Late Tolstoy’s Perception of Law

ABSTRACT Tolstoy’s literary works, as well as a number of events in his life, leave no doubt about the writer’s deep familiarity with law in both the theoretical and practical spheres. In his later years, this served as a basis for his sharply critical position in relation to law as such. Tolstoy interprets law as a pseudoscience written in an unnatural language, aimed at allowing the ruling classes to oppress the people and justify violence. Law (pravo) replaces evident moral law with pseudo-law in the form of an arbitrary legal establishment. Pseudo-law distorts the true relationship among morality, religion, and legal institutions. Part of Tolstoy’s critique stems from his clash with positivist interpretations of law that reject natural law. Tolstoy asks a number of important questions regarding the foundations and premises of law: What is a human court, according to positive laws adopted at the whims of legislatures, without the absence of the prospect of the Last Judgment? What can be considered genuine law? Are there laws more important and more binding than juridical ones? Instead of having his questions answered, Tolstoy is still reproached as an anarchist and legal nihilist.