Summary Shemyakin court for the reader. "The Tale of the Shemyakin Court": plot, artistic features

“Shemyakin Court” is a fairy tale, in which the venality of the court and all those who are in power is shown in a satirical vein.

Summary of "Shemyakin Court" for the reader's diary

Name: Shemyakin Court

Number of pages: 6. "Russian democratic satire of the 17th century". Publishing house "AN USSR". 1954

Genre: Fairy Tale

Year of writing: 17th century

Time and place of the plot

The action of the satirical fairy tale takes place in Russia, approximately in the 17th century.

Main characters

The poor brother is a man tired of poverty, desperate, having lost all hope for a better life.

A rich brother is a greedy, stingy, prudent man, a wealthy peasant.

Pop is a rich man's acquaintance, arrogant and arrogant.

Male (third plaintiff)- a random person whose father died under the weight of the poor.

Plot

There lived two peasant brothers: a rich one and a poor one. A rich peasant lent money to a poor brother for many years, but he could not overcome the need. Once a poor man came to his brother with a request to give him a horse to bring firewood from the forest. The rich man reluctantly agreed, but when his brother asked him for a collar, he became angry and refused the request.

The poor man sighed bitterly, and tied the firewood to the horse's tail. When he took the firewood home, he forgot to put out the gateway, and the horse's tail came off. There was nothing to do, and the poor man brought his brother a horse without a tail. Seeing such a disgrace, the rich man became angry and went to the city to complain about his brother to the judge Shemyaka. The poor man trudged after him, knowing full well that he would still have to go to court.

The brothers reached a certain village, and the rich man stopped at his good friend, a rural priest. They sat down to supper at the table, and the poor man lay down on the couch hungry. He stared at his brother and priest as they ate dinner, and fell on the cradle in which he slept. Small child. The poor man crushed the priest's son to death, and he also went to the city to complain about him.

Passing through the bridge, the poor man decided to end his bitter life, and jumped down. He fell on a sick old man, whom his son was taking on a sleigh to the bathhouse, and killed him by accident. The victim also went to Judge Shemyaka.

At the trial, the poor man showed the judge a stone wrapped in a scarf. He decided that this was a solid bribe, and led the case as he saw fit. He told the poor man to keep his brother's horse until it grew a tail.

Hearing the complaint of the priest, Shemyaka, flattered by the solid "bribe" of the poor, decided to give the poor peasant a priest until she had a child.

When the son of the deceased old man began to complain, the judge decided so - let the plaintiff kill the poor man in the same way, that is, throw himself at him from the bridge.

So the rich man and the priest had to pay the poor man extra so that he refused to comply with the judicial decisions, and returned to everyone what was due: the horse to his brother, and the priest to his legal spouse. The third plaintiff also did not want to jump from the bridge, and paid the poor man compensation.

Meanwhile, Shemyaka sent his man to the poor man to give him the promised bribe. In response, the poor man showed a stone wrapped in a scarf and explained that if the judge had made decisions not in his favor, he would have bruised him with this stone.

Upon learning of this, Shemyaka was very happy that he had so deftly got out of a difficult situation, and the contented poor man went home.

Conclusion and opinion

The work is unique, first of all, in that it does not contain exclusively positive or negative characters. Each of them had his own truth, and Judge Shemyaka cleverly took advantage of this. He twisted history for his own selfish purposes, and only by a lucky coincidence of circumstances did his decisions turn out to be acceptable to all the heroes.

the main idea

People in power can interpret the truth as they see fit.

Author's aphorisms

“... I lent you a lot, but I couldn’t fix it ...”

“... And that and the clamp you don’t have your own ...”

“... Shemyaka, having listened to the petition, says to the poor:“ Answer! ”...”

"... According to the judge's decree, as he says, her tail will grow, at that time I will give your horse .."

“... I thank and praise God for judging him. If I had not judged by him, he would have hurt me ... "

Interpretation of obscure words

collar- the main part of the harness worn around the horse's neck.

Drovni- peasant. sled without a body.

Gateway- space, a gap between the gate and the ground.

