One of the founders Old Russian state it is customary to consider Prince Oleg, nicknamed for his ability to foresee the future, the Prophetic. Until now, it is not completely clear whether he really existed or whether it was literary character that combines features historical prototypes- Oleg ( Kyiv prince, mentioned by the agreement between Rus' and Byzantium of 911 and Oleg, a contemporary of Igor Rurikovich. In addition, the Laurentian Chronicle reports that Oleg died in 912 and was buried in the city of Kyiv on Mount Shchekovitsa. At the same time, according to the Novgorod chronicle, this sad event occurred in 922 and Oleg was buried in the city of Ladoga.
But the confusion is connected not only with the life of Prince Oleg, but also with the circumstances of his death.
Magi prediction.
According to classic legend, the Magi warned Oleg that he would die from his beloved horse. From that moment on, the prince stopped riding him, but ordered to feed him with selected grain. Four years after the prediction, Oleg, who returned from a military campaign, remembered his favorite and wanted to see him. Upon learning that the horse had died, Oleg, laughing at the Magi, wanted to see his bones. Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin remarkably told about what happened next:
The prince quietly stepped on the horse's skull
And he said: “Sleep, lonely friend!
Is yours old master survived you:
At the funeral feast, already close,
It's not you who will stain the feather grass under the ax
And drink my ashes with hot blood!
So that's where my death lurked!
The bone threatened me with death!”
From dead head coffin snake
Meanwhile, hersing crawled out;
Like a black ribbon wrapped around the legs:
And suddenly the stung prince cried out.
"Song of the Prophetic Oleg"
No doubt, the legend is beautiful and instructive, in the sense that the Magi must be obeyed, but, at the same time, it is completely unreliable.
And the point is not even that snakes do not have the habit of stinging with their sharp forked sting at the end (this is a delusion), as Pushkin wrote, but simply and without fanfare they bite with poisonous teeth. And the point is not that in order for a snake to bite a person, the latter still needs to try. And not that it is not clear why Oleg needed to step on the horse's skull with his foot? Some strange expression of respect for an old fighting friend.
Parting.
But let's assume that's exactly what happened. And the prince was still bitten by a snake. It is logical to assume that it was a viper, since neither a cobra, nor an efa, nor a rattlesnake, nor the most deadly snake in the world, the black mamba, is found in our area. And here new questions arise. It is completely incomprehensible how, in such a miraculous way, an ordinary viper could bite through a boot made of rough leather? But even if this did happen, why did Oleg die after all? The bite of vipers is fatal for pregnant women and children, but not for a healthy and strong warrior, which was the prince.
Interestingly, there is an Icelandic saga very much reminiscent of the myth of death. Prophetic Oleg. In her we are talking about the Viking Orvar Odd. The sorceress predicted his death from a horse, for which he was beaten to the point of blood. So that the prediction would not come true, Odd and his friend Asmund killed the horse, threw the corpse into the pit and filled it with stones. The saga goes on to tell of Odd's death:
“And as they walked quickly, Odd hit his foot and bent down. “What was it, what did I hit my foot on?” He touched the point of the spear, and everyone saw that it was the skull of a horse, and immediately a snake flew out of it, rushed at Odd and stung him in the leg above the ankle. The poison immediately worked, the whole leg and thigh swelled up. Odd was so weakened by this bite that they had to help him go to the shore, and when he arrived there, he said: “You should now go and cut down a stone coffin for me, and let someone stay here to sit beside me and write down that story. which I will lay down about my deeds and life.
Death by horse.
It is still not known exactly whether the saga of Orvar Odd caused the legend of the death of the Prophetic Oleg from a snakebite, or vice versa. But we can definitely say that the cause of the death of the prince was different. Various researchers call different reasons, among which the version about the poisoning of Oleg and the insidious murder by his own combatants is the most popular. We are in Once again we are convinced how far from reality the legends known to all of us since childhood can be.
Life of Mikhail Klopsky. Like a note about last days Pafnuty, the Novgorod "Life of Mikhail Klopsky" was written in the 70s, but in its nature and origin it differs significantly from Innokenty's note. This is by no means a record of an eyewitness, but a detailed hagiographic narrative about the life and miracles of the Novgorod holy fool, who sympathized with the Moscow princes (it was this circumstance that contributed to the preservation of the Life in the all-Russian literature after the annexation of Novgorod). The creator of the Life of Michael undoubtedly relied on certain literary traditions, more folklore (or based on folklore) than hagiographic.
Unusual for hagiographic literature was the very beginning of the Life: it did not begin with a story about the birth and upbringing of a saint, like most lives, but with a description of the unexpected and mysterious appearance of an unnamed hero in the Klopsky Monastery. Before us is, as it were, a “closed” plot, causing bewilderment and natural curiosity of the reader.
