Two legal criteria that particularly distinguish these groups within society are the rules on increased (double) criminal liability for the murder of a representative of a privileged stratum (Article 1 of the PP) and the rules on a special procedure for inheriting real estate (land) for representatives of this stratum (Article 91 PP). These legal privileges extended to subjects named in Russian Pravda as princes, boyars, princely men, princely tiuns, and firemen.
The bulk of the population was divided into free and dependent people, there were also intermediate and transitional categories. Legally and economically independent groups were the townspeople and community smerds (they paid taxes and performed duties only in favor of the state). The urban (townsman) population was divided into a number social groups- boyars, clergy, merchants, “lower classes” (artisans, small traders, workers, etc.). In addition to free smerds, there were other categories of them, which Russian Truth mentions as dependent people. A free community member had certain property that he could bequeath to his children (land - only to his sons). In the absence of heirs, his property passed to the community. The law protected the person and property of the smerda. For committed misdeeds and crimes, as well as for obligations and contracts, he bore personal and property liability. In the trial, Smerd acted as a full participant.
The short edition of Russian Pravda does not mention procurement, but the Long edition contains a special Charter on procurement. Purchase - a person working on the feudal lord’s farm for a “kupa”, that is, a loan that could include various values - land, livestock, grain, money, etc. This debt had to be worked off, and there were no established standards or equivalents. The scope of work was determined by the lender. Therefore, with the increase in interest on the loan, bondage intensified and could continue for a long time.
The law protected the person and property of the purchaser, prohibiting the master from punishing him without reason and taking away his property. If the purchase itself committed an offense, the responsibility was twofold: the master paid a fine for it to the victim, but the purchase itself could be “given away,” that is, turned into a complete slave. His legal status changed dramatically. For attempting to leave the master without paying, the purchaser was also turned into a slave. A purchaser could act as a witness in a trial only in special cases: in minor cases (“in small claims”) or in the absence of other witnesses (“need”). The purchase was the legal figure that most clearly illustrated the process of “feudalization,” enslavement, and enslavement of former free community members.
The serf is the most powerless subject of law. His property status is special - everything he owned was the property of the master. All consequences arising from the contracts and obligations that the slave entered into (with the knowledge of the owner) also fell on the master. The identity of a slave as a subject of law was not actually protected by law. For his murder, a fine was levied, as for the destruction of property, or another slave was transferred to the master as compensation. The slave who committed the crime had to be handed over to the victim (in an earlier period he could simply be killed at the scene of the crime). The master always bore punitive liability for the slave. In a lawsuit, a slave could not act as a party (plaintiff, defendant, witness).
Response plan:
2. Characteristics of the legal status of certain categories of the dependent population
Classification of types of dependent population:
3. Slaves: serfs, servants, robes
Characteristics of the legal status of certain categories of the dependent population:
Smerda- a category of the population that is rarely mentioned by sources. There are a considerable number of scientific points of view regarding this category. Smerd is a villager, but lives outside the community. Various sources draw a connection between the prince and the smerd, because stink is mentioned when we're talking about about the prince’s household, the prince’s exclusive jurisdiction, and the prince’s military campaigns. Based on this, we can conclude that smerds more often inhabited princely villages. The question of the origin of such a category as smerda is also controversial: they could have been captives and outcasts imprisoned on the ground. Their dependence on the prince was determined by their origin, as well as their residence on the land of the feudal prince.
Smerd is a subject of law: he is responsible for the offenses committed, and also has the right to transfer property by inheritance to his sons and, accordingly, inherit it.
