Tales of Troubled Times. Tales and stories dedicated to the "Trouble"

V. O. Klyuchevskoy

Review of the study by S. F. Platonov "Old Russian legends and stories about the troubled times of the 17th century as a historical source"

V. O. Klyuchevskoy. Works in eight volumes. Volume VII. Research, reviews, speeches (1866-1890) M., Publishing house of socio-economic literature, 1959 Theme chosen by Mr. Platonov, can be considered risky in some respects. Literary works that could serve as sources for the history of the Time of Troubles are not only numerous, but also very diverse in their literary forms, in place and time of origin, in the views of their compilers on the events described, and finally, in terms of the goals and motives that caused their compilation. . This diversity and abundance of material exposed the researcher to the danger of depriving his study of its proper value and completeness, made it difficult to select and group data, the order of presentation and the choice of the very methods of study. The author did not hide these difficulties from himself, and they were noticeably reflected in his work. Having set himself the task of a "systematic review" of the literary works of the Great Russian literature of the 17th century, devoted to the depiction and discussion of the events of the Time of Troubles, the author, however, himself admits in the preface that he was unable to withstand the "uniform reception" in any general order presentation, nor in the study of individual works. He considered the “chronological system” to be the best system for reviewing his material, but the lack of accurate information about the time of compilation of many legends about the Troubles forced him to abandon this order of presentation. He adopted a more complex division of his material, dividing the monuments he analyzed into three sections, from which one formed works compiled before the end of the Troubles, the other - the most important works the time of Tsar Michael, the third is secondary and later works, and among the secondary ones, the author analyzed one story about the murder of Tsarevich Dimitri, compiled, apparently, also before the end of the Troubles. Moreover, "the author sometimes found it more convenient to give an account in one place about works of different times due to their inner proximity and dependence of one on the other" 1 . Therefore, a review of the works compiled before the end of the Troubles, he began detailed analysis so-called Another story, consisting of parts of different times, and in connection with the fifth part of it, he dismantled the story about the Troubles of the chronograph of the second edition, compiled after the Troubles, which served as its source. There is one inconvenience in such an arrangement of the material: it prevented the author from using to the proper extent precisely that feature of the monuments he analyzed, which could most of all give unity and integrity to his work. He notes in the preface that among the monuments he analyzes, there are often journalistic and moral-didactic works. I think that even more can be said: on all these monuments, more or less clear traces of political overtones are visible, they are all tendentious to a certain extent. In this regard, the Time of Troubles made a noticeable change in Old Russian historiography: it brought the Old Russian narrator about events in his native land out of that epic dispassion into which the Old Russian chronicler tried, although not always successfully, to shut himself up. This is understandable: the Time of Troubles put the Russian people in such an unusual state for them, which, against their will, disturbed their feelings and nerves and through them awakened thought. In this excitement, one can even notice a certain movement: feelings of surprise and anxiety, caused by the first symptoms of the Troubles, then turn into political passions and, finally, when the Troubles have passed, turn into calm political opinions. So, the awakening and development of political thought under the influence of the Time of Troubles is the question that constitutes the center of gravity of the task chosen by the author and the solution of which could impart integrity to his research. In the analysis of some works, he notes which parties they belonged to, what political opinions their compilers held, but due to the order of the material adopted by the author, these marks do not add up to a complete picture. You can even notice the author's inclination to reduce the price that this journalistic tendentiousness of the literary monuments of the Time of Troubles has for the historian. Archpriest Terenty's accusatory story about the vision of 1606 is very curious as an energetic protest against the vices of contemporary Russian society and especially the greed for "vile customs and mores of bad languages" that was revealed in it, nevertheless, the author denies it the significance of a historical source 2. About all the legends compiled before the end of the Troubles, the researcher notes that they "or do not give at all actual material for the historian", or give information that needs strict critical verification 3. There is no historical source that does not need critical verification. Moreover, what to call factual material for the historian? Historical facts are not only incidents; ideas, views, feelings, impressions of people of a certain time - the same facts and very important, in the same way requiring critical study. The significance that the Other Legend acquired in the society of the Time of Troubles, the political role, which was then almost for the first time assigned to the Russian pen, is in itself such important fact, which should be strongly emphasized in a study on the sources of the history of the Time of Troubles. The story of Terenty was presented to the patriarch, by the tsar's order it was publicly read in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral and led to the establishment of a six-day fast throughout the kingdom. The story of the Nizhny Novgorod vision of 1611 went from hand to hand in the first militia near Moscow. King Sigismund himself recognized the annoying power of the Russian patriotic writing directed against him in 1611 and complained to the Moscow boyars that about him then wrote in Rus' 4 . Other gaps in Mr. Platonov, having some connection with the specified. If the narrative writing about the Time of Troubles reflected political parties and opinions, then those who fought, methodological convenience would require that a critical review of this writing explain the origin of these parties and opinions, as well as their significance during the Time of Troubles. Due to the fact that this demand is left unanswered, the historical sources studied by the author are divorced from the historical soil from which they emerged, and his criticism does not exhaust all the material that they give her. Let's take one example. The suppression of the Moscow dynasty was accompanied by an important change in the Moscow state system: the hereditary fatherland of the Danilovichs began to turn into an elective monarchy. How did Russian society in the first half of the 17th century to this change of sovereigns by God's will sovereigns according to the many-rebellious human desire, as the sovereign Moscow publicist of the 16th century put it. Tsar Ivan in a letter sent by him to King Stefan Batory, and whether one or another view of the difference and significance of these two sources of power was included in the programs political parties that time? The author does not raise the question of this, although it is clear from his presentation that one can find something in the writing he analyzes to answer this question. Thus, we encounter in it traces of dissympathy for the electoral authorities. Nizhny Novgorod Vision 161! d. does not want a king appointed by the people "of their own free will"; Filaret's manuscript considers the accession of Prince Vasily Shuisky, who was enthroned by Muscovite adherents without the advice of the whole earth, without the participation of the Zemsky Sobor, to be absolutely correct. Further, the author notes in the preface that the literary nature of the works about the Troubles is very diverse. Among them there are story, or legends, lives, chroniclers, chronographs, visions and one cry. It's all pretty worked out in Old Russian writing Literary forms that differed in the choice of subjects, methods of presentation, and even in the way of understanding the phenomena depicted. These features must be taken into account when critical appraisal works clothed in one or another of these literary forms, especially in one in which phenomena are reflected at the largest angle of refraction. These are, for example, visions, of which quite a lot has been preserved in ancient Russian writing and which made a particularly strong impression on the ancient Russian person. Vision- usually a sharp accusatory sermon with a mysterious atmosphere, caused by the expectation or onset of a public disaster, calling society to repentance and purification, the fruit of an alarmed feeling and piously excited imagination. One would expect the author to express his opinion about these forms, about how criticism should be treated with them, and even indicate how much their stereotyped structure has changed under the influence of new political concepts and trends that publicists of the 17th century carried out in these forms. Unfortunately, in the book of Mr. Platonov we find neither such a judgment, nor such indications, which were all the more necessary because in Time of Troubles and partly under his influence there was a profound change in ancient Russian historiography. The methods of presentation and the worldview of the ancient Russian chroniclers and compilers of "tales" are well known. This worldview and these methods began to noticeably change from the beginning of the 17th century. The author notes interesting news in the monuments he examines. The chronograph's second edition narration of the Time of Troubles is no longer that simple weather list of individual events, mechanically linked by moralistic reflections, which we usually find in ancient Russian chronicles: it is a series of essays and characteristics in which the narrator tries to catch the connection and meaning of events, outstanding features and even the hidden motivations of the actors. The narrator thinks about the natural causes of phenomena, without involving in the human confusion the mysterious forces by which the chronicler directs the life of people and peoples. The historical view is secularized. New methods and tasks of narration encourage the search for new literary forms, exquisite titles. Prince Khvorostinin writes a story about the Time of Troubles under the title: "Words of Days and Tsars", but this story is the same series of general essays and characteristics as the story of a chronograph; from it we learn not so much about faces and events as about how the narrator looked at faces and events. According to the Novgorod Metropolitan Isidore, the clerk Timofeev at the beginning of the reign of Michael is Vremnik; but this is far from being a timepiece of the old chronicle warehouse, but rather a historical and political treatise: its compiler reflects more than tells about what happened. He knows the methods of scientific presentation and the requirements of historical objectivity, and knows how to formulate them; under the clumsy pretentiousness of his exposition, historical ideas and political principles shine through. All such glimpses of political reflection and historical pragmatism, scattered in the tales of the Time of Troubles, could be combined into a special integral essay that would constitute a chapter from the history of Russian historiography, depicting one of the turning points in its development. Such an outline would seem to be demanded by the very task of a study devoted to the critical study of the sources of our history, and it could lead to the excitation of questions not devoid of scientific significance. Let us point out the possibility of one of them. Revealing the reasons for the indicated turning point in the development of Russian historiography, the researcher will inevitably focus on the interest with which Russian chronographs of the 17th century related to the Time of Troubles. Articles about this time, written by the compilers of chronographs themselves or by other writers, occupy a prominent place in the Russian-historical department of these chronographs. Andrey Popov's wonderful research on the chronographs of the Russian edition made it possible to trace the consistency and perseverance with which this department grew in their composition. Initially, the news, borrowed from Russian sources, in these chronographs are timid additions to Byzantine history without an organic connection with it. Then these news are brought into closer connection with Byzantine history, they are not mechanical prefixes to it, but its constituent parts in synchronistic presentation with Byzantine events. In the chronographs of the XVII century. Russian history takes another step forward, steps out of the established framework of the chronograph, or, more precisely, expands them: Since the fall of Byzantium, it breaks its connection with the fate of the latter and continues in a solitary presentation until the reign of Mikhail Fedorovich. The further the composition of the Russian chronograph developed, becoming more and more complicated, the more it expanded. Russian continuation Byzantine chronicle, until, finally, in the so-called chronographs of a special composition, Russian history stood out as an independent and, moreover, dominant department: in the narrative before the fall of Constantinople, Russian news disappears, is pulled out of the presentation of Byzantine history and transferred to the Russian continuation of the chronograph, forming the beginning of a special Russian- historical department, which, gradually expanding, closes the general historical department. In this growth of the Russian-historical department of chronographs, it is permissible to see a reflection of the turn that was taking place in the worldview of Russian scribes who worked on the presentation world history, which ancient Russian people studied using chronographs. What is especially curious is that at the same time as this separation of the Russian-historical department and into the general historical department, which until then was fed almost exclusively by biblical and Byzantine sources, jets from the sources of Western European, Latin chronicles and cosmography pour in with increasing abundance. Thus, the horizons of Russian historical thought were broadened from two sides. Was this change connected with this expansion in Russian historiography? We have seen that the articles about the Time of Troubles in the chronograph of the second edition, compiled soon after the Troubles, were one of the first monuments, if not the first of the monuments, in which both new methods of historical presentation and a new look at historical phenomena are noticeable. To what extent were these methods and this view inspired by acquaintance with new historical sources and new historical measures, which were revealed to the Russian thinker of the 17th century. Polish World Chronicle and Latin cosmography? Here is a question, the study of which, it seems, would not be superfluous in a study on the historiography of the Time of Troubles. But if mr Platonov allowed some gaps in the study of what the monuments he analyzed give for the history of Russian political thought and historiography in the 17th century, but he tried to extract from them everything that he found in them suitable for the "history of external facts" of the Time of Troubles. These monuments are so diverse and so many of them have not yet been published, scattered among the manuscripts of various ancient repositories, that hardly anyone will dare to reproach the author for the incompleteness of his critical review, which he himself admits 6 . However, he treated the handwritten material very carefully: from the list attached to the study, it can be seen that he had to revise more than a hundred manuscripts from different libraries. In the preface, he lists the questions that he posed to himself when studying each monument: he tried "to determine the time of its compilation and indicate the identity of the compiler; to find out the goals by which the compiler was guided and the circumstances under which he wrote; to find the sources of his information and, finally, characterize the approximate degree of general reliability or plausibility of his story" 7 . Such critical program fully corresponds to the main task of the author to indicate what is in the monument suitable for the history of external facts, and the researchers of the Time of Troubles will undoubtedly be grateful to Mr. Platonov for his instructions, which will help them discover the origin and factual content of many of the tales of that time, as well as the degree of confidence they deserve. In analyzing most of the monuments, at least the main ones, the author paid special attention to their composition and sources, and here, thanks to critical sensitivity and careful study and comparison of texts and editions, he managed to reach new and reliable conclusions. Many monuments, such as Another legend And Vremnik clerk Timofeev, have not yet been analyzed in our literature with such thoroughness, as did Mr. Platonov. In general, the careful elaboration of critical bibliographic and bibliographic details is, in our opinion, the strongest side of Mr. Platonov. When reading in his book pages about the life of princes Khvorostinin, Katyrev-Rostovsky and Shakhovsky, attention involuntarily stops at the author’s ability to mosaically select small data scattered from various sources and put them into a single essay, and his habit of accurately identifying the sources from which he draws his information, facilitating the verification of his conclusions, at the same time makes it possible to see what each such page cost him: he picked up in the order books and indicated in the note up to 60 places where the name of Prince I. M. Katyrev-Rostovsky is mentioned, so that on the basis of these references, write in the text of the study 5 lines about the life of Prince Katyrev in 1626-1629. 