Chelo- forehead.

petition- in Russia until the third quarter of the 18th century, an individual or collective written petition, in which they "beaten with a forehead."

Polaty- a couch arranged between the wall of the hut and the Russian stove.

bribe- payment, reward, bribe.

New words

Whip- a type of percussion weapon, the main element of which is a long braided rawhide belt, originally with a knot at the end.

Pop- Orthodox priest

Popadya- Pope's wife

plaintiff- a person whose rights are being sued.

defendant- a person called by the court to answer at the request of the plaintiff.

Rating of the reader's diary

Average rating: 4.7. Total ratings received: 17.

There lived two peasant brothers: one rich and the other poor. For many years the rich lent money to the poor, but he remained just as poor. Once a poor man came to ask a rich man for a horse to bring firewood. He reluctantly gave the horse. Then the poor man began to ask for a collar. But the brother got angry and did not give the collar.
There is nothing to do - the poor tied his firewood to the horse's tail. When he was carrying firewood home, he forgot to set up a gate, and the horse, passing through the gate, tore off his tail.
The poor man brought his brother a horse without a tail. But he did not take the horse, but went to the city to judge Shemyaka to beat his brother with his forehead. The poor man followed him, knowing that he would still be forced to appear in court.
They came to a village. The rich man stayed with his acquaintance - a rural priest. The poor man came to the same ass and lay down on the bed. The rich man and the priest sat down to eat, but the poor man was not invited. He watched from the bed what they were eating, fell down, fell on the cradle and crushed the child. Pop also went to town to complain about the poor man.
They were crossing the bridge. And below, along the moat, one man was taking his father to the bathhouse. The poor man, foreseeing his death, decided to commit suicide. He threw himself off the bridge, fell on the old man and killed him. He was caught and brought before the judge. The poor man thought about what to give him to the judge ... He took a stone, wrapped it in a kerchief and stood in front of the judge.
After listening to the complaint of the rich brother, Judge Shemyaka ordered the poor man to answer. He showed the judge a wrapped stone. Shemyaka decided: let the poor not give the horse to the rich until it grows a new tail.
Then he brought a petition pop. And the poor man showed the stone again. The judge decided: let the priest give the poor priest until he “gets” a new child.
Then the son began to complain, whose father was crushed by the poor. The poor man showed the stone again to the judge. The judge decided: let the plaintiff kill the poor man in the same way, that is, throw himself at him from the bridge.
After the trial, the rich began to ask the poor for a horse, but he refused to give it back, citing a judicial decision. The rich man gave him five rubles to give him a horse without a tail.
Then the poor man began, by a judicial decision, to demand a priest from the priest. The priest gave him ten rubles, only that he should not take the priests.
Poor suggested that the third plaintiff comply with the judge's decision. But he, on reflection, did not want to rush at him from the bridge, but began to put up and also gave the poor bribe.
And the judge sent his man to the defendant to ask about the three bundles that the poor man showed to the judge. The poor man pulled out a stone. Shemyakin's servant was surprised and asked what kind of stone it was. The defendant explained that if the judge did not judge him, he would have bruised him with this stone.
When he learned of the danger that threatened him, the judge was very glad that he judged in this way. And the poor man, rejoicing, went home.

Read in 3 minutes

"The judge thought the scroll was full of rubles." Illustration by R. de Rosciszewski

There is nothing to do - the poor tied his firewood to the horse's tail. When he was carrying firewood home, he forgot to set up a gate, and the horse, passing through the gate, tore off his tail.

The poor man brought his brother a horse without a tail. But he did not take the horse, but went to the city to judge Shemyaka to beat his brother with his forehead. The poor man followed him, knowing that he would still be forced to appear in court.

They came to a village. The rich man stayed with his acquaintance - a rural priest. The poor man came to the same ass and lay down on the bed. The rich man and the priest sat down to eat, but the poor man was not invited. He watched from the bed what they were eating, fell down, fell on the cradle and crushed the child. Pop also went to town to complain about the poor man.

