How the peoples of the Volga region lived. Peoples of the Volga region
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Federal state budgetary higher education institution
Oryol State University
Faculty of Law
Department of History of State and Law
Course work
in the discipline "History of State and Law"
on the topic: “Court in the ancient Russian state”
Performed:
Rejepova V.D.
Scientific adviser:
Levina I.R.
Introduction
Chapter 2. Types of courts in the Old Russian state
2.1 Community court
2.2 Princely court
2.3 Patrimonial court
2.4 Church court
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
Relevance of the topic: Emergence judicial system in Ancient Rus' is a little-studied question. This is largely due to the fact that in Ancient Rus' there were no special judicial bodies. Judicial functions were performed by representatives of the administration, including the Grand Duke. However, there were special officials who assisted in the administration of justice. Judicial functions were also performed by the church and individual feudal lords, who had the right to judge people dependent on them (patrimonial justice). The judicial powers of the feudal lord formed an integral part of his immunity rights.
Judicial power was concentrated in ancient Rus' in the hands of princes and their officials (mayors and tiuns), veches and communities. The process was competitive and transparent. The case was decided on the basis of the evidence presented by the parties; these were: confession, witnesses and hearsay, oath, courts of God or ordeals (i.e., trials by water or fire), “field” or judicial duel, red-handed and external signs. The winner of the duel was considered right. On the other hand, if the criminal was caught on the spot or with a stolen item, this was considered sufficient for conviction. The court in its decision stated the outcome of the competition between the parties; At first the court decision was oral, later it was clothed in written form. The guilty verdict of the court was handed over with the “head” of the convicted person to the victim, to satisfy the order specified by the court.
Target course work consists in studying the institutions of the judicial system of the ancient Russian state.
To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following tasks of the course work:
Expand the concept of court in Ancient Rus';
Study the basics of the judicial process in Ancient Rus';
Reveal the main types of ships in Ancient Rus'.
The subject of the study is various sources characterizing and examining the court and judicial process of the Old Russian state.
The object of the study is the court and process in the Old Russian state.
Despite the lack of knowledge of this topic, the theoretical basis for the study was the works of such famous domestic authors as Sverdlov M.B., Yushkov S.V., Kostomarov N., articles and monographs of Russian and foreign lawyers, materials of scientific journals.
The methodological basis of the research, for solving the set goals and objectives of the work, is a combination of various general theoretical methods: statistical, study of elements historical analysis, comparative legal method, method expert assessments, analysis of literary sources and documents, information, legal and other methods of scientific analysis and research.
When writing this work, educational and scientific literature on the history of the Russian state and law. This course work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion and a list of sources used.
The first chapter of the course work examines general provisions on the judicial system in Ancient Rus'. In particular, the concept of court and the basis of the judicial process in Ancient Rus', as well as the position of different segments of the population in the judicial process of Ancient Rus', are revealed here.
In the second chapter of the course work, the main types of courts in Ancient Rus' are studied: community court, princely court, patrimonial court, church court.
Chapter 1. General provisions on the judicial system in Ancient Rus'
1.1 The concept of court in Ancient Rus'
court russian law slavic
The Old Russian state and law go through a series of successive stages in their development. The period of their emergence and formation (IX-XI centuries) is the least provided with reliable written sources, including containing information about the development of the judicial system in the ancient Russian state.
The word “court” in Ancient Rus' had very diverse meanings:
1) court meant the right to judge, judicial power,
2) court - the law that determines the procedure of the court; in this sense, the court meant the same thing as a code of law: Russkaya Pravda or some of its articles are sometimes entitled in the lists with the words: Yaroslavl court, in others - the code of law of Yaroslav,
3) court - the space of judicial power - what we call competence, for example “a governor with a boyar court” or “without a boyar court”, i.e. with or without the right to judge famous circle affairs; finally,
4) court - a judicial process, a court agreement with all the acts preceding it and with all the consequences arising from it.
IN ancient Russian history The word court is first mentioned in the Charter of Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich “On tithes, courts and church people.” Vladimir Svyatoslavovich - from 969 the Prince of Novgorod, and from 980 - the Grand Duke of Kiev, under whom the baptism of Rus' took place, i.e. Christianity was adopted. The exact date of adoption of the Charter has not been determined by historians, but researchers of the events of that era attribute its appearance to the first years of the 11th century. The document mentions the current Church of the Holy Mother of God (consecrated in 996), Princess Anna (died in 1011), the metropolitan and bishops (the first bishoprics of Belgorod, Novgorod and Polotsk arose at the very beginning of the 11th century).
To date, no more ancient source with a mention of courts than the Charter “On tithes, courts and church people” has been found, which allows us to associate with it the separation of the court from the princely power, the emergence of the court in Rus' as an institution of justice and count its history from the first years of the 11th century.
The adoption of Christianity undoubtedly contributed to the formation of ancient Russian law. At first, through the perception of Byzantine law in the form of church rules (canons). Subsequently, as ties with Western and Scandinavian neighbors expanded, the influence of their culture, including legal, also increased. Old Russian princes began to create their own laws.
Thus, the appearance of the first written lists of laws - statutes in the Slavic language under the general name Yaroslav's Truth is associated with the name of Prince Yaroslav the Wise. From these historical monuments one can trace how the origin and development of law and legal proceedings took place in Ancient Rus', for what acts people were persecuted and how the trial was carried out. They also mentioned blood feud as a form of retribution to the offender for the murder committed: “whoever kills a person, the relatives of the murdered person will avenge the death by death; and when there are no avengers, then the murderer will be exacted from the murderer in money to the treasury...”. Next, the size of the penalties was listed depending on the nobility and position of the killed: the largest fine ("vir") - for the head of a princely boyar. In later sources, blood feud is completely replaced by a fine in favor of the family of the deceased.
In addition, the charters and charters of Yaroslav contained norms establishing the procedure for legal proceedings and the system of punishment for crimes. The place of trial was the princely court, and the prince himself was the main arbiter of justice. At the same time, the prince could entrust the conduct of the court to people specially appointed by him from his entourage, the so-called virniks, who had the right to hire a scribe as their assistants. The Yaroslav Charters also mention the possibility of resolving the litigation by involving 12 citizens who examined the case, decided the issue of the defendant’s guilt, leaving the judge with the right to impose punishment. This is apparently one of the first prototypes of the future jury trial.
Thus, in the Old Russian state the court was not separated from the administration. Posadniks and other officials who administered justice received a certain part of the vir and sales collected during the consideration of cases. In addition, they were rewarded by the parties involved in the process. The highest court was Grand Duke. Old Russian law did not yet know the distinction between criminal and civil proceedings, although some procedural actions could only be used in criminal cases (pursuit, arch). In any case, in both criminal and civil cases an adversarial (accusatory) process was used, in which the parties had equal rights. Both parties to the lawsuit were called plaintiffs. (Researchers believe that the church court also used the inquisitorial, investigative process with all its attributes, including torture).
Russkaya Pravda knows two specific procedural forms of pre-trial preparation of a case - pursuit of a trace and a summary. Pursuing a trail is finding a criminal in his tracks. If the trail leads to the house of a specific person, it means that he is the criminal; if it leads to a village, the community bears responsibility; if he gets lost on the main road, the search for the criminal stops. If neither the lost item nor the thief are found, the victim has no choice but to resort to calling out, i.e. Post a missing item in a marketplace in hopes that someone will identify stolen or lost property from another person. A person who discovers lost property can, however, claim that he acquired it in a lawful way, for example, by purchase. Then the process of arching begins. The owner of the property must prove the good faith of its acquisition, i.e. indicate the person from whom he purchased the item. In this case, the testimony of two witnesses and a mytnik - a collector of trade duties - is sufficient.
The judicial authorities in the ancient Russian state included the community court, which considered cases on the basis of customary law. During the time of Russian Pravda, the court was not separated from the administration, and the judge was, first of all, the prince himself. The princely court resolved the affairs of the feudal nobility and disputes between princes.
The most important matters were decided by the prince together with his husbands, the boyars, while less important ones were considered by representatives of the princely administration. The usual place of court is the "prince's court" (the residence in the capital and the courts of princely officials in the provinces). Local courts operated by mayor and volostel, assisted by tiuns, virniks (collectors of court fees) and other servants. Russkaya Pravda also determines the amount of these fees in favor of numerous judicial officials from the auxiliary personnel (swordsman, children's worker, snowstorm worker).
In addition to the state court (the prince and his administration), a patrimonial court was actively formed in Kievan Rus - the court of the landowner over the dependent population. It is formed on the basis of immunity awards. One can also call a community court, where minor intra-community matters could be decided. But information about the functions of this court is not preserved in the sources. The functions of the church court, which was in charge of family and marriage relations and fought against pagan rituals, were carried out by bishops, archbishops and metropolitans. The affairs of the monastery people were handled by the abbot of the monastery, the archimandrite.
Since ancient times, legal proceedings have included 3 stages: identification of the parties, trial proceedings and execution of the sentence. Both parties were called plaintiffs or superniks (a little later - litigators from a lawsuit - a legal dispute). The state does not yet act as a plaintiff, even in criminal cases; it only helps a private person in prosecuting the accused. And the distinction between criminal and civil proceedings does not yet exist, as well as between investigative (inquisitorial) and accusatory (adversarial).
The parties in all cases are private individuals: clan, community, family, victims. The trial was a massive event, attended by crowds of relatives, neighbors and other supporters. The reason for initiating a case could be not only a family petition (for the injury or murder of a relative), but also the capture of a person at the crime scene.
It is also known from the most ancient period that one of the forms of beginning the process was a cry - a public announcement of a crime (loss of property, for example) and the beginning of the search for the criminal. A three-day period was given to return the stolen property, after which the person in whose possession the item was found was declared guilty. It was obliged to return the stolen property and prove the legality of its acquisition. If this could be done, the search began - the continuation of the search for the kidnapper. The last one in the code, who had no evidence, was recognized as a thief with all the ensuing consequences. Within one territorial unit (volost, city), the code went to the last person, when entering someone else's territory - to a third person, who, having paid increased compensation for losses, could begin the code at his place of residence.
