It is the regulation of criminal and enforcement proceedings.

Peculiarities Russkaya Pravda: it consolidated class inequality in criminal law, the right of the strong, the right of the master, and also "fist" law.

Russkaya Pravda did not contain a definite concept of crime. It was characterized as insult, that is, causing material, physical or moral damage to someone.

1. murder... True, Yaroslav also contained provisions on the admissibility of blood feud for the murder, if the murdered did not have any avengers or his relatives did not want to take revenge, then a monetary penalty was provided for the murder; Later, Russkaya Pravda banned blood feud for murder and established for everyone, except the prince, - for his murder, the death penalty was imposed - differentiated fines according to the social status of the murdered: for the murder of privileged people - "princely men" (warriors, princely servants - "firemen" , "Driveways") a double criminal fine of 80 hryvnia was established; for townspeople, merchants, swordsmen - 40 hryvnia; for a slave - 5 hryvnia.

   Its types:

   a) murder in a quarrel or at a feast;

   Types of punishment according to Russian Truth:

   1. revenge;
   2. stream and plunder;
   3. fine: vira; sale (in favor of the prince); lesson (compensation to the victim); headache (assigned to the whole family).

The main reasons that influenced the formation of criminal law were the further development of feudal relations, the presence of antagonistic classes and the aggravation of the struggle between them. It was they who determined the direction of the state's punitive activities.

The private nature of ancient law manifested itself in the field of criminal law. According to Russian Pravda, a crime was defined not as a violation of the law or the prince's will, but as an "offense", that is, causing moral or material damage to a person or group of persons. A criminal offense was not delimited in the law from a civil one. The objects of the crime were persons and property. The objective side of the crime fell into two stages: an attempted crime (for example, a person who drew a sword but did not strike was punished) and a completed crime. One of the features of Russkaya Pravda was the lack of a clear distinction between criminal offenses and civil offenses. All of them were united by the concept of "offense", but not in the sense of an insult to honor, but in the sense of causing harm (physical, material and moral).

The concept of "offense" included both murder and non-payment of a debt: "if you kill a fireman in offense, then pay a tribute of 80 hryvnia to the murderer." There was no difference in the procedures for prosecuting offenders: both arose on the initiative of the victim.

According to the Russian Truth, the subjects of the crime were feudal lords, urban people and feudal-dependent peasants. Serfs were not subjects of law, and for their crimes and deeds they were subject to punishment, sometimes more cruel than other members of society. So, according to Art. 65, a slave who struck a free husband could be killed. The lack of property made it impossible for them to pay fines. Therefore, for the commission of a crime, slaves were subject to a different responsibility. The payment of the fine, compensation for the damage caused by the slave, was made by his owner, and the punishment of the slave for committing a crime was no longer the matter of the state, but of the feudal lord. Article 121 provided for liability for theft committed by a fugitive slave, the lord of the fugitive slave was obliged to pay for the property taken away by his slave at a fixed price. He could beat him, kill him, and in the event of theft from third parties, the owner of the slave could give him over to the persons who suffered from theft (Article 121). If the owner kept the slave with him, then he was obliged to pay the victim a lesson. A free person paid a fine for theft in favor of the prince and a lesson in favor of the victims (Articles 75, 79, 82, etc.). With complicity in theft, i.e. when the subjects of one crime are several people, the same responsibility was imposed regardless of the degree of participation in the commission of the crime (Articles 42, 43, 44). In Art. 35-46, 69, 76, 81 the legislator provided different kinds thefts, primarily depending on the nature and value of the stolen property - horse theft, theft of livestock, bread, clothing, etc.

A clear distinction between the motives of the crime and the concept of guilt did not yet exist, but they were already outlined in the law. Article 6 of the PP mentions the case of murder "revealed at a feast", and Article 7 of the PP - murder "by robbery without any wedding". In the first case, an unintentional, openly committed murder is meant (and "at a feast" means also in a state of intoxication). In the second case - robbery, mercenary, premeditated murder (although in practice it is possible to kill intentionally at a feast, and unintentionally - in a robbery). The infliction of mutilation (truncation of an arm, leg) and other bodily harm was considered a grave crime against the person. They should be distinguished from insult by action (blow with a bowl, horn, sword in a scabbard), which was punished even more severely than light bodily injury, beatings.

According to the Russian Truth, property crimes included robbery (not yet distinguishable from robbery), theft ("tatba"), destruction of other people's property, theft, damage to landmarks, arson, horse-stealing (as a special type of theft), malicious non-payment of debt, etc. the concept of "tatba" was regulated. Such types of it are known as theft from closed premises, horse theft, theft of a slave, agricultural products, etc. The law allowed the murder of a thief with impunity, which was interpreted as a necessary defense.

When determining the punishment for theft, it was taken into account where the property was stolen from (from the yard, barn, field, etc.).

The arson of the courtyard and the threshing floor were also particularly dangerous crimes.

Article 44 listed monetary fines for the theft of various types of livestock, established increased liability for the theft of princely cattle. Strengthening the protection of feudal property, the article meant the suppression of attempts on her, first of all, by the smerds.

When determining the punishment "Russkaya Pravda" took into account the presence of intent when committing a crime: "If someone, out of malice, slaughters someone else's horse or other cattle, he pays a 12 hryvnia fine, and the owner pays a fixed price for the damage caused."

Articles 54, 55 specified in detail malicious, careless and accidental bankruptcy and, depending on the significance of the subjective moment, determined various punishments. In case of accidental or careless bankruptcy, the merchant received an installment plan, payment for several years ("there is no harm from God"), in case of malicious bankruptcy, the merchant could be sold into slavery.

Russkaya Pravda does not know the stages of preparation and commission of criminal offenses.

Crimes against the person. They included murder, but Russkaya Pravda did not mean every murder of a person. Thus, according to Pravda Yaroslav, a murder committed as a blood feud was not a crime and was not subject to punishment. In Pravda Yaroslavichi, revenge was replaced by monetary vengeance and headlongering, and a murder committed as a blood feud became a crime and was subject to punishment on a general basis (Article 1). Article 3 of the Extensive Pravda for the murder of the “prince of her husband” established a double virus (80 hryvnia), and for the murder of all other representatives of the princely administration - a simple virus (40 hryvnia). For the murder free woman Art. 88 Extensive Pravda collected 20 hryvnias.

