The formation of Russian statehood
The formation of the state is a natural and progressive stage in the development of any society. The first signs of statehood are noted among the Eastern Slavs as early as the 6th century. Most historians determine that it was in this century that our ancestors formed a state formation - the “power of the Volynians”. It was the first of the political associations known from historical documents. One of these associations was the union of tribes headed by Kiy (known since the end of the 5th century). The Novgorod chronicle tells about the elder Gostomysl, who headed the ninth century. Slavic unification around Novgorod. Eastern sources suggest the existence on the eve of the formation of the state of three large associations of Slavic tribes: Kuyaba, Slavia and Artania. Kuyaba (or Kuyava), apparently, was located around Kyiv. Slavia occupied the territory in the area of Lake Ilmen, its center was Novgorod. The location of Artania is determined differently by different researchers (Ryazan, Chernihiv).
It is from the beginning of the VI century. on the East European Plain, as a result of the migration of the Slavs, unions of tribes were created, where blood relations still prevailed. But by the eighth century the unifying principle is not kinship, but the commonality of the territory. It is no coincidence that the names of these unions were most often formed from the habitat: landscape features (for example, clearing- “living in the field”) or the names of the river (for example, Moravans- from r. Moravia). Through the swampy area (from " rubbish"- swamp) got their name Dregovichi, along the rivers - Polotsk and buzhane, the tribes located to the north of the glades began to be called northerners. This indicates that at that time, among the Slavs, territorial ties already prevailed over tribal ones, and that the process of state formation was becoming irreversible.
Thus, the recognition that Russia, along with other civilizations of Europe, entered the transitional period to a medieval civilization, becomes indisputable. But it should be noted that this transition among the Eastern Slavs on the scale of a vast territory took place for a long time and unevenly. The Russian historian S.M. Solovyov wrote: “According to the four main river systems, the Russian land was divided in ancient times into four main parts: the first was the lake region of Novgorod, the second was the region of the Western Dvina, i.e. the region of Krivskaya or Polotsk, the third - the region of the Dnieper, i.e. the region of ancient Russia proper, the fourth - the region of the Upper Volga, the region of Rostov. The specificity of the river network on the East European Plain has been considered since the time of Herodotus as one of the favorable geopolitical factors; the river network objectively contributed to "... the unity of the people and the state, and for all that, the river systems initially determined the special systems of regions and principalities."
Thanks to the extensive river network in the VI-VIII centuries. trade is activated (such trade routes as “from the Varangians to the Greeks”, “from the Varangians to the Arabs”, etc.) are known. Trade routes became the economic basis for the unification of the Slavic tribes, and external danger became the impetus for unification. It should be noted that the Slavs themselves participated in military campaigns. Historical sources confirm the military campaigns of the Slavs in the Crimea, on the islands in the Aegean Sea, about campaigns in Byzantium. According to The Tale of Bygone Years, in order to free the land of the glades from tribute to the Khazars, a relative of the Scandinavian (Varangian) prince Rurik, Prince Oleg, went south with his retinue and approached Kyiv, where Askold and Dir reigned. Oleg lured them out of the city by cunning, killed and captured Kyiv, making it his capital. According to the chronicle, he called Kyiv "Mother city of Rus". This story, by the way, quite clearly reflects the fact of confrontation by the end of the 9th century. two centers of the emerging Russian statehood - Novgorod and Kyiv. Since they were on the trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks", the desire for unification and control over these territories is understandable. At the same time, the new dynasty went to shift the center of political life from north to south, making Kyiv its capital.
Thus began the history of Kievan Rus. Until now, the problem of the origin of the name "Rus" remains debatable. Some modern historians and linguists are inclined to believe that the term " Rus"has a dual Scandinavian-Finnish origin. In their opinion, "Rus" is armed people in boats, rowers, participants in sea voyages. So the Finnish population called the Varangians - Vikings (Normans). And this coincides with the version of The Tale of Bygone Years, where "rus" acts as the name of one of the Norman tribes, whose representative was Rurik (Sineus and Truvor are translated from Old Swedish as a family and squad).
Thus, in accordance with The Tale of Bygone Years, a representative of the Rus tribe with his family and squad was invited to rule in an already existing Slavic state. The method of calling a prince with a retinue was widespread in Europe in the early Middle Ages. In itself, the calling of a foreign prince did not change the Slavic nature of the existing society. The Old Russian nationality developed on the basis of a wide interaction of several sub-ethnic components: Slavic, Baltic, incl. and with a noticeable influence of Turkic. At the same time, it is worth noting that the very concept of "Ancient Russia" is conditional and serves only to refer to two historical events occurring simultaneously: the process of the formation of Russian statehood and the ethnogenesis of the Eastern Slavs in a historically remote period. Actually, “ancient” can be used to designate the period of the collapse of the united Slavic world, which ends by the 8th century. transition to the early Middle Ages. It is worth noting that for all the originality of its historical development, Russia from the end of the VIII century. develops as a medieval civilization.
But not 882 - the year of the capture of Kyiv, but 862 is a conditional date for the emergence of Russian statehood. In the "Tale of Bygone Years" in 862, Rurik was invited to reign in Novgorod. Apparently, he was called in order to have a counterweight in the fight against the Viking raids. It is from this moment that we can talk about the existence of the ancient Russian state. The chronicle narratives about the Varangian origin of the ancient Russian ruling dynasty of Rurikovich (882-1598) gave rise to a long discussion between the Normanists and their opponents, the anti-Normanists. Supporters of the Norman theory (whose origins were in the 18th century German historians Z. Bayer, G. Miller) believed that the state among the Slavs arises with outside help from the Scandinavians. Supporters of the anti-Normanist theory (at the origins of which stood M.V. Lomonosov) believed that the Varangians could not give the Slavs statehood, the role of the Varangians in its formation was insignificant. The debate between the supporters of these two approaches is mainly on two issues: 1. Were the Varangian princes the founders of the state among the Slavs? 2. Does the term "Rus" have a Scandinavian or other origin? Political and ideological considerations played a decisive role in this discussion. However, often both of them identified the origin of the state with the origin of the ruling dynasty in it. The fact of calling the Varangians, if it really took place, speaks not so much about the emergence of Russian statehood, but about the origin of the princely dynasty. If Rurik was a real historical figure, then his vocation to Russia should be seen as a response to the real need for princely power in the Russian society of that time.
Today, there is no doubt both the East Slavic roots of statehood, and the active participation of immigrants from Scandinavia in the formation of Kievan Rus. The history of the development of the ancient Russian state resembles the formation of Ancient Rome: the ruling alien dynasty had to build a system of relations with the indigenous population, who had mastered a specific territory and had already formed socio-cultural, economic and political traditions.
The unification of the East Slavic tribes into the Old Russian state was prepared by internal socio-economic reasons. The Varangians only accelerated this process, being a necessary consolidating element, playing the role of a military force that helped complete the unification process. Thus, the whole complex of prerequisites is finally taking shape, contributing to the strengthening of statehood among the Eastern Slavs. Among them are external and internal prerequisites, where it is incorrect to prioritize certain factors. Until now, a number of researchers give priority in the formation of the state to internal socio-economic processes. Some modern historians believe that external factors played a decisive role. However, it is worth noting that only the interaction of both internal and external, with insufficient socio-economic maturity of the East Slavic society, could lead to the historical breakthrough that occurred in the Slavic world in the 9th - 10th centuries.
To external preconditions should be attributed to the "pressure" exerted on the Slavic world by its neighbors, namely the Normans and the Khazars. On the one hand, their desire to take control of the trade routes that connected the West with the South and the East accelerated the formation of princely retinue groups that were drawn into foreign trade. Receiving agricultural and craft products from their fellow tribesmen, primarily furs, as well as exchanging them for prestigious consumption products and silver from foreign merchants, selling them captured foreigners, the local nobility more and more subjugated the tribal structures, enriched themselves and isolated themselves from ordinary community members. Over time, she, having united with the Varangian warrior-merchants, will begin to exercise control over trade routes and trade itself, which will lead to the consolidation of previously disparate tribal principalities located along these routes. On the other hand, interaction with more advanced civilizations led to the borrowing of certain socio-political forms of their life. The Byzantine Empire has long been considered the true standard of state and political structure. It is no coincidence that for a long time the great princes in Russia were called, following the example of the powerful state formation of the Khazar Khaganate, Khakans (Kagans). It should also be noted that the existence of the Khazar Khaganate in the Lower Volga protected the Eastern Slavs from the raids of nomads, who in previous eras (the Huns in the 4th - 5th centuries, the Avars in the 7th century) interfered with peaceful labor and, in the end, the emergence of the "embryo "statehood.