Another procedural action is following the trail - searching for the criminal along the tracks. If it was a murderer, then the discovery of his traces on the territory of the community obliged its members to pay “wild vira” or look for the culprit. If the tracks were lost in forests, wastelands and roads, the search stopped. The trial was adversarial, which means that both sides “competed” on equal terms, collected and presented evidence and evidence. Various types of evidence were used in the trial: oral, written, and witness testimony. Eyewitnesses of the incident were called vidokas, in addition to them there were rumors - witnesses of the “good fame” of the accused, his guarantors. Only a free person could act as a listener; purchases (“in small litigation”) and boyar tiuns (slaves) were used as vidoks.
With a limited amount of judicial evidence, oaths (“company”) and ordeals (trials with iron and water) were used by court decision. We know about the latter only from Western sources, because there is no direct evidence of ordeals in Rus'. When tested with iron, the guilt of the subject was judged by the nature of the burn from the hot metal; When testing with water, a suspect, tied in a special way, was immersed in water; if he did not drown, he was found guilty. Ordeals are a type of divine judgment.
It is possible that already in ancient times in Rus', when there was insufficient evidence, a judicial duel was used to finally clarify the truth, but information about it was preserved only from a later time (field). Such general ideas Russian Pravda and other sources give us information about ancient Russian law and procedural judicial norms. We see that the legislator was guided by the principle of causality (reference to a specific case) and did not resort to theoretical generalizations. Whole line legal norms are only outlined in legislation, and their development is a matter of the future.
1.2 general characteristics trial in ancient Rus'
The general form of the process from ancient times consisted of three stages: 1) identification of the parties, 2) court proceedings and 3) execution of the decision. But along with the general one, there were other forms in which one or another of the indicated parts of the process was missing. Parties. Both parties were called “plaintiffs,” “supers,” or “litigants.” Such identical names of the parties indicate the absence of procedural advantages for both the plaintiff and the defendant, with some exceptions, however, for criminal claims.
The concept of the state as a plaintiff (in criminal cases) does not yet exist; therefore, there is no distinction between criminal and civil, investigative and indictment processes. But since quite early times, the state has been helping the private plaintiff in prosecuting the accused, leading the prosecution of crimes against communities and actively protecting the interests of the parties, prohibiting the victim from releasing the criminal from punishment under the law. There is news that already in the 12th century. the public authorities prosecuted crimes even when the private plaintiff abandoned the claim, and that the proximate reason for this phenomenon was that the authorities did not want to renounce the criminal fine that followed them. But to think that monetary interest was the only one that then guided the state authorities in its criminal and police activities would be wrong. The parties, as a general rule, in all cases are private individuals. But in ancient times, private persons did not mean physical persons: then the family, clan and community acted as plaintiffs and defendants. Subsequently, a limitation of this appeared, and it was established who exactly could avenge father, son and brother. Under Russian law, the community's primary duty to answer for murder claims is beyond doubt; from it arose mutual responsibility (in which the community is no longer only the defendant, but also the judge of crimes).
In addition to the family, role and community, the plaintiffs and defendants were legal entities in the proper sense, usually in in full force its members - individuals. Moreover, their legal capacity had unlimited limits: women, both married and widows, children and even slaves, could bring claims. Having excluded crowds of relatives and neighbors from participating in the trial, the law had to determine who must necessarily appear in person at the trial and who could send a representative (“defendant”, “accomplice”) on their behalf. It is likely that initially the personal presence of the parties in court was a general rule, since the process must be carried out by personal means (for example, trials by fire and water, oath and field) with the help of family and clan. Therefore, Russian Truth is silent about representation at all. In the era of the Novgorod and Pskov judicial charters, judicial representation received widespread development. Who could have representatives? According to the Novgorod Charter, anyone could have attorneys, who are called defendants in it (Articles 15, 19, 82; according to the Pskov Charter, this right belonged only to women, children, monks and nuns, decrepit old people, the deaf). Who could be the representative? First of all, people related to the plaintiff or defendant through family ties.
In addition to natural representatives, any third party could be sent as a defendant, with one exception: persons vested with public (administrative) power cannot be private attorneys. This was obviously done in order to prevent involuntary pressure on the judge's conscience.
Establishment of relations between the parties before trial. The procedural relations of the parties are established, as a general rule, by an agreement between them. The contents of this agreement were next questions: the subject of the dispute, the judge to whom you should go for a decision, and the deadline for appearing in court. However, the second of these three items was included in the agreement only in the era of Russian Truth.
In more late time The term becomes an essential condition of the contract. The importance of this condition is determined by the fact that the party that has not fulfilled it, i.e. failure to appear within the prescribed period, thereby losing the claim. Meanwhile, in cases where the established deadline is canceled by the court and postponed to another time, these strict consequences disappear: a three-time summons is sent to the person who failed to appear, after which a fine for failure to appear is collected.
In a later era, the contract was concluded with the participation of the judiciary, to which the plaintiff turned for assistance as a general rule. The judiciary will provide bailiffs; those bailiffs who perform their duties within the city are called Podvoisky. The activities of these persons are not, however, public service: the plaintiff must hire them (ibid.). To facilitate the parties, a constant fee has been introduced, for the walking and riding of bailiffs in Pskov for 10 versts - money; in Novgorod, this fee was called pogon and was different depending on which court the bailiff was coming from: if from the court of the ruler, then for 100 versts 4 hryvnias, from the prince - 5 kunas, from his tiun - 2 kunas.
Special types of establishing the relationship of the parties before trial are: a) arch, b) pursuit of the trail.
The code consists of the plaintiff finding the appropriate defendant through a call, a code and an oath. Everyone who has lost an item announces it at the auction - shout - of the “world” where it happened over the course of three days. If the plaintiff finds his thing three days after the call, then the one from whom it was found is recognized as the defendant, who not only returns the thing, but also pays a criminal fine - 3 hryvnia for the offense. If the call has not yet been made, or if the owner found the thing in the hands of another before the expiration of the legal three days after the call, or, finally, he found it not in his city (or “world”), then the arch begins.
The person in whose possession the thing was found is by no means recognized as a defendant: he could legally acquire it from a third party known to him. That is why the law, leaving a thing in the possession of the person who bought it, obliges him, together with the original owner, to go to the person from whom the first purchased it. If this third party also refers to the legal way of acquiring the thing, then the collection is continued further by all interested parties. The one who reaches the third vault must give the plaintiff a price equal to the thing in money, and he himself leads the vault further.
The arch can end in three ways: either the last owner does not prove that he acquired the thing legally from someone, or if he is able to prove it, but does not know the person from whom he bought it, or, finally, the arch will lead to the borders of the state. In the first case, the last owner is recognized as a thief and is subject to a criminal fine and a private penalty, which goes to the satisfaction of those to whom he sold the stolen item. In the second and third cases, the last owner must prove that he bought and did not steal the item. This can only be proven by the oath of two witnesses to the purchase. The oath of two free husbands can be replaced by the oath of one Mytnik. In the Statutory Dvina Charter, the end of the vault is determined by the number of vaults, namely ten (the real thief was not found before this; Statutory Dvina Charter 5).
Track. If the criminal was not caught at the crime scene, then the search for traces begins. It was assumed that where the “face” lay, the criminal was hiding there. Hence, if a “head” is found - the corpse of a murdered person, then the rope where the head lies must look for the culprit and hand him over, after which the accused does not use any procedural means of defense, or the rope itself must pay a wild price. If a stolen item is found in someone's house, then the owner of the house is liable for theft as the alleged thief.
Then the concept of “face” expands even more: the very trace left by a criminal or a thing is recognized as a face. While searching for the theft along the “trace”, the plaintiff can always lose these traces. Where they are lost, a criminal is suspected. If the trail is lost on a high road or in an empty steppe, then every claim ends.
In the courts of the Old Russian state, the following main means of establishing the truth were used: hearsay, divine judgments and acts.
Rumors and videos. In the literature, there is a twofold explanation for the names “hearsay” and “vidok”. According to the first, the viewer is an eyewitness to the fact that took place; hearsay - a person who testifies by hearing. According to the second, sight and rumor mean two procedural roles, completely different from each other. A fork is a simple witness in our sense of the word, and a listener is an accomplice to whom the plaintiff and defendant were “sent.”
Number of rumors. The best indication of the difference between hearsay and witnesses in our sense of the word is that the law directly requires a certain number of them in various types of cases: for cases of personal insults, two witnesses are required, or, more correctly (as we will see below), two on each side . Probably the same amount was required in cases of theft. In cases of murder, the prosecutor must present seven allegations, etc.
All these various requirements for the number of obediences are simplified in the era of the Pskov and Novgorod charters, when in all matters requiring obedience, only one listener acts.
Qualities required from hearers. The rumor must be a free man - a “husband”. But a direct exception to this was also allowed: a) slaves of the highest kind, namely the noble boyar tiuns (who themselves carried out justice in the boyar estates) and semi-free people - purchases - can, at the request of necessity (i.e. due to the lack of servants-husbands) recognized for obedience; b) a slave of any kind can be admitted to obedience in an improper sense, i.e. according to the serf, the process may begin, but not end with his testimony; in the process itself, the serf does not play role or listen, and does not take the oath.
Finally, it is decided that “slave listens to slave,” i.e. in lawsuits against a slave, the same slave can be put forward as a rumor.
The second quality required of an acolyte is that he must be a citizen of the state, and not a foreigner. An exception is made to this principle in claims of citizens against foreigners.
Finally, from the concepts of the servant as a husband, it follows that the servant could not be a woman.
Hearing speech in court. The hearing a) must be in court: failure to appear in court leads to the loss of the claim for the party that brought it; b) must verbally confirm everything that the party that nominated him said. The identity of the testimony must be literal: “word against word”; c) in the era of Russian Truth, if a court settlement ended with the hearings of both sides showing in accordance with the words of those who made them, then the hearings must go to the company and swear an oath. In the era of judicial letters, the hearsay allowed wives to take part in a judicial duel with the defendant.
God's judgments. In the Old Russian state, the forms of God's judgment were: lot, company, ordeal and field.
Lot. The oldest way to resolve all dubious matters. However, the lot does not have any independent meaning. And it is used in combination with other evidence.
Company. The word “rota” does not quite correspond to the current concept of an oath (borrowed from Poland): a company, according to ancient interpreters, means a dispute, a battle. It served as the initial source from which ordeals and legal battles subsequently developed. In our most ancient monuments it appears in the form of an oath before the gods or before God. In later Christian times it was called the kiss of the cross.
In a judicial sense, a company has a dual meaning: independent and auxiliary. Rota, which has independent significance, is committed by the parties to the claim themselves in the absence of rumors.