Purchase– is a representative of the feudal-dependent population, however, his basis for his dependence is also the subject of scientific debate ( or a loan agreement with conditions placing the debtor in a dependent position, or a personal rental agreement with payment wages forward). The point of view of modern researchers is inclined to believe that the basis of the procurement agreement is still a loan agreement. From the word “hire” (“hire” - interest) used in the RP in relation to procurement, it follows that the purchaser is the person who pays interest to the creditor. Purchases were divided into two types: role-playing, i.e. arable ( in rural areas: creditor - feudal lord) And non-role-playing (in cities: lender - moneylender). The position of a role purchase is characterized by: 1) responsibility for the safety of the property transferred to him by the master for work on the arable land 2) the obligation to accompany the master on a military campaign. The Ordinance on Procurement The lengthy edition of the RP contains rules that protect the interests of the procurement itself, because Before the adoption of this Charter, there was a tendency towards groundless enslavement of procurement and their excessive exploitation. Cases in which a purchaser could lose the status of a free person and become a slave:
1. in case of malicious bankruptcy
2. in case of escape
3. in case of committing a theft (crime): because the poor cannot pay for the fine; the purchase had to be sold to serfs, and the owner of the purchase had the priority right to purchase it.
Thus, zakup – a debtor who has taken out a loan on the security of his personal freedom (self-mortgage). The purchaser must earn the interest on the master's farm, and the debt must be repaid from funds earned on the side or received on his farm. The purchase was subject to the jurisdiction of the prince, possessed personal property, could enter into loan and personal hiring agreements, but was limited in the right to act as an hearer in court.
Slaves, servants, robes– categories of the population identical in their legal status, which, in turn, is close to the status of a slave. The difference (feature) of slavery in the Old Russian state is its patriarchal nature: slaves were not used as the main labor (production) force, but, as a rule, performed only auxiliary economic work. This was caused by the unproductiveness of using slave power as the main force in farming in Rus'. Russian Truth establishes several ways of losing a person’s personal freedom and his transition to a state of servitude:
1. self-selling
2. forced sale to slaves (malicious bankruptcy, etc.)
3. marrying a rob (without concluding a contract with her master)
4. admission to tiuns (key holders) without an agreement with the master (“without a row”)
5. commission of a crime by the purchaser (escape, theft)
6. captivity (not fixed in the RP)
7. birth from a slave (not enshrined in the RP)
Forced sale and self-sale becoming slaves was carried out in relation to insolvent debtors (by the insolvent debtor himself, in the case of self-sale), in the event that the criminal could not pay the fine, and also if the “flow and plunder” sanction was applied to the criminal, which also implied the transfer of family members of the criminal to servitude .
Main feature the legal status of these categories of the population was lack of legal personality: this provision determines its participation in civil circulation as an object of law.
Criminal law: RP does not consider the slave as the subject of a crime - his master is responsible for the offenses committed by the slave. This is due to the fact that only property sanctions were of value to the state (they were income): a poor person could not pay the fine. That is why in one of the articles of the RP it is proposed that the master hand over the slave-thieves to the prince - this could ease the situation of the owner, who is forced to pay a double fine for the crime of his slave. In the case of the murder of a slave, the master was compensated for the harm caused, and a fine was paid on the basis of the destruction of someone's property.
Civil law: a slave could not enter into transactions or be liable for obligations. If a runaway slave acquired property, then his master became its owner. The debts of the slave were the debts of the owner.
Procedural law: a slave could not act as a party to the case (his master was responsible for him). He could not act as an auditor, however, if he witnessed a serious crime, then the plaintiff could speak from his words. A serf could testify only in one case: if there was no evidence, then the boyar tiun could testify.
According to modern demographers, in the territory Kievan Rus lived from 2.5 to 4.5 million people. Medieval Rus' was characterized by low population density (2 times less than in Western Europe) with vast undeveloped spaces and large distances between populated areas.
By the end of the 11th century. This includes the first information about the granting by princes of land holdings to their confidants (boyars, bishops, monasteries) - villages with peasants. The first owner known to us was in the 70s. XI century Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. Archaeological research already clearly identifies dozens of feudal estates in the 12th century - fortified settlements measuring 1000 m2 or more, with the owner’s mansions and craft workshops that produced “urban” products (for example, glass bracelets).
