Is it possible today to imagine a life in which there are no books, newspapers, magazines, notepads? Modern man is so accustomed to the fact that everything important and requiring ordering should be written down, that without this knowledge would not be systematized, fragmentary. But this was preceded by a very difficult period, stretching for millennia. Literature consisted of chronicles, annals and the lives of saints. Works of art began to be written much later.
When did ancient Russian literature originate?
The prerequisite for the emergence of ancient Russian literature was various forms of oral folklore, pagan traditions. Slavic writing originated only in the 9th century AD. Until that time, knowledge, epics were passed from mouth to mouth. But the baptism of Rus', the creation of the alphabet by the Byzantine missionaries Cyril and Methodius in 863 opened the way for books from Byzantium, Greece, and Bulgaria. Through the first books transmitted Christian doctrine. Since there were few written sources in antiquity, it became necessary to rewrite books.
ABC contributed cultural development Eastern Slavs. Since the Old Russian language is similar to Old Bulgarian, then Slavic alphabet, which was used in Bulgaria and Serbia, could be used in Rus'. East Slavs gradually adopted the new script. In ancient Bulgaria, culture reached its peak of development by the 10th century. The works of the writers of John the Exarch of Bulgaria, Clement, Tsar Simeon began to appear. Their work also influenced ancient Russian culture.
Christianization ancient Russian state made writing a necessity, because without it state life, social, international connections. The Christian religion is not able to exist without teachings, solemn words, lives, and the life of the prince and his court, relations with neighbors and enemies were reflected in the annals. There were translators and scribes. All of them were church people: priests, deacons, monks. It took a long time to rewrite, but there were still few books.
Old Russian books were written mainly on parchment, which was obtained after special processing of pig, calf, and sheep skin. Manuscript books in the ancient Russian state were called "charate", "harati" or "veal". Durable, but expensive material made books expensive, which is why it was so important to find a replacement for the skin of pets. Foreign paper, called "overseas" appeared only in the XIV century. But until the 17th century, parchment was used to write valuable government documents.
Ink was obtained by combining old iron (nails) and tannin (growths on oak leaves, which were called "ink nuts"). In order for the ink to be thick and shiny, glue from cherries and molasses was poured into them. Iron ink, which has a brown tint, was distinguished by increased durability. To give originality and decorativeness, colored ink, sheet gold or silver were used. For writing, goose feathers were used, the tip of which was cut off, and a cut was made in the middle of the point.
What century does Old Russian literature belong to?
The first ancient Russian written sources date back to the 9th century. The ancient Russian state of Kievan Rus occupied an honorable place among other European states. Written sources contributed to the strengthening of the state and its development. The Old Russian period ends in the 17th century.
Periodization of ancient Russian literature.
- Written sources of Kievan Rus: the period covers the XI century and beginning of XII I century. At this time, the chronicle was the main written source.
- Literature of the second third of the XIII century and the end of the XIV century. The Old Russian state is going through a period of fragmentation. Dependence on the Golden Horde set back the development of culture for many centuries.
- The end of the XIV century, which is characterized by the unification of the principalities of the northeast into one Moscow principality, the emergence of specific principalities, and the beginning of the XV century.
- XV - XVI centuries: this is the period of centralization of the Russian state and the emergence of journalistic literature.
- XVI - late XVII century is the New Time, which accounts for the appearance of poetry. Now the works are released with the indication of the author.
the oldest of famous works Russian literature is the Ostromir Gospel. It got its name from the name of the Novgorod posadnik Ostromir, who ordered the scribe Deacon Gregory to translate it. During 1056 - 1057. translation has been completed. It was the posadnik's contribution to the St. Sophia Cathedral, erected in Novgorod.
The second gospel is the Arkhangelsk, which was written in 1092. From the literature of this period, a lot of hidden and philosophical meaning is hidden in the Izbornik of the Grand Duke Svyatoslav in 1073. The Izbornik reveals the meaning and idea of mercy, the principles of morality. The gospels and apostolic epistles formed the basis of the philosophical thought of Kievan Rus. They described earthly life Jesus, and also described his miraculous resurrection.