It was not a crime to murder a night thief (v. 40), caught at the scene of the crime, but provided that at the time of the murder the thief was not tied up, and this murder took place before dawn. The murder of a slave or a slave was not a crime according to Russian Truth (Article 89). The law regarded this as inflicting property damage on the owner of the slave and obliged the murderer to reimburse the owner for the short-term price, and to the prince - 12 hryvnias of sale only in the event of the murder of a slave or a slave without guilt. If the owner himself killed a slave or a slave, then this was not considered a crime, and the guilty did not pay not only the lesson, but also the sale.

According to the Expanded Truth, the most dangerous crime was robbery without any quarrel. For this crime, the capital punishment was established - flow and plunder (Article 7). Almost the same dangerous crime was considered to be the murder of the “prince's husband” in robbery, if a specific killer was not identified and the community was not looking for a murderer. Vira in 40 hryvnia was withdrawn for the murder of free people close to the court, as well as for the murder of boyar and younger princely servants. The murder of other categories of citizens seemed less dangerous for the ruling class, as evidenced by the size of the sale levied in favor of the prince: for an artisan and artisan - 12 hryvnia (Art. 15), a serf and a serf - 5 hryvnia (Art. 16), slaves - 6 hryvnia. A later origin is Art. 89, which provided for the murder of a slave and a slave 12 hryvnia sale to the prince.

Russkaya Pravda devoted quite a lot of attention to other crimes against personal rights. So, Kratkaya Pravda imposed a fine of 40 hryvnias for cutting off a hand, for beatings to bruises and blood it allowed blood feud, and in case of impossibility of revenge - 3 hryvnia for an insult, and the criminal paid the doctor's fee.

For crimes against honor, Russkaya Pravda provided for a 12 hryvnia fine.

Thus, the system of crimes and the system of punishments in Russian Pravda testify to the strict protection of feudal relations by law.

Note that the death penalty is not mentioned in the code, although in practice it undoubtedly took place. The silence can be explained by two circumstances:

The legislator understands the death penalty as a continuation of blood feud, which he seeks to eliminate;

The influence of the Christian church, which opposed the death penalty in principle.

Punishments in the Kiev state were a means of carrying out punitive activities against class enemies and criminals. Only in the initial period of the existence of the Kiev state blood feud was a relic of the primitive communal system. Revenge consisted of inflicting harm on the enemy. The measure of evil inflicted by the avenger on the offender was not determined by anything other than his arbitrariness. Blood feud was not in the interests of the feudal class. The basic principles of feudal law demanded its abolition and the establishment of norms according to which the life, health and honor of feudal lords, as well as their property, would be protected incomparably more strictly than the life, health and property of another free person.

In the second half of the XI century. blood feud as a punishment was replaced by a pecuniary punishment. Russian Truth knows enough complex system monetary fines (virus, sale, lesson). Vira was paid not for all crimes, but for the murder of free people and persons of the princely administration, for cutting off an arm, leg, nose or gouging out the eyes (Articles 1, 2, 3, 11, 12, 27 of the Short Pravda), for the murder of the “prince's husband »Double faults were charged - 80 hryvnias, but for the murder of a slave (Article 89) it was not provided.

In some cases, Russkaya Pravda prescribed a wild virus, or a general one. The community paid for a wild virus if, when committing a murder in robbery, it refused to look for the culprit (Art. 3). In this case, the payment of the vira by the community was envisaged in installments for several years (Article 4). Wild vira was appointed for murder in a quarrel (v. 6), if the offender was with the members of the gang in mutual guarantee. The obligation of the community to help the criminal in the payment of the vira began only when the criminal himself had previously participated in the payments of the wild vira.

The sale was ordered for property crimes, depending on the number of stolen goods and for some crimes against the person (Articles 30, 68), providing for material compensation for injury.

For causing material damage, the perpetrators, according to Russian Pravda, paid monetary compensation to the victims (lesson). It was provided for the murder of slaves (Art. 14, 16, 89), mutilation (Art. 27), beatings (Art. 29). Article 85 gives the entire price list of the set prices, which were collected in favor of the victims for the cattle stolen from them.

According to Russkaya Pravda, the capital punishment remains "flow and plunder." The punishment included the confiscation of property and the surrender of the offender (together with the family) "head", ie. into slavery. The essence of this punishment was gradually reduced to the physical destruction of the offender and his property. S.V. Yushkov gives a vivid example of the use of a stream and the plundering of representatives of the administration who are disagreeable to Novgorod: "... the morning of the murder of Semyon Borisovich, and his whole house was plundered, and he sat down, and his wife." This punishment was imposed for murder in robbery (v. 7), arson (v. 83) and horse-stealing, which, in all likelihood, was punishable by a flood and plunder if it was committed repeatedly by the same person. Otherwise, it is difficult to understand the meaning of Art. 47, which provides for a fine of 3 hryvnias for stealing a prince's horse; and for the stinking horse - 2 hryvnia. "

The death penalty is not mentioned as a punishment in Russian Pravda. However, it was widely applied to those who rebelled against the princely power, to traitors.

In the system of punishments established by Russkaya Pravda, the principles of the right of privilege and a clear class approach to the imposition of punishments were clearly expressed. In Russkaya Pravda, the most ancient elements of custom are still preserved, associated with the principle of talion ("an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"), in cases of blood feud. But main goal punishment becomes compensation for damage (material and moral).

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………… ... 3

Chapter 1 Crime and types of crimes in Russian Pravda ……………… 5

1.1 The concept of "crime" in Russian Pravda ……………………………… ..5

1.2 Types of crimes ……………………………………………………… .10

1.3 Property crimes ………………………………………… ..... 14

Chapter 2 Types of Punishments …………………………………………………… ... 17

2.1 Blood feud, torrent and plunder ..................... ... ... 17

2.2 Vira ……………………………………………………………………… .20

2.3 Other types of punishments ………………………………………………. …… 21

Conclusion ………………………………………………………………… ... 24

Bibliographic list ………………………………………………… ..27

Introduction

Currently great value in human life has the science of criminal law. Developing over the centuries, it constantly changed its composition: it absorbed new, more perfect norms and got rid of outdated ones that had lost their former significance and were out of date. It has long been proven that the institutions of law and the state are closely interconnected, that they constantly intersect, helping each other to develop. The science of criminal law is by no means an exception. It, like many other legal branches, has passed a long thorny path of development, emerging from customary law and, having differentiated along with the state over many centuries, has come down to our times.

The purpose of this work is to analyze the content of this unique monument of Old Russian law, to compare the legal norms set forth in it with those currently in force, to follow their development, transformation, and the withering away of some of them.

The object of the research is the legislation of Russia.

The subject of the research is the norms of Russian Truth.