Behind the high walls of such estates there were the boyar’s mansions, numerous service premises, “cages” - storerooms, stables, and craft workshops belonging to the patrimonial owner. The inhabitants of the estate differed sharply in their social and property status. In the first place were representatives of the administration of the estate: tiun, groom, ratay (arable) headman. Their lives were protected by a fine much higher than for the murder of a common man; they supervised servants, among whom were artisans and captive or hired servants. In the princely villages there lived personally free “smerds” - they performed military service and were part of the princely army. The main population of a boyar or monastic estate was made up of personally free peasants - “people” whose dependence was expressed in the payment of an annual quitrent. The master's arable land was usually cultivated by bankrupt peasants or slaves who were “planted” on the land and did not have any rights.
The instability of the peasant economy (it was associated with crop failures, epidemics, and raids by nomads) forced the community member to turn to the owner with a request for a loan - a “coupe” or to enter into an agreement - a “row” on the terms of issuing to such a “ryadovich” or “purchase” of seeds or a worker livestock The escape of the “purchase” or the theft he committed turned him into a slave. Thus, the feudal estate not only tied the peasants to itself through “non-economic” violence, but also became a kind of guarantee of the stability of society.
Around the estate there were arable lands, meadows, and hunting grounds with beaver traps. “Expansive Pravda” records in detail in legislative norms the penalties for violating the master’s boundaries and any attempt on the property of the patrimonial owner, right down to a rope from a hunting trap; regulates his relations with the “rank and file” and “purchases” (who, in particular, can be beaten “about business” but not when drunk); indicates the procedure for carrying out the “case” - the search for a runaway slave.
It was the XII century that became the time of intensive formation and growth of ancient Russian cities: at the turn of the X-XI centuries. there were only 20-25 urban centers; in the 11th century chronicles mention 64 new centers, and in the 12th century. - another 134. However, a real city can be considered a settlement that combined several functions, i.e. which was a trade and crafts, administrative, military, and spiritual center.
In the center of the city there was a fortified detinets with a garrison, the residence of the prince or his mayor and the city cathedral. Detinets was surrounded by a trade and craft settlement, divided into “ends” (districts) and streets, often along professional lines. The main roads and streets diverged from the center to the chopped wooden walls and gates, along which, within the radius of the ring of fortifications and behind them, the city itself grew, acquiring a radial-ring layout. Already from the 10th century. the streets began to be paved, and the design of the pavements remained unchanged for about a thousand years. The “average” ancient Russian city occupied from 2.5 to 40 hectares and had a population of 3-5 thousand; only in the largest centers there were 8-10 thousand (Old Ryazan) or 20-30 thousand inhabitants (Kyiv and Novgorod). A significant part of the townspeople - approximately 15% - led a completely peasant lifestyle. Within the city limits there were gardens and vegetable gardens, and immediately outside the walls there were arable lands and pastures; Rye, oats and wheat were stored in the townspeople's barns.
The houses of the townspeople were often combined with workshops—leatherworks, jewelry, foundries, and weaving. In large cities there were about a hundred different craft specialties, the division of which was based on the finished product. The products of artisans went to merchants; some products - jewelry "smithy", "Russian" padlocks - were even exported along with furs and wax traditional for Rus'. Moneylenders who provided them with loans were associated with merchants and artisans; The uprising in Kyiv in 1113 forced Vladimir Monomakh to limit the loan rate to 20% per annum.
Novgorod and Smolensk entered into trade agreements with North German cities, united in a trade and political union - the Hansa. In Novgorod there were German and Gothic courts, and in Kyiv already in the 12th-13th centuries. there was a Jewish quarter and, along with it, a “Latin” monastery, while the surviving sources do not contain evidence of national-religious intolerance.
