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 of the 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, also 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 Truth" 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 (negligent 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.

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 Volyns”. 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 antiquity 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 patrimonial forms of feudalism arise earlier (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 Western Slavs, Volhynians, Croats and the adoption of Christianity is nearing completion.

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 Rurik 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, like 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 voluntarily 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
First of all, 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 gods, 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 classes were replenished with the clergy. The church is gradually turning into a large landowner.

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 character, 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 system of punishments was built on the principle of a talion and included: blood feud (subsequently prohibited), a fine (vira, half-vira, double, wild or wholesale and a lesson), “stream and plunder” (there is still a controversy about the creature 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 property arises with the establishment of feudalism and feudal ownership of land. Feudal property is formalized in the form of a princely domain (land ownership belonging to a given princely family), a boyar or monastic estate. In the Brief Edition of Russian Pravda, the inviolability of feudal landed property 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? Is it possible to consider the collapse of the Old Russian state and the ensuing political disunity of the Russian lands as 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.

Appendix

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.

The concept of "social system" includes: the economic development of the country, the class structure of society, the legal status of classes and social groups of the population.

Historical, written and archaeological sources testify that in the economic life the main occupation of the Eastern Slavs was dominated by agriculture. Both slash (in forest areas) and arable (fallow) agriculture developed.

In the X-XII centuries. there is a significant growth of cities with a handicraft and trade population. In the XII century in Russia there were already about 200 cities.

In the ancient Russian state, princely, boyar, church and monastic land ownership was developed, a significant part of the community members became dependent on the owner of the land. Feudal relations are gradually formed.

The formation of feudal relations in Kievan Rus proceeded unevenly. In Kyiv, Chernihiv, Galician lands, this process was faster than among the Vyatichi and Dregovichi.

The feudal social system in Russia was established in the 9th century. As a result of the social differentiation of the population, the social structure of society was formed. According to their position in society, they can be called classes or social groups.

These include:

* feudal lords (princes great and appanage, boyars, church and monasteries);

* free community members (rural and urban "people" and "people");

* smerds (communal peasants);

* purchases (a person who has fallen into debt bondage and works out "kupa");

* outcasts (a person who left the community or freed himself from slavery by ransom);

* servants and serfs (court slaves);

* urban population (urban aristocracy and urban lower classes);

The ruling class of feudal lords was formed in the 9th century. These included grand dukes, local princes, boyars. The state and personal reign was not divided, therefore the princely domain was an estate belonging not to the state, but to the prince as a feudal lord.

Along with the grand ducal domain, there was also boyar-druzhina agriculture.

The form of princely agriculture was the estate, i.e. a form of ownership in which land was inherited.

The appearance in the Long Edition of Russkaya Pravda, dating back to the end of the 11th-beginning of the 12th centuries, of articles mentioning boyar tyuns, boyar ryadovichi, boyar serfs and boyar inheritance allows us to conclude that boyar land ownership was also established by this time.

For a long time, a group of feudal boyars was formed from the richer combatants of the prince and from the tribal nobility. The form of their land tenure was:

1. fiefdom;

2. holding (estate).

Estates were acquired through the seizure of communal lands or by grants and were inherited. The boyars received the holding only by grant (for the duration of the boyar's service or until his death). Any land ownership of the boyars was associated with the service to the prince, which was considered voluntary. The transfer of a boyar from one prince to the service of another was not regarded as treason.

The feudal lords should include both the church and the monasteries, which, after the adoption of Christianity in Russia, gradually became large landowners.

Free community members made up the bulk of the population of Kievan Rus. The term "people" in Russkaya Pravda refers to free, predominantly communal peasants and the urban population. Judging by the fact that in Russkaya Pravda (Article 3) "people" were opposed to "prince-husband", he retained his personal freedom.

Free community members were subjected to state exploitation, paying tribute, the method of collection of which was polyudie. The princes gradually transferred the right to collect tribute to their vassals, and free community members gradually became dependent on the feudal lord.