They were crossing the bridge. And below, along the moat, one man was taking his father to the bathhouse. The poor man, foreseeing his death, decided to commit suicide. He threw himself off the bridge, fell on the old man and killed him. He was caught and brought before the judge. The poor man thought about what to give him to the judge ... He took a stone, wrapped it in a kerchief and stood in front of the judge.

After listening to the complaint of the rich brother, Judge Shemyaka ordered the poor man to answer. He showed the judge a wrapped stone. Shemyaka decided: let the poor not give the horse to the rich until it grows a new tail.

Then he brought a petition pop. And the poor man showed the stone again. The judge decided: let the priest give the poor priest until he “gets” a new child.

Then the son began to complain, whose father was crushed by the poor. The poor man showed the stone again to the judge. The judge decided: let the plaintiff kill the poor man in the same way, that is, throw himself at him from the bridge.

After the trial, the rich began to ask the poor for a horse, but he refused to give it back, citing a judicial decision. The rich man gave him five rubles to give him a horse without a tail.

Then the poor man began, by a judicial decision, to demand a priest from the priest. The priest gave him ten rubles, only that he should not take the priests.

Poor suggested that the third plaintiff comply with the judge's decision. But he, on reflection, did not want to rush at him from the bridge, but began to put up and also gave the poor bribe.

And the judge sent his man to the defendant to ask about the three bundles that the poor man showed to the judge. The poor man pulled out a stone. Shemyakin's servant was surprised and asked what kind of stone it was. The defendant explained that if the judge did not judge him, he would have bruised him with this stone.

When he learned of the danger that threatened him, the judge was very glad that he judged in this way. And the poor man, rejoicing, went home.

retold

26.09.2019

The story "Shemyakin Court" may interest the reader if you think about its content.

Why was one brother rich and the other poor, even though the rich man helped his brother for many years? Should he help him again? The author describes the behavior of the characters, does not explain the reasons for what happened. What follows is a comical description of what happened to the horse. Who was to blame? The one who, having given a horse, did not give a collar? Or the one who tied the logs to the horse's tail?

The stringing of absurd accidents on each other leads to the fact that the reader is no longer funny, but frightened. This takes place before the court scene, where the comic element intensifies again.

Those ridiculous decisions that the judge proposes are taken quite seriously by people, victims of crimes. This intensifies the impression of complete arbitrariness and lawlessness taking place in court. If this is all Russian reality, then it becomes bitter, sad.

Many questions arise when we reach the end of the work. What does the final phrase mean: “Then the poor man returned to his house, rejoicing and praising God. Amen". I do not want to assume that the author approves the actions of the poor in this way. The following interpretation seems to be more correct: this ending of the story is grotesque, thus increasing the impression of the absurdity of what is happening.

The sad thing is that the story depicts quite tenacious phenomena of Russian life. A similar Shemyakin court is shown in many modern films, for example, "Voroshilov Shooter".

It turns out that this work is relevant to this day.

There lived two brothers. One was poor and the other rich. The poor brother had no firewood. Nothing to fire up the oven. It's cold in the hut.

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

I'll go to my brother, I'll ask for a horse.

His wealthy brother received him unkindly.

Take a horse, take care not to impose a big cart, but don’t rely on me ahead: give today and give tomorrow, and then go around the world yourself.

The poor man brought the horse home and remembered:

Oh, I don't have a collar! I didn’t ask right away, and now there’s nothing to go - my brother won’t let me.

Somehow he tied the firewood more tightly to the tail of his brother's horse and rode off.

On the way back, wood caught on a stump, but the poor man did not notice, whipped up his horse.

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

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

Lost a horse! I won't let this thing go!

And sued the poor man.

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

They go, they go. The poor man thinks:

I myself have never been to court, but I have heard the proverb: the weak do not fight the strong, and the poor do not sue the rich. They will sue me.

They were just walking across the bridge. There were no railings. The poor man slipped and fell off the bridge. And at that time, a merchant was driving down the ice, taking his old father to the doctor.

The poor man fell and got right into the sleigh and bruised the old man to death, while 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, a rich brother, and a merchant.

The poor man was completely upset:

Now they will surely sue.

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

Seven troubles - one answer: if the judge does not judge according to me and sue, I will kill the judge.

