompletitud del proceso de centralización legal y la formación de un solo campo legal en todo el país . O campo legal, na opinião dos autores do artigo, com o menos um carácter dos niveles todo este tempo, a natureza fragmentada e a dispersão no nivel de bajo rango

Early Modern Russian State, "Tsar’s Discourse" and Russian Orthodox Church in the XV-XVII Centuries

The article examines some special aspects of the centralized Russian state formation as the part of the Pan - European process of the early modern state formation. The researchers focus on the problem of the Tsar’s discourse as on the problem of the total claims the true Orthodox monarch should comply with. The Orthodox Church took the active part in the formation of this "discourse", and the compliance with the requirements of it guaranteed to the top authority loyalty of its people and readiness to carry out its requirements. The Church gave Grand Dukes the powerful tool when applying secular practices of legitimation

Forest legislation of Peter the great: traditions and innovations

Summing up the overall result of Peter's activities in the field of forest legislation and forest protection, we quote the words of V.V. Chernykh: "Despite the complexity and inconsistency of regulatory legal acts, Peter's law-making played an important role in the development of forest protection legislation. Some of them were included in the Forest Charter of the Empire, adopted in 1802, and in other regulatory legal documents that operated on the territory of the Russian state