Smerds made up the bulk of the population of the Old Russian state. These were communal peasants. Smerd was personally free, his personal integrity was protected by the prince's word (Art. 78 paragraphs). The prince could give land to the stink if he worked for him. Smerds had tools of production, horses, property, land, conducted a public economy, lived in communities.

Part of the communal peasants went bankrupt, turned into "thin smerds", turned to the feudal lords and the rich for a loan. This category was called "purchases". The main source characterizing the position of "purchase" are Art. 56-64, 66 Russian Pravda, lengthy edition.

Thus, "purchases" are peasants (sometimes also representatives of the urban population), who temporarily lost their freedom for using a loan, "kupa", taken from the feudal lord. He was actually in the position of a serf, his freedom was limited. He could not leave the courtyard without the permission of the master. For trying to escape, he turned into a slave.

"Outcasts" were free and dependent. These were:

* former purchases;

* serfs redeemed at will;

* people from the free strata of society.

They were not free until they entered the service of the owner. The life of an outcast is protected by the Russian Truth with a fine of 40 hryvnia.

At the lowest rung of the social ladder were serfs and servants. They were not subjects of law, but the owner was responsible for them. Thus, they were the owners of the feudal lord. If he committed theft, then the master paid. In the case of beatings by a serf, he could kill him "in the dog's place", i.e. like a dog. If a slave took refuge with his master, then the latter could protect him by paying 12 hryvnias, or hand him over for reprisal.

The law forbade sheltering runaway serfs.

Political system

Let us briefly consider the political system of the Old Russian state.

The concept of government includes:

* questions of the structure of the state;

* political form of government;

* structure and competence of central and local authorities and administration;

* military device;

* the judicial system of the state.

The formation of the ancient Russian state continued until the first third of the 12th century. It was an integral state based on the principle of suzerainty-vassalage. According to the form of government, the ancient Russian state was an early feudal monarchy with a fairly strong monarchical power.

The main characteristics of the ancient Russian early feudal monarchy can be considered:

* economic and political influence of the boyars on the central and local authorities;

* the great role of the council under the prince, the dominance of large feudal lords in it;

* the presence of a palace-patrimonial system of government in the center;

* the presence of a feeding system on the ground.

It arose at a time when there were no prerequisites for the formation of a centralized state, with poorly developed trade and crafts, and the absence of strong economic ties between individual regions. The feudal lords needed a strong central authority to cover or support the seizure of communal and new lands.

The support of the Grand Duke by the feudal lords contributed to the rapid spread of his power over the vast territory of Russia.

Kievan Rus was not a centralized state. It was a conglomerate of feudal estates-principalities. The Kyiv prince was considered a suzerain or "elder". He gave land (flax) to the feudal lords, provided them with assistance and protection. The feudal lords had to serve the Grand Duke for this. In case of violation of fidelity, the vassal was deprived of his possessions.

The supreme authorities in the Old Russian state were the Grand Duke, the council under the prince, feudal congresses, veche.

The power functions of the Grand Duke of Kyiv during the reign of Oleg (882-912), Igor (912-945) and regent Olga under Svyatoslav (945-964) were relatively simple and consisted of:

* organization of squads and military militias and their command;

* protection of state borders;

* the implementation of campaigns to new lands, the capture of prisoners and the collection of tribute from them;

* maintaining normal foreign policy relations with the nomadic tribes of the south, the Byzantine Empire, the countries of the East.

Initially, the Kyiv princes ruled only the Kyiv land. During the conquest of new lands, the Kyiv prince in the tribal centers left a thousand led by a thousand, a hundred led by a sot, smaller garrisons led by a tenth, which served as the city administration.

At the end of the 10th century, the functions of the power of the Grand Duke undergo changes. The feudal nature of the power of the prince began to manifest itself more clearly.

The prince becomes the organizer and commander of the armed forces (the multi-tribal composition of the armed forces complicates this task):

* takes care of the construction of fortifications along the external border of the state, the construction of roads;

* establishes external relations in order to ensure the security of borders;

* carries out legal proceedings;

* Carries out the approval of the Christian religion and financially provides for the clergy.