Come to the judge. A new one has been added to the old one. The judge began to judge, 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 one, and another, and a third. The judge saw and thought: Isn't the peasant showing gold?

I looked again - a big promise.

If and silver, a lot of money.

And he ordered the poor brother to keep the tailless horse until the horse's tail grew back.

And the merchant said:

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

That is where the trial ended.

Rich Brother says:

Okay, so be it, I'll take your tailless horse.

What are you, brother, - the poor man answers. - Let it be, as the judge ordered: I will hold your horse until the tail grows.

The rich brother began to persuade:

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

Okay, give me money.

The rich brother counted out thirty rubles, and on that they got along.

Then the merchant began to ask:

Listen, little man, I forgive you your fault, you still won’t return your parent.

No, let's go, if the court has ordered, jump on 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 a hundred rubles from the merchant. And just about to leave, the judge calls him:

Well, let's promise.

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 sued me, I would have killed you.

That's good, - the judge thinks, - that I judged this peasant, otherwise I wouldn't live.

And the poor man, cheerful, with songs, came home.

There is nothing to do - the poor tied his firewood to the horse's tail. When he was carrying firewood home, he forgot to set up a gate, and the horse, passing through the gate, tore off his tail.

Then he brought a petition pop. And the poor man showed the stone again. The judge decided: let the priest give the poor priest until he “gets” a new child.

After the trial, the rich began to ask the poor for a horse, but he refused to give it back, citing a judicial decision. The rich man gave him five rubles to give him a horse without a tail.

Then the poor man began, by a judicial decision, to demand a priest from the priest. The priest gave him ten rubles, only that he should not take the priests.

Poor suggested that the third plaintiff comply with the judge's decision. But he, on reflection, did not want to rush at him from the bridge, but began to put up and also gave the poor bribe.

When he learned of the danger that threatened him, the judge was very glad that he judged in this way. And the poor man, rejoicing, went home.

The work we are interested in is perhaps the most popular monument of the 17th century. Its name subsequently even became a proverb: "Shemyakin Court" means an unfair trial, a parody of it. Known poetic and dramatic arrangements of "The Tale of Shemyakin court”, as well as its popular reproduction. In addition, she gave rise to the well-known tale of a poor and rich brother.

Authorship issues, sources

The author of The Tale of the Shemyakin Court is unknown, because it is folk in origin. Researchers searched for works similar in content in Indian and Persian literatures. It is also known that the well-known writer Mikołaj Rey, who lived in the 17th century and received the honorary title of "father of Polish literature", worked with a similar plot. In some lists it is directly stated: “The Tale of the Shemyakin Court” was written out “from Polish books”. Questions about her sources, however, remained unresolved. There is no convincing evidence of the connection of the Russian monument with a specific work of foreign literature. The identified roll calls indicate the presence of so-called wandering plots, nothing more. As is often the case with folklore monuments, jokes and anecdotes cannot belong to one people. They successfully roam from one area to another, since everyday conflicts are essentially the same everywhere. This feature makes it especially difficult to distinguish between translated and original monuments of literature of the 17th century.

"The Tale of the Shemyakin Court": content

The first part of the story tells about incidents (at the same time hilarious and sad) that happened to a poor peasant. It all starts with the fact that his rich brother gives him a horse, but forgets about the collar. The protagonist ties firewood to the tail, and it breaks. The next misfortune happened to the peasant when he spent the night at the priest's bed (that is, on a lounger). Naturally, the greedy priest did not invite him to have dinner. Looking at the table bursting with food, main character accidentally knocks over a baby, the son of a priest. Now for these offenses the poor fellow will face trial. Out of desperation, he wants to take his own life and throws himself off the bridge. And again - failure. The peasant himself remains intact, but the old man, on whom the main character landed, went to the forefathers.

So, the peasant will have to answer for three crimes. The climax awaits the reader - the cunning and unfair judge Shemyaka, having taken a stone wrapped in a scarf for a generous promise, decides the case in favor of the poor peasant. So, the first victim had to wait until the horse grew a new tail. The priest was offered to give his wife to a peasant, from whom she should bear a child. And the son of the deceased old man, as compensation, must himself fall off the bridge and hurt the poor peasant. Naturally, all the victims decide to pay off such decisions.