8 Biographies of the three named writers of the 17th century. can be considered valuable contributions of Mr. Platonov in the biographical dictionary of Russian historiography. All this, given the author's thorough acquaintance with other people's works on the subject of his choice, makes him recognize his research as the fruit of a leisurely, deliberately and clearly carried out work. But, inspiring confidence in the conclusions about the origin, sources and composition of the monuments, the study of Mr. Platonov not always convincing enough in the assessment and characterization of these monuments as historical sources. The reason for this is in some uncertainty of the critical measure applied to them by the researcher. We have already had occasion to notice that the author's criticism does not fully capture the content of the works he analyzes as sources for the history of the Time of Troubles. Basing his assessment on the quality and quantity of "factual material" provided by a monument to a historian, the author does not include in this material the political opinions and tendencies carried out in the monument, considering them only "literary" and not historical facts, and thus confusing or identifying not quite coinciding concepts of a historical fact and a historical event or incident. It is difficult to agree with the author when he speaks of Avr. Palitsyn and deacon I. Timofeev, that both of these writers, "not only describing, but also discussing the era they lived through, often left the role of historians and entered the field of journalistic reasoning", as if to ponder over historical phenomena, describing them, --> means step out of the role of a historian: judgment is not a tendency, and an attempt to understand the meaning of a phenomenon to oneself and others is not propaganda 9 . Some shaky point of view is felt in other judgments of the author. In connection with the fifth Another story he analyzes in detail the articles of the chronograph of the second edition, identical with her, about the events of 1607-1613. 10 He very thoroughly proves the idea, expressed by A. Popov, that these articles belong to the compiler of the chronograph, therefore, they were moved from here to Another story, and not vice versa. But he does not agree with the review of A. Popov, who recognized these articles as "the original integral work of an unknown Russian author", i.e., the compiler of the chronograph of 1617. He does not recognize the integrity of this work, because in it coherent sketches of persons and events are torn apart by incoherent and brief chronicles. But even if we admit that these chronicle notes were inserted into the narrative by the compiler of it, and not by an outside hand, then after all, Mr. Platonov noticed that these insertions are frequent only at the beginning of the narrative, going from 1534, and that the closer the narrator approaches his time, to the beginning of the 17th century, the less brief notes he has and the more connected his story. This means that the narrator, knowing less about the time, which he did not remember, was not able to coherently present the borrowed information. The author, it seems, confuses the integrity of the composition, the belonging of the work to one pen, with the literary harmony of presentation. He also does not recognize the originality of the work, because its compiler "did not just compose his testimony, but was guided by literary sources". It is unlikely that the author wrote here what he wanted to say: he knows very well that being an original historical narrator does not mean compose testimonies not guided by sources; otherwise, a rare historian can be recognized as original. Thus, there does not seem to be sufficient grounds for polemics with A. Popov, especially when the author himself admits that the chronograph's narration being analyzed "has a very noticeable imprint of originality in style and views" 11 . For the same reason, the reader is unlikely to be completely satisfied with the analysis New Chronicler in the author's book. Turning to the analysis of this monument, one of the most important sources for the history of the Time of Troubles, Mr. Platonov remarks that "nothing has been done so far" to shed light on its origins. Unfortunately, even the vacillating considerations of the author do not sufficiently shed light on the origin of the monument. He raises the question: isn't the New Chronicler a collection of data officially collected at the patriarchal court for the history of the Time of Troubles? This question was suggested to the author by Tatishchev's conjecture that the Chronicler was compiled by Patriarch Job or his cell-attendant, as well as by the testimony of Patriarch Hermogenes that he recorded "in the chronicler" some events of his time. Observations on the text of the monument lead Mr. Platonov to the conclusion that the New Chronicler is distinguished by the "internal integrity" of the narrative: he is completely imbued with a unity of view of events, which indicates the work of one author; there is not even a trace of the personal sympathies and antipathies of the compiler in it, which indicates the later origin of the monument, when the immediate impressions of the Time of Troubles had already begun to shine. However, from further observations of the author over the monument, it turned out that the New Chronicler looks at the same events and faces in completely different ways, that he speaks officially and calmly about the same person in one place, and differently in another. Thus, in the Chronicler there is neither unity of view, nor personal dispassion of the compiler, and, consequently, there is no inner integrity. The author explains this by the compiler's excessive dependence on the various sources that he used, his inability to merge "the diverse parts of his collection into a single literary work." All signs of separate legends. "It would seem that all this means only that the New Chronicler is a mechanical stitching together of articles written at different times by different persons, or "a collection of diverse literary and historical material," as the author himself put it. However, after a few pages, reducing the results of his observations, the author refuses to recognize the New Chronicler as a chronicle that was compiled gradually, by the work of several persons, and dwells on the opinion that "according to all indications" it was processed from beginning to end around 1630 and, moreover, by one person. admit that the data he cited "do not categorically resolve the issue of the origin of the monument" 12. He could not resolve this issue, limiting himself to the data of one list of the Chronicler, on which he mainly based his considerations in the belief that this published list "happily" reproduced the original text monument | 3. It is difficult to justify such confidence in the edition, which is known to be very faulty, and it is even more difficult to blame the author for not taking on the really "enormous work" of comparing all the numerous lists of this monument that have been preserved in our ancient repositories. But you can regret it. The lists of the Chronicler differ in significant variations in the text and composition of the monument. The three prints have different beginnings and endings. Of the three lists that accidentally fell into our hands, one is similar to the printed Nikonovsky, the other begins with an annalistic story about the defeat of Novgorod in 1570, and the third - with a list of boyars, "which of them were traitors" from 1534. Perhaps the study lists of the monument would help to clarify its origin, but in the lists of the short edition of the Tale of 1606, an indication of the time of compilation of this legend was found. Finally, it is hardly possible to recognize as firmly established the author's view of the story of the Troubles, included in the well-known Stolyarovsky list of the chronograph. The author agrees with Mr. Markevich, who considers this narrative to be a fairly complete book of private origin, so Mr. Platonov thinks that this monument has hitherto been included in the ranks of literary works only "through a misunderstanding" 14 . So, this is a non-literary and unofficial monument. It may be feared whether there are sufficient grounds for such a verdict. True, in the narration under consideration we often find news, clothed in the form of a discharge record or painting. But it is known how much in the Moscow chronicles of the XV and XVI centuries. detailed extracts from rank books, which does not prevent them from remaining chronicles and even literary works. On the other hand, the news of the annalistic warehouse was sometimes included in the category books for communication and explanation of military marching or court ceremonial paintings. But it is necessary to distinguish a bit book with chronicle inserts from an annals with bit inserts. Both sets retained their typical features in composition and presentation techniques and had specific goals. If news was placed among the discharge paintings that were not directly related to them, revealing the intention of the compiler to depict the general course of affairs, then it was meant to compile not a stationery book for business office information, but a historical, literary story for the edification of an inquisitive reader. There is a lot of such news in the narrative under consideration, and from them, even without discharge extracts, a rather detailed and curious story would have been compiled, at least until the accession of Michael. As for the lack of rhetoric and "any attempt to build a coherent literary exposition" in the unknown narrator, it is not clear why his exposition seems to the author in literary terms below, for example, chronicles according to the Voskresensky List or below the New Chronicler, with whom, we note by the way, he also had common sources: as the Chronicler undoubtedly used discharge paintings, so some news of a non-digit character from an unknown narrator resemble the Chronicler’s story, depicting one and the same moments with similar features. So, there are some reasons to see in the monument under consideration not a book of digits, but a chronicle compiled from various sources, mainly from digit paintings, not without the participation of personal observations and memoirs of the compiler. According to the nature of the main source and the tone of presentation, simple, but at the same time restrained and formal, it is difficult to assume that this chronicle was undertaken on a private initiative, and not on official instructions. It can easily be that, contrary to the opinion of the author, we have here in front of us a monument not only literary, but also official. From the analysis of individual monuments, let's move on to the general results of Mr. Platonov and we will indicate what he has done on the chosen subject and what remains to be done. In the preface to his work, he notes that "a historical-critical study of the tales of the Time of Troubles in their entirety constituted until recently an unfulfilled task in Russian historiography." It can be said without exaggeration that in relation to the early and main legends, the author successfully solved the problem he had assumed and thus filled in one of the noticeable gaps in our historiography: he carefully sorted out the vast and diverse material, for the first time introduced into scientific circulation several little-known monuments, such as Vremnik Timofeev, and successfully unraveled several private issues in the historiography of the Time of Troubles or prepared their resolution. The student of the history of the Time of Troubles will find enough indications in his book to know what each of the main legends about the Time of Troubles can give him and what he should not look for there. to the category of biographical and are not devoid of literary integrity and originality 15 . But later compilations, as well as local legends about the Time of Troubles, are briefly characterized by the author or only listed with an indication of their sources. The incompleteness of this list is justified by the abundance of such monuments and the difficulty of collecting them. Meanwhile, these compilations, compiled in the course of the 17th century, are not devoid of scientific significance in many respects. Firstly, their sheer number shows how long and with what intensity attention was maintained in Russian society to an era so abundant in extraordinary phenomena. Then in them you can find fragments of earlier legends that have not come down to us. Finally, this compilative writing acquaints us with the course of historiography in the 17th century, with its techniques and favorite themes, with the way it learned to use sources and explain historical phenomena. In explanation, I will point to one manuscript (from the library of E. V. Barsov). At its core, this is a chronograph list of the third edition, belonging to the second category of its lists according to the classification of A. Popov 16 . Mr. Platonov rightly noted that in the lists of the chronograph of the XVII century. it is not possible to establish any exact types of compilations because each manuscript is different 17 . The manuscript we are talking about represents an attempt to remake the last part of the chronograph of the third edition, changing the composition that it has in the lists of the second category. It begins directly with the 151st chapter, a story about the invasion of the Crimean Khan on Moscow in 1521, but not because the previous chapters were lost in it - they did not exist. The first pages of the list are occupied by a detailed table of contents, which exactly corresponds to the chapters placed in it. In the story about the Khan's invasion, the compiler inserted visions of the "righteous hunter" Vasily the Blessed and other pious people of the city of Moscow, described in his own way the last days and the death of Grand Duke Vasily, guided by the well-known chronicle legend 18. In general, the story about the times of Grand Duke Vasily and Tsar Ivan is more detailed here than in the lists of the 2nd category of the third edition of the chronograph. The Time of Troubles is described in these lists according to the second edition of the chronograph, Another story And legend A. Palitsyna; in our manuscript we find extracts from Legends, hedgehog, from the Solovetsky chronograph and some sources unknown to us 19 . So, in the story of the famine under Tsar Boris, we find curious features that we do not find in other legends about that time. From one detail, one can guess where this alteration was drawn up: the charter on the accession of Vasily Shuisky is given here according to its list, which was sent to Tver to the governor Z. Tikhmenev, with a note of June 19, 114. 20 Having collected similar indications of the chronograph lists, it will be possible to to judge where and how they were processed in the 17th century. tales of the Troubles. Particularly in need of replenishment is the review of local legends made by Mr. Platonov 21 . These stories serve an important addition major common sources for the history of the Troubles. So, in the New chronicler there is a brief story about the defeat of Lisovsky near Yuryevets 22 . In the lists of the lengthy edition of the life of St. Macarius Zheltovodsky we find a curious detailed story about this episode. However, these gaps do not prevent us from recognizing the book of Mr. Platonov a valuable contribution to Russian historiography, well deserving of the prize sought by the author. Such a price is attached to the essay of Mr. Platonov to the highest degree serious attitude the author to his task, a thorough study of the material, critical observation and the novelty of many conclusions.

