Representation in a republic may or may not be freely elected by the general citizenry. In many historical republics, representation has been based on personal status and the role of elections has been limited. This remains true today; among the159 states that userepublic in their official names as of 2017[update], and other states formally constituted as republics, are states that narrowly constrain both the right of representation and the process of election.
The term developed its modern meaning in reference to the constitution of the ancientRoman Republic, lasting from theoverthrow of the kings in 509BC to the establishment of theEmpire in 27 BC. Thisconstitution was characterized by aSenate composed of wealthyaristocrats wielding significant influence; several popularassemblies of all free citizens, possessing the power to elect magistrates from the populace and pass laws; and aseries of magistracies with varying types of civil and political authority.
The term originates from the Latin translation ofGreek wordpoliteia.Cicero, among other Latin writers, translatedpoliteia into Latin asres publica, and it was in turn translated by Renaissance scholars asrepublic (or similar terms in various European languages).[3][4] The term can literally be translated as 'public matter'.[5] It was used by Roman writers to refer to the state and government, even during the period of theRoman Empire.[6]
The termpoliteia can be translated asform of government,polity, orregime, and it does not necessarily imply any specific type of regime as the modern wordrepublic sometimes does. One ofPlato's major works on political philosophy, usually known in English asThe Republic, was titledPoliteia. However, apart from the title, modern translations are generally used.[7]Aristotle was apparently the first classical writer to state that the termpoliteia can be used to refer more specifically to one type ofpoliteia, asserting in Book III of hisPolitics: "When the citizens at large govern for the public good, it is called by the name common to all governments (to koinon onoma pasōn tōn politeiōn), government (politeia)". In later Latin works the termrepublic can also be used in a general way to refer to any regime, or to refer specifically to governments which work for the public good.[8]
In medievalNorthern Italy, a number of city states hadcommune orsignoria based governments. In the late Middle Ages, writers such asGiovanni Villani described these states using terms such aslibertas populi, a free people. The terminology changed in the 15th century as the renewed interest in the writings ofAncient Rome caused writers to prefer classical terminology. To describe non-monarchical states, writers (most importantly,Leonardo Bruni) adopted the Latin phraseres publica.[9]
While Bruni andMachiavelli used the term to describe the states of Northern Italy, which were not monarchies, the termres publica has a set of interrelated meanings in the original Latin. In subsequent centuries, the English wordcommonwealth came to be used as a translation ofres publica, and its use in English was comparable to how the Romans used the termres publica.[10] Notably, duringThe Protectorate ofOliver Cromwell the wordcommonwealth was the most common term to call the new monarchless state, but the wordrepublic was also in common use.[11]
While the philosophical terminology developed inclassical Greece andRome, as already noted byAristotle there was already a long history of city states with a wide variety of constitutions, not only in Greece but also in theMiddle East. After the classical period, during theMiddle Ages, many free cities developed again, such asVenice.
Since theAge of Revolution the termrepublic has described a system of government in which the source of authority for the government is a constitution[12] and the legitimacy of its officials derives from the consent of the people rather thanheredity ordivine right.[13]
The modern type of republic itself is different from any type of state found in the classical world.[14][15] Nevertheless, there are a number of states of theclassical era that are today still called republics. This includes ancientAthens and theRoman Republic. While the structure and governance of these states was different from that of any modern republic, there is debate about the extent to which classical, medieval, and modern republics form a historical continuum.J. G. A. Pocock has argued that a distinct republican tradition stretches from the classical world to the present.[5][16] Other scholars disagree.[5] Paul Rahe, for instance, argues that the classical republics had a form of government with few links to those in any modern country.[17]
The political philosophy of the classical republics has influenced republican thought throughout the subsequent centuries. Philosophers and politicians advocating republics, such asMachiavelli,Montesquieu,Adams, andMadison, relied heavily on classical Greek and Roman sources which described various types of regimes.
Aristotle'sPolitics discusses various forms of government. One form Aristotle namedpoliteia, which consisted of a mixture of the other forms,oligarchy anddemocracy. He argued that this was one of the ideal forms of government.Polybius expanded on many of these ideas, again focusing on the idea ofmixed government and differentiated basic forms of government between "benign"monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, and the "malignant"tyranny, oligarchy, and ochlocracy. The most important Roman work in this tradition is Cicero'sDe re publica.
Over time, the classical republics became empires or were conquered by empires. Most of the Greek republics were annexed to theMacedonian Empire ofAlexander. The Roman Republic expanded dramatically, conquering the other states of the Mediterranean that could be considered republics, such asCarthage. The Roman Republic itself then became the Roman Empire.
The termrepublic is not commonly used to refer to pre-classical city-states, especially if outside Europe and the area which was under Graeco-Roman influence.[5] However some early states outside Europe had governments that are sometimes today considered similar to republics.