On this moment In our historical literature, the belief prevails that the private legal life of ancient Russia was most fully and truly reflected in the most ancient monument of Russian law - in Russian Pravda. As far as my knowledge of the material under study permits, I completely agree with this statement, because in Russkaya Pravda almost all branches of the law of that time are covered. This document talks in sufficient detail about the contracts that existed at that time: sale and purchase (of people, things, horses, as well as self-sale), a loan (money, things), lending (with or without interest), personal employment (for service, for performing certain work); it is clearly regulated legal position certain groups of the population (dependent and independent), the main features of private law are fixed. But the most extensive and more detailed section of the other set out is the section devoted to crime and punishment, as well as the trial in Ancient Rus.

Outline the main provisions;

List the main types of crimes and punishments;

Analyze the principles of criminal responsibility for committing crimes of various gravity;

Determine the measure of influence on the punishment system of various sources of law;

Compare the norms on crime and punishment in Russkaya Pravda with the norms of customary Slavic law that were in force before its creation, to identify common and different features in them.

The study used private scientific methods: historical, systemic-structural, comparative-legal.

The work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion and a list of sources used.

Chapter 1 Crime and types of crimes in Russian Pravda

1.1 The concept of "crime" in Russian Pravda

More than 100 copies of Russkaya Pravda have survived to this day. All of them fall into 3 main editions: Short, Extensive and Abbreviated (referred to in the literature as KP, PP and SP, respectively). The oldest edition (prepared no later than 1054) is the Brief Truth, consisting of Yaroslav's Pravda (Art.1-18), Yaroslavich's Pravda (Art.19-41), Virny's Pocon (Art.42), Mostnikov's Lesson (Art.43) ... The extensive edition appeared no earlier than 1113 and is associated with the name of Vladimir Monomakh. It is divided into the Court of Yaroslav (Articles 1-52) and the Charter of Vladimir Monomakh (Articles 53-121). An abridged edition appears in the middle of the 15th century from a revised Extensive edition.

Modern science of criminal law, the term “crime” means a socially dangerous act provided for by the criminal law, committed guilty (ie with intent or negligence) by a sane person who has reached the age of criminal responsibility.

With the introduction of Christianity in Russia, under the influence of a new morality, the pagan concepts of crime and punishment were replaced. In the sphere of criminal law of Ancient Rus, the private nature of the ancient Christian-Byzantine legal norms based on Roman private law is manifested. This replacement is most clearly expressed in the princely statutes and in the Russian Pravda, where any crime was defined not as a violation of the law or the prince's will, but as an “offense”, that is, infliction of material, physical or moral harm to any person or group of persons. For this offense, the perpetrator had to pay some compensation. Thus, the criminal offense did not differ in the law from the civil one.

In the text of the PP, the motives of the crimes are outlined. Thus, Article 6 of the PP mentions a case of murder “at a banquet explicitly”, and Article 7 - murder “by robbery without any quarrel”. In the first case, it means unintentional, openly committed murder (and “at the feast” means also in a state of intoxication). In the second case - robbery, mercenary, premeditated murder (although in practice it is possible to kill intentionally at a feast, but unintentionally in a robbery).

According to Russkaya Pravda, the objects of the crime were person and property. The state has not yet been seen as an object of crime. This was due to the early period of the state's existence and the absence, in this connection, of an abstract concept of the state and state power.

Russkaya Pravda knew two generic objects of crime - personality and property. However, each of the genera includes different types of crimes. Among the crimes against the person should be called: murder, mutilation, wounds, beatings, insult by action. The princely statutes also knew insult by word, where the object of the crime was the honor of a woman. Murder. The crime against life is called in Russian Pravda "murder" or "robbery", but in the first case, it is called murder in general, and in the second - premeditated. The difference between unintentional and premeditated crime is not indicated in the Ancient Truth, the 2nd Truth speaks about it with some ambiguity, it quite clearly distinguishes the mentioned concepts of the 3rd Truth, namely, it distinguishes a murder committed in a "swada" (quarrel), at a feast, open and robbery murder without any wedding, when the murderer is issued on the stream. Crimes against life also included mutilation (removal of an arm or leg, etc.). And then it was clear why it was equal to murder: the crippled person diminished in his legal capacity (in the Christian era, the crippled person entered the care of the church), he could not defend himself. Russkaya Pravda also knew crimes against health: minor injuries (inflicting a wound with a naked sword, taking away a finger, beatings and blows, which had no offense to insult of honor). Honor crimes. Russkaya Pravda knew an insult to honor by deed (pulling out a beard, blowing with an naked sword), and not by word.

Among the crimes against property rights, the following types of crimes were distinguished: theft (tytba), illegal use of someone else's property (unauthorized riding on someone else's horse, harboring runaway slaves, appropriation of a stolen object, malicious non-payment of debts, embezzlement of property through illegal transactions), destruction of someone else's property (arson ). Russian Truth pays Special attention theft (tatbe). The severity of the burden was determined by the value of the stolen. For example, the most difficult type of thief is horse stealing (for the horse was the most important means of production, as well as combat equipment). But along with this, the criminal severity of the crime is measured by the intensity of the criminal will: "if someone steals cattle in a stable, then 3 hryvnias and 30 kunas, in the field then 60 kunas", i.e. theft of things protected by the owner is punishable more heavily than simple theft.

The extermination of other people's things was punished according to the Russian Truth in 3 times more severely than a tatba. For example, arson was punishable by flood and plunder. The severity of the punishment for arson was obviously determined by following points: arson is the most easily accessible, and therefore the most dangerous way destruction of someone else's property; it was often used as a means of class struggle (indignant peasants could take revenge on the owner); the social danger of arson was explained by the fact that the houses were wooden, and, accordingly, the arson of one house could lead to the destruction of the entire settlement. Illegal use of other people's things is punishable according to the Russian Truth on a par with a thief.

In criminal law, the class nature of feudal law is very clearly manifested, openly defending the ruling class and neglecting the interests of the working people. This is clearly seen when considering the individual elements of the corpus delicti.

So, the subject of a crime can be any person, except a slave. Serfs were not recognized as subjects of law at all. Art. 46 Russkaya Pravda says that if the slaves turn out to be thieves, then the prince does not punish them with a fine, since they are not free (and because of this, as the legislator probably believes, they can commit theft at the instigation of their master). The owner of such a slave was obliged to pay double remuneration to the victim. His master is responsible for the actions of the slave. However, in some cases, the victim can deal with the offender slave himself, without resorting to government agencies, up to the murder of a slave who has encroached on a free person.