At night, after the divine service, a certain priest appeared in his cell in the monastery and saw that in the cell an unknown "elder was sitting on a chair, and a candle was burning in front of him." The astonished priest backed away and brought Abbot Theodosius, but the cell was locked. Looking through the window, the abbot greeted the stranger with a prayer; the stranger answered with the same prayer, this was repeated three times. “Who are you, are you a man or a demon? What is your name? asked after that the abbot. “Are you a human or a demon? What's your name? the stranger repeated the same question. The hegumen asked a second time: “Are you a man or a demon?”; the stranger also asked: “Are you a man or a demon?”; the same thing happened a third time. Breaking open the door to the cell, the abbot began to incense; the old man closed himself from the censer, but overshadowed himself sign of the cross. However, he did not want to give his name and to the question “How did you come to us and where are you from?” answered the same question again. The secret of his origin was revealed later, when Prince Konstantin, who arrived at the monastery, told the monks that the stranger was a noble man, a “owner” (relative) of the prince. Further, it is told how Mikhail Klopsky, who became a monk, recognized the robbers in the people who came to the monastery, deprived the mind of the priest who stole the panagia, predicted paralysis to the mayor who offended the monastery fishermen.
Mikhail Klopsky was a holy fool, and this largely justified the eccentric nature of the stories about him. This feature of the Life connects the Life of Michael with secular literature of this nature, which we will talk about in the future, for example, with the legends of Solomon and Kitovras, where the “wild beast” Kitovras, like Mikhail, “sees through” the present and future of his interlocutors and hides deep wisdom behind external eccentricity.
The Tale of Peter and Fevronia (original plot). Wisdom central character, revealing unexpectedly for others, is also characteristic of another monument hagiographic literature, which was originally formed, apparently, in the same period - for the "Tale of Peter and Fevronia". One of the most outstanding monuments ancient Russian hagiography and literature in general, The Tale of Peter and Fevronia, like The Life of Mikhail Klopsky, arose on local material (Peter and Fevronia were saints of the Murom Principality), but acquired an all-Russian literary distribution.
The question of the origin of the "Tale of Peter and Fevronia" is complex and caused controversy in scientific literature. At present, it can apparently be considered established that the written text of the Tale that has come down to us dates back to a time no earlier than the middle of the 16th century. and was created by the writer-publicist of this era Yermolai-Erasmus. However, already in the XV century. there was a church service to Peter and Fevronia, where the main motives of the story were mentioned - Peter's victory over the serpent, his marriage to Fevronia and their joint burial. It is quite possible, therefore, that Yermolai, like other medieval hagiographers, subjected the already existing hagiographic tale to stylistic processing. We will turn to the story of Yermolai-Erasmus; while we outline the main plot of life.
The plot of the life of Peter and Fevronia is not like most life stories. Here there is no suffering for the faith, no martyrdom of heroes, affirming their holiness. The heroes of the story have very little connection with history; attempts to establish their historical prototypes are doubtful; for the XV-XVI centuries. these heroes, in any case, were characters of the distant past. In the center of the story is the peasant girl Fevronia, who agreed to heal Prince Peter, who fell ill from snake blood spilled on him. As a reward for this, Fevronia demands that the prince marry her. At the beginning, Peter tries to “tempt” Fevronia: washing himself in a bathhouse before being cured, he sends Fevronia a piece of flax and demands that she weave “a srachka and ports and a bridle” out of it. But Fevronia acts as befits a folklore trickster whom they are trying to fool (cf., for example, Akira at the court of the Egyptian king): she responds with absurdity to absurdity, agreeing to fulfill Peter's request, provided that the prince cooks for her from a sliver loom. The attempt of the healed prince to simply break his promise also ends unsuccessfully: Fevronia prudently ordered to smear all his ulcers (received from snake blood), except for one, and Peter's treachery leads to the fact that from "that scab, many scabs began to disperse on his body"; for the final cure, Peter has to fulfill his promise. After the death of his brother, Peter takes the throne of the Principality of Murom. When the rebellious boyars decide to expel the peasant princess from Murom, she agrees to leave if she is allowed to take with her what she asks. The boyars agree, and the princess asks "only the wife of my prince Peter." Peter follows her. In the end, Peter and Fevronia safely "dominate" in Murom; after the “repose of the kupnem” (simultaneous death) and separate burial, they nevertheless turn out to be reunited “in a single coffin”.
