The head of the Old Russian state was the Grand Duke of Kiev, who was at the same time the head of the feudal hierarchy, legislator, military leader, recipient of tribute and supreme judge. Such wide circle His powers gave grounds for a number of authors (N. Karamzin) to claim that he was an autocratic monarch. However, most historians (N. Kostomarov, V. Klyuchevsky, M. Tikhomirov, A. Kuzmin) believe that the power of the great Kyiv prince was significantly limited: first by the council of the tribal nobility and the people's veche, and later by the senior princely squad and the Boyar Duma. At the same time, a number of modern authors (I. Froyanov, A. Dvornichenko) generally deny the monarchical nature of the Old Russian state and argue that the main political role in pre-Mongol Rus' belonged to the people's council.
The power of the Great Prince of Kyiv was hereditary and passed on according to the ladder principle, that is, to the next most senior appanage prince (younger brother or eldest nephew). However, it must be said that this principle was violated quite often, and the struggle for the grand ducal throne between the appanage princes of the “Rurik house” was characteristic feature political system of Ancient Rus'.
The support of princely power in Ancient Rus' was the princely squad. The question of its origin and functions still causes the most heated debate. But traditionally, this term itself served to designate a small but very influential social group of ancient Russian society. In the early stages of its existence, the princely squad lived mainly from military campaigns, foreign trade and tribute collected from the subject population (polyudye), and then (from the middle of the 11th century) took an active part in the process of the formation of feudal land ownership.
The princely squad itself was divided into two parts: senior and junior. The senior squad (gridis, ognishchans, tiuns and boyars) not only participated in all military campaigns and diplomatic relations with foreign powers, but also took an active part in managing the princely domain economy (tiuns, ognishchans) and the state as princely posadniks and volostels. The junior squad (children, youths) was the prince’s personal guard, which also participated in all military campaigns and carried out individual orders of the prince to manage his domain economy and the state as guards public order, swordsmen (bailiffs), virniks (fines collectors), etc.
According to the majority of historians (B. Grekov, B. Rybakov, L. Cherepnin, A. Kuzmin) from the middle of the 11th century. the process of disintegration of the princely squad as a purely military organization begins and the formation of boyar patrimonial land ownership takes place, which was formed:
1) through the grant of state land into private inalienable possession (allod or patrimony);
2) either through the grant of land from the princely domain to private but alienable possession (flax or fief).
3. Dependent population of Ancient Rus'
We can judge the various categories of the dependent population of Ancient Rus' from the same “Russian Pravda”, but since this source is clearly not enough, in historical science there are still ongoing disputes in the assessment social status various categories dependent population Kievan Rus.
a) Smerda. B. Grekov divided all smerds into two main groups: communal smerds, independent of private owners and paying tribute only to the state, and sufferer smerds, who were land dependent on the feudal lords and bore feudal duties in his favor - corvee and quitrent. I. Froyanov argued that the smerds were divided into “internal”, i.e. prisoners planted on the land of the feudal lord, and “external”, i.e. conquered tribes who paid tribute (military indemnity) to the Grand Duke. V. Klyuchevsky, L. Cherepnin, B. Rybakov considered the Smerds to be state (princely) peasants who were feudally dependent on the state and bore duties in its favor in the form of tribute. S. Yushkov believed that the status of the smerd was akin to the legal status of the serf peasant in the 16th–17th centuries.
b) Servants (servants). B. Grekov divided all serfs into “whitewashed”, that is, complete ones who did not run an independent household and were the personal servants of the feudal lord, and “hired men” - former free community members who fell into the category of slaves for debts. A. Zimin believed that the term “servants” meant the entire dependent population of Ancient Rus', and the term “serf” meant only slaves. I. Froyanov argued that the servants were captive slaves, and the slaves were slaves of local origin, etc.
Closely related to this dispute is the problem of the place of slavery in ancient Russian society. According to most historians (B. Grekov, M. Tikhomirov, A. Kuzmin), slavery in Rus' existed only in the form of domestic slavery and did not play a significant role in the social division of labor. According to their opponents (I. Froyanov, P. Pyankov), slavery played a key role in Ancient Rus'.
c) Ryadovichi. According to most historians (B. Grekov, M. Tikhomirov, A. Kuzmin), the dependence of the ryadovich on the feudal lord was purely feudal in nature, since through the signing of a special agreement (row) he entered into a dependent position on the landowner and bore feudal duties in his favor.
d) Procurement. B. Grekov considered purchases to be made by former free smerds, who, through receiving a cash loan (kupa), found themselves in a dependent position on the feudal lord. A. Zimin, I. Froyanov, V. Kobrin argued that the purchases were “unwhitened” serfs who either worked in the lord’s plowing fields or were the feudal lord’s servants. The main difference between purchases and white-washed serfs was that they ran a personal household and could, over time, repay their debt and gain freedom again.
d) Outcasts. Most Soviet historians shared the point of view of B. Grekov, who considered the outcasts to be former slaves planted on the land of the feudal lord, that is, serfs.
100 RUR bonus for first order
Select type of work Thesis Course work Abstract Master's thesis Report on practice Article Report Review Test Monograph Problem Solving Business Plan Answers to Questions Creative work Essay Drawing Works Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Master's thesis Laboratory work Online help
Find out the price
All feudal societies were strictly stratified, i.e. divided into classes, whose rights and obligations were clearly defined by law as unequal in relation to each other and to the state. Each class had its own legal status. To view feudal society as divided exclusively into exploiters and exploited is a simplification. A representative of the feudal class, for all his material well-being could lose his life more likely than a poor peasant. Monasticism (with the exception of the highest church hierarchs) lived in such asceticism and deprivation that its position could hardly arouse the envy of the simple classes.
Slaves and serfs. Without becoming the dominant mode of production, slavery in Rus' became widespread only as a social system. There were reasons for this. Keeping a Slave was too expensive , during the long Russian winter there was nothing to occupy him. Unfavorable for the use of slave labor climatic conditions complemented the decline of slavery in neighboring countries: there was no clear example to borrow and the spread of this institution in the Slavic lands. Its spread developed community ties were also hampered , the possibility of obtaining a harvest by free community members. Slavery in Rus' was patriarchal in nature.
The terms “slave”, “servant”, “servant” were used to denote the state of slavery. However, some historians believe that these terms of different origins: servants and slaves were from fellow tribesmen, slaves were from prisoners of war. In addition to captivity, the source of slavery was birth from a slave. Criminals and bankrupts also fell into slavery. A dependent person (purchase) could become a slave in the event of an unsuccessful escape from his master or theft. There were cases of self-sale into slavery.
The legal status of a slave changed over time. Since the 11th century. In Russian law, the principle began to operate according to which a slave could not be a subject of legal relations. He was the owner of the master, he did not have his own property. For criminal offenses committed by a slave, the owner was responsible for the material damage caused to him. For the murder of a slave he received compensation in 5-6 hryvnia.
Under the influence of Christianity, the lot of slaves was alleviated. In relation to the 11th century. we can already talk about protecting the identity of the slave for pragmatic reasons. A layer of serfs appeared who were promoted to the administrative service of the master and had the right to command on his behalf other categories of the dependent population. The Church is intensifying persecution for the murder of slaves. Slavery is degenerating into one of the forms of severe personal dependence with the recognition of certain rights for slaves, first of all, the right to life and property.