However, in the West of the 12th century. became the time of birth of commune cities, liberated from the power of feudal lords. Already in the X-XI centuries. In the cities of Italy, England and France, merchant guilds, craft guilds, corporations of lawyers, scientists, and even “brotherhoods of the lame and blind” appeared with their own courts and other rights enshrined in statutes and charters. The center of such a “commune” became the town hall and the market; A feudal castle was usually located outside the city walls.
In Rus', not a single city (with the exception of Novgorod) was outside the state-princely jurisdiction and did not achieve self-government. Cities were created by princely authority; The “heart” of the Russian city became the Detinets (Kremlin) with the princely administration and boyar courts. Next to the princely estates in the cities there were boyar courts with a mass of dependent people. Their presence prevented the consolidation of townspeople along professional lines; therefore, in Rus' the guild organizations characteristic of Western European cities never developed.
We can only talk about the elements of the “urban system” that began to appear in the 12th century. These include the bodies of district self-government - “ends”, and later - more or less autonomous “settlements”, which could unite both people of the same profession and the structure of the city militia. Since the 12th century. Merchant corporations began to appear: the association of Novgorod wax traders (“Ivanskoye Sto”). However, even in the heyday of Rus' in the XII-XIII centuries. universities did not arise in our cities; the only organization, which ensured the development of education until the end of the 17th century. the church remained.
Already in the treaties with Byzantium, the norms of Russian customary law - “Russian law” were mentioned, which were later included in the “Russian Truth” - the first written code of laws. Yaroslav the Wise created the oldest part of “Russian Truth”; These norms established payment for murder, insults, mutilations and beatings, for theft and damage to other people's property. “The Truth of the Yaroslavichs” (the sons of Yaroslav the Wise; created around 1072) included a “charter on fines” in favor of the prince for the murder of free people and a “lesson for bridge builders” - rules for those who pave roadways in cities. Supplemented and revised in the 12th century. the legislation became known as the “Long-Range Pravda”; it regulated the relations between landowners and peasants in the princely and boyar households. The name of Vladimir Monomakh is associated with an addition to the “Russian Pravda” of 1113 - the “Charter of Vladimir Vsevolodovich”, which regulated the collection of interest by usurers.
Wherein state law did not oppose tradition, but coexisted with it, gradually displacing the most brutal forms of lynching. K XII century blood feud disappeared. Now the criminal paid a “vira” (fine) in favor of the prince and money to the victim’s relatives. From the end of the 11th century. Lynching was prohibited against a thief caught in the act of a crime; he was supposed to be tied up and taken to the princely court. If on the territory of their “world” community members discovered the corpse of a person they knew, they had to help the authorities find the killer. For hiding the “murderer,” the community members paid a large fine—a “wild virus.”
Among property crimes, Russkaya Pravda paid the most attention to theft (“theft”) and arson. Horse stealing was considered the most serious type of theft, since the horse was the main means of production and military equipment. Setting fire to one house in wooden Rus' could lead to the burning out of an entire village or even a city; if a fire occurred in winter, it led to the death of people left homeless and property. When finding out that the theft had been committed, the victim shouted to the neighbors, and they “followed the trail” - using signs they identified and caught the thief - “dad”. Suspicion could fall on any family, and then she had to “lead the trail” - prove her innocence. If the lost item or the thief was not found, the victim could make a “cry” - an announcement in the square about the loss in the hope that someone had seen the stolen property from another person. If the new owner of a thing declared that he had bought it, then he had to prove the good faith of its acquisition with the involvement of two witnesses or a “mytnik” - a collector of trade duties.
The trial took place at the prince's court in the presence of community members. Even then, any litigation involved the plaintiff, the defendant, and, if necessary, witnesses - “videos” and “hearsays”. When there was no clear evidence against the suspect, the plaintiff and defendant (or their representatives) began a legal duel - a “field”; the victor won the case, since it was believed that God helps the right. Another type of God's judgment was testing the participants with hot iron and water: tied up man lowered into water; if he began to drown, he was considered to have won the case.
