The Council Code of 1649, having summarized and absorbed the previous experience of creating legal norms, had its own sources . Sources of the Code are:

Legal experts;

Directive books of orders;

Royal decrees;

Duma verdicts;

Decisions of Zemsky Sobors (most of the articles were compiled based on petitions from council members);

- “Stoglav”;

Lithuanian and Byzantine legislation;

New decree articles on “robbery and murder” (1669), on estates and estates (1677), on trade (1653 and 1677), which were included in the body of legal norms of the Code after 1649.

The Council Code defines head of state status- Tsar, autocratic and hereditary monarch. The provision on the approval (election) of the tsar at the Zemsky Assembly did not at all shake the established principles, but, on the contrary, justified them. Even criminal intent (not to mention actions) directed against the person of the monarch was severely punished.

The Code contained a set of norms that regulated the most important industries government controlled. These norms can be conditionally classified as administrative. Attaching peasants to the land (Chapter 11 “The Trial of the Peasants”); the townsman reform, which changed the position of the “white settlements” (chap. 14); change in the status of patrimony and estate (chap. 16 and 17); regulation of the work of local government bodies (Chapter 21); entry and exit regime (Article 6) - all these measures formed the basis of administrative and police reforms.

Important transformations with the adoption of the Council Code took place in the region judicial rights. The Code constituted a whole set of norms regulating the organization of the court and process. Compared to the Code of Laws, there is an even greater differentiation of the process into two forms: “trial” and “search”.

Chapter 10 of the Code describes in detail the various procedures of the court: it was divided into two processes - the “trial” itself and the “decision”, i.e. rendering a sentence, a decision. The trial began with the “initiation”, the filing of a petition. The defendant was summoned to court by a bailiff, he could present guarantors, and also fail to appear in court twice if there were good reasons for this. The court accepted and used various proof: witness testimony (at least ten witnesses), written evidence (the most confidential of them are officially certified documents), kissing the cross (for disputes over an amount not exceeding one ruble), drawing lots. To obtain evidence, “general” (a survey of the population about the fact of a crime) and “general” (about a specific person suspected of a crime) search were used. A unique procedural action in court was the so-called “pravezh”. The defendant (most often an insolvent debtor) was regularly subjected to corporal punishment by the court (beating with a rod on his bare calves). The number of such procedures should have been equivalent to the amount of debt. So, for example, for a debt of one hundred rubles they flogged for a month). “Pravezh was not just a punishment - it was also a measure to encourage the defendant to fulfill the obligation (himself or through guarantors). The settlement was oral, but recorded in a “judicial list”; each stage was formalized in a special document.

The search or “detective” was used in the most serious criminal cases. Special place and attention was given to crimes about which it was stated: “the word and deed of the sovereign,” i.e. in which the state interest was affected. The case in the search process could begin with a statement from the victim, with the discovery of a crime, or with an ordinary slander.

In Chapter 21 of the Council Code of 1649, such a procedural procedure as torture was regulated for the first time. The basis for its use could be the results of a “search”, when the testimony was divided: part in favor of the suspect, part against him. The use of torture was regulated as follows: firstly, it could be used no more than three times, with a certain break; secondly, the testimony given during torture (“slander”) had to be cross-checked using other procedural measures (interrogation, oath, search).

In area criminal law The following changes have been made. First of all, the circle of subjects of the crime is determined: they can be either individuals or a group of persons. The law divides the subjects of a crime into main and secondary, understanding the latter as accomplices. In turn, complicity can be physical (assistance, practical assistance, committing the same actions as the main subject of the crime) and intellectual (for example, incitement to murder in Chapter 22). In connection with this, even a slave who committed a crime at the direction of his master began to be recognized as a subject of a crime. At the same time, it should be noted that the law distinguished from secondary subjects of a crime (accomplices) persons who were only involved in the commission of a crime: accomplices (persons who created the conditions for the commission of a crime), connivers (persons obliged to prevent the crime and did not do so), non-informers ( persons who did not report the preparation and commission of a crime), concealers (persons who hid the criminal and traces of the crime). The Code, among other things, knows the division of crimes into intentional, careless and accidental. For a careless crime, the perpetrator is punished in the same way as for an intentional criminal act (punishment follows not for the motive of the crime, but for its result). The law also distinguishes mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Mitigating circumstances include intoxication; uncontrollability of actions caused by insult or threat (affect); and to aggravating ones - repetition of the crime, the amount of harm, the special status of the object and subject of the crime, the combination of several crimes.

The law distinguishes separate stages of a criminal act: intent (which in itself can be punishable), attempted crime and commission of a crime. The law also knows the concept of relapse, which in the Council Code coincides with the concept of a “dashing person,” and the concept of extreme necessity, which is not punishable only if the proportionality of its real danger on the part of the criminal is observed. Violation of proportionality meant exceeding the limits of necessary defense and was punished.

The objects of crime according to the Council Code of 1649 were: church, state, family, person, property and morality. Crimes against the church were considered the most dangerous and that is why they were put in first place, which was done for the first time in the history of Russian secular codifications. This change had a double meaning. On the one hand, the church occupied a special place in public life, and on the other, the adoption of the church under the protection of state institutions and laws indicated their priority in the political system.

The Council Code of 1649 brought great changes to the region real, obligatory and inheritance law. The scope of civil law relations was defined quite clearly. The legislator was encouraged to do this by the development of commodity-money relations, the formation of new types and forms of ownership, and the quantitative growth of civil transactions.

The subjects of civil law relations were both private (individuals) and collective persons. In the 17th century, the legal rights of a private individual gradually expanded due to concessions from a collective entity. Legal thinking of this era was characterized by the consideration of established relations as eternal relations. Legal relations that arose on the basis of norms regulating the sphere of property relations were characterized by the instability of the status of the subject of rights and obligations. First of all, this was expressed in the division of several powers associated with one subject and one right (for example, conditional land ownership gave the subject the rights of possession and use, but not disposal of the subject). With this, difficulty arose in determining the true full-fledged subject. Subjects of civil law had to satisfy certain requirements, such as gender (there was a significant increase in the legal capacity of women compared to the previous stage), age (the qualification of 15-20 years made it possible to independently accept an estate, enslaving obligations, etc.), social and property status.

According to the Council Code, things were the subject of a number of powers, relations and obligations. The main methods of acquiring property were seizure, prescription, discovery, grant, and direct acquisition in exchange or purchase.

In the Code of 1649, regulation is acquired land grant. It was a complex set of legal actions, including the issuance of a letter of complaint; drawing up a certificate (i.e. recording in the order book certain information about the person assigned); taking possession, which consisted in the public measurement of land. The distribution of land, along with the Local Order, was carried out by other bodies - the Rank Order, the Order of the Grand Palace, the Little Russian, Novgorod, Siberian and other orders. In the 17th century, contract remained the main method of acquiring ownership of property, and in particular land. In a contract, ritual rituals lose their significance, formalized actions (participation of witnesses in concluding a contract) are replaced by written acts (“assault” of witnesses without their personal participation).