The connection between the Tale of Peter and Fevronia and oral folk art, a reflection in it of the "world" folklore motifs are very significant and have been repeatedly noted in the scientific literature. However, the existing records of fairy tales and traditions about these saints are late (not earlier than late XIX c.) and were already formed under the influence of the written hagiographic tradition (although, perhaps, they also include genuine folklore motifs). In the plot of the Tale, two main fairy story – fairy tale about wrestling with a kite and novelistic fairy tale about a wise peasant girl who marries noble person and subjected to difficult trials. The hero of the life, Peter, falls ill after he defeats the snake; Fevronia heals him of ulcers. This plot brings the Tale closer to the Celtic legend and the medieval Western novel about Tristan and Isolde: like Fevronia, Isolde heals Tristan, who fell ill from the blood of a dragon; The theme of the reunion of heroes after death coincides with “Tristan and Isolde” (in the Tale, the heroes miraculously end up in a single coffin, in the legend of Tristan, a thorn bush grows from his grave, connecting it with Isolde’s grave). Plot Combination unequal marriage a peasant woman and a noble man with the motif of healing the groom is not typical for Russian fairy tales known to us, but the same combination is inherent in Boccaccio's short story about Gillette from Narbonne (The Decameron, day 3, short story 9) and Shakespeare's comedy "All is well that ends well", - probably, such a contaminated plot also existed in Russian folklore of the 15th century.
The plot of the life of Peter and Fevronia is thus one of the most popular plots in world literature. To its specific development in Old Russian writing we will turn in a further presentation, in connection with the development of the narrative Literature XVI V.
The Tale of Peter Ordynsky. Close to the "Tale of Peter and Fevronia" and another hagiographic story - about Peter, Prince of the Horde. And here in the center of the narrative is a legendary, non-historical character, and there is no theme of martyrdom and suffering for the faith. The hero of the Life is the pious Tatar prince Peter, to whom the apostles Peter and Paul appeared in a dream, were given two bags of gold and ordered to build a temple with this money. To build a temple, Peter needs the permission of the local Rostov prince, but the prince treats Peter's request without much sympathy. The figure of this prince is generally very peculiar. He's not a villain at all - rather positive character, but at the same time a prudent politician, clearly teasing the pious prince: “Vladyka will arrange a church for you, but I won’t give you a place. What will you do?" Peter, referring to the command of the apostles, humbly agrees to buy from the prince, "how much your grace will excommunicate from this land." Hearing these words and seeing the bags in the hands of Peter, the prince decides to himself to benefit from the “horror” of Peter and the bishop (archbishop), shocked by the miracle: “You have how much to excommunicate from the horror of the lord, from the saints the apostle” (p. 101). Here is a clear game with the word "excommunicate", which in the first case has a modestly pious, and in the second - an openly cynical meaning. The prince demands so many gold coins for the land for the temple, so that they could cover the entire plot ceded to Peter. Peter agrees, acquires a plot with a lake on it, digs it in with a moat and lays out so much money along the borders of his plot (taking it out of magic bags) that they fill carts and chariots sent by the prince. After the construction of the temple, Peter is going to return to his Horde, but the prince persuades him to marry in the Rostov land. And again, the motives of the prince’s behavior are frankly practical: “If this husband, the tsar’s tribe [a relative of the Khan], goes to the Horde, and our city will be sponsored ... Peter, if you want, we will have a bride for you?” (p. 102). After the death of Peter "in the depths of old age" on the land given to him by the prince, a monastery was built.
The rest of the Life is devoted to the fate of this monastery and the descendants of Peter the Orda and disputes between the monastery and the city of Rostov over the lake located on the monastery land. Like the story about the purchase of princely land by Peter, this story has a clearly folklore character. The dispute about the lake begins with a kind of competition between city (Rostov) and monastic (Petrovsky) fish catchers: Even if they were playing, Petrovstia fishermen threw the net, then a lot of fish would be taken out, and the city of fisherman, who toiled a lot, would become poor ”(p. 103). Offended for their “catchers”, the descendants of the prince who gave the letter to Peter decide to deprive Peter’s descendants (owners of the monastery land) of the right to fish, referring to the fact that their ancestor ceded the land to Peter, but not the lake. The resolution of this dispute again turns out to be typical of folklore, and the ambassador of the Tatar tsar acts as a fair judge. He asks the Rostov princes if they can remove water from the land given to Peter. “Our water is the fatherland, lord, but we cannot take it off, lord,” the princes answer. “If you cannot remove water from the earth, then what do you call your own? And this creation is the Most High God for the service of all people,” the ambassador decides (p. 104).
Hagiography, as we see, was not aloof from the new trends in Russian literature of that time. Many of its features of the life-tale of the XV century. echoed the secular story - a genre that became most widespread in the second half of the 15th century.