The company becomes an auxiliary means during testimony and during a judicial duel. The testimony of witnesses (hearsay) in the era of Russian Truth always ends in a company. During judicial duels, the company precedes the field, constituting, as it were, its necessary first part.
Who took the oath? According to the Russian Pravda, both the plaintiff and the defendant. Although in many places of the Russian Pravda only the oath of one side is mentioned - either the plaintiff or the defendant, it does not at all follow from this that the right of oath for the other side is not implied here.
In the era of letters of judgment, it was no longer both parties who swore an oath together, and it was not the lot that decided the choice between them, but the following general rule: the defendant was given the choice to either take the oath himself or provide the oath to the plaintiff.
Ordeals. Ordeals are trials through fire and water. In our country, the first news about them comes from the Extensive Russian Truth, and in treaties with the Germans they are mentioned in last time. In general, it is generally accepted to think that from the 13th century. Our ordeals are disappearing; but judicial acts even of the 16th century. indicate that even at that time the water test was carried out. The form of these tests remains little known to us: it is only known that the test by fire was carried out through a hot iron.
We get information about the form of water tests from the teaching of Serapion, the 13th century preacher: “The divine rules command that many hearken to condemn a person to death. You listen to the water and say: if it begins to drown, there is an innocent one, if it still floats, there are Magi. Can't the devil, seeing your lack of faith, hold back so that he doesn't plunge into murder? I, having abandoned the obedience of a god-created man, and turned to soulless existence - to water, accepted obedience to the angry: God.
What was the meaning of these tests, and what could be their consequences? Sources indicate that if the tests were accompanied by long-term marks (wounds) and suffering, then the person was found guilty. In this case, the tests had final decisive force.
Field (judicial duel). All the means of struggle outlined above are closely related to each other: if there are rumors, then the matter is decided by them; if there are no rumors, then (depending on the value of the claim) a company or lot, a test with water or iron, follows. The field stands completely outside this system of means. The field is not mentioned in our sources until the 13th century. (i.e. when ordeals disappear from the laws), but then continuously exists until the 17th century. The first mention of it is contained in the treaty with the Germans in 1229 (Articles 15 and 16). Here judicial duels are juxtaposed next to ordeals.
There is no doubt that judicial duels originate in ancient times from the very properties of the original process (personal struggle); they are as ancient among us as war, and, therefore, were by no means borrowed by us from outside. One must think that judicial duels, existing next to ordeals as their replacement, depending on the arbitrariness of the parties, by the 13th century. began to displace the ordeals.
An essential condition of a judicial duel is the equality of the parties, which was understood primarily in the sense of physical equality.
Hence the following provisions: only a man against a man, a woman against a woman, but not a man against a woman can fight (Psk. court. gr., 119). The elderly, children and monks are not obliged to enter the duel of adults and healthy people. In both cases, the weaker side may have “mercenaries”, hired fighters. But since in this case the equality of impositions was violated, the other side also received the right to have a hireling. A further condition of the duel is equality of weapons: our weapons could be swords and clubs. The third condition of the duel is its time and place.
According to the Novgorod court charter, a duel can follow no earlier than two weeks after the case was considered in court; if the duel did not take place within this period, then the side that evaded it is accused. The place of the duel was a specially designated “pale”, a special battle theater outside the city. Court officials had to be present during the fight.
In what cases did the field take place? The scope of application of the duel coincides with the scope of application of ordeals. Further, the field was used in those claims for land ownership in which the right of both parties is affirmed by equivalent written acts. Finally, the field applies to claims arising from such contracts that did not require a formal conclusion of the transaction. In all other cases the field is disabled.
Who should take the field? On the one hand - the defendant, on the other - either the hearing or the plaintiff. The defendant issues a challenge to the hearing; if the hearing officer evades the call, then the plaintiff is called.
Consequences of court battles: the winner is recognized as right in any case.
Acts. By the end of the existence of the Old Russian state, written evidence (acts) was presented to the court in most cases arising from contracts that were previously decided by hearsay, and in litigation regarding real estate. These acts are either informal - boards or formal - records. The first are domestic acts, the second are fortified. Strengthening in Pskov took place through leaving a copy in the chest of the Holy Trinity. The first did not exclude the possibility of either testimony or judgments of God; the latter decided the matter unconditionally.
The verdict and its execution. The process in the Old Russian state begins, is conducted and ends with the forces of the parties themselves. In ancient times, a court decision was first given verbally, then it takes the form of a letter - either “right” if the trial took place, or “non-judicial” if the party was accused of failure to appear. The document will be issued to the right party for its satisfaction. Satisfaction, although based on the law, is, however, the subject of new conditions between the parties, “negotiations between them.
Simultaneously with the appearance of the first court decisions, the need arises to ensure the possibility of coercion against individuals who do not want, for whatever reason, to conform their actions to the decisions made by the judiciary.
Despite the generally accepted early period development Russian state understanding of enforcement proceedings as part of civil proceedings, analysis and enforcement legislation allows us to come to the conclusion that enforcement actions, regardless of what historical stage development of legislative regulation is subject to analysis, were supposed to be so simple that for the most part they were entrusted not to judges (courts) as government bodies with special qualities that are necessary to solve the first task, but to other, “lower” bodies (pravetchik, police, volost and rural superiors, and later - bailiffs, police and volost executive committees, bailiffs).
The exception here is the period from 1261 to 1649, when judges could themselves execute decisions in cases of real estate, but they had the right to entrust execution of executive actions to persons appointed by them, from which it can be assumed that judges were unlikely to use the right to execute .
The study of the executive process in this regard has always been a thankless task. On the one hand, it was necessary to adhere to the official version that “the process of enforcing a decision is part of the general civil judicial process, and all enforcement actions must be carried out in the same order and with the same basic techniques as the actions of the court itself in examining the case " On the other hand, it was impossible not to notice that the execution of decisions was always “in the hands of less qualified workers.”
Among the first Russian sources of law containing norms of an executive nature, one can note the Treaty of Oleg with the Greeks, in which it was established that “the claim must be recovered from the guilty party in full, but if he cannot pay everything, then he must give up everything he has, and to swear that there is no one who could help him in payment,” as well as Russian Pravda, which provided for the possibility of dealing with a debtor merchant according to the “arbitrariness” of the owner of the goods that died due to the fault of this merchant.
However, these legal provisions can be called “rules of executive law” only conditionally. These Russian rules practically repeat the provisions of ancient Roman law. according to which the creditor himself, upon the maturity of payment, could arrest the debtor and, by selling him at public auction, receive satisfaction from the proceeds or keep the defendant until the debt is fully paid off. Thus, punishment for obligations could be carried out without trial and adversarial or investigative principles. Similar norms were contained in the agreement between Novgorod and the Germans in 1261. According to the Novgorod Charter of Judgment, the party was allowed to receive independent satisfaction from the debtor, but only after the expiration of the period for voluntary performance, which in case of a dispute could be established in court. As we see, enforcement proceedings at this time could exist completely independently of the civil process, just as the latter could do without the enforcement process.
Over time, unauthorized execution was prohibited, and arrest began to be imposed only with the permission of the judiciary. However, on the outskirts of the Russian Empire until the 17th century. were recognized as the legal actions of a creditor who arbitrarily took possession of the property pledged to him by the debtor after a delay in payment.
The first reform of enforcement proceedings in Russia in 1261 attracts attention with the emergence of the first legislatively regulated method of executing court decisions, called “delivery by the head.” “Giveaway by head” provided for the deprivation of the insolvent debtor and members of his family (wife, children) of freedom and their sale into slavery at auction.
If the debtor was singular, he could take the debtor as his slave. A little later, “eternal slavery” was replaced by temporary work, in which the debtor either worked off the debt himself, or he could be bought out by other persons. Such an enforcement measure is quite attractive due to its effectiveness, but note that this measure is impossible for a democratic state that constitutionally does not recognize forced labor.
The reform of 1261 is also interesting because during its implementation, the first officials appeared who specialized in the execution of court decisions on the collection of sums of money, called “pravetchiki.” The task of the “pravetchiki” was to “correct the claim”, i.e. actually transfer to the creditor the property or funds awarded to him from the defendant without depriving the debtor of his freedom.
Accordingly, the measures that the pravetniks applied to debtors were called “pravezh”, and if the pravezh was ineffective, the defendant was given the head to the lender before redemption. Court control over the execution process under the reform of 1261 was limited to the implementation of decisions on land ownership, which in the Middle Ages in Russia were given special meaning. The execution of such decisions was entrusted to persons specially appointed by the court, but could also be carried out by the judges themselves.
Chapter 2. Types of courts in the ancient Russian state
2.1 Community court
Being a large and structurally complex form of social organization, the community could exist only if there was a highly developed system of self-government. In the peasant community, this system was the result evolutionary development the most ancient self-governing potestar institutions, was the successor to popular rule, an almost universal phenomenon during the times of Ancient Rus', but later it was supported among the peasantry - the social class closest to the land and the widest segment of the Russian population.
Peasant democracy in communities was slightly inferior in scale to the early state government, but undoubtedly surpassed it in experience, ability to survive under conditions of restrictions, opposition, heavy jealous and suspicious control from the growing centralized bureaucracy.
If we imagine a community as a self-governing organization and consider it precisely in this aspect, then its center and main link will be the gathering - community, village, rural. It clearly defines what we today call direct public democracy, presenting the most flexible and viable form, going back to the times when people, united in self-governing groups, decided matters together, acted in solidarity and by common consent.
Village courts were clearer and closer to most community members than state courts: here, it seemed to them, it was easier to find the truth and get fair satisfaction of their claims. Community legal proceedings were based on local customs, which the common man understood at least, but state courts were guided by laws that were completely incomprehensible to the peasant. He was bitterly and sincerely perplexed when, being in the right according to rural concepts and aware of this rightness, he lost the case according to the law in the volost court or before the magistrate. He was repelled by formalism, officialdom and the callousness of court officials, which did not and could not exist in a communal environment. Village judges began to consider a family, land or other dispute, having a fairly clear idea of it not so much from the words of the parties, but from personal observations and their own impressions, because before their eyes a conflict arose and flared up in the family or between neighbors. Knowing, as a rule, all the “ins and outs” of the dispute, they did not feel any particular need for what in state courts is called “collection and analysis of evidence”: “When the case is known to the whole world, what is the need for evidence? The world will then stand up for what is right.” It is difficult to mislead, deceive, outwit, or fool such knowledgeable judges by taking advantage of the opponent’s innocence. So, if the judges were not bribed, which, unfortunately, happened in the last times of the community’s existence, one could fully count on a fair verdict. “The peasants value the village court very much, despite the absence of any legal authority in it.” The advantage of community courts over volost courts was expressed in their efficiency; despite the lack of any support from the state and the law, noted I.G. Orshansky, they manage to solve most peasant affairs to the end. S.V. Pachman argued, relying on some static data, that two-thirds of the cases to be considered in the volost courts ended in reconciliation in the community.