To internal preconditions should include those changes that took place in the socio-economic and political life of the East Slavic world. First of all, it should be noted the changes that took place in the economy of the Eastern Slavs by the 9th century. For example, the development of agriculture, especially arable farming in the steppe and forest-steppe region of the Middle Dnieper, led to the appearance of an excess product, and this created the conditions for separating the princely retinue group from the community (there was a separation of military administrative work from productive). In the North of Eastern Europe, where farming could not become widespread due to harsh climatic conditions, crafts continued to play an important role, and the emergence of an excess product was the result of the development of exchange and foreign trade. Thus, a specific (so-called Scandinavian-Russian) model of transition to feudalism is being formed. In tribal principalities, the bulk of the rural population had not yet lost their communal property, and the formation of feudal relations took place through the collection of tribute. Most researchers consider the Old Russian state to be early feudal. Early feudal society is not identical to feudal society. The main characteristic features of feudal society have not yet developed to a mature state in it, and there are many phenomena inherent in the previous stage. It is not so much about the predominance of one or another mode at the moment, but about the development trend, about which of the modes is developing, and which are gradually fading away. In the ancient Russian state, the future belonged precisely to the feudal way of life. Of course, the tribute included elements of both military indemnity and a national tax. But at the same time, tribute was collected from the peasant population, who gave the prince and his combatants part of their product. This brings tribute closer to feudal rent.
Despite the differences in the time of formation (from the end of the 5th century - the Visigothic and Frankish kingdoms, to the 9th-10th centuries - the Slavic, Scandinavian states, Hungary) and in the ratio of "barbarian" and ancient elements, the process of development of feudalism in all early medieval states of Europe was of the same type. At the initial stage of the development of feudal relations, direct producers were subordinate to state power. The latter relied on the service nobility of the ruler (king, prince), coinciding mainly with the state apparatus. At the second stage, individual large-scale land ownership (the so-called senior or patrimonial). The time of its occurrence and the rate of development had significant regional differences. In general, a certain pattern can be traced in early medieval Europe: the closer to the south-west of the continent, the earlier patrimonial forms of feudalism arise (as close chronologically as possible to the emergence of state forms), develop faster, and spread more widely. Italy and southern France can be considered extreme points here (Spain, located in the south-west of Europe, was conquered by the Arabs at the beginning of the 8th century). At the same time, the closer to the northeast, the patrimonial forms appear later, develop more slowly, and spread to a lesser extent (the extreme points are Russia and Scandinavia). As already noted, in Russia in the IX century. a system of exploitation of the personally free population by the military service nobility (team) of the Kyiv princes is being formed by collecting tribute (polyudya). But feudal relations, as is typical of this time in Western Europe, do not become decisive, not only because of the common interests of large landowners, but also because of the influential role of the patriarchal neighborhood community. However, due to the increasing colonization of the territories of the East Slavic world, the free land fund is increasingly shrinking; the number of villages belonging to the princes and populated by their serfs is increasing. In the X century. arises, and in the next century the dominal (patrimonial) land tenure of the Kiev princes is strengthened. Princely land ownership increased, from the 9th century. there is a growth of boyar estates (this was also facilitated by the practice of feeding, when the prince granted his warriors for a certain period of territory to collect tribute - “food”).
The increasingly complicated intra-tribal relations and inter-tribal clashes become the socio-political prerequisites for the formation of the state among the Eastern Slavs. These factors accelerated the formation of princely power, increased the role of princes and squads, both defending the tribe from external enemies and acting as an arbiter in various disputes. In the end, the power of the prince was strengthened, and his interests were increasingly alienated from the interests of his fellow tribesmen. According to sources, the Kyiv princes in the IX-X centuries. gradually subjugated the East Slavic unions of tribal principalities. The leading role in this process was played by the military service nobility - the squad of the Kyiv princes. Some of the unions of tribal principalities were subdued by the Kiev princes in two stages. On the first they paid a tribute - tribute, maintaining internal "autonomy". Tribute was collected through polyudya- a detour by Kiev squad detachments of the territory of a subordinate union. In the X century. tribute was levied in fixed amounts, in kind or in cash. The units of taxation were smoke(peasant yard) ralo and plow(in this case, the land area corresponding to the capabilities of one peasant farm).
At the second stage, the unions of tribal principalities were directly subordinated to the Kievan prince. The local reign was liquidated, and a representative of the Kyiv dynasty was appointed as the prince-governor. At the same time, in order to neutralize the separatist tendencies of the local nobility, instead of the old tribal center, a new “city” was built: Vladimir-Volynsky, Smolensk (in a new place), Turov, etc. At the same time, according to the latest research, it is worth noting that cities like such, i.e. there was probably no economic center in Russia until the end of the 10th century. The Old Russian term "grad" meant a fenced place, a fortification, which naturally was the center of a group of rural communities, but far from always fell under the concept of a city. Experts say that only 18 cities arose on the settlements of the 9th-mid-10th centuries. (and earlier), 15 - in the settlements of the second half of the X-beginning of the XI century. Even Kyiv, up to Yaroslav the Wise, was a relatively small town, which did not even include the area where Hagia Sophia was located. The heyday of ancient Russian cities falls already in the XI-beginning of the XIII century. The earlier cities were either the centers of local princes (such as the Drevlyan capital Iskorosten), or trading posts, which became the centers of the so-called polyudye.
The early Kievan state, from a political point of view representing a federation of principalities and territories directly subordinate to the Grand Duke, from a socio-economic point of view, was a combination of territorial communities with elements of tribal relations. The concept of "clan", often appearing in Russian sources, included different types of family ties, from the clan itself to a large family. It is no coincidence that the root “genus” is the basis of many Russian words (people, motherland, spring, native, give birth, harvest, etc.). The genus was presented as a cosmic universal being.
When determining the whole complex of prerequisites for the emergence of a state among the Eastern Slavs, it is necessary to take into account spiritual prerequisites. Like some other factors, the evolution of the pagan ideas of the Slavs of that era contributed to the establishment of the power of the prince. Thus, as the prince's military power grew, bringing booty to the tribe, defending it from external enemies and taking on the problem of settling internal disputes, his prestige and authority grew. Thus, as a result of the prince's distance from the circle of affairs and concerns familiar to the community members, as well as as a result of his performing complex managerial functions, he was endowed with supernatural powers and abilities. They began to see the prince as a guarantee of the well-being of the entire tribe, and his personality was identified with a tribal totem. All of the above led to sacralization, that is, the deification of princely power, and also created spiritual prerequisites for the transition from communal to state relations. But the process of deification (sacralization) did not occur instantly, of course. The ruling stratum of the early feudal society, organized into a retinue corporation, was still distinguished by a rather significant intra-estate democracy: the prince in this era was not yet an all-powerful monarch, but rather the first among equals. His duty was the distribution of tribute among the combatants. Decisions on all important state issues were taken by the prince after consultation with them.
There was also an internal hierarchy in the squad organization: the top of the squad layer was represented by old squad, its members were named boyars. The bottom layer was young squad. Its representatives were called youths. From the second half of the XI century. this term is transferred to the military servants of the princes and boyars, who were recruited mainly from the "young squad". The more privileged layer within it begins to be called children's. The presence of a hierarchy is an essential feature of medieval culture.
Thus, the transformation of East Slavic society gradually proceeded. The Varangian princes with their retinues were increasingly involved in the formation of the state. It is obvious that the process of registration of a single state is long in terms of time characteristics.
The history of Kievan Rus is usually divided into two periods: 1. From the 80s. 9th century until the end of the 10th century; 2. From the end of the X century. until the end of the 20s of the XII century. Initially, the state was a kind of federation of principalities and lands; Kyiv had a purely symbolic meaning. Kievan Rus is the successor of Ancient Russia and the next stage in the formation of the Russian ethnos. Kievan Rus existed on the territory of Eastern Europe for more than two centuries. She is mentioned in the ancient French epic "The Tale of Roland", in the ancient German epic "The Song of the Nibelungs", in the ancient Russian epic about the Kyiv heroes. Kievan Rus is a society with a relatively high degree of development of statehood. The formation of Kievan Rus as a political and cultural center under Vladimir I Svyatoslavovich (980-1015), the unification of the Western Slavs, Volhynians, Croats and the adoption of Christianity is being completed.
The early Middle Ages knew two types of statehood: eastern (the Byzantine Empire and the Arab Caliphate were an example of a strong statehood of the eastern type), based on relations of allegiance, and European statehood, based on cooperation between government and society.
In the initial period of Kievan Rus, local tribal principalities were preserved. The tribal princes recognized the supreme power of the Kyiv prince, used his military assistance, and collected taxes for him. On the ground, either they ruled, or the governors appointed by the Kyiv prince, who were combatants of the Kyiv princes or their relatives. The princes and their squads traveled around the territories subject to them, collected tribute from the population (“polyudye”), administered court, imposed fines on the guilty, and so on.