In theancient Near East, a number of cities of theEastern Mediterranean achieved collective rule. Republic city-states flourished inPhoenicia along theLevantine coast starting from the 11th century BC. In ancient Phoenicia, the concept ofShophet was very similar to aRoman consul. UnderPersian rule (539–332 BC), Phoenician city-states such asTyre abolished the king system and adopted "a system of thesuffetes (judges), who remained in power for short mandates of 6 years".[18][19]Arwad has been cited as one of the earliest known examples of a republic, in which the people, rather than a monarch, are described as sovereign.[20][unreliable source?] TheIsraelite confederation of the era of theJudges[21]before theUnited Monarchy has also been considered a type of republic.[5][22][23] The system of government of theIgbo people in what is nowNigeria has been described as "direct and participatory democracy".[24]
Early republican institutions come from the independentgaṇasaṅghas—gaṇa means 'tribe' andsaṅgha means 'assembly'—which may have existed as early as the 6th century BC and persisted in some areas until the 4th century AD in India. The evidence for this is scattered, however, and no pure historical source exists for that period.Diodorus, a Greek historian who wrote two centuries after the time ofAlexander the Great's invasion of India (now Pakistan and northwest India) mentions, without offering any detail, that independent and democratic states existed in India.[25] Modern scholars note the worddemocracy at the time of the 3rd century BC and later suffered from degradation and could mean any autonomous state, no matter how aristocratic in nature.[26][27]
TheMahajanapadas were the sixteen most powerful and vast kingdoms and republics of the era; there were also a number of smaller kingdoms stretching the length and breadth ofAncient India. Among the mahajanapadas and smaller states, theShakyas,Koliyas,Mallakas, andLicchavis followed republican government.
Key characteristics of thegaṇa seem to include agaṇa mukhya (chief), and a deliberative assembly. The assembly met regularly. It discussed all major state decisions. At least in some states, attendance was open to all free men. This body also had full financial, administrative, and judicial authority. Other officers, who rarely receive any mention, obeyed the decisions of the assembly. Elected by thegaṇa, the chief apparently always belonged to a family of the noble class ofKshatriyaVarna. The chief coordinated his activities with the assembly; in some states, he did so with a council of other nobles.[28] TheLicchavis had a primary governing body of 7,077gaṇa mukhyas, the heads of the most important families. On the other hand, theShakyas,Koliyas,Mallakas, andLicchavis,[clarification needed] during the period aroundGautama Buddha, had the assembly open to all men, rich and poor.[29] Early republics orgaṇasaṅgha,[30] such as Mallakas, centered in the city ofKusinagara, and theVajjika (or Vṛjika) League, centered in the city ofVaishali, existed as early as the 6th century BC and persisted in some areas until the 4th century AD.[31] The most famous clan amongst the ruling confederate clans of the VajjiMahajanapada were the Licchavis.[32] TheEmpire of Magadha included republican communities such as the community of Rajakumara. Villages had their own assemblies under their local chiefs calledgramakas. Their administrations were divided into executive, judicial, and military functions.
Scholars differ over how best to describe these governments, and the vague, sporadic quality of the evidence allows for wide disagreements. Some emphasize the central role of the assemblies and thus tout them as democracies; other scholars focus on the upper-class domination of the leadership and possible control of the assembly and see anaristocracy.[33][34] Despite the assembly's obvious power, it has not yet been established whether the composition and participation were truly popular. This is reflected in theArthashastra, an ancient handbook for monarchs on how to rule efficiently. It contains a chapter on how to deal with thesaṅghas, which includes injunctions on manipulating the noble leaders, yet it does not mention how to influence the mass of the citizens, indicating that thegaṇasaṅgha are more of an aristocratic republic, than democracy.[35]
The Icelandic Commonwealth was established in 930 AD by refugees fromNorway who had fled the unification of that country under KingHarald Fairhair. The Commonwealth consisted of a number of clans run by chieftains, and theAlthing was a combination of parliament and supreme court where disputes appealed from lower courts were settled, laws were decided, and decisions of national importance were taken. One such example was theChristianisation of Iceland in 1000, where the Althing decreed that all Icelanders must be baptized into Christianity, and forbade celebration of pagan rituals. Contrary to most states, the Icelandic Commonwealth had no official leader.
In the early 13th century, theAge of the Sturlungs, the Commonwealth began to suffer from long conflicts between warring clans. This, combined with pressure from the Norwegian kingHaakon IV for the Icelanders to rejoin the Norwegian "family", led the Icelandic chieftains to accept Haakon IV as king by the signing of theGamli sáttmáli ("Old Covenant") in 1262. This effectively brought the Commonwealth to an end. The Althing, however, is still Iceland's parliament, almost 800 years later.[36]
In Europe new republics appeared in the late Middle Ages when a number of small states embraced republican systems of government. These were generally small, but wealthy, trading states, like the Mediterraneanmaritime republics and theHanseatic League, in which the merchant class had risen to prominence. Knud Haakonssen has noted that, by theRenaissance, Europe was divided with those states controlled by a landed elite being monarchies and those controlled by a commercial elite being republics.[10]
Italy was the most densely populated area of Europe, and also one with the weakest central government. Many of the towns thus gained considerable independence and adopted commune forms of government. Completely free of feudal control, the Italian city-states expanded, gaining control of the rural hinterland.[37] The two most powerful were theRepublic of Venice and its rival theRepublic of Genoa. Each were large trading ports, and further expanded by using naval power to control large parts of the Mediterranean. It was in Italy that an ideology advocating for republics first developed. Writers such asBartholomew of Lucca,Brunetto Latini,Marsilius of Padua, and Leonardo Bruni saw the medieval city-states as heirs to the legacy of Greece and Rome.
