Poll attached
options
Kievan Rus founding
Mongol yoke
1500s
1600
1700s
1800s
options
Kievan Rus founding
Mongol yoke
1500s
1600
1700s
1800s
Richard Pipes' Property & Freedom is a good book to read for insight into why Russia developed differently than the West. He argues private property is a critical concept for development of institutions conducive to liberty, and that these were essentially destroyed under the Mongol Yoke. The origins lie there although one could argue that the diverging trends did not become decisive until much later, but certainly Peter I at the latest. A strong case can be made that it was the triumph of Muscovy as the dominant state in Russia that insured how Russia would develop which would put it in the 1500s with Ivan the Terrible.
Pretty much this.This question should be put in context. With some exception, the most significant though partial ones being Britain and Poland, the vast majority of European countries were basically moving toward a more absolutist frame from 1450 to about 1780. Russia followed basically an analogous (though not identical) pattern in this regard.
I would sat that institutionalized "modern" absolutism in Russia can be traced to the Early Romanovs after the Troubles, building incrementally from there and especially after Peter the Great, but the bases for that had been already set by Ivan III and Ivan IV.
The anomaly, however, did not come out until later. Russia became more absolutist than the rest of Europe when it managed to keep her absolutism intact while the other European countries had started the process to reverse it (Britain being an exception on the opposite side) which did not really happen before the 1770s at earliest.
the Boyar' Revolt? I do believe Ivan the Terrible killed a lot of Nobles stalin-style scaring them into not crossing him through secret police (Oprichniki?)Nonsense, sorry. Russia before Peter has evolved in the same direction as other countries: Boyar Duma - the House of Lords, Pomestnyy Sobors - the States General, a large number of elective offices in the Municipality.
the Boyar' Revolt? I do believe Ivan the Terrible killed a lot of Nobles stalin-style scaring them into not crossing him through secret police (Oprichniki?)
That definitely sets a precedent for the Monarch being unquestionable.
Funny, it is said that when Ivan first came to power it seemed he was to put Russia on the path to enlightment and then one day he supposedly just snapped and became paranoid. Imagine if Ivan succeeded in granting privileges to the Boyars' we could have maybe seen real democratic traditions developing in Russia similar to England.
Enlightened in this context is essentially meaningless and I'd posit that a Russia with more noble privilege is in fact more likely to end up a backwards power with no ability to modernize. A powerful traditionalist landed elite running a nation is never conducive to reform.
the Boyar' Revolt? I do believe Ivan the Terrible killed a lot of Nobles stalin-style scaring them into not crossing him through secret police (Oprichniki?)
That definitely sets a precedent for the Monarch being unquestionable.
Funny, it is said that when Ivan first came to power it seemed he was to put Russia on the path to enlightment and then one day he supposedly just snapped and became paranoid. Imagine if Ivan succeeded in granting privileges to the Boyars' we could have maybe seen real democratic traditions developing in Russia similar to England.
Under Ivan the Great from what read. There was a time when Lithuanian magnates defected to Muscovy, rather than the other way around under Ivan the Terrible.