Feudal lords. The feudal class was formed gradually. It included princes, boyars, warriors, local nobility, mayors, tiuns, etc. The feudal lords carried out civil administration and were responsible for military organization . They were mutual with bound by the vassalage system, collected tribute and court fines from the population, were in a privileged position compared to the rest of the population. Russian Truth, for example, establishes a double principle in 80 hryvniafor the murder of princely servants, tiuns, grooms, firemen. But she is silent about the boyars and warriors themselves, from which we can conclude that most likely they were punished for the encroachment on their lives. the death penalty. The ruling class of ancient Russian society wore name "boyars"". Along with this, the most common name, in the sources there are and others: the best people, deliberate men, princely men, firemen.
There were two ways to form the boyar class. Firstly, tribal nobility became boyars , released in the process of decomposition of the tribal system. These were deliberate men, city elders, zemstvo boyars, speaking on behalf of their tribe. Together with the prince, they took part in military campaigns, enriching themselves from the captured trophies. The second category consisted princely boyars - boyars-ognishchans, princely men . As the power of the Kyiv princes strengthened, the zemstvo boyars received from the prince immunity letters, which assigned to them the lands they owned as hereditary property (patrimony). Subsequently, the layer of zemstvo boyars completely merges with the princely boyars, the differences between them disappear.
The princely boyars, who were part of the second category of boyars, were in the past the prince's warriors, and during military campaigns they became the core of the Russian army. Constantly staying with the prince, the warriors carried out his various tasks in governing the state, were advisers to the prince on internal and foreign policy. For this service to the prince, the warriors were allocated land and became boyars.
Clergy. Its legal status as a privileged social group took shape with adoption of Christianity, which became important factor strengthening national statehood at the initial stage of its development. The Christian religion, which replaced paganism, brought with it doctrine of the divine origin of the supreme state power, humble attitude towards her. After adoption of Christianity in 988 The princes began to widely practice distributing land to the highest representatives of the church hierarchy and monasteries. It was concentrated in the hands of metropolitans and bishops a large number of villages and cities, they had their own servants, slaves and even an army. The church received the right to collect tithes for its maintenance. Over time, she was removed from the princely jurisdiction and began to judge her hierarchs herself, as well as administer justice to everyone who lived on her lands.
At the head of the church organization was a metropolitan, appointed by the Patriarch of Constantinople (the princes tried to gain the right to appoint metropolitans for themselves, but during the period under review they were not successful). Under the metropolitan there was a council of bishops. The territory of the country was divided into dioceses headed by bishops appointed by the metropolitan. In their dioceses, bishops managed church affairs together with a college of local priests - the choir.
Urban population. Kievan Rus was a country not only of villages, but also of cities, of which there were up to three hundred. Cities were military strongholds, centers of struggle against foreign invasion, centers of crafts and trade. There was an organization here similar to the guilds and workshops of Western European cities. The entire city population paid taxes. The church charter of Prince Vladimir speaks of the payment of duties on weights and measures; There was also a special citywide tax - pogorodie. Old Russian cities did not have their own self-government bodies, were under princely jurisdiction. Therefore, urban (“Magdeburg law”) did not arise in Rus'.
Free city residents enjoyed the legal protection of Russian Pravda; they were covered by all its articles on the protection of honor, dignity and life. A special role in the life of cities was played by the merchants, who early began to unite into corporations (guilds), called hundreds. Usually the “merchant hundred” operated under some church. "Ivanovo Sto" in Novgorod was one of the first merchant organizations in Europe.
Peasantry. The bulk of the population were stinks. Some researchers believe that all rural residents were called smerds. Others believe that the smerds are only part of the peasantry, already enslaved by the feudal lords. Russian Pravda nowhere specifically indicates a limitation on the legal capacity of smerds; there are indications that they pay fines characteristic of free citizens. But in the testimonies about the smerds, their unequal position slips through: their constant dependence on the princes, who “favor” the villages with the smerds.
The Smerdas lived rope communities. The community in the Old Russian state was no longer consanguineous, but territorial, neighborly in nature. It operated on the principle of mutual responsibility and mutual assistance. The responsibilities of the peasant population in relation to the state were expressed in the payment of taxes (in the form of tribute) and dues, and participation in armed defense in the event of hostilities.
The basis for the formation of categories of dependent peasantry was “purchase” - an agreement with the master, secured by the personality of the debtor himself. Zakup - an impoverished or ruined peasant who has found himself in a dependent position; he took inventory, a horse, and other property from the master and earned interest on the debt. Zakup retained partial legal capacity: he could act as a witness in certain types of litigation, his life was protected by a 40-hryvnia vira (like the life free man). He had the right to leave his owner to earn money, he could not be beaten without “guilt”, the law protected his property. However, for escaping from the master, the purchaser turned into a slave. Under Prince Vladimir Monomakh, the procurement situation was eased (limiting interest on the amount of debt, suppressing the unreasonable sale of purchases to slaves, etc.).
Ancient Rus' (9-12 centuries) was a proto-state (early), which was just beginning to take shape as a political system. The former disparate communities began to gradually unite into a single state, headed by the Rurik dynasty.
Scientists agree that Ancient Rus' was an early feudal monarchy.
The origin of the socio-political system of Ancient Rus'
The state (Ancient Rus') was formed at the end of the 10th century on the territory of the Eastern Slavs. It is headed by a prince from the Rurik dynasty, who promises patronage and protection to the surrounding feudal lords. In exchange for this, the feudal lords give part of their lands for the use of the prince as payment.
At the same time, part of the lands conquered during wars and military campaigns is given for the use of the boyars, who receive the right to collect tribute from these lands. To remove the tribute, warriors were hired, who could settle in the territory to which they were attached. Thus, a feudal hierarchy begins to form.
Prince -> patrimonial owners -> boyars -> small land holders.
Such a system contributes to the fact that the prince turns from an exclusively military leader (4th-7th century) into a political figure. The beginnings of a monarchy appear. Feudalism develops.
Socio-political system of Ancient Rus'
The first legal document was adopted by Yaroslav the Wise in the 11th century and was called “Russian Truth”.
The main objective of this document is to protect people from unrest and regulate public relations. The “Russian Truth” spelled out various types of crimes and punishments for them.
In addition, the document divided society into several social categories. In particular, there were free community members and dependent ones. Dependents were considered not full citizens, had no freedoms and could not serve in the army. They were divided into smerds (common people), serfs (servants) and temporarily dependents.
Free community members were divided into smerds and people. They had rights and served in the army.
Features of the political system of Ancient Rus'
In the 10th-12th centuries, the head of the state (which united several principalities) was a prince. The council of boyars and warriors were subordinate to him, with the help of whom he administered the state.
The state was a union of city-states, since life outside the cities was poorly developed. City-states were ruled by princely mayors.
Rural lands were ruled by boyars and patrimonial lands, to whom these lands belonged.
The prince's squad was divided into old and young. The ancient one included boyars and older men. The squad was engaged in collecting tribute, carrying out trials and managing locally. The junior squad included young people and less noble people. The prince also had a personal squad.
Legislative, executive, military and judicial powers were in the hands of the prince. With the development of the state, these branches of government began to separate into separate institutions.
Also in Ancient Rus' there were the beginnings of democracy, which were expressed in the holding of popular assemblies - veche.
The final formation of the political system in Rus' was completed by the end of the 12th century.
Special attention when studying the Old Russian state, one should pay attention to the characteristics of the state and social system and legal system.
