It is argued that the political institutions of Muscovite Russia (Tsarstvo, adequately translated as kingdom in the early-modern times)—the meeting of the sobor (land) with its three voting bodies and the council of boyars (Duma) on the level of the Tsardom of Russia. As a whole, they were instruments of finding consensus between the Tsar and the powerful and rich groups of the ‘country’ (Zemlja) such as Church, nobility and big merchants. On the local level, autonomy and cooperation with the center in Moscow was established in the self-government (Mir) of villages and town-quarters (Sloboda), which also organised tax raising and other services for the government as quartering troops. Institutions of local law-enforcement (Guba) cooperated with the Ministry for law enforcement (razbojnik prikaz) in Moscow. Peter I (in the French way, by not convoking the sobor, ending the boyars’ council and founding new institutions in a new capital) established absolutism and Empire in Russia. As Putin said, ‘Historiography should neither date that change back nor render an image of Russia as immobile and centralistic by nature nor idealize the pre-Petrine system rendering an image of a ‘real Russia’ back in times.’

中文翻译：

---

'沙皇下令，博雅尔同意'

有人认为，俄罗斯莫斯科的政治机构（Tsarstvo，在近代被恰当地翻译为王国）——sobor（土地）及其三个投票机构的会议和博雅尔委员会（Duma）在俄罗斯沙皇。总的来说，它们是在沙皇与“国家”（泽姆利亚）的强大而富有的群体（如教会、贵族和大商人）之间达成共识的工具。在地方一级，自治和与莫斯科中心的合作在村镇自治（斯洛博达）自治政府（米尔）建立，它还作为驻扎部队为政府组织税收和其他服务。地方执法机构（古巴）与莫斯科执法部（razbojnik prikaz）合作。彼得一世（以法国的方式，通过不召集 sobor，结束博雅尔委员会并在新首都建立新机构）在俄罗斯建立了专制主义和帝国。正如普京所说，“历史编纂既不应该追溯这种变化，也不应该将俄罗斯的形象描绘成本质上是固定的和集中的，也不应该理想化前佩特林制度，从而描绘出一个‘真正的俄罗斯’的形象。”