COMMENTS

The seventh volume of the Works of V. O. Klyuchevsky includes his individual monographic studies, reviews and reviews, created during the period of the scientist's creative flourishing - from the late 1860s to the early 1890s. If the "Course of Russian History" makes it possible to trace the general theoretical views of V. O. Klyuchevsky on the course of the Russian historical process, then the works published in the seventh and eighth volumes of his Works give an idea of ​​​​V. O. Klyuchevsky as a researcher. The studies of V. O. Klyuchevsky, placed in the seventh volume of the Works, are mainly connected with two problems - with the position of the peasants in Russia and the origin of serfdom ("The serf question on the eve of its legislative excitation", "Law and fact in the history of the peasant question", "The origin of serfdom in Russia", "The poll tax and the abolition of servility in Russia", "Review of the study by V.I. On the issue of Russia's economic development (" Economic activity Solovetsky Monastery in the White Sea Territory", "Russian ruble of the XVI-XVIII centuries. in its relation to the present "). Primary attention to issues of a socio-economic nature and their formulation by V. O. Klyuchevsky was a new phenomenon in Russian bourgeois historiography of the second half of the 19th century. In his sketches for a speech at a debate, dedicated to the protection V. I. Semevsky dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Science, V. O. Klyuchevsky wrote: “Is the peasant question only a question of limiting and abolishing serfdom? .. The question of serfdom before Alexander II was a question of its adaptation to the interests of the state and hostel conditions" (See p. 483.). V. O. Klyuchevsky, in his review of Semevsky’s work, noted the complexity and versatility of the peasant question in Russia and reproached the author for the fact that “weakness historical criticism in the study comes from a lack of a historical view of the subject under study "(See p. 427.). Responding to the topical issues of the post-reform period, one way or another connected with the peasant question and the reform of 1861, serfdom, V. O. Klyuchevsky traced the stages in the development of serfdom in Russia, the reasons that both gave rise to it and led to its abolition, characteristic phenomena in the boyar, landowner, monastic economy. In his interpretation of this problem, V. O. Klyuchevsky went much further than the Slavophiles and representatives of the "state school", - first of all, its most important representative B. N. Chicherin, according to whose thought the whole history community development in Russia it consisted in "enslavement and emancipation of estates", carried out by the state depending on its needs. V. O. Klyuchevsky, on the contrary, believed that serfdom in Russia was determined by a private law moment that developed on the basis of the economic debt of peasants to landowners; the state only legislatively sanctioned the developing relations. The scheme proposed by V. O. Klyuchevsky was as follows. primary form serfdom in Rus' (See p. 241.) was servility in its various forms, which developed for a number of reasons, including as a result of personal service earlier free man under certain economic conditions. Later, with the development of large-scale private landownership, the peasantry, according to V. O. Klyuchevsky, as a "free and passable tenant of someone else's land" gradually lost the right to transfer either due to the impossibility of repaying the loan received for arranging, or as a result of preliminary voluntary refusal from leaving the leased land for the loan received. Thus, the strength of the peasant was determined not by his attachment to the land as a means of production, but by his personally obligated relationship with the landowner. This led to the conclusion that serfdom is "a set of serf relations based on fortress, known private act of possession or acquisition" (See p. 245.). The state, in order to meet its own needs, only "allowed the extension to the peasants of the previously existing serfdom of the servile disposition, in spite of the land attachment of the peasants, if only the latter had ever been established by it" (See 246.) Tracing in parallel the path of development of servitude in Russia, its original forms and the process of development of serfdom, Klyuchevsky sought to show how the legal norms of servitude gradually spread to the peasantry as a whole and in the course of the enslavement of the peasants, servitude, in turn, lost its specific features and merged with the enslaved peasantry. V. O. Klyuchevsky attributed the development of serfdom to the 16th century. Until that time, in his opinion, the peasantry, which was not the owner of the land, was a free tenant of privately owned land. From the second half of the XV century. in Rus', due to an economic turning point, the reasons for which for Klyuchevsky remained unclear, landowners, extremely interested in working hands, develop the agricultural farms of their bonded serfs and intensively attract free people to their land; the latter "could not support their economy without the help of foreign capital," and their number "grew enormously" (See pp. 252, 257, 280.). As a result, the growing indebtedness of the peasants led to the fact that the landowners voluntarily began to extend the norms of servile law to the peasants who owed money, and serfdom for peasants was a new combination of legal elements that were part of various types of servitude, but "adapted to the economic and state situation of rural population" (See pp. 271, 272, 338, 339.). “Without encountering in the legislation the slightest trace of the serfdom of the peasants, one can feel that the fate of the peasant liberty has already been decided apart from the state legislative institution, which had to formalize and register this decision, imperatively dictated by historical law, at the appropriate time,” wrote V. O Klyuchevsky, seeing in the loss of the right of transition by many peasants the "cradle of serfdom" (See pp. 280, 278, 383, 384.). "In the circle of land relations, all kinds of servility are already late XVII V. began to merge into one common concept serf man.""This explains the legal indifference with which the landowners in the second half of the 17th century exchanged yard serfs, full and indentured, for peasants, and peasants for backyard people" (See pp. 389--390, 389.). This process of merging was completed with the introduction of the poll tax under Peter I, and the will of the landowners turned into state law. The indicated scheme of V. O. Klyuchevsky, further developed by M. A. Dyakonov, for its time had unconditionally positive value. Despite the fact that in his monographic works on the history of serfdom in Russia, Klyuchevsky, in his own words, limited himself to the study of legal aspects in the development of serfdom, the main place in Klyuchevsky's scheme was occupied by an economic factor independent of the will of the government. Klyuchevsky caught the connection between servility (bondage) and serfdom, gave interesting characteristic various categories of servility that existed in Russia until the 18th century, and tried to reflect the order of the emerging relations between peasants and landowners. But, focusing on the analysis of the reasons for the enslavement of the peasantry to private law relations and considering loan records as the only documents that determined the loss of independence of the peasants, Klyuchevsky not only underestimated the role of the feudal state as an organ of the class rule of the feudal lords, but also did not recognize that the establishment of serfdom was a consequence of development of the system of feudal socio-economic relations. In Soviet historical literature, the question of the enslavement of the peasants was the subject of a major study by Academician B. D. Grekov (See. V. D. Grekov, Peasants in Rus' from ancient times to the 17th century, book. I - II, M. 1952 - 1954.) and a number of works of other Soviet historians (See L. V. Cherepnin, Actual material as a source on the history of the Russian peasantry of the 15th century, "Problems of Source Studies". Sat. IV, M. 1955, pp. 307--349; his own"From the history of the formation of the class of the feudal-dependent peasantry in Rus'", "Historical Notes", Vol. 56, pp. 235--264; V. I. Koretsky, From the history of the enslavement of peasants in Russia at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th century, "History of the USSR" No 1, 1957, pp. 161-191.). For the history of the preparation of the reform of 1861, two articles by V. O. Klyuchevsky devoted to the analysis of the writings of Yu. In these articles, he shows, not without irony, that even "sincere and conscientious" noblemen public figures, when work began on the preparation of the Regulations of 1861, remained in the positions of "ideas and events" of the first half of the 19th century. and assumed the provision of land to the peasants to be placed within the framework of a "voluntary" agreement between the landowners and the peasants. To characterize the scientific interests of V. O. Klyuchevsky, it should be noted that he devoted his first large monographic work "Economic activity of the Solovetsky Monastery in the White Sea Territory", published in 1866, to the history of colonization and the economy of monasteries, which he later developed and generalized in the second part of the "Course of Russian History". In this work, unconditional attention deserves the history of the emergence of the monastery economy, "the curious process of concentration in the hands of the Solovetsky brotherhood of vast and numerous land plots in the White Sea" (See p. 14.), which passed to the monastery as a result of purely economic transactions - mortgage, sale etc. The latest detailed study of land ownership and the economy of the patrimony of the Solovetsky Monastery belongs to the pen of A. A. Savich, who comprehensively examined the acquisitive activity of this largest northern Russian feudal lord of the 15th-17th centuries. (Cm. A. A. Savich, Solovetsky votchina XV-XVII centuries, Perm 1927.) The article "Pskov Disputes" (1877), devoted to some issues of ideological life in Rus' XV-XVI centuries, is connected with Klyuchevsky's many years of work on the ancient Russian lives of saints. This article of Klyuchevsky arose in the conditions of the intensified in the second half of the 19th century. controversy between the dominant Orthodox Church and old believers. The article contains material about the futility of medieval disputes on church issues and about the rights of church administration in Rus'. Until now, another work by V. O. Klyuchevsky "The Russian ruble of the 16th-18th centuries in its relation to the present" has fully retained its scientific significance (Verification of Klyuchevsky's observations on the value of the ruble in the first half of the 18th century, undertaken recently by B. B. Kafengauz, showed the correctness of his main conclusions (See. V. V. Kafengauz, Essays on the domestic market of Russia first half of XVIII in., M. 1958, pp. 187, 189, 258, 259). Based on a subtle analysis of sources, this work testifies to the source study skill of V. O. Klyuchevsky; the conclusions of this work on the comparative ratio of monetary units in Russia since the beginning of the 16th century. until the middle of the 18th century. in their relation to monetary units second half of the 19th century necessary to elucidate many economic phenomena in the history of Russia. Two works by V. O. Klyuchevsky, published in the seventh volume, are associated with the name of the great Russian poet A. S. Pushkin: "Speech delivered at the solemn meeting of Moscow University on June 6, 1880, on the day the monument to Pushkin was opened" and "Eugene Onegin ". V. O. Klyuchevsky owns a phrase brilliant in form: “You always want to say too much about Pushkin, you always say too much and you never say everything that follows” (See p. 421.). In his articles about Pushkin, V. O. Klyuchevsky emphasized Pushkin's deep interest in history, which gave "a coherent chronicle of our society in the faces of more than 100 years" (See p. 152.). Klyuchevsky sought to give a generalizing character to the images of people of the 18th century outlined in various works of Pushkin, to explain the conditions in which they arose, and on the basis of these images to draw a vivid picture of the noble society of that time. Such an approach to the work of A. S. Pushkin cannot but be recognized as correct. But in his interpretation of the images of the noble society of the 18th century, as in the fifth part of the "Course of Russian History", V. O. Klyuchevsky considered the culture of Russia of that time too one-sidedly, not seeing advanced trends in it. The articles placed in the seventh volume of the Works of V. O. Klyuchevsky, as a whole, are a valuable historiographic heritage on a number of important issues in the history of Russia. A more or less complete list of the works of V. O. Klyuchevsky, published from 1866 to 1914, was compiled by S. A. Belokurov ("List of printed works of V. O. Klyuchevsky. Readings in the society of Russian history and antiquities at Moscow University", book I, M. 1914, pp. 442--473.) The omissions in this list are insignificant (There are no mentions of the work of P. Kirchman "History of public and private life", M. 1867. This book was published in the processing of Klyuchevsky, who sections about Russian life were rewritten.The review of "Great Cheti-Minei", published in the newspaper "Moskva", 1868, No. 90, dated June 20 (republished in the Third Collection of Articles), was not noted. O. Klyuchevsky according to the report of A. V. Prakhov on the frescoes of St. Sophia Cathedral in Kiev at a meeting of the Moscow Archaeological Society on December 20, 1855 ("Antiquities. Proceedings of the Archaeological Society", vol. XI, issue Ill, M. 1887, p. 86), speech in November 1897 on the report of V.I. Kholmogorov "On the question of the time of creation of scribe books" ("Antiquities. Proceedings of the Archaeographic Commission, vol. I, M. 189S, p. 182). On April 24, 1896, V. O. Klyuchevsky delivered a speech "On the educational role of St. Stephen of Perm" (Readings of the OIDR, 1898, book II, protocols, p. 14), September 26, 1898 - a speech about A. S. Pavlov (Readings of the OIDR, 1899, vol. II, protocols, p. 16), spoke on April 13, 1900 on the report of P.I. Ivanov "On the redistribution of the peasants in the north" ("Antiquities. Proceedings of the Archaeographic Commission", vol. II, issue II, M. 1900, p. 402), on March 18, 1904, delivered a speech on the activities of the OIDR (Readings of the OIDR, 1905, book II, protocols, p. 27), On the publication of protocol records of these speeches by V. O. Klyuchevskogr S. A. Belokurov does not provide any information. He also does not mention the article by V. O. Klyuchevsky "M. S. Korelin" (died January 3, 1894), published in the appendix to the book: M. S. Korelin, Essays from history philosophical thought in the Renaissance, "The Worldview of Francesco Petrarca", M. 1899, pp. I-XV.). Some works of V. O. Klyuchevsky, published in 1914 and later, were not included in the list of works by S. A. Belokurov (among them are "Reviews and answers. The third collection of articles", M. 1914, reprinted, M. 1918; reprinted the first two collections of articles, "The Course of Russian History", "History of Estates", "The Legend of Foreigners", "Boyar Duma", etc.) (See also: "Letters of V. O. Klyuchevsky to P. P. Gvozdev". In Sat .: "Proceedings of the All-Russian Public Library named after Lenin and the State Rumyantsev Museum", issue V, M. 1924; an abridged record of Klyuchevsky's speeches at the Peterhof meeting in June 1905 is given in the book: "Nicholas II. Materials for characterizing the personality and reign", M. 1917, pp. 163--164, 169--170, 193-196, 232--233.). Most of the articles, studies and reviews of V. O. Klyuchevsky were collected and published in three collections. The first one is entitled "Experiments and Research", was published back in 1912 (again in 1915) (It included studies: "Economic activity of the Solovetsky Monastery", "Pskov disputes", "Russian ruble of the XVI-XVIII centuries. in its relation to the present", "The origin of serfdom in Russia", "The poll tax and the abolition of servility in Russia". "The composition of the representation at the zemstvo councils of ancient Russia".). The second collection appeared in print in 1913 and was called "Essays and Speeches" (The collection contained articles: "S. M. Solovyov", "S. M. Solovyov as a teacher", "In memory of S. M. Solovyov", " Speech at the solemn meeting of Moscow University on June 6, 1880, on the day of the opening of the monument to Pushkin", "Eugene Onegin and his ancestors", "Promotion of the Church to the success of the Russian civil law and order", "Sadness", "Good people of ancient Rus'", "I. N. Boltin", "The Meaning of St. Sergius for the Russian people and state", "Two upbringings", "Memories of N. I. Novikov and his time", "Undergrowth Fonvizin", "Empress Catherine II", "Western influence and church schism in Russia in the 17th century", "Peter the Great Among His Collaborators".) Finally, a year later (in 1914), the third collection was published - "Answers and Reviews" (Including "Great Menaias-Chetias collected by the All-Russian Metropolitan Macarius", "New Research on the history of ancient Russian monasteries", "Analysis of the work of V. Ikonnikov", "Amendment to one anti-criticism. Answer to V. Ikonnikov", "Manuscript library of V. M. Undolsky", "The Church in relation to the mental development of ancient Russia", "Analysis of works A. Gorchakov", "Alleluia and Paphnutius", "Academic review of the work of A. Gorchakov", "Doctoral dispute of Subbotin at the Moscow Theological Academy", "Analysis of the book by D. Solntsev", "Analysis of the work of N. Suvorov", "The Serf Question on the eve of its legislative initiation", "Review of the book of S. Smirnov", "G. Rambaud - a historian of Russia". "Law and Fact in the History of the Peasant Question, Answer to Vladimirsky-Budanov", "Academic Review of Prof. Platonov's Research", "Academic Review of Chechulin's Research", "Academic Review of N. Rozhnov's Research" and translation of the book review Th. V. Bernhardt, Geschichte Russlands und der europaischen Politik in den Jahren 1814--1837). All three collections of articles were republished in 1918. The texts of V. O. Klyuchevsky's works in this volume are reproduced from collections of his articles or from autographs and journal publications when the articles were not included in collections of his works. The texts are published according to the rules set forth in the first volume of the "Works of V. O. Klyuchevsky". References to archival sources in the published works of Klyuchevsky are unified, but with handwritten material do not match. Tom goes out under the general supervision of an academician M. N. Tikhomirova, text prepared and commented V. A. Aleksandrov And A. A. Zimin.

