|
When Part of Russia was a Democracy – Novgorod Before the
Muscovite Occupation Paul Goble
Maps:
Euroatlas.com |
||
|
Staunton, July 25 – Vladimir Putin’s increasing authoritarianism
has sparked a new round of suggestions in Russia and elsewhere that “Russians
are organically incapable of democracy and European values.” But such views ignore the history of the
Novgorod Republic which, until Moscow occupied it, was among the most
democratic parts of Europe for four centuries. While Novgorod’s democratic traditions and Moscow’s destruction
of them are downplayed or even ignored by many who follow the Muscovite single
stream of Russian history approach, these two parts of Russian history are
increasingly being recalled by Russian regionalists and others who would like
to see a democratic, non-Muscovite Russia emerge. Click on the map for more detailed image A good example of this is provided today by Pavel Pryannikov in his Tolkovatel blog who describes in some detail the
political arrangements of the Novgorod Republic, including representation,
elections, the existence of parties (“sides”), and various checks and
balances which existed until Muscovy destroyed all this in 1478. The Novgorod Republic began in 1136 when the residents of that
city arrested and expelled the prince and his family who had ruled them up to
that point. The revolutionaries, for
that is what they were, declared the popular assembly or “veche”
to be the supreme organ of state power for a territory from the Baltic Sea to
the Urals and from the White Sea to Lake Seliger. More than anywhere else in Europe at the time, the participants
in this process were extremely broad, although the 40 to 50 boyar families
played a disproportionate role. But also important in the veche
were representatives of the merchant classes, the various guilds, armed
groups, and the church. Each year, the Novgorod veche elected
a head of government and his deputy, who oversaw domestic and foreign policy
and together with the prince commanded the armed forces and headed the
courts. The head of government was
expected to cooperate with the veche and, when he
didn’t, was ousted. The prince, at least in peacetime, was expected to
cooperate as well. The role of the church in the Novgorod Republic was also
distinctive, Pryannikov points out. Its head, an archbishop, was chosen by a remarkably
democratic process. The Veche chose three
candidates, and then the winner was selected by lot, an approach very
different from the top down arrangements of the Moscow patriarchate. Novgorod was divided into territorial districts, and these
districts, which had different interests, became the foundation for “sides”
as political parties were then called.
They competed among themselves in the veche
and those who hoped to head the republic were typically based in one or two
and had to appeal for support from the others. Obviously, the medieval Novgorod Republic was not a democracy in
anything like the modern sense, the commentator acknowledges, but it was far
more democratic in terms of the franchise and of the legislature’s control of
the executive than was London or any other major European city at that time. And this proto-democracy lasted almost four centuries – until it
was destroyed by a combination of trickery and force by Moscow in 1478. Since
that time, Moscow has sought to dismiss the Novgorod Republic as simply
“feudalism.” But as the Pryannikov article shows, ever more Russians are
recalling its traditions and their differences from Moscow’s. Originally published at http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.ca/2014/07/window-on-eurasia-when-russia-was.html
|
|
|