(During this period, popular unrest begins. In 1068, Izyaslav brutally suppressed a popular uprising, and in 1113, frightened by a new unrest, the boyars and bishops summoned Vladimir Monomakh to Kyiv with a strong retinue, who suppressed the uprising).

The princely power was exercised locally by posadniks, volostels and tiuns. By issuing laws, the prince consolidated new forms of feudal exploitation and established legal norms.

Thus, the prince becomes a typical monarch. The Grand Duke's throne was first inherited according to the principle of "seniority" (to the elder brother), and then according to the principle of "fatherland" (to the eldest son).

The council under the prince did not have separate functions from the prince. It consisted of the city elite ("the elders of the city"), large boyars, influential palace servants. With the adoption of Christianity (988), representatives of the higher clergy entered the Council. It was an advisory body under the prince to resolve the most important state issues: declaring war, concluding peace, alliances, issuing laws, financial issues, and court cases. The central governing bodies were officials of the princely court.

It should be noted that with the improvement of the system of feudalism, the decimal (thousands, centurions, and tenths) system is gradually being replaced by the palace and patrimonial system. Separations between the organs of state administration and the management of the personal affairs of the prince disappear. The general term tiun is specified: "fireman" is called "fiery tiun", "senior groom" - "tiun stableman", "village and military headman" - "rural and military tiun", etc.

With the complication of the tasks of public administration, the role of these positions has strengthened, the functions have become more precise, for example: "voivode" - head of the armed forces; "tiun equestrian" - responsible for providing the prince's army with horses; "butler-fireman" - the manager of the princely court and performing certain state tasks; "stolnik" - food supplier.

Feudal congresses (snems) were convened by the grand dukes to resolve the most important issues of foreign and domestic policy. They could be nationwide or several principalities. The composition of the participants was basically the same as the Council under the prince, but the specific princes were also convened for feudal congresses.

The functions of the congress were:

* adoption of new laws;

* distribution of lands (fiefs);

* solution of issues of war and peace;

* protection of borders and trade routes.

The Lyubechsky congress of 1097 is known, which, having in mind the unification of efforts in the fight against external enemies, "the organization of the world" recognized the independence of the specific princes ("let each one keep his fatherland"), at the same time called for observing Russia by all for "one". Snem in 1100 in Uvetichi was engaged in the distribution of fiefs.

Veche was convened by the prince or the feudal elite. All adult residents of the city and non-citizens participated in it. The decisive role here was played by the boyars and the urban elite "the elders of the city." Serfs and people subordinate to the householder were not allowed at the meeting.

It is known that the decision to kill Prince Igor for abuse of collecting tribute was made by the Drevlyans at their meeting.

In 970, the Novgorod Veche invited Vladimir Svyatoslavovich to reign.

The following questions were decided at the meeting:

Convocation and recruitment of the people's militia and the choice of leader;

A protest was expressed against the policies of the prince.

The executive body of the veche was the Council, which actually replaced the veche. The veche disappeared as feudalism developed. Preserved only in Novgorod and Moscow.

Local governments were initially local princes, who were later replaced by the sons of the Kyiv prince. In some less important cities, posadnik-governors were appointed, thousands of the Kyiv prince from his entourage.

The local administration was maintained at the expense of part of the extortions from the population. Therefore, the posadnik and volosteli were called "feeders", and the management system was called the "feeding" system.

The power of the prince and his administration extended to the townspeople and the population of lands that were not captured by the feudal lords. The feudal lords also received immunity - the legal registration of power in the possessions. In the immunity (defensive) charter, the land granted to the feudal lord and the rights to the population, which were obliged to be subordinate, were determined.

In the Old Russian state, the court was not separated from the administrative power. The supreme court was the Grand Duke. He judged combatants and boyars, considered complaints against local judges. The prince conducted the analysis of complex cases at a council or veche. Individual cases could be entrusted to a boyar or a tyun.

In the localities, the court was carried out by the posadnik and volosteli.