REVIEW ON THE RESEARCH OF S. F. PLATONOV "OLD RUSSIAN TALES AND STORIES ABOUT THE TIME OF TROUBLES OF THE XVII CENTURY AS A HISTORICAL SOURCE"

V. O. Klyuchevsky's review of the study by S. F. Platonov "Old Russian legends and stories about the Time of Troubles of the 17th century as a historical source" (St. Petersburg, 1888) was first published in the book: "Report on the 31st awarding of awards to Count Uvarov ", St. Petersburg. 1890, pp. 53-66, and ed. SPb. 1890, pp. 1--14. Reprinted in book: V. O. Klyuchevsky,

Russian literature is part of Russian history,

it reflects Russian reality, but also constitutes

one of its most important aspects. Without Russian literature

it is impossible to imagine Russian history and, of course,

Russian culture.

D.S. Likhachev

The events of the Time of Troubles are reflected in the works of many authors. Historical songs and tales, novels and stories, short stories and essays, poems and plays are the most common genres of literature about the Troubles. These works are distinguished by a bright intense action, an epic depiction of characters and events, a clear and expressive language. Despite their uniqueness, they are united by the desire to build fictional story about the past based on a deep study of various sources.

219. "Another legend" // Troubles in the Muscovite state: Russia began XVII centuries in the notes of contemporaries / comp.: A.I. Pliguzov, I.A.Tikhonyuk; intro. Art. IN AND. Buganova; post-last A.I. Pliguzova. - M.: Sovremennik, 1989. - S. 21-59.

The name of this work was given by the historian I.D. Belyaev in 1853 to distinguish it from the “Tale” by A. Palitsyn. « Another story" - a work composed of once independent literary works and documents of the Time of Troubles, is a remarkable evidence of the historical self-awareness of the 20s of the 17th century.

220. Chronicle book attributed to Prince I.M. Katyrev-Rostovsky // XI- XVIIcenturies: textbook. allowance / comp. N.K. Gudziy. - Ed. 6th, rev. - M.: Uchpedgiz, 1955. - S. 344.

The book, written in 1626, for the first time gives a complete description of the main events of the Time of Troubles. It begins with a short story about the reign of Ivan the Terrible and brings the story to the election of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov to the kingdom. At the end of the book, characteristics and portraits of the Moscow tsars, Xenia Godunova and False Dmitry I, are given.

221. "Moscow Chronicle" Konrad Bussov // Troubles in the Muscovite state: Russia began XVII century in the notes of contemporaries / comp.: A.I. Pliguzov, I.A.Tikhonyuk; intro. Art. IN AND. Buganova; post-last A.I. Pliguzova. - M.: Sovremennik, 1989. - S. 238-403.

K. Bussov, a native of Germany, was abandoned by fate to Russia in 1601 and spent eleven years here. Having not achieved success in the military field, he decided to become famous as a writer. In 1612, yesterday's mercenary wrote the work "The Troubled State of the Moscow State", which went down in history as the "Moscow Chronicle". Bussov's work is saturated with information he received from numerous Russian interlocutors, and is remarkable for a mass of details that are absent in other sources. In his "Chronicle" there are noble heroes, knights and monarchs.

The Moscow Chronicle is the most reliable of all foreign writings about the Time of Troubles at the beginning of the 17th century.

222. A new story about the glorious Russian kingdom // Reader on ancient Russian literatureXI- XVIIcenturies: textbook. allowance / comp. N.K. Gudziy. - Ed. 6th, rev. - M.: Uchpedgiz, 1955. - S. 306-314.

"New Tale" - a journalistic propaganda appeal. Written in late 1610 - early 1611, at the most intense moment of the struggle, when Moscow was captured by Polish troops. Addressing "people of all ranks", the story called them to take active steps against the invaders.

223. Lamentation for the Captivity and the Final Destruction of the Muscovite State // Reader on Ancient Russian Literature XI- XVIIcenturies: textbook. allowance / comp. N.K. Gudziy. - Ed. 6th, rev. - M.: Uchpedgiz, 1955. - S. 314-316.