It was said above that reconciliation of the parties and resolution of the case on the merits were two of the most important functions of community courts, but in reality they often merged. In any case, village gatherings and courts did not consider it possible to release the disputants as enemies. Reconciliation could take place in the form of mutual renunciation of the parties' claims, after which there was, in fact, no need to resolve the dispute. But most often, reconciliation in court was achieved without renunciation of claims on either side through a compromise, a settlement deal. This is truly a transaction from a civil law point of view. “Like a deal,” wrote S.V. Pachman, reconciliation is that form of private protection of rights, through which the parties resolve, according to mutual consent, controversial or dubious legal relationship, without resorting to the assistance of the court. But usually settlement deals are concluded through the court itself, and even for the most part on the initiative of the latter. Becoming in such a connection with judicial proceedings, a settlement agreement, as it were, replaces a court decision, is its surrogate, so that the decision serves only as a formal sanction of a voluntary agreement between the parties.”9 Judges spend most of their time on exhortations, persuading the parties in order to persuade them to end the litigation and part with the world. If the litigants are very heated in mutual accusations and reproaches, the judges stop the negotiations and postpone the case for a certain period in order to give the disputants time to calm down, come to their senses, and come to their senses. Over time, everything would work out, the peasants believed, the dispute would lose its severity and stop by itself. This folk method of resolving conflicts is very ancient in origin and has been successfully used even in matters of blood feud. Almost all categories of peasant cases of a civil nature could end in reconciliation in the form of a settlement deal.
The procedural side of community legal proceedings was relatively simple. First of all, it was assumed that both parties in the process should be active, willing to give explanations, and recognize obvious, even if unfavorable for the outcome of the case, unpleasant facts for them. The sincerity of the peasant's behavior in court was highly assessed, and stubbornness, arrogant denial, and concealment of information and facts necessary for a correct judicial decision, on the contrary, were sharply condemned. Community legal proceedings, generally speaking, were based on faith and trust; the plaintiff, who did not have a single piece of evidence confirming his claim, could still count on a decision in his favor if the defendant himself admitted this claim. The court noted: “The defendant admitted that he really acted against the plaintiff against his conscience.” In many cases, the village court would be helpless if a cunning defense attorney stood next to the defendant, telling him - “don’t confess!”, “It’s not proven - you’re not guilty!” That is why representation of the interests of the parties in community litigation was, as a rule, not allowed. The material to justify the verdict must be obtained first-hand; the community court preferred to deal with the defendant himself, to talk with him, and not with his representative. In state court, speeches in the interests of the defendant are made mainly by a professional - a lawyer, a “dear friend” of all defendants and accused. As official jurisprudence teaches, “the golden rule of a defendant in civil proceedings is the ability to remain silent,” let the lawyer say everything for him: it will be better that way!
Observing the fruits of advocacy in the volost court, as a result of which the right one left the court accused, and the guilty one acquitted, the Russian peasants for the most part developed a persistent rejection of the figure of the lawyer, whom they often called a liar. It is possible that for this reason, representation of the parties did not become part of the procedural practice of the community courts. In general, the village judges sought to base their decisions on facts that the defendant himself simply admitted, generally agreeing with the verdict that was not in his favor. When, having received a fair sentence, he left the court angry and dissatisfied, it means that the truth did not reach his consciousness; in this case, the judges felt some inconvenience, believing that the case did not pose last point, the ultimate goal of the proceedings has not been achieved. State courts have probably never had such subtle problems of an ethical and legal nature. When two respectable villagers stood before the court - one as an accused and the other as a victim, the judges first of all tried to reconcile the parties and find suitable grounds for this. The victim was persuaded in every possible way to forgive the accused if he confessed everything and admitted his guilt. Forgiveness could be unconditional or contain any conditions of a property or personal nature, for example, making amends for the harm, apologizing at the gathering. The “forgiven matter” was immediately stopped, and the forgiveness itself was perceived with warm approval, the judges praised the parties and rejoiced that everything was done “in a good way,” in a Christian way.
Reconciliation of parties in cases on charges of theft, battery, and fraud often took the form of a settlement deal, which was widely practiced when considering civil law disputes. A settlement between a thief and a victim, allowing the criminal to pay off a severe punishment, looks rather strange if you do not take into account that the community never rose to the concept of a “case of public prosecution.” She did not take criminal acts against individual community members personally; these acts were perceived as a private grievance and a matter of private persecution. In such cases, the world was obliged to give a quick and fair trial in order to protect the offended, but it did not show any interest in prosecuting the criminal. The victim himself must initiate consideration of the conflict in court; no one else could do this. This circumstance once again proves that the peasant in the Russian community was not a faceless creature, completely merged with the collective, that in the sphere of customary legal relations within the community he acted as a subject of private rights, a bearer of completely autonomous property and personal interests.
The absence of a clearly defined punitive line in community justice explains the fact that peasants were often unable to assimilate many of the criminal legal concepts that guided the state judicial system and criminal legislation. This concerns, first of all, the concept of crime. In the people's legal consciousness, it was significantly closer to an ordinary offense and was perceived as a consequence of a certain combination of circumstances that happened by the will of God. The peasants looked at the criminal himself as the first victim of his bad deed; he had already suffered, punished himself by stepping over his inherent image of God and his inner human dignity. This is a person who has lost himself, pitiful, often embittered and who does not really understand what is happening to him. For a civilized state, a bad human act, defined in the code as a crime, is a reason for punishment, suppression, and all kinds of abuse of the criminal on completely legal and rationally justified grounds. For community members, a criminal is the same God’s creation as everyone else, but he is a stumbled, unhappy person towards whom compassion should be shown and who has the right to count on the help of his neighbors. The customary legal consciousness of the peasants proceeded from the fact that “society must and has the right to put the criminal in such a position as to make him harmless and at the same time not so much punish as correct and instruct.”
Therefore, a crime is dangerous not because of its subjective side, for any intent is nothing more than a clouding of the mind or a delusion of an inexperienced soul, but because of its objective side, the presence of harm caused to the victim. The efforts of the community court in so-called criminal cases are primarily aimed at eliminating and compensating for harm. That is why they often ended in the same way as civil cases - material, monetary reward for the victim, but did not have any other legal consequences. In those cases where non-material sanctions were applied, they were reduced mainly to floggings and disgraceful actions. “Those guilty of theft,” testifies one of the sources, “are sometimes subjected to humiliating punishment: the stolen item is imposed on the culprit and led with the beating of drums. The one who stole the flour was once harnessed to a sleigh and forced to take the flour to the peasant from whom it was stolen.”
Since crime is mainly harm, such concepts as attempted crime, forms of guilt, mitigating and aggravating circumstances, etc. turned out to be far from the peasant legal consciousness. The system of punishments for crimes tried in community courts is rather vague and is not clearly distinguished from property sanctions applied in civil cases. Settlement deals in any case included certain payments, compensation, restoration of destroyed buildings at the expense of the culprit, etc.
Community judges, however, understood that property sanctions for the crime of one person placed a heavy burden on his innocent family, wife, children, elderly parents, and therefore they applied these sanctions very carefully in criminal proceedings. Believing by common sense that the offender must personally suffer the unpleasant consequences associated with any criminal punishment, community courts, in the absence of prisons, hard labor, places of exile and deportation, turned, and quite widely, to types of corporal punishment. Flogging in the community was not only a measure of punishment, but also, one might say, a means of education, a method of preventive influence on persons capable of committing offenses and crimes. They flogged not only drunkards and debauchees, but also bad, faulty householders, tax defaulters, flogged adult children for disrespectful attitude to elderly parents and, of course, criminals - thieves, swindlers, instigators and participants in bloody fights. In almost all cases, corporal punishment required the decision of assemblies and some (not all) courts. But sometimes reprisals in the form of caning were carried out without any trial by decision of the organizers of public works. Thus, in secular towns, each householder was responsible for his own section of the fence, which was marked with special marks; if the work was “worthless,” then the culprit was brought to the place of bad work and punished with rods from five to twenty strokes.
Similar documents
Social and legal relations regulated by sources of ancient Russian law. Russian Truth is the first set of laws of Rus'. Main features of civil, property, inheritance, family law. Criminal law, court and process in the ancient Russian state.
course work, added 09/08/2009
The system of governing bodies in the Old Russian state - the nature of political power under early feudalism. Central Administration and political system in ancient Rus'. Local government in ancient Rus', its formation and organization of local authorities.
abstract, added 10/06/2008
Social order and the social structure of the Old Russian state. History of the development of Kievan Rus, features of its political organization, governing bodies. Characteristics of the structure and development of cities in Ancient Rus', the significance of ancient Russian law.
test, added 11/09/2010
Stages of the trial according to Russian Truth during the period of Kievan Rus, the process of evidence and types of punishment for crimes. Judicial system of the Moscow state. Reforming the courts in the Russian Empire. The judicial system of the Soviet period.
abstract, added 09/18/2013
Institutes of appeal and cassation proceedings in the arbitration process. General provisions on instantiation. Characteristics and features of the trial at the appeal stage. Powers of the appellate instance, procedure for filing a lawsuit.
thesis, added 03/15/2011
Historical content, characteristic features and economic development of Kievan Rus. The main reasons for the fragmentation and collapse of the state. Consequences of decentralization of Russian lands. The significance of the Old Russian state in the history of the Slavic peoples.
abstract, added 02/18/2009
History and brief description of the Pskov Judicial Charter: civil and criminal law, two types of inheritance and the system of crimes and punishments. Standardization of the court system, their competence and powers. Dual organization and conduct of the trial.
abstract, added 11/10/2010
State and society of Ancient India. Legal status of certain population groups. Political system Ancient India. Legal system of ancient India. The structure of the judicial system of Ancient India. Courts and judicial system.
course work, added 12/09/2004
The most important institutions and systems of constitutional law, their structure and components. History and main stages of its formation and development, current trends and reflection in state legislation. Various norms and provisions of the Basic Law.
test, added 04/13/2016
Specifics of Old Russian contract law. The essence and significance of religious norms as a source of ancient Russian law. The nature of the legal regulation of civil relations according to Russian Pravda, features of criminal law and the process under it.