Across Europe a wealthy merchant class developed in the important trading cities. Despite their wealth they had little power in thefeudal system dominated by the rural land owners, and across Europe began to advocate for their own privileges and powers. The more centralized states, such as France and England, granted limited city charters.
In the more loosely governedHoly Roman Empire, 51 of the largest towns becamefree imperial cities. While still under the dominion of theHoly Roman Emperor most power was held locally and many adopted republican forms of government.[37] The same rights to imperial immediacy were secured by the major trading cities of Switzerland. The towns and villages of alpineSwitzerland had, courtesy of geography, also been largely excluded from central control. Unlike Italy and Germany, much of the rural area was thus not controlled by feudal barons, but by independent farmers who also used communal forms of government. When theHabsburgs tried to reassert control over the region both rural farmers and town merchants joined the rebellion. TheSwiss were victorious, and theSwiss Confederacy was proclaimed, and Switzerland has retained a republican form of government to the present.[23]
Two Russian cities with a powerful merchant class—Novgorod andPskov—also adopted republican forms of government in 12th and 13th centuries, respectively, which ended when the republics were conquered byMuscovy/Russia at the end of 15th – beginning of 16th century.[38]
Following the collapse of theSeljuk Sultanate of Rum and establishment of theTurkishAnatolian Beyliks, theAhiler merchant fraternities established a state centered onAnkara that is sometimes compared to the Italian mercantile republics.
The dominant form of government for these early republics was control by a limited council of elitepatricians. In those areas that held elections, property qualifications or guild membership limited both who could vote and who could run. In many states no direct elections were held and council members were hereditary or appointed by the existing council. This left the great majority of the population without political power, and riots and revolts by the lower classes were common. The late Middle Ages saw more than 200 such risings in the towns of the Holy Roman Empire.[39] Similar revolts occurred in Italy, notably theCiompi Revolt in Florence.
While the classical writers had been the primary ideological source for the republics of Italy, in Northern Europe, theProtestant Reformation would be used as justification for establishing new republics.[40] Most important wasCalvinist theology, which developed in the Swiss Confederacy, one of the largest and most powerful of the medieval republics.John Calvin did not call for the abolition of monarchy, but he advanced the doctrine that the faithful had the duty to overthrow irreligious monarchs.[41] Advocacy for republics appeared in the writings of theHuguenots during theFrench Wars of Religion.[42]
Calvinism played an important role in the republican revolts in England and the Netherlands. Like the city-states of Italy and the Hanseatic League, both were important trading centres, with a large merchant class prospering from the trade with the New World. Large parts of the population of both areas also embraced Calvinism. During theDutch Revolt (beginning in 1566), theDutch Republic emerged from rejection ofSpanish Habsburg rule. However, the country did not adopt the republican form of government immediately: in the formal declaration of independence (Act of Abjuration, 1581), the throne ofking Philip was only declared vacant, and the Dutch magistrates asked theDuke of Anjou, queenElizabeth of England and princeWilliam of Orange, one after another, to replace Philip. It took until 1588 before theEstates (theStaten, the representative assembly at the time) decided to vest the sovereignty of the country in themselves.
In 1641 theEnglish Civil War began. Spearheaded by thePuritans and funded by the merchants of London, the revolt was a success, andKing Charles I was executed. In EnglandJames Harrington,Algernon Sidney, andJohn Milton became some of the first writers to argue for rejecting monarchy and embracing a republican form of government. TheEnglish Commonwealth was short-lived, and the monarchy was soon restored. The Dutch Republic continued in name until 1795, but by the mid-18th century thestadtholder had become ade facto monarch. Calvinists were also some of the earliest settlers of the British and Dutch colonies of North America.
A revolutionary Republican hand-written bill from the Stockholm riots during theRevolutions of 1848, reading: "DethroneOscar he is not fit to be a king: Long live the Republic! The Reform! down with the Royal house, long liveAftonbladet! death to the king / Republic Republic the People. Brunkeberg this evening". The writer's identity is unknown.
Along with these initial republican revolts,early modern Europe also saw a great increase in monarchical power. The era ofabsolute monarchy replaced the limited and decentralized monarchies that had existed in most of the Middle Ages. It also saw a reaction against the total control of the monarch as a series of writers created the ideology known asliberalism.
Most of theseEnlightenment thinkers were far more interested in ideas ofconstitutional monarchy than in republics. TheCromwell regime had discredited republicanism, and most thinkers felt that republics ended in eitheranarchy ortyranny.[43] Thus philosophers likeVoltaire opposed absolutism while at the same time being strongly pro-monarchy.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau andMontesquieu praised republics, and looked on the city-states of Greece as a model. However, both also felt that a state like France, with 20 million people, would be impossible to govern as a republic. Rousseau admired therepublican experiment in Corsica (1755–1769) and described his ideal political structure of small, self-governing communes. Montesquieu felt that a city-state should ideally be a republic, but maintained that a limited monarchy was better suited to a state with a larger territory.