Russkaya Pravda does not know the age limit of criminal liability, the concept of insanity. Drunkenness does not exclude liability. In the literature, it was argued that intoxication, according to the Russian Truth, mitigated responsibility (murder at a feast). In fact, it was not the state of intoxication that mattered in killing in a fight, but the element of a simple quarrel between equals. Moreover, Russkaya Pravda knows cases when intoxication causes heightened responsibility. So, if the owner hits the purchase under a drunken hand, then he loses this purchase with all his debts; a merchant who has drunk someone else's goods entrusted to him is responsible not only in a civil, but also in a criminal procedure, moreover, very strictly. Russian Truth in Art. 54 mentions a merchant who could drink, lose or spoil someone else's goods, given to him either for transportation or for sale. The agreement of the commission is clearly visible in the next article, where a foreign merchant instructs a Russian to sell his goods at the local market.

Russian Pravda already knows the concept of complicity. This problem can be solved simply: all the accomplices in the crime answer equally, the distribution of functions between them has not yet been noted.

The provisions that determined the responsibility of accomplices in connection with the commission of specific crimes were formulated earlier than others in Russian Pravda. So, in Art. 31 The short version (according to the Academic List) says: "And if (someone) steals a horse or oxen or (steals) a house, and at the same time stole them alone, then pay him a hryvnia (33 hryvnia) and thirty cut; if there are thieves 18 (even 10), then (to pay each) three hryvnias and thirty rezan to pay people (princely).

Russkaya Pravda distinguishes responsibility depending on the subjective side of the crime. It does not distinguish between intent and negligence, but there are two types of intent - direct and indirect. This takes place in the case of responsibility for murder: murder in robbery is punishable by the capital punishment - flood and plunder, murder in "swada" (fight) - only vira. However, some researchers believe that responsibility here does not depend on the form of intent, but on the nature of the crime itself: murder in robbery is a base murder, and murder in a fight can somehow be justified from a moral point of view. On the subjective side, liability for bankruptcy also differs: only intentional bankruptcy is considered criminal. A state of passion excludes responsibility. Art. 6 PP mentions the case of murder “at the banquet”, and v. 7 PP- murder "by robbery without any wedding." In the first case, an unintentional, openly committed murder is meant (and “at a feast” means also in a state of intoxication). In the second case - robbery, mercenary, premeditated murder (although in practice it is possible to kill intentionally at a feast, and unintentionally - in a robbery). A grave crime against the person was mutilation (truncation of an arm, leg) and other bodily harm. They should be distinguished from insult by action (blow with a bowl, horn, sword in a scabbard), which was punished even more severely than light bodily injury, beatings.

According to the norms of Russian Pravda, only a person with free will and consciousness can be a criminal. When committing offenses by capable persons in each individual case, the presence of the consciousness of the wrongness of the action was required. In the same way, for the existence of a crime, the "evil will of the doer" is considered a necessary element. The consciousness and will of the agent can be temporarily paralyzed, as a result of which the act loses its criminal character; this is the so-called state of passion: "if someone hits another with a botog ... and the offended one, unable to bear it, pokes with a sword, then he is not guilty of this." This is the original foundation of the right to revenge. This state was separated from the state of necessary defense. It was noted that the latter prevents a criminal attack, and in the first case (in a state of passion), an already committed criminal offense is punished.

As for the objective side of the corpus delicti, the greatest number of crimes is committed by action. Only in very few cases is criminal inaction also punishable (concealment of a find, prolonged non-repayment of debt).

2.2 Types of crime

Being a legal monument of the feudal state with all its inherent characteristics, Russkaya Pravda in its articles clearly delineates the legal status of various groups of the population. Starting with Article 19, the class division of society is more clearly pronounced. The law establishes fines for the murder of princely servants, for theft and damage to princely property.

Article 19 of the KP reads: “If they kill a fire-dweller for an insult, then the murderer has to pay 80 hryvnia for him, but people do not need to; and for the prince's driveway - 80 hryvnia. " Most likely, the words “murder for offense” mean murder in response to the actions of the victim (as suggested by AI Sobolevsky). It can be assumed that we are talking about the murder of a prince's servant in the performance of his duties.

The next type of premeditated murder according to Russkaya Pravda was robbery. In Ancient Russia, it was considered the gravest crime. In the case of the murder of a fire-dweller, the duty to search for the offender was assigned to the worm (community) on the territory of which the murder was committed. If the killer was not caught, then the rope was obliged to pay the virus in the amount of 80 hryvnia.

A rather interesting rule is set out in Article 21 of the KP, dedicated to the murder of a fire-dweller or a princely tyuntse when they protect the prince's property (“at the cage, or at a horse, or at a herd, or when a cow is stolen”). This article obliges on the spot to deal with the murderer (“kill in the dog's place”), which speaks of the especially dangerous nature of this crime and once again confirms the fact of enhanced protection of the prince's servants.

A number of subsequent articles of the CP (Articles 22-27) list the fines levied for the murder of princely servants, as well as people dependent on the prince. After reading these articles, you can imagine social structure society of that time, to determine the position of certain groups of the population on the social ladder. The fines listed in these articles help us to understand this. So, the life of the prince's tiun and the senior groom is estimated at 80 hryvnia, the life of a village headman, a plowman, a slave-nurse or her child - at 12 hryvnia, and the lives of ranks, smerds and slaves are valued below all - only 5 hryvnias.

Revenge in Russkaya Pravda is mentioned not only in articles dealing with murder. So, for example, according to article 2 of the CP, in case of beating a person to blood and bruises, the victim is given an alternative: either to take revenge or take 3 hryvnia from the offender for the offense. Moreover, in this case, a witness is not even required. “If there is no sign on it, then let the vidocq come; if he cannot, then it’s the end ”. Thus, in this article we first encounter the concept of vidocq, i.e. a direct witness - an eyewitness to what is happening. Besides vidocq, Russkaya Pravda knows one more type of witness - hearsay, i.e. a person who can vouch for the innocence of the accused, defend his good name.

Unlike Article 2 of the CP, Article 3 pays attention not to the nature of the damage inflicted, but considers the tools with which the beatings are inflicted: batog, pole, palm, bowl, horn, blunt side of a sharp weapon. Such a list suggests that the law does not take into account the degree of danger to the health of the victim of the object with which the beating is inflicted. It is not the bodily harm inflicted that matters, but the insult directly inflicted by the blow. In this case, the victim has the right to immediate revenge. If the offended did not immediately take revenge on the offender for one reason or another (did not overtake), then the latter is subject to a monetary penalty in the amount of 12 hryvnia.