The highest measure was “flow and plunder”: sometimes this meant the murder of the convict and the theft of his property, sometimes expulsion and confiscation of property, sometimes sale into serfs. The next heaviest punishment was “vira” (fine), imposed for murder. The main punishment for most crimes was a fine - “sale”. “Virs” and “sales” in favor of the prince were accompanied by compensation for damage to the victim or his family (the so-called “golovnichestvo” and “lesson”). The princely virnik collected fines. He came to the house of the convict with his retinue and waited for payment of the fee, receiving in-kind support every day. Therefore, it was more profitable for the criminal to pay the fine or debt as quickly as possible.
A law cannot be a law if there is no strong force behind it.
Mahatma Gandhi
Whole population Ancient Rus' can be divided into free and dependent. The first category included nobility and ordinary people who had no 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 involuntary people in Rus' was different.
The entire dependent population of Rus' can be divided into 2 classes: those completely deprived of rights and those who retained partial rights.
- Serfs- slaves who fell into this position due to debts or by decision of the community.
- Servants- slaves who were purchased at auction were taken prisoner. These were slaves in the classical sense of the word.
- Smerda- people born into dependence.
- Ryadovichi- people who were hired to work under a contract (series).
- Purchases- worked off a certain amount (loan or purchase) that they owed, but could not repay.
- Tiuny- managers of princely estates.
Russian truth also divided the population into categories. In it you can find the following categories of the dependent population of Rus' in the 11th century.
It is important to note that the categories of the personally dependent population in the era of Ancient Rus' were smerds, serfs and servants. They also had complete dependence on the prince (master).
Completely dependent (whitewashed) segments of the population
The bulk of the population in Ancient Rus' belonged to the category of completely dependent. These were slaves and servants. In fact, these were people who, by their social status, were slaves. But here it is important to note that the concept of “slave” in Rus' and Western Europe was very different. If in Europe slaves had no rights, and everyone recognized this, then in Rus' slaves and servants had no 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 its articles, provided for payment in the event of killing a person. So, for a free citizen the payment was 40 hryvnias, and for a dependent one - 5.
Serfs
Serfs - that’s what they called people in Rus' who served others. This was the largest stratum of the population. People who became completely dependent were also called " whitewashed slaves».
People became slaves as a result of ruin, misdeeds, and the decision of fiefdom. They could also become free people who, for certain reasons, have lost part of their freedom. Some voluntarily became slaves. This is due to the fact that a part (small, of course) of this category of the population was actually “privileged”. Among the slaves were people from the prince’s personal service, housekeepers, firemen and others. They were rated in society even higher than free people.
Servants
Servants are people who have lost their freedom not as a result of debt. 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 an insignificant layer.
Differences between servants and slaves
How were servants different 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 dependent as a result of their misdeeds. One could become a slave voluntarily. To put it even simpler: the slaves served, the servants did the work. What they had in common was 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 lost only part of their freedom. They were not slaves or servants. Yes, they depended on the “owner”, but they could run a personal household, engage in trade and other matters.
Purchases
Purchases are 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 “purchaser”. He became economically dependent on his master, but after he completely repaid the debt, he became free again. This category of people could be deprived of all rights only if the law was violated and after a decision by the community. Most common reason, according to which Purchases became slaves - theft of the owner's property.
Ryadovichi
Ryadovichi - were hired to work under a contract (row). These people were deprived of personal freedom, but at the same time retained the right to conduct personal farming. As a rule, the agreement was concluded with the land user and it was concluded by people who were bankrupt or unable to lead a free lifestyle. For example, series were often concluded for 5 years. Ryadovich was obliged to work on the princely land and for this he received food and a place to sleep.
Tiuny
Tiuns are managers, that is, people who locally managed the economy and were responsible to the prince for the results. All estates and villages had a management system:
- Fire Tiun. 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 fire tiun is the head of a city or village.