For the first time in the Council Code of 1649 it was regulated easement institute(legal restriction of the property rights of one person in the interests of the right of use of another or other persons). The legislator knew personal easements (restrictions in favor of certain persons specifically specified in the law), for example, the weeding of meadows by warriors in service. Easements in rem (limitation of property rights in the interests of an indefinite number of entities) included: the right of the mill owner to flood the underlying meadow owned by another person for production purposes; the ability to build a stove near the wall of a neighbor’s house or build a house on the boundary of someone else’s property (Chapter 10). Along with this, the right of ownership was limited either by a direct prescription of the law, or by the establishment of a legal regime that did not guarantee “eternal ownership.”

The Council Code of 1649 is a unified set of laws of Rus', regulating all spheres of life of the state and citizens.

Reasons for the creation of the Council Code

The last legislative document adopted before the creation of the Council Code dated back to 1550 () and was without a doubt outdated. Since the adoption of the last document, significant changes have occurred in the state and economic system: new government bodies, decrees were adopted, sometimes repeating the old ones with some clarifications, and sometimes contradicting them. It was impossible to work with the outdated document, so we decided to create a new one.

Existing legislative acts and new documents were not stored in one place, but were scattered throughout the country and belonged to the departments in which they were adopted. This led to the fact that legal proceedings in different parts countries was carried out on the basis different laws, since in more distant provinces they simply did not know about orders from Moscow.

In 1648, the Salt Riot occurred. The workers who rebelled demanded civil rights and the creation of a new legal document. The situation became critical, it was no longer possible to postpone it, so a meeting was assembled, which spent a whole year developing a new bill.

The process of creating the Cathedral Code

The creation of a new document was not carried out by one person, as was the case before, but by a whole commission, headed by N.I. Odoevsky. The Code went through several main stages before the king signed it:

• first, careful work was carried out with numerous sources of law (documents, case law, etc.);
• then meetings were held on the topic of certain legal acts that raised any doubts;
• the drafted document was sent for consideration to, and then to the sovereign;
• after editing there was another discussion of all the amendments;
• the bill was supposed to come into force only after it was signed by all members of the commission.

This approach was innovative and made it possible to create a complete, well-systematized document that differed favorably from its predecessors.

Sources of the Council Code

The main sources of the Council Code were:

• Byzantine law;
• Lithuanian Statute of 1588 (used as a model);
• petitions to the king;
• decree books in which all issued acts and decrees were recorded.

In the Council Code there has been a tendency to divide the rules of law into various branches and to systematize them in accordance with this division. This approach is used in modern law.

Various branches of law in the Council Code of 1649

The Code determined the status of the state, the status of the king, and also contained a whole set of norms regulating all sectors government activities, starting from legal proceedings and ending with the economy and the right to leave the country.

Criminal law has been supplemented with a new classification of crimes. Such types as a crime against the church, a crime against the state, a crime against the order of government, a crime against deanery, official crimes, crimes against the person, against morality and property crimes appeared. The classification became more detailed, which greatly simplified the judicial proceedings and the sentencing process, since there was no longer any confusion.

The types of punishment were also expanded: execution, exile, imprisonment, confiscation of property, fines, dishonorable punishments.

The growth of commodity-money relations led to the transformation of civil law. The concept of an individual and a collective appeared. Women received more rights to carry out certain transactions with property. Purchase and sale agreements were now sealed not verbally, but in writing (the prototype of a modern contract between the parties).

There have been only minor changes in family law. The principles of Domostroy were in effect.

The Council Code also determined the procedure for legal proceedings, criminal and civil. New types of evidence of guilt appeared (documents, kissing the cross), and new types of investigative and procedural measures were identified. The court has become fairer.

A convenient system for describing laws and acts made it possible not only to quickly and effectively use the new law, but also, if necessary, to supplement it - this was another difference from previous documents.

Enslavement of the peasants

The Council Code was of great importance for the peasants, since the issues of feudal property were described in it as completely as possible. The Code did not give the peasants any freedoms; moreover, it tied them even more to the land and the feudal lord, thereby completely enslaving them.

Now there was no right of exit; the peasant with his entire family and belongings completely became the property of the feudal lord, which could be sold, bought or passed on by inheritance. The rules for searching for runaway peasants also changed: now there was no time limit of ten years, a person was searched for his entire life. In fact, the peasant could not leave or run away from the feudal lord and was obliged to obey his master at all times.

The meaning of the Cathedral Code

The Council Code of 1649 outlined new trends in the development of law and jurisprudence, consolidated a new state order and new social norms. It became the prototype of modern systematization and cataloging of regulatory documents, creating restrictions on branches of law. The cathedral code was in force until 1832.

On January 29 (February 8), 1649, the Zemsky Sobor adopted a new set of laws Russian state- Cathedral Code of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich.

The appearance of this document at the very beginning of the reign of the second tsar of the Romanov family was associated with a serious socio-political and socio-economic crisis, as a result of which a wave of popular uprisings swept across the country. The legal system that existed in Russia did not suit not only the peasants, townspeople and ordinary archers, but also the nobility, who sought to expand and legislate their rights and privileges.

In June 1648, Moscow nobles and the upper ranks of the posad turned to the tsar with a request to convene a Zemsky Sobor to discuss the accumulated problems. Based on the joint decision of the tsar, the highest clergy and the Boyar Duma, a commission of 5 people was organized under the leadership of Prince N.I. Odoevsky, which included boyar S.V. Prozorovsky, okolnichy prince F. F. Volkonsky and clerks G. Leontiev and F. A. Griboedov.

The commission had to harmonize with each other all existing regulations and, supplementing them with new regulations, combine them into one code. The Code was based on decree books of orders, Moscow codes of law, boyar sentences, collective petitions, extracts from the Lithuanian statute of 1588, the Kormchaya Book, which contained the codes and laws of the Greek kings, decrees of ecumenical and local church councils.

The text of the Code was submitted for discussion and approval to the Zemsky Sobor, specially convened for this purpose, which began work on 1(11) September 1648 The Tsar, the Boyar Duma and the Consecrated Cathedral met separately from the elected representatives of the estates, led by Prince Yu. A. Dolgoruky. During the discussion, the draft document underwent significant revision, resulting in 82 new articles appearing in the final version.

Divided into 25 chapters, the 967 articles of the new code of laws, in contrast to similar documents of the previous period, contained norms not only of procedural law, but also of state, civil, administrative and criminal law. The Code for the first time determined the status of the head of state, the procedure for civil service, and the types of state and criminal crimes. The greatest attention was paid to issues of legal proceedings.