Also, Article 4 of the KP (a blow with a sword not removed from its scabbard) and Article 8 of the KP (pulling out a beard and mustache) read about the insult. Both of these articles provide for a penalty of 12 hryvnia.

Article 9 of the KP reads: "If someone, having taken out a sword, does not strike, he will put down the hryvnia." The crime described in this article can be characterized as an attempted crime, or as a completed crime (threat, insult). I agree with the statement of V.I.Sergeevich and M.F. Vladimirsky-Budanov that the said act is not an insult, but a threat, since Article 3 of the KP provides an approximate list of objects, the impact of which was offensive.

Next row articles of the CP (Articles 5, 6 and 7) is devoted to self-harm. There are three main types of self-harm: injury to the arm, leg, and finger. The removal of a hand, as well as the deprivation of the opportunity to use it, in ancient Russian law was equated with death, therefore, for this insult, a punishment was imposed, which was equal to the punishment for murder, i.e. a fine of 40 hryvnia was imposed. Also, blood feud could be used as a punishment for this crime. But unlike other articles, which provided for blood feud as a form of punishment, in the event of injury, relatives of the victim could take revenge, tk. he himself was not able to.

The princely statutes provided for crimes against the church, as well as against family relations. The Church, imposing a new form of marriage, with the help of criminal law, fought hard against the remnants of pagan rituals.

There were no crimes against the state as special kind crimes. This was due to the early period of the state's existence and the absence, in this connection, of an abstract concept of the state and state power. Crimes against the princely power were considered as crimes against the prince as an individual. Simply in such cases, direct reprisals were used without trial and investigation. Just remember what Princess Olga did with her husband's murderers.

1.4 Property crimes

Not only the princely servants enjoyed special protection, but also his property. Thus, Article 28 of the KP establishes the amount of fines for the abduction or extermination of princely cattle. The same article also mentions the smerd's horse. Immediately striking is the different amount of the fine for the theft of the prince's horse and the stinker. In my opinion, this difference is not caused by the different use of these horses (that is, the prince's horse is fighting, and the peasant's is a worker), but simply the law puts the prince's property under greater protection in comparison with the property of the smerd.

Whole line articles of the CP (Articles 29, 31, 32, 35 -37, 39, 40) consider various cases of theft. In the monument of law I am studying, a significant place is assigned to theft, the system of punishments for it has been developed in sufficient detail, which indicates the widespread occurrence of this antisocial phenomenon at that distant time.

It should be noted that Russkaya Pravda provides for more severe punishment in the event of a crime committed by a group of persons, i.e. the concept of complicity is already known (Articles 31 and 40 of the CP). Regardless of the number of criminals, each of them had to pay an increased fine compared to the fine imposed for theft committed alone.

Article 38 of the KP confirms the rule established, apparently, by custom - the right to kill a thief at the scene of a crime. But the law restricts this right, allowing him to be killed only at night and prohibiting the killing of a tied thief. In this, there is a similarity with the current concept of exceeding the limits of necessary defense. This article, as well as Article 33 of the KP (which provides for sanctions for physical violence against a smerd, fireman, tiun or swordsman without a prince's permission), aims to strengthen princely jurisdiction by limiting lynching. Indirectly confirming the existence of a community court, Article 33 of the KP indicates the desire of the princely power to establish a monopoly on the court.

It should not be overlooked that when drafting the PP, the legislator not only used the norms of the CP, but also retained the composition of its articles when it was appropriate. Thus, Articles 10 - 14 of the KP passed almost unchanged, respectively, to Articles 31 - 35 PP. Just like in the CP, in the Extensive edition there are a number of articles (Articles 35 - 39 PP) on the code of stolen property. The source of these articles are Articles 14 - 16 of the KP, which regulate the procedure for the Code.

It is inextricably linked with this complex of articles, and at the same time it is continued by articles on theft (tatba). Article 40 of the PP allows, without any trial, to kill a night thief at the scene of a crime “in the dog's place”, thereby duplicating Article 38 of the KP. If the thief was kept until dawn, and people saw him tied up, then he cannot be killed, otherwise he will have to pay a fine of 12 hryvnia.

If the thief was captured and his life was saved, then at dawn he should be handed over to the princely court.

Comparing Articles 41 and 43 of the PP on theft from closed room, (ie on the theft of specially protected property), from Articles 42 and 45 of the PP on theft “on the field”, it can be noted that in the first case, the punishment is significantly higher. From this it follows that the Extensive Edition of Russkaya Pravda introduces a new norm that was absent in the KP and reflects the strengthening of the protection of private property in consumer goods and means of production.

A more progressive rule in comparison with the KP is set out in Article 44 of the PP. Its progressive nature lies in the fact that, unlike the articles of the KP, which tried to thoroughly list the objects of theft, this article allows the victim to return the property stolen from him without specifying the object of theft.

At the end of the cycle of articles devoted to theft, Article 46 of the PP, which speaks of theft committed by a slave, i.e. a person who is personally dependent and does not bear personal responsibility to the prince for this reason (that is, does not pay the “sale”). In this case, the responsibility rests with the owner, who is obliged to reimburse the victim for the double value of the stolen goods.

Chapter 2 Types of Punishments

2.1 Blood feud, torrent and plunder

The system of punishments according to Russkaya Pravda is quite simple. The death penalty is not mentioned in the code, although in practice it undoubtedly took place. The silence can be explained by two circumstances:

The legislator understands the death penalty as a continuation of blood feud, which he seeks to eliminate;

The influence of the Christian Church, which opposed the death penalty in principle.

The capital punishment for Russkaya Pravda remains a stream and plunder, imposed only in three cases - for murder in robbery (Art. 7 of the PP), arson (Art. 83 of the PP) and horse-stealing (Art. 35 of the PP). The punishment included the confiscation of property and the surrender of the offender (along with the family) to the “head”, i.e. into slavery. This punishment included the confiscation of property and the surrender of the offender (along with the family) to the “head”, ie. into slavery.

Looting meant the forcible seizure of property. The stream included various forms of personal punishment: exile, enslavement, and even murder. From here such forms of punishment as the death penalty, corporal punishment and imprisonment, known in our country by Byzantine models after the adoption of Christianity, could have developed. Already, the bishops advised Vladimir to execute the robbers, although later they also proposed to restore old order collection of vir. In the annals, however, one can find indications that those condemned to death could pay off her.

In the literature, there is a lot of controversy about the legal basis of blood feud. Was it a pre-trial or post-trial punishment? Russkaya Pravda does not give a direct answer to this question. Historically, blood feud has developed as the duty of the family of the victim to deal with the offender. But the process of feudalization Old Russian state, the increased role of the prince and the princely court made significant changes in the application of the custom of blood feud. For some time, the princely court coexisted with the communal one, but gradually, thanks to the strengthening of feudal relations, the princely court took a leading position, pushing the communal court into the background.