State system and local government
According to the form of government, it was an early feudal monarchy. Supreme power belonged to the Grand Duke, who was the bearer of legislative, executive and judicial powers. The prince had a Council consisting of the oldest squad (military nobility), the most influential palace servants and the highest clergy.
When necessary, feudal congresses were convened, which brought together princes and large feudal lords. The prince's council and feudal congresses did not have strictly defined competence.
The veche was also preserved - the people's assembly, which met as needed and resolved the most important issues: war and peace, the removal of the prince, etc.). Over time, it lost its meaning.
The central bodies of government were built on the basis of the palace-patrimonial system, in which government was carried out on the basis of the administrative apparatus of the princely court. In the hands of princely servants (butler, stable keeper, etc.) the functions of managing some branch of the palace economy and a similar sphere in government administration were combined.
Local government was carried out by mayors and volosts directed from the center, operating on the basis of a feeding system, i.e. their maintenance was assumed by the population of the managed territories.
A special role in the state mechanism was played by the army, the backbone of which was the grand ducal squad. If necessary, other princes were called up with their squads. In case of serious military danger, the people's militia gathered.
The Old Russian state did not have special judicial bodies. Judicial functions were performed by state and local authorities. However, there were special officials who assisted in the administration of justice. Among them we can name, for example, the Virniks, who collected criminal fines for murder. The Virniks, when on duty, were accompanied by a whole retinue of minor officials. Judicial functions were also performed by the church and individual feudal lords, who had the right to judge people dependent on them (patrimonial justice). The judicial powers of the feudal lord formed an integral part of his immunity rights.
Social order
The main classes of ancient Russian society were feudal lords and feudal-dependent people. The feudal lords included princes, “best”, “eldest” men, boyars, firemen, who owned land property in the form of estates (hereditary property).
Origin of the privileged classes: from the tribal nobility, military service, servants especially close to the prince (tiuns, etc.).
Feudal property was hierarchical in nature. Large feudal lords - princes - were lords (suzerains), who had vassals who were in certain relationships with the lords, regulated by feudal agreements and special, immunity charters. The nobility received certain territories at their disposal with the right to carry out justice on them and collect tribute without the participation of the prince. Gradually these territories (by the 11th-12th centuries) became the property of their owners.
After the adoption of Christianity, which played an important role in the formation of ancient Russian statehood, the privileged classes were replenished with clergy. The church is gradually turning into a large landowner.
Feudal lords were exempt from paying taxes and duties, had the exclusive right of ownership of land, to occupy high government positions, participate in the adoption of laws, exercise judicial functions, participate in international negotiations, etc.
The bulk of the population of Kievan Rus were smerds. They owned plots of land and had the necessary tools. The vast majority of the population of Ancient Rus' lived in a community (urban or rural). A territorial or neighboring community - verv was a subject of law, it was responsible for crimes committed on its territory, acted as a subject in land disputes, etc. A community member could leave the community (for example, “not invest” in wild vira). During the period under review (9th-12th centuries), some of the smerds remained free (paid tribute, performed duties), but some of them had already become dependent on the feudal lords (paid quitrents and performed corvée).
Another group of dependent people were purchases. These are people who, due to financial difficulties, borrowed some property (kupa). The dacha coupe was formalized by agreement in the presence of witnesses. Before the debt was repaid, the purchase was dependent on the owner and bore certain duties in his favor.
Particular attention should be paid to slavery and the institution of servitude. The main source of slavery was captivity. However, due to climatic conditions and other factors (relatively high level development of production, other conditions for the formation of statehood, etc.) slavery did not spread in Rus' and was of a limited, patriarchal nature. Initially, the source of servitude was also captivity. Later, servile dependence begins to be regulated by the Russian Truth, which provided for the following cases of conversion to serfs:
1) failure to return what was borrowed;
2) as a measure of punishment;
3) registration of entry into the service of the feudal lord as a key keeper in an inappropriate manner (without witnesses);
4) self-selling into slaves;
5) entering into marriage between a free man and a slave.
The slave was deprived of all rights, he was not a subject of law, the owner was responsible for him. There were two types of servitude: white (eternal) and temporary. Outcasts had a special status - a personally free, but defenseless category of the population before society and the state: blood feud did not apply to outcasts, they were forbidden to provide assistance in paying fines.
The urban population consisted of artisans and merchants. They could unite into professional organizations (like workshops and guilds).
Russian Truth
When considering the legal system, it should be borne in mind that in the Old Russian state there was a common law based on the customs of the pre-state period and still retaining their features (sacred character, blood feud, etc.) and princely legislation that appeared quite early. The most complete expression of the latter was Russian Truth. This legislative monument is the result of the law-making activities of Prince Yaroslav the Wise and his descendants. In science, there is an unconfirmed version of Russian Truth as a private codification. The sources of Russian Truth were: common law, legislation of princes, arbitrage practice, Byzantine canon law.
Russian Truth is a multifaceted legislative document, built on a casual system, which contained norms regulating various aspects of the social life of ancient Russian society. Russian Truth was divided into three editions: Brief, Long and Abridged. More than a hundred lists of Russian Truth have reached us.
It regulated civil law relations (the system of contracts, inheritance law, etc.), considered acts of a criminal law nature, and regulated procedural relations. Crime was understood as “offense”, i.e. causing physical, property or moral harm. The process was based on three stages: “cry out” (announcement of committed crime on the shopping area), “pursuit of the trail” (search for a criminal or a missing thing) and “record” (analogous to a modern confrontation). In the process of proof, the following were used: “red-handed” (evidence), testimony of witnesses (“vidokov” and “hearsay”), “rota” (oath), ordeals, etc.
The punishment system was built on the principle of talion and included: blood feud (subsequently prohibited), a fine (vira, half-vira, double, wild or general and lesson), “flow and plunder” (there is still controversy about the essence of this type punishment. The most common point of view is that it is confiscation of property and expulsion of the offender from the community.
Russian Pravda and other sources of ancient Russian law quite clearly distinguish between two main parts of civil law - the right of property and the law of obligations. Property rights arise with the establishment of feudalism and feudal ownership of land. Feudal property is formalized in the form of a princely domain (land ownership belonging to a given princely family), a boyar or monastic estate. The Brief Edition of Russian Pravda enshrines the inviolability of feudal land ownership. In addition to ownership of land, she also talks about the ownership of other things - horses, draft animals, slaves, etc.
Russian Truth knows obligations from contracts and obligations from causing harm. Moreover, the latter merge with the concept of crime and are called offense.
Old Russian law of obligations is characterized by foreclosure not only on property, but also on the personality of the debtor, and sometimes even on his wife and children. The main types of contracts were contracts of barter, purchase and sale, loan, luggage, and personal hire. Agreements were concluded orally, but in the presence of witnesses - hearsay. The purchase and sale of land apparently required writing. When selling a stolen item, the transaction was considered invalid, and the buyer had the right to demand compensation for losses.
The loan agreement is regulated most fully in Russian Pravda. In 1113, there was an uprising of the Kyiv lower classes against the moneylenders, and Vladimir Monomakh, called upon by the boyars to save the situation, took measures to streamline the collection of interest on debts. The law names not only money as the object of a loan, but also bread and honey. There are three types of loans: a regular (household) loan, a loan made between merchants (with simplified formalities), and a loan with self-mortgage - procurement. There are different types of interest depending on the loan term. The period for charging interest is limited to two years. If the debtor paid interest for three years, then he had the right not to return the amount borrowed to the creditor. Short-term borrowing carried the highest interest rate.