The Code finally established serfdom in the country, abolishing the “fixed summer” and declaring the search for fugitive peasants indefinite. The eternal hereditary dependence of the peasant was established, and his property was recognized as the property of the landowner.

The entire posad population was attached to the posads and transferred to the category of tax-paying estates, but received as a privilege the exclusive right to engage in commercial and industrial activities.

The Code seriously limited the rights of the clergy, who, with the exception of the patriarch and his employees, were henceforth subject to trial on a general basis and could not acquire estates. To manage the former estates of monasteries and clergy, a Monastic Order was established.

In the interests of the serving nobility, the document equalized estates and estates, allowing landowners to own and dispose of land allocated for service.

The adoption of the Code was one of the main achievements of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich. It remained the fundamental law of the Russian state until 1830.

Lit.: Maslov K. A. Cathedral Code: materials for a seminar on the history of state and law of Russia [Electronic resource] // Website of students and graduates of the Faculty of Law of St. Petersburg State University. 2001-2011. URL: http://www .law -students .net /modules .php ?name =Content &pa =showpage &pid =333 ; Cathedral Code of 1649. L., 1987;

Introduction

1. Creation of the Cathedral Code

2. Study of the Cathedral Code

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

The relevance of the topic of this work is due to the fact that in the first half of the 17th century. The legislative activity of the Russian state is noticeably increasing, the government’s desire to subject to legal regulation as many aspects and phenomena of social and state life. The culmination of this activity was the creation of the Council Code of 1649.

The uprising of 1648 was a spontaneous uprising of townspeople, archers, serfs and boyar household servants against the ruling elite, led by boyar B. I. Morozov. However, soon, in order to prevent the further development of the uprising, they, together with the top of the posad, took the initiative of negotiations with the tsar into their own hands. On June 10, at a meeting of nobles and merchants, a petition to the Tsar was adopted, the authors of which spoke on behalf of the popular multitude of the Moscow state, demanding to convene a Zemsky Sobor to adopt the laid down book in order to streamline legislation.

In an effort to prevent the unification of the forces of the people and the serving nobility, the government made concessions to the latter. On July 16, 1648, the Zemsky Sobor was convened.

The purpose of this essay is to reveal the content and essence of the Council Code of 1649.

The objectives of the abstract are

Study of the creation of the Cathedral Code;

Disclosure of the contents of the Council Code.

The following literature was used in writing this abstract: Zarubin D.V. Cathedral Code and legality. – M., 2005; History of Russia / Ed. A.N. Krasovsky. – M., 2004; History of Russia /Ed. Krasovsky A.N. – M., 2005, etc.

1. Creation of the Cathedral Code

The hearing of the draft Code took place at the cathedral in two chambers: in one were the tsar, the Boyar Duma and the Consecrated Cathedral; in the other - elected people of various ranks. Deputies of nobles and townsmen had a great influence on the adoption of many norms of the Code. On January 29, 1649, the preparation and editing of the Code was completed. Externally, it was a scroll consisting of 959 narrow paper columns. At the end were the signatures of the participants of the Zemsky Sobor (315 in total), and along the gluing of the columns were the signatures of the clerks. From this original scroll, a copy was made in the form of a book, from which the Code was printed twice during 1649, 1200 copies in each edition.

The Council Code reflected the fundamental problems of social life in the mid-17th century. It legislated the needs of the ruling class at this stage of its development and, at the same time, concessions to certain layers of feudal society, caused by the need to strengthen the class rule of the feudal lords.

The Code reflected a long process of intra-class struggle between large and small feudal lords, high-born nobility and small-time service members. This problem was solved in favor of the latter. The Code takes a serious step towards equating the legal regime of estates with the regime of estates, which concerned wide circles of feudal lords, especially small ones. It is no coincidence that the chapter on estates appears in the law before the chapter on estates

The equation of estates with estates proceeded along the lines of primarily granting landowners the right to dispose of land. Until now, essentially only patrimonial owners had the right to own land. True, their rights were somewhat limited, which was also preserved in the Code (certain limits on the right to alienate patrimony, restrictions on inheritance, and some others). However, in principle, the patrimonial owner has necessary element property rights - the right to dispose of property.

The situation is different with the estate. In previous years, the landowner was completely deprived of the right to dispose, and sometimes even the right to own land. The latter occurred, for example, in the case when a landowner, even for the most valid reason, left the service. The estate was a kind of salary, so it ceased to be issued when the serviceman left the service.

The Council Code made significant changes to this matter. First of all, it expanded the landowner's right to own land. Now the landowner, who had retired, retained the right to the land. True, he was not left with his former estate, but according to a certain norm, he was given a so-called subsistence estate - a kind of pension. The same pension was received, if necessary, by the widow of the landowner, as well as his children: boys - until they grow up and go into service themselves, girls - until won't get married. This is certainly not inheritance

The idea of ​​a living estate has been making its way for a long time. We meet it, in particular, already in the Verdict of the Zemsky Sobor of the first Militia of 1611 (Article 7, etc.) 7 It is curious that according to the Council Code (Chapter II), a subsistence estate should be issued even to the widow of an executed traitor, all of whose property is confiscated (if the wife did not know about her husband’s infidelity).

The right to dispose of the estate, according to the Council Code, is manifested in the permission of the so-called delivery subsistence estate, the possibility of exchanging the estate, including for an estate, in some other institutions. The Code satisfied the long-standing interests of small feudal lords regarding the enslavement of peasants. The abolition of lesson years in the XIth chapter of the law was the final step towards the establishment of serfdom on a national scale

Urban settlements are not forgotten in the law either. On the one hand, he was given an indulgence: in ch. XIX, the so-called “white places” in the suburbs are abolished. However, this same chapter assigns the “black” townspeople to the town where they lived at the time of the adoption of the Code. However, the last measure can be interpreted differently. Prohibiting the departure of black people from Posad, ch. XIX prevented their burden from being shifted onto the shoulders of those who remained. The tendency to protect the townspeople from the Belomest residents is also not a new phenomenon. It can be traced in previous legislation, in particular, in the act of the Zemsky Sobor of 1619 published in this volume

In the Council Code there are no special chapters characterizing the political system of Russia. However, the presence of the monarch, the Boyar Duma, Zemsky Sobors, orders, local government bodies and their main features are quite well characterized by law.

The Code consolidates the process of strengthening royal power, characteristic of an estate-representative monarchy and reflecting the tendency to develop into an absolute monarchy. For the first time in Russian legislation, the Code allocates a special chapter devoted to the criminal legal protection of the personality of the monarch (Chapter II). It is emphasized that even the discovery of intent to commit a criminal act against the king entails the death penalty.