The Middle Volga region is a special ethnographic region of Eastern Europe, located at the junction of Europe and Asia. The peoples inhabiting the Volga region have much in common both in economic and historical development, as well as in origin, culture, and way of life.
The peoples of the Volga region include: MORDVIANS, MARI, UDMURTS, CHUVASH, KAZAN or VOLGA TATARS and BASHKIRS. True, the Bashkirs are included among the peoples of the Volga region conditionally; in fact, they occupy a middle position between the peoples of Central Asia and the Volga region and culturally gravitate towards both.
The purpose of this work is to give as complete as possible comparative description traditional economy and everyday life of the peoples of the Volga region in the 17th - first half of the 20th centuries.
Farming.
The basis of the economy of the peoples of the Middle Volga region at all times was agriculture, which served as the main source of their existence. In the 19th - early 20th centuries, it was the predominant occupation of the Mordovians. Among the Mari, Tatars and Udmurts, agriculture was largely supplemented by other non-agricultural activities. Until the 17th century, the traditional type of economy among the Bashkirs was semi-nomadic cattle breeding. Until the 16th century, the predominant occupations of the Mari were hunting and fishing.
But among all the peoples of the Middle Volga region, the most important branch of agriculture was field cultivation. It was semi-natural in nature and was characterized by very low productivity, for example, grain yields in Chuvashia did not exceed 40-45 poods per dessiatine1. Communal land use prevailed everywhere. The community regulated all land relations of communal peasants. She redistributed land, meadows and other lands. Equal per capita distribution of land led to the fact that peasant farms received an allotment in the form of small plots located in different places. In the 19th century, the Finno-Ugric peoples, under the influence of the Russian population, were dominated by a three-field system, in which all arable land was divided into three parts (three fields). The first field was intended for winter crops, the second was sown with spring crops, and the third was fallow, that is, it was not sown at all and was most often used for pasturing livestock. On next year the fallow field was dug up for winter crops, the winter crops were sown with spring crops, and the spring crops remained. Over the course of three years, all fields were changed. Wheat, peas, and hemp were also grown in the southern regions; the latter was grown on personal plots and was the main technical crop of the peoples of the Volga region. Potatoes appeared in the Volga region in the middle of the last century, but were not widely used and were cultivated as a garden crop.
People: Russians
Settlement area: central Russia mainly, also the Volga region, the Urals, Siberia, the Far East, Ukraine, Belarus and all regions of Russia
Sedentary agriculture and cattle breeding, handicrafts high level(e.g. wood products, wood construction). Cuisine with a predominance of flour dishes, for example, pancakes, Easter cakes, kulebyak. Gardening
Religion: Orthodoxy
People: Tatars
Settlement area: Volga region, Ural, Siberia
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: cattle breeding in a semi-nomadic form (especially horse breeding), weaving, carpet weaving. Cuisine of dairy and meat dishes (kumys, for example).
Religion: Islam
People: Bashkirs
Settlement area: Ural
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: semi-nomadic cattle breeding, beekeeping and forestry (especially weaponry, blacksmithing, felt making, weaving, carpet production). Meat cuisine predominated
Religion: Islam
People: Chuvash, Mordovians
Settlement area: Volzhe, Priokye
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: farmers, smelted steel, skill in making knives.
Religion: pagans
People: Ukrainians
Settlement area: Left Bank Ukraine (annexed in 1654)
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: agriculture and settled cattle breeding, crafts at a high level. Cuisine with a predominance of flour and vegetable dishes (dumplings, kulesh, borscht, uzvar). Gardening
Religion: Orthodoxy
People: Mari (Cheremis)
Settlement area: Volga region, Priokye
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: beekeepers, forest gatherers (mushrooms and berries), peasants
Religion: pagans
People: Kalmyks
Settlement area: between the Yaik and Volga rivers (became subjects of Russia in 1655)
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: nomadic herders
Religion: Islam, Buddhism
People: Buryats
Settlement area: Transbaikalia (joined in the 17th century)
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: nomadic pastoralists. Meat cuisine. Crafts: sheepskin, leather, felt, blacksmithing.
Religion: paganism, buddhism
People: Udmurts
Settlement area: Ural
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: nomadic pastoralists, hunters, beekeepers. They were famous for the art of weaving. They lived in communities of relatives.
Religion: Orthodox and pagans
People: Karelians
Settlement area: Karelia
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: hunters, fishermen, woodcutters, farmers. The wheel was hardly used.
Religion: Orthodox and Lutherans
People: Kabardians, Nogais, Adygs, Abazas, Circassians
Settlement area: North Caucasus
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: cattle breeding (sheep), mountain gathering (berries, nuts), crafts. Meat and dairy cuisine
Religion: Islam
People: Belarusians
Settlement area: Belarus
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: peasants (sedentary), settled agriculture and cattle breeding. Picking berries and mushrooms, collecting birch and maple sap. Gardening
Religion: Orthodoxy
People: Yakuts, Evenks, Khanty and Mansi, Evens, Chukchi, Koryaks, Tungus, Yukagirs and others
Settlement area: Siberia, Far North, Far East
Culture, main activities and lifestyle features: nomadic herders (reindeer), taiga hunters, fishermen, hunting for furs, seals and walrus ivory. They mostly lived in portable prefabricated yurts, yarangas, tents, and less often in huts.
Religion: pagans
Population Samara region formed over a number of centuries. Since ancient times, the Middle Volga region has been a borderland of ethnic massifs of different origins.
Once upon a time, beyond the Samara River, in the direction of present-day Novokuybyshevsk, foreign lands stretched - the nomadic lands of the Bashkirs and Nogais, and the state border of Rus' ran right along the river. In 1586, Samara was founded as a border post to protect Russian lands from Nogai nomads. Time passed, the once warring peoples began to cooperate, and the fertile Volga lands attracted settlers here. Russians, Chuvash, Tatars, Mordovians, Germans, Kalmyks, Ukrainians, Bashkirs, and Jews began to live nearby. Different cultures, way of life, traditions, religions, languages, forms of management... But everyone was united by one desire - to create, build, raise children, develop the region.
The same economic conditions and close contacts in the process of developing the region were the basis for the development of international features in the traditional culture of peoples. A notable feature of the Samara region is the absence of interethnic conflicts and clashes. Many years of peaceful cohabitation, the use of everything valuable in the life and economy of neighbors had a beneficial influence on the creation of strong ties between the Russian population and other peoples of the Volga region.
According to the 2002 census, 3 million 240 thousand people live in the region. The ethnic composition of the population of the Samara region is multinational: 135 nationalities (for comparison, in Russia there are 165 in total). The national composition of the population is as follows:
Russians make up the majority 83.6% (2,720,200);
Tatars – 4% (127,931);
Chuvash – 3.1% (101,358);
Mordovians – 2.6% (86,000);
Ukrainians – 1.8% (60,727);
Armenians – 0.7% (21,566);
Azerbaijanis – 0.5% (15,046);
Kazakhs – 0.5% (14,918);
Belarusians – 0.4% (14,082);
Germans - 0.3% (9,569);
Bashkirs – 0.2% (7,885 people);
Jews – 0.2% (6,384);
Uzbeks – 0.2% (5,438);
Roma – 0.2% (5,200);
Tajiks – 0.1% (4,624);
Mari – 0.1% (3,889);
Georgians – 0.1% (3,518);
other nationalities (Udmurts, Koreans, Poles, Chechens, Ossetians, Kyrgyz, Moldovans) - 0.7% (25,764)
Besermyane(self-name - Beserman; udm. Beserman) - a small Finno-Ugric people in Russia, dispersedly living in the north-west of Udmurtia in 41 locality, of which 10 villages are mono-national.
The number, according to the 2002 census, is 3.1 thousand people.
They speak the dialect of the Udmurt language of the Finno-Ugric group Ural family, in general close to the southern dialects of the Udmurt language, which has an explanation in the ethnic history of the Besermyans [ source not specified 1550 days] .
Believers of Besermians are Orthodox Christians; The folk religion of the Besermians is very close to the folk religion of the Udmurts, also including some elements of Islamic origin.
Kerzhaki- ethnographic group of Russian Old Believers. The name comes from the name of the Kerzhenets River in the Nizhny Novgorod region. Carriers of culture of the North Russian type. After the defeat of the Kerzhen monasteries in the 1720s, tens of thousands fled to the east - to the Perm province. From the Urals they settled throughout Siberia, to Altai and the Far East. They are one of the first Russian-speaking residents of Siberia, the “old-timer population”. They led a rather closed communal lifestyle with strict religious rules and traditional culture. In Siberia, Kerzhaks formed the basis of Altai masons. They contrasted themselves with later migrants to Siberia - the “Rasei” (Russian) ones, but subsequently almost completely assimilated with them due to their common origin.
Komi-Yazvintsy (Komi, Yodz, Komi Yoz, Permyaks; Komi-Yazvin. Komiyoz, Permyakyuz, Komi Utyr; Komi yozwa komiyas, yazvinsa; k.-p. Komi Yazvinsa) - an ethnographic group of Komi-Zyryans and/or Komi-Permyaks, or a separate Finno-Ugric people in Russia.
Kungur, or Sylven, Mari(Mar. Köҥgyr Mari, Suliy Mari) - an ethnographic group of Mari in the southeastern part of the Perm region of Russia. The Kungur Mari are part of the Ural Mari, who in turn are part of the Eastern Mari. The group received its name from the former Kungur district Perm province, which until the 1780s included the territory where the Mari had settled since the 16th century. In 1678-1679 In the Kungur district there were already 100 Mari yurts with a male population of 311 people. In the 16th-17th centuries, Mari settlements appeared along the Sylva and Iren rivers. Some of the Mari were then assimilated by the more numerous Russians and Tatars (for example, the village of Oshmarina of the Nasadsky village council of the Kungur region, former Mari villages along the upper reaches of the Ireni, etc.). The Kungur Mari took part in the formation of the Tatars of the Suksun, Kishert and Kungur regions of the region.