Marriage and family legislation developed in Ancient Rus' in accordance with canonical rules. Initially, customs associated with the pagan cult were in effect. One of the forms of individual marriage in the pagan era was bride abduction (including imaginary), another was purchase. Polygamy was quite widespread. With the introduction of Christianity, new principles of family law were established - monogamy, difficulty in divorce, lack of rights for illegitimate children, cruel punishments for extramarital affairs.
According to the Church Charter of Yaroslav, a monogamous family becomes an object of protection by the church. Members of such a family, primarily the wife, enjoy her full protection. Marriage was necessarily preceded by betrothal, which was considered indissoluble
In addition to the Russian Truth, social relations in the Old Russian state were regulated by a number of other regulatory documents. These are primarily princely charters and statutory charters. The statutes were fixed on long time relations between the state and church authorities. For example, the Charter of Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich on tithes, courts and church people (defining the jurisdiction of the church - intra-family relations, witchcraft), the Charter of Prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich on church courts (regulation of family and marriage relations, as well as prosecution for crimes related to violation of family norms). marriage law, sex crimes and crimes against the church).
A separate category legal documents consisted of treaties between Rus' and Byzantium in 907, 911, 944 and 971. These are the first written agreements that have reached our time. They regulated trade relations between Russian merchants and Byzantium, determined the procedure for resolving civil disputes, the procedure for prosecuting perpetrators and types of punishment for criminal offenses.
Control questions
1. List the prerequisites for the formation of a state among the Eastern Slavs.
2. What are the features of the formation of the Old Russian state?
3. Why did the Old Russian state bypass the slaveholding phase of development? What factors contributed to this?
4. Why did two centers of Slavic statehood actually emerge with various forms reign: early feudal monarchy in Kyiv and feudal republic in Novgorod?
5. Features of the organization of state power in the Old Russian state.
6. What is the palace-patrimonial management system?
7. How was local government carried out in Kievan Rus?
8. Social structure of the Old Russian state and its features.
9. The main features of the institution of servitude in Ancient Rus'.
10. List the main sources of ancient Russian law. What is the significance of Russian Truth?
11. Legal regulation of procedural relations in Kievan Rus.
12. Describe criminal law according to Russian Pravda.
13. What are the features of the legal regulation of marriage, family and inheritance relations in Rus' in the X-XII centuries?
14. How the Eastern Slavs lived in the 7th-8th centuries. (settlement, nature of economic activity, beliefs, clan organization, social stratification, tribal associations, relationships with neighboring peoples)?
15. Why did the Eastern Slavs bypass the slaveholding stage of development? What prevented slavery from becoming the basis of their economic activity?
16.Under the influence of what factors did the process of political consolidation of the East Slavic tribes take place? What reasons underlay the emergence of statehood among the Eastern Slavs?
17.What role did the baptism of Rus' play in the formation and strengthening of national statehood?
18. What does the Tale of Bygone Years say about the calling of the Varangians to the Russian land? How do supporters of the “Norman theory” of the origin of the Old Russian state interpret the chronicle information? What is the scientific inconsistency of this theory?
19.What did the social system of the Old Russian state look like? What was the legal status of the main categories of its population? Why is ancient Russian society considered early feudal?
20.What elements did it consist of? political system Kievan Rus? What is the palace-patrimonial management system?
21.What are the reasons for the loss of state unity in Russia? Is it possible to consider the collapse of the Old Russian state and the ensuing political disunity of Russian lands as a logical stage in the development of Russian statehood?
22.What sources of law played a decisive role in the formation of the legal system of the Old Russian state? What caused the development of the grand ducal legislation?
23.What is the origin of Russian Truth? What editions does it include? What is the technical and legal level of this legal monument? What influence did he have on the subsequent development of domestic law, what is its general historical significance?
24. What characteristics can be given to the law of obligations, inheritance and family and marriage law, based on the provisions of the Russian Pravda?
25. What did the system of crimes and punishments look like in Russian Pravda?
26.What were the features of the judicial process in the Old Russian state? What types of evidence did Russkaya Pravda provide for?
Literature
1. Reader on the history of state and law of the USSR. – M., 1990.
2. Russian legislation of the X-XX centuries. / ed. O.I. Chistyakova. T. 1. – M., 1984.
3. Vladimirsky-Budanov M.F. Review of the history of Russian law. – Rostov-on-Don, 1995.
4. Isaev I.A. History of state and law of Russia: textbook. allowance. – M., 2004.
5. History of state and law of Russia / ed. Yu.P. Titova. – M., 2004.
6. History of the domestic state and law / ed. O.I. Chistyakova. – M., 2004.
7. Kudinov O.A. History of domestic state and law. – M., 2005.
8. Rogov V.A. History of state and law of Russia. – M., 1995.
9. Rybakov B.A. Kievan Rus and Russian principalities of the XII-XIII centuries. – M., 1982.
10. Yushkov S.V. Metropolitan justice. – M., 1989.
Tasks
Task No. 1
In the historical and legal literature, the following forms of the emergence of the state are distinguished:
1) Athenian - classical (social division of labor and the growth of its productivity, the emergence of the family, private property, the split of society into opposing classes, the emergence of the state in the form of policies);
2) Roman (the reasons listed in the previous paragraph and the struggle of the plebeians against the patricians);
3) ancient Germanic (the emergence of the state as a result of violence);
4) Asian (geographical conditions, creation of irrigation structures, creation of a superstructure for construction management - the state apparatus).
Which form do you think is acceptable to explain the emergence of the state in Kievan Rus? Is it possible, using the example of the formation of Kievan Rus, to talk about any one form of the emergence of a state among the ancient Slavs?
Task No. 2
During the reign of Prince Yaroslav the Wise, two criminal cases took place. The essence of the first was that, defending his family and property, boyar K. killed a thief who had entered the house. In the second case, during a fight between two Smerds, one killed the other.
Explain what the prince's court should be guided by and what decisions should be made in these cases.
Task No. 3
The boyar slave T. started a fight with a resident of the settlement, blacksmith K., on the street, as a result of which he beat the blacksmith himself and the merchant P., who tried to separate them. He managed to hide from his pursuers in his master's house. The victims appealed to the princely court.
What decision should the prince make, given that the events took place in the 11th century? Can a slave be the subject of a crime?
Task No. 4
Resolve the dispute that arose between two residents of the settlement - shoemaker A. and potter V., taking into account the fact that it took place at the beginning of the 12th century. The initiator of the trial was shoemaker A., who asked to punish potter V. for beating him in a fight. According to eyewitnesses of the incident, the fight was provoked by shoemaker A.
What decision will the prince make? Would the fact that the fight was provoked by the potter influence the decision?
Task No. 5
During the trial of the murder of the merchant L., the prince, in order to clarify all the circumstances and punish the culprit - vigilante P., interviewed three people who, in his opinion, could help recreate the full picture of what happened. Two of them said that they were present at the fight, the third was not personally at the fight, but assured that he knew everything from the words of the wife and son of the murdered man. Last story seemed the most convincing to the prince.
Could the prince be guided when making a decision by the testimony of a person who did not see the crime itself, given that the crime took place in 1097?