With folding by the end of the X century. structure of a single state, an extensive management apparatus is formed. Representatives of the retinue nobility acted as officials of the state administration. Acted under the prince council (Duma), consisting of the top squad. From among the combatants, the prince appointed posadniks- governors in cities, governor- leaders of various military units, thousandth- senior officials (in the so-called decimal system of the military-administrative division of society, dating back to the pre-state period), tributaries- land tax collectors swordsmen, virnikov, emtsev, access- court officials Mytnikov- collectors of trade duties, biriches, metelnikov- minor officials. The rulers of the princely patrimonial economy also stand out from the squad - tiunas(since the 12th century they have been included in the system of state administration).
The title of Grand Duke was inherited by the Rurik family, but according to the East Slavic tradition, power was transferred not only to direct heirs, but also to members of the family. This left an imprint on the features of the political system. The Kiev principality was not a hereditary patrimony of the princely family (as a dynastic inheritance). Hence the claims of the Grand Dukes to the possession of all Russian territories. So gradually the Grand Duke became the supreme owner of the entire Russian land. This influenced the nature of power, which initially acquires a despotic character, despite the presence of elements of democracy. The role of the veche is gradually being lost. In the X - X centuries. There is a process of strengthening the central government. So, the introduction by Princess Olga in 946 of "lessons", a fixed tribute, meant the abolition of polyudy and its replacement with a centralized tax (lesson-rent). Prince Vladimir (980-1015) abolished the former federal structure, his numerous sons began to rule separate principalities. The constituent parts of the state were no longer tribal unions, but volosts. If in Western Europe the basis for the development of feudal relations was private ownership of land, then in Russia it was state property. The hierarchical relationship between a suzerain (senior) and a vassal (dependent) is built horizontally, not vertically. It is no coincidence that the state of Kievan Rus was not strong enough; Initially, there was a contradiction between the desire of individual families of Rurikovich to establish a strong monarchical power and the inability of large landowners to resist these aspirations. The emergence of feudal relations in Russia did not lead to a dialogue between centers of power: seigneurs, churches and cities, as was the case in Western Europe, did not create a balance of opposing social forces, was not a prerequisite for limiting the power of princes and the formation of a civil society in which power is under public control. . The nature of the connections between the princes and the boyars, as well as between the princes and the church, was more of a personal nature. At the same time, the rights of the vassal were not secured by anything. This also determined the psychology of the Russian boyars: the lack of guaranteed rights gave rise to the same feeling of inferiority among the service nobility that was characteristic of all service people. Under these conditions, the princes were the only real political force in the country. It was among them that individualism, characteristic of European culture, developed. But in the absence of opposing forces to balance this individualism, it turned into self-will, more characteristic of Eastern despots.
The formation of feudal relations was accompanied by the formation of a legal system. The Code of Laws of Ancient Russia, called " Pravda Russian» , was originally spoken orally. Some of its norms were included in the agreements between Russia and Byzantium in 911 and 944. In the first half of the 11th century, during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, two legislative codes were approved - the Ancient Truth, or Truth of Yaroslav, and the Truth of the Yaroslavichs, which together constituted the so-called Short Edition of Russian Truth. At the beginning of the XII century. on the initiative of Vladimir Monomakh, a lengthy edition of Russkaya Pravda is being created. In addition to the norms dating back to the era of Yaroslav the Wise, it included the "Charter" of Vladimir Monomakh, which consolidated new forms of social relations associated with the emergence of boyar land ownership, the population personally dependent on the feudal lords, etc. Its analysis allows historians to talk about the existing system of state administration and about ancient Russian society.
The privileged part of the society were the senior combatants of the prince - the boyars. They were considered free servants and served the prince under an agreement for the right to collect tribute from a certain territory and for part of the military booty. Land grants and the conduct of an independent economy in the boyar estates - estates began to emerge in the 11th century, but did not receive significant distribution, similar to the fief system in the countries of Western Europe. This is due to the frequent movements of combatants during their service from one principality to another, tk. the boyar had the right at any time to go to the service of another prince from the Rurik dynasty, breaking the service contract unilaterally.
The semi-free categories of the population included purchases- debtors who borrowed money, grain, livestock, etc. from a prince or boyar (kupa); Ryadovichi- community members who concluded an agreement with the prince, boyar (row); hirelings- employed. Their dependence was temporary, limited by the period of fulfillment of the contract or repayment of the debt. At this time, their legal capacity was limited - they could not arbitrarily leave the creditor, testify in court, were subjected to corporal punishment, and in case of non-return of the debt, they became slaves (serfs).
The free population consisted of serfs, their life, as is clear from Russkaya Pravda, was equated with a thing. Sources servility were: sale for debts, voluntary sale of oneself into slavery, marriage to a serf, captivity, birth in a family of serfs, sale into servitude for especially dangerous crimes. social status serf could be quite high if he held a position in the princely administration. Main part serfs used as a servant.
Basically, "Russian Truth" determined the relationship between the Old Russian community ( rope) and princely (boyar) economy. Many authors believed that the main peasant population of the country were the smerds mentioned more than once in the sources. However, Russkaya Pravda, speaking of community members, constantly uses the term " people"("people"), not " stinks". To date, there are many rather contradictory hypotheses about the social essence smerdov, their legal and social status, their economic status and other characteristics. But most researchers acknowledge
firstly, close connection smerdov with the prince, dependence on him, Secondly,
consider smerdov limited, albeit fairly broad, public
group. Probably, stinks were not free or semi-free princely tributaries, sitting on the ground and bearing duties in favor of the prince. For the kill people was subject to a fine of 40 hryvnia, for the murder of stink- only 5. Smerd had no right to leave his property to indirect heirs. In the absence of such, it was transferred to the prince.
Kievan Rus was the largest state in Eastern Europe. In the ninth century its most dangerous adversary was the Khazar Khaganate. The dependence of some East Slavic unions of tribal principalities on Khazaria was eliminated only by the middle of the 10th century. But already in 964-965. Prince Svyatoslav dealt a decisive blow to the Khazar Khaganate, after which it ceased to exist. An important direction of Russian foreign policy was relations with the Byzantine Empire - the most powerful state in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Periods of peace, during which trade relations flourished, were replaced by military conflicts, but the spiritual influence of Byzantium grew. Princess Olga maintained peaceful relations with Byzantium. In 946 or 957 (this question is debatable) she made a diplomatic visit to Constantinople and converted to Christianity.
Under Vladimir, relations with Byzantium entered a new stage. Prince Vladimir (980-1015) tried to establish the pagan religion as a state ideology, choosing the six most popular, respected Slavic gods as national ones, but the pagan gods were, first of all, local deities and it was not always possible to plant their cult in other tribal lands . Such spiritual guidelines were needed that would consolidate society, not exalt the gods of some lands to the detriment of others. In addition, belief in local gods did nothing to strengthen the power of the great Kievan prince. This forced Vladimir to continue his search for a religion that would meet the new needs of ancient Russian society. Pagan beliefs did not enjoy authority in the countries closest to Russia: Christian Byzantium, Jewish Khazaria, Bulgar converted to Islam. In order to have equal relations with them, it was necessary to choose one of the great world religions as the state religion of Kievan Rus. In other words, there was a situation of choosing a civilizational alternative, because faith, as the spiritual basis of the unity of society, determines the general direction of the development of culture, the features of the political and economic system in a particular country.
The reign of Vladimir the Holy is connected with the replacement of tribal princes by their sons, who were called to defend the new faith and strengthen the power of the Kyiv prince in the field. Thus, he turned the Russian land into the possession of the Rurik family. The strengthening of power gave him the opportunity to organize the population of the whole country to create powerful defensive lines on the southern borders and resettle here part of the Slovenes, Krivichi, Chud and Vyatichi. The Grand Duke himself, as epics testify, began to be perceived by the people's consciousness no longer as a warrior-defender, but as the head of state, organizing the protection of his borders.
The heyday of the Old Russian state is associated with the activities of Yaroslav the Wise (1019-1054). In 1036, Yaroslav became the sovereign prince of Kievan Rus, and Kyiv became one of the largest cities in Europe, competing with Constantinople. Yaroslav the Wise for the first time succeeded in appointing Hilarion, Russian by birth, as Metropolitan of Kyiv. The largest royal courts of Europe sought to intermarry with the family of the Kievan prince.