In addition, there were patrimonial courts - the courts of landowners over the dependent population, on the basis of immunity.

In the communities there was a communal court, which, with the development of feudalism, was replaced by the court of administration.

The functions of the ecclesiastical court were carried out by bishops, archbishops, metropolitans.

3. Development of Old Russian feudal law

In the Old Russian state, the source of law, as in many early feudal states, is a legal custom inherited from the primitive communal system. The "Tale of Bygone Years" notes that the tribes had "their customs and the laws of their fathers." The source refers to the norms of customary law, and the concepts are used as synonyms.

With the development of feudalism and the aggravation of class contradictions, customary law loses its significance. During the time of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich (978/980-1015), legislation expressing the interests of feudal lords, affirming feudal principles and the influence of the church, was becoming increasingly important.

The first legal document that has come down to us was the charter of Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich "On tithes, courts and church people." The charter was created at the turn of the X-XI centuries. in the form of a short statutory charter, which was given to the Church of the Holy Mother of God. The original has not come down to us. Only lists compiled in the 12th century are known. (Synodal and Olenets editions).

The charter acts as an agreement between the prince (Vladimir Svyatoslavovich) and the metropolitan (presumably Lyon). According to the charter, initially - the prince:

a) the patron of the church (protects the church and provides it financially);

b) does not interfere in the affairs of the church;

Tithing is determined for the existence of the church. According to the charter, the prince owes 1/10 of the funds received from:

court cases;

In the form of tribute from other tribes; give to the church

From trade.

Like a prince, each house had to give 1/10 of the offspring, income from trade, and the harvest to the church.

The statutory charter was drawn up under the strong influence of the Byzantine church, as evidenced by the content of the articles in terms of determining the corpus delicti.

The purpose of the charter is the approval of the Christian church in the Old Russian state. The provision of Vladimir's charter "On tithes, courts and church people" is aimed at:

* preservation of the family and marriage, assertion of the inviolability of family ties;

* protection of the church, church symbols and Christian church order;

* struggle against pagan rites.

The collections of Byzantine ecclesiastical law (nomocanons) that were widespread in the Old Russian state were of great importance. Subsequently, on their basis, with the involvement of norms from Russian and Bulgarian sources in Russia, "helmsman" (guiding) books were compiled as sources of church law.

Thus, after the adoption of Christianity (988), the church acts as an element of the state.

In the ninth century gains development and secular law. Collections of law appear, containing the legal material accumulated by the princely and communal courts. More than 110 such collections have come down to us in various lists. These collections were called "Russian Truth" or "Russian Law". By Russian historians, they are united by similarity among themselves in 3 editions:

1. Brief truth (KP).

2. Long Truth (PP).

3. Abbreviated Truth (SP).

Some lists are named after their location:

* Synodal - kept in the library of the Synod;

* Trinity - was kept in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra;

* Academic - kept in the library of the Academy of Sciences.

The short truth is divided into 2 parts:

1. The most ancient truth (see vv. 1-18) - compiled in the 30s. 11th century

Yaroslav the Wise (1019-1054), therefore known as the Truth of Yaroslav. It contains norms of customary law (for example, blood feud), the privilege of feudal lords is not sufficiently expressed (the same punishment is established for the murder of any person).

2. Truth of the Yaroslavichs (see Art. 19-43), compiled in the 70s. XI century, when the son of Yaroslav Izyaslav reigned in Kyiv (1054-1072). The truth of the Yaroslavichs reflects a higher level of development of the feudal state: princely property and administration are protected; instead of blood feud, a monetary penalty is established, and it is different, depending on the class position.

The lengthy truth was compiled during the reign of Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125). It consists of 2 main parts:

1. The charter of Yaroslav, including a brief truth (see Art. 1-52) "Court Yaroslavl Volodemerech".

2. Charter of Vladimir Monomakh (see Art. 53-121) "Charter of Volodemer Vsevolodovich".

In this document:

* the feudal right as a privilege is fully formalized;

* civil law, criminal law, judicial system and legal proceedings are regulated in more detail;

* articles appear on the protection of the boyar estates, on the relationship between feudal lords and purchasers, and on smerds.