TheAmerican Revolution began as a rejection only of the authority of theBritish Parliament over the colonies, not of the monarchy. The failure of the British monarch to protect the colonies from what they considered the infringement oftheir rights to representative government, the monarch's branding of those requesting redress as traitors, and his support for sending combat troops to demonstrate authority resulted in widespread perception of the British monarchy astyrannical.
With theUnited States Declaration of Independence the leaders of the revolt firmly rejected the monarchy and embraced republicanism. The leaders of the revolution were well-versed in the writings of the French liberal thinkers, and also in the history of the classical republics.John Adams had notably written a book on republics throughout history. In addition, the widely distributed and popularly read-aloud tractCommon Sense, byThomas Paine, succinctly and eloquently laid out the case for republican ideals and independence to the larger public. TheConstitution of the United States, which went into effect in 1789, created a relatively strongfederal republic to replace the relatively weakconfederation under the first attempt at a national government with theArticles of Confederation and Perpetual Union ratified in 1781. The first ten amendments to the Constitution called theUnited States Bill of Rights, guaranteed certainnatural rights fundamental to republican ideals that justified the Revolution.
TheFrench Revolution was also not republican at its outset. Only after theFlight to Varennes removed most of the remaining sympathy for the king was a republic declared andLouis XVI sent to the guillotine. The stunning success of France in theFrench Revolutionary Wars saw republics spread by force of arms across much of Europe as a series ofclient republics were set up across the continent. The rise ofNapoleon saw the end of theFrench First Republic and herSister Republics, each replaced by "popular monarchies". Throughout the Napoleonic period, the victors extinguished many of the oldest republics on the continent, including theRepublic of Venice, theRepublic of Genoa, and theDutch Republic. They were eventually transformed into monarchies or absorbed into neighboring monarchies.
Outside Europe, another group of republics was created as theNapoleonic Wars allowed the states of Latin America to gain their independence. Liberal ideology had only a limited impact on these new republics. The main impetus was the local European-descendedCreole population in conflict with thePeninsulares—governors sent from overseas. The majority of the population in most of Latin America was of either African orAmerindian descent, and the Creole elite had little interest in giving these groups power and broad-basedpopular sovereignty.Simón Bolívar, both the main instigator of the revolts and one of its most important theorists, was sympathetic to liberal ideals but felt that Latin America lacked the social cohesion for such a system to function and advocatedautocracy as necessary.
In Mexico, this autocracy briefly took the form of a monarchy in theFirst Mexican Empire. Due to thePeninsular War, the Portuguese court was relocated to Brazil in 1808. Brazil gainedindependence as a monarchy on September 7, 1822, and theEmpire of Brazil lasted until 1889. In many other Latin American states various forms of autocratic republic existed until most were liberalized at the end of the 20th century.[44]
In East Asia, China had seen considerableanti-Qing sentiment during the 19th century, and a number of protest movements developed calling for constitutional monarchy. The most important leader of these efforts wasSun Yat-sen, whoseThree Principles of the People combined American, European, and Chinese ideas. Under his leadership, theRepublic of China was proclaimed on January 1, 1912.
Republican ideas were spreading, especially in Asia. The United States began to have considerable influence in East Asia in the later part of the 19th century, withProtestant missionaries playing a central role. The liberal and republican writers of the West also exerted influence. These combined with nativeConfucian inspired political philosophy that had long argued that the populace had the right to reject unjust governments that had lost theMandate of Heaven.
The aftermath ofWorld War II leftItaly with a destroyed economy, a divided society, and anger against the monarchy for its endorsement of theFascist regime. These frustrations contributed to a revival of the Italian republican movement.[50] KingUmberto II was pressured to call the1946 Italian institutional referendum to decide whether Italy should remain a monarchy or become a republic.[51] The supporters of the republic chose the effigy of theItalia turrita, thenational personification of Italy, as their unitary symbol to be used in the electoral campaign and on the referendum ballot on the institutional form of the State, in contrast to theSavoy coat of arms, which represented the monarchy.[52] On June 2, 1946 the republican side won 54.3% of the vote and Italy officially became a republic,[53] a day celebrated since asFesta della Repubblica. Italy has a written democraticconstitution, resulting from the work of aConstituent Assembly formed by the representatives of all theanti-fascist forces that contributed to the defeat of Nazi and Fascist forces during theliberation of Italy.[54]
In the years followingWorld War II, most of the remaining European colonies gained their independence, and most became republics. The two largest colonial powers were France and the United Kingdom. Republican France encouraged the establishment of republics in its former colonies. The United Kingdom attempted to follow the model it had for its earlier settler colonies of creating independentCommonwealth realms still linked under the same monarch. While most of the settler colonies and the smaller states in theCaribbean and thePacific retained this system, it was rejected by the newly independent countries inAfrica andAsia, which revised their constitutions and becamerepublics instead.
