In modern times, people appear to just say a republic is a government with no king. Fine, but to me that seems not to be the case with how classical era governments were considered.
The word republic comes from the Latin 'Res Publica' meaning 'public thing', a government that is the public affair of its citizens and not the private concern of individuals.
Monarchy, comes from the Greek 'mon' (One), and 'Archon' (ruler).
Monarchy = One ruler
Diarchy = ruled by two
Triarchy = ruled by three
etc
So, being a republic is not mutually exclusive with being a monarchy? Look at Sparta, two kings, an assembly body that did most of the decision making, a constitution, and citizenship. Was Sparta a Republic?
>>869063
No because the kings were hereditary and the ruling class was made up of an elite upperclass that wasn't elected. Sparta isn't a monarchy or republic, it is an oligarchy because it was ruled by a small group of elite officials.
>>869521
Athens is the classic example of a democracy, and only the upper section of its populace was voting citizens. And it didn't elect its politicians either.
(They used sortition for their politicians, because electing politicians was aristocratic and undemocratic according to them)
>>869521
No for fuck sake, stop taking your modern definitions of whater into your judgement. Sparta was a democracy due to the definitions of the citizen. Which was a man born from two spartan parents.
Athens were the same but it had more lax rules and it created more stability because of it. However Athens was far more warmongering because they could travel and battle without fearing a slave rebellion.
>>869626
>sortition
Imagine if random citizens were elected to office the way you might select them for jury duty.
>>869728
It would not be that bad, it worked for Athens. What's with all this peasant tier cocksucking of so called experts?
>>869728
If you could sort the selection pool by education so you don't get STEMlords in charge of tourism and culture, liberal arts majors in charge of infrastructure and utilities, it might work well.
In Athenian democracy, a group of people would be chosen by lot to be in charge of something, rather than just a single person, and those people would have experts advising them.
It wasn't just some single random citizen given full authority over the cities ships, or something. And any laws was voted on with direct democracy.
So politicians chosen by lottery, and direct democracy for all decisions.
I'd like to know if The most Serene republic of Venice actually qualifies as a republic.
>>869063
>So, being a republic is not mutually exclusive with being a monarchy? Look at Sparta, two kings, an assembly body that did most of the decision making, a constitution, and citizenship. Was Sparta a Republic?
Athens also had kings. They were called the Basileus, but they only had religious duties. Same with the Spartan kings. The Spartan kings only had religious duties, plus the generalship which was held by the elected Strategoi in Athens.
They didn't rule in any way. They had no direct political power. In Sparta the government was run by a council of Spartiate elders, with their motions ratified by a standing body of citizens voting at assembly.
The "kings" were only a functionary relic of the older era where kings actually ruled. So a true monarchy is incompatible with republic.
>>870401
Sparta was a Diarchy, not a monarchy.
Anyways, all that means is that if the king/s power is limited witha constitution, then it can be a republic.
Athens Basileus was just a title.