The abbreviated truth arose in the 15th century. from the Long Truth and acted in the Muscovite state.

In addition to the Russian Truth, the sources of secular law in Russia are the Russian-Byzantine treaties, which contain not only the norms of international law, but also the norms regulating internal life. 4 treaties of Russia with Byzantium are known: 907, 911, 944 and 971. The treaties testify to the high international prestige of the Old Russian state. Much attention is paid to the regulation of trade relations.

The main source of ancient Russian feudal law is Russkaya Pravda. The main part of it is devoted to criminal and procedural law, however, there are articles containing civil law norms, especially obligations and inheritance.

Let us briefly consider the content of Russkaya Pravda according to the scheme:

* property rights;

* liability law;

* inheritance law;

* procedural law;

* Crime and Punishment.

In Brief Truth there is no general term for the right of ownership, because the content of this right was different depending on who was the subject and what was meant by the object of the property right. At the same time, a line was drawn between the right of ownership and the right of possession (see Articles 13-14 of the CP).

In "Russkaya Pravda" considerable attention is paid to the protection of the private property of the feudal lords. Strict liability is provided for damage to boundary marks, plowing the boundary, for arson, cutting down a side tree. Of property crimes, much attention is paid to theft ("tatba"), i.e. secret theft of things.

In the Long Truth, the feudal lords' property right to serfs is fixed, including the procedure for finding, detaining, returning a runaway serf, and responsibility for harboring a serf is established. The one who gave the serf bread (equally for harboring) had to pay the price of the serf - 5 hryvnias of silver (serfs cost from 5 to 12 hryvnias). The one who caught the serf received a reward - 1 hryvnia, but if he missed it, he paid the price of the serf minus 1 hryvnia (see Art. 113, 114).

In connection with the development of private property, inheritance law is being formed and developed. In the norms of inheritance law, the desire of the legislator to preserve property in this family is clearly visible. With its help, the wealth accumulated by many generations of owners remained in the hands of one and the same class.

By law, only sons could inherit. The father's court without division passed to the youngest son. (Art. 100 PP). Daughters were deprived of the right to inherit, tk. when they got married, they could take property outside their clan. This custom existed among all peoples during the transitional period from the primitive communal system to a class society. It was also reflected in Russian Truth.

With the strengthening of the princely power, the provision "If the smerd dies childless, then the prince inherits, if unmarried daughters remain in the house, then allocate a certain part for them, if he is married, then do not give them a part" (Article 90 of the PP).

An exception was made for the daughters of boyars and warriors (later also clergy), artisans and community members, their inheritance in the absence of sons could pass to daughters (Article 91 of the PP). Children, adopted by a slave, did not participate in the inheritance, but received freedom along with their mother (Article 98 of the PP).

Until the age of majority of the heirs, their mother disposed of the inheritance property. If a widowed mother got married, she received part of the property "for a living". In this case, a guardian from the next of kin was appointed. The property was transferred in the presence of witnesses. If the guardian lost part of the property, he had to compensate.

There was a difference between inheritance by law and by will. The father could divide the property between his sons as he saw fit, but he could not bequeath it to his daughters.

The dominance of private property led to the emergence of the law of obligations. It was relatively underdeveloped. Obligations arose not only from contracts, but also from causing harm: damage to the fence, illegal riding of someone else's horse, damage to clothing or weapons, death of the master's horse through the fault of the purchase, etc. In these cases, there was not a civil claim (compensation), but a fine. Obligations extended not only to the property of the debtor, but also to his personality.

According to Russkaya Pravda, a conscientious bankrupt (merchant) was not sold into slavery, but received an installment plan from the creditor. A malicious bankrupt was sold with all his property into slavery.

The "Russkaya Pravda" also reflected the obligation from the treaties. Agreements, as a rule, were concluded orally in the presence of rumors or mytnik (witnesses). In Russkaya Pravda, contracts were known: purchase and sale, loan, luggage (a loan agreement between merchants), personal hiring, purchasing.