Britain followed a different model in the Middle East; it installed local monarchies in several colonies and mandates includingIraq,Jordan,Kuwait,Bahrain,Oman,Yemen andLibya. In subsequent decades revolutions andcoups overthrew a number of monarchs and installed republics. Several monarchies remain, and the Middle East is the only part of the world where several large states are ruled by monarchs with almost complete political control.[55]
In the wake of the First World War, the Russian monarchy fell during theRussian Revolution. TheRussian Provisional Government was established in its place on the lines of a liberal republic, but this was overthrown by theBolsheviks who went on to establish theUnion of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). This was the first republic established underMarxist–Leninist ideology. Communism was wholly opposed to monarchy and became an important element of many republican movements during the 20th century. The Russian Revolution spread intoMongolia and overthrew its theocratic monarchy in 1924. In the aftermath of the Second World War, the communists gradually gained control ofRomania,Bulgaria,Yugoslavia,Hungary andAlbania, ensuring that the states were reestablished as socialist republics rather than monarchies.
Communism also intermingled with other ideologies. It was embraced by many national liberation movements duringdecolonization. In Vietnam, communist republicans pushed aside theNguyễn dynasty, and monarchies in neighbouringLaos andCambodia were overthrown by communist movements in the 1970s.Arab socialism contributed to a series of revolts and coups that saw the monarchies ofEgypt, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen ousted. In Africa, Marxism–Leninism andAfrican socialism led to the end of monarchy and the proclamation of republics in states such asBurundi andEthiopia.
A republic does not necessarily have aconstitution but is often constitutional in the sense ofconstitutionalism, meaning that it is constituted by a set of institutions which provide aseparation of powers. The termconstitutional republic is a way to highlight an emphasis on the separation of powers in a given republic, as withconstitutional monarchy orabsolute monarchy highlighting the absoluteautocratic character of amonarchy.
World's states coloured by systems ofgovernment:Parliamentary systems: Head of government is elected or nominated by and accountable to the legislature
Presidential system: Head of government (president) is popularly elected and independent of the legislature
Presidential republic
Hybrid systems:
Semi-presidential republic: Executive president is independent of the legislature; head of government is appointed by the president and is accountable to the legislature
Assembly-independent republic: Head of government (president or directory) is elected by the legislature, but is not accountable to it
With no monarch, most modern republics use the titlepresident for thehead of state. Originally used to refer to the presiding officer of a committee or governing body in Great Britain the usage was also applied to political leaders, including the leaders of some of theThirteen Colonies (originally Virginia in 1608); in full, the "President of the Council".[56] The first republic to adopt the title was theUnited States of America. Keeping its usage as the head of a committee thePresident of the Continental Congress was the leader of the original congress. When the new constitution was written the title ofPresident of the United States was conferred on the head of the newexecutive branch.
If the head of state of a republic is also thehead of government, this is called apresidential system. There are a number of forms of presidential government. A full-presidential system has a president with substantial authority and a central political role.
In other states the legislature is dominant and the presidential role is almost purely ceremonial and apolitical, such as inGermany,Italy,India, andTrinidad and Tobago. These states areparliamentary republics and operate similarly to constitutional monarchies withparliamentary systems where the power of the monarch is also greatly circumscribed. In parliamentary systems the head of government, most often titledprime minister, exercises the most real political power.Semi-presidential systems have a president as an active head of state with important powers, but they also have a prime minister as a head of government with important powers.
The rules for appointing the president and the leader of the government, in some republics permit the appointment of a president and a prime minister who have opposing political convictions: in France, when the members of the rulingcabinet and the president come from opposing political factions, this situation is calledcohabitation.
In some countries, likeBosnia and Herzegovina,San Marino, andSwitzerland, the head of state is not a single person but a committee (council) of several persons holding that office. The Roman Republic had twoconsuls, elected for a one-year term by thecomitia centuriata, consisting of all adult, freeborn males who could prove citizenship.
Indemocracies, presidents are elected, either directly by the people or indirectly by a parliament or council. Typically in presidential and semi-presidential systems the president is directly elected by the people or is indirectly elected as done in the United States. In that country, the president is officially elected by anelectoral college, chosen by the States. All U.S. States have chosen electors by popular election since 1832. The indirect election of the president through the electoral college conforms to the concept of the republic as one with a system of indirect election. In the opinion of some, direct election conferslegitimacy upon the president and gives the office much of its political power.[57] However, this concept of legitimacy differs from that expressed in the United States Constitution which established the legitimacy of the United States president as resulting from the signing of the Constitution by nine states.[58] The idea that direct election is required for legitimacy also contradicts the spirit of theGreat Compromise, whose actual result was manifest in the clause[59] that provides voters in smaller states with more representation in presidential selection than those in large states; for example citizens of Wyoming in 2016 had 3.6 times as much electoral vote representation as citizens ofCalifornia.[60]
In states with a parliamentary system, the president is usually elected by the parliament. This indirect election subordinates the president to the parliament, and also gives the president limited legitimacy and turns most presidential powers intoreserve powers that can only be exercised under rare circumstances. There are exceptions where elected presidents have only ceremonial powers, such as inIreland.