Nagaibaki (nogaibaki, Tat. nagaibәklәr) - an ethno-religious group of Tatars living mostly in the Nagaybak and Chebarkul municipal districts of the Chelyabinsk region. Language - dialect of the middle dialect of the Tatar language. Believers are Orthodox Christians. By Russian legislation are officially small people .
Nenets(Nenets. Neney Neneche, Khasovo, neschang ( obsolete - Samoyeds,yuraki) - Samoyed people in Russia, inhabiting the Eurasian coast of the Arctic Ocean from the Kola Peninsula to Taimyr. The Nenets are divided into European and Asian (Siberian). European Nenets are settled in the Nenets Autonomous Okrug of the Arkhangelsk Region, and Siberian Nenets are settled in the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug of the Tyumen Region and in the Dolgano-Nenets Taimyr Municipal District Krasnoyarsk Territory. Small groups of Nenets live in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug, Murmansk and Arkhangelsk regions, and the Komi Republic.
VOLGA REGION:
The Kalmyks' home corresponded to their way of life. Roaming with his herds from place to place, the Kalmyk had a portable dwelling - a yurt - a kind of felt hut on a wooden base. The decoration of the yurt consisted of a low bed with several felts; next to it was placed a box where “burkhans” (idols) were kept. In front of the burkhans they placed a small wooden table, decorated with carvings, paints and gilding, with silver or copper cups in which donations were placed - oil, wheat and spices. Necessary accessories The yurt was made up of a tagan, which occupied its middle. This hearth, in which food was cooked, was considered a sacred place.
The outerwear of the Kalmyks consisted of a robe or single-breasted beshmet, borrowed from the Caucasian highlanders. The beshmet was tied at the waist with a belt; for the rich, the belt was decorated with iron plates with silver notches. In winter they wore a sheepskin or fox fur coat. Hats of the national Kalmyk cut with a quadrangular crown were very popular in Russia. Headdresses for Russian coachmen and coachmen were cut in their likeness. Kalmyk women's clothing consisted of a wide blouse and trousers. On their heads they wore low yellow caps with a black pattern, decorated with gold thread and thick red fringe.
The main food of the Kalmyks was goat and lamb meat. A strong broth from lamb was even considered healing. Instead of bread, crumpets were baked from rye or wheat flour in hot ashes from steeply kneaded dough. In addition to them, budan was prepared from flour - milk mixed with flour and boiled in a cauldron. Wheat dough balls fried in lamb fat were also a special delicacy.
Germans(natives from various regions of Germany) at the beginning of the 20th century. constituted a colony of approximately 400 thousand people and lived in the territory of what is now the Samara and Saratov regions. The first colonists appeared here after the manifestos of Empress Catherine II, which called on everyone in Europe to freely settle in “the most beneficial places for the population and habitation of the human race, the most useful places that have remained idle to this day.” The German settlements of the Volga region were, as it were, a state within a state - a completely special world, sharply different from the surrounding Russian population in faith, culture, language, way of life, and the character of the people.
After the start of the Great Patriotic War, the national formations of the Volga Germans were liquidated, and their inhabitants were evicted to different regions of the country, mainly to Kazakhstan. Many of the Germans who returned to the Volga region in the 60s and 70s left for Germany after the collapse of the USSR.
Tatars profess Islam Sunni sense, i.e., along with the Koran, they recognize the Sunnah - the Muslim Holy Tradition about the deeds of the Prophet Muhammad. The main part of the Sunna arose at the end of the 7th - beginning of the 8th century. For many centuries, the mullahs and their numerous assistants educated boys and their wives educated girls, as a result of which literacy was much more widespread among the Tatars than among the Russians.
Kalmyks profess Buddhism, preserved by them since their migration from the east. The beliefs are based on the Ten Commandments about good and evil deeds, much like the Christian religion. Evil deeds include taking a life, robbery, adultery, lies, threats, harsh words, idle talk, envy, malice in the heart; good deeds - to have mercy from death, to give alms, to maintain moral purity, to speak kindly and always the truth, to be a peacemaker, to act in accordance with the teachings of the holy books, to be satisfied with one’s condition, to help one’s neighbor and to believe in predestination.
Volga Germans - mostly Lutherans. Russians - Christians Orthodox persuasion.
39)Peoples of the European North of Russia.
This is the territory from the Kola Peninsula and Karelia to the Northern Urals.
A permanent population appeared here in 3-2 thousand BC. Local residents knew how to make polished stone tools, boats dug out of tree trunks, and bows and arrows. They made pottery without using a potter's wheel and covered it with ornaments. The peoples have a slight Mongoloid identity with a general Caucasoid appearance. The most ancient tribes most likely spoke the languages of the Samoyedic group. Later, speakers of Finno-Ugric languages penetrated here. At the end of the 1st - beginning of the 2nd millennium AD. in the southwestern Urals, a large tribal association of ancient Permians (creators of artistic culture - the Perm animal style) formed. Their descendants are the Komi-Zyryans and Komi-Permyaks. From the 6th century AD the sources mention a nationality (all), whose descendants are now called Vepsians. Already in the 9th century. AD On the Karelian Isthmus lived the Korela people - the ancestors of modern Karelians. In the 8th-11th centuries. AD Slovenes appeared in the European North of Russia. Nowadays, Russians make up the majority of the population.
Economy and material culture. The Sami and Nenets have long been engaged in reindeer herding. The peasant economy of the Russians, Karelians, Vepsians and both Komi nationalities became the basis for the formation of the economic and cultural type of northern farmers. Initially, farming was carried out as shifting.
Livestock farming has not received much development.
They were actively engaged in fishing. Hunting for fur-bearing animals, upland and other game. Procurement of mushrooms, wild berries and herbs.
All these activities remain important today. Fur farming has been added.
Mining of minerals is developing (coal in Komi, iron ore in Karelia).
Religion. In the 11th-13th centuries. AD Karelians and Vepsians converted to Orthodoxy. Many still retained their previous beliefs in the forester, the bathhouse owner and other representatives of lower demonology. In our time, among northern Russians, Karelians, Vepsians and Komi, there is little interest in Orthodoxy, but vestiges of superstitions associated with lower demonology often persist.
41. Peoples of Transcaucasia
In the conditions of everyday work and communication with representatives of other nationalities, residents of Transcaucasia have a noticeable tendency to form microgroups based on nationality. Possessing fairly good organizational skills, communication skills, and independence, they strive to become informal leaders in teams.
The Armenian people were formed in the Armenian Highlands in their basic qualities back in the 4th century BC. The state of Armenians was part of the political landscape Ancient East, and at the end of the 20th century it again appeared on the world map.
Georgians occupy mountain valleys, highlands and plateaus between the Greater and Lesser Caucasus, being the strategic center of the entire Caucasian region. Consisting of large number Ethnographic groups of people are distinguished by both the unity of their common consciousness and the individualism of each individual person.
Between Georgia and the Adyghe lands along the Black Sea coast lies the land of the Abkhazians, which was called the “land of the soul”; the ethnogenesis of the Abkhazians connects them with the ancient population of the lands south of the Caucasus. In the everyday culture of the Abkhaz, its indigenous potential was combined with influences from related Adyghe peoples and neighboring Western Georgia. Abkhazia acts in many ways as a reserve of the early traditions of the Caucasian community, especially that mountainous part that is connected to the Black Sea.
Among the relatively large peoples of Transcaucasia live several relatively small ones (Kurds, Aisors, Udins, Tats, Talysh). In the Western Caucasus there are settlements of Greeks, some of which appeared in the Caucasus a long time ago, while others moved from Anatolia in the second half of the 19th century.
41.South Caucasus (Transcaucasia)- a geopolitical region located on the border of Eastern Europe and South-West Asia, lying south of the main, or watershed, ridge of the Greater Caucasus. Transcaucasia includes most of the southern slope of the Greater Caucasus, the Colchis Lowland and the Kura Depression, the Lesser Caucasus, the Armenian Highlands, the Talysh Mountains and the Lenkoran Lowland. Within the Transcaucasus there are independent states: Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. In the same region are: Abkhazia and South Ossetia, whose independence is recognized only by Russia and three other countries, as well as the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. Transcaucasia borders on the Russian Federation in the north, and Turkey and Iran in the south.
The Transcaucasian republics of the CIS include Azerbaijan and Georgia, two bordering Russia, as well as Armenia, which during the Soviet period constituted one Transcaucasian economic region.
The area of the three republics is 186.1 thousand km2, the population is 17.3 million people.
The largest republic in terms of area and population is Azerbaijan, the smallest is Armenia.
The main titular peoples of Transcaucasia belong to different language families. Georgians are representatives of the Kartvelian language family of the Kartvelian group, Armenians also form their own group in the Indo-European language family, Azerbaijanis belong to Turkic group Altai language family. The majority of the Georgian population are Christians, Azerbaijanis are adherents of Shiite Islam, and Armenians are Christians and Monophysites.\
Azerbaijanis(Azerb. azərbaycanlılar, آذربایجانلیلار, or Azerbaijani. azərilər, آذری لر) - Turkic-speaking people, constituting the bulk of the population of Azerbaijan and a significant part of the population of northwestern Iran. The total number is over 30 million people. In addition to Iran and Azerbaijan, they traditionally live in the territory modern Russia(Dagestan), Georgia (Borchaly) and Turkey (Kars and Ygdir).
They belong to the Caspian type of the Caucasian race.
They speak Azerbaijani.
Believing Azerbaijanis predominantly profess the Islam Shiite persuasion (Jafarite madhhab).
The formation of the modern Azerbaijani ethnos on the territory of Eastern Transcaucasia and Northwestern Iran was a centuries-long process that culminated mainly in the Abkhazians (Abkh. aҧsua) - one of the Abkhaz-Adyghe peoples, the indigenous population of Abkhazia, living in the Northwestern part of the Caucasus. There are also large diasporas in Turkey, Russia, Syria, Jordan, and dispersedly in Western countries. Europe and the USA.
According to the 1989 census, the number of Abkhazians in Abkhazia was 93.3 thousand people (18% of the population of Abkhazia), according to the 2003 census - 94.6 thousand people (44% of the population), according to the 2010 census - 122.1 thousand. people (about 51%). At the beginning of the 21st century, their total number in the world is estimated at 185 thousand people (according to Abkhaz demographers, about 600 thousand). Abkhazians live in 52 countries of the world.
They speak Abkhaz language, the majority of those living in Abkhazia also speak Russian.
