Russian Folktales · Chapter
Shemyák the Judge explained
A poor brother, after a series of misfortunes involving his rich brother's horse, a peasant's child, and an old man, faces three lawsuits before Judge Shemyák.
What happens
A poor brother, after a series of misfortunes involving his rich brother's horse, a peasant's child, and an old man, faces three lawsuits before Judge Shemyák. The judge, misled by the poor man's threatening gestures with a stone (which he mistakes for a bribe), delivers absurd verdicts that paradoxically benefit the poor man. The rich brother, the peasant, and the son each pay the poor man to avoid the ridiculous outcomes, leading to peace and profit for the poor brother.
Themes in this chapter
Trickery and Cunning
The poor man uses a stone wrapped in cloth to threaten the judge, which is misinterpreted as a bribe, allowing him to escape punishment through cunning rather than innocence.
Social Class and Hierarchy
The story highlights the disparity between the rich and poor, with the poor man being a 'butt for all' and the rich using the legal system to oppress him, though the poor man ultimately triumphs through wit.
Characters to notice
- The Judge
Judge Shemyák presides over the cases, misinterpreting the poor man's stone as a bribe and delivering comically unjust verdicts.
- The Rich Man
The rich brother who lends his horse to the poor brother and later sues him for the loss of the horse's tail.
- The Poor Man
The poor brother who accidentally causes harm but uses a stone to threaten the judge, leading to favorable but absurd judgments.
- The Peasant
A rich peasant whose child is killed by the poor man; he sues and later pays the poor man to avoid the judge's bizarre ruling.
- The Son
The son whose father is drowned by the poor man; he sues and eventually pays the poor man to avoid the judge's dangerous verdict.
Key passages
“The poor man is a butt for all, as he cannot give anything.”
The poor man is an easy target for everyone because he has no money or resources to defend himself.
This line underscores the vulnerability of the poor in a society where wealth determines justice.
“If the judge had not decided in my favour I should have killed him with this stone!”
If the judge had ruled against me, I would have killed him with this stone.
The poor man reveals his true threat, showing that his apparent bribe was actually a weapon, highlighting the judge's foolishness.