There is one copy in church collection of the writings and homilies Flower Garden. This collection also includes extracts from the Short Chronicler and Kiev Pechersk Patericon, Story about Abdication Books in edition the end of the 15th century, the canonical texts mainly from Novgorod monuments and other materials. It includes special redaction of Church Statute of Prince Yaroslav. According to Vladimir Avtokratov, processing of this redaction is similar to processing of Pravosudiye, therefore compiler of Pravosudiye could be the author of Flower Garden. The name of the monument is a postscript at the bottom of the leaf.
Date
Pravosudiye was dated 13—14th centuries by Serafim Yushkov, 13th century by Boris Grekov. Mikhail Tikhomirov noted the similarity of the terminology of Pravosudiye and Moscow monuments, like Sudebniks, and believed that Pravosudiye could not be composed before the 14th century. Lev Cherepnin connected Pravosudiye with Cyprian, Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus' and some documents of the end of the 14th century. Vladimir Avtokratov gave a late date: between 1497 and paleographic date of available copy of Pravosudiye, that is the beginning of the 16th century.
Content
According to Mikhail Tikhomirov, Pravosudiye Mitropolichye was not related to church courts. It was an original work written by "some not a very literate monk". Vladimir Avtokratov supposed that Pravosudiye could be created by Novgorod clergy. If one use the late date, the purpose of creating Pravosudiye could be an attempt to replace the main clauses of the Sudebnik of 1497 with obsolete Novgorod legal norms. According to Boris Grekov, this Sudebnik became unacceptable "for the adherents of the old order", that is, adherents of Novgorod law as opposed to Moscow one. However, the compiler also introduced a number of clauses related to the strengthening of Grand Prince of Moscow. A certain number of Pravosudiye norms of both the all-Russian and local Novgorod law were intentionally archaized. The other norms are outdated in comparison with the judicial practice of the end of the 15th century. This can be explained by typical for this time heightened interest in the texts of Novgorod olden time, as well as interest in codification of law because of the emergence of a unified Russian code of laws, Sudebnik of 1497. The title of Pravosudiye does not correspond to its content: there is not anything about Metropolitan Bishop and his court in the articles of the document. According to Vladimir Avtokratov, the title could be drawn up to more authority for mainly obsolete legal norms.