Thus, it becomes possible for the prince to intervene in the custom of blood feud, and the murderer has the opportunity to redeem himself through the prince's mediation (although, no doubt, he could have negotiated with the relatives of the murdered person before). At this time, a special category of persons cut off from their community (merchants, outcasts), as well as numerous princely warriors and servants (gridni, yabetniks, swordsmen, firemen, etc.), who needed special princely protection, stood out. Having broken with the community for various reasons, they lost their protector. Now the prince was to become their new protector, so they were interested in strengthening the princely power. In turn, restraining the lynching of the community, the prince introduced his own measure of punishment - vira, i.e. a fine of 40 hryvnia, paid for the murder to the prince's treasury.

Undoubtedly ancient custom blood feud did not suit either the prince, who was interested in weakening the communal courts that hindered the centralization of power, or the Christian Church with its new standards of morality and ethics, but, being very widespread, it could not be liquidated immediately. Therefore, it can be assumed that the prince gives his sanction to blood feud, securing this provision in Article 1 of Yaroslav's Pravda. Thus, blood feud in the Russian Truth has a pronounced transitional character from the direct reprisal of the clan to the punishment imposed and executed by the state. But it should be noted that blood feud is applied only in the case of the killing of a free person by a free person.

Only after the death of Yaroslav the Wise, “having gathered again, his sons Izyaslav, Svyatoslav, Vsevolod and their husbands Kosnyachko, Pereneg, Nikifor canceled the blood feud for the murder, and decided to be ransomed with money” (Article 2 PP).

Primary form punishment in Ancient Russia is revenge carried out by the victim and his neighbors. At first, it was extremely uneven, as it was determined by the degree of angry feelings and the strength of the victims. Later, revenge begins to be subject to various restrictions, thanks to which it acquires a public character, because it is subject to the control of public authorities. Restrictions on revenge are reduced to: reducing the number of crimes for which revenge is allowed, setting a time limit for revenge, narrowing the circle of avengers.

“Russkaya Pravda” knows revenge for murder, mutilation, bloody ”blue wounds, even for a blow with a hand or any non-military weapon, as well as for theft. Children take revenge for injuries, only the victim himself can take revenge for wounds and beatings and, moreover, only after striking.

“Russkaya Pravda” of the Extensive edition mentions only revenge for murder and theft and does not impose punishment on the one who pokes a sword for the blow inflicted. The court checked the observance of the rules of revenge. At the same time, the court itself could award revenge. A hint of post-trial revenge is contained in the Brief Edition of Pravda and in the chronicle story about the trial of the Suzdal wizards. In addition to these restrictions, the right to asylum played an important role in mitigating revenge. The places of refuge were, first of all, churches, about which several chronicle indications have survived. “Russkaya Pravda” in one case mentions asylum 8 in a private house: a slave who struck a free man could hide in a mansion, and the master could not betray him.

2.2 Vira

A ransom is a monetary reward paid by the offender and his relatives to the victim and his neighbors, subject to their refusal to take revenge. Such a substitution of one custom for another. essentially the opposite, could only happen gradually. Refusal to take revenge was accompanied by rituals that eliminated any suspicion of cowardice in front of the enemy.

Once established, ransoms are compiled into a rather complex system of rules. The size of the ransom, determined first by agreement of the parties, is gradually fixed in accordance with the damage caused. Intervention of public authorities in the ransom system entails the establishment of fines both in favor of the authorities and in favor of the victims. So there are: vira - a penalty for murder in favor of the prince; payment for the head, dullness or headache, received in favor of the relatives of the murdered; sale - a fine for other offenses, except for murder and mutilation (for mutilation, a half-verse was charged), also levied in favor of the prince.

In favor of the victims of crimes other than murders, a lesson, protor, ruin, etc. was paid. The ransom system is the dominant form of punishment for Russkaya Pravda and its contemporary monuments, but it is not the only one.

Vira is a fine that was imposed only for murder. Vira entered the prince's treasury. The relatives of the victim were paid a headache equal to vira. Vira could be single (40 hryvnia for the murder of a simple free person) or double (80 hryvnia for the murder of a person with privileges - Articles 19, 22 KP, Article 3 PP).

There was a special type of vira - "wild" or "general", which was imposed on the entire community. The punishment was for simple, non-violent murder; at the same time, the community either refused to extradite its suspect in the murder of a member, or could not “divert the trail from itself” (suspicions). The community paid for its member only if he had previously participated in large payments for his neighbors. The institution of the "wild" vira served as a police function, binding all members of the community with mutual responsibility. For the infliction of mutilation, grievous bodily harm, "half-vests" were appointed (20 hryvnias - Art. 27.88PP). All other crimes (both against the person and property) were punished with a fine - sale, the amount of which was differentiated depending on the severity of the crime (1, 3.12 hryvnia). The sale went to the treasury, the victim received a lesson - monetary compensation for the damage caused to him. Russian Pravda knows the institute of wild or indiscriminate vira (in the amount of 80 hryvnia), imposed for the murder of princely servants. For example, in Art. 19, 22 and 23 KP mentions a fine of 80 hryvnia for the murder of a fireman, princely tyun or groom.

2.3 Other types of punishment

Article 11 begins the next section (Articles 11 - 17), establishing the rates of fines for the murder of representatives of various social groups associated with the princely (and partly with the boyar) economy, ranging from high-ranking tiuns and ending with a slave. This section introduces the following kill penalty system:

Ognischanin, tiun, equestrian - 80 hryvnia;

Princely youth, groom, cook - 40 hryvnia;

Rural tiun, artisan, nurse - 12 hryvnia;

Slave - 6 hryvnia;

Smerd, serf, ryadovich - 5 hryvnias.

In this section, Article 15, which says about fines for the murder of an artisan. Probably, the reason for the creation of this article and the establishment of a high fine of 12 hryvnia was the fact that a significant number of handicraft items were not bought at that time, but were produced by personally dependent artisans - slaves. Since in the XI-XII centuries, i.e. at the time of the creation of the Expanded Truth, Ancient Russia was experiencing a period of rise and flourishing of handicraft production, then the fact of the increased importance of artisans in the economy and the improvement of their qualifications becomes irrefutable.

Like other medieval Truths, the Expanded Truth knows the institution of the horde, i.e. so-called "Divine judgment". Articles 21 and 22 PP mention the testing of those persons who cannot find witnesses (rumors) to overthrow the slander with iron and water.

