Shemyakin court

Shemyakin court
The title of an ancient Russian satirical story that exposed the arbitrariness and selfishness of the feudal court.
Shemyaka - real historical figure, Galician prince Dimitry Shemyaka (d. 1453), notorious for his cruelty, treachery and unrighteous deeds. In the struggle for the Moscow throne, he gained the upper hand for some time over his rival, Prince Vasily of Moscow, and blinded him. Subsequently, the Moscow prince received the nickname Vasily the Dark (that is, blind), under which he went down in history.
Allegorically: wrong, unfair trial, parody of trial(ironic, contemptuous).

encyclopedic Dictionary winged words and expressions. - M.: “Locked-Press”. Vadim Serov. 2003.

Shemyakin court

The expression is used in the meaning: wrong, unfair trial; arose from an old Russian satirical story about Shemyakin court, which exposed the arbitrariness and selfishness of the feudal court. This story, dedicated to the personality of Prince Dmitry Shemyaka (died in 1453), enjoyed wide popularity; it is preserved in many manuscripts of the 17th and 18th centuries. and served as a subject for popular prints and books.

Dictionary of catch words. Plutex. 2004.

See what “Shemyakin court” is in other dictionaries:

- (treacherous, dishonest court) This is Sidorov’s truth and Shemyakin’s court. Wed. The cause of these martyrs was raised and reconsidered; the Shemyakinsky sentences were canceled and the good name and honor of these innocent victims of falsehood... were restored... N. Makarov.... ... Michelson's Large Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary

Dictionary Ushakova

SHEMYAKIN COURT. see court. Ushakov's explanatory dictionary. D.N. Ushakov. 1935 1940 ... Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

Noun, number of synonyms: 1 unfair trial (1) ASIS Dictionary of Synonyms. V.N. Trishin. 2013… Synonym dictionary

Shemyakin court- only units , stable combination Unfair, biased, corrupt court. Conduct Shemyakin's court. Synonyms: krivosu/d (obsolete) Etymology: After the name of Judge Shemyaka from the Russian satirical story of the second gender. XVII century see also court. Encyclopedic... ... Popular dictionary of the Russian language

The title of an ancient satirical story about the unrighteous judge Shemyak, preserved in many manuscripts of the 17th and 18th centuries, popular prints and folk tales, and in late XVIII And early XIX V. received literary treatment made by F.... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron

A common noun denoting an unfair trial. Associated with the same name of the Russian satirical story of the 2nd half of the 17th century, written on the basis of a popular story among many peoples fairy tale plot. Theme of the story... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Shemyakin court (treacherous, dishonest court). This is Sidorov's truth and Shemyakin's court. Wed. The case of these martyrs was raised and reconsidered; the Shemyakinsk sentences were overturned and the good name and honor of these innocent victims of falsehood... were restored... Michelson's Large Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary (original spelling)

Razg. Outdated Unfair trial. /i> Connected with the personality of Prince Dmitry Shemyaka (XV century), the arbitrariness and lawlessness of the feudal court. BMS 1998, 557; DP, 173, 346; BTS, 1287, 1494; Mokienko 1989, 162 ... Big dictionary Russian sayings

Shemyakin court- shem yakin with ud, shem yakin court a... Russian spelling dictionary

Books

• Shemyakin court. Part 1, P. P. Svinin. Shemyakin court, or the last civil strife of the appanage Russian princes. Historical novel XV century. Reproduced in the original author's spelling of the 1832 edition (Moscow publishing house...

There lived two brothers. One was poor, and the other was rich. The poor brother ran out of wood. There is nothing to light the stove with. It's cold in the hut.

He went into the forest, chopped wood, but there was no horse. How to bring firewood?

I'll go to my brother and ask for a horse. His rich brother received him unkindly:

Take a horse, but be careful not to put a lot of burden on me, and don’t rely on me in advance: give it today and give it tomorrow, and then go around the world yourself.

The poor man brought his horse home and remembered:

Oh, I don’t have a clamp! I didn’t ask right away, but now there’s no point in going - my brother won’t let me.

Somehow I tied the wood more tightly to the tail of my brother’s horse and rode off. On the way back, the logs got caught on a stump, but the poor man didn’t notice and whipped up his horse.

The horse was hot, rushed and tore off its tail.

When the rich brother saw that the horse had no tail, he cursed and shouted:

Ruined the horse! I won't leave this case like this! And he took the poor man to court.

How much or how much time has passed, the brothers are summoned to the city for trial.

They are coming, they are coming. The poor man thinks:

“I haven’t been to court myself, but I’ve heard the proverb: the weak don’t fight the strong, and the poor don’t sue the rich. They will sue me."

They were walking just across the bridge. There was no railing. A poor man slipped and fell off the bridge. And at that time, a merchant was riding below on the ice, taking his old father to the doctor.

The poor man fell and fell right into the sleigh and bruised the old man to death, but he himself remained alive and unharmed.

The merchant grabbed the poor man:

Let's go to the judge!

And three went into the city: a poor man and a rich brother and a merchant.

The poor man became very sad:

“Now they’ll probably sue.”

Then he saw a heavy stone on the road. He grabbed the stone, wrapped it in a rag and put it in his bosom.

“Seven troubles - one answer: if the judge does not judge me and judges me, I will kill the judge too.”

We came to the judge. New things have been added to the old ones. The judge began to judge and interrogate.

And the poor brother looks at the judge, takes out a stone in a rag from his bosom, and whispers to the judge:

Judge, judge, look here.

So once, and twice, and three times. The judge saw it and thought: “Isn’t the guy showing gold?” I looked again - there was a big promise. “If there’s silver, there’s a lot of money.”

And he ordered the poor brother to keep the tailless horse until the horse grew a tail. And he said to the merchant:

Because this man killed your father, let him stand on the ice under the same bridge, and you jump on him from the bridge and crush him to death, just as he crushed your father.

That's where the trial ended. Rich brother says:

Well, okay, so be it, I’ll take the tailless horse from you.

“What are you saying, brother,” the poor man replies. “Let it be as the judge ordered: I’ll hold your horse until the tail grows.”

The rich brother began to persuade:

I'll give you thirty rubles, just give me the horse.

Well, okay, give me the money.

The rich brother counted out thirty rubles, and with that they got along. Then the merchant began to ask:

Listen, little man, I forgive you for your guilt, you still can’t bring back your parent.

No, let's go, if the court has ordered, jump at me from the bridge.

I don’t want your death, make peace with me, and I’ll give you a hundred rubles,” the merchant asks.

The poor man received one hundred rubles from the merchant. And just as he was about to leave, the judge called him over:

Well, let's do what we promised.

The poor man took out a bundle from his bosom, unfolded the rag and showed the stone to the judge.

This is what he showed you and said: “Judge, judge, look here.” If you had sued me, I would have killed you.

“It’s good,” the judge thinks, “that I judged by this guy, otherwise I wouldn’t be alive.”

And the poor man, cheerful and singing, came home.

Shemyakin Court- the title of an ancient satirical story about the unrighteous judge Shemyak, preserved in many manuscripts of the 17th and 18th centuries, popular prints and folk tales, and at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries. which received literary treatment by F. Zadubsky, A. Osipov (or A. Olenin), P. Svinin and the newest publishers of the Nikolsky market. All descriptive techniques of the story, partly moral, reveal later processing ancient legend based on fairy tale motifs.

Traditional brothers, rich and poor, quarrel because the poor man spoiled the rich man's horse. Since the rich man did not give a collar, the poor man had to tie the sleigh to the horse's tail. While driving through the gate, he forgot to set the gateway, and the horse's tail broke off. The rich man refuses to accept the horse and goes to the city with a complaint against his brother to Judge Shemyaka. The petitioner and the defendant make the journey together. A second involuntary misfortune befalls the poor man. While sleeping, he falls from the bed into the cradle and kills the priest's child. The pop joins the rich. Upon entering the city, the poor man decides to commit suicide and throws himself off the bridge, but falls on a sick old man, whom his son was apparently taking across the ice to the bathhouse. The victim also goes to the judge with a complaint. During the trial, the accused shows Shemyaka a stone wrapped in a scarf. The judge is sure that this is a “promise”, and decides all three cases in a very unique way: the horse must remain with the poor man until it grows a tail; The priest gives his wife to the poor man so that the priest has a child from him, and the third plaintiff can take revenge on the poor man in the same way that the latter killed his father. It is quite natural that the plaintiffs not only waive the penalty, but give the defendant a generous compensation in the form of compensation. The story doesn't end there. The judge sends his scribe to receive a bribe from the poor man, but, having learned that the latter showed him not money, but a stone intended to “hurt” the judge in the event of a guilty verdict, he thanks God for saving his life. So everything characters the stories remain one way or another satisfied with the outcome of the matter, which ended happily only thanks to the simplicity of the poor man.

The story of the Sh. Court was published several times (“Archive” by Kalachov, book IV, 1-10; “Monuments” by Kostomarov, issue II, 405-406; “Russians folk tales"Afanasyeva, ed. A. Gruzinsky, M., 1897, vol. II, 276-279; “Historical Reader” by Buslaev, 1443-1446; “Collection of the Department of Russian Language and Literature of the Academy of Sciences”, vol. X, No. 6, pp. 7-12; "Russians folk pictures"Rovinsky, book. I, 189-191, book. IV, 172-175; “Chronicles of Literature” by Tikhonravov, vol. V, 34-37; separate publication of the Society of Amateurs ancient writing, St. Petersburg, 1879, etc.), but questions about its origin, original Russian features, further development, later layers, etc. have been little clarified.

Until eastern and western parallels were brought to bear on the case, Sh.’s trial was looked upon as quite original, very ancient work Russian satire, and put it in connection with the general view of Russian people on the sad state of legal proceedings, explained it with such proverbs as “hang around with a clerk, but keep a stone in your bosom,” and even commented on some articles of the “Code” of Alexei Mikhailovich and “Tales of foreigners about Russia XVII V.". This research method turned out to be unsuccessful. IN in this case Particularly intriguing was the historical name of the famous Galician prince Dmitry Shemyaka, who barbarically blinded Vasily the Dark. Sakharov even quoted the words of some Russian chronographer, who combined the saying with historical event: “From this time in great Russia, every judge and admirer in reproaches was nicknamed Sh. court.” In the same spirit, Karamzin also spread this observation of the ancient Russian scribe: “having neither the rules of honor nor a prudent state system on his conscience, Shemyak in short time his rule strengthened the affection of Muscovites for Vasily, and in themselves civil cases, trampling under foot justice, ancient statutes, common sense, he left forever the memory of his iniquities in folk proverb about the court of Sh., still in use.” Soloviev and Bestuzhev-Ryumin repeat the same thing. Alexander Nikolaevich Veselovsky was the first to point out the accidental use eastern name Shemyaki to historical figure Galician prince of the 15th century. (“History of Literature” by Galakhov, vol. I, 433). On the other hand, scientists were interested in the accidental victory of eternal truth over human falsehood, carried out in the story, albeit with a touch of some irony. Buslaev had no doubt about its Russian origin and was only surprised that the type of judge Shemyaka, from wise and fair (biblical Solomon), took on the opposite shade, and instead of telling a story with moral idea the story of Sh.'s trial has descended to a humorous parody, despite its early, eastern prototypes. He thought that the additions to the story were expressed in satirical antics against crooked justice and bribery with promises, as phenomena of a later time, that is, the legend turned into an ordinary satire on Russian clerks (Historical Reader, 1443). Sukhomlinov explained this apparent opposition different beginnings, from which the version about Shemyak was gradually formed, and in the decline of morality he sees the influence of Semitic legends about the four Sodom judges - “Deceiver”, “Deceiver”, “Forger” and “Crooked Judge”. Like Jewish legends, in the Russian story the serious is mixed with the funny; therefore, “the favorite ideas of folk literature about the victory of truth over falsehood, about saving the unfortunate from malice powerful of the world merge with features from the legend of the courts, common among Indo-European and Semitic peoples” (“Collection”, X, 28). We should not forget that in the Sh. court the judge acquits the poor man who has committed essentially unwitting crimes, and thereby saves him from the revenge of people who are morally guilty, thanks to which the satire on bribery has not lost its edifying purpose. This is how A. N. Veselovsky looks at the tendency of the story: of course, the judge poses the questions casuistically, but in such a way that the penalties fall with all their weight on the plaintiffs and they prefer to abandon the claim.

The beginning of a comparative study of the story was laid by Western scientists, who became acquainted with it through the free translation of Pastor Heydecke in the Riga almanac “Janus” for 1808 (“Etto Schemiakin Sud. Ein russisches Sprichwort”, 147-151) and a more accurate one by A. Dietrich (“Russische Volksmärchen”, Leipzig, 1831, 187-191). Von der Hagen was the first to point out the similarity of the Sh. Court with the late German song about “The Court of Charlemagne”, published, by the way, in Bamberg in 1493 (“Literarischer Grundriss zur Geschichte der deutschen Poesie”, B., 1812, p. 172). Common features medieval legends and Russian stories concern not only the basic nature of the judicial decision. A squandered merchant borrows 1,000 guilders from a Jew with the condition that he allow the lender to cut out a pound of meat from him if the money is not returned. Although the deadline was missed due to the fault of a Jew, he nevertheless refused to accept the money and turned to the “ideal judge,” Charlemagne, or, as some scholars think, Charles IV. On the way, two similar misfortunes happened to the debtor: his horse ran over a child running down the street, and he himself fell out of a window while sleeping and killed an old knight. The sentences passed are as follows: a Jew can cut out meat, but no more and no less than 1 pound (cf. the famous episode in Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice); instead of the crushed child, the defendant must adopt another with the victim’s wife, and the knight’s son can kill the defendant, but only by falling from the window (V. Docen, “Etwas über die Quellen des Shakspear's Schauspiele,” in “Museum für altdeutsche Literatur,” vol. II , 279-283). Benfey cites a Tibetan fairy tale, which served as an intermediary link between the supposed Indian source and the Russian Sh. court. A poor Brahmin borrows a bull from a rich man for work, but the bull runs away from the owner's yard; On the way to the judge, the Brahmin falls from the wall and kills a wandering weaver and a child sleeping under the clothes on which the traveler sat down to rest. The judge’s sentences are distinguished by the same casuistry: since the plaintiff did not “see” that the bull was brought to him, then his “eye” should be gouged out; the defendant must marry the weaver's widow and have a child with the injured mother (Pantschantatra, 1859, vol. I, 394-397). The German folklorist noticed the same similarity with the Indian tale of the Cairo merchant, which probably also goes back to an unknown Buddhist source (ibid., 402-403). Subsequently more direct sources were found (S. Tawney, “Indian Folk-Lore notes from the Pali Jatakas,” etc., in the Journal of Philol., 1883, XII, 112-120; W. Morris, “Folk -Tales of India", in "The Folk-Lore Journal", 1885, III, 337-448, etc.). It is quite natural that such a harmonious and stable legend in detail is more likely to belong to wandering legends. In recent times, Muslim versions have been indicated (Clonston, “Popular Tales and Fiction of their migrations and transformations”, London, 1887, I, 62-64; V. Zhukovsky, “Persian versions of the Sh. Court”, in “Notes of the Eastern Department of the Russian Archaeological Societies", vol. V, 155-176), German (K. Simrock, "Deutsche Märchen", Stuttgart, 1864, 322-324; his, "Die Quellen des Shakspeare", I, 233-234), Italian ( G. Sercambi, “Nouvelle Scelta di Curiosità letteraria ined. o rare dal sec. XIII al XVII", Bologna, 1871, IV, 23-37, 274-276), English ("Marke more foole. Bishop Persy's Folio Manuscript. Ballads and Romances", Galle, III, 127-134), Romanian (Elena D. O. Sevastos, “Povesti”, Iasi, 1892, 74-77), Polish, and finally, Jewish in the “Babylonian Talmud” and the “Book of the Righteous,” given in Russian translation in the article by M. Sukhomlinov.

The question remains unresolved as to how this legend came to us. Based on direct evidence from Tolstoy’s list “Sh. court of the 17th century" (extracted from Polish books), Tikhonravov thought that "in its present form, the satirical story about the court, already christened with the name of Sh., went through the alteration of the Russian person and received purely folk colors, but individual episodes could have been borrowed from Polish books." To do this, he pointed to the anecdote “About an accident” in the popular story “The Adventures of a new entertaining jester and a great rogue in matters of love, Conscience-Dral” (a bricklayer falls from a high tower and kills the man sitting below), as well as one episode in “Figei Kach" by a Polish writer of the 16th century. Nikolai Ray from Naglowitz about the accused who “showed the stone to the judge” (N. Tikhonravov, “Works”, vol. I, M., 1898, pp. 310-313), but analogies and parallels in no way can be taken as sources.

The story went from manuscripts to print. In the first half of the 18th century. at the Akhmetyevsk factory, 12 pictures were engraved for the Sh. court, with text printed by Rovinsky (book I, 189-192, IV, 166); the popular print was repeated five times, and in last time, already with a censorship mark, printed in 1839. Further development the story was expressed in later literary adaptations in the style of “The Adventures of the Poshekhonians,” for example, in “The Tale of Crooked Court, and how naked Erema, the granddaughter of Pakhom, caused trouble with his neighbor Thomas, and other things,” published in 1860. The whole comedy of this “Tale” rests on the development of the well-known theme: “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” caricatured in a farcical spirit.

Literature. A. Pypin, “Sh. Court" (in the "Archive of Historical and Practical Information" Kalachov, IV, 1859, 1-10); N. Tikhonravov, “Sh. Court" (in "Chronicles of Russian Literature", vol. III, M., 1861, 34-38); M. Sukhomlinov, “The Tale of the Court of Sh.” (in the “Collection of the Department of Russian Language and Literature of the Academy of Sciences”, vol. X, 1873, no. 6); A. Veselovsky, in “History of Literature” by Galakhov (St. Petersburg, 1881, X, 432-433); D. Rovinsky, “Russian folk pictures” (part IV); F. Buslaev, “My leisure time” (Moscow, 1886, 293-313); Y. Porfiryev, “History of Russian Literature” (Part I, 158-159); S. Oldenburg, “Bibliographic list of Sh. Court” (“Living Antiquity”, 1891, issue III, 183-185).

Shemyakin Court

the title of an ancient satirical story about the unrighteous judge Shemyak, preserved in many manuscripts of the 17th and 18th centuries, popular prints and folk tales, and at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries. which received literary treatment by F. Zadubsky, A. Osipov (or A. Olenin), P. Svinin and the newest publishers of the Nikolsky market. All the descriptive techniques of the story, partly moral, reveal a late reworking of an ancient legend based on fairy-tale motifs.

Traditional brothers, rich and poor, quarrel because the poor man spoiled the rich man's horse. Since the rich man did not give a collar, the poor man had to tie the sleigh to the horse's tail. While driving through the gate, he forgot to set the gateway, and the horse's tail broke off. The rich man refuses to accept the horse and goes to the city with a complaint against his brother to Judge Shemyaka. The petitioner and the defendant make the journey together. A second involuntary misfortune befalls the poor man. While sleeping, he falls from the bed into the cradle and kills the priest's child. The pop joins the rich. Upon entering the city, the poor man decides to commit suicide and throws himself off the bridge, but falls on a sick old man, whom his son was apparently taking across the ice to the bathhouse. The victim also goes to the judge with a complaint. During the trial, the accused shows Shemyaka a stone wrapped in a scarf. The judge is sure that this is a “promise”, and decides all three cases in a very unique way: the horse must remain with the poor man until it grows a tail; The priest gives his wife to the poor man so that the priest has a child from him, and the third plaintiff can take revenge on the poor man in the same way that the latter killed his father. It is quite natural that the plaintiffs not only waive the penalty, but give the defendant a generous compensation in the form of compensation. The story doesn't end there. The judge sends his scribe to receive a bribe from the poor man, but, having learned that the latter showed him not money, but a stone intended to “hurt” the judge in the event of a guilty verdict, he thanks God for saving his life. Thus, all the characters in the story remain one way or another satisfied with the outcome of the case, which ended happily only thanks to the simplicity of the poor man.

The story of the Sh. Court was published several times ("Archive" by Kalachov, book IV, 1-10; "Monuments" by Kostomarov, issue II, 405-406; "Russian folk tales" by Afanasyev, ed. by A. Gruzinsky, M. , 1897, vol. II, 276-279; "Historical Reader" by Buslaev, 1443-1446; "Collection of the Department of Russian Language and Literature of the Academy of Sciences", vol. X, No. 6, pp. 7-12; "Russian folk pictures" Rovinsky, book I, 189-191, book IV, 172-175; "Chronicles of Literature" by Tikhonravov, volume V, 34-37; separate publication of the Society of Lovers of Ancient Literature, St. Petersburg, 1879, etc.), but questions little is known about its origin, original Russian features, further development, later layers, etc.

Until eastern and western parallels were brought to the case, the Sh. trial was looked at as a completely original, very ancient work of Russian satire, and they put it in connection with the general view of the Russian people on the sad state of legal proceedings, explained with such proverbs as “with the clerk hang around, and keep a stone in your bosom,” and even commented on some articles of Alexei Mikhailovich’s “Code” and “Tales of Foreigners about Russia in the 17th Century.” This research method turned out to be unsuccessful. In this case, the historical name of the famous Galician prince Dmitry Shemyaka, who barbarously blinded Vasily the Dark, was especially intriguing. Sakharov even quoted the words of some Russian chronographer, who connected the proverb with a historical event: “from this time in great Russia, every judge and admirer in reproaches was nicknamed Sh. court.” In the same spirit, Karamzin also extended this observation of the ancient Russian scribe: “having neither the rules of honor nor a prudent state system on his conscience, Shemyaka in the short time of his rule strengthened the attachment of Muscovites to Vasily, and in civil matters themselves, trampling justice underfoot, ancient statutes, common sense, left forever the memory of its iniquities in the popular proverb about the court of Sh., which is still in use today.” Soloviev and Bestuzhev-Ryumin repeat the same thing. Alexander Nikolaevich Veselovsky was the first to point out the accidental application of the eastern name Shemyaki to the historical figure of the Galician prince of the 15th century. ("History of Literature" by Galakhov, vol. I, 433). On the other hand, scientists were interested in the accidental victory of eternal truth over human falsehood, carried out in the story, albeit with a touch of some irony. Buslaev did not doubt its Russian origin and was only surprised that the type of judge Shemyaka, from the wise and fair (biblical Solomon), took on the opposite shade, and instead of a story with a moral idea, the story of the Sh. court condescended to a playful parody, despite the earlier, eastern prototypes. He thought that the additions to the story were expressed in satirical antics against crooked justice and bribery with promises, as phenomena of a later time, that is, the legend turned into an ordinary satire on Russian clerks (Historical Reader, 1443). Sukhomlinov explained this apparent opposition by various principles from which the version of Shemyak was gradually formed, and in the decline of morality he sees the influence of Semitic legends about the four Sodom judges - “The Deceiver”, “The Deceiver”, “The Forger” and “The Crooked Judge”. Like Jewish legends, in the Russian story the serious is mixed with the funny; therefore, “the favorite ideas of folk literature about the victory of truth over falsehood, about the salvation of the unfortunate from the malice of the powerful of the world merge with features from the legend of the courts, common among the Indo-European and Semitic peoples” (“Collection”, X, 28). We should not forget that in the Sh. court the judge acquits the poor man who has committed essentially unwitting crimes, and thereby saves him from the revenge of people who are morally guilty, thanks to which the satire on bribery has not lost its edifying purpose. This is how A. N. Veselovsky looks at the tendency of the story: of course, the judge poses the questions casuistically, but in such a way that the penalties fall with all their weight on the plaintiffs and they prefer to abandon the claim.

The beginning of a comparative study of the story was laid by Western scientists who became acquainted with it through the free translation of Pastor Heydecke in the Riga almanac "Janus" for 1808 ("Etto Schemiakin Sud. Ein russisches Sprichwort", 147-151) and a more accurate one by A. Dietrich ("Russische Volksmärchen", Leipzig, 1831, 187-191). Von der Hagen was the first to point out the similarity of the Sh. Court with the late German song about “The Court of Charlemagne”, published, by the way, in Bamberg in 1493 (“Literarischer Grundriss zur Geschichte der deutschen Poesie”, B., 1812, p. 172). The common features of the medieval legend and the Russian story concern not only the basic nature of the judicial decision. A squandered merchant borrows 1,000 guilders from a Jew with the condition that he allow the lender to cut out a pound of meat from him if the money is not returned. Although the deadline was missed due to the fault of a Jew, he nevertheless refused to accept the money and turned to the “ideal judge,” Charlemagne, or, as some scholars think, Charles IV. On the way, two similar misfortunes happened to the debtor: his horse ran over a child running down the street, and he himself fell out of a window while sleeping and killed an old knight. The sentences are as follows: a Jew can cut out meat, but no more and no less than 1 pound (cf. the famous episode in Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice); Instead of the crushed child, the defendant must adopt another with the wife of the victim, and the son of a knight can kill the accused, but only by falling from the window (V. Docen, “Etwas über die Quellen des Shakspear”s Schauspiele,” in “Museum für altdeutsche Literatur,” t. . II, 279-283). Benfey cites a Tibetan fairy tale, which served as an intermediary between the supposed Indian source and the Russian Sh. court. A poor Brahmin borrows a bull from a rich man for work, but the bull runs away from the owner's yard; on the way to the judge the brahmin falls from the wall and kills the traveling weaver and the child who was sleeping under the clothes on which the traveler sat down to rest. The judge's verdicts are distinguished by the same casuistry: since the plaintiff did not “see” that the bull was brought to him, then his “eye” should be gouged out. ; the defendant must marry the weaver's widow and raise a child with the injured mother ("Pantschantatra", 1859, vol. I, 394-397). A German folklorist noticed the same similarity with the Indian tale of the Cairo merchant, which probably also goes back to the unknown Buddhist source (ibid., 402-403). Subsequently, more direct sources were found (S. Tawney, "Indian Folk-Lore notes from the Pali Jatakas", etc.) d., in "Journal of Philol.", 1883, XII, 112-120; W. Morris, "Folk-Tales of India", in "The Folk-Lore Journal", 1885, III, 337-448, etc.). It is quite natural that such a harmonious and stable legend in detail is more likely to belong to wandering legends. In recent times, Muslim versions have been indicated (Clonston, "Popular Tales and Fiction of their migrations and transformations", London, 1887, I, 62-64; V. Zhukovsky, "Persian versions of the Sh. Court", in "Notes of the Eastern Department of the Russian Archaeological Societies", vol. V, 155-176), German (K. Simrock, "Deutsche Märchen", Stuttgart, 1864, 322-324; his, "Die Quellen des Shakspeare", I, 233-234), Italian ( G. Sercambi, "Nouvelle Scelta di Curiosità letteraria ined. o rare dal sec. XIII al XVII", Bologna, 1871, IV, 23-37, 274-276), English ("Marke more foole. Bishop Persy"s Folio Manuscript . Ballads and Romances", Halle, III, 127-134), Romanian (Elena D. O. Sevastos, "Povesti", Iasi, 1892, 74-77), Polish, finally, Jewish in the "Babylonian Talmud" and the "Book of the Righteous", given in Russian translation in the article by M. Sukhomlinov.