Under him, foreign policy became more active. Yaroslav made a number of military campaigns to neighboring lands: in 1030 - against the Baltic "chud" and built the city of Yuryev (Yuri is the Orthodox name of Yaroslav) to the west of Lake Peipus, founded Yaroslavl on the Upper Volga; in 1037, Yaroslav inflicted a final defeat on the Pechenegs, who, as a result, were forced to leave the Black Sea steppes further to the southwest and ceased to pose a danger to Russia. These lands were gradually settled by the Kipchaks, whom the Russians called the Polovtsians for their unusual hair color for the Turks, similar to the color of fresh straw - chaff. In an effort to create a strong defense of Russia against the steppe nomads, Yaroslav advanced the Russian borders down the right bank of the Dnieper, where he created a new defensive line along the Ros river on the borders of the "Great Steppe". He was called like the rulers of the "Holy Roman Empire" Caesar (Caesar), in the ancient Slavic pronunciation - the king. Above the sarcophagus of Yaroslav on the wall of St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv, you can read the inscription, made in the 11th century: "The Assumption of Our Tsar." The symbolism of this title is significant: in his piety, Yaroslav was compared with the biblical kings, in the fullness of power - with the Byzantine Caesars.
Yaroslav, before his death, divided his possessions between several heirs, bequeathing them to "live in peace and love" and "obey" his elder brother Izyaslav in everything and not quarrel. Anticipating future political upheavals, he himself divided the land between his sons, instructing them to live in harmony and obey the eldest in the family of the new Kyiv prince Izyaslav Svyatoslavich. The next most important city of Chernigov went to Svyatoslav, in Pereyaslavl Vsevolod began to reign, in Smolensk - Vyacheslav, in Vladimir Volynsky - Igor. By this decision, the division of the Old Russian state into separate principalities, which had practically already begun in the 11th century, was finally fixed.
The last Kyiv prince who managed to stop the collapse of the Old Russian state was Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125). After the death of the prince and the death of his son Mstislav the Great (1125-1132), the fragmentation of Russia became a fait accompli. In the X-XII centuries. early medieval states in Western and Central Europe are disintegrating. By the middle of the 12th century, that is, within the framework of this pan-European process, Russia also entered a period of fragmentation.
test questions
1. What role did the Great Migration of Nations play in the formation of early medieval states? When and in what directions did the settlement of the Slavs take place?
2. Specify the general and special in the genesis of feudalism in Europe and in Russia.
3. When and how was the state of Rus formed? What role did the Vikings play in this?
4. Name the first Russian princes. What are they famous for?
5. What was the social structure of Kievan Rus, its evolution?
6. How did the state administration apparatus develop in Russia?
Literature
1. History of Russia (Russia in world civilization): Course of lectures / Comp. and resp. ed. A. A. Radugin. Moscow: Center. – 2001.
2. History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the twentieth century Proc. allowance for university students. M .: "Drofa". – 2001.
3. History of Russia from ancient times to the present day / Ed. A.N. Sakharov. M. - 2012.
4.Polyakov, A.N. Ancient Russian civilization: the foundations of the political system // Questions of history. 2007. No. 3. S. 50–695.
5. Sapozhnikova N.D., Konopleva L.A. Domestic history (IX - XXI centuries): Proc. allowance. Yekaterinburg: Publishing House of the Russian State Prof. Pedagogical University. - 2002.
6. Solovyov S. M. Works. In 18 books. Book. 1. [Text] M.: "Thought". – 1988.
Particular attention in the study of the Old Russian state should be paid 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. The supreme power belonged to the Grand Duke, who was the bearer of legislative, executive and judicial power. Under the prince there was a Council, consisting of the oldest squad (military nobility), the most influential palace servants and the highest clergy.
In necessary cases, feudal congresses were convened, which brought together princes and large feudal lords. The council under the prince and the feudal congresses did not have a strictly defined competence.
The veche was also preserved - the people's assembly, which met as needed and decided the most important issues: war and peace, removal of the prince, etc.). Over time, it has lost its meaning.
The central organs of state administration were built on the basis of the palace and patrimonial system, in which the administration of the state was carried out on the basis of the administration of the princely court. In the hands of the prince's servants (butler, stable, etc.), the functions of managing any branch of the palace economy and a similar sphere in public administration were combined.
Local government was carried out by posadniks and volosts sent from the center, acting on the basis of a feeding system, i.e. their maintenance was undertaken by the population of the administered 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 with their squads. In the event of a serious military danger, the people's militia gathered.
The Old Russian state did not have special judicial bodies. Judicial functions were carried out by state and local authorities. However, there were special officials who assisted in the administration of justice. Among them are, for example, virniks who collected criminal fines for murder. Virnikov, when they were on duty, was 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 were 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, the “best”, “oldest” men, boyars, firemen, who owned land property in the form of estates (hereditary property).
The origin of the privileged estates: from 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 relations with lords, regulated by feudal treaties and special, immunity letters. The nobility received at the disposal of certain territories with the right to exercise judgment on them and collect tribute without the participation of the prince. Gradually, these territories (by the 11th-12th centuries) become the property of their owners.
After the adoption of Christianity, which played an important role in the formation of ancient Russian statehood, the privileged estates were replenished with the clergy. The church is gradually turning into a large landowner.
The feudal lords were exempted from paying taxes and taxes, had the exclusive right to own 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, had the necessary tools. The vast majority of the population of Ancient Russia lived in a community (urban or rural). A territorial or neighboring community - a 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 vir). During the period under review (9th-12th centuries), part of the smerds remained free (paying tribute, performing duties), but some of them already became dependent on the feudal lords (paying dues and performing corvée).
Purchases made up another group of dependent people. These are people who, due to financial difficulties, borrowed some property (kupa). The dacha of the kupa was drawn up by an agreement in the presence of witnesses. Until the return of the debt, the purchase was dependent on the owner and carried certain duties in his favor.
Particular attention must be paid to slavery and the institution of servitude. The main source of slavery was captivity. However, due to climatic conditions and other factors (a relatively high level of development of production, other conditions for the formation of statehood, etc.), slavery did not spread in Russia and was of a limited, patriarchal nature. Initially, the source of servility was also captured. Later, servile dependence begins to be regulated by the Russian Truth, which provided for the following cases of turning into serfs:
1) non-return of borrowed money;
2) as a measure of punishment;
3) registration of entry into the service of the feudal lord as a key tyun in an improper way (without witnesses);
4) self-sale into slaves;
5) entry of a free man into marriage with a serf.
The serf was deprived of all rights, he was not a subject of law, the owner was responsible for him. Serfdom was of two types - free (eternal) and temporary. Outcasts had a special status - a personally free category of the population, but defenseless before society and the state: blood feuds did not extend to outcasts, they were forbidden to assist in the payment of fines.
The urban population consisted of artisans and merchants. They could unite in 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, customary law was in force, based on the customs of the pre-state period and still retaining their features (sacred nature, blood feud, etc.) and princely legislation that appeared quite early. The most complete expression of the latter was Russkaya Pravda. This legislative monument is the result of the law-making activity 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 Pravda were: customary law, the legislation of princes, judicial practice, Byzantine canon law.
Russkaya Pravda is a multifaceted legislative document built according to a casual system, which contained norms regulating various aspects of the social life of ancient Russian society. Russian Truth was divided into three editions: Short, Long and Abbreviated. More than a hundred lists of Russian Truth have come down to us.
It regulated civil law relations (a system of contracts, inheritance law, etc.), considered acts of a criminal law nature, and regulated procedural relations. Crime was understood as “insult”, i.e. causing physical, property or moral harm. The basis of the process was three stages: “call out” (announcement of a crime committed on the trading floor), “chase the trace” (search for a criminal or a missing thing) and “arch” (an analogue of a modern confrontation). In the process of proving, the following were used: “red-handed” (evidence), testimony of witnesses (“vidoks” and “rumors”), “company” (oath), ordeals, etc.
The punishment system was built on the principle of a talion and included: blood feud (subsequently prohibited), a fine (vira, half-vira, double, wild or general and a lesson), “stream and plunder” (there is still a controversy about the essence of this type punishment The most common point of view is the confiscation of property and the expulsion of the offender from the community.
Russkaya Pravda and other sources of ancient Russian law quite clearly distinguish between two main parts of civil law - the right to property and the law of obligations. The right of ownership arises with the establishment of feudalism and feudal ownership of land. Feudal property is formalized in the form of a princely domain (land property belonging to a given princely family), a boyar or monastic estate. In the Brief Edition of Russian Pravda, the inviolability of feudal land ownership is fixed. In addition to ownership of land, it also speaks of the ownership of other things - horses, draft animals, serfs, etc.
Russian Truth knows obligations from contracts and obligations from causing harm. Moreover, the latter merge with the concept of crime and are called resentment.
Old Russian law of obligations is characterized by foreclosure not only on property, but also on the person of the debtor, and sometimes even on his wife and children. The main types of contracts were contracts of exchange, sale, loan, luggage, personal hiring. Agreements were concluded orally, but in the presence of witnesses - rumors. The purchase and sale of land apparently required a written form. When selling a stolen item, the transaction was considered invalid, and the buyer had the right to demand damages.