- Regular tiun. He was subordinate to the fireman, being responsible for a certain element of the economy, for example: crop yield, raising animals, collecting honey, hunting, and so on. Each direction had its own manager.
Often ordinary people could get into tiuns, but mostly they were completely dependent serfs. In general, this category of the dependent population of Ancient Rus' was privileged. They lived in the princely court, had direct contact with the prince, were exempt from taxes, and some were allowed to start a personal household.
"Russian Truth" is the most important legal source in history Russian state. The document contains provisions on the lifestyle and status of various segments of the population. In addition, the ancient source is a collection of criminal, civil and cultural norms. This article will examine the legal status of population groups according to “Russian Truth”. So let's get started.
"Russian Truth": general characteristics
The first official collection of legal norms that appeared in Kievan Rus dates back to 1016. Historians call Yaroslav the Wise the main compiler of the document. The document was first discovered by researcher Vasily Tatishchev, who found and analyzed a short version of it.
"Russian Truth" includes rules of hereditary, procedural, criminal and commercial nature. In fact, a small document provided comprehensive information about almost all the rules public life. Separately, it is worth highlighting the categories of the population according to “Russian Truth”, their legal status and status. On this moment Not a single original copy of the famous document has survived. There are only relatively later versions and lists, dating from the 13th-15th centuries.
Princes and their entourage
It’s worth talking a little more about the legal status of the population according to “Russian Truth”. We need to start with the privileged layers. In Rus' at the beginning of the second millennium, these were the boyars and princes. Princes in the document refer to persons holding power in a particular region. The Grand Duke is the ruler of Kiev; his sons or relatives sit in other Russian cities. The prince has two main functions: to administer court and collect taxes.
The expression “princely men” is used several times in the document. This is what people in Rus' were called who were surrounded by the ruler. These are loyal to the prince, one might say, his agents. The represented persons cannot be identified as a separate class. Although in “Russkaya Pravda” the legal status of the population implies the presence of “princely husbands,” these persons are not indicated in any other ancient Russian source.
Finally, it is worth talking about the boyars. This is a privileged class, obliged to faithfully serve their prince. Boyar servants perform various functions. They should be discussed further.
Boyars and nobility
What place do boyars occupy in the population according to “Russian Truth”? Legal status feudal lords are always different, because each representative of the privileged class has his own functions and responsibilities.
In "Russkaya Pravda" the concept of "tiun" is often found. This is a boyar or princely manager who could have different legal status. The concept itself came from Scandinavia, where feudal lords were called tiuns. They collected tribute, ruled volosts and even administered justice. In Rus', the position of the represented persons was different. At the time of the appearance of "Russian Truth", tiuns were most often boyars close to the prince. They were engaged in managing and organizing the functions of their ruler. However, over time, even slaves began to acquire the status of tiun.
Ognishchanin was also a privileged servant. He was engaged in the protection of princely property. According to Russian Pravda, the life of a fireman was valued at 80 hryvnia. This is twice the price of a common man. There are also “old grooms” - princely servants in charge of the stables of their ruler.
Clergy
Representatives Orthodox Church have a special legal status according to Russian Pravda. The population of the ancient Russian state had a large percentage of clergy, churchmen and monks.
The clergy in Rus' was divided into white and black. The white category included priests (ordinary priests - the largest group), archpriests, protopresbyters, as well as various types of deacons. Special place in Russian Orthodoxy, clergymen who accepted the schema - a special spiritual status - occupied the position. The black category includes monasticism, which is also classified into several types. Yaroslav the Wise actively contributed to the development of the clergy in Rus'. The Russkaya Pravda established separate standards for killing or causing harm to church representatives.
Free people
Who were included in the category of so-called commoners? What status did the independent and free inhabitants of Rus' have? The legal status of the population according to the brief "Russian Truth" is reflected quite clearly. Main actor in the document in question, the husband is a free person. For the murder of a husband, a fine of 40 hryvnia is imposed. A variety of representatives of the ancient Russian population could be called husbands.