The Code also pays sufficient attention to such an essential element of the political system of feudal society as the church. Crimes against her are highlighted in a special chapter that opens the Code.

The governing bodies - the Boyar Duma, orders, etc. - are characterized, as is typical for a feudal state, from the standpoint of recognition of their judicial functions.

The Code marks the development of all branches of law of that time. Entire chapters are devoted to administrative and financial law, property law (especially land law - Chapters XVI and XVII), contracts (Chapter X), and inheritance. Of course, much attention is paid to criminal law (chapters I -V, X, XXI, XXII, etc.) and the process. General concept The crime remains the same, but one can note the development of ideas about the elements of the crime. The crime system is becoming more complex. The set of rules about them, provided for by the Code, for the first time acquires the character of a system and is streamlined. The most dangerous acts for feudal society take first place: crimes against the church, state crimes, especially dangerous acts against the order of government. The first chapters of the Code are dedicated to them. Subsequent chapters deal primarily with crimes against the person and property crimes, although a clear distinction based on the object of the crime between acts directed against the state and private individuals is not always maintained in the systematization.

In the Council Code, the system of punishments becomes more complicated and toughened. The most brutal forms of repression are becoming commonplace, which, however, was characteristic not only of the Russian Middle Ages. The scope of the class resistance of the enslaved peasants, which reached the level of peasant wars, also determined the most acute forms of suppressing the resistance of the oppressed, including through tightening criminal repression. In procedural law, there is an increasing tendency to expand the scope of the search, although the court still ranks first in terms of jurisdiction. The Code thus consolidated the main features of the political system and law of Russia, which later turned out to be quite stable for two hundred years, despite all the reforms of the 18th century. The use of the norms of the Council Code in the second half of the 18th and the first half of the 19th century, during the period of the development of capitalism and the decomposition of feudal relations, meant that the conservative regimes of that time sought support in the Code for strengthening the autocratic system.

The Council Code in general and on individual issues has repeatedly been the subject of research in pre-revolutionary and Soviet literature, as well as modern researchers.

2. Study of the Cathedral Code

Its study began in the 30-40s. XIX century representatives of noble historical and legal science (V. Stroev, F. Moroshkin, V. Linovsky, etc.), in whose works a frank apology for the Code and tsarist legislation was given. These were the first generalizing works containing studies of the Code as a whole - origins, sources, structure, influence

The bourgeois and democratic trends in the historiography of the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries are characterized by attention to the question of the role of the Zemshchina, that is, the role of the ordinary nobility, representatives of the commercial and industrial world of cities, including participants in the Zemsky Sobor of 1648, in the preparation of the Code. A.P. Shchapov was the first to raise this question. Specific studies on the significance of petitions from nobles, townspeople and meetings of the Zemsky Sobor also belong to V.I. Sergeevich, N.P Zagoskin, M.F. Vladimirsky-Budanov and others. Historiography of the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries gave great results in the study of sources Code. One of the areas concerned the reception in the Code of Foreign Law, mainly, of the Lithuanian Statute of 1588. M. F. Vladimirsky-Budanov, having devoted a special study to this, allowed a clear exaggeration of the role of the Statute as a source. The actual state of the matter corresponds to the opinion of V. O. Klyuchevsky. He believed that the drafters of the Code, using the Statute, “... took the formulas of the very norms, legal provisions, but only common to both rights or indifferent, eliminating everything unnecessary and not related to the law and judicial procedure Moscow, they generally recycled everything they borrowed. Thus, the Statute served not so much as a legal source of the Code, but as a codification manual for its drafters.”

In the 40s In the 17th century, a translation of the Statute was made into Russian with significant adaptations of the text to Russian reality. Probably, this text was used when working on the Code, the same should be said about the reception of the norms of Byzantine law, which on Russian soil was reflected in the Helmsman and other collections of church law. Byzantine law. Among the sources on the basis of which the Code was to be drawn up, in the preamble, in the first place are city ​​laws of the Greek kings(or briefly - us city). But the compilers of the Code themselves, in the margins of its handwritten scroll, indicated a source from city only for 14 articles from 967 articles of the code. M. F. Vladimirsky-Budanov considered the Code’s borrowings from Kormcha “few and fragmentary

Soviet legal historian S.V. Yushkov noted exaggerated evidence from bourgeois literature about the Code’s borrowing of provisions of foreign law, emphasizing that by referring to the use of Byzantine law, the drafters sought to strengthen the authority of their legislative activity.

The use of archival materials made it possible to expand the understanding of the progress of work on the Code, which was reflected in a number of publications by P. P. Smirnov, and in relation to the sources of the Code - in the works of M. A. Dyakonov, P. P. Smirnov (Chapter XIX), S. B. Veselovsky (chap. XVIII and XXV).

The text of the Code was published several times, mainly for educational purposes. In “Monuments of Russian Law” a special sixth issue is dedicated to the Council Code, where the text of the law is given according to the Complete Collection of Laws Russian Empire, different from the original text. The Council Code in the PSZ has undergone some editing. In addition to purely spelling corrections, some technical omissions were corrected.

The original text was first reproduced in the publication of M. N. Tikhomirov and P. P. Epifanov “The Cathedral Code of 1649. Tutorial" M., 1961

Royal power. In the middle of the 17th century. a weakening of the role of zemstvo councils is planned, and in the districts - the elective provincial administration, which was increasingly replaced by the power of the governor. Against the background of these events, the Code of 1649 gave the most complete and concentrated expression of the status of the power of the tsar as the supreme head of state in the conditions of the beginning of the collapse of the estate-representative monarchy and the emergence of absolutism during the period of developed feudalism; The new code of royal power deals with Chapter II - “On the sovereign’s honor, and how to protect the sovereign’s health” and Chapter III, which concerns the protection of order in the sovereign’s court. Despite the fact that the title of the second chapter includes royal “honor” and “health”, only two of the 22 articles of the chapter are devoted to protecting the health of the sovereign (II, 1, 13). The chapter opens with a definition of the death penalty for bare intent against the life and health of the king. The Code for the first time introduced into legislation the punishability of bare intent, but, as usual, it established sanctions in a differentiated manner. If the death penalty was imposed for intent on the life or health of the king, regardless of the class position of the perpetrator, then a feudal-dependent person (servant in the broad sense) for intent against his master was sentenced to have his hand cut off (XXII, 8). Intent on the life and health of the tsar was elevated to the rank of state and political crimes. The remaining articles of Chapter II are devoted to the definition of other types of state crimes, as especially dangerous crimes, the investigation procedure for them and the nature of sanctions. Crimes of this kind include “treason to the Moscow state” and “spree and conspiracy” against the tsar and “against his sovereign’s boyars and okolnichy and the Duma and neighboring people, and cities and regiments and governors” (II, 18-20), i.e. against political system in general and its individual representatives.