The loan agreement is most fully regulated in Russian Pravda. In 1113, there was an uprising of the lower classes of Kyiv against usurers, and Vladimir Monomakh, called by the boyars to save the situation, took measures to streamline the collection of interest on debts. The law in the form of an object of a loan names not only money, but also bread, honey. There are three types of loans: an ordinary (household) loan, a loan made between merchants (with simplified formalities), and a loan with self-mortgage - purchasing. There are different types of interest depending on the term of the loan. Interest collection period is limited to two years. If the debtor paid interest within three years, then he had the right not to return the amount owed to the creditor. The short-term loan entailed the highest interest rate.
Marriage and family legislation developed in Ancient Russia in accordance with canonical rules. Initially, there were customs associated with a pagan cult. One of the forms of individual marriage in the pagan era was the kidnapping of the bride (including imaginary), the other was the purchase. Polygamy was quite widespread. With the introduction of Christianity, new principles of family law are established - monogamy, the difficulty of divorce, the 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 from the church. Members of such a family, primarily the wife, enjoy her full patronage. Marriage was necessarily preceded by betrothal, which was considered indissoluble
In addition to the Russian Truth, public relations in the Old Russian state were regulated by a number of regulatory documents. These are, first of all, princely statutes and statutory charters. Charters fixed for a long time the relationship 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 the norms of family and marriage law, sexual crimes and crimes against the Church).
Treaties between Russia and Byzantium in 907, 911, 944 and 971 constituted a separate category of legal documents. These are the first written contracts that have come down to our time. They regulated trade relations between Russian merchants and Byzantium, determined the procedure for resolving civil legal disputes, the procedure for prosecuting the guilty and the types of punishments for criminal offenses.
test questions
1. List the prerequisites for the formation of the 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 pass the slaveholding phase of development? What factors contributed to this?
4. Why did two centers of Slavic statehood actually develop with different forms of government: the early feudal monarchy in Kyiv and the feudal republic in Novgorod?
5. Features of the organization of state power in the Old Russian state.
6. What is the palace and patrimonial management system?
7. How was local government carried out in Kievan Rus?
8. The social structure of the Old Russian state and its features.
9. The main features of the institution of servility in Ancient Russia.
10. List the main sources of ancient Russian law. What is the meaning of Russian Truth?
11. Legal regulation of procedural relations in Kievan Rus.
12. Describe the criminal law according to Russian Truth.
13. What are the features of the legal regulation of marriage, family and inheritance relations in Russia in the X-XII centuries?
14. How did the Eastern Slavs live in the 7th-8th centuries. (settlement, nature of economic activity, beliefs, tribal organization, social stratification, tribal associations, relationships with neighboring peoples)?
15. Why did the Eastern Slavs pass 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 were the reasons for the emergence of statehood among the Eastern Slavs?
17. What role did the baptism of Russia 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 chronicle information? What is the scientific inconsistency of this theory?
19. How 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 the state system of Kievan Rus consist of? What is the palace and patrimonial system of government?
21. What are the reasons for the loss of state unity by Russia? Can the collapse of the Old Russian state and the ensuing political disunity of the Russian lands be considered a natural 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 legal provisions of Russian Truth?
25. What did the system of crimes and punishments look like in Russkaya Pravda?
26. What features did the trial in the Old Russian state have? What types of evidence did Russkaya Pravda provide for?
Literature
1. Reader on the history of the state and law of the USSR. - M., 1990.
2. Russian legislation of the X-XX centuries. / ed. O.I. Chistyakov. 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 the state and law of Russia: textbook. allowance. - M., 2004.
5. History of the state and law of Russia / ed. Yu.P. Titov. - M., 2004.
6. History of the domestic state and law / ed. O.I. Chistyakov. - M., 2004.
7. Kudinov O.A. History of domestic state and law. - M., 2005.
8. Rogov V.A. History of the 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 number 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 (emergence of the state as a result of violence);
4) Asian (geographical conditions, the creation of irrigation facilities, the creation of a superstructure for construction management - the state apparatus).
In your opinion, which of the forms is acceptable for explaining the emergence of the state in Kievan Rus? Is it possible, using the example of the formation of Kievan Rus, to speak of any one form of the emergence of the state among the ancient Slavs?
Task number 2
During the reign of Prince Yaroslav the Wise, two criminal cases took place. The essence of the first was that, protecting his family and property, boyar K. killed a thief who entered the house. In the second case, during a fight between two smerds, one killed the other.
Explain what should be guided by, and what decisions the princely court should make in these cases.
Task number 3
The boyar serf 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 escape from his pursuers in the house of his master. 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 serf be the subject of a crime?
Task number 4
Resolve the dispute that arose between two residents of the settlement - the shoemaker A. and the potter V., taking into account the fact that it took place at the beginning of the 12th century. The initiator of the trial was the shoemaker A., who asked to punish the potter V. for beating him in a fight. According to eyewitnesses of the incident, the fight was provoked by the shoemaker A.
What decision will the prince make? Would the fact that the fight was provoked by a potter affect the decision?
Task number 5
During the trial of the murder of the merchant L., the prince, in order to clarify all the circumstances and punish the culprit, combatant 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. The last story seemed to the prince the most convincing.
Could the prince be guided in making a decision by the testimony of a person who did not see the actual event of the crime, given that the crime took place in 1097?
Task number 6
Resolve the situation that arose at the beginning of the XII century. During the bargaining at the bazaar, a quarrel arose between the Varangian merchant and the princely combatant V., which escalated into a fight. A Varangian merchant was injured in the fight: he was beaten, his goods were partially destroyed. He demanded that the prince condemn the guilty combatant.
What decision was made by the princely court? Will the fact that the victim was a foreigner affect the outcome of the case?
Task number 7
During a quarrel, smerd K. killed the boyar serf 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 at that time? How would the decision change if it was not a serf who was killed, but a smerd?
Task number 8
At the princely court, a case was heard about the theft of goods from merchant R. by merchant I. The testimonies of the victim and the accused were confused. It was not clear what kind of goods were stolen, where this goods were stored, why the suspicions fell on the merchant I. Both parties swore on the Bible, promising to tell the truth. However, the situation has not been clarified. The prince postponed the decision of this case for the next day, so that the parties could bring more solid evidence of their positions.
What evidence could be used in the trial of the 11th-12th centuries if a similar situation took place in Kievan Rus?
Tests
1. The reasons for the formation of the Old Russian state are:
a) increase in labor productivity, geographical location and climatic conditions, ethnic and religious community of Slavic tribes;
b) the conquest by the Slavic tribes of other peoples inhabiting the territory of the future Old Russian state;
c) the conclusion of an agreement on the creation of the 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 were invited as a ruler - the Varangian prince with his retinue;
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 under 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 governments consisted of:
a) in the receipt by the governors of salaries from the princely treasury;
b) in leaving the governors to themselves part of the duties and tribute collected for the prince;
c) the need for the governors to engage in handicrafts or to cultivate the land for the maintenance of themselves and their apparatus.
7. Feudal lords in Kievan Rus were represented by:
a) princes, "best", "oldest" men, boyars, firemen, church;
b) princes, boyars and the church;
c) "best" and "oldest" husbands, firemen.
8. Slaves in Ancient Russia had the status:
b) serfs;
c) free people.
9. Smerdy is:
a) the entire free population of Kievan Rus;
b) free peasants;
c) urban population engaged in petty trade and handicrafts.
10. The sources of Russian Truth were:
a) customary law, the legislation of princes, judicial practice, Byzantine canon law;
b) customary law and religious norms;
c) judicial practice.
11. Russian Truth understood crime as:
a) injury or harm caused to one or more people;
b) a socially dangerous act infringing on the interests protected by the state;
c) property damage caused to a certain person.
12. Criminal liability in Russian Pravda is represented by:
a) mainly property punishments;
b) self-harmful punishments and the death penalty;
c) imprisonment and hard labor.
13. Litigation on Russian Pravda:
a) was of an accusatory and adversarial nature;
b) was wanted;
c) was competitive.
14. The stages of the trial under Russkaya Pravda were:
a) call, arch, persecution of the trace;
b) to cry out, persecution of the trace, flood and plunder;
c) set and call.
15. Witness testimony according to Russkaya Pravda was:
a) testimony of video records and rumors;
b) testimonies of eyewitnesses of the crime;
c) testimonies of persons who own land allotments, 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 Russkaya Pravda with changes and additions made in certain historical periods.
17. In what century was a single Old Russian state founded on the territory of the Eastern Slavs with a center in Kyiv?
a) In the eleventh century. b) In the ninth century. c) in the tenth century.
18. In what year was the first treaty between the Kievan 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) Abbreviated Truth. b) Brief Truth. c) Extensive Truth.