4. Tales
Of all the genres of ancient Russian literature, the story was undoubtedly the most connected with the literature of the subsequent time. The word "story" was Old Russian a broader meaning than in modern language - this term sometimes denoted extensive works of a consolidated nature (for example, "The Tale of Bygone Years" - the chronicle already known to us early XII V.); but most often old Russian story- is a separate literary monument, which is not included in more extensive codes and does not have a clearly marked secular or ecclesiastical purpose.
In the XV century. collections of mixed composition, including stories, are widely used; one can think that it was during this period that secular monuments of this nature, known before, began to penetrate quite widely into writing. This period, in particular, includes the oldest lists of translated monuments known to us, which, apparently, penetrated into Russian writing in previous centuries: for example, “The Tale of Akira the Wise” and “The Tale of Indian kingdom". Some of the hagiographic monuments that we mentioned above, such as the life of Peter and Fevronia or Peter, Prince of the Horde, also adjoined the genre of the story.
Serbian "Alexandria". Among the translated stories of this time, the so-called Serbian "Alexandria" - a novel about the life and adventures of Alexander the Great - should be mentioned first of all. This novel appeared in Rus' in the 15th century. and became more popular than the chronographic "Alexandria" (part of the "Greek Chronicler", see earlier, p. 195); inserts from the Serbian “Alexandria” supplemented the text of the story about Alexander in the “Russian Chronograph” of the late 15th century.
The oldest Russian copy of the Serbian "Alexandria" was copied by the hand of the Cyril-Belozero monk Euphrosyn, already known to us, he also owns the oldest known manuscripts of the "Tale of the Indian Kingdom", "Zadonshchina" and some other monuments.
The oldest Russian copy of the Serbian “Alexandria” is at the same time the only Russian list of the 15th–16th centuries. All the rest, of which there are quite a few (about two hundred), belong to a later time, to the 17th and 18th centuries. Nevertheless, a comparison of these lists with each other and with South Slavic texts allows us to conclude that in the 15th century. Euphrosynus' list was not the only one. The list of "Alexandria" that originally appeared in Rus' had a number of features: for the most part, these are omissions in the text, which are somehow characteristic of all Russian texts of the monument. Much was incomprehensible to Russian scribes, as can be seen from the errors and changes found in later manuscripts. If this all-Russian protograph was close to the South Slavic texts, then the text in the collection of Euphrosynus is already a slightly modified text. The scribe who created it tried, as far as possible, to make the text meaningful, without obvious gaps and corrupted places; in some cases he misunderstood what he probably did not understand. But he, in any case, did not copy the original lying before him, but tried to improve it. It was not Euphrosynus who did this, which is evident from the fact that there is a gap in his list, which is not in other texts dating back to the same type of Russian lists. Since a significant part of the texts of the XVII-XVIII centuries. does not go back to this alteration, but to the original underlying it (the all-Russian protograph), then, therefore, in the 15th century. in Rus' there were several Russian lists of the Serbian "Alexandria".
The Serbian "Alexandria", which took shape in the 13th-14th centuries, apparently ascended to the Middle Greek original, but it penetrated Russia in the South Slavic (Serbian) version (the Serbian "Alexandria" also reveals some Latin influences: it is possible that its South Slavic original originated in Dalmatia, closely connected with neighboring Italian lands). The Serbian "Alexandria" differed from the chronographic one by a number of significant features. Alexander was credited here with the conquest of Rome and Jerusalem, interest in the heroes Trojan War and at the same time monotheism and friendly relations with biblical prophet Jeremiah. In the Serbian "Alexandria" the Romanesque features were also considerably strengthened; important place occupied here is the theme (completely unknown to all other legends about Alexander) of love between Alexander and Roxana: Alexander informs his mother that it is this “ female love”, “shooting” his heart, prompted him to think about his “home” for the first time; when he, treacherously poisoned, dies, Roxana mourns her "Macedonian sun" and slaughters herself over her husband's coffin. The adventurous nature of the Serbian “Alexandria” is especially striking in its Russian lists, where the entire second part (after the victory over Darius) breaks up into separate chapters, each of which tells about some new amazing adventure of Alexander and new miracles he saw: “ The legend about divii cattle and about human-like animals, and about divii wives, and about mravii…”, “About divii people, every man had 6 arms and 6 legs, and about dog-headed people, and about racekh…”, “About the ezer, Izh dead fish are alive, and about humans - from the belt a horse, and a mountain man - giants will be called, and about the sunny city and about people with one-legged ... "," how Alexander frightened the lions and elephants with cunning ... "etc.