Task No. 6
Resolve the situation that arose at the beginning of the 12th century. During bargaining at the bazaar, a quarrel arose between the Varangian merchant and the princely warrior V., which escalated into a fight. The victim in the fight was a Varangian merchant: he was beaten, his goods were partially destroyed. He demanded that the prince condemn the guilty warrior.
What decision was made by the princely court? Will the fact that the victim was a foreigner affect the outcome of the case?
Problem No. 7
During a quarrel, Smerd K. killed the boyar slave E. Since the murder took place at a fair with a large crowd of people, Smerd K. was immediately taken to the princely court for trial.
What decision did the prince make in accordance with the legislation in force during this period? How would the decision have changed if it was not the serf who was killed, but the smerd?
Task No. 8
At the princely court, the case of the theft of goods from the merchant R. by the merchant I. was examined. The testimony of the victim and the accused was confusing. It was unclear what kind of goods were stolen, where this goods were stored, and why suspicion fell on merchant I. Both sides swore an oath on the Bible, promising to tell the truth. However, the situation was never clarified. The prince postponed the decision of this case until the next day, so that the parties could provide more compelling evidence of their positions.
What evidence could be used at the trial of the 11th-12th centuries if a similar situation had taken place in Kievan Rus?
Tests
1. The reasons for the formation of the Old Russian state are:
a) increasing labor productivity, geographical position and climatic conditions, ethnic and religious community of Slavic tribes;
b) the conquest of other peoples inhabiting the territory of the future Old Russian state by Slavic tribes;
c) conclusion of an agreement on the creation of a state by the elders of the Slavic tribes.
2. The Norman theory of the origin of the state among the Slavs was refuted:
a) O.I. Klyuchevsky;
b) M.V. Lomonosov;
c) O.I. Chistyakov.
3. According to the Norman theory of the origin of statehood among the Slavs:
a) the Slavic tribes invited the Varangian prince and his retinue as ruler;
b) the state of the Slavs arose as a result of the Mongol-Tatar conquest;
c) the state arose as a result of the conquest of the Slavic tribes by the Pechenegs.
4. The early feudal monarchy in the Old Russian state is characterized by the presence of a prince at the head of state:
a) Boyar Duma;
b) feudal congresses and people's councils;
c) Zemsky Sobor.
5. Form of government - feudal republic, took place:
a) in Novgorod;
b) in Kyiv;
c) in the Rostov-Suzdal land.
6. The feeding system as a way of maintaining local government bodies consisted of:
a) in the receipt by the governors of salaries from the princely treasury;
b) in the governors retaining for themselves part of the duties and tribute collected for the prince;
c) the need for governors to engage in crafts or cultivate the land to support themselves and their staff.
7. The feudal lords in Kievan Rus were represented by:
a) princes, “best”, “oldest” men, boyars, firemen, the church;
b) princes, boyars and the church;
c) “best” and “oldest” husbands, firemen.
8. Serfs in Ancient Rus' had the status:
b) serfs;
c) free people.
9. Smerdas are:
and all free population Kievan Rus;
b) free peasants;
c) urban population, employed petty trade and craft.
10. The sources of Russian Truth were:
a) common law, legislation of princes, judicial practice, Byzantine canon law;
b) customary law and religious norms;
c) judicial practice.
11. Russian Truth understood crime as:
a) offense or harm caused to one or more people;
b) a socially dangerous act that encroaches on state-protected interests;
c) property damage caused to a certain person.
12. Criminal liability in Russian Pravda is presented:
a) mainly property punishments;
b) self-mutilation and death penalty;
c) imprisonment and hard labor.
13. Trial according to Russian Truth:
a) was of an accusatory-adversarial nature;
b) was wanted;
c) was competitive.
14. The stages of the trial under Russian Pravda were:
a) call out, arch, chase a trace;
b) cry out, chase the trail, flood and plunder;
c) vault and shout.
15. The testimony on Russkaya Pravda was:
a) evidence of video and hearsay evidence;
b) testimony of eyewitnesses of the crime;
c) testimony of persons who own land plots and who can provide any information about the crime.
16. Three editions of Russian Pravda are:
a) three parts regulating homogeneous social relations;
b) three parts regulating the legal status of various classes;
c) editions of Russian Pravda with changes and additions made during certain historical periods.
17. In what century was a single Old Russian state based in Kyiv founded on the territory of the Eastern Slavs?
a) In the 11th century. b) In the 9th century. c) In the 10th century.
18. In what year was the first agreement between the Kyiv state and Byzantium concluded?
a) In 907. b) In 862. c) In 911.
19.Which of the three editions of Russian Truth is the most ancient?
a) Abridged Truth. b) Brief Truth. c) Extensive Truth.
20. One of the types of punishments in Russian Pravda was golovnichestvo. Headiness is:
a) monetary recovery in favor of the family of the murdered person
b) a fine for the murder of persons belonging to the lower strata of society.
c) confiscation of the criminal’s property.
21. For the murder of “princely men”, according to Russian Pravda, a fine was established in the amount of:
a) 40 hryvnia b) 80 hryvnia c) 20 hryvnia.
22. Capital punishment according to Russian Truth.
a) death penalty.
b) hard labor.
c) life imprisonment.
d) confiscation of property and extradition of the criminal (along with his family) to
23. Which Kiev prince reduced usurious interest rates?
a) Svyatopolk.
b) Ivan Kalita.
c) Vladimir Monomakh.
d) Saint Vladimir.
24. What was the name of the oldest code of Russian law, the text of which came before us?
didn't arrive?
a) Russian Law
b) Yaroslav's truth.
c) The truth of Yaroslavich.
d) Council Code.
25. The most powerless subject according to Russian Truth.
a) purchase, b) slave, c) employee, d) Ryadovich.
26. When was the Old Russian state formed with its capital in Kyiv?
a) in the 6th century, b) in the 10th century, c) in the 11th century..
27. Which of the ancient customs is fully preserved by Russian Truth?
a) mutual responsibility.
b) bride kidnapping.
c) polygamy.
d) blood feud.
28. When was Yaroslav’s Truth published?
a) Before 1054 b) In 882 c) In the 10th century d) B 1113
29. Name the supporters of the Norman theory.
a) M.B. Lomonosov, G.F. Derzhavin.
b) Bayer, Schlozer.
c) M.N. Pokrovsky, N.A. Ryzhkov.
d) B.D. Grekov, B.A. Rybakov.
30. Which of the Russian princes canceled death penalty?
a) Alexander Nevsky.
b) Yaroslav and Yaroslavichs.
c) Vladimir I,
31. Name the second edition of Russian Truth .
a) The truth of Yaroslavich.
b) Abridged Truth.
c) Extensive Truth.
d) Charter of Vladimir Monomakh.
32. What document first defined ecclesiastical jurisdiction?
a) The helmsman's book.
b) Charter of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich.
c) Charter of Yaroslav.
d) Domostroy.
33. Name the oldest monument Russian law, the text of which
does science have?
a) Yaroslav's truth.
b) Russian Law.
c) Charter of Vladimir Monomakh.
d) Oleg’s treaty with the Greeks in 911.
Application
The concept of “social system” includes: the economic development of the country, the class structure of society, the legal status of classes and social groups of the population.
Historical, written and archaeological sources indicate that in economic life the main occupation of the Eastern Slavs was agriculture. Both slash-and-burn (in forest areas) and arable (fallow) farming developed.