20. One of the types of punishments in Russian Pravda was golovnichestvo. Headache is:
a) monetary recovery in favor of the family of the murdered
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 husbands" 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) the death penalty.
b) hard labor.
c) life imprisonment.
d) confiscation of property and extradition of the criminal (together with his family) to
23. Which Kyiv prince lowered usurious interest?
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 is before us
did not come?
a) Russian Law
b) Yaroslav's truth.
c) The truth of the Yaroslavichs.
d) Cathedral Code.
25. The most powerless subject according to Russian Truth.
a) a purchase, b) a serf, c) an employee, d) a 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 10th century.
27. Which of the ancient customs is completely preserved by Russkaya Pravda?
a) mutual responsibility.
b) kidnapping of brides.
c) polygamy.
d) blood feud.
28. When was Pravda Yaroslav published?
a) Before 1054 b) In 882 c) In X 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 abolished the death penalty?
a) Alexander Nevsky.
b) Yaroslav and Yaroslavichi.
c) Vladimir I,
31. Name the second edition of Russian Truth .
a) The truth of the Yaroslavichs.
b) Abbreviated Truth.
c) Extensive Truth.
d) The charter of Vladimir Monomakh.
32. What document first defined ecclesiastical jurisdiction?
a) Pilot book.
b) The charter of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich.
c) Yaroslav's charter.
d) Domostroy.
33. Name the oldest monument of Russian law, the text of which
has science?
a) The truth of Yaroslav.
b) Russian law.
c) The charter of Vladimir Monomakh.
d) Oleg's treaty with the Greeks in 911.
Application
In terms of features legal status of the population and its individual strata, there are many disagreements regarding the place and role of various social groups in society and the system of relationships between them, but there are also fairly clear positions. So, the distinction according to the degree of freedom is obvious: the entire population was divided into free (boyars, representatives of the clergy and merchants, communal farmers, artisans, etc.), dependent (serfs) and semi-dependent (zakupy, ryadovichi) people.
There is no doubt the increasing stratification of society and the separation of the ruling stratum, which is grouped mainly within the framework of the princely squads. There are differences in the question of the evolution of its composition. If some emphasize the ethnically non-Slavic (as a rule, Scandinavian) origins of the retinue layer, which is only gradually replenished by representatives of the Slavic tribal elite (I. D. Belyaev), then others see the process of formation of the nobility as the result of the internal decomposition of Slavic collectives, with an insignificant share of a foreign element (S V. Yushkov).
An analysis of the composition of this already fully formed stratum of the elite is to some extent hampered by the insufficient completeness of the decay processes and the certain complexity of distinguishing between the ruling stratum and the rest of the population. First of all, this boyars and princely men- companions. The privileged status of this group consisted in the right to participate in meetings with the princes, to receive various government positions from them, as a rule, with the transfer of certain territories or part of the tribute received by the prince, to be present at princely feasts, to provide weapons, etc. In legal terms, this was expressed in increased (usually double) criminal liability for the murder of representatives of this group (Article 1 of the Long Pravda) and a special procedure for inheriting land (Article 91 of the Long Pravda).
From the end of the X century. another privileged group begins to form - clergy. The policy of supporting the Church by the state and the gradual strengthening of her position in Russia created the basis for the concentration in her hands of very significant wealth and the opportunity to participate in political activities. This was especially evident in the Novgorod land, where the archbishop ("Vladyka") actually managed the city treasury and often acted as a kind of arbitrator.
There were also significant privileges merchants. Initially, these were people from the retinue circle, engaged in both war and trade, from the middle of the 11th century. the merchant class was gradually replenished with people from other strata - artisans, free community members and even serfs, finally turning into an independent professional and social group. Although its unity was very conditional. On the one hand, the most privileged part of it clearly stood out - guests - merchants trading with foreign countries, on the other - a significant mass of small traders operating in the local market.
If there were more or less clear ideas about the elite of ancient Russian society, then the situation is completely different with the unprivileged strata of the population. Disagreements exist literally on all positions: the sources of formation, the degree of freedom and dependence, the system of internal and external relations, the place and role in the social structure, relations with the state, the standard of living - all these issues are treated very ambiguously in historical literature.
Perhaps the most mysterious figure of Ancient Russia is stink. Some see in the smerds that make up the majority of the rural population free farmers-communities, whose duties in relation to the prince (state) were limited only to paying taxes and performing duties in favor of the state (S. A. Pokrovsky), others, on the contrary, consider them as dependent people , the oppressed (L. V. Cherepnin). I. Ya. Froyanov generally considered them to be a relatively small group of former captives, state slaves, planted on the ground. Along with these "internal" smerds, he also singles out a group of "external" ones: subjugated tribes who paid tribute.
The reasons for the discrepancies are largely related to the obvious duality of the smerd's status. In the event of the death of a childless smerd, his inheritance ("ass", "status") passed to the prince. On the one hand, the smerd had obligations under contracts, had the right to participate in the trial, on the other hand, there were signs of legal incompetence: the fine for killing him was equal to the fine for killing a serf (5 hryvnias). Apparently, the difficulty of identifying the status of a smerd is due to the fact that while maintaining a single name for this social group for quite a long time, its position was constantly changing. Perhaps, initially it was a communal farmer, then a state tributary.
The category is somewhat better defined in Russkaya Pravda. purchase, to which, in the Extended Edition, a whole section is allocated - the Charter on Procurement. Purchase - a person who has taken a kupa - a loan (land, livestock, grain, money, etc.) and is obliged to work it out. Since interest on the loan increased - cuts, the duration of working off could constantly increase. The absence of firm standards for working off caused constant conflicts that required the settlement of relations between debtors and creditors, as a result of which the limits on debt cuts were set.
The person and property of the purchaser were protected by law, the master was forbidden to punish him for no reason and take away his property. At the same time, in the case of an offense committed by the purchase itself, the responsibility turned out to be joint and several: the victim received a fine from his master, but the purchase could be turned into a complete serf - a slave ("issued by the head"). In the same way, for leaving the master without paying, the purchase became a serf. As a witness in a trial, the procurement could act only in special cases: in minor cases ("in small claims") or in the absence of other witnesses ("on need").
Another not entirely clear figure of Russian Pravda are ryadovichi. Most modern historians believe that the Ryadovichi in Kievan Rus are people who were dependent on the master according to the "row" (contract) and close in their position to purchases. So, the fine for killing him was equal to the fine for killing a smerd. On the contrary, L. V. Cherepnin believed that in Russia there was no special category of ryadoviches, putting forward the hypothesis that this term in Russian Pravda was used to refer to ordinary smerds and serfs.
Apparently, both the purchasers and the Ryadovichi differed not so much in their position as in the way they acquired their status and can be classified as semi-slaves - a kind of temporary serfs. Unlike complete slaves, they retained the right to return their freedom if they fulfilled their obligations.
But, perhaps, there is no more controversial category of the population in the entire social structure of early medieval Russia than serfs- people whose right to own the masters was not limited in any way. Secular law did not interfere at all in the relationship of the master to the serf, it only held the masters liable for the damage caused to their serfs by third parties. The life of servants was protected by law not as an independent value, but only as property belonging to any owner. The serfs were not personally responsible: "their prince does not execute them by selling." Kholop did not have his own property and at any time he could be sold or given to any person. For all the consequences arising from the contracts and obligations concluded with the consent of the owner by the serf, the responsibility was borne by the master. The law practically did not protect the life of a serf. True, for his murder by third parties a fine of 5 hryvnia was imposed, but this is not so much a punishment as compensation for the loss of property (another form of compensation could be the transfer of another slave to the master). In certain cases, a serf can generally be killed without bearing any responsibility for it. The serf who committed the crime himself should have been handed over to the victim (in an earlier period he could simply be killed at the scene of the crime). Penalties against the actions of a serf also applied to the master. Kholop could not appear in court as any of the parties. The testimony of a serf as a witness was insignificant: in the absence of other evidence, a free person could refer to his testimony, but with the obligatory clause about "the words of a serf." In other words, from a formal point of view, a serf is a slave of Russian medieval society.
However, a feature of the position of a serf was often the discrepancy between his legal status and practice (as, indeed, in Russian law as a whole). In fact, even if by the good will of the masters, serfs could possess not only movable property, but even households, had their own farms, passed property by inheritance, etc.
But the main distinguishing feature of ancient Russian servility was not so much its legal status as the practical use of this provision. The labor of serfs was used not so much in the production process as in everyday life, therefore a more accurate definition of a serf is servant. Although, undoubtedly, among the serfs we meet plowed and courtyard people, the bulk were the servants of the prince or boyar, who were part of his personal servants and squad. It was from their midst that the princely administration was formed (for example, tiuns, keykeepers, firemen) and even prominent representatives of the elite came out.