The so-called community smerds were independent both legally and economically. These people performed certain duties in favor of the state and also paid taxes. Here it is worth highlighting the townspeople. Both smerds and posadniks had property that could be inherited. Representatives of these categories bore property and personal liability for crimes and misdemeanors committed. There were also different social groups in the cities: artisans, workers, small traders, merchants and other categories of people. The legal status of the free population according to Russian Pravda was stipulated for each separate category. Basically, fines and other types of punishment were established for various crimes and misdemeanors. It was by the severity of the sanctions that one could determine how privileged a particular class was.
Purchases and rank and file
It is worth moving to a group of dependent people. In this industry, it stands out quite a large number of categories of the population. The most privileged group among dependent people are the so-called warrior elders and princely breadwinners. These are the elders who are involved in managerial affairs.
The lowest position was occupied by purchases, smerds and ryadovichi. At the same time, the dependent smerd should not be confused with the communal smerd, who was in an intermediate position on the “ladder of dependence”, and therefore had some rights and opportunities. A dependent smerd is a simple peasant whose property was inherited by the prince. People who became slaves due to debt bondage were called purchasers. These are dependent Russians who took on a “kupa” - a debt that they subsequently could not repay. The ryadovichi, in turn, concluded a “row” with the feudal lord - a special agreement under which they received responsibilities for cultivating the land.
Serfs
The most powerless and most dependent category of people deserves to be discussed separately. Serfs in Kievan Rus were close in status to slaves, however, according to many historians, they were not such. According to “Russian Truth”, the legal status of social groups close to serfs had the status of not a subject, but an object of law. There were no penalties for killing one's own slave. For someone else's they paid 12 hryvnia. Here it is worth remembering the price of a commoner’s life, which, according to the document in question, was 40 hryvnia. The difference between free people and slaves is obvious.
Serfdom manifested itself in many forms. Groups of slaves depend on how exactly this or that person acquired this status. For example, a purchaser who committed a serious crime was converted into white-washed (full) servitude, which was passed on by inheritance. The same applies to failure to pay debt. Sometimes the amount due could be so large that the debtor immediately became not a purchaser, but a slave.
Serfs should not be confused with servants. The so-called servants acquired a semi-slave status as a result of captivity, which was often used during military campaigns. There were incredibly many servants in Rus'. Almost every family whose head participated in a military campaign had one foreign slave with them.
Population according to "Russian Truth": tables
The legal status of each category of the population can be characterized indefinitely. However, the best understanding comes only when looking at the structure of the inhabitants of Kievan Rus, recorded in the form of a table.
The table presents fairly generalized data. Thus, there are still debates about whether servants should be classified as servitude. Historians also debate the role of smerds. Not all of them were addicts.
Thus the data in tabular form gives the best characteristics legal status of the population according to Russian Pravda.
Collection of criminal norms
Provisions governing penalties for crimes or misdemeanors best reflect legal inequalities various categories population. Any person other than a serf was considered the subject of a crime in Kievan Rus. "Russian Truth" did not provide for an age of criminal responsibility for people. However, the document already reflected the concept of complicity.
The main crime in the document is “tatba”, that is, theft. Horse stealing was considered the worst type of theft. No less attention was paid to murder. The most common form of punishment for murder or assault was a fine. Its amount varied depending on which category of the population the person belonged to.
Civil law
Old Russian legislation had an extensive and high-quality civil system. Considerable attention in "Russian Pravda" is paid to property rights. The feudal lord had full property rights to the means of production and incomplete property rights to the worker.
For damage to property, the culprit had to pay a fine and compensate for the damage. The contractual system was also developed. It was she who formed and consolidated the legal status of the population of Ancient Rus'. People took on debts, became dependent, and then entered into a series or coupa. All this contributed to the establishment of a social system that persisted for many subsequent centuries.