In the X-XII centuries. There has been a significant increase in cities with a craft and trade population. In the 12th century there were already about 200 cities in Rus'.
In the ancient Russian state, princely, boyar, church and monastic land ownership developed; a significant part of the community members became dependent on the owner of the land. Feudal relations gradually formed.
The formation of feudal relations in Kievan Rus was uneven. In the Kyiv, Chernigov, and Galician lands this process went faster than among the Vyatichi and Dregovichi.
The feudal social system in Rus' was established in the 9th century. As a result of social differentiation of the population, the social structure of society was formed. Based on their position in society, they can be called classes or social groups.
These include:
* feudal lords (great and appanage princes, boyars, churches and monasteries);
* free community members (rural and urban “people” and “people”);
* smerds (communal peasants);
* purchases (a person who has fallen into debt bondage and is working off a “kupa”);
* outcasts (a person who left the community or was freed from servitude by ransom);
* servants and serfs (court slaves);
* urban population (urban aristocracy and urban lower classes);
The dominant class of feudal lords was formed in the 9th century. These included grand dukes, local princes, and boyars. State and personal reigns were not separated, so the princely domain was an estate that belonged not to the state, but to the prince as a feudal lord.
Along with the grand-ducal domain, there was also boyar-druzhina agriculture.
The form of princely agriculture was patrimony, i.e. a form of ownership in which land was inherited.
The appearance in the Long Edition of Russian Pravda, dating back to the end of the 11th and beginning of the 12th centuries, of articles that mention boyar tiuns, boyar ryadovichi, boyar serfs and boyar inheritance allows us to conclude that by this time boyar land ownership had become established.
For a long time, a group of feudal boyars was formed from the richer warriors of the prince and from the tribal nobility. Their form of land tenure was:
1. patrimony;
2. holding (estate).
Patrimonies were acquired by seizing communal lands or by grant and were passed on by inheritance. The boyars received tenure only by grant (for the duration of the boyar's service or until his death). Any land ownership of the boyars was associated with service to the prince, which was considered voluntary. The transfer of a boyar from one prince to the service of another was not considered treason.
The feudal lords include both the church and the monasteries, which, after the adoption of Christianity in Rus', gradually became large landowners.
Free community members made up the bulk of the population of Kievan Rus. The term “people” in Russian Pravda means free, predominantly communal peasants and the urban population. Judging by the fact that in Russian Pravda (Article 3) “lyudin” was contrasted with “prince-husband,” he retained personal freedom.
Free community members were subjected to state exploitation by paying tribute, the method of collection of which was polyudye. The princes gradually transferred the right to collect tribute to their vassals, and free community members gradually became dependent on the feudal lord.
Smerds made up the bulk of the population of the Old Russian state. These were communal peasants. Smerd was personally free, his personal integrity was protected by the prince’s word (Article 78 pp.). The prince could give the smerd land if he worked for him. Smerds had tools of production, horses, property, land, ran a public economy, and lived in communities.
Some communal peasants went bankrupt, turned into “bad scum,” and turned to feudal lords and rich people for a loan. This category was called “purchases”. The main source characterizing the “purchase” situation is Art. 56-64, 66 Russian truth, lengthy edition.
Thus, the “purchases” are peasants (sometimes representatives of the urban population) who have temporarily lost their freedom for using a loan, a “purchase” taken from the feudal lord. He was actually in the position of a slave, his freedom was limited. He could not leave the yard without the master's permission. For attempting to escape, he was turned into a slave.
"Outcasts" were free and dependent. These were:
* former purchases;
* slaves bought into freedom;
* come from free strata of society.
They were not free until they entered the service of their master. The life of an outcast is protected by Russian Truth with a fine of 40 hryvnia.
At the lowest rung of the social ladder were slaves and servants. They were not subjects of law, and the owner was responsible for them. Thus, they were the owners of the feudal lord. If he committed theft, then the master paid. If a slave was beaten, he could kill him “in the dog’s place,” i.e. like a dog. If a slave took refuge with his master, the latter could protect him by paying 12 hryvnia, or give him up for reprisals.
The law prohibited sheltering runaway slaves.
Political system
Let us briefly consider the political system of the Old Russian state.
The concept of government includes:
* issues of state structure;
* political form of government;
* structure and competence of central and local authorities and management;
* military device;
* state judicial system.
Formation ancient Russian state lasted until the first third of the 12th century. It was an integral state based on the principle of suzerainty-vassalage. In terms of the form of government, the ancient Russian state was an early feudal monarchy with a fairly strong monarchical power.
The main characteristics of the ancient Russian early feudal monarchy can be considered:
* economic and political influence of the boyars on the central and local authorities;
* the great role of the council under the prince, the dominance of large feudal lords in it;
* the presence of a palace-patrimonial management system in the center;
* availability of a feeding system on site.
It arose at a time when there were no prerequisites for the formation of a centralized state, with poorly developed trade and crafts, and the absence of strong economic ties between individual regions. The feudal lords needed a strong central government to provide cover or support during the seizure of communal and new lands.
The support of the Grand Duke by the feudal lords contributed to the rapid spread of his power over the vast territory of Rus'.
Kievan Rus was not a centralized state. It was a conglomerate of feudal principalities. The Kyiv prince was considered a suzerain or "elder". He gave land (flax) to the feudal lords, provided them with assistance and protection. The feudal lords had to serve the Grand Duke for this. If loyalty was violated, the vassal was deprived of his possessions.
The highest authorities in the Old Russian state were the Grand Duke, the prince's council, feudal congresses, and the veche.
The power functions of the Grand Duke of Kyiv during the reign of Oleg (882-912), Igor (912-945) and regent Olga under Svyatoslav (945-964) were relatively simple and consisted of:
* organizing squads and military militias and commanding them;
* protection of state borders;
* carrying out campaigns to new lands, capturing prisoners and collecting tribute from them;
* maintaining normal foreign policy relations with the nomadic tribes of the south, the Byzantine Empire, and the countries of the East.
At first, the Kyiv princes ruled only the Kyiv land. During the conquest of new lands, the Kiev prince in the tribal centers left a thousand led by a thousand, a hundred led by a sotsky, and smaller garrisons led by a ten, which served as the city administration.
At the end of the 10th century, the functions of the power of the Grand Duke underwent changes. The feudal nature of the prince's power began to manifest itself more clearly.
The prince becomes the organizer and commander of the armed forces (the multi-tribal composition of the armed forces complicates this task):
* takes care of the construction of fortifications along the external border of the state, the construction of roads;
* establishes external relations to ensure border security;
* carries out legal proceedings;
* carries out the establishment of the Christian religion and provides financial support for the clergy.
(During this period, popular unrest began. In 1068, Izyaslav brutally suppressed the popular uprising, and in 1113, fearing new unrest, the boyars and bishops summoned Vladimir Monomakh to Kyiv with a strong squad, who suppressed the uprising).
Princely power was exercised locally by mayor, volosts and tiuns. The prince, by issuing laws, consolidated new forms of feudal exploitation and established legal norms.
Thus, the prince becomes a typical monarch. The Grand Duke's throne was passed on first by inheritance according to the principle of "seniority" (to the elder brother), and then according to the principle of "fatherland" (to the eldest son).
The council under the prince did not have functions separate from the prince. It consisted of the city elite (“city elders”), major boyars, and influential palace servants. With the adoption of Christianity (988), representatives of the highest clergy entered the Council. It was an advisory body under the prince to resolve the most important state issues: declaration of war, conclusion of peace, alliances, publication of laws, financial issues, court cases. The central governing bodies were officials of the princely court.