The law strictly regulated the sources of internal servility: self-sale into slavery (of a person, family), birth from parents, one of whom is a serf, marriage to a robe, tyunism (keykeeper) - entering the service as a household manager to a master without a row (an agreement on maintaining the status free man). The commission of a crime, the flight of a purchase from the master, the loss or loss of another's property by the merchant could also become a source of servility. At the same time, a number of researchers believe that the main source of servility was external - war, captivity, although it is absent in Russkaya Pravda (the rationale for this is seen in the fact that Russkaya Pravda regulates only internal processes).
A relatively small group, but very significant in the structure of social relations, consisted of artisans. In social terms, they were very heterogeneous: firstly, free communal artisans living in the countryside, secondly, free urban craftsmen and, thirdly, serf artisans.
The former focused on meeting economic needs, the latter - on household and, possibly, military needs. A number of historians believe that already in the pre-Mongolian period, handicraft associations arose similar to the guild organizations of Western European cities (M.N. Tikhomirov), but there is no direct information about this in the sources, and indirect information is very scarce and contradictory.
Thus, the social structure of Ancient Russia is a complex interweaving of relations of the most diverse levels - professional, social, related, etc., often amorphous, fuzzy, contradictory, characteristic of the transitional era.
- So, for the murder of the most noble people, a double vir is set - 80 hryvnia, for the bulk of the free - 40. There were categories of people for whose murder a fine was paid in an even smaller amount - 12.5 hryvnia.
- Unlike ordinary members of the community, in the event of whose death, in the absence of sons, the inheritance passed to the prince, the daughters of the boyars had the right to the inheritance. However, such a right belonged to all free people, except for smerds.
- It was expressed, in particular, in the granting of judicial immunity (the right of the monasteries to investigate and judge for certain crimes committed on its territory) with the corresponding receipt of court fees, the release of monks from all types of nationwide taxes, etc.
- According to A. E. Presnyakov, "the question of ancient Russian smerds is apparently destined to remain extremely controversial - for a long time, perhaps forever" (Presnyakov A.E. Princely law in ancient Russia: lectures on Russian history. Kievan Rus. M., 1993. S. 241).
- "Russian Pravda by smerd ... means an unprivileged simple free ... commoner ... Smerd ... as an ordinary citizen is everywhere exposed by Russian Pravda as a free person, unlimited in his legal capacity, he forms the bulk of the free population of Ancient Russia" (Pokrovsky S. A. The social structure of the Old Russian State // Proceedings of the All-Union Legal Correspondence Institute. T. XIV. M., 1970. S. 61, 64).
- By the beginning of the 11th century, the term "smerd" (in the sense of a peasant exploited on state land) began to be used along with the term "man", people (in the sense of free communal peasants)" ( Cherepnin L.V. From the history of the formation of the class of the feudal-dependent peasantry in Russia // Historical Notes. T. 56. M., 1956. S. 248).
- The word "serf" Russian Pravda refers only to a man, an unfree woman is called a "robe". The collective name for both is "servants" (chad).
- The Church, whose representatives interfered in the personal relations of the masters with the serfs, had a serious influence on the mitigation of the position of the serfs. The Church not only portrayed the Christian ideal of the serf-owner, but also established ecclesiastical punishment for the murder of their own slaves and for their cruel treatment, protested against the sale of serfs into the hands of the filthy, against the trade in slaves in general ("fore-salvation of souls"), and itself contributed to the liberation of serfs, especially in form of absolution "to your liking." The liberated serfs ceased all relations with the old masters and, under the name of outcasts, along with others who had lost their means of subsistence, became under the protection of the church.
A law cannot be a law if there is no strong one behind it.
Mahatma Gandhi
The entire population of Ancient Russia can be divided into free and dependent. The first category included nobles and ordinary people who did not have debts, were engaged in crafts and were not burdened with restrictions. With dependent (involuntary) categories, everything is more complicated. In general, these were people who were deprived of certain rights, but the entire composition of unwilling people in Russia was different.
The entire dependent population of Russia can be divided into 2 classes: completely deprived of rights and retained partial rights.
- serfs- slaves who fell into this position due to debts or by decision of the community.
- Servants- slaves, who were acquired at auction, were taken prisoner. They were slaves in the classical sense of the word.
- Smerdy people born into addiction.
- Ryadovichi- people who were hired under a contract (a number).
- Procurement- Worked out a certain amount (loan or kupa), which they owed, but could not pay back.
- Tiunes- Managers of the princely estates.
Russian truth also divided the population into categories. In it you can find the following categories of the dependent population of Russia in the 11th century.
It is important to note that the categories of the personally dependent population in the era of Ancient Russia were serfs, serfs and servants. They also had complete dependence on the prince (owner).
Completely dependent (whitewashed) segments of the population
The main part of the population in Ancient Russia belonged to the category of completely dependent. These were serfs and servants. In fact, these were people who, according to their social status, were slaves. But here it is important to note that the concept of "slave" in Russia and in Western Europe was very different. If in Europe slaves did not have rights, and everyone recognized this, then in Russia serfs and servants did not have rights, but the church condemned any elements of violence against them. Therefore, the position of the church was important for this category of the population and provided relatively comfortable living conditions for them.
Despite the position of the church, completely dependent categories of the population were deprived of all rights. This demonstrates well Russian Truth. This document in one of the articles provided for payment in the event of the murder of a person. So, for a free citizen, the fee was 40 hryvnias, and for a dependent - 5.
serfs
Kholops - so in Russia they called people who served others. It was the most massive stratum of the population. People who fell into complete addiction were also called " whitewashed serfs».
People became serfs as a result of ruin, misdemeanors, decisions of the patrimony. They could also become free people who, for certain reasons, have lost part of their freedom. Some volunteered to become slaves. This is due to the fact that a part (small of course) of this category of the population was actually “privileged”. Among the serfs were people from the personal service of the prince, housekeepers, firemen and others. They were quoted in society even higher than free people.
Servants
The servants are people who have lost their freedom not as a result of debts. These were prisoners of war, thieves condemned by the community, and so on. As a rule, these people did the dirtiest and hardest work. It was a minor layer.
Differences between servants and servants
How did servants differ from serfs? It is as difficult to answer this question as it is today to tell how a social accountant differs from a cashier ... But if you try to characterize the differences, then the servants consisted of people who became addicted as a result of their misconduct. Slaves could become voluntarily. If it is even simpler: the servants served, the servants performed. They were united by the fact that they were completely deprived of their rights.
Partially dependent population
Partially dependent categories of the population included those people and groups of people who had lost only part of their freedom. They were not serfs or servants. Yes, they depended on the "owner", but they could run a personal household, trade and other things.
Procurement
Purchases - ruined people. They were given to work for a certain kupa (loan). In most cases, these were people who borrowed money and could not repay the debt. Then the person became a "purchase". He became economically dependent on his master, but after he fully repaid the debt, he again became free. This category of people could be deprived of all rights only if the law was violated and after the decision of the community. The most common reason why Zakupy became serfs was the theft of the master's property.
Ryadovichi
Ryadovichi - were hired to work under an agreement (row). These people were deprived of personal freedom, but at the same time they retained the right to conduct a personal subsidiary plot. As a rule, a row was concluded with the land user and it was concluded by people who went bankrupt, or were unable to lead a free lifestyle. For example, often the rows were for 5 years. Ryadovich was obliged to work on the princely land and for this he received food and a place to sleep.
Tiunes
Tiuns are managers, that is, people who managed the household locally and were responsible to the prince for the results. In all estates and villages there was a management system:
- Fire tyun. This is always 1 person - a senior manager. His position in society was very high. If we measure this position by modern standards, then the fiery tiun is the head of a city or village.
- common tiun. He obeyed the fireman, being responsible for a certain element of the economy, for example: productivity, raising animals, collecting honey, hunting, and so on. Each department had its own manager.
Ryadovichi could often get into tiuns, but basically they were completely dependent serfs. In general, this category of the dependent population of Ancient Russia was privileged. They lived in the princely court, had direct contact with the prince, were exempt from taxes, some were allowed to start a personal household.
A feudal society is characterized by the division of the population into estates, i.e. social groups that have rights and obligations defined by law. In Kievan Rus, the process of formation of estates had just begun. The entire population of Kievan Rus can be conditionally divided into three categories: free, semi-dependent and dependent people.
The top of the free people were prince and his retinue . Of these, the prince chose the governor and other officials. At first, the legal status of the squad differed from the Zemstvo elite - well-born, noble, of local origin. But in the XI century, these two groups are combined into one - boyars . The boyars were a privileged part of society. They were exempt from paying taxes.
The free population also included clergy, which was a separate group of the population and was divided into black and white. played a leading role in the state black clergy - monastic. The best scientists (Nestor, Hilarion, Nikon), doctors (Agapit), artists (Alimpiy) lived and worked in the monasteries, who kept chronicles, rewrote books, organized various schools. To white clergy churchmen belonged: priests, deacons, clerks, palamari.