Legal provision of state integrity and security by suppressing the possibility of defections to the side of other states - both peacefully and especially in war time- was legally supplemented in Code VI by the chapter “On traveling citizens”.

Servicemen, townspeople and arable people of the Siberian, Vyatka and Ustyug cities were exempted from paying duties on various types of charters, “because the place is distant and Siberian servicemen come to Moscow. At the time, traveling charters issued to nobles, children of boyars, Tatars and Streltsy heads were exempted from duties when sent to distant Siberian cities, as well as letters “in administrative matters” issued to the heads, centurions of Moscow arrows and archers; This included letters of petition from the archers against each other, “because they were service people, and the lands were not the sovereign’s”, letters of issuance of cash and grain rubles to monasteries and service people according to the instrument for permission to trade duty-free in the cities - “duties for their “Don’t have a stratum and poverty” (XVIII, 47-53).

Fees were used to pay for certificates certifying an increase in rank: in the case of production from city nobles or for boyars on the yard list, from the yard list - in elections, as well as when setting up salaries and land wages; letters of appointment as provincial elders, grief clerks, heads, centurions and atamans among the Cossacks of Siberian cities (XVIII, 65, 68-71).

Boyar Duma. The very drafting of the Code is connected with the legislative function of the Boyar Duma. On the advice of the Consecrated Cathedral and the Boyar Duma, the Tsar entrusted the Commission, headed by the boyar I. Odoevsky, with the compilation of the Statutory Book, among the sources of which were boyar sentences. Then “the sovereign said” and “the boyars sentenced” to assemble a Zemsky Sobor with the aim of judging and adopting the Code. The text of a number of its chapters contains references to laws adopted even before the Code by decree of the tsar and the verdict of the boyars. But incomparably more valuable is the presentation of the basics adopted with the participation of the Boyar Duma at the time of drawing up the Code. In 1641, in response to a petition from nobles and boyars’ children complaining about exorbitant toll fees according to the tsar’s and boyar’s verdict, a decree was adopted, which was included in the 1st and 2nd articles of Chapter IX “On tolls and transportation, on bridges.” The Code left in force court cases regarding slaves, abandoned even before it “by the sovereign’s decree and by boyar sentences” (XX, 119).

The presumption of treason is also present in Chapter VII, which establishes the legal regime of military service. Here we are talking about betrayal of military duty: desertion or, perhaps more precisely, temporary defections to the enemy’s side in a military situation in order to report information about the condition of military units. The culprit was subjected to death by hanging in full view of enemy forces (VII, 20). Treason specifically to the state, and not just to the sovereign, is also provided for in Chapter XX: “If someone who betrays the state moves away from the Moscow dominion to another dominion, then his people will be set free” (XX, 33).

Another type of state crime, following treason, provided for by the Code, is, as indicated above, “spree and conspiracy,” i.e., to some extent, an organized action of a mass of people against the tsar, boyars, governors, etc. In order to prevent such phenomena, the law obliged anyone who finds out about an impending conspiracy to inform the tsar, the boyars, and in the cities, the governors and officials (II, 18). Otherwise, those who knew about the osprey and the conspiracy, but did not report them, were threatened with the death penalty (II, 19). It was forbidden to come to the tsar, boyars, Duma people, and, in business, to governors and clerks, “unwillingly, in a crowd and in a chattering manner.” An aggravating circumstance could be the beating and robbery of officials. For such actions the death penalty was imposed “without any punishment” (II, 20, 21).

The norms aimed at protecting order in the royal court, the very honor of the court and the security of the sovereign, were developed in such detail in legislation for the first time. At their core, they are attached to laws designed to protect the order of government.

In his study on the history of the political court in Russia XVII V. G. G. Telberg noted that in the Code “for the first time in the history of Russian legislation, a systematic description of the composition of state crimes was given” and the process for these cases was defined.

State law also includes laws relating to the prerogatives and regalia of royal power. These include, first of all, coinage, concentrated in the hands of the state since the 16th century. The Code deals with coinage and consists of only two articles - “On money masters (who will begin to make thieves’ money.” Actually, only the first article relates to the minting of coins. It divides the offenses in relation to coins into two parts: firstly , the use of copper, tin or deposit money instead of the silver accepted in the state is pure counterfeiting, and, secondly, an admixture of copper, tin, and lead in silver, i.e., damage to money for the purpose of profit. Thus, It is not reasonable to classify this article only as counterfeiting, which is found in the literature. Both types of crime were regarded by the law as causing outside losses and the guilty were given the qualified death penalty - pouring molten metal into the throat (V, 1). Another article the same chapter punished craftsmen for mixing with precious metals simple metals when making orders. In this case, trade execution and compensation for losses to customers were imposed (V, 2).

The undoubted prerogative of the government was to collect fees for registration of business documents by applying a treasury seal. The regulation of this issue in the Code is given an independent Chapter XVIII - “On Printing Duties”. It identifies certain groups of persons and types of fees levied on certification of acts. The first category included landowners and, accordingly, documents relating to estates and patrimonial affairs.

A significant source of replenishment of the treasury were fees for attaching seals to letters of judgment in court cases. Duties were collected for sending letters to cities in court cases, half a half for each letter - regardless of whether the plaintiff and defendant referred to the “common truth” or one side named witnesses, and regardless of how many letters were sent (XVIII, 31 , 32, 43, 44). If the case was not conducted at the initiative of the parties, then the fees were paid by the party found guilty by the court (XVIII, 31, 32, 33). For certificates of petition

In close connection with the participation of the Boyar Duma in legislator activities is its participation in resolving the most important state issues of internal and foreign policy, and in the Code it was reflected in the formula: “And the boyars and okolnichy and duma people sit in their quarters and, according to the sovereign’s decree, do all sorts of sovereign affairs together” (X, 2).

The Boyar Duma also had independent competence in legal proceedings, independent of the tsar. So, for example, when a victim complains against a judge that the judge “accused him of a case based on promises. ..”, it was prescribed that “the court case should be brought to the attention of the boyars, and a decree should be issued in that case, depending on the case” X, 7). In another case, cases were referred to “all boyars” for consideration when some ordered judge “goes to trial and accuses someone not according to the court without cunning” (in the case of judicial ribka, -A. M.)(X, 10) .

The high position of the Boyar Duma in the state system, and the boyars and other Duma ranks in the class hierarchy of feudal society, corresponded to the legal protection of their immunity. It is significant that the chapter “on sovereign honor” contains a ban on coming “unwillingly, en masse and in conspiracy” not only to the tsar, but also to the boyars, okolnichy and duma people (II, 20). Violation of this prohibition was punishable by law. death penalty(II, 21).