"Lament" was written in 1612, shortly after the burning of Moscow and the capture of Smolensk. The author seeks to find out the reasons that led to the "fall of high Russia".

224. The story of the death of Prince Mikhail Vasilievich Skopin-Shuisky// Reader on ancient Russian literatureXI- XVIIcenturies: textbook. allowance / comp. N.K. Gudziy. - Ed. 6th, rev. - M.: Uchpedgiz, 1955. - S. 316-323.

The story tells about the sudden death and burial of an outstanding commander of the Time of Troubles, who glorified himself by victories over the troops of False Dmitry II.

225. Boris Godunov: [historical song] // Russian folklore: a book for students and teachers / comp., commentary, reference, method. materials M.A. Krasnova. - M.: AST Publishing House LLC; “Publishing house “Olimp”, 2001. - S. 240. - (School of classics).

226. Minin and Pozharsky: [historical song] // Russian historical song: [collection] / entry. Art., comp., note. L.I.Emelyanova. - L .: Owls. writer, 1990. - S. 137-139. - (The poet's library. Founded by M. Gorky. Small series. Ed. 4th).

227. Mikhail Skopin (As it was in the one hundred and twenty-seventh year; Something else happened in Moscow): [historical songs] // Historical songs. Ballads / comp., prepared. texts, intro. Art., comment. S.N. Azbelev. - M.: Sovremennik, 1991. - S. 257-264. - (Treasures of Russian folklore).

228. Lamentation of Xenia Godunova: [historical song] // Historical songs. Ballads / comp., prepared. texts, intro. Art., comment. S.N. Azbelev. - M.: Sovremennik, 1991. - S. 249-251. - (Treasures of Russian folklore).

229. Skopin-Shuisky: [historical song] // Hearts from strong damask steel: [collection] / ed.-comp. T.A. Sokolova; foreword D.M. Balashova; dictionary, commentary S.V. Ilyinsky. - M.: Patriot, 1990. - S. 525-530. - (faithful sons of the Fatherland).

A historical song is a kind of chronicle told by the people themselves. The songs of the Time of Troubles, taking shape in the course of events, played an agitational role. It was a kind of artistic journalism, calling for a fight, reflecting the ideas, ideas, views of the Russian people, and inevitably using the legends, rumors and rumors of that time for its own purposes.

Almost all the main moments of the Time of Troubles are somehow reflected in the songs.

230. Veltman, E. The Adventure of Prince Gustav Irikovich, the groom of Princess Xenia Godunova / E. Veltman; publ., foreword and note. A.P. Bogdanov. – M.: “Mol. guard”, 1992. – 480 p.

The proposed historical novel presents a broad picture of the historical events of the second half of the 16th - early 17th centuries. Many interesting pages are dedicated to Ksenia Godunova.

231. “Let all the Fatherlands burn with salvation ...”: [repertoire-thematic collection] / comp. K.A. Kokshenev. – M.: Sov. Russia, 1990. - 128 p. - (B-chka to help amateur art. No. 13. Sons of the Fatherland. Issue. 2).

About the glorious men of Russia - Prince Dmitry Pozharsky and layman Kozma Minin, who with their valor and honor hold an unquenchable fire of memory in the hearts of their descendants. Of particular interest to the reader are the monologues from the drama by S.N. Glinka "Minin"; chapters from the book by E.A. Tikhomirov “Minin and Pozharsky, or the Liberation of Moscow from the Poles in 1612”; scenes from the work of G.R. Derzhavin Pozharsky, or the Liberation of Moscow.

232. Dmitriev, I.I. Liberation of Moscow: [poem] / I.I. Dmitriev // Complete collection of poems / entry. Art., prepared. text and notes. G.P. Makogonenko. - L .: Leningrad. otd. publishing house "Owls. writer", 1967. - S. 82-87. - (Series "Poet's Library". Founded M. Gorky).

233. Zagoskin, M.N. Yuri Miloslavsky, or Russians in 1612: a historical novel in three parts / M.N. Zagoskin; post-last and note. Vl. Muraviev. – M.: Mosk. worker, 1981. - 284 p.

The action of the novel takes place at a time when the people's militia was assembled under the leadership of Minin and Pozharsky, and the Polish-Lithuanian invaders were expelled from Moscow.

234. Ostrovsky, A.N. Kozma Zakharyich Minin, Sukhoruk / A.N. Ostrovsky // Full. coll. op. T.3. Plays. 1862-1864 / comp. volumes G.I. Vladykin. - M .: State publishing house of the artist. lit., 1950. - S. 7-245.

The play reproduces the events of the beginning of the 17th century. The playwright portrays one of the leaders of the people's militia as a fiery patriot, a fighter for the unity of the Russian land.

235. Pushkin, A.S. Boris Godunov / A.S. Pushkin // Dramatic Works. Prose / comp., postscript author. to prose, comment. E.A. Maymin; postscript author. to dramas by S.M. Bondy. - M .: Education, 1984. - S. 5 -72.

236. Rostopchina, E.P. Visiting the Moscow Armory: [poem] / E.P. Rostopchina // Queens of the Muses: Russian poets X IX - early XX centuries: [collection] / comp., author introd. Art. and comment. V.V. Uchenov. - M.: Sovremennik, 1989. - S. 85 - 86.

In her patriotic poem, the famous Russian poetess of the 19th century calls to honor the memory of the savior of Russia, Prince Dmitry Pozharsky.

237. Ryleev, K. Boris Godunov. Demetrius the Pretender: [thoughts]/ K. Ryleev // Works / comp. G.A. Kolosova; intro. Art. and note. A.M. Peskov. - M .: Pravda, 1983. - S. 167 - 173.

N.M. Karamzin. They represent a large cycle of poems on the themes of Russian history, in which the reader is confronted with images of Russian historical figures.

238. Tolstoy, A. K. The night before the attack: [poem]/ A. K. Tolstoy // Collection. op. in 4 volumes. T. 1 / comp. and general ed.I.G. Yampolsky. - M .: "Pravda", 1980. - S. 143 - 146.

239. Tolstoy, A.K. Night before the attack: [poem] / A.K. Tolstoy // Russian writersXIXcentury about Sergiev Posad. Ch.IIIIV-XX centuries about Sergiev Posad” / Yu.N. Palagin.- Sergiev Posad, LLC "Everything for You - Moscow Region", 2004. -C. 247 -248.

A poem about the siege of the Trinity - Sergius Monastery.

240. Tolstoy, A.K. Death of Ivan the Terrible. Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich. Tsar Boris: drama trilogy/ A.K. Tolstoy // Collected works. in 4 volumes. V.3 / comp. and general ed. I.G. Yampolsky. - M .: "Pravda", 1980. - 528 p.

Tolstoy turned to those times when the Russian state was shaken by internal cataclysms, when the ancient dynasty, and Russia found itself on the threshold of the Time of Troubles. The focus is on the personalities of the three monarchs, the psychology of individual characters with their inner passions.

241. Borodin, L. “We must survive if the Troubles end” / L. Borodin // Motherland. - 2005. - No. 11. - S. 103-107.

242. Borodin, L. The Queen of Troubles: a story / L. Borodin // Russian Troubles. - M.: Publishing house "Chronicler", 2001. - S. 7-162. – (The world of modern prose).

The book vividly and figuratively tells about the life of Marina Mnishek - the wife of False Dmitry I, and then False Dmitry II.

243. Voloshin, M.A. Dmetrius - Emperor (1591-1613) / M.A.pp. 126-128.

Poem about False Dmitry I.

244. Voloshin, M.A. Writing about the kings of Moscow / M.A. Voloshin // Poems. Articles. Memoirs of contemporaries / comp., entry. Art., preparation of the text and comments. Z.D. Davydova, V.P. Kupchenko; ill. and designed N.G. Peskova. - M.: Pravda, 1991. - pp.123-126.

In poems from the collection "Burning Bush" poetic portraits of Boris and Ksenia Godunov, False Dmitry I, Marina Mnishek, Vasily Shuisky and others are given.

245. Karavaeva, A.A. On Mount Makovtse: [story] / A. Karavaeva // Selected Works. In 2 vols. T. 1. Golden beak; On Mount Makovtse: stories. Stories / introductory article, note. L. Skorino; comp. V. Karavaeva; prepared text by S. Gladysheva. - M.: Artist. lit., 1983. - pp. 200-425.

The story takes place at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Using documentary sources, the author draws a vivid picture of the defense of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. Real characters live and act alongside fictional characters. historical figures Cast: Nikon Shilov, Pyotr Slota, Ivan Sueta, Avraamiy Palitsyn, Ksenia Godunova. Of particular interest to the residents of Sergiev Posad, as it describes the events that took place directly in these places.

246. Kornyushin, L. In the time of unrest: a historical novel-chronicle/ L. Kornyushin. - M .: Military Publishing House, 1992. - 447 p.

The historical novel covers the events of the late 16th - early 17th centuries. The author truthfully portrayed the events of those turbulent years, drew memorable images of statesmen - B. Godunov, V. Shuisky and others, as well as representatives of the people - from archers to "dashing" people.

247. Kostylev, V.I. Minin and Pozharsky: a story / V.I. Kostylev; foreword A.N. Sakharov. – M.: Det. lit., 2006. - 87 p.: ill.

The story tells about two glorious figures of the Time of Troubles.

248. Muravyova, M. “Monk and Cellar Trinity Averky”: [poem] / M. Muravyova // Poets of Sergiev Posad: XX century: an anthology / comp.: N.A. Bukharin, I.F. Kudryavtsev, V.N. Sosin. - Sergiev Posad: "Everything for You", 1999. - S. 328 - 329.

The poem of the Sergiev Posad poetess is dedicated to Avraamy Palitsyn.

249. Palagin, Yu.N. Foreign writers XVI-XIX centuries about Sergiev Posad. Ch.II: from the book “Russian and foreign writers XIV-XX centuries about Sergiev Posad” / Yu.N. Palagin. - Sergiev Posad, LLC "Everything for You - Moscow Region", 2001. - 343 p.

The proposed book is interesting because in it different authors from different centuries and countries provide an opportunity to look at the history of Russia from the outside. Undoubted interest among readers will be the story of the "Diary of Marina Mniszek" and "The Moscow Chronicle" by Konrad Bussov.

250. Palagin, Yu.N. Writers and scribes XIV- XVIIIcenturies inSergiev Posad. Part 1 / Yu.N. Palagin. - Sergiev Posad, 1997. -240 p.

About the centuries-old dramatic work of Russian ascetics to create a national culture. Among the people about whom the book tells are Abraham Palitsyn, Dionysius Zobninovsky and other eyewitnesses of the Time of Troubles.

251. Radzinsky, E.S. Blood and ghosts of the Russian Troubles / E.S. Radzinsky. – M.: Vagrius, 2000. – 368 p.

252. Radimov, P. Lavra. Siege of the Lavra. Peasant Vanity. Godunov's grave: [poems] / P. Radimov // Poets of Sergiev Posad: XX century: an anthology / comp.: N.A. Bukharin, I.F. Kudryavtsev, V.N. Sosin. - Sergiev Posad, "Everything for You", 1999. - S. 24-26.