The most widespread religions are Orthodoxy (from the 6th century) and Sunni Islam (from the 15th century). From the end of the 15th century.
Georgians(self-name - kartvelebi, cargo. ქართველები) - people of the Kartvelian language family. Most of the Georgian nation is concentrated within the borders of Georgia. . Also, many Georgians live in eastern provinces Turkey and in the interior of Iran, especially in the city of Fereydunshahr. Many Georgians have dark hair, and some have blonde hair. Most Georgians have brown eyes, although 30% have blue or gray eyes. Due to the remoteness of the Georgians from the main routes of invasion and migration, the territory of Georgia turned out to be the object of great demographic homogeneity, due to which modern Georgians are direct descendants of the indigenous inhabitants of the Caucasian Isthmus. According to the linguistic principle, the Georgian people include three groups: Iberian, Svan and Mingrelian-Laz, with the last two included in separate (from Georgian) language groups of the Kartvelian family. The majority of Georgians traditionally profess Christianity (Orthodoxy), which was adopted on May 6, 319. Most of them anthropologically belong to the Kpontian and Caucasian types of the Caucasian race. The most famous Georgian in the world is called Joseph Stalin [
42. Since ancient times, Central Asia and Kazakhstan have been distinguished by the diversity of their ethnic composition and the wide variety of economic and cultural characteristics of individual regions, the difference between which was due to the sharp contrasts of natural conditions described above - a combination of vast sandy and clayey deserts suitable for cattle breeding, and powerful mountain systems, where In the foothills and mainly on the foothill plains, as well as in the valleys and deltas of rivers, the most ancient centers of agricultural culture arose, where, along with agriculture, cattle breeding and fishing were developed. Individual localities differed from one another in the features of historically established relationships between the economic activities of the population and the geographic environment, which in turn determined the way of life, the nature of material culture - types of settlements and housing, means of transportation, food, etc.
Ethnographic science has developed the principle of classifying the population into so-called economic and cultural types; economic and cultural types are historically established complexes of interrelated economic and cultural features, characteristic of peoples at approximately the same level of socio-economic development and living in similar natural and geographical conditions.
Ethnographers identify the territory of Central Asia and Kazakhstan at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. three main economic and cultural types: 1) settled inhabitants of oases, conducting intensive farming using artificial irrigation; 2) semi-sedentary population combining cattle breeding with agriculture; 3) nomadic pastoralists. In six of the fifteen natural-economic zones identified by geographers in Central Asia and Kazakhstan in pre-revolutionary period, judging by historical and ethnographic materials, the economic and cultural type of sedentary farmers predominated, farming on artificially irrigated lands and intermountain valleys and on flat foothills; in three zones - the economic and cultural type of nomadic pastoralists, a significant part of whom were also engaged in irregular farming in their wintering grounds and at temporary sources and springs in the desert zone; in four - the economic and cultural type of semi-sedentary farmers and pastoralists, who were characterized by irregular irrigated and cairn farming on the outskirts of agricultural oases and in the lower reaches of rivers, sometimes combined with fishing. We see a slightly different version of the same economic and cultural type in mountainous areas, where mountain pasture and transhumance cattle breeding was sometimes combined with rain-fed, non-irrigated (rain-fed - crops under spring rains) and small-oasis irrigated agriculture.
For each of the large peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan, one of these three economic and cultural types was the main, traditional and predominant, but at the same time, individual ethnographic or local groups among the same people often belonged to different economic and cultural types.
The majority of the population of Central Asia and Kazakhstan at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. engaged in settled agriculture on artificially irrigated lands and nomadic cattle breeding. Sedentary agricultural and steppe pastoral peoples have never existed in isolation from each other. They have always been in close economic relations, exchanging the products of their farms; Political and cultural ties between them were also always strong. These centuries-old connections between the sedentary population and the steppe tribes determined extremely many unique features of the history, way of life and features of the material and spiritual culture of the peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan. As the latest archaeological and ethnographic research shows, semi-sedentary tribes also played a significant role in the history of Central Asia, being the creators of unique forms of economy and culture.
Let us give a brief description of the three economic and cultural types identified in Central Asia and Kazakhstan.
1. Sedentary farmers. They existed in Central Asia and Kazakhstan since ancient times, on the fertile banks of the river systems of the East, which include a number of Central Asian rivers (Amu Daryu, Syr Daryu, Murgab, etc.), where natural conditions provided the possibility of irrigation, On the basis of plow irrigation agriculture, the most ancient state associations, class societies were formed and the foundation of modern civilization was laid.
Even in the slave era, intensive irrigated agriculture with the use of large irrigation structures became widespread. buildings (dams, canals, etc.), in the construction of which slave labor was widely used. This type of farming is most widespread in the territory of modern Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and southern Turkmenistan. It determined the flourishing of the economy of the powerful ancient slave states of Central Asia with their high and unique civilization.
The inhabitants of agricultural oases - Uzbeks, Tajiks, Turkmens, etc. - over the centuries have accumulated a wealth of experience in irrigation farming, in the construction of powerful irrigation structures, and in methods of irrigating fields.
Farmers have developed a number of ways to restore soil fertility and agricultural techniques to improve their physical and chemical properties: reclamation by sanding, destruction of takyr crust, fertilization with silty sediments of irrigation water, waste, soil from destroyed clay buildings and coastal dumps of abandoned canals, characterized by a high content of potassium salts; they used watering and washing the soil in order to get rid of harmful salts in the upper layer, etc.
Areas of irrigated agriculture in river valleys, intermountain basins and the foothills of Central Asia stand out as areas with an exceptionally dense agricultural population. At the beginning of the 20th century. in certain parts of the Bukhara and Samarkand oases along Zeravshan and in the Fergana Valley, the average population density exceeded 150-200 people per 1 sq. km; in the Khorezm oasis - 80-100 people per 1 sq. km. Population density decreased towards the periphery of the oases. In most cases, densely populated agricultural irrigated areas were sharply delimited from neighboring sparsely populated desert or swampy (in river deltas) areas used for cattle breeding. Settlements of farmers in the irrigated zone were confined to irrigation systems and were located adjacent to the cultivated areas.
In the lower reaches of large rivers - on the Amu Darya, Syr Darya, Zeravshan - a dispersed (“farm”) type of settlement prevailed: individual farmsteads of farmers were scattered relatively far from one another (for example, in Khorezm - 400-500 m); they formed a wide (from 2 to 5 km) strip along the main main canals. The location of the estates depended on the direction of the canals and their branching into smaller ones.
Did the nature of the irrigation network largely determine the settlement of farmers in the intermountain basins (Fergana, the basins of the Zeravshan, Talas, Asy, etc.) rivers? where on extensive alluvial fans a network of large villages formed, stretching along fan-shaped diverging channels, as well as in the foothills of the Kopet-Dag and Tien Shan on the border between the desert and the mountains, where tracts of irrigated land are surrounded by desert and mountain-steppe pastures.
Mountain villages were most often located at the bottom of wide valleys and in their side branches. Every piece of alluvial sediment from mountain rivers was used for crops.
After the zone of irrigated lands, a zone of rainfed lands began, located along the slopes and up the valleys of mountain rivers. The inhabitants of the mountainous regions of the Pamir-Alai and Tien Shan - Tajiks, Uzbeks, Kyrgyz - developed various methods of field cultivation in the mountains, on mountain sloping slopes, on terraces and on alluvial cones of mountain rivers, etc.; they created forms of intensive terrace farming.
On the foothill plains of Kopet-Dag and the Nurata Mountains, “kariz” irrigation was used (kariz is a structure for using groundwater); its construction required enormous amounts of human labor and deep knowledge of the terrain, structure and slopes of the underlying soils. Both irrigated and rain-fed agriculture among the Uzbeks, Tajiks, Kyrgyz, and Turkmen of Kopet-Dag were combined with mountain pasture cattle breeding. Irrigated agriculture in combination with stall and desert transhumance cattle breeding was developed among the Uzbeks, Karakalpaks and Turkmen of the Khorezm oasis, among the Uzbeks and Tajiks of the Bukhara oasis, in the Tashkent (among the Uzbeks), Murgab and Tedjen oases (among the Turkmen), in the Fergana Valley, etc.
2. Semi-sedentary population. It combined livestock breeding, farming, and sometimes fishing in its economy.
Many peoples of Central Asia and Kazakhstan until the beginning of the 20th century. the traditions of irregular semi-sedentary extensive cairn and estuary agriculture were preserved, dating back to the Chalcolithic and Bronze Ages. As is known, the estuary method of irrigation, which consisted in the fact that individual areas of river floods and lakes were isolated, drained and sown, is the prototype of all modern irrigation. In the estuary areas and cairn lands bordering river channels and lakes, sowing melons, millet, dzhugar and rice was widely practiced. Field cultivation on estuaries and guillemots was very dependent on natural conditions and was characterized by great instability and irregularity.
Semi-sedentary farmers and pastoralists at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. were settled primarily on the outskirts of large agricultural oases, in the lower reaches of many rivers, as well as in naturally irrigated areas of the foothills and northern Kazakhstan steppes (see map, pp. 36 - 37). This type was common among the inhabitants of the delta regions of the Amu Darya and Syr Darya - Karakalpaks, Turkmen and Northern Khorezm Uzbeks; in the Bukhara oasis - among the Turkmens, Uzbeks and Kazakhs; in Fergana - among some of the Kyrgyz and Karakalpaks. In the mountainous regions of Central Asia, this type also included part of the Tajiks (in the Baysun and Kugistan mountains of southern Uzbekistan), the Kyrgyz (in the Issyk-Kul basin) and the Uzbeks, who were characterized by rain-fed agriculture in combination with mountain pasture cattle breeding. The Turkmens also practiced semi-sedentary farming, and for a long time combined cattle breeding with agriculture. In the northern regions of Kazakhstan, semi-sedentary farming (rain-fed farming) was carried out by Kazakhs (in the basins of Irgiz, Turgai, Emba, etc.).
The semi-sedentary population of Central Asia and Kazakhstan can be divided into two large groups: the first consisted of nomadic herders (Kazakhs, some groups of Uzbeks) who had recently settled in the cultural zone of oases and border regions and migrated from the steppes (Kazakhs, some groups of Uzbeks), the second - ethnographic groups of peoples who, throughout the history of their formations led a semi-sedentary lifestyle (a significant part of the Karakalpaks, Aral Uzbeks, as well as part of the Turkmen and Syr Darya Kazakhs). These are the descendants of tribes and peoples whose complex type of economy prevailed in antiquity, the early and late Middle Ages. Inhabitants of vast deltaic regions, lakeside and riverine areas, they inherited the archaic traditions of complex agriculture, livestock breeding and fishing, apparently from the Bronze Age tribes that lived in these areas.