Alexander in the novel constantly puts himself in the most difficult situations, boldly plays with his fate, "sweeps his head back," in the words of his generals. He dresses up in the clothes of his subjects, acting either as one of his associates, or as his own ambassador. His behavior is especially impudent when he comes to Darius under the guise of a Macedonian ambassador, and then runs from royal palace with the help of a magic ring that makes him invisible. This motive, however, is complicated by another, which clearly contradicts it: drinking cups of wine presented to him under the guise of an ambassador, Alexander then hides them "in his bowels." The Persian nobles are surprised at this, but the ambassador assures that this is the custom at the court of his master. When Alexander hurriedly leaves the Persian palace, he uses both the hidden bowls, handing them to the “goalkeepers” as a kind of pass, and at the same time a magic ring (it remains unclear whether the Persian “goalkeepers” see the person who hands them the bowls - p. 33 –35, p. 240, note 117).
Plot vicissitudes of "Alexandria", unexpected twists in the fate of the hero served not only to enhance the amusement of the story. They made the content of the story more convincing for the reader. Still not knowing the impending outcome of Alexander's desperate adventures, the reader of "Alexandria" experienced these adventures, worried and rejoiced when they ended happily. Such plot tension unusually increased the effectiveness of the narrative, and it also made the motif of the frailty and fragility of human achievements, constantly recurring in the novel, much sharper and deeper. The successes achieved with such labor and risk ultimately led to nothing: early death was predicted to the hero from birth, and he could not avoid it. “About the wise Alexander among men,” Darius asks in the cave of the dead, “and are you condemned to be with us?” The thought of death did not leave Alexander even among the most hilarious adventures: “Alexander is sad, but death will be proclaimed to him, every man preaches his death, joy will pass over in pity,” one of the chapters of the novel unexpectedly ends, telling about how how Alexander laughed when he caught one-legged people. And at the end of the novel, the prophet Jeremiah, having appeared to Alexander in a dream, informed him of his imminent death, and the commander arranged a farewell review for his troops (pp. 47-48, 62-64).
The plot twists and turns of "Alexandria" helped readers Ancient Rus' believe in the reality of the events that took place in the story. But, drawing its heroes, depicting their actions and conveying direct speech, "Alexandria", like many other ancient Russian stories, most often followed the usual traditions of church and other "business" writing. The life of "the virtuous husband of Alexander" was described here in the same words as the lives of saints or heroes were described. historical narrative.
Drawing the emotions of its heroes, "Alexandria" largely followed the literature of the XIV-XV centuries. (and especially literature that reflected the so-called second South Slavic influence) to the methods of "expressive-emotional style". Both Alexander himself and other heroes of the novel did not skimp on expressing their feelings, they exclaimed a lot, shed tears and kissed each other. Upon learning of Alexander’s entry into Babylon, Darius was “filled with great pity”, then hearing about the coming to the aid of the troops of the Indian king, he “came from great sorrow into little joy”, but when he saw Alexander who went out to fight, “he was terrible, leaving everything, rush to run” (p. 31, 36, 37). Just as emotional Persian king and after a complete defeat, when the unfaithful Persians, piercing the king with swords and "splits", threw him on the road. The "verbs" of Darius, addressed to the passing Macedonian king, brought Alexander to emotion; together with other Macedonians, he took the Persian king on his shoulders and carried him to the palace, where an even more pathetic scene took place. Darius, "weeping a lot", gave Alexander his daughter Roxana; Alexander kissed her, and the mortally wounded king became “joyful” and, not forgetting to ask Alexander to take revenge on the murderers, died (pp. 37–38). All this expression culminates in the closing scenes of the novel, which describe tragic death treacherously poisoned Alexander and the suicide of his faithful wife Roxana.
Willingly noting and even exaggerating the sensitivity of its heroes, "Alexandria", however, invariably limits itself to only external manifestations feelings. Behind the cries and kisses of "Alexandria" it is almost impossible to guess the inner movements of the soul of the characters, their psychology and characters. This property is also typical for other monuments of the “expressive-emotional style”, where, according to D.S. Likhachev, “feelings, separate states human soul do not yet unite into characters", and "manifestations of psychology do not add up to psychology".