Of the other punishments used in Ancient Russia, it is also worth mentioning the punishment with a whip and even the use of self-mutilating punishments in special cases.

However, despite the increasing distribution in Kievan Rus of the above types of punishment, the first place in public relations that period was occupied by self-injustice or reconciliation of victims with violators. In this regard, it is worth paying attention to the specifics of understanding crime in Ancient Russia. This is not a violation of legal norms that threaten the security of the state or society, but an infringement and trampling on private interests. The very term "crime" is not known to antiquity. Instead, words such as resentment, litter, ruin, protor are used. Resentment did not mean an insult to honor at all. This was the name of both murder and non-payment of a debt. In all these words, in the foreground is the concept of harm caused to an individual or a group of individuals. The material side of the crime was thus predominant. The main attention was paid to the material damage caused by the crime, and not to the danger threatening from evil will.

Conclusion

Undoubtedly, Russkaya Pravda is the most unique monument of Old Russian law. Being the first written code of laws, it nevertheless quite fully covers a very broad sphere of the relations of that time. It is a set of developed feudal law, which reflects the norms of criminal and civil law and process.

Russkaya Pravda is an official act. Its text itself contains indications of the princes who adopted or changed the law (Yaroslav the Wise, Yaroslavichi, Vladimir Monomakh).

Russkaya Pravda can be defined as a code of private law - all of its subjects are individuals, concepts legal entity the law doesn't know yet. Some features of codification are related to this. Among the types of crimes provided for by Russian Pravda, there are no crimes against the state. However, this does not mean that the actions against the princely power took place with impunity. Simply, in such cases, direct reprisals were used without trial and investigation. The personality of the prince himself, as an object of criminal encroachment, was considered as an individual who differed from others only in higher status and privileges. The content of property rights was associated with specific subjects; it could be different depending on the property. Russkaya Pravda does not yet know the abstract concepts: "property", "possession", "crime". The code was built according to a casual system, the legislator tried to provide for all possible life situations.

The private nature of ancient law manifested itself in the field of criminal law. According to Russian Pravda, a crime was defined not as a violation of the law or the prince's will, but as an "offense", that is, causing moral or material damage to a person or group of persons. A criminal offense was not delimited in the law from a civil one. The objects of the crime were persons and property. The objective side of the crime fell into two stages: an attempted crime (for example, a person who drew a sword but did not strike was punished) and a completed crime. The law outlined the concept of complicity (the case of robbery "in a crowd" is mentioned), but he did not share the roles of accomplices (instigator, concealer, etc.).

In Russkaya Pravda, there is already an idea of ​​exceeding the limits of necessary defense (if the thief is killed after his arrest, after some time, when the immediate danger in his actions has already disappeared). To mitigating circumstances, the law attributed the state of intoxication of the criminal, to aggravating circumstances - selfish intent. The legislator knew the concept of recidivism, repetition of a crime (in the case of horse theft).

These legal features are due to the sources of Russkaya Pravda. The rules and principles of customary law included in it are incompatible with abstract concept legal entity. For custom, all subjects are equal, and all of them can only be individuals.

The norms of Russkaya Pravda protected private property (movable and immovable), regulated the procedure for its transfer by inheritance, according to obligations and contracts.

The system of punishments according to Russkaya Pravda is quite simple. The death penalty is not mentioned in the code, although in practice it undoubtedly took place.

The capital punishment under Russkaya Pravda remains a stream and plunder, imposed only in three cases - for murder in robbery (Art. 7 of the PP), arson (Art. 83 of the PP) and horse-stealing (Art. 35 of the PP). The punishment included the confiscation of property and the surrender of the offender (along with the family) to the “head”, i.e. into slavery.

The next most severe type of punishment was vira - a fine that was imposed only for murder. Vira entered the prince's treasury.

The relatives of the victim were paid a headache equal to vira. Vira could be single (40 hryvnia for the murder of a simple free person) or double (80 hryvnia for the murder of a person with privileges - Articles 19, 22 KP, Article 3 PP).

There was a special type of vira - "wild" or "general", which was imposed on the entire community. The punishment was for simple, non-violent murder; at the same time, the community either refused to extradite its suspect in the murder of a member, or could not “divert the trail from itself” (suspicions). The community paid for its member only if he had previously participated in large payments for his neighbors. Institute

"Wild" vira performed a police function, tying all members of the community with mutual responsibility. For the infliction of mutilation, grievous bodily harm, "half-veils" were appointed (20 hryvnia - Art. 27.88PP). All other crimes (both against the person and property) were punished with a fine - sale, the amount of which was differentiated depending on the severity of the crime (1, 3.12 hryvnia). Sale

entered the treasury, the victim received a lesson - monetary compensation

for the damage caused to him.

In Russkaya Pravda, the most ancient elements of custom are preserved, associated with the principle of talion ("an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"), in cases of blood feud. But the main purpose of punishment becomes compensation for damage (material and moral).

Bibliographic list

Educational and special literature:

1. Vladimirsky - Budanov, M.F. Review of the history of Russian law. / M.F. Vladimirsky - Budanov. - Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix. - 1995 - 724s;

2. Zemtsov, B.N. History of domestic state and law. / B.N. Zemtsov. - M .: Sirius. - 2009. - 336s .;

3. Isaev, I.A. History of the state and law of Russia. / I.A. Isaev .- M .: Jurist. - 1998.- 428s .;

4. History of state and law of Russia: textbook; ed. Yu.P. Titov. - M.: Norma. - 2004. - 544 p .;

5. History of the domestic state and law. Part 1: tutorial; ed. O.I. Chistyakov. - M .: Jurist. - 2004. - 413s .;

6. Klyuchevsky, V.O. Russian history. Full course of lectures in three books... / V.O. Klyuchevsky. - Moscow. - Thought. - 1993. - 241s .;

7. Kudinov, O. A. History of domestic state and law. / O.A. Kudinov. - M.: Prospect. - 2004. - 273s .;

8. Russian legislation of the X-XX centuries. T. 1. Legislation of Ancient Rus: ed. Vasilyeva, O.A - Moscow. - Legal literature. - 1998 .-- 592s;

9. Sverdlov, M.B. From Russian Law to Russian Truth. / M.b. Sverdlov. - Moscow. - Legal literature. - 1988. - 194s .;

10. Syrykh, V.M. History of the state and law of Russia. / V.M. Raw. - M .: Prospect. - 2000 .-- 228s;

11. Reader on the history of state and law of Russia; under Yu.P. Titov. - M .: SIRIUS. - 2005. - 464 p .;

12. Khrisanov, V.I. History of the state and law of Russia. / IN AND. Khrisanov. - SPb. : Peter. - 1999. - 516s .;

Periodicals:

13. Kuznetsov, D.V. The Punishment System: History and Perspectives. / D.V. Kuznetsov. // Russian investigator. - 2005. - No. 6. - P. 17 - 29;

14. Skuratov, Yu. A. Conceptual issues of the development of criminal legal system in Russia / Yu.A. Skuratov // Legality. - 1997. -No. 3.- P.44-49;

15. Tikhomirov, M.N. Lists and origin of editions of Russkaya Pravda. / M.N. Tikhomirov. // Bulletin of Moscow State University. - 1999. - No. 11. - S. 32-35;

16. Yushkov, S.V. Russian Truth: Origin, Sources, Its Significance. / S.V. Yushkov. // Legal literature. - 2001. - No. 5. - P.11-14.