Zemsky Sobors. The most important feature of the estate-representative monarchy of Russia, which emerged in the second half of the 16th century, was the functioning of zemstvo councils, which included the tsar, the Borya Duma, the Consecrated Cathedral, consisting of the highest spiritual ranks, and elected representatives of the nobility - Moscow and city, as well as trading circles and the top of the settlement, peasants, and then only in the person of representatives of the participants in the Zemsky militia of 1612, took part only in the Zemsky Council of 1613. Zemsky councils were bodies of the state. This concept should be distinguished from the concept of “state institution,” which was a link in the state apparatus. I

By resorting to zemstvo councils, the kings sought to use! the increased share in the country of the nobility and the elite of the urban population. The councils arose not at the request of the estates to limit royal power, but at the initiative of the sovereigns to strengthen their power. By formally limiting royal power, zemstvo councils objectively strengthened it. This was one of the features of class institutions in Russia. Restored after the events of the early 17th century. The estate-representative monarchy reached its greatest rise in the first three decades, and by the middle of the century its decline began to be outlined in conjunction with the strengthening of central power and the growth of absolutist tendencies. The last zemstvo councils to resolve issues of great national importance, significant in composition, were assembled in the late 40s and early 50s. XVII century

The Code of 1649, which itself was the result of the activities of one of the most important and representative zemstvo councils in composition and therefore called Soborny, nevertheless did not reflect in its composition the zemstvo councils as bodies government controlled. We can name only two or three cases when the drafters of the Code, citing new legislative provisions, refer to councils as the basis for such decisions. And all these cases relate to the limitation of the prerogatives of the church - both in the sphere of land ownership and judicial competence.

Thus, the prohibition for the highest spiritual ranks (patriarch, metropolitans, etc.) and monasteries to buy, take as a mortgage or as a contribution to the soul ancestral, served and purchased estates, and for patrimonial holders, respectively, to sell or mortgage them to clergy and corporations was adopted on Cathedral 1648 (XVII, 42).

At the same time, a decision was made to create a Monastic Order. The basis for this decision was the petition to the Tsar of service people from the stolniks to the children of the boyars, guests, merchants of the living room, cloth and other hundreds and settlements and townspeople (XIII, 1). In this list of authors of the petition for the creation of the Monastic Order, there are no Duma ranks and the Consecrated Cathedral.

In conditions of separate meetings of boyars and clergy, on the one hand, and elective representations from other classes, on the other, the government had the opportunity to rely on one of the parties in resolving certain issues, despite the disagreement of the other party. In itself, such a circumstance was already a sign of the independent position of royal power and thereby the collapse of class representation as a specific political system.

In addition to those just named, the Code contains many new provisions directly or indirectly related to the Council of 1648, but the latter is not mentioned. In view of the significant strengthening of the absolutist features of the monarchy, reflected in the Code of 1649, and due to the fact that the code arose on the eve of the decline of zemstvo councils, the absence of any legal provisions concerning their activities becomes understandable.

Orders. The order management system reached its greatest development in the 17th century. The first half of the century was the final stage its composition., The orders were the central executive and judicial bodies of the state apparatus of the estate-representative monarchy. Despite the cumbersomeness, parallelism and unclear delimitation of functions, orders by the middle of the 17th century. have already formed into a single system of centralized management, having a certain structure, stability of staff and quite high level centralization of activities. Together with short-term orders, their total number in the 17th century reached 80, and long-term orders numbered up to 40. The Code of 1649 mentions 16 orders, two of them are of a collective nature - the Judgment Order and the Quarters. There were several of both. The fact that the Code affected the order system only to a relatively small extent is explained, in our opinion, by the following three circumstances. Firstly, the Code does not contain constitutional norms containing the legal basis for the structure and competence of bodies state power. Those of them that arose before the Code were understood to operate naturally on the basis of the established system of competence. And only in those cases when new governing bodies were introduced or the competence of previously established ones acquired particular importance for the state, the Code paid special attention to them. Thus, the Monastic Order, founded according to the Code of 1649, is given a separate chapter, XIII. The issues of the activities of the Printed (Chapter XVIII), [^ Streletsky (Chapter XXIII) orders and the New Quarter, which was engaged in the fight against tavern (Chapter XXV), are highlighted in separate chapters. Secondly, many orders were both administrative and judicial. The detailed coverage of procedural issues in the Code of Legal Procedure could not but lead to the mentioned activities primarily of those orders whose duties included the analysis of cases in accordance with their sectoral or territorial purpose. Thirdly, the largest of the orders, such as Local, Serfs and Robbers, could not but be indicated for their intended purpose due to the fact that the Code paid great attention to local-patrimonial land ownership, the rights of feudal lords to peasants and slaves. The compilers limited themselves to these instructions. The issue of classification of orders is controversial. We will not go into consideration of this dispute and adhere to one or another classification, since we are talking about a very limited number of orders. We will only accept the division into orders with foreign policy and domestic policy orientation. And the first in the Code are the Ambassadorial Prikaz and the Rank, but both are mentioned only in connection with the internal political functions subordinate to them. The Ambassadorial Prikaz was entrusted with the collection of Polonyanichny money intended for the ransom of prisoners. Previously, the Polonyanichny Prikaz was responsible for this. The Code and the collection system changed - not according to the regular letter, as before, but to the new census books of 1646-1648, i.e. subvorsh (VIII,).

The Code paid much more attention to orders, the leading function of which was questions domestic policy related to economic and social basis the existing system - feudal land tenure, the position of the feudal-dependent sections of the population and ensuring law and order, associated primarily with the protection of the life and property of the ruling and propertied circles.

The local order kept scribe books, taking into account the economic potential of landholdings of all types, and census books, the main purpose of which was to record the tax allocation of feudal estates. The scribe books of 1626-1628 are associated with the Code of 1649. and census books of 1646-1648. (XI, 1, 2, 9). On their basis, the entire land and peasant policy of the government was built in accordance with the norms of the Code. The local order monitored the compliance of all land documentation, including scribes' notes, with the scribe books (XVI, 52; XVII, 35). In disputes about land, records in previous scribe books were also taken into account (XVII, 25).

The growing bureaucratization of the state apparatus entailed an increase in the volume of paperwork. In the development of the latter, a significant role was played by the Code of 1649, which introduced the mandatory registration in the orders of all serfdom on peasants and slaves and transactions on land and property issues. This opened up additional opportunities for replenishing the sovereign’s treasury, which was in great need of money, by collecting proceeds from acts drawn up in orders. For this purpose, back in the 16th century ladle. a Printed Order was created, in which all acts of transaction and letters brought from different orders were certified state seal, for the application of which a fee was charged. The amount of the duty varied depending on the nature of the act and transaction. A significant increase in the volume of office work by the middle of the 17th century. and the recognition by law of legal force only for those acts of transactions and letters that had the sovereign’s seal, served as the reason for separating the activities of the Printing Order into a separate chapter of the Code, called “On Printing Duties.” It consists of 71 articles regulating in detail the procedure for collecting and the amount of fees for printing documents.