It should be noted that with the improvement of the system of feudalism, the decimal (thousand, centurion, and ten) system is gradually being replaced by the palace-patrimonial system. The divisions between government bodies and the management of the prince’s personal affairs disappear. The general term tiun is specified: “ognishchanin” is called “tiun-ognishny”, “senior groom” is called “tiun equerry”, “village and military headman” is called “village and military tiun”, etc.
As the tasks of public administration became more complex, the role of these positions became stronger, the functions became more precise, for example: “voivode” - head of the armed forces; "tiun equestrian" - responsible for providing the princely army with horses; “butler-fireman” - manager of the princely court and performing certain government tasks; "Stolnik" - food supplier.
Feudal congresses (snems) were convened by the grand dukes to decide critical issues external and domestic policy. They could be national or several principalities. The composition of the participants was basically the same as the Council under the Prince, but appanage princes were also convened at feudal congresses.
The functions of the congress were:
* adoption of new laws;
* distribution of lands (fiefs);
* resolving issues of war and peace;
* protection of borders and trade routes.
The Lyubechsky Congress of 1097 is known, which, with a view to uniting efforts in the fight against external enemies, the “order of the world”, recognized the independence of appanage princes (“let each one keep his fatherland”), at the same time called for preserving Rus' by all “one”. In 1100, in Uvetichi, he was engaged in the distribution of fiefs.
The veche was convened by the prince or the feudal elite. All adult residents of the city and non-citizens participated in it. Decisive role The boyars and the city elite "city elders" played here. Serfs and people subordinate to the landlord were not allowed to attend the meeting.
It is known that the Drevlyans made the decision to kill Prince Igor for abusing the collection of tribute at their veche.
In 970, the Novgorod veche invited Vladimir Svyatoslavovich to reign.
Issues discussed at the meeting:
Convening and recruiting the people's militia and choosing a leader;
Protest was expressed against the prince's policies.
The executive body of the veche was the Council, which actually replaced the veche. The veche disappeared as feudalism developed. Survived only in Novgorod and Moscow.
At first, local governing bodies were local princes, who were later replaced by the sons of the Kyiv prince. In some less important cities, posadnik-governors, thousands of the Kyiv prince from his entourage, were appointed.
The local administration was supported by part of the collections from the population. Therefore, the mayor and volostels were called “feeders,” and the management system was called a “feeding” system.
The power of the prince and his administration extended to the townspeople and the population of lands not captured by the feudal lords. The feudal lords received immunity - legal registration power in the domains. The immunity (protection) document determined the land granted to the feudal lord and the rights to the population, which was obliged to be subordinate.
In the Old Russian state, the court was not separated from administrative power. The highest judicial authority was the Grand Duke. He tried warriors and boyars, and considered complaints against local judges. The prince carried out analysis of complex cases at a council or veche. Individual matters could be entrusted to a boyar or tiun.
Locally, the court was carried out by the mayor and the volost.
In addition, there were patrimonial courts - courts of landowners over the dependent population, on the basis of immunity.
In the communities there was a community court, which with the development of feudalism was replaced by an administration court.
The functions of the church court were carried out by bishops, archbishops, and metropolitans.
3. Development of Old Russian feudal law
In the Old Russian state, the source of law, as in many early feudal states, is legal custom inherited from the primitive communal system. The Tale of Bygone Years notes that the tribes had “their own customs and the laws of their fathers.” The source refers to the norms of customary law, and the concepts are used as synonyms.
With the development of feudalism and the aggravation of class contradictions, customary law loses its importance. During the time of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich (978/980-1015), legislation expressing the interests of feudal lords, asserting feudal principles and the influence of the church, became increasingly important.
The first legal document that came down to us was the charter of Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich “On tithes, courts and church people.” The charter was created at the turn of the X-XI centuries. in the form of a short charter, which was given to the Church of the Holy Mother of God. The original has not reached us. Only lists compiled in the 12th century are known. (Synodal and Olenets editions).
The charter acts as an agreement between the prince (Vladimir Svyatoslavovich) and the metropolitan (presumably Lyon). According to the charter, initially - the prince:
a) patron of the church (protects the church and provides it financially);
b) does not interfere in the affairs of the church;
Tithes are determined for the existence of the church. According to the charter, the prince owes 1/10 of the funds received from:
Court cases;
In the form of tribute from other tribes; give to the church
From trade.
Like the prince, each house also had to give 1/10 of the offspring, income from trade, and harvest to the church.
The charter was drawn up under the strong influence of the Byzantine church, as evidenced by the content of the articles regarding the definition of the crime.
The purpose of the charter is to establish the Christian Church in the Old Russian state. The provisions of Vladimir’s charter “On tithes, courts and church people” are aimed at:
* preservation of family and marriage, affirmation of the inviolability of family ties;
* protection of the church, church symbols and Christian church order;
* fight against pagan rituals.
Collections of Byzantine church law (nomocanons) widespread in the Old Russian state were of great importance. Subsequently, on their basis, with the involvement of norms from Russian and Bulgarian sources, “helmsman” (guiding) books were compiled in Rus' as sources of church law.
Thus, after the adoption of Christianity (988), the church acts as an element of the state.
In the 9th century. Secular law is also being developed. Collections of law appear, containing legal material accumulated by the princely and communal courts. More than 110 such collections have reached us. various lists. These collections were called "Russian Truth" or "Russian Law". Russian historians, based on their similarity to each other, united them into 3 editions:
1. Brief truth (KP).
2. Extensive truth (PP).
3. Short truth (SP).
Some lists are named by location:
* Synodal - kept in the library of the Synod;
* Trinity - kept in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra;
* Academic - kept in the library of the Academy of Sciences.
The short truth is divided into 2 parts:
1. The most ancient truth (see art. 1-18) - compiled in the 30s. XI century
Yaroslav the Wise (1019-1054), therefore known as Yaroslav's Truth. It contains norms of customary law (for example, blood feud), and the privilege of feudal lords is not sufficiently expressed (the same punishment is established for the murder of any person).
2. Truth of the Yaroslavichs (see art. 19-43), compiled in the 70s. XI century, when Yaroslav’s son Izyaslav (1054-1072) reigned in Kyiv. The truth of the Yaroslavichs reflects a higher level of development of the feudal state: the princely property and persons of the administration are protected; instead of blood feud, a monetary penalty is established, and it varies depending on class status.
The lengthy truth was compiled during the reign of Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125). It consists of 2 main parts:
1. Charter of Yaroslav, including a brief truth (see Art. 1-52) “Court of Yaroslavl Volodemerech”.
2. Charter of Vladimir Monomakh (see art. 53-121) “Charter of Volodemer Vsevolodovich.”
In this document:
* feudal law is fully formalized as a privilege;
* civil law, criminal law, judicial system and legal proceedings are regulated in more detail;
* articles appear on the protection of boyar estates, on the relationship between feudal lords and purchases, and on stinkers.
The abridged truth arose in the 15th century. from Prostranstnaya Pravda and operated in the Moscow state.
In addition to the Russian Pravda, the sources of secular law in Rus' are Russian-Byzantine treaties, which contain not only norms of international law, but also norms regulating internal life. There are 4 known treaties between Rus' and Byzantium: 907, 911, 944 and 971. The treaties testify to the high international authority of the Old Russian state. Much attention is paid to the regulation of trade relations.