Zemtsov, B.N. History of domestic state and law. / B.N. Zemtsov. - M .: Sirius. - 2009. - S. 58;

Kudinov, O. A. History of domestic state and law. / O.A. Kudinov. - M.: Prospect. - 2004. - S. 62 .;

Reader on the history of state and law of Russia; under Yu.P. Titov. - M .: SIRIUS. - 2005. - P.59 .;

Sverdlov, M.B. From Russian Law to Russian Truth. / M.b. Sverdlov. - Moscow. - Legal literature. - 1988. - S. 93;

The section devoted to crime and punishment according to the Russian Truth is key in my term paper since it is in it that, using the necessary sources, I will try to most accurately reflect the peculiarities of the criminal law of Ancient Rus, answer the questions posed to me and solve the main tasks set out by me in the introduction to this work.

The modern science of criminal law under the term "crime" understands a socially dangerous act provided for by the criminal law, committed guilty (ie with intent or negligence) by a sane person who has reached the age of criminal responsibility. And what was meant by this term in the distant period of the creation of Russian Truth? This is the question we will have to answer in this chapter.

With the introduction of Christianity in Russia, under the influence of a new morality, the pagan concepts of crime and punishment were replaced. In the sphere of criminal law of Ancient Rus, the private nature of the ancient Christian-Byzantine legal norms based on Roman private law is manifested. This replacement is most clearly expressed in the princely statutes and in the Russian Pravda, where any crime was defined not as a violation of the law or the prince's will, but as an "offense", that is, causing material, physical or moral harm to any person or group of persons. For this offense, the perpetrator had to pay some compensation. Thus, the criminal offense did not differ in the law from the civil one.

Fines dominate in the Republic of Poland, although in practice the arsenal of criminal penalties was quite large. The code was issued shortly after the adoption of Christianity, and was intended to break the last ties with paganism. Severe forms of punishment contradicted the Christian doctrine of humanity, they were not included in the code. RP is purely secular, criminal penalties against the interests of the church were established in church statutes.

In practice, the following types of punishments were used: blood feud (it can only conditionally be attributed to punishments), flood and plunder, death penalty, criminal fines, imprisonment, self-injurious punishment. Criminal fines for encroachment on a person are of a pronounced class character; in case of encroachment on property, this is manifested less sharply.

Murder.

Article 1 of Pravda Yaroslav the Wise provides for revenge of relatives for murder, if there are no avengers, then a fine of 40 hryvnia (gr.) Is paid. In this article, there is no social differentiation of those guilty when paying a fine, but murder is recognized as the most dangerous crime, all editions of the RP begin with it. In truth, the Yaroslavichs for the murder of the firemen, the grooms of the prince, the tiun provided for an increased fine of 80 g., For the murder of a free man, a fine of 40 g was paid.

True, the Yaroslavichi admits the murder of a thief at the scene of a crime, even if he is a princely fireman (21, 38). The law obliged the detained thief to be tied up and taken to the prince's court for trial. In the Extensive Pravda (PR.PR) (2) there is an indication that the sons of Yaroslav the Wise canceled the “head-kill” for the murderers and introduced monetary fines.

The ransoms for murder have been around for quite some time. In PR.PR. mentions numerous categories of persons and the amount of fines for their murder. The murder of a wife (Article 88) was punishable by the same court as the murder of a husband. The code is silent on how they dealt with female murderers. The murder of a slave was equated with the destruction of someone else's property, for it the owner was paid its cost.

In all these cases it comes about ordinary domestic killings on the basis of quarrels or fights, but the RP also mentions more dangerous crimes - robbery and murder in robbery.

Robbery meant professional criminality, damage to property and person, the consequence of which could be deliberately stipulated by the code murder in robbery (3.7 PR, PR, 20 PR, YR). The robbers who committed the murder did not pay a fine, but were issued to the prince for a stream and plunder. Communities were required to search for murderers or pay fines.

Crimes against the person.

Beatings, insults, bodily harm were punishable by fines. Although the fines were differentiated depending on the severity of the injury, there is no clear understanding of the degree of harm in the RP.

Property crimes.

Most of all attention in RP is paid to theft, it is written in detail what fine the thief must pay for theft of various items. General Principle such, the victim should fully compensate for the material damage, so the perpetrator must pay the cost of the stolen and pay a fine. Estate protection is rare. The murder of a thief at the scene of a crime was not considered a crime and did not entail punishment.

Stream and plunder.

In PR, PR, a stream and plunder was appointed in three cases for the most dangerous crimes: for stealing a horse, setting fire to a house and a threshing floor, professional robbery (Article 7, 83). It is impossible to accurately determine the content of this type of punishment, not a single description of such a practice has come down to us. The property was confiscated in favor of the prince, and the criminal himself turned into slavery. The fate of his wife and children is not clear.

The death penalty.

Russian truth does not know the death penalty, but it is known that it was used.

Criminal fines.

Fines were the main type of punishment for RP, applied for all types of crimes.

SALE is the most common fine paid for beatings, encroachments on property, insults. Size 1-12 gr. The sale is paid to the prince, it is a public fine, testifying to the free state of the guilty party.

VIRA was a criminal fine that was paid only for murder and only for a free person. In PR.YAR, M, the size of the vira is the same for all - 40g. In the PR of the Yaroslavichs, a double bee was installed for the firemen and grooms.

GOBLET. The law did not condone the killer, who even invested money in a wild virus. In addition to vira, he had to pay head-on to the relatives of the murdered person in the amount of 12 grams. From own funds (5).

LESSONS. Lessons were fines for the destruction of property and property. Since slaves and slaves were equated with the property of the owners, a lesson was paid for their murder, not a vira.