Abstract Over the course of the eighteenth century, Russian rulers released dozens of decrees about petitions. First, the decrees regulated the format of petitions, emphasizing their formulaic nature and moving them away from the personal appeals with supplication and abasement that were present in earlier centuries. These decrees recognized that petitions were essential to the administrative functioning of the imperial Russian state but saw them as akin to forms or applications. Second, the decrees stated firmly that petitioners should not approach the ruler directly. In part, these decrees reflect the rulers’ irritation at being endlessly bothered by personal requests, but Russia’s rulers also gave a more serious justification for the ban on personal appeals: they had established the rule of law, which meant that their subjects did not need to bother them personally and instead should clearly know other authorities—courts, governors—to address for aid. While efforts to change the format of petitions largely succeeded, efforts to curtail petitions directly to the ruler largely failed. That failure likely reflects several factors: inefficiencies in the judicial or administrative system, contradictory laws that still made space for petitions because they were useful, and because they held the promise of getting help quickly.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Alison K. Smith
University of Toronto
Law and History Review
University of Toronto
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Alison K. Smith (Mon,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/68af4322ad7bf08b1ead1f47 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s073824802510103x
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: