Towards centralization: «dual behavior» in Russian law and the problem of creating a national Russian legislation in the second half of the 15th – end of the 16th centuries

Abstract

In the historical tradition, the name of the Russian state formed in the second half of the 15th century has become established as «centralized». At the same time, there is no clear and unambiguous definition of the essence of this term in Russian historical literature, and the existing definitions are vague and nebulous. This uncertainty is due to the fact that «centralization» itself is a complex and multifaceted political and legal phenomenon, and the processes of centralization of power at different levels proceeded at different speeds. For this reason, early modern states were under-centralized. The author of the article proves this thesis using the example of the «dual authority» of Russian law in the era of the «long 16th century» (mid-15th – mid-17th centuries). At that time, crown law coexisted with customary law. At the same time, customary law was not inferior in importance to crown law. This was due to the institutional weakness of the early modern state. Lacking the developed «muscles» of po wer, it was forced to seek support «from below». This forced necessity contributed to the conservation of traditional legal culture and customary law as its integral component. As a result, the legal fi eld of early modern states, including the Russian one, was in fact a hastily stitched «patchwork quilt». And as long as this situation persisted, it was premature to talk about the completion of centralization processes.