253. Razumov, V.A. Trinity inmates: a historical story/ V.A. Razumov. - M .: "Det. lit.", 1981. - 190 p.: ill.

The book is addressed primarily to young readers. The author writes vividly and figuratively about the heroism and valor of the Russian people who defended the Trinity Monastery under the onslaught of a fierce enemy. "Saved monastery not with solid walls, but with ordinary people”,- these words can express the main idea of ​​the story.

254. Sergienko, K.K. Xenia: a novel / K.K. Sergienko; rice. Y. Ivanova; [last A.N. Sakharov]. – M.: Det. lit., 1987. - 319 p.: ill. – (Library series).

The author vividly and accurately managed to show the tragic throwing of people during the Time of Troubles. In the center of the novel is the image of Ksenia Godunova, who, at the time of difficult trials, managed to maintain her life principles and not lose herself.

255. Skvortsov, K. Time of Troubles: plays / K. Skvortsov; engravings by V. Noskov // Roman-newspaper. - 1997. - No. 12. - S. 2–58.

256. Skorino, L. On Mount Makovtse / L. Skorino // Karavaeva A. Selected works: in 2 vols. V.1. Golden beak. On Mount Makovtse: stories. Stories. – M.: Artist. lit. , 1988. - P.593-589.

About the history of the creation of the story by A. Karavaeva "On Mount Makovets".

257. Tolstoy A.N. The Tale of the Time of Troubles (from the handwritten book of Prince Turenev) / A.N. Tolstoy // Selected works / editorial board: G. Belenky, P. Nikolaev, A. Puzikov; intro. Art. and note. S. Serov. – M.: Artist. lit., 1990. - S. 40-56. - (B-ka teachers).

258. Tolstoy, A.N. The Tale of the Time of Troubles (from the handwritten book of Prince Turenev) / A.N. Tolstoy // Meetings with history: popular science essays / comp. I.L. Andreev; intro. Art. I.D. Kovalchenko. – M.: Mol. guard, 1980. - S. 136-141.

259. Fedorov, Yu.I. Boris Godunov: historical novel / Yu.I. Fedorov; artistic S. Astrakhantsev. - M.: Russian word, 1994. - 574 p.

260. Tsvetaeva, M.I. Marina / M.I. Tsvetaeva // Poetry and prose / comp. A.A. Saakyants; formal. artistic E. Enenko. - M .: Eksmo Publishing House, 2002.- pp. 125-127.

The poem is dedicated to Marina Mnishek.

261. Chikov, A.F. Peasant Vanity: [poem] / A.F. Chikov // Spare planet: Poetry and prose / comp. V. Golubev; foreword V. Golubev, O. Blinova, V. Evdokimova. - Sergiev Posad: LLC "All for You - Moscow Region", 2009. - P. 29.

262. Shirogorov, V.V. The Last Kingdom: A Novel - Trilogy.In 3 books. / V.V. Shirogorov. – M.: Mol. guard, 1999.

Book 1. Will of the Terrible Angel. - 302 p.: ill.

Book 2. Princess Xenia. - 302 p.: ill.

Book 3. Son of perdition. - 302 p.: ill.

The historical trilogy resurrects the dramatic events of the Great Troubles. In the center of the story is the bright figure of the Rzhev nobleman David Zobninovsky, the future great Russian ascetic, Archimandrite Dionysius of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery.

263. Russian Troubles: [sb.] / transl. from fr. and English, intro. Art., comp.M.G. Lazutkina; editorial board: S.K. Apt [i dr.]. - M.: OLMA-PRESS, 2006. - 576 p.: l. ill.

This collection includes six works, the main characters of which are the heroes of the Russian Troubles: Boris Godunov, Vasily Shuisky, Pyotr Basmanov, Martha Nagaya, Marina Mnishek, Ksenia Godunova and others.

The reader is given a unique opportunity to get acquainted with the plays of French and English authors: P. Merimet, L. Halevi, R. Cumberland, J. G. Alexander, E. Meshchersky.

Troubled times at the beginning of the 17th century. marked the beginning of a new stage in the history of Russia. Significant changes took place in society: a new ruling dynasty appeared, on for a long time formed negative attitude to the bearers of Western European culture, the country was ruined.

The consequences of the Time of Troubles were overcome for decades, and yet it was impossible to completely restore the former forms of life. The Time of Troubles became, in a certain sense, a frontier in the history of late medieval Russia. Dedicated to Troubles large complex literary and historical works of the 17th century, the genre of which can be defined as historical journalism. This literature, created throughout the 17th century, is dedicated to the events of the turn of the 16th–17th centuries. and the first decade of the 17th century.

The most popular of early writings about the Time of Troubles was "The Tale of How the All-Seeing Eye of Christ Christ Godunov Takes Revenge on Shedding the Innocent Blood of the New Passion-Bearer, the Blessed Tsarevich Dmitry Uglichsky" and its later revision "The Tale of How to Raise the Tsar's Throne in Moscow by Falsehood Boris Godunov...".

“The Tale of How the All-Seeing Eye of Christ Christ Godunov to Take Revenge on the Shedding of Innocent Blood of the New Passion-Bearer, the Blessed Tsarevich Dmitry Uglichsky” was compiled in the Trinity-Sergius Monastery by one of the monks who was an eyewitness to most of the events (with the exception of Grigory Otrepyev’s foreign adventures and a few more episodes), about which wrote. The work describes the events of the late 16th - early 17th centuries. (before the election of Vasily Shuisky to the kingdom). The author not only does not hide his political views, but even passionately promotes them: Boris Godunov, the murderer of Tsarevich Dimitri and the actual usurper of the royal throne, is declared the culprit of all misfortunes. Compared to Godunov, even Grigory Otrepiev does not look like a villain, although the author condemns him. The positive character of the story is the newly married Tsar Vasily Shuisky, whose name is associated with hopes for the end of the Time of Troubles. The work is written in literary language.

One of the earliest literary works about the Time of Troubles is the so-called "The Tale of the Troubles from the Article List", which was compiled immediately after the assassination of False Dmitry I as a guide for the ambassadors to the Commonwealth, Prince G. K. Volkonsky and deacon A. Ivanov, sent by the new Tsar Vasily Shuisky immediately after the coronation. Sending ambassadors to the Polish king Sigismund III, Vasily Shuisky tried to establish peaceful relations with the Commonwealth. Hence, in the story, harsh accusations against False Dmitry I, which should justify his overthrow from the throne and reprisal against him.

The first of the works that influenced subsequent ones was "The Tale of a Vision to a Spiritual Man" by Archpriest Terenty of the Annunciation Cathedral in the Kremlin, written in 1606 in anticipation of an attack on Moscow by the troops of I. Bolotnikov. "The Tale of a Vision in Novgorod" tells about the vision of the Novgorod miracle workers to a certain monk Varlaam in St. Sophia Cathedral on the eve of the capture of Novgorod by the Swedes in 1611.

Researchers conclude that the Novgorod story was written after the occupation of Novgorod by the Swedes. "The Tale of a Vision in Nizhny Novgorod", also written in 1611, but even before the capture of Novgorod by the Swedes (in any case, the author did not know about it), also uses Terenty's story as a source, introducing Nizhny Novgorod realities into the plot.

WITH Nizhny Novgorod story connected and "The Tale of a Vision in Vladimir", similar to it in plot. It was only in Vladimir that a woman became a visionary, to whom the Mother of God appeared. Both stories, Nizhny Novgorod and Vladimir, were sent in 1611 to the cities, being an integral part of the patriotic correspondence between the latter, which preceded the creation of the militia.

A number of works were created after the end of the Time of Troubles, but their authors were direct participants in the events. These works include the chapters on the Troubles of the Chronograph edition of 1617, and the New Chronicler, and some monuments of hagiography (for example, "The Life of Tsarevich Dimitri").

In addition, the description of the Time of Troubles is used by the authors to express their political and ideological positions. One of these stories was written by Prince Ivan Mikhailovich Katyrev-Rostovsky, who, despite the relatively low rank of a Moscow nobleman, belonged to the highest nobility of Russia at that time. The prince did not pursue the ranks, but served honestly, as far as possible with the general "reeling" in the Time of Troubles. In 1608, he nevertheless fell out of favor with Vasily Shuisky and was sent to the province in distant Tobolsk, where he stayed until the end of the Troubles.

The essay about the Time of Troubles by Prince Ivan Andreevich Khvorostinin also reflects the character and views of the author. Contemporaries speak of him as an arrogant, unpleasant person. To match the author and his work "Words of days, and kings, and saints of Moscow ...", in which I. A. Khvorostinin focuses on his own figure, and tries in every possible way to whitewash himself and emphasize his significance in the events of the Time of Troubles.

The work of Prince Semyon Ivanovich Shakhovsky is a treatise on Tsarevich Dimitri. The source of the treatise was the story of I. M. Katyrev-Rostovsky. The work of S. I. Shakhovsky brings it closer to the "Words of the days, and the kings, and the saints of Moscow ...".

Troubles were described not only by aristocrats, but also by representatives of other segments of the population. Of the works written by church authors, the most famous was the "History" by the cellar of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery Avraamy Palitsyn, an active participant in the events of the Time of Troubles. During the period of the siege of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery by the Polish troops, A. Palitsyn participated in the composition of letters of patriotic content, which were sent around the cities and played a significant role in the unity of society. The Trinity cellar tells about events well known to him: about the siege of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. The author writes about his role in protecting the monastery.

Ivan Timofeev came out of the command environment - the author of another famous work about the Time of Troubles, the so-called "Vremennik". It is written in a heavy ornate language, testifying to the author's attempt to imitate the style of church literature, and also to the fact that he did not master this style.

A separate group consists of compilations based on the works of contemporaries of the Time of Troubles. Often they combine fragments of several sources that contradict one another in their assessments of events. These sources seem to "speak with different voices."

For example, in compiled in the 1630s-1640s. In the text "Another Tale" the narration is conducted with the involvement of "The Tale of How the All-Seeing Eye of Christ Christ Godunov Takes Revenge by Shedding the Innocent Blood of the New Passion-Bearer, Blessed Tsarevich Dmitry Uglichsky" and the Chronograph edition of 1617.

The "Manuscript of Filaret", which in fact has nothing to do with Patriarch Filaret, was written in the 1620s. on a column, believed to be in the Posolsky Prikaz. Among its sources are the story of I. M. Katyrev-Rostovsky and, presumably, the New Chronicler, compiled around 1630.

Troubles occupied the minds of Russian people throughout the entire 17th century. On the example of stories and legends about the Time of Troubles, one can trace the process of turning modernity into history, and journalism into historiography.

The literature of the Time of Troubles, on the one hand, brought new features to Russian literary process and thus it is quite organically integrated into the beginning of the "transitional" XVII century, and on the other hand, it completely continues the tradition that existed before with a number of features. As we will see later, practically all literary works of the first half of the 17th century were so complex and ambiguous. The process of genre transformation of ancient Russian literature did not begin from outside and was not so much associated with Western influence as it turned out to be initially gradually provoked by the internal laws of literary development.