The question remains unresolved as to how this legend came to us. Based on the direct evidence of Tolstoy’s list of the “Sh. Court of the 17th century” (copied from Polish books), Tikhonravov thought that “in its present form, the satirical story about the court, already christened with the name of Sh., went through the alteration of a Russian person and received purely folk colors , but individual episodes could have been borrowed from Polish books." To do this, he pointed to the anecdote “About an Accident” in the popular story “The Adventures of the New Entertaining Jester and the Great Rogue in Love Affairs Conscience-Dral” (a bricklayer falls from a high tower and kills the man sitting below), as well as one episode in “Figei Kach" by a Polish writer of the 16th century. Nikolai Ray from Naglowitz about the accused who “showed a stone to the judge” (N. Tikhonravov, “Works”, vol. I, M., 1898, pp. 310-313), but analogies and parallels in no way can be taken as sources.

The story went from manuscripts to print. In the first half of the 18th century. at the Akhmetyevsk factory, 12 pictures were engraved for the Sh. court, with text printed by Rovinsky (book I, 189-192, IV, 166); The popular print edition was repeated five times, and for the last time, with a censorship mark, it was published in 1839. Further development of the story was expressed in later literary adaptations in the style of “The Adventures of the Poshekhontsy,” for example, in “The Tale of Crooked Court, and the about how the naked Erema, Pakhom’s granddaughter, caused great harm to his neighbor Thomas, and about other things.” The whole comedy of this “Fairy Tale” rests on the development of the well-known theme: “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” caricatured in a farcical spirit.

Literature. A. Pypin, "Sh. Court" (in the "Archive of Historical and Practical Information" Kalachov, IV, 1859, 1-10); N. Tikhonravov, "Sh. Court" (in "Chronicles of Russian Literature", vol. III, M., 1861, 34-38); M. Sukhomlinov, "The Tale of the Court of Sh." (in the "Collection of the Department of Russian Language and Literature of the Academy of Sciences", vol. X, 1873, no. 6); A. Veselovsky, in “History of Literature” by Galakhov (St. Petersburg, 1881, X, 432-433); D. Rovinsky, “Russian folk pictures” (part IV); F. Buslaev, “My leisure time” (Moscow, 1886, 293-313); Y. Porfiryev, “History of Russian Literature” (Part I, 158-159); S. Oldenburg, "Bibliographic list of Sh. Court" ("Living Antiquity", 1891, issue III, 183-185).

A. I. Yatsimirsky.

Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron. - S.-Pb.: Brockhaus-Efron. 1890-1907 .

See what “Shemyakin Court” is in other dictionaries:

The title of an ancient Russian satirical story that exposed the arbitrariness and selfishness of the feudal court. Shemyaka is a real historical person, the Galician prince Dimitry Shemyaka (d. 1453), notorious for his cruelty, treachery and unrighteousness... ... Dictionary of popular words and expressions

- (treacherous, dishonest court) This is Sidorov’s truth and Shemyakin’s court. Wed. The cause of these martyrs was raised and reconsidered; the Shemyakinsky sentences were canceled and the good name and honor of these innocent victims of falsehood... were restored... N. Makarov.... ... Michelson's Large Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary

Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

SHEMYAKIN COURT. see court. Ushakov's explanatory dictionary. D.N. Ushakov. 1935 1940 ... Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

Noun, number of synonyms: 1 unfair trial (1) ASIS Dictionary of Synonyms. V.N. Trishin. 2013… Synonym dictionary

Shemyakin court- only units , stable combination Unfair, biased, corrupt court. Conduct Shemyakin's court. Synonyms: krivosu/d (obsolete) Etymology: After the name of Judge Shemyaka from the Russian satirical story of the second gender. XVII century see also court. Encyclopedic... ... Popular dictionary of the Russian language

Literature 7th grade. A textbook-reader for schools with in-depth study of literature. Part 1 Team of authors

The Tale of the Shemyakin Court

The Tale of the Shemyakin Court

In some places there lived two brother farmers: one rich, the other poor. The rich man lent money to the poor man for many years, but could not correct his poverty.

After some time, a poor man came to a rich man to ask for a horse so that he could use it to bring firewood for himself. His brother didn’t want to give him a horse, he said: “I loaned you a lot, but I couldn’t fix it.” And when he gave him a horse, and he took it and began to ask for a collar, his brother was offended by him and began to blaspheme his misery, saying: “You don’t have your own collar either.” And he didn’t give him a collar.

The poor man left the rich man, took his wood, tied it by the horse’s tail and brought it to his yard. And he forgot to put up the gateway. He hit the horse with a whip, but the horse, with all its strength, rushed with the cart through the gateway and tore off its tail.

