How are monarchies formed from scrap? Was it just an accumulation

shameless self bump

The Romanovs started because Muscovy was in shambles and the Boyars wanted to find someone who could unite the realm.

>>3342568
>Was it just an accumulation of resources?
More like the accumulation of manpower.

>>3342568
It started when Chad would take all the women in the tribe and cuck all the Virgins into serving him.

In western europe they arose from military leadership. A guy with a sword and a whole bunch of dudes also with swords could get you anything you wanted. It took another guy with a sword and a whole bunch of dudes also with swords to stop them.

The Romans were unable to pay these dudes in gold so they gave them land instead.

All types of early aristocracy arose from military leadership across all peoples really. It wasn't a cushy position unless until much later, they were expected to fight to a certain degree.

>>3343172
What about eastern europe? Like the kievan rus', kingdom of hungary, dacia, etc

>>3343172
>All types of early aristocracy arose from military leadership across all peoples really.
Bit of an oversimplification don't you think? The rulers of many early kingdoms had more important priestly roles than military. The emperors of Shang China, the pharaohs of Egypt (a title which literally means "high priest of every temple"), and the mycenaen wanax to name a few.

It certainly helps to justify your rule by saying I not only have the most powerful ancestors, but I also have super human ability to communicate with them better than anyone else, and that's why I'm king.

>>3343302
>The rulers of many early kingdoms had more important priestly roles than military.
To justify absolute monarchies. It's the same concept as the Christian Divine Right, when the king starts declaring that the only thing above him are the God(s) themselves he can do what he likes. But monarchies never start out like that; early kings, or the position that would eventually become king, were nothing more than men chosen to lead their tribe in war. These men would become prestigious through their victories and gain followers who look to them for leadership in peacetime as well, and there you have the start of a kingship. The feudal king's primary duty was to lead his country in war, it was centuries later when the feudal states centralized into the despotic monarchies we think of today where the king was an all-powerful head of state.

>>3343243
Same thing really.

>>3343941
>But monarchies never start out like that
They did in the East, ignoring outside invaders, and China... Monarchy evolving from the priestshood who's ability become more and more promiant. Since their responsibility was to sacrefise to the ancestors they slowly got the power to redistribute the communal crops in some form. Fast forward and the ability to demonstraite their ancestors power made said clan more prevalent.