The distinction between a republic and a monarchy is not always clear. Theconstitutional monarchies of the former British Empire and Western Europe today have almost all real political power vested in the elected representatives, with the monarchs only holding either theoretical powers, no powers or rarely used reserve powers. Real legitimacy for political decisions comes from the elected representatives and is derived from the will of the people. While hereditary monarchies remain in place, political power is derived from the people as in a republic. These states are thus sometimes referred to ascrowned republics.[61]
Terms such as "liberal republic" are also used to describe all of the modern liberal democracies.[62]
There are also self-proclaimed republics that act similarly to absolute monarchies with absolute power vested in the leader and passed down from father to son. North Korea and Syria are two notable examples where a son has inherited political control. Neither of these states are officially monarchies. There is no constitutional requirement that power be passed down within one family, but it has occurred in practice.
There are alsoelective monarchies where ultimate power is vested in a monarch, but the monarch is chosen by some manner of election. A current example of such a state isMalaysia where theYang di-Pertuan Agong is elected every five years by theConference of Rulers composed of the nine hereditary rulers of theMalay states, and theVatican City-State, where thepope is selected by cardinal-electors, currently allcardinals under the age of 80. While rare today, elective monarchs were common in the past. The Holy Roman Empire is an important example, where each new emperor was chosen by a group of electors. Islamic states also rarely employedprimogeniture, instead relying on various forms of election to choose a monarch's successor.
ThePolish–Lithuanian Commonwealth had an elective monarchy, with a wide suffrage of some 500,000 nobles. The system, known as theGolden Liberty, had developed as a method for powerful landowners to control the crown. The proponents of this system looked to classical examples, and the writings of the Italian Renaissance, and called their elective monarchy arzeczpospolita, based onres publica.
In general being a republic also impliessovereignty as for the state to be ruled by the people it cannot be controlled by a foreign power. There are important exceptions to this, for example, republics in theSoviet Union were member states which had to meet three criteria to be named republics:
be on the periphery of the Soviet Union so as to be able to take advantage of their theoretical right to secede;
be economically strong enough to be self-sufficient upon secession; and
be named after at least one million people of the ethnic group which should make up the majority population of said republic.
It is sometimes argued that the former Soviet Union was also a supra-national republic, based on the claim that the member states were differentnation states.
TheSocialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was a federal entity composed of six republics (Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia). Each republic had its parliament, government, institute of citizenship, constitution, etc., but certain functions were delegated to the federation (army, monetary matters). Each republic also had a right ofself-determination according to the conclusions of thesecond session of the AVNOJ and according to thefederal constitution.
The Swiss cantons displayed on the cupola of theFederal Palace
In Switzerland,all cantons can be considered to have a republican form of government, with constitutions, legislatures, executives and courts; many of them being originally sovereign states. As a consequence, severalRomance-speaking cantons are still officially referred to as republics, reflecting their history and will of independence within the Swiss Confederation. Notable examples are theRepublic and Canton of Geneva and theRepublic and Canton of Ticino.[63]
Flag of the US state ofCalifornia, a sub-national entity.
States of the United States are required, like the federal government, to be republican in form, with final authority resting with the people. This was required because the states were intended to create and enforce most domestic laws, with the exception of areas delegated to the federal government and prohibited to the states. The founders of the country intended most domestic laws to be handled by the states. Requiring the states to be a republic in form was seen as protecting the citizens' rights and preventing a state from becoming a dictatorship or monarchy, and reflected unwillingness on the part of the original 13 states (all independent republics) to unite with other states that were not republics. Additionally, this requirement ensured that only other republics could join the union.
In the example of the United States, the original 13 Britishcolonies becameindependent states after the American Revolution, each having a republican form of government. These independent states initially formed a loose confederation called the United States and then later formed the current United States by ratifying the currentU.S. Constitution, creating aunion that was a republic. Any state joining the union later was also required to be a republic.
Before the 17th Century, the term 'republic' could be used to refer to states of any form of government as long as it was not a tyrannical regime. French philosopherJean Bodin's definition of the republic was "the rightly ordered government of a number of families, and of those things which are their common concern, by a sovereign power." Oligarchies and monarchies could also be included as they were also organised toward 'public' shared interests.[12] In medieval texts, 'republic' was used to refer to the body of shared interest with the king at its head.[64][65] For instance, theHoly Roman Empire was also known as theSancta Respublica Romana, the Holy Roman Republic.[66][67] TheByzantine Empire also continued calling itselfthe Roman Republic as the Byzantines did not regard monarchy as a contradiction to republicanism. Instead, republics were defined as any state based on popular sovereignty and whose institutions were based on shared values.[68]
In a republic state, power is held by the people through elected representatives. The head of state is typically elected or nominated by representatives. In a democratic state, power is wielded by the people of the state, typically through a mixture of elected representatives and direct voting, but in theory could happen purely byDirect democracy without elected representatives acting as proxies. Many states are considered a mixture of both ideals, such as aRepresentative democracy orDemocratic republic.