And so the poor man brought a horse without a tail to his brother. And his brother saw that his horse did not have a tail, and he began to revile his brother, saying that, having begged the horse from him, he had ruined it. And, without taking back the horse, he went to beat him with his forehead in the city, to Shemyaka the judge.

And the poor brother, seeing that his brother had gone to attack him, went after his brother himself, knowing that they would send for him from the city anyway, and if he didn’t go, he would also have to pay the bailiffs travel tickets.

And they both stopped in a certain village, not reaching the city. The rich man went to spend the night with the priest of that village because he knew him. And the poor man came to that priest, and when he arrived, he lay down on his bed. And the rich man began to tell the priest about the death of his horse, for which he was going to the city. And then the priest began to dine with the rich man, but the poor man is not invited to eat with him. The poor man began to watch from the floor to see what the priest and his brother were eating, broke free from the floor and crushed the priest’s son to death. And he also went with his rich brother to the city to beat the poor man with his brow for the death of his son. And they came to the city where the judge lived; and the poor man follows them.

They walked across the bridge near the city. And one of the residents of the city took his father to the bathhouse to wash. The poor man, knowing that he would be destroyed by his brother and the priest, decided to put himself to death. And rushing, he fell on the old man and crushed his father to death. They grabbed him and brought him to the judge.

He was thinking about how to get rid of the misfortune and what to give to the judge. And, not finding anything, he thought of this: he took the stone, wrapped it in a scarf, put it in his hat and stood before the judge.

And so his brother brought his petition, a lawsuit against him for the horse, and began to beat Judge Shemyaka with his forehead. Shemyaka, having listened to the petition, says to the poor man: “Answer!” The poor man, not knowing what to say, took a wrapped stone from his hat, showed it to the judge and bowed. And the judge, believing that the poor man had promised him a bribe, said to his brother: “If he tore off the tail of your horse, do not take your horse from him until the horse grows a tail. And when the tail grows, then take your horse from him.”

And then another trial began. The priest began to look for him for the death of his son, for the fact that he had run over his son. The poor man again took the same knot out of his hat and showed it to the judge. The judge saw and thinks that in another case another bundle of gold promises, he says to the priest: “If he killed your son, give him your priest wife until he gets you a child from your priest; at that time take his butt along with the child.”

And then the third trial began for the fact that, throwing himself from the bridge, he killed the old father of his son. The poor man, taking a stone wrapped in a scarf from his hat, showed it to the judge for the third time. The judge, believing that for the third trial he will promise him a third knot, says to the one whose father was killed: “Climb onto the bridge, and let the one who killed your father stand under the bridge. And you yourself fall from the bridge onto him and kill him just like he did your father.”

After the trial, the plaintiffs and the defendant withdrew from the order. The rich man began to ask the poor man for his horse, and he answered: “According to the judge’s decree, as he says, its tail will grow, at that time I will give up your horse.” The rich brother gave him five rubles for his horse, so that he would give it to him, even without a tail. And he took five rubles from his brother and gave him the horse. And the poor man began to ask the priest according to the judge's decree, so that he could get a child from her, and having obtained it, he would give the priest back to him with the child. The priest began to hit him with his forehead so that he would not take his priest. And he took ten rubles from him. Then the poor man began to say to the third plaintiff: “By the judge’s decree, I will stand under the bridge, but you climb onto the bridge and throw yourself at me just as I did at your father.” And he thinks: “If I throw myself, you won’t hurt him, but you’ll hurt yourself.” He, too, began to put up with the poor man and gave him a bribe so that he would not throw himself at himself. And so the poor man took for himself from all three.

The judge sent a servant to the defendant and ordered him to take those three knots shown. The servant began to ask him: “Give me what you showed the judge from your hat in knots; he told me to take it from you.” And he, taking out a tied stone from his hat, showed it. Then the servant says to him: “Why are you showing the stone?” And the defendant said: “This is for the judge. “I,” he says, “whenever he began to judge by me, killed him with that stone.”

The servant returned and told everything to the judge. The judge, having listened to the servant, said: “I thank and praise God for judging by him. If he didn’t judge me by him, he would kill me.”

Then the poor man went home, rejoicing and praising God.

Questions and tasks

1. What type of humor is used in this work?

2. Explain the meaning of the title of this work. Which moral values are affirmed and which ones are denied in the work?

3. Why did the poor farmer win all three lawsuits?

4. Describe the image of Shemyaka.

5. Explain ideological meaning the ending of the work. Why do both the poor man and Shemyaka praise God at the end of the story?

6. What folklore features did you note in the story?

7. Prepare a retelling of “Shemyakin’s trial” on behalf of the judge.