The main source of ancient Russian feudal law is "Russian Truth". The main part of it is devoted to criminal and procedural law, however, there are articles containing rules of civil law, especially obligations and inheritance.
Let's briefly look at the contents of "Russian Truth" according to the scheme:
* ownership;
* law of obligations;
* inheritance law;
* procedural law;
* Crime and Punishment.
In the Brief Truth there is no general term for ownership, because the content of this right was different depending on who was the subject and what was meant by the object of the property right. At the same time, a line was drawn between the right of ownership and the right of possession (see Art. 13-14 KP).
In "Russian Truth" considerable attention is paid to the protection of the private property of feudal lords. Strict liability is provided for damage to boundary signs, plowing of boundaries, arson, and cutting down of berm trees. Among property crimes, much attention is paid to theft ("theft"), i.e. secret theft of things.
The Prostransnaya Pravda enshrines the property rights of feudal lords over serfs, including the procedure for finding, detaining, and returning a runaway serf, and establishes responsibility for harboring a serf. Those who gave bread to a slave (as well as for harboring) had to pay the price of a slave - 5 hryvnia of silver (slaves cost from 5 to 12 hryvnia). The one who caught the slave received a reward - 1 hryvnia, but if he missed him, he paid the price of the slave minus 1 hryvnia (see Art. 113, 114).
In connection with the development of private property, inheritance law is formed and developed. In the rules of inheritance law, the desire of the legislator to preserve property in a given family is clearly visible. With its help, the wealth accumulated by many generations of owners remained in the hands of the same class.
By law, only sons could inherit. The father's courtyard passed to the youngest son without division. (Article 100 PP). Daughters were deprived of the right to inherit because when they got married, they could take property outside their clan. This custom existed among all peoples during the transition period from the primitive communal system to class society. It is also reflected in Russkaya Pravda.
With the strengthening of princely power, the provision was enshrined: “If the smerd dies childless, then the prince inherits, if unmarried daughters remain in the house, then allocate a certain part for them, but if she is married, then do not give them a part” (Article 90 PP).
An exception was made for the daughters of boyars and warriors (later the clergy), artisans and community members; their inheritance, in the absence of sons, could pass to their daughters (Article 91 PP). Children adopted by a slave did not participate in the inheritance, but received freedom along with their mother (Article 98 PP).
Until the heirs came of age, their mother managed the inherited property. If a widowed mother got married, she received part of the property “for subsistence.” In this case, a guardian from the immediate family was appointed. The property was transferred in front of witnesses. If the guardian lost part of the property, he had to compensate.
There was a difference between inheritance by law and by will. The father could divide property between his sons at his discretion, but could not bequeath to his daughters.
The dominance of private property led to the emergence of the law of obligations. It was relatively underdeveloped. Obligations arose not only from contracts, but also from causing harm: damage to a fence, unauthorized riding on someone else's horse, damage to clothing or weapons, death of the master's horse due to the fault of the purchase, etc. In these cases, not a civil claim (compensation), but a fine arose. The obligations extended not only to the debtor's property, but also to his person.
According to Russian Pravda, a bona fide bankrupt (merchant) was not sold into slavery, but received installments from the creditor. The malicious bankrupt was sold with all his property into slavery.
The obligations from the treaties were also reflected in Russkaya Pravda. Agreements, as a rule, were concluded orally in the presence of rumors or mytnik (witnesses). In "Russkaya Pravda" contracts were known: purchase and sale, loan, luggage (loan agreement between merchants), personal hiring, procurement.
Criminal law in the Old Russian state was formed as a right-privilege, but shades of more early period. It is reflected in Russian-Byzantine treaties and Russian Pravda.
The peculiarity of "Russian Truth" is that it punishes only intentional crimes or causing harm. (Crimes committed through negligence were reflected only in the 17th century in the “Cathedral Code”). In "Russian Truth" a crime is called "offense", which means causing moral, material or physical damage. This stemmed from the understanding of “offense” in ancient times, when offending an individual meant insulting a tribe, community or clan. But with the emergence of feudalism, compensation for damage for a crime (offense) went not in favor of society, but of the prince.
Responsibility was borne only free people. The owner was responsible for the slaves. “If the thieves are slaves... whom the prince does not punish with sale, because they are not free people, then for slave theft they will pay double the agreed price and compensation for losses” (Article 46).
The types of crimes provided for by "Russian Truth" can be divided into:
a) crimes against the person;
b) crimes against property or property crimes;
The first group includes murder, insult by action, bodily harm, and beatings.
There was a distinction between murder in a quarrel (fight) or while intoxicated (at a feast) and murder by robbery, i.e. premeditated murder. In the first case, the perpetrator paid the criminal fine together with the community, and in the second case, the community not only did not pay the fine, but was obliged to hand over the murderer along with his wife and children to “flood and ruin.”
Insult by action, physical insult (a blow with a stick, pole, hand, sword, etc.) was punishable by “Russian Truth,” and insult by word was considered by the church.
Bodily injuries included injury to a hand (“so that the hand falls off and withers”), damage to a leg (“it will begin to limp”), an eye, a nose, and the cutting off of fingers. Battery included beating a person until they were bloody and bruised.
Crimes against honor included pulling out mustaches and beards, for which a heavy fine was imposed (12 hryvnias of silver).
The second group includes crimes: robbery, theft (theft), destruction of other people's property, damage to boundary signs, etc.
Robbery associated with murder was punished by “deluge and ruin.” According to the “Russian Truth,” theft is considered to be the theft of a horse, a serf, weapons, clothes, livestock, hay, firewood, a rook, etc. For the theft of a horse, a “horse thief” was supposed to hand over a professional horse thief to the prince for “flood and ruin” (Article 35).
For a simple (one-time) theft of a prince's horse, a penalty of 3 hryvnia was imposed, and for a stink - 2 hryvnia (Article 45). The thief could be killed on the spot (v. 40). But if he was tied up and then killed, then 12 hryvnia was collected.
Punishments according to “Russian Truth” provided, first of all, for compensation for damage. The Pravda of Yaroslav provided for blood feud on the part of the relatives of the victim (Article 1). The Yaroslavichs abolished blood feud.
Instead of revenge for the murder of a free person, a vira was established - a monetary penalty in the amount of 40 hryvnia. For the murder of the "prince's husband" compensation was established in the amount of double vira - 80 hryvnia. For the murder of a smerd or a serf, the penalty was not vira, but a fine (lesson) of 5 hryvnia.
Among the monetary penalties for murder are vira in favor of the prince and golovnichestvo (usually vira) in favor of the family of the murdered person, for other crimes - sale in favor of the prince and a lesson in favor of the victim. “Wild vira” was exacted from the community in case of refusal to extradite the criminal.
The highest punishment according to Russian truth is white flow and ruin - conversion (sale) into slavery and confiscation of property in favor of the prince. This punishment was applied for 4 types of crimes: horse theft, arson, murder by robbery and malicious bankruptcy.
The proceedings were adversarial in nature. The main role in court belonged to the parties. The process was a lawsuit (dispute) between the parties before a judge. The court acted as an arbitrator and made a decision orally. Peculiar forms of this process were “cry”, “vault” and “pursuit of the trail”.
The evidence was the testimony of rumors, videos, ordeals, court battles, and the oath.