The termdemocracy is sometimes used interchangeably with the term republic, while others have made sharp distinctions between the two for millennia. "Montesquieu, founder of the modern constitutional state, repeated in his The Spirit of the Laws of 1748 the insight that Aristotle had expressed two millennia earlier, 'Voting by lot is in the nature of democracy; voting by choice is in the nature of aristocracy.'"[69] Additional critics of elections includeRousseau,Robespierre, andMarat, who said of the new French Republic, "What use is it to us, that we have broken the aristocracy of the nobles, if that is replaced by the aristocracy of the rich?"[70]
The termrepublic originated from the writers of theRenaissance as a descriptive term for states that were not monarchies. These writers, such as Machiavelli, also wrote important prescriptive works describing how such governments should function. These ideas of how a government and society should be structured is the basis for an ideology known asclassical republicanism orcivic humanism. This ideology is based on the Roman Republic and the city states of Ancient Greece and focuses on ideals such ascivic virtue,rule of law and mixed government.[71]
This understanding of a republic as a form of government distinct from aliberal democracy is one of the main theses of the Cambridge School of historical analysis.[72] This grew out of the work ofJ. G. A. Pocock who in 1975 argued that a series of scholars had expressed a consistent set of republican ideals. These writers included Machiavelli, Milton, Montesquieu and the founders of the United States of America.
Pocock argued that this was an ideology with a history and principles distinct from liberalism.[73] These ideas were embraced by a number of different writers, includingQuentin Skinner,Philip Pettit[74] andCass Sunstein. These subsequent writers have further explored the history of the idea, and also outlined how a modern republic should function.
A distinct set of definitions of the term "republic" evolved in the United States, where the term is often equated with "representative democracy." This narrower understanding of the term was originally developed by James Madison[75][76] and notably employed inFederalist Paper No. 10. This meaning was widely adopted early in the history of the United States, including inNoah Webster's dictionary of 1828.[77] It was a novel meaning to the term; representative democracy was not an idea mentioned by Machiavelli and did not exist in the classical republics.[78] There is also evidence that contemporaries of Madison considered the meaning of "republic" to reflect the broader definition found elsewhere, as is the case with a quotation ofBenjamin Franklin taken from the notes ofJames McHenry where the question is put forth, "a Republic or a Monarchy?".[79]
The term republic does not appear in theDeclaration of Independence, but it does appear in Article IV of the Constitution, which "guarantee[s] to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government." What exactly the writers of the constitution felt this should mean is uncertain. TheSupreme Court, inLuther v. Borden (1849), declared that the definition ofrepublic was a "political question" in which it would not intervene. In two later cases, it did establish a basic definition. InUnited States v. Cruikshank (1875), the court ruled that the "equal rights of citizens" were inherent to the idea of a republic.
However, the term republic is not synonymous with the republican form. The republican form is defined as one in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whom those powers are specially delegated.[80][81][better source needed]
Beyond these basic definitions, the word republic has a number of other connotations. W. Paul Adams observes that republic is most often used in the United States as a synonym for "state" or "government," but with more positive connotations than either of those terms.[82] Republicanism is often referred to as the founding ideology of the United States.[83][84] Traditionally scholars believed this American republicanism was a derivation of the classical liberal ideologies ofJohn Locke and others developed in Europe.[83]
In the 1960s and 1970s,Bernard Bailyn began to argue that republicanism was just as, or even more important than liberalism in the creation of the United States.[85] This issue is still much disputed and scholars likeIsaac Kramnick completely reject this view.[86]
^"Republic | Definition of Republic by the Oxford English Dictionary".Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved2022-05-10.A state in which power rests with the people or their representatives; specifically a state without a monarchy. Also: a government, or system of government, of such a state; a period of government of this type. The term is often (especially in the 18th and 19th centuries) taken to imply a state with a democratic or representative constitution and without a hereditary nobility, but more recently it has also been used of autocratic or dictatorial states not ruled by a monarch. It is now chiefly used to denote any non-monarchical state headed by an elected or appointed president.
^"Definition of Republic".Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved2017-02-18.a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch
^"Republic".Merriam Webster. Merrium-Webster Inc. Retrieved5 June 2019.
^Rubinstein, Nicolai. "Machiavelli and Florentine Republican Experience" inMachiavelli and Republicanism Cambridge University Press, 1993.
^abHaakonssen, Knud. "Republicanism."A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy. Robert E. Goodin and Philip Pettit. eds. Cambridge: Blackwell, 1995.
^abMunro, André."republic".Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved15 Dec 2021.
^Paine, Thomas (1776). "On the Origin and Design of Government in General, With Concise Remarks on the English Constitution".Common Sense.
^Nippel, Wilfried. "Ancient and Modern Republicanism".The Invention of the Modern Republic ed. Biancamaria Fontana. Cambridge University Press, 1994 p. 6
^Reno, Jeffrey. "republic".International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences p. 184
^Pocock, J.G.A.The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition (1975; new ed. 2003)
^Paul A. Rahe,Republics, Ancient and Modern, three volumes, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 1994.
^Jidejian, Nina (2018).TYRE Through The Ages (3rd ed.). Beirut: Librairie Orientale. pp. 57–99.ISBN9789953171050.
^Medlej, Youmna Jazzar; Medlej, Joumana (2010).Tyre and its history. Beirut: Anis Commercial Printing Press s.a.l. pp. 1–30.ISBN978-9953-0-1849-2.
^Everdell, William Romeyn (1983). "Samuel and Solon: The Origins of the Republic in Tribalism".The End of Kings: A History of Republics and Republicans (2 ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press (published 2000). p. 18.ISBN9780226224824. Retrieved10 June 2019.[...] Samuel [...] has the distinction of being the first self-conscious republican in his society of whom we have nearly contemporary written record and of whose actual existence we can be reasonably sure.
