The “true evidence” in the perception of the lex salica

Introduction. The text of the Lex Salica (Salic Law) presents us the form of the contestable trial, widely spread in the barbarian kingdoms. The main question, which was discussed by the judges and people in the judicial assemblywas connected with the evaluation of the proofof guilt. Methodsand materials. Russian researchers traditionally rely on the definition of the proof of guilt based on the opinion formulated by Z. Chernilovsky who included witness testimony, compurgators’ oaths and ordeals in the definition. Important opinions of foreign researchers include R. Zohm’s conclusion that witness testimonywas the main proof of lawfulness of the plaintiff’s demands, and K. F. Drew’s opinion (based on the conclusion that kinship played a major role in those days) that compurgation and ordeal were decisive factors for the proof of guilt. Analysis. Сompurgator kinsmen argued not in favor or against specific facts, but confirmed that the accused and their oath of innocence were trustworthy. Ordeal was never used as a standalone legal measure, but only as an alternative, where the accused had to stand trial with a boiling kettle or buy out his hand and produce compurgators. Proof ofguilt bywitness testimonyhasa priority in the Salic Law, with far more frequent mentions than compurgators or ordeal. Results. The analysis of the articles of the Salic Law containing such phrases as “be he held culpable” or “a true evidence” makes it possible toexpand the list of incriminating facts with, first ofall, material evidence (mostlya stolen object with an owner’s mark or distinguishing characteristics) that served to incriminate the offender. In addition to that, a number of articles contain explicit references to the use ofadmission of guilt (usually, when there was no wilful intent) and survivors’ testimony as a proof of guilt of accomplices in crime.