The characters' speeches are usually just as stereotyped in "Alexandria". The lengthy oratorical speeches of Darius, Alexander and other characters do not reflect them in any way. emotional state: they are as conditional as the speeches of heroes in military and historical stories. The fact that Darius, found by Alexander barely alive, pronounces his speech “breathing little” does not at all reduce its length and grandiloquence: “I am Darei the king, raise his temporary charm to heaven and bring his untiring honor to hell. I am Darei the notorious, king of the world, I am Darei, who from many thousands of people we honor beh, and now I myself lie down on the ground. And you, Alexandre, were a visionary to me, I fell down from the colic of glory, and I’m dying with such a death, you, Alexandra, are also afraid of such a death ”(p. 37). Alexander himself is no less eloquent. Having learned in a dream from Jeremiah the prophet about his imminent death, he was “terrible to be” and “weeping bitterly”, but immediately burst into lengthy doxologies to Sabaoth: “Glory to you, glory to you, wonderful, incomprehensible, indescribable, inscrutable God, all from non-existence to being brought” (p. 62-63) . Among the celebrations on the occasion of the arrival of the Olympiad, Alexander (in fulfillment of the prediction of imminent death) is poisoned by his butler Vrinush: the king becomes "studish" and begins to "tremble", but this does not stop his eloquence. Alexander mourns the frailty of the world, addresses with separate speeches to his commanders, to Roxana, to the villain Vrinush and, finally, to all the kings and nobles (pp. 69-70).
The monologues of "Alexandria" are quite conditional and do not reflect psychology in any way. actors. However, the situation is different with the dialogues of the novel and, in general, with all the remarks directly related to the actions of the characters.
The strength of "Alexandria" was its plot, and direct speech in the novel turned out to be expressive precisely in those cases when it was connected with the plot. Where the word of the heroes of "Alexandria" became a deed, it immediately acquired human intonations.
“Take this cup, hold it! Darei the tsar sent the guards to approve me, ”Alexander tells the Persian goalkeepers, handing them the cups hidden during the feast and leaving the palace by deceit (p. 35).
“... when you acquire all the zemstvo, then you will inherit hell,” Ivant, the leader of the naked wise men of the Rakhmans, predicted to Alexander, welcoming the king. “How is this word of speech?” Alexander asked in fear. “It is not appropriate for a wise man to interpret,” answered Ivant. Short and expressive was the further dialogue between the king and the rahmans, when Alexander offered to give them something that was not in their land. "Give us, Tsar Alexander, immortality, let's die!" the Rahmans exclaimed. “I am not immortal, what immortality will I give you?” Alexander replied. “Go in peace, Alexandra, take the whole land, then go to the nude yourself,” Ivant remarked again, saying goodbye to Alexander (pp. 44-46). Just as laconic was Alexander’s answer to Porus, who reminded his conqueror in the cave of the dead that he too would someday be “brought down” to this cave: “Be grieving for the dead, and not for the living,” Alexander answered the Indian king (p. 58) . And even in the last chapter of the novel, abundant in long speeches, the most powerful was the brief remark of Alexander, accepting the last parade of his victorious troops: “See all of these, all of them will go underground!” (p. 64).
Trojan tales. "Alexandria" was not the only one in ancient Russian literature a monument that ultimately goes back to the ancient tradition. Late 15th - early 16th century - the time of penetration into Rus' of several detailed legends about the Trojan War (until the 15th century, only short story about the conquest of Troy from the "Chronicle" of John Malala). Along with the "Tale of the Devastation of Troy", included in the "Russian Chronograph", in Rus' was translated during this period (from the Latin original) and the extensive "Trojan History" by Guido de Columna, compiled at the end of the 13th century. It was not only a description of the Trojan War, but also a whole collection of epic legends of antiquity. It told about the journey of the Argonauts for the Golden Fleece, and about the love of Jason and Medea, and about the first destruction of Troy by the Argonauts, and about the new clash of the Greeks with the Trojans after the abduction of Helen by Paris, and about all the vicissitudes of the war (the love of Achilles and Polyxena, the death of Hector and Achilles, trick with a wooden horse), and about the wanderings of Odysseus (Ulysses). Some episodes of the "Trojan Story" revealed a more developed psychologism than the Serbian "Alexandria" (for example, the description of the love languor of Medea, waiting for a meeting with Jason), but on the whole, the "Trojan Story" turned out to be a huge monument in size with inconsistent separate parts; she was deprived of that story sequence(the theme of the inevitable death of the protagonist), which is typical for novels about Alexander. It is not for nothing that the original edition, which was a literal translation of the story of Guido de Columna, was then reworked and replaced by more original short editions.
The wisdom of the central character, which reveals itself unexpectedly to those around him, is also characteristic of a monument of hagiographic literature that originally developed, apparently, at the end of the 15th century - for the Tale of Peter and Fevronia.
One of the most outstanding monuments of ancient Russian hagiography and literature in general, The Tale of Peter and Fevronia, like The Life of Mikhail Klopsky, arose on local material (Peter and Fevronia were saints of the Murom Principality), but acquired an all-Russian literary distribution.
The question of the origin of The Tale of Peter and Fevronia is complex and has caused controversy in the scientific literature. At present, it can apparently be considered established that the written text of the Tale that has come down to us dates back to a time no earlier than the middle of the 16th century. and was created by the writer-publicist of this era Yermolai-Erasmus.