^Bocca, Giorgio (1981).Storia della Repubblica italiana (in Italian). Rizzoli. pp. 14–16. [ISBN unspecified]
^Smyth, Howard McGaw Italy: From Fascism to the Republic (1943–1946)The Western Political Quarterly vol. 1 no. 3 (pp. 205–222), September 1948.JSTOR442274
^Anderson, Lisa. "Absolutism and the Resilience of Monarchy in the Middle East."Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 106, No. 1 (Spring, 1991), pp. 1–15
^"Presidential Systems"Governments of the World: A Global Guide to Citizens' Rights and Responsibilities. Ed. C. Neal Tate. Vol. 4. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2006. pp. 7–11.
^The novelist and essayistH. G. Wells regularly used the term crowned republic to describe the United Kingdom, for instance in his workA Short History of the World.Alfred, Lord Tennyson in his poemIdylls of the King.
^Dunn, John. "The Identity of the Bourgeois Liberal Republic". The Invention of the Modern Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
^"République" (in French).Historical Dictionary of Switzerland. Retrieved1 February 2021.Les nouveaux cantons de la Suisse latine choisirent le titre de république, qui soulignait leur indépendance, alors que "canton" met l'accent sur l'appartenance à la Confédération; Genève, Neuchâtel et le Tessin l'ont conservé jusqu'à nos jours. [The new cantons of Latin Switzerland chose the title of republic, which underlined their independence, while "canton" emphasizes membership of the Confederation; Geneva, Neuchâtel and Ticino have kept it to this day.]
^Christopher Dawson (2002).The Making of Europe: An Introduction to the History of European Unity. CUA Press. p. 101.ISBN9780813210834.
^Giuliano Amato, Enzo Moavero-Milanesi, Gianfranco Pasquino, Lucrezia Reichlin (2019).The History of the European Union: Constructing Utopia. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 17.ISBN9781509917426.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
^Anthony Kaldellis (2013).Ethnography After Antiquity: Foreign Lands and Peoples in Byzantine Literature. University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 14.ISBN9780812208405.
^McCormick, John P. "Machiavelli against Republicanism: On the Cambridge School's 'Guicciardinian Moments'"Political Theory, Vol. 31, No. 5 (Oct., 2003), pp. 615–43
^Pocock, J. G. AThe Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition Princeton: 1975, 2003
^Philip Pettit,Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government, NY: Oxford U.P., 1997,ISBN0-19-829083-7; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997.
^In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219;Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627.
^GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government) – One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people ... directly ... Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 695
^W. Paul Adams "Republicanism in Political Rhetoric Before 1776".Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 85, No. 3 (Sep., 1970), pp. 397–421
^Bailyn, Bernard.The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1967.
^Kramnick, Isaac.Republicanism and Bourgeois Radicalism: Political Ideology in Late Eighteenth-Century England and America. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990.
Speech of U.S. Senator against the Mexican–American War characterizing it as imperialist and presidential.
Martin van Gelderen &Quentin Skinner, eds.,Republicanism: A Shared European Heritage, v. 1,Republicanism and Constitutionalism in Early Modern Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge U.P., 2002
Martin van Gelderen & Quentin Skinner, eds.,Republicanism: A Shared European Heritage, v. 2,The Values of Republicanism in Early Modern Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge U.P., 2002
Willi Paul Adams, "Republicanism in Political Rhetoric before 1776",Political Science Quarterly 85(1970), pp. 397–421.
Joyce Appleby, "Republicanism in Old and New Contexts", inWilliam & Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, 43 (January, 1986), pp. 3–34.
Everdell, William R. (2000),The End of Kings: A History of Republics and Republicans (2nd ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Eric Gojosso,Le concept de république en France (XVIe – XVIIIe siècle), Aix/Marseille, 1998, pp. 205–45.
James Hankins, "Exclusivist Republicanism and the Non-Monarchical Republic",Political Theory 38.4 (August 2010), 452–82.
Frédéric Monera,L'idée de République et la jurisprudence du Conseil constitutionnel – Paris: L.G.D.J., 2004Fnac,LGDJ.fr
Philip Pettit,Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997, pp. x and 304.
J. G. A. Pocock,The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975
J. G. A. Pocock, "Between Gog and Magog: The Republican Thesis and the Ideologia Americana",Journal of the History of Ideas 48 (1987), p. 341
J. G. A. Pocock, "The Machiavellian Moment Revisited: A Study in History and Ideology"Journal of Modern History 53 (1981)
Paul A. Rahe,Republics Ancient and Modern: Classical Republicanism and the American Revolution, 3 v., Chapel Hill: U. of North Carolina Press 1992, 1994.
Jagdish P. Sharma,Republics in ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C., 1968
David Wootton, ed.,Republicanism, Liberty, and Commercial Society, 1649–1776 (The Making of Modern Freedom series), Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1994.
_-_Palazzo_Nuovo_-_Musei_Capitolini_-_Rome_2016.jpg)
.png)
.svg)
.jpg)
