Już bezprawie czy jeszcze prawo? O główszczyźnie i wróżdzie w Prusach Książęcych i Prusach Królewskich w czasach nowożytnych

Abstract

The wergild as a financial punishment for husband killing survived in Prussia until the mid-18th century, but the general rule was that the perpetrators of husband killing were sentenced to death. The reason why the wergild survived for such a long time in Prussia was the fact that courts applied the Chelmno law, according to which the wergild was recognized by tradition and also found in subsequent registers of the Chelmno law. At the beginning of the early modern period the wergild could apply only in case of assassinations committed in self-defense or by accident; deliberate crimes were subject to the law of retaliation. Yet, the law of retaliation could not be applied in relation to groups. With time the wergild could not be used out of court and the law of retaliation was abolished. The next step restricting the use of the wergild was the fact that it was to be applied in case of unintentional or accidental homicides; moreover, in case of killing in self-defence the perpetrator was exempt from the wergild. It was the court that passed a sentence of the wergild, but in cases of reconciliation the sentence was passed by other arbitration bodies. The wergild was allowed mainly among noblemen, which was in accordance with the Polish law of the time. The circle of people entitled to the wergild was reduced to the closest agnate, while in case of husband killing it applied only to the perpetrator. The wergild was no longer shared with the authorities; it was only the judge who received the fee referred to as multa. The value of the wergild was determined by the rank of the office held by the assassinated person. Moreover, the wergild constituted a kind of financial unit used to establish the value of fines and compensatory damages. Apart from the compensation in the form of financial gratification, the wergild constituted the indemnification for physical injury or damage to honour. The latter could also entail some additional punishment e.g. the act of submission. Until the mid-17th century the tradition of bloody retaliation (vendetta) was practiced at least among the nobility. It was illegal and punished by death sentence. Its alternative continued to be the possibility of settlement. The retaliation was limited only to the perpetrator of the homicide.

Authors and Affiliations

Grzegorz Białuński

Keywords

Related Articles

The Representation of Selected Silesian Cities in the 15th–17th Centuries

The representation of Silesian cities during the late Middle Ages and early modern times combines illustrative and textual elements. Both of these elements are subject to certain rules typical of the poetics of the so-ca...

Maria Spławska-Korczak, Zamek krzyżacki w Świeciu. Próba rekonstrukcji zamku wysokiego w średniowieczu, Toruń 2014, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK, ss. 222

Recenzja publikacji: Maria Spławska-Korczak, Zamek krzyżacki w Świeciu. Próba rekonstrukcji zamku wysokiego w średniowieczu, Toruń 2014, Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK, ss. 222.

Dwór II w Strzyży Górnej i jego mieszkańcy w drugiej połowie XVIII i na początku XIX wieku

In this article I attempt to reconstruct the layout and form of Dwór II [Manor house II] in Strzyża Górna and to present its owner. The manor house was one of several manor houses situated in the upper part of the Strzyż...

Uwagi na temat nowożytnych fundacji ołtarzowych w kościele pw. śś. Jana Chrzciciela i Jana Ewangelisty w Toruniu: wiek XVIII

The article concerns the founders of the 18th century retables in the Church of SS. Johns in Torun. The main group of founders came from the clergy connected directly with the church, particularly its parish priest: Sewe...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP191032
  • DOI 10.15762/ZH.2016.18
  • Views 31
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Grzegorz Białuński (2016). Już bezprawie czy jeszcze prawo? O główszczyźnie i wróżdzie w Prusach Książęcych i Prusach Królewskich w czasach nowożytnych. Zapiski Historyczne. Poświęcone Historii Pomorza i Krajów Bałtyckich, 81(2), 47-64. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-191032