However, already in the XV century. there was a church service to Peter and Fevronia, where the main motives of the story were mentioned - Peter's victory over the serpent, his marriage to Fevronia and their joint burial. It is quite possible, therefore, that Yermolai, like other medieval hagiographers, subjected the already existing hagiographic tale to stylistic processing. We will turn to the story of Yermolai-Erasmus; while we outline the main plot of life.
The plot of the life of Peter and Fevronia is not like most life stories. Here there is no suffering for the faith, no martyrdom of heroes, affirming their holiness. The heroes of the story have very little connection with history; attempts to establish their historical prototypes are doubtful; for the XV-XVI centuries. these heroes, in any case, were characters of the distant past.
In the center of the story is the peasant girl Fevronia, who agreed to heal Prince Peter, who fell ill from snake blood spilled on him. As a reward for this, Fevronia demands that the prince marry her. At the beginning, Peter tries to “tempt” Fevronia: washing himself in a bathhouse before being cured, he sends Fevronia a piece of flax and demands that she weave “a srachka and ports and a bridle” out of it.
But Fevronia acts as befits a folklore trickster whom they are trying to fool (cf., for example, Akira at the court of the Egyptian king): she answers absurdly absurdly, agreeing to fulfill Peter's request on condition that the prince prepares a loom for her from a sliver.
The attempt of the healed prince to simply break his promise also ends unsuccessfully: Fevronia prudently ordered to smear all his ulcers (received from snake blood), except for one, and Peter's treachery leads to the fact that from "that scab, many scabs began to disperse on his body"; for the final cure, Peter has to fulfill his promise.
After the death of his brother, Peter takes the throne of the Principality of Murom. When the rebellious boyars decide to expel the peasant princess from Murom, she agrees to leave if she is allowed to take with her what she asks. The boyars agree, and the princess asks "only the wife of my prince Peter." Peter follows her.
In the end, Peter and Fevronia safely "dominate" in Murom; after the “repose of the kupnem” (simultaneous death) and separate burial, they nevertheless turn out to be reunited “in a single coffin”.
The connection between The Tale of Peter and Fevronia and oral folk art, the reflection of "world" folklore motifs in it is very significant and has been repeatedly noted in the scientific literature. However, the existing records of fairy tales and legends about these saints are late (not earlier than the end of the 19th century) and were already formed under the influence of written hagiographic tradition (although they may also include genuine folklore motifs).
The plot of the Tale combines two main fairy tale plots - a fairy tale about a fight with a snake and a short story about a wise peasant girl who marries a noble person and undergoes difficult trials. The hero of the life, Peter, falls ill after he defeats the snake; Fevronia heals him of ulcers.
This plot brings the Tale closer to the Celtic legend and the medieval Western novel about Tristan and Isolde: like Fevronia, Isolde heals Tristan, who fell ill from the blood of a dragon; the theme of the reunion of heroes after death coincides with “Tristan and Isolde” (in the Tale, the heroes miraculously end up in a single coffin, in the legend of Tristan, a thorn bush grows from his grave, connecting it with Isolde’s grave).
The combination of the plot of the unequal marriage of a peasant woman and a noble man with the motive of healing the groom is not typical for Russian fairy tales known to us, but the same combination is inherent in Boccaccio's short story about Gillette from Narbonne (The Decameron, day 3, short story 9) and Shakespeare's comedy ends well,” such a contaminated plot probably existed in Russian folklore of the 15th century.
The plot of the life of Peter and Fevronia is thus one of the most popular plots in world literature. We will turn to its specific development in Old Russian writing in a further presentation, in connection with the development narrative literature 16th century
History of Russian literature: in 4 volumes / Edited by N.I. Prutskov and others - L., 1980-1983
An attempt to cure cancer with the help of drugs alternative medicine significantly reduces the patient's chances of survival, according to a study by American scientists. Nevertheless, to unconventional ways are regularly treated even by young and educated people.
Alternative medicine methods are very popular not only in the post-Soviet space and in the outskirts of civilization, but throughout the world. According to statistics, every third resident of the United States prefers to be treated with herbs, homeopathy, acupuncture and other leeches. But if in the case of a runny nose and some other diseases, such methods are sometimes quite effective (for example, in 2015, a Chinese woman Yuyu Tu received Nobel Prize for creating a cure for malaria based on an extract of wormwood), then in the case of serious diseases like cancer, they can cause deadly harm, Gazeta.ru warns.