Local control. In the 17th century the main administrative unit was the district (VI, 5, X, 142, 145, etc.), divided into camps and volosts (VI, I VIII, 1; XXI, 97). After the events of the intervention and the Peasant War of the beginning of the 17th century. Along with provincial and zemstvo institutions introduced in the second half of the 16th century, voivodship-mandatory administration was established everywhere in the districts; the leadership of voivodes meant the further development of centralization of pressure, since voivodes were directly and to a greater extent than provincial and zemstvo institutions subordinate to the central authorities management (primarily orders).

The Code of 1649 is associated with the codification of the basic rights and duties of the governor in managing the county.

In addition to their own judicial duties, voivodes, using letters from orders, carried out searches and investigations in court cases that were carried out in orders, “and without hesitation to write about them” (X, 22). The governor was entrusted with control over the execution of court decisions, both adopted locally and at the center. The collection of duties in customs houses, taverns, on transports and bridges was carried out by elected heads and tselovniks, also subordinate to the governors (XI, 6).

Armed forces. The armed forces were the most important lever of the state apparatus of the rising absolutist monarchy. They were intended to resolve both foreign policy problems and domestic political problems - the suppression of popular uprisings of the 17th century. was " rebellious age" It is natural, therefore, that (the Code of 1649 paid great attention to the armed forces. Four chapters are devoted to them: VII - “On the service of all military people of the Moscow state”, XXIII - “On archers”, XIV - “Decree on atamans and Cossacks” and VIII - “On the redemption of the captives.”

The Code reflects the armed forces primarily in the form in which they had developed by the 17th century. The changes that occurred in the first half of the 17th century, the introduction of regiments of the new system, received partial coverage.

The escape of military men of “all ranks” from regimental service before the term of leave was punished differentially: for the first escape - whipping, for the second - a whip and a reduction in local and monetary salary. For escaping a third time - whipping and complete confiscation of estates (VII, 8).

Escape from the service of foreigners, archers and Cossacks led to investigation, return to the “regiments from the bailiff”, punishment with a whip and withholding of “undeserved wages”. Their owners were responsible for fugitive, untraceable Danish people. They were charged 20 rubles per person (VII, 9). Of course, the category of military criminal crimes included cases of looting, robbery and violence against the local population, and the destruction of grain and meadows.

Church. During the period of feudalism, the Russian church was not only one of the largest feudal institutions, but also the most important integral part feudal statehood, its ideological headquarters; A peculiarity of the development of the Orthodox Church, in contrast to the Catholic Church, was that throughout its history, especially during the patriarchal period, it did not have a significant degree of independence and independence from the royal power.

According to the Code, the Church was deprived of the legal opportunity to increase its land holdings. Another step to limit the economic power of the church was the deprivation of hierarchs and monasteries of the right to have their own settlements and fishing and trading establishments in the suburbs and the confiscation in favor of the settlements of those that were already in their possession. And although this measure applied to all privately owned settlements, at least 60% of them fell on church property. It should be emphasized that, despite all the prohibitions and confiscations, the Code of 1649 did not stop the growth of church land ownership, but still undermined its unlimited legal possibilities. It was also important that the ban on selling and giving away estates in the monastery was given not in the form of a specific church institution, as was the case in 1580-1584, but as a national law introduced into the new code.

The Code of 1649 is also associated with an attempt to deprive the higher clergy, with the exception of the patriarch, as well as monasteries of administrative and judicial privileges, mainly jurisdiction in relation to church people in the bulk of civil and criminal cases.

Strengthening state control over the church, associated with the organization of the Monastic Order, and a number of provisions of the Code, which entailed the infringement of the material rights of the clergy, caused strong dissatisfaction on his part.

Autocracy of the 17th century. sought, on the one hand, to limit the economic power of the church and subordinate it to the national system of centralization, and on the other hand, it decisively took the church under the protection of the law in order to protect its teachings, ideas and organization of church life itself from the encroachments of both its ideological opponents and criminal elements and violators of the established order. Both of these sides of the autocratic policy are clearly presented in the Code.

The extent to which the government attached importance to the protection of the church as its ideological headquarters is shown by the fact that in the Code the first chapter is given “On blasphemers and church rebels”, and only in second place is the chapter on the honor of the sovereign and on the prevention of attacks on his health.

Conclusion

The Council Code of 1649 was a new stage in the development of legal technology. It became the first printed monument of Russian law. Before him, the publication of laws was limited to their announcement in marketplaces and in churches, which was usually specifically indicated in the documents themselves. The appearance of a printed law largely eliminated the possibility of abuses by governors and officials in charge of legal proceedings.

The Council Code has no precedents in the history of Russian legislation. In terms of volume it can only be compared with Stoglav, but in terms of the wealth of legal material it surpasses it many times over. Among the legal monuments of other peoples of our country, the Council Code can be compared with the Lithuanian Statute, but the Code also compares favorably with it. The Code had no equal in contemporary European practice.

The Council Code is the first systematized law in the history of Russia. In literature, therefore, it is often called a code; this, however, is not legally correct. The Code contains material relating not to one, but, perhaps, to all branches of law of that time. This is, rather, not a code, but a small set of laws. At the same time, the level of systematization in individual chapters devoted to specific branches of law is not yet so high that it can be called codification in the full sense of the word. Thus, the Code is not a codification or even a set of codes.

Nevertheless, the systematization of legal norms in the Council Code should be considered very perfect for its time. For the first time, the law is divided into thematic chapters, devoted, if not to a specific branch of law, then at least having a specific object of regulation. Stoglav was also divided into chapters, but they were, rather, simply articles of law. The chapters of the Council Code are divided into articles highlighting the specific subject of rationing.

Even pre-revolutionary researchers noted that the Council Code compares favorably with both previous and subsequent legislation from a linguistic point of view, since the Code is not yet clogged with the mass of foreign words and terms that Peter I introduced into the laws, most often without any need, and sometimes with distortions of meaning. Thanks to this, the Council Code is easily perceived by the reader of our time.

The Council Code summed up the long development of Russian law. It was based on all previous legislation, especially on acts of the 17th century.

According to modern researchers, the sources of the Code were statutory and decree books of orders, decrees and boyar sentences, legal codes, the Lithuanian Statute, etc.