3. Nomad and pastoralists. They occupied vast spaces of steppes, mountains and deserts of Central Asia and Kazakhstan.
Nomadic pastoralism varied depending on the regions. Kazakhs, who lived in the vast steppes, in the recent past (until the beginning of the 20th century) wandered mainly over long distances in the meridional direction, moving far to the north in summer and far to the south in winter. The territories and routes of their migrations were strictly defined, traditional and passed on from generation to generation.
Kazakh nomadic cattle breeding is characterized by the leading role of sheep and horse breeding.
Among the Turkmens, nomadic routes in the desert were determined by the location of wells and the seasonal use of pastures. Part of the population lived permanently in oases, while the other went with herds to the sands, moving along certain tracts located near wells or drainage structures built in the desert on takyrs, which also served as watering holes for the herd. The herd was dominated by sheep, goats and camels. The latter were especially important as a transport animal in the vast sandy and waterless spaces of the great Central Asian deserts.
Among the Kirghiz, who occupied the mountain plateaus and valleys of the Tien Shan, nomadism was predominantly vertical in nature, being associated with changes in the vegetation cover of pastures. Summer pastures were located high in the mountains, in alpine meadows, and wintering areas were located in deep valleys protected from cold winds and blizzards.
Significant place among various breeds Cattle in the high mountainous regions of the Pamir-Alai and Tien Shan were occupied by mountain yaks.
Nomadic and partly transhumance livestock raising was the main, but not the only, occupation of the nomads; Many of them were engaged in farming, which had an auxiliary value, in their winter camps. From ancient times, nomads in the mountains used spring waters and temporary seasonal flows for field cultivation and developed the skills of so-called bulak (on springs-bulak) and estuary farming. In the steppes and deserts, they learned to collect water on takyrs after rain and drain it into the lowlands; these lowlands were sown different cultures. In Turkmenistan, in some places, depressions (oytak) were used to set up melon fields and sow grain crops.
The economic and cultural types of Central Asia and Kazakhstan, reflecting the historically established relationships between the economic activities of the population and the geographical environment and thus being a historical category, have undergone changes in the process of development of the economy and culture of the Central Asian peoples. These changes have become especially significant in Central Asia and Kazakhstan today, when socialist agriculture uses the historically developed labor skills of the population in a completely new way. The most ancient type of semi-sedentary complex economy disappeared along with extensive forms of subsistence farming and remnants of patriarchal clan life. Nomadic cattle breeding disappeared as a special economic and cultural type.
The general nature of livestock farming has changed. In most collective and state farms, the transhumance form of livestock farming is common. The watering of large areas of the steppes of Kazakhstan, the sandy deserts of Karakum and Kyzylkum as a result of irrigation construction and the widespread distribution of artesian wells improved the food supply, expanded the area of pastures, and facilitated the work of shepherds and cattle breeders. The composition of the herd has also changed. Valuable and highly productive meat-wool and Karakul breeds of small ruminants, meat and dairy breeds of cattle are becoming increasingly important; Due to the development of new means of transport, camel and horse breeding decreased.
Irrigated agriculture based on modern agricultural technology, producing highly marketable valuable agricultural crops, primarily cotton, has flourished the most.
43. In addition to anthropological and linguistic characteristics, the peoples of Siberia have a number of specific, traditionally stable cultural and economic characteristics that characterize the historical and ethnographic diversity of Siberia. In cultural and economic terms, the territory of Siberia can be divided into two large historical regions: 1) southern - the region of ancient cattle breeding and agriculture; and 2) northern – the area of commercial hunting and fishing. The boundaries of these areas do not coincide with the boundaries of landscape zones. Stable economic and cultural types of Siberia developed in ancient times as a result of historical and cultural processes that were different in time and nature, occurring in conditions of a homogeneous natural and economic environment and under the influence of external foreign cultural traditions.
By the 17th century among the indigenous population of Siberia according to the predominant type economic activity The following economic and cultural types have emerged: 1) foot hunters and fishermen of the taiga zone and forest-tundra; 2) sedentary fishermen in the basins of large and small rivers and lakes; 3) sedentary hunters of sea animals on the coast of the Arctic seas; 4) nomadic taiga reindeer herders-hunters and fishermen; 5) nomadic reindeer herders of the tundra and forest-tundra; 6) cattle breeders of steppes and forest-steppes.
In the past, foot hunters and fishermen of the taiga mainly included some groups of foot Evenks, Orochs, Udeges, separate groups of Yukaghirs, Kets, Selkups, partly Khanty and Mansi, Shors. For these peoples, hunting for meat animals (elk, deer) and fishing were of great importance. A characteristic element of their culture was the hand sledge.
The settled-fishing type of economy was widespread in the past among the peoples living in the river basins. Amur and Ob: Nivkhs, Nanais, Ulchis, Itelmens, Khanty, among some Selkups and Ob Mansi. For these peoples, fishing was the main source of livelihood throughout the year. Hunting was of an auxiliary nature.
The type of sedentary hunters of sea animals is represented among the sedentary Chukchi, Eskimos, and partly sedentary Koryaks. The economy of these peoples is based on the production of sea animals (walrus, seal, whale). Arctic hunters settled on the coasts of the Arctic seas. The products of marine hunting, in addition to satisfying personal needs for meat, fat and skins, also served as an object of exchange with neighboring related groups.
Nomadic taiga reindeer herders, hunters and fishermen were the most common type of economy among the peoples of Siberia in the past. He was represented among the Evenks, Evens, Dolgans, Tofalars, Forest Nenets, Northern Selkups, and Reindeer Kets. Geographically, it covered mainly the forests and forest-tundras of Eastern Siberia, from the Yenisei to the Sea of Okhotsk, and also extended to the west of the Yenisei. The basis of the economy was hunting and keeping deer, as well as fishing.
The Nenets belong to the nomadic reindeer herders of the tundra and forest-tundra, reindeer Chukchi and reindeer Koryaks. These peoples have developed a special type of economy, the basis of which is reindeer husbandry. Hunting and fishing, as well as marine fishing, are of secondary importance or are completely absent. The main food product for this group of peoples is deer meat. The deer also serves as a reliable means of transportation.
Cattle breeding of the steppes and forest-steppes in the past was widely represented among the Yakuts, the world's northernmost pastoral people, among the Altaians, Khakassians, Tuvinians, Buryats, and Siberian Tatars. Cattle breeding was of a commercial nature; the products almost completely satisfied the population's needs for meat, milk and dairy products. Agriculture among pastoral peoples (except for the Yakuts) existed as an auxiliary branch of the economy. These peoples were partly engaged in hunting and fishing.
Along with the indicated types of economy, a number of peoples also had transitional types. For example, the Shors and northern Altaians combined sedentary cattle breeding with hunting; The Yukaghirs, Nganasans, and Enets combined reindeer herding with hunting as their main occupation.
The diversity of cultural and economic types of Siberia determines the specifics of indigenous peoples' development of the natural environment, on the one hand, and the level of their socio-economic development, on the other. Before the arrival of the Russians, economic and cultural specialization did not go beyond the framework of the appropriating economy and primitive (hoe) farming and cattle breeding. The diversity of natural conditions contributed to the formation of various local variants of economic types, the oldest of which were hunting and fishing.
At the same time, it must be taken into account that “culture” is an extra-biological adaptation that entails the need for activity. This explains so many economic and cultural types. Their peculiarity is their sparing attitude towards natural resources. And in this all economic and cultural types are similar to each other. However, culture is, at the same time, a system of signs, a semiotic model of a particular society (ethnic group). Therefore, a single cultural and economic type is not yet a community of culture. What is common is that the existence of many traditional cultures is based on a certain method of farming (fishing, hunting, sea hunting, cattle breeding). However, cultures can be different in terms of customs, rituals, traditions, and beliefs.
Irina Sorokina
Presentation “Peoples of the Volga Region”
Chuvash and Mari, Buryat and Udmurt,
Russian, Tatar, Bashkir and Yakut.
Various peoples big family,
And we, friends, should be proud of this.
Our common home is called Russia,
Let everyone feel comfortable in it.
We will overcome any difficulties together
And only in unity is the strength of Russia.
Average Volga region is a special ethnographic region of Eastern Europe, located at the junction of Europe and Asia. Peoples, inhabiting Volga region, have much in common both economically and historically, as well as in origin, culture, and way of life. TO peoples of the Volga region include: Chuvash, Mordovians, Mari, Tatars, Udmurts and Bashkirs. True, the Bashkirs are included in the number peoples of the Volga region conditionally, since they actually occupy a middle position between peoples of Central Asia and the Volga region, culturally gravitate toward both.
This presentation introduces children of senior preschool age to culture and way of life peoples of the Volga region, gives an idea of national costumes and these holidays peoples.
Publications on the topic:
Dear Colleagues! I present to your attention the author's didactic manual“Peoples of Russia”, intended for senior preschool children.
Festival of the Peoples of the Volga Region Program content. 1. To consolidate the idea of people of different nationalities of the Volga region: Mordovians, Chuvash, Tatars, Russians. 2. Educate.
Festival of the Peoples of the Volga Region Scenario of the festival of peoples of the Volga region “At Grandma’s in the Village” Purpose: formation creative personality, a citizen of his country, oriented.
Lesson summary “What kind of peoples are they? Summary of joint activities to organize an exhibition on the topic: “Peoples of the Volga region” Type of integrated activity: cognitive, social.
Indigenous peoples of Sakhalin Municipal budgetary preschool educational institution Kindergarten“Smile” Dolinsk, Sakhalin region. SUBJECT:.
We display such models at the stand between the nature corner and the patriotic corner. They are used in educational activities to become familiar with the environment.
Peoples living in the Irkutsk region The history of the formation of the population of the Irkutsk region begins with the Old and New Stone Ages. The proof is archaeological finds.
GCD Virtual journey “Peoples of the Southern Urals”. Virtual trip “Peoples of the Southern Urals” Tasks. Continue to develop children’s interest in the “small Motherland.” Introduce children to what...
