Tsarist autocracy facts for kids

Tsarist autocracy (Russian: царское самодержавие, romanized: tsarskoye samoderzhaviye), also known as Tsarism, was a way of ruling Russia where the Tsar (the emperor) had almost total power. It was a type of absolute monarchy, which means the ruler had complete control over the government and the people. This system started around the time of Ivan III (1462–1505) and ended after the Russian Revolution of 1917.

What Tsarist Autocracy Was

The Tsarist autocracy was a system where the Tsar was the most powerful person in the country. He had full control over the state and its people. The Tsar was seen as a father figure to his subjects, who were like his children. This idea was so strong that people often called him "царь-батюшка" (tsar-dear father).

Unlike some Western monarchies, the Russian Empire also combined the Tsar's rule with supreme authority over religious matters. This meant the Tsar had a lot of power over the Russian Orthodox Church.

Another important feature was that the Tsar owned a very large part of the country's land and businesses. This was much more than what kings in Western Europe owned.

Many people in Russia supported the autocracy. Writers and thinkers like Fyodor Dostoyevsky believed that Russia needed a strong Tsar to be powerful and successful. They thought that ideas like republicanism (where people elect their leaders) and liberal democracy (where people have many freedoms and vote for their government) did not fit Russia.

History of Tsarist Rule

Ivan III (who ruled from 1462 to 1505) started the foundations for Tsarist autocracy. He was inspired by the traditions of the Byzantine Empire. This system would then govern Russia for many centuries. Over time, during the 17th and 18th centuries, this absolute rule grew stronger.

After a difficult period called the Time of Troubles (1598–1613), Michael of Russia became the first Tsar from the Romanov dynasty. He was chosen by a special assembly called the Zemsky Sobor. At first, these assemblies were called often because the Romanov family was not very strong yet.

The Romanov dynasty gained full absolute power during the reign of Peter the Great (1682–1725). Peter made the Tsar's power much stronger. He reduced the power of the Russian nobility (rich families) and created a new system of government workers based on skills, not just family background. Peter also took more control over the Russian Orthodox Church.

After Peter, there were some attempts by the nobility to get their power back. To stop this, Catherine the Great (1762–1796) gave special rights and privileges to the nobility in 1785. She also set up local self-government in towns. This helped keep the powerful classes happy, but the real power stayed with the Tsar's government.

Later, Alexander I (1801–1825) created an advisory council to help with laws. Alexander II (1855–1881) set up elected local governments called Zemstvo and an independent court system. However, Russia did not have a national elected assembly (like a parliament) or a constitution until the 1905 Revolution.

The Tsarist autocracy finally ended after the Russian Revolution of 1917.

How Tsarist Rule Influenced Russia

Some historians believe that the traditions of Tsarist autocracy helped set the stage for the totalitarianism (a system where the government has total control over people's lives) seen in the Soviet Union. They think that the ideas of absolute rule and the Tsar owning much of the state's wealth shaped Russia's political culture for a long time.

For example, some experts like Stephen White argue that Russia's unique political history is closely tied to its long experience with absolute rule. He believes that autocracy is a key part of Russian politics. However, other historians disagree with this view.

Some analysts during the Cold War even linked Russia's autocratic rule to influences from the Tatars (Mongol groups) in its history. They sometimes suggested that these "Asiatic" influences made Russians untrustworthy.

Debates About Tsarist Autocracy

Historians have different opinions about the concept of Tsarist autocracy. Some argue that the term itself is too vague. They also question if Russia in different centuries can be considered the same, or how "Tsarist" autocracy was different from other forms of absolute rule in Europe.

One big debate is whether Tsarist autocracy was the same as despotism (cruel and oppressive rule) and if it truly came from Mongol rule. Some scholars from the Soviet Union believed that the nobility and government workers were the main supporters of the Tsar's absolute power. They argued that absolute rule in Russia was similar to absolute rule elsewhere.

However, this created a problem for their theories, because they also believed that the economic situation of a society was most important. If absolute rule was the same everywhere, but Russia's economy was different, how could that be?

To solve this, some suggested that the Russian monarchy was a mix of Western European absolute rule and "oriental despotism." They thought that any absolute elements in Russia were not unique to it.

Other historians focused on the ideas and beliefs of Russian officials to explain how decisions were made in the 19th century. They showed that the government was not always a single, powerful unit controlled by one class. They argued that the Tsar and the nobility depended on each other to rule.

Outside Russia, some historians like Hans-Joachim Torke argued that the Tsar was not all-powerful. He pointed out that Christian morals and court customs limited the Tsars. The "American school" of historians in the 1980s and 1990s also emphasized the important role of powerful groups of elites at court. One historian, Edward Keenan, even suggested that the Tsar was sometimes just a puppet controlled by the powerful boyars (noblemen) behind the scenes.

However, other historians like David Ransel and Paul Bushkovitch think that this view goes too far. They believe it doesn't show how complex the relationship between the Tsar and the nobility was. Bushkovitch argues that the real question is where the actual power lay, not just what the laws said. He found that the Tsar's power changed with each ruler, and the nobility was not always united.

Charles J. Halperin also warned against saying that the Tsar and the state always dominated politics or society. He agreed that Russia was different from Western Europe, but he stressed that these differences were not absolute. He believed that how people actually interacted and ruled was more important than abstract theories.

See also

In Spanish: Gobierno zarista para niños

• Byzantinism
• King-in-Parliament
• Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality
• Royal assent
• Royal prerogative