The appearance of verse writing should undoubtedly be attributed to the new features of the literature of the Time of Troubles. These are verses preceding the syllabic, in which there is as yet no order in either the number of syllables or the number of stresses in a line. The fact that these are still poems can be judged, perhaps, only by the presence of rhyme (almost always in pairs, quite often - verbal). Initially, such verses, called "presyllabic verses" (from the Polish wiersz - verse) were formed in Ukraine. Perhaps one of the most early examples such verses are short verses by Gerasim Smotrytsky, attached to the Ostroh Bible, printed by Ivan Fedorov in Ostrog in 1581. Russian-Polish contacts during the Time of Troubles contributed to the extremely intensive penetration of pre-syllabic verses from Ukraine (which was then under the rule of the Polish-Lithuanian state) to Russia. Virches could be independent works, but for the most part they were part of traditional prose (most often rhetorical, oratorical or journalistic) works.

D.S. Likhachev noted in his time that an innovative feature of the period of the beginning of the 17th century should be considered the discovery by literature of a human character - a character not only socially significant, but also ordinary person, ordinary, sometimes even ordinary, contemporary. As early as the 16th century, according to the researcher, two signs opposing tradition appeared in historical works: the unity of the point of view and the unity of the theme (both, in contrast to the principles of formation chronicles, written in principle by different chroniclers who continued each other's work). So there are texts dedicated to a very limited historical period or even to one person.

The traditional features of the literature of the Time of Troubles include the ideological orientation, themes, problems, genre characteristics and most of the stylistic features of the works of this time. Let's go straight to the text.

Works about the Troubles can be divided into two groups. The first includes texts that arose before Mikhail Romanov was elected to the throne. They are a direct response to events. Their main purpose can be defined as propaganda, in connection with which the works themselves can be included in the group of journalistic ones. The second group includes texts written after the end of the Time of Troubles itself and representing an attempt at a historical understanding of what happened. Both of them appeal to the Old Russian tradition, but, as a rule, to its different aspects.

In the autumn of 1606, when Bolotnikov's troops were approaching Moscow, the "The Tale of a Vision to a Spiritual Man" which is based on the plot scheme of vision. It tells about a certain resident of Moscow, who "in a thin dream" saw how the Mother of God, John the Baptist and saints in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin prayed to Christ to spare the Russian Orthodox people, suffering from the horrors of the Time of Troubles. In accordance with the tradition dating back to the sermons of Serapion of Vladimir, the misfortune of the Muscovite state is associated with the fact that the people have become stagnant in sins. Christ, touched by the tears of the Mother of God, tells her that a necessary condition for the forgiveness of the Russian people and the alleviation of their lot is complete and sincere repentance. After that, one of the saints addresses the dreamer with the words: "Go and tell, saint of Christ, that you have seen and heard." The unnamed “spiritual husband” told about the vision to the archpriest of the Annunciation Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin Terenty, who ordered to write a story about this event and gave it to the patriarch, and also told the tsar.

The genre of visions was extremely common at this time. The participants in the vision vary: it can be the Mother of God, Christ, the "wonderful wife" in light robes and with an icon in her hands, local patron saints (for example, Ustyug native Grigory Klementyev is the patrons of Ustyug the Great Procopius and John of Ustyug). In the same way, the conditions necessary for salvation are designated in different ways: one can speak of the need for repentance, fasting and prayer, and the building of a church. The Nizhny Novgorod legend says that in a newly built church, an unlit candle should be placed on the throne and put Blank sheet paper. Forgiveness will be marked by the fact that "the candle will be kindled from the fire of heaven, and the bells themselves will ring out, and the name of who owns the Russian state will be written on paper."

Researchers of this group of works have repeatedly noted the everyday concreteness inherent in them. As before, everyday details play an important role, most likely testifying to the authenticity of what is being told. So, in one of the Moscow visions, as witnesses of the miracle, "6 watchmen from the row of vegetables" are called by name.

Another popular genre in the Time of Troubles was agitation letters and "replies", combining literary forms and forms of business writing.

Between 1610 and 1612 by unknown author was written "A new story about the glorious Russian kingdom and the great state of Moscow"- a kind of journalistic manifesto, designed to raise the spirit of the people, awaken patriotic feelings and inspire them to fight. In difficult conditions, when many rich, noble and powerful people betrayed Rus' and support the Poles, the author addresses "all sorts of ranks to people who have not yet turned their souls away from God, and from Orthodox faith they did not retreat, and in faith they do not follow errors, but hold on to piety, and did not betray their enemies, and they did not deviate into their apostate faith, but are ready to stand for the Orthodox faith to the point of bloodshed. "The Orthodox faith and the Russian Church, headed by Patriarch Hermogenes - the only stronghold, a powerful and invincible force that no army is able to break. R. Picchio wrote about the image of Patriarch Hermogenes in the "New Story ...": "Against Poland with its arrogant humanism, Poland, which carried literature, fed by the Latin tradition and already fertilized by the meeting with the Renaissance, old Russia exposes the figure of the supreme clergyman, confident that his holy words, devoid of secular brilliance, but burning with biblical passion, will be able to give rise to an unceasing echo in the Orthodox people. "" New story ..." Picchio considered a monument, most fully and holistically conveyed to us the spiritual state of Russian society of that time, which had a firm intention to oppose the Catholic West with the fortress of its own, original and highly spiritual literary tradition.

A.S. Demin, who was engaged in the figurative structure of the "New Story ...", noted that its author "was inclined to operate with dual, contradictory, complementary categories, to combine contrasting features in the appearance of characters." Such, for example, is the Polish king, who, anticipating the complete and final capture of Russia, simultaneously demonstrates both his joy and his malice. From anger, the king twitched, jumped up, "boiled with bobs", resembled a "fierce and ferocious and indomitable stallion", which snores, breaks out of the bridle and is ready to throw everyone into the "non-starting moat". On the other hand, signs of heartfelt joy are repeatedly reported (when using the traditional formula "rejoice in your heart" and its synonymous variants). As a result, according to A.S. Demin, "statements about "boiling" movements of anger and heartfelt manifestations of joy, when added, did not semantically cancel each other, but created a kind of single," average "semantic whole, transitional between two extremes, in a story about a king who does not calm down in joy, but also in malice does not rush somewhere, but, as a result, from feelings "boils" on the spot, barely restrained.

The same duality of A.S. Demin also notices other characters in the New Tale, and even its author himself. Speaking of those who now serve the Polish king, the author hopes for the secret desire that still remains in them "to stand with us for the faith." Speaking of enemies, he hopes that at least one of them is "soft and compassionate in heart." Finally, speaking about himself, he honestly admits that he himself served the Poles and is now "greatly favored" by them.

Rhymed speech is used in the "New Tale...", which is one of the ways to characterize the characters. So, one of the boyars who swore allegiance to the Polish king, treasurer Fyodor Andronov, is described as follows: “neither from the royal families, nor from the boyar ranks, nor from other elected military heads; they say that from the Smerdov slaves. the deed is not worthy of him in the name of Stratilat (St. Theodore Stratilat, the heavenly patron of Fedor Andronov), but in the name of Pilate, or in the name of the monk, but in the name of the unlike, or in the name of the passion-bearer, but in the name of the earth-eater , or in the name of the saint, - but in the name of the tormentor, and the persecutor, and the destroyer, and the destroyer of the Christian faith "

In 1612 created "Lamentation for captivity for the final ruin of the lofty and most luminous Muscovite state." The text was written at a time when Minin and Pozharsky were already gathering the Zemstvo militia, but Moscow was still in the hands of the Poles and no one could predict the outcome of the coming hard and bloody struggle (that is, until the autumn of 1612). Both the name of the monument and its style bring the reader back to the ancient Russian rhetorical tradition, to the "common places" of hagiographic and preaching literature. The traditional hagiographical formula is reminiscent of the rhetorical question with which the work begins: "How shall we begin to mourn, alas! such a fall of the glorious, lucid, great Russia? What source will fill the abyss of tears, our sobs and groans?" "Lamentation" is an attempt to give a detailed account of the events of recent years, starting with the appearance of the first impostor, the "forerunner of the Antichrist", the "son of darkness", as well as an invitation to think not only about the consequences, but also about the causes of the Troubles. And here again, like the ancient Russian preachers of the era of the Tatar-Mongol invasion (for example, Serapion of Vladimir), the author of "Lament ..." saw the causes of the disasters that befell the Russian land, not only in the power, deceit and treachery of external enemies, but also in the damage to the morals of the Russian people, who have forgotten God and are immersed in numerous vices, likened to the inhabitants of the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah: "Truth is poor in men and untruth reigns ... and malice is exposed, and we cover ourselves with lies."
In the 10s of the XVII century. the cellar of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery Avraamy Palitsyn wrote "The Tale" - one of the most famous and popular literary monuments of the Time of Troubles. The text of the Tale was revised several times between 1611 and 1620. and in total has 77 chapters. In the center of the narrative is the famous siege of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, the story is brought to the Deulinsky truce of 1618. Historians quite highly rate this text for its scrupulous factuality, philologists draw attention to Palitsyn’s special flair for contemporary innovative trends in literature (noting, in particular, the use of presyllabic verses in the Tale).

Trying to uncover the causes of the Troubles, Avraamiy Palitsyn speaks of a general decline in morals and emphasizes the social contradictions of the previous period. Mention is made of the terrible famine that occurred under Boris Godunov and as a result of which a huge number of people died: then it turned out that the barns of the rich were bursting from a huge amount of bread hidden from people. The rich did not spare their people, so our enemies did not spare us.

Another reason for the Troubles is, according to Palitsyn, the transformation of autocracy into autocracy by Boris Godunov. The publicist condemns the tsar's arbitrariness and the blind obedience to the monarch of his advisers, who are called to govern the state, associated with it. However, even more than the autocracy of the tsar, Palitsyn is afraid of the autocracy of the people.

One of the important problems for Avraamy Palitsyn is connected with the theme of power and attitude towards the new royal dynasty. For contemporaries, the Time of Troubles also meant a crisis of autocracy, the fall of a legitimate dynasty (the very one whose ideological justification for property rights was enshrined in numerous monuments of the 16th century). The embodiment of this social ill-being was an event that had never been seen before - the appearance on the throne of "false kings", impostors. As a result, publicists (and Avraamy Palitsyn, in particular) faced the need to reconcile the principles of hereditary and elective monarchy and take into account the role of the people's will in the election of pretenders to the kingdom. Palitsyn writes that popular unanimity on the issue of choosing a tsar is an indisputable evidence that this particular candidate was chosen by God, an instrument of Divine Providence. Tsar Mikhail Romanov is a sovereign, "granted by God ... before his birth, chosen from God and anointed from the womb." He is contrasted in the "Tale" by Vasily Shuisky, who reigned not by God's will, but only by "the desire of the hearts" and that is why he could not receive popular recognition.

In the "Tale" of Avraamy Palitsyn, the biographical, memoir component is clearly felt. As you know, his work was not completely flawless, at one time he served False Dmitry II. And now he is trying to whitewash his reputation, exaggerate his own significance, telling in detail about his trip to the Ipatiev Monastery near Kostroma for Mikhail Romanov, about his participation in the solemn meeting of the new sovereign at the gates of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, about his activities in the process of concluding the Deulinsky truce and a number of other events.