Composition specifics

The Tale of the Shemyakin Court is divided into two parts. The first part consists of the three episodes described above. By themselves, they are perceived as ordinary funny anecdotes that perform the function of a tie. Here they are, as it were, taken out of the framework of the main narrative, although this is not observed in the classical examples of court narratives. In addition, all the events described there are narrated in A not in the present, which is the difference between the Tale of Shemyakin's Court. This feature gives dynamism to the plot of the ancient Russian monument.

The second component of the composition is more complex: Shemyaka's actual sentences, which are the adventures of a poor peasant, are preceded by a frame - a scene when the defendant shows the "reward" to the judge.

Traditions of satire

Satire was very popular in 17th century literature. The fact of its demand can be explained based on the specifics of the social life of that time. There was an increase in the role of the trade and craft population, but this did not contribute to the development of their civil rights. In satire, many aspects of the life of the society of those times were condemned and denounced - an unfair trial, hypocrisy and hypocrisy of monasticism, extreme

"The Tale of the Shemyakin Court" fits well into the established tradition. The reader of that time would undoubtedly understand that the story parodies the "Code" of 1649 - a set of laws that proposed choosing a measure of punishment depending on what the offender's crime was. So, for the murder was supposed to be executed, and the production was punished by filling the throat with lead. That is, "The Tale of the Shemyakin Court" can be defined as a parody of ancient Russian legal proceedings.

Idea level

The story ended happily for the wretched peasant, he triumphs over the world of injustice and arbitrariness. "Truth" turns out to be stronger than "falsehood". As for the judge himself, he learned a valuable lesson from what happened: "The Tale of Shemyakin's Court" ends with the hookmaker learning the truth about the "message". But nevertheless, he even rejoices in his own sentences, because otherwise, the spirit would have been knocked out of him with this cobblestone.

Artistic features

"The Tale of Shemyakin's Court" is distinguished by the speed of action, the comical situations in which the characters find themselves, as well as the emphatically dispassionate manner of narration, which only enhances the satirical sound of the ancient Russian monument. These features indicate the closeness of the story to magical and social folk tales.

Today, another work called Shemyakin's Court came into my reader's diary. We met the story of Shemyakin's Court in the 8th grade at a literature lesson.

the story of the Shemyakin court

The story of the Shemyakin Court tells about poverty and introduces us to an unfair trial, showing us a little man with his ingenuity. The work of Shemyakin's Court was written by an unknown author, and this satire dates back to the seventeenth century.

Shemyakin Court summary

In order to get acquainted with the plot of the work Shumyakin Court, we offer that it will allow us to work with the work in the future and make it. In an ancient Russian work of the second half of the seventeenth century, it tells about two brothers: a poor and a rich one. The poor man constantly asked the rich horse, and one day, taking the horse and not receiving a collar from his brother for use, the horse’s tail comes off, because the poor man had to attach firewood to the horse’s tail. The brother now does not want to take the horse and goes to court. In order not to pay tax for a summons to court, the poor brother follows.

On the way to the city, the brother stops at his friend's priest, where he invites him to the table, but the poor are not given dinner, and he only has to look out from the bed. And then the poor man accidentally falls and just on the cradle with the child. The child dies. Now the pop is going to court.

On the way, the poor brother decides to commit suicide and throws himself off the bridge, but just falls on a sleigh with a man. With his fall, he kills the father of one of the townspeople, who at that time is taking his father on a sleigh to the bathhouse.

And now three victims went to court, where the poor man showed ingenuity. During the accusations of all the crimes that fell on the loser, he showed the judge a stone. The judge, thinking about money and the fact that there was gold in the bundle, passed a sentence in favor of the accused, so the horse was left to the poor man, the wife of the priest was sent to him, who was supposed to live with him until the child was born. And in the end, the poor man had to be killed by the injured city dweller in the same way that he killed his father.

