Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Zemsta matką sprawiedliwości. Wergeld (główszczyzna) w Prusach Krzyżackich i Prusach Książęcych.

100%

Białuński G.

Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne

|

2015

|

tom 67

|

nr 2

11-30

PL

W świecie cywilizacji tradycyjnej (barbarzyńskiej) wymiar sprawiedliwości był realizowany w drodze samopomocy, tzw. wróżdy (legalnej zemsty rodowej, germ. faida). Zemsta musiała mieć charakter jawny i stanowiła wręcz obowiązek wszystkich współrodowców, oczywiście spośród ludziwolnych. Legalność wróżdy wypływała również z jej sakralnego charakteru (stąd „święty” lub „honorowy obowiązek”). Celem wróżdy było zatem takżeprzebłaganie bóstw poprzez złożenie ofi ary z przestępcy. Ubocznym efektem wróżdy były krwawe i wyniszczające wojny wewnętrzne, stąd z czasem wraz ze wzmocnieniem władzy zwierzchniej starano się ją wyrugować, a przynajmniej zastąpić zapłatą prywatnej kary, tzw.opłatą kompozycyjną, czyli główszczyzną (w świecie germańskim zwaną wergeldem).

2

„Dla powszechnego rozwoju, podniesienia i poprawy naszego księstwa”. Lokacje miast mazurskich w Prusach Książęcych (1525-1701)

100%

Białuński G.

Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne

|

2017

|

tom 69

|

nr 2

23-46

EN

The article presents the process of creation of new towns in the Duchy of Prussia (1525-1701), which later became Masuria. More specifically, the paper describes how a hamlet received a location privilege. The establishment of towns described here (Olecko, Gołdap, Węgorzewo, Giżycko,Pisz and Ełk) was initiated by Albert, the Duke of Prussia (1525-1568). He was motivated by the idea partially formulated in the location privilege: “For the general growth, elevation and betterment of our duchy”. The duke personally granted the location privilege only to Olecko, which was the sole town established on previously unsettled land. In the remaining cases, he only gave a verbal promise. This did not guarantee a rapid grant of thelocation privilege as the promise was fulfilled by the duke’s successors in the remaining cases. It happened first in case of Gołdap and Węgorzewo, just several years after the promise had been made. It took a little longer in case of Giżycko (after several decades), while Pisz and Ełk had to wait the longest (almost or more than 100 years). Each town had its own different origins. Gołdap was created quickly (1565-1570) on an area which used to be a duke’s grange. Węgorzewo, Giżycko, Pisz and Ełk waited for several hundred years for a legally binding location privilege. It is important to note that each of the aforementioned towns was established near a former castle of the Teutonic Order. Moreover, the hamlets which developed near the former castles had a different status but they all performed a market or craft function. With time, this function served as a basis for applying for the town privilege. The market function was originally carried out by the peasant hamlets in Węgrorzewo and Giżycko, even though the towns were createdon the tenant farmer villages. Furthermore, the old peasant hamlets still functioned but as the contemporary out-of-town jurydykas (German Schloβfreiheit). Pisz was established on the basis of an old peasant hamlet and it never was a tenant farmer village. In case of Ełk it was the exact opposite, there never was a separate peasant hamlet. The tenant farmervillage located there evolved into a town. Only two towns were founded due to the inhabitants’ initiative, namely Olecko and Gołdap. The remaining ones were established collectively by the whole community. Most frequently, it took place with the participation of the inhabitants of the former hamlets (Giżycko, Pisz, and Ełk). The former inhabitants did not participate in the process of town building only in the case of Węgorzewo and Gołdap.Generally speaking, each location privilege described here gave the towns the so-called town privilege (German Stadtrecht). It described in detail the area of land and the type of the town privilege which was granted (Culm law in each case). Moreover, it allowed the creation of town authorities (mayor, council and bench) and granted them the option to issue documents and statutes (German Willkür) as well as allowed them to possess a seal. Furthermore, it allowed the towns to organize markets and fairs on certainfixed dates as well as regulated the rights and obligations of the townsmen. Even though the location privilege formally meant the end of the town creation process as far the law was concerned, it did not mean that it was the end of its formation. Further steps had to be made to constitute the authorities and the bench, to write statutes (German Willkür), guild regulations, etc.

3

Zmiany w prawie Prus Krzyżackich po wojnie trzynastoletniej. O dokumencie wielkiego mistrza Marcina Truchsessa dla rycerstwa posiadającego dobra na prawie magdeburskim dla obojga płci z 1487 r.

100%

Białuński G.

Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne

|

2016

|

tom 68

|

nr 2

17-32

PL

Prawo magdeburskie w Prusach stosowane w nadaniach ziemskich pojawiło się z w czwartym dziesięcioleciu XIV w. w czasach wielkiego mistrza Dytryka von Altenburga. Przy tym powstało ono nie w Magdeburgu a na Śląsku i Morawach, a jego twórcą był biskup ołomuniecki Bruno von Schaumburg (1245-1281). W Prusach Zakon przyjął podobne zasady, tylko początkowo ograniczając dziedziczenie do męskich krewnych. W XV w. władze Zakonu zmieniły jednak stanowisko, przyjęły, że dobra magdeburskie są lennami i dlatego starały się rozszerzyć swoje uprawnienia

4

Z przemian społeczno-prawnych na ziemiach pruskich. Problem tzw. oraczy (XV-XVIII wiek)

100%

Białuński G.

Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne

|

2018

|

tom 70

|

nr 2

11-22

PL

Oracze (Pflüger) to specyficzna grupa społeczna, która funkcjonowała od drugiej połowy XV w. tylko w okręgu ełckim w państwie zakonu krzyżackiego w Prusach. Oracze byli małymi wolnymi (Freie), którzy zamiast obowiązku służby zbrojnej mieli obowiązek wystawiania służby oraczowskiej (konia ze sprzężajem). Początkowo ich pozycja społeczna (i ekonomiczna) była zbliżona do wolnych, choć w świadomości ówczesnych mieszkańców była ona nieco niższa. Swoje majątki posiadali oracze bez przywilejów lokacyjnych, ale kierowano się wobec nich prawem magdeburskim prostym. Pod koniec XVII w. w związku ze wzrastającymi obciążeniami (czynszami, daninami i robociznami) oracze zaczęli być zrównywani z chłopami szarwarkowymi i ostatecznie w XVIII w. zaliczono ich do jednej warstwy chłopów królewskich (kӧniglichen Bauern).

5

Ród Wyszeliców

100%

Białuński G.

Echa Przeszłości

|

2012

|

tom 13

25-39

EN

The founder of the Wyszelic family was the largely enigmatic figure of Wyszela. There is little evidence to substantiate the hypothesis that Wyszela was a Prussian fugitive who escaped from the territory governed by the Teutonic Knights. His sons became high-ranking officers in Pomerania. Przybysław (who died around 1284) was appointed the voivod of Świecie in 1253. The office was also held by his brother, Paweł (who died around 1295), and his nephew, Stanisław (who died after 1309). Other members of the family were also civil servants who rose through the ranks. Przybysław’s son, Wyszela (who died around 1290), was appointed governor of Nowe, and Paweł’s son, Adam (who died after 1309), was elected governor of Tczew and Świecie. Most members of the Wyszelic family were knighted. The Wyszelic family maintained close ties with Pomeranian dukes, including Świętopełk II, Mściwój II, Przemysł II and Ladislaus I. Between 1262 and 1275, members of the family remained in the service of Kuyavian Duke Kazimierz and Duke of Greater Poland Bolesław the Pious. Having returned to Eastern Pomerania, the Wyszelic family continued to give support to the Greater Poland cause, and they manned nearly all civil offices in southern Pomerania. During the reign of Venceslaus II, the Wyszelics lost their offices and possessions in Pomerania due to unsuccessful competition against the Święca family. They returned to the district of Wyszogród where they owned estates in Gądecz, Brzeźno and Strzelce. The male line of the family probably died out shortly after 1309. The Wyszelics had a private coat of arms depicting a cross with arrowheads.

6

Niezany wilkierz miasta Giżycka

100%

Białuński G.

Echa Przeszłości

|

2013

|

tom 14

39-48

EN

In addition to municipal charters, general town bylaws (Wilkühr) were among the most important documents regulating life in a town. They were collections of rules which governed the conduct of local communities. The Wilkühr was drafted by the local inhabitants upon the consent of the authorities. The article describes the unknown town bylaws of Giżycko (formerly Lötzen) which were introduced between 1669 and 1723. A copy dating back to the 17th/18th centuries has survived to this day and is used by the court in Giżycko. The document contains 105 articles which deal with various municipal issues. They offered protection to different religious groups and established their right to celebrate religious holidays and hold church ceremonies. They guaranteed the dignity of the noble classes in their dealings with the local authorities, clergy and townsfolk. Selected articles regulated local governance, citizenship acquisition, distribution of responsibilities among members of the local community and organizational matters in the town. The Wilkühr also addressed trade issues and introduced fire fighting rules. It dealt with land holdings, meadows, horse pastures, municipal forests and livestock keeping. The document detailed the rights and obligations of servants and hired workers, and it set rules for the management of fisheries. Unlike other collections of common bylaws, the Wilkühr did not regulate the activities of local craftsmen and breweries, and its general focus was on land, meadows and pastures. The discussed document offers valuable insights into the problems faced by the inhabitants and authorities of modern towns in the Duchy of Prussia.