The cities provided the middle group of free people. The inhabitants of the cities were legally free, even equal to the boyars, but in fact they depended on the feudal elite.
The lowest group of the free population was represented by peasants - stinks . They owned land and livestock. Smerdy made up the vast majority of the population of Kievan Rus, paid the established taxes and served military service with personal weapons and horses. Smerd could inherit his property to his sons.
Semi-dependent (semi-free) people. In Kievan Rus there was a fairly large group of semi-free people - purchases. This was the name given to smerds who, for various reasons, temporarily lost their economic independence, but under certain conditions had the opportunity to regain it again. Such a smerd borrowed a “kupa”, which could include money, grain, livestock, and until such time as he returned this “kupa”, he remained a purchase. A zakup could have his own farm, yard, property, or he could live on the land of the one who gave him the “kupa” and work on this land.
Dependent (involuntary) people were called serfs .
To outcasts included people who, for various reasons, left the social group to which they previously belonged, but did not join another. All these people passed under the protection of the church. The bulk of the outcasts in Kievan Rus came from serfs who received freedom.
6. Russian Pravda: origin, lists, editions, pages, general x-ka, knowledge in the development of Russian law.
Origin: RP has been composed for a long time (in the 11th-11th centuries), but some of its articles go back to pagan antiquity. For the first time its text was discovered by V.N. RP has come down to us in more than a hundred lists of the XIV-XVI centuries, which differ greatly from each other in composition, volume, and structure. There is no consensus in the literature about the origin of this legislative monument, as, in fact, about the interpretation of its content. Scientists have been arguing about this for over 250 years, since the time when, in 1738, V.N. Tatishchev discovered and prepared for publication the first list of Russian Pravda.
Sources of codification –
customary law and princely court. practice. Common law includes- provisions on blood feud (Art. 1) and mutual responsibility (Art. 19 KP). The legislator has a different attitude to these customs: he seeks to limit blood feud (narrowing the circle of avengers) or completely cancel it, replacing it with a fine (vira). Mutual responsibility, on the contrary, is preserved by him as a political measure that binds all members of the community with responsibility for their member who committed the crime (“wild vira” was imposed on the entire community).
Norms developed by princely judicial practice, are numerous in Russian Pravda and are sometimes associated with the names of the princes who received them (Yaroslav, the sons of Yaroslav, Vladimir Monomakh).
Certain influence on Russian Pravda rendered Byzantine canon law.
Editions: traditionally preserved numerous versions of Russian Pravda are divided into two main editions, which differ in many respects, and received the names "Short"(6 lists) and "Spacious"(over 100 listings). As a separate edition stands out "Abbreviated"(2 lists), which is an abbreviated version of the "Large Edition".
1) "Brief Truth" consists of the following legal texts:
- "The Truth of Yaroslav", from 1016 or 1036 (Art. 1-18);
- “The Truth of the Yaroslavichs” (Izyaslav, Svyatoslav, Vsevolod), dated 1072 (Art. 18-41);
Pokon virny - determining the order of feeding virniks (princely servants, vira collectors), 1020s or 1030s. (Art. 42);
A lesson for bridgemen (regulated the wages of bridgemen (pavement builders, or, according to some versions, bridge builders), 1020s or 1030s (Article 43).
++"Short Truth" consisted of 43 articles. Its first part, the most ancient, spoke about the preservation of the custom of blood feud, about the lack of a sufficiently clear differentiation in the amount of judicial fines, depending on the social status of the victim. The second part (Art. 18 - Art. 43) reflected the further development of feudal relations: blood feud was abolished, the life and property of feudal lords were protected by increased penalties.
2) Spacious- Lists of "PP" are found in the lists of church laws, in the annals, in articles from the Holy Scriptures of a judicial and legislative nature ("The Measure of the Righteous").
The composition of the "PP": 2 parts - the court of Prince Yaroslav the Wise and the Charter of Vl. Monomakh, which were included in the "Brief Pravda" with later changes and additions to the Charter adopted during the reign of Vladimir Monomakh, after the suppression of the uprising in Kyiv in 1113. "PP" was compiled in the XII century. She was used by spiritual judges in the analysis of secular cases or litigation. It differed significantly from the "Brief Truth". Number of articles - 121. This code reflected further social differentiation, the privileges of feudal lords, the dependent position of serfs, purchases, lack of rights of serfs.
"PP" testified to the process of further development of feudal agriculture, paying much attention to the protection of property rights to land and other property. In connection with the development of commodity-money relations and the need for their legal regulation, "Large Pravda" determined the procedure for concluding a number of contracts, transferring property by inheritance.
3) "Abridged Truth" belongs to a much later period. Historians believe that it developed in the 15th century. in the Moscow state after the annexation of the territory "Great Perm" According to Tikhomirov, it was written exactly there, which was reflected in the cash account.
General x-ka: RP is the most unique monument of Old Russian. rights.
This is the first written code of laws, the RP quite fully covers a very wide area of relations. It is a set of developed feudal law, which reflects the norms of criminal and civil law and process.
RP is an official act. Its very text contains indications of the princes who adopted or changed the law (Yar. Wise, Yaroslavichi, Vl. Monomakh).
RP is a monument of feudal law. It comprehensively defends the interests of the ruling class and frankly proclaims the lack of rights of unfree workers - serfs, servants.
The RP satisfied the needs of the princely courts so well that it was included in legal collections until the 15th century. Lists of PP were actively distributed as early as the 15th - 16th centuries. (only in 1497 was the Judicial Code of Ivan III published, replacing the PP as the main source of law).
Influence The code can be traced in the subsequent monuments of law: the Novgorod Judicial Charter, the Pskov Judicial Charter of 1467, the Moscow Sudebnik of 1497, the Lithuanian Charter of Casimir IV - 1468, the Lithuanian Statute of 1588.
Russian Pravda was widely spread in all the lands of Ancient Russia as the main source of law and became the basis of legal norms until 1497, when the Sudebnik, published in the Moscow centralized state, replaced it.
Russian Pravda reflects the main branches of law.
The social relations that have developed in Russia, the new form of ownership have become an objective prerequisite for the emergence of a new set of laws - Russian Truth. The truth consolidated the existing system of class relations and property relations in the state.
In Russkaya Pravda there are no decrees on determining the methods of acquiring, the volume and procedure for transferring land property rights, with the exception of the estate (yard), but there are punitive decrees on violating the boundaries of land ownership.
The sources do not indicate the existence of the institution of private land ownership. It was not in the era of Russian Truth. The land was the collective property of the community. Forests, hayfields and pastures were in common use. Everything related to the timing and methods of dividing arable land among members of the community, the use of forests, hayfields, waters and pastures, the distribution of taxes and duties among householders, was decided by the world, i.e. general meeting of householders under the leadership of the headman - the elected head of the community. This form of collective ownership is also explained by climatic conditions, especially in the northern regions. It was impossible for a single farm to survive.
Law of Obligations. Civil obligations were allowed only between free persons and arose either from a contract or from a tort (offense). Of the contractual obligations mentioned purchase and sale, loan, hire and luggage. For a legal purchase, it was required to purchase a thing for money from its owner, and to conclude an agreement in the presence of two free witnesses. The Loan Ordinances distinguish between interest-bearing and non-interest-bearing loans. In Russkaya Pravda, a free person who received a loan and pledged to pay it back with his work is called a purchase. It was forbidden for the master to sell the purchase under the threat of the release of the latter from the loan and the payment of a fine by the master. The deposit agreement was made without witnesses, but when a dispute arose during the return of a thing deposited, the keeper cleansed himself with an oath.
Obligations arose as a result of committed crimes, as well as offenses of a civil nature (careless and accidental).
Inheritance, called in Russian Pravda the ass and the remainder, was opened at the time of the death of the father of the family and passed to the heirs either by will or by law. The father had the right to divide his estate among the children and allocate part of it to his wife at his own discretion. The mother could transfer her property to any of the sons whom she recognized as the most worthy.
Inheritance by law was opened when the testator did not leave a will.
The general legal order of inheritance was determined in Russian Pravda by the following rules. After the father, who did not leave a will and did not divide his house during his lifetime, the legitimate children of the deceased inherited, and part of the inheritance went in favor of the church “for the remembrance of the soul of the deceased” and part in favor of the surviving wife, if the husband did not assign her a share of his property during his lifetime . Children born from a robe did not inherit from their father, but received freedom along with their mother. Daughters do not inherit from smerds, they inherit from feudal lords.
Marriage was preceded by betrothal, which received religious consecration in a special rite. The engagement was considered indissoluble. Marriage was concluded through a religious ceremony performed in a church (wedding). The marriage could be terminated (terminated). Russian law of the pagan era allowed polygamy.
Everyone had to pay church tithes.