List of used literature

1. Zarubin D.V. Cathedral Code and legality. – M., 2005

2. History of Russia / Ed. A.N. Krasovsky. – M., 2004

3. History of Russia / Ed. Krasovsky A.N. – M., 2005

4. Lyashchenko, L.M. Historical documents. – St. Petersburg, 2005

5. Marusova L.N. Cathedral Code and Code of Laws. – M., 1989

6. Mitin A.B. Monuments of history, culture, architecture. – St. Petersburg, 2005

7. Mikhailina T.S. Russia in an era of change. – Kyiv, 2000

8. Pavlenko N.I. History of Russia: events, documents, persons. – M., 2004

9. Tvardovskaya V.A., Gorinov M.M. History of Russia from ancient times. – M., 2005

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Cheat sheet on the history of state and law of Russia Lyudmila Vladimirovna Dudkina

32. General characteristics of the cathedral code of 1649

On July 16, 1648, the Tsar and the Duma, together with the Council of the Clergy, decided to harmonize with each other and bring together into one code all the sources of existing law and supplement them with new decrees. Draft Code was composed of a commission of boyars: the prince Odoevsky , prince Seeds of Prozorovsky , okolnichy prince Volkonsky and Dyakova Gavrila Leontyev And Fedora Griboedova . At the same time, it was decided to assemble the Zemsky Sobor for consideration and approval of this project by September 1. Ultimately, the discussion of the Code was completed in 1649. The original scroll of the Code, found by order of Catherine II by Miller, is currently kept in Moscow. The Code is the first of the Russian laws published immediately after its approval. For the 1st time The Code was printed April 7-May 20, 1649. Then in the same year, 1649 (August 26-December 21). When the third edition was made under Alexei Mikhailovich is still unknown. Since then, the printing of laws has been included a necessary condition included in the publication of laws.

The meaning of the Council Code of 1649 is great, since this act is not only a set of laws, but also a reform that gave an extremely conscientious response to the needs and demands of that time.

Cathedral Code of 1649 is one of the most important legal acts adopted at a joint meeting of the Boyar Duma, the Consecrated Council and elected representatives of the population. This source of legislation is a scroll 230 m long, consisting of 25 chapters, divided into 959 handwritten columns, printed in the spring of 1649 in a huge circulation for its time - 2400 copies.

Conventionally, all chapters can be combined into 5 groups (or sections) corresponding to the main branches of law: Ch. 1–9 contain state law; Ch. 10–15 – statute of legal proceedings and judicial system; Ch. 16–20 – real right; Ch. 21–22 – criminal Code; Ch. 22–25 – additional articles about archers, about Cossacks, about taverns.

The sources for drawing up the Code were:

1) “Rules of the Holy Apostles” and “Rules of the Holy Fathers”;

2) Byzantine legislation (as far as it was known in Rus' from helmsmen and other church-civil legal collections);

3) old codes of law and statutes of former Russian sovereigns;

4) Stoglav;

5) legitimization of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich;

6) boyar sentences;

7) Lithuanian Statute of 1588

Cathedral Code of 1649 for the first time determines the status of the head of state- autocratic and hereditary king. The attachment of peasants to the land, the township reform, which changed the position of the “white settlements”, the change in the status of patrimony and estate in the new conditions, the regulation of the work of local governments, the regime of entry and exit - formed the basis of administrative and police reforms.

In addition to the concept of “dashing deed” in the meaning of “crime”, the Council Code of 1649 introduces such concepts as “theft” (accordingly, the criminal was called a “thief”), “guilt”. Guilt was understood as a certain attitude of the criminal towards the crime.

The following criminal law elements were distinguished in the system of crimes:: crimes against the church; state crimes; crimes against the order of government; crimes against decency; malfeasance; crimes against the person; property crimes; crimes against morality; war crimes.

From the book General History of State and Law. Volume 2 author Omelchenko Oleg Anatolievich

System and general doctrine of the code The Civil Code was an extensive code (2385 art.). Its legal system differed from the largest bodies of private law at the turn of the 18th–19th centuries. and was similar to the construction of the Saxon civil code. This construction dates back to

From the book History of State and Law of Russia. Cheat sheets author Knyazeva Svetlana Alexandrovna

30. Structure and content of the Council Code of 1649 The changes that occurred in socio-political relations should have been reflected in law. Otherwise, the full existence of the state is impossible. In 1648, the Zemsky Sobor was convened, which continued its

From the book History of Political and Legal Doctrines: A Textbook for Universities author Team of authors

1. General characteristics Statehood in Ancient Greece arose at the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. e. in the form of independent and independent policies - separate city-states, which, along with urban areas, also included adjacent rural settlements. Transition

From the book Philosophy of Law author Alekseev Sergey Sergeevich

1. General characteristics The history of ancient Roman political and legal thought covers a whole millennium and in its evolution reflects significant changes in the socio-economic and political-legal life of Ancient Rome over for a long time. The very history of Ancient Rome

From the book Philosophy of Law. Textbook for universities author Nersesyants Vladik Sumbatovich

1. General characteristics In the history of Western Europe, the Middle Ages occupied a huge era of more than a thousand years (V-XVI centuries). The economic system, class relations, state orders and legal institutions, the spiritual climate of medieval society were those

From the book History of Public Administration in Russia author Shchepetev Vasily Ivanovich

1. General characteristics The Renaissance and Reformation are the largest and most significant events of the late Western European Middle Ages. Despite their chronological affiliation with the era of feudalism, in their socio-historical essence they represented

From the book Selected Works on Civil Law author Basin Yuri Grigorievich

1. General characteristics Holland is the first country in Europe where, during a long national liberation struggle against the domination of feudal-monarchical Spain (second half of the 16th - early 17th centuries), the bourgeoisie came to power and a bourgeois system was established

From the author's book

1. General characteristics of the English bourgeois revolution of the 17th century. dealt a crushing blow to feudalism and opened up space for rapid growth capitalist relations in one of the leading countries of Western Europe. It had an incomparably wider resonance than

From the author's book

1. General characteristics The Enlightenment is an influential general cultural movement of the era of transition from feudalism to capitalism. It was an important component of the struggle that the then young bourgeoisie and the masses waged against the feudal system and its ideology. Specifics

From the author's book

1. General characteristics The socio-political life of Western Europe in the first half of the 19th century was marked by the further establishment and strengthening of bourgeois orders in this region of the world, especially in such countries as England, France, Germany,

From the author's book

1. General characteristics In the 20th century. The development of political and legal research is gaining momentum. Continuity with previous teachings (neo-Kantianism, neo-Hegelianism) is noticeably supplemented by new directions and schools in jurisprudence (integrative jurisprudence,

From the author's book

From the author's book

From the author's book

From the author's book

From the author's book

§ 1. General characteristics Chapter 24 of Volume I of this Textbook showed various, mainly non-contractual, legal grounds for the use of housing. Here it is advisable to consider the contractual basis and content of the housing rental agreement. For many

Return