In 1616-1619. clerk Ivan Timofeev creates "Vremennik", which depicts the history of Russia from Ivan the Terrible to Mikhail Romanov. The author of Vremennik is a supporter of hereditary monarchy; he sees in the succession to the throne within the limits of one surname the order established by God. From the point of view of this order, Ivan Timofeev speaks of Ivan the Terrible, the legitimate heir to the great princes of the Russian state. This principle is interrupted after the death of the son of the Terrible, Fyodor Ivanovich, who left the kingdom "without children and without inheritance." Thus ended the great family of Russian autocrats, whose roots go back to ancient times. And then illegal rulers appeared on the throne, whom Timofeev calls "false tsars", "worker-tsars", "self-crowned", etc. Along with such rulers, those stand out who did not arbitrarily seize power, but were elected by the Zemsky Sobor - such, for example, is Boris Godunov. But in this case, the expression of human will was not accompanied by divine recognition, so Godunov on the throne turned out to be not an autocrat, but a lawless "autocrat". Mikhail Romanov is fundamentally different from all these rulers, a worthy descendant of an ancient family, in the act of electing which the will of the people was an expression of the will of God.

D.S. Likhachev noted the duality of the characteristics that certain figures in Russian history receive in Timofeev's work (as well as in a number of other works of the Time of Troubles). Next to the rhetorically embellished praise of Ivan the Terrible is a passionately condemning story about his "fiery anger." Speaking of Boris Godunov, the author sees his duty to speak not only about his evil, but also about his good deeds, so that no one has the opportunity to reproach him for partiality or one-sidedness: do not hide his blessings to the world." Good and evil are not inherent in a person and are not given to him in an unchanged form. Some people can be influenced by others: for example, Anastasia Romanova had a very positive influence on Grozny, and after her death, his character changes not at all for the better. Boris Godunov, in turn, was positively influenced by the kind Fyodor Ioannovich. According to Timofeev, Godunov was most radically changed by the power he unexpectedly received, to which he had no legal right: "Upon receiving this majesty, the Abiya pretended to be unbearable in every way, he would be cruel and heavy about everything."

The researchers noted that, by the nature of his service, Ivan Timofeev had access to archives where the most important documents were stored, therefore his "Vremennik" describes important historical events that are no longer recorded in any other source. But along with this, Ivan Timofeev acts not only as a historian, but also as a memoirist, recording those events that he himself witnessed. So, he talks about people going to the Novodevichy Convent, when people asked Boris Godunov to accept the royal crown. During this event, a certain youth specially climbed under the very window of the cell of Tsaritsa Irina and there loudly yelled, begging her to bless her brother for the kingdom, and Boris himself hypocritically wrapped a scarf around his neck, "showing to understand, as if to strangle yourself for the sake of the compelled, at least, if the prayers do not stop" .

Another source that Ivan Timofeev boldly and often used is, according to D.S. Likhachev, a variety of rumors, rumors, rumors and conversations that create a polyphonic sound in the narrative, the effect of multiple points of view. This feature is most pronounced when the author speaks about different versions of the interpretation of the events connected with the death of Ivan the Terrible.

Another historian of the Time of Troubles is Ivan Andreevich Khvorostinin, who came from the family of the Yaroslavl princes and in his youth was close to False Dmitry I, who granted him a kravchi. Under Shuisky, he was sent to repentance at the Joseph-Volokolamsky Monastery, then returned to Moscow, at the beginning of 1613 he already served as a governor in Mtsensk, then in Novosili, and in 1618 in Pereyaslavl Ryazansky. Tsar Michael rewarded him for his service and appointed him as a stolnik. The accusation of high treason was forgotten, but soon it was replaced by another - of freethinking and atheism. In 1623 he was exiled to the Kirillo-Belozersky monastery under the supervision of a "kind" and "strong life" monk. Khvorostinin received forgiveness from the tsar and patriarch shortly before his death, which followed in 1625.

Wanting to whitewash himself and give his own view of the historical events of the early 17th century, Khvorostinin, apparently shortly before his death, wrote a large-scale work "Words of days and tsars and saints of Moscow". Like Avraamiy Palitsyn, Khvorostinin pays much attention to his role in certain events: he writes that he tried to expose the vain pride of False Dmitry and was worried about saving his soul; claims that he was valued and at one time singled out from others by Patriarch Hermogenes himself, etc.

Like Ivan Timofeev, Khvorostinin gives complex, sometimes dual and contrasting characteristics to the historical figures of that time. Boris Godunov turns out to be both power-hungry and God-loving at the same time. On the one hand, he builds temples, decorates cities, tames the covetous; he is "in the wisdom of the life of this world, like a good giant, clothed and receiving glory and honor from the kings." On the other hand, it is reported that he embittered people against each other, provoked "hatred and flattery" in his subjects, restored slaves to masters, killed many noble people and, in general, "seduce the world and introduce hatred."

Around the same time, two stories were created dedicated to the tragic death of a brave commander, who especially proved himself in the fight against False Dmitry II, Prince Mikhail Vasilyevich Skopin-Shuisky. The prince died suddenly after a feast at Prince Borotynsky, and the cause of death among the people was poison, which was allegedly given to him by the wife of Prince Dmitry Ivanovich Shuisky Maria. These events are discussed in "The Tale of the Death and Burial of Prince Mikhail Vasilyevich Skopin-Shuisky". The traditional features of the "Tale ..." include close attention the author to the genealogy of his hero (Skopin-Shuisky was of a royal family, belonged to "a single branch with the owner of the universe Augustus, Caesar of Rome" and among the direct ancestors had "the founder of the single Orthodox Christian faith, Prince of Kiev and All Russia Vladimir"), mention of devilish instigation as a force that prompts Mary to commit a crime, a combination of elements of lamentation and glory (in this case, however, with a significant predominance of the first over the second). The mourning of the hero is exaggerated: "And the same princesses, his mother and wife, who came to her house, and fell down on her table, crying highlander ... pouring her tears with her tears, and tear rapids, like a river stream, spilled onto the floor from the table" .

A.S. Demin drew attention to the description of the appearance of the mortally poisoned Mikhail. When the prince returned home after the feast, "his eyes were brightly indignant, and his face was terribly marked with blood, and his hair on his head, standing, wavered." According to the researcher, the manifestations of a fatal disease in this case "are more like anger: cloudy, burning eyes; a bloodshot face; hair standing on end." Mikhail is poisoned by a fierce evil potion - as a result, ferocity and malice flow into Mikhail and manifest in him.

Finally, another work of the Time of Troubles - "Chronicle Book" attributed by some scientists to Prince Ivan Mikhailovich Katyrev-Rostovsky, and by others to Prince Semyon Ivanovich Shakhovsky. The very title of this work, according to researchers, indisputably testifies to the importance for the author of the ancient Russian chronicle tradition, on which he tries to rely, although he transforms its individual elements. The work begins with a lengthy title, which is at the same time an "announcement", a presentation of the content of the text, which will set out the history of the "reigning city of Moscow" from its beginning, about the origin of the great princes of Moscow, "about the suppression of the root of the royal from Augustus the king", about the reign of Boris Godunov and about the attack on Moscow by the heretic Grishka Otrepiev (False Dmitry I). As in the Tale of Avraamy Palitsyn, in the Chronicle Book the prose exposition is interspersed with presyllabic verses.

A common feature of the literature of the Time of Troubles A.S. Demin considered an exaggerated image of feelings. Indeed, the authors of that time did not skimp on colors when describing emotional experiences. Anger makes a man insane, makes him bark at the air like a dog and throw absurd words like stones. Grief not only causes river streams of tears, but also encourages you to beat your head on the ground, scratch your chest with your nails. Fear pierces right into the human heart. Noting that such an exaggeration of feelings is generally not characteristic of oral folk art, A.S. Demin drew attention to the analogy of this hyperbolization in the song about the murder of Tsarevich Dimitri:
Not a whirlwind twists along the valley,
Not a gray feather grass tends to the ground.
That is the terrible wrath of God
For Orthodox Rus'.

According to A.S. Demina, "spread new manner stories about feelings were largely due to the current difficult situation, which gave rise to feelings of uncertainty, distrust and fear in the country ... The authors used exaggerations to expose the secret and reveal the hidden ... Even in documents, references to exaggerated manifestations of feelings, for example, profuse tears, were considered a kind of proof of the truth statements".

Researchers of the literature of the Time of Troubles also drew attention to the very noticeable heterogeneity of the writers' layer of that time. Here is a monk, and an orderly clerk, and princes from the Rurik family, although they represent minor families. All this testifies to the fact that there were no professional writers yet, the writing class had not yet developed and there was no monopoly on writing work at that time, anyone who wished, guided by one or another motive, could become a writer - to tell about the events that he witnessed; try to uncover the causes of events and evaluate them; finally, whitewash yourself and present your own activities in a favorable light.

© All rights reserved

Page 1

The turbulent events of the beginning of the 17th century, which received the names of "troubles" from contemporaries (such a definition was held for a long time in historical science, fixed by noble and bourgeois historiography), found wide reflection in literature. Literature acquires an exclusively topical journalistic character, promptly responding to the demands of the time, reflecting the interests of various social groups involved in the fight. wiring diagram

Society, having inherited from the previous century an ardent faith in the power of the word, in the power of conviction, seeks to propagate certain ideas in literary works, achieving specific effective goals.

Among the stories that reflected the events of 1604-1613, one can single out works that express the interests of the ruling boyars. Such is the "Tale of 1606" - a journalistic work created by a monk of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. The story actively supports the policy of the boyar tsar Vasily Shuisky, tries to present him as a popular choice, emphasizing the unity of Shuisky with the people. The people turn out to be a force that the ruling circles cannot but reckon with. The story glorifies Shuisky's "courageous daring" in his struggle with the "evil heretic", "defrocked" Grishka Otrepiev. To prove the legitimacy of Shuisky's rights to the royal throne, his family is elevated to Vladimir Svyatoslavich of Kyiv.

The author of the story sees the causes of "distemper" and "disorganization" in the Muscovite state in the pernicious rule of Boris Godunov, who, by the villainous murder of Tsarevich Dmitry, stopped the existence of the family of lawful tsars of Moscow and "took the royal throne in Moscow by falsehood."

Subsequently, "The Tale of 1606" was revised into "Another Legend". Defending the positions of the boyars, the author portrays him as the savior of the Russian state from adversaries.

"The Tale of 1606" and "Another Legend" are written in the traditional book manner. They are built on the contrast of the pious champion of the Orthodox faith Vasily Shuisky and the "sly, sly" Godunov, "evil heretic" Grigory Otrepyev. Their actions are explained from traditional providentialist positions.

This group of works is opposed by stories that reflect the interests of the nobility and the townspeople's trade and craft strata of the population. Here we should first of all mention those journalistic messages that Russian cities exchanged, rallying their forces to fight the enemy.

"A NEW STORY ABOUT THE MOST GLORIOUS RUSSIAN KINGDOM…" The journalistic propaganda appeal - "A new story about the glorious Russian Tsardom and the great State of Moscow" draws attention to itself. Written in late 1610 - early 1611, at the most intense moment of the struggle, when Moscow was occupied by Polish troops, and Novgorod was captured by Swedish feudal lords, the New Tale, addressing "people of all ranks", called them to active actions against the invaders. She sharply denounced the treacherous policy of the boyar government, which, instead of being a "land holder" native land, turned into a domestic enemy, and the boyars themselves into "earth-eaters", "crooks".

A characteristic feature of the story is its democracy, a new interpretation of the image of the people - this "great ... waterless sea." The calls and messages of Hermogenes are addressed to the people, enemies and traitors are afraid of the people, the author of the story appeals to the people. However, the people in the story do not yet act as an effective force.