In the end, everyone paid money to the poor brother so that the court sentence would not be executed. Moreover, when the judge found out that the poor man had an ordinary stone instead of gold, he also seemed pleased with his decisions that he awarded in favor of the poor, because otherwise, the poor man would have killed him with a stone.

If we analyze the work, then we perfectly see who and what the Shemyakin Court story makes fun of. This is both bribery and injustice in judicial decisions in the days of feudalism. Reading the satirical work Shemyakin Court, one involuntarily asks the question, but on whose side is the author? And here, just the case when the author does not support anyone, he simply shows all the bitterness of what is happening, where each hero deserves sympathy, although, just here, hardly anyone will take the side of the judge. The judge can be condemned, because it was he who made unfair decisions that reached the point of absurdity.

Shemyakin Court main characters

In the Shemyakin court, the main characters are the poor and rich brothers, the priest, the city dweller and the judge Shemyakin. It was by his name that the court was named.

The Tale of the Shemyakin Court is an ancient Russian work of folk art. Writer sets out main point story in a satirical way.

The work tells about two brothers and about the situation that happened to one of the brothers.

Both brothers are villagers, but one of them is rich and the other is poor. A rich brother often gave a loan to a poor brother, but he still remained a beggar. Once a poor man asked for a horse for a while. The rich brother let him use the horse, but did not give him a bridle. Because of this, the poor had to tie the wagon to the horse's tail. When he returned back, the horse caught on one of the parts of the gate, tearing off his tail.

When the rich man found out what happened to his horse, he was very angry and refused to take his horse back. Having thought over the situation well, he decided to apply to the city court so that Judge Shemyaka would pass a sentence.

The road to the city was not easy, so the brothers decided to stay with a local priest, who was an acquaintance of a rich brother. In the evening, only two people sat down to dinner (the priest and the rich brother), but they did not invite the poor brother to the table. He watched them eat and suffered from unbearable thirst and hunger. After a while he lost consciousness. Having lost consciousness, he fell on the cradle in which the priest's child was sleeping. The priest's child died immediately. The pope was furious and decided to go to the city to see the judge in order to get a decent punishment for the poor.

Having climbed onto the bridge, the poor man decided that he had no way out of this situation, and he decided to take his own life. At that moment, a son was passing under the bridge, who was taking his elderly father to the bathhouse. The beggar brother rushed down and landed right on the old man, thereby killing him.

The beggar was dragged to court and at the same moment the poor man began to think what he could do to get out of this situation. Not having a penny in my pocket. He picked up a stone from the ground, wrapped it in cloth and placed it before the judge.

The rich brother began to tell a story about how the poor man crippled his horse. Then the judge asked the poor man what he could say in his defense, but he only pointed to the bundle with the stone. Pop told a story about how a poor man killed his child, the judge again turned to the beggar to find out his opinion about this situation, but he again pointed only to a bundle with a stone. The young man described the situation about what happened to his father. After this story, the judge again gave the word to the poor brother, he did not answer, but again pointed to the bundle of cloth.

Then the judge ruled that the rich brother should give the horse to the poor until the horse's tail grows back. The priest must give his wife to the poor so that she will give birth to a child, and the young man must kill the poor man in the same way that he killed his father.

Upon returning to the village, the rich man began to pray for the return of the horse back, and the poor man refused him, paying attention to the verdict. Therefore, he offered him money to return the horse in the state in which it is now. The poor man agreed to his proposal, took the money and gave the horse back.

Pop followed the example of the rich man and also paid money so that his wife would stay with him.

The young man did not carry out the judge's sentence and also paid a certain amount of money to the poor.

To find out what the bundle that the poor man had with him at the trial meant, the judge sent his servant to him. The poor man showed the traveler a bundle with a stone, which he took out of his pocket. The servant was surprised and asked the question, what could this mean? The poor man said that if Shemyaka had passed a different sentence, he would have killed him with this stone.

The servant conveyed everything that the poor man had said to him. And then the judge was delighted that he correctly pronounced the verdict.

As a result, the story of the Shemyakin Court teaches us that the main thing in a person is how he can use his mental abilities, and not his material wealth.

Reader's diary.