Scientists from Yale University in the United States conducted a special study during which they traced the consequences of the intervention of alternative medicine in oncological diseases. The results of the work are published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
Experts analyzed data from National Base cancer data for 2004-2013. They identified 281 patients who were diagnosed with early-stage breast, prostate, lung or colon cancer. All of these people refused treatment and turned to alternative medicine. They paid dearly for their decision.
When the researchers compared the survival rates of these patients with data from 560 patients with similar diagnoses who underwent chemotherapy, radiotherapy and/or surgery, they found that adherents of alternative treatments were 2.5 times more likely to die within five years of diagnosis.
For some types of cancer, this difference was even more impressive. Thus, breast cancer killed supporters of alternative medicine 5.68 times more often than those who sought help from conventional doctors. Likelihood of dying from lung cancer among followers non-traditional methods treatment increased by 4.57 times, from lung cancer - by 2.17 times.
A noticeable difference was not observed only in prostate cancer. But this does not indicate the effectiveness of alternative methods in the treatment of this particular oncological disease, but that this type of cancer develops slowly and in five years is not able in most cases to bring a person to the grave.
Scientists did not take into account exactly what non-traditional practices the desperate patients resorted to: it could be herbal medicine, homeopathy, special diets, and energy crystal treatment. The result was the same everywhere.
The researchers were amazed that the supporters of alternative medicine were not poor and uneducated people from the provinces, but quite the opposite - young educated people with high level income. This only emphasized the destructiveness of alternative methods of treatment, because these patients had a tangible advantage: they were generally healthier, younger, richer. With the effectiveness of alternative methods, their results could be better than in the group that underwent conventional treatment, but this did not happen, experts say.
“It scares me. They were young patients who would have been easy to cure, but instead all sorts of healers gave them snake oil,” said one of the authors of the study, James Yu.
His colleague Skyler Johnson, lead author of the study, who is a practicing oncologist, said that thanks to the work done, medical professionals "now have evidence that the use of alternative medicine methods instead of proven cancer treatments leads to death of patients." "We hope that patients and doctors will use this information when making decisions about treatment," he said.
Scientists hope that the findings will help fight misinformation about the alleged effectiveness of alternative medicine methods. At the very least, patients will be informed about possible consequences. “If the patient makes a decision, being informed about all the possible consequences, he can do anything. We cannot force him to choose something - only advise,” said James Yu.
Bites from venomous snakes are deadly, but there are people who own example prove that every rule has exceptions. American Bill Haast He became famous for opening his own serpentarium in Miami, where he kept rattlesnakes. From his wards, he suffered more than 170 bites in his life, but died at the age of 100 years.
The Haast Serpentarium is perhaps the most famous attraction in Florida. Every year more than 50 thousand tourists visited Haast's performances, they looked with bated breath at the fact that the serpentologist took his wards with his bare hands, not being afraid of bites, and began to milk them.
For many years, Haast tried to prove that by developing immunity to snake venom and using it as a medicine, one could be cured of various diseases, including multiple sclerosis and lupus, arthritis and Parkinson's disease. Haast suggested using a "cocktail" of the venom of five snakes - cobra, water muzzle, krait, mamba and rattlesnake. Needless to say, no state body would approve such experiments.
To develop immunity, Bill Haast regularly made injections containing snake venom, gradually increasing the dose. Bill had been handling snakes his entire adult life, so milking them was commonplace. He started collecting snakes at the age of 16, as soon as he graduated from school, by the age of 19 he was already doing it quite professionally. During the war, Bill served in aviation, he visited South America, Africa and India and, taking the opportunity, brought several snakes to America, including his first cobra. In those years, the law did not yet prohibit the transportation of snakes on an airplane, however, the crew members were not at all happy about the neighborhood with reptiles.
The Serpentarium was founded in 1947. For the first five years, only the Haast family took care of it - himself, his wife and young son. Bill Jr. fell victim to snakes four times and soon completely lost interest in his father's business. Haast himself set a record that got into the Guinness Book: by mid-2008, he had already received 172 bites. This was reminiscent of the absence of several fingers on the hands. One of the cobra bites that Haast received in the 1950s turned out to be critical. Then he went to the hospital, they ordered the strongest vaccine from India for him, but the serpentologist refused to use it and soon recovered himself.
Haast often acted as a blood donor in cases where it was necessary to urgently save patients from snake bites. In total, about 20 lives were saved thanks to him. In the 1950s, Haast donated blood to researchers at the University of Miami to develop a polio vaccine.
In the Haast Serpentarium, everyone could get up close and personal with the snakes. It is worth noting that strict safety rules were introduced after a six-year-old child fell into a hole with a 12-pound crocodile named Cookie in 1977. The incident ended in the death of a child, although before that, for 20 years, the crocodile had not tarnished his reputation. What happened so shocked Haast that the next day he shot the pet.
