WITNESS IN ANCIENT RUSSIA

Abstract

The article examines the features of the procedural figure of a witness and the specifics of witness testimony in Ancient Russia. The authors believe that the study should take place from the earliest stage of the formation and development of a particular legal phenomenon, despite the dissimilarity of the appearance of such norms with the legal provisions of national law in the current edition. In this case, the beginning of the study should actually take place from the beginning of the 10th century. The article states the lack of unity of opinion on the issue of differentiating the procedural figures of hearing and vidok, found in both the Brief and the Extensive "Russian Truth", and the presence of errors even in an encyclopedic publication of the academic level, where the purpose of giving them testimony and its reputation. Emphasizing the importance of the procedural figure of the hearing and citing different opinions of researchers about its procedural status, the authors propose to distinguish between the procedural figures of the hearing and the vidocq both by the method of obtaining the information of interest to the court, and by the nature of the information that they were required to report to the court. In conclusion, the following conclusion is made: the principle of saving linguistic means led to the fact that only one term remained in the language, the term "vidocq" by the XV-XVI centuries was practically lost, and the message absorbed both meanings into its semantics, and the institution of obedience, gradually evolving , by the Moscow period of the development of legislation, which also absorbed elements of Old Russian law, turned into an institution of witnessing, and a witness could only be an eyewitness.

Keywords

• vidok
• posluh
• witness
• mass search
• witness immunity