Criminal law in the Old Russian state was formed as a right-privilege, but shades of an earlier period have been preserved. It is reflected in Russian-Byzantine treaties and Russkaya Pravda.

A feature of "Russian Truth" is that it punishes only for intentional crimes or causing harm. (Crimes committed through negligence were reflected only in the 17th century in the "Cathedral Code"). In "Russkaya Pravda" the crime is called "insult", which refers to the infliction of moral, material or physical damage. This followed from the understanding of "offense" in antiquity, when inflicting offense on an individual meant insulting a tribe, community or clan. But with the formation of feudalism, compensation for damage for a crime (offense) did not go in favor of society, but of the prince.

Only free people were responsible. The owner was responsible for the serfs. "If the thieves are serfs ... whom the prince does not punish by sale, because they are not free people, then for the serf theft to pay double fixed prices and compensation for losses" (Article 46).

The types of crimes provided for by Russkaya Pravda can be divided into:

a) crimes against the person;

b) crimes against property or property crimes;

The first group includes murder, assault, bodily harm, beatings.

There was a difference between murder in a quarrel (fight) or in a state of intoxication (at a feast) and murder by robbery, i.e. premeditated murder. In the first case, the perpetrator paid a criminal fine together with the community, and in the second case, the community not only did not pay the fine, but was obliged to hand over the murderer, together with his wife and children, to "stream and ruin."

Insult by action, physical insult (a blow with a stick, a pole, a hand, a sword, etc.) was punished by the "Russian Truth", and an insult with a word was considered by the church.

Bodily injuries included a wound to the arm (“so that the arm falls off and dries out”), damage to the leg (“it starts to limp”), an eye, nose, and cutting off the fingers of the hand. Beatings included beating a person to the point of blood and bruises.

The crimes against honor included pulling out mustaches and beards, for which a large fine (12 hryvnias of silver) was collected.

The second group includes crimes: robbery, theft (tatba), destruction of other people's property, damage to boundary marks, etc.

Robbery associated with murder was punished with "flood and ruin". According to Russkaya Pravda, theft is considered to be the abduction of a horse, a serf, weapons, clothes, livestock, hay, firewood, a boat, etc. For the theft of a horse, a "horse thief" was supposed to issue a professional horse thief to the prince for "flow and ruin" (Article 35).

For a simple (one-time) theft of a princely horse, a penalty of 3 hryvnia was supposed to be recovered, a smerd - 2 hryvnia (Article 45). A thief could be killed on the spot (v. 40). But if he was tied up, then killed, then 12 hryvnias were collected.

Punishment according to Russkaya Pravda provided, first of all, compensation for damages. Yaroslav's Pravda provided for blood feud on the part of the victim's relatives (Article 1). Yaroslavichi canceled the blood feud.

Instead of revenge for the murder of a free man, a vira was established - a monetary penalty in the amount of 40 hryvnias. For the murder of the "princely husband" compensation was established in the amount of double vira - 80 hryvnias. For the murder of a smerd or a serf, not a vira was collected, but a fine (lesson) in the amount of 5 hryvnias.

Among the monetary penalties for the murder - vira in favor of the prince and golovnichestvo (usually vira) in favor of the family of the murdered, for other crimes - sale in favor of the prince and a lesson in favor of the victim. "Wild Vira" was exacted from the community in case of refusal to extradite the criminal.

The highest measure of punishment according to Russian truth is white flow and ruin - conversion (sale) into slavery and confiscation of property in favor of the prince. This punishment was applied for 4 types of crime: horse theft, arson, robbery and malicious bankruptcy.

The proceedings were adversarial. The main role in the court belonged to the parties. The process was a lawsuit (dispute) of the parties before the judge. The court acted as an arbitrator and made a decision orally. Peculiar forms of this process were "shout", "arch" and "persecution of the trace".

The evidence was the testimony of rumors, vidakov, ordeals, court fights, an oath.