Books have always been a source of philosophical thought. Translations from Syriac, Greek, Georgian penetrated into Rus'. There were also transfers from European countries: England, France, Norway, Denmark, Sweden. Their works were revised and copied by ancient Russian scribes. Ancient Russian philosophical culture is a reflection of mythology and has Christian roots. Among the monuments of ancient Russian literature, the “Messages of Vladimir Monomakh”, “The Prayers of Daniil the Sharpener” stand out.
The first ancient Russian literature is characterized by high expressiveness and richness of language. To enrich the Old Slavonic language, they used the language of folklore, speeches of orators. Two literary style, one of which is “High” solemn, the other is “Low”, which was used in everyday life.
Genres of literature
- lives of saints, include biographies of bishops, patriarchs, founders of monasteries, saints (they were created in compliance with special rules and demanded a special style of presentation) - patericons (the life of the first saints Boris and Gleb, abbess Theodosia),
- the lives of the saints, which are presented from a different point of view - apocrypha,
- historical works or chronicles (chronographs) - brief records of the history of ancient Rus', Russian chronograph of the second half of the 15th century,
- works about fictional travels and adventures - walking.
Genres of Old Russian literature table
Central among the genres of ancient Russian literature is chronicle writing, which has developed over the centuries. These are weather records of the history and events of Ancient Rus'. The chronicle is a surviving written annalistic (from the word - summer, records begin "in the summer") monument from one or more lists. The names of chronicles are random. This may be the name of the scribe or the name of the area where the chronicle was written. For example, Lavrentievskaya - on behalf of the scribe Lavrenty, Ipatievskaya - on the name of the monastery where the chronicle was found. Chronicles are often vaults that combine several chronicles at once. Protographs were the source for such vaults.
The chronicle, which served as the basis for the vast majority of ancient Russian written sources, is the Tale of Bygone Years of 1068. common feature Chronicles of the XII-XV centuries is that the chroniclers no longer consider political events in their annals, but focus on the needs and interests of "their principality" (Annals of Veliky Novgorod, Pskov annals, annals of the Vladimir-Suzdal land, Moscow annals), and not events of the Russian land as a whole, as it was before
What work do we call a monument of ancient Russian literature?
"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" of 1185-1188 is considered the main monument of ancient Russian literature, describing not so much an episode from the Russian-Polovtsian wars as reflecting events of an all-Russian scale. The author connects Igor's failed campaign in 1185 with strife and calls for unity in order to save his people.
Sources personal origin- These are heterogeneous verbal sources that share a common origin: private correspondence, autobiographies, travel descriptions. They reflect the author's direct perception of historical events. Such sources first appear in the princely period. These are the memoirs of Nestor the chronicler, for example.
In the 15th century, the heyday of chronicle writing begins, when voluminous chronicles and short chroniclers coexist, telling about the activities of one princely family. Two parallel trends emerge: the official point of view and the opposition point of view (the church and princely descriptions).
Here it should be said about the problem of falsifying historical sources or creating documents that never existed before, amending original documents. To do this, developed a whole system of methods. In the 18th century, interest in historical science was universal. This gave rise to a large number falsification, presented in epic form and presented as the original. A whole industry of falsifying ancient sources is emerging in Russia. Burnt or lost annals, such as the "Word", we study from the surviving copies. So copies were made by Musin-Pushkin, A. Bardin, A. Surakadzev. Among the most mysterious sources is the Book of Veles, found in the Zadonsky estate in the form of wooden boards with text scrawled on them.
Ancient Russian literature of the 11th-14th centuries is not only teachings, but also rewriting from Bulgarian originals or translation from Greek of a huge amount of literature. The large-scale work done allowed the ancient Russian scribes to get acquainted with the main genres and literary monuments of Byzantium over two centuries.
Give chronicles. Already the first acquaintance with the Byzantine historical chronicles gave Russian scribes the idea to create something similar for their country. They began to collect ancient traditions and keep an annual record of current events. This primary material was combined and edited in generalizing works - annalistic codes.
The compilation of a new chronicle was always associated with some important event in political or church life - the beginning of the reign of the Grand Duke, the arrival of a new metropolitan or bishop to the cathedra, the construction of a temple. It is believed that the impetus for the beginning of Russian chronicle writing - the compilation of the Most Ancient Code - was the consecration of St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv. The cathedral housed the residence of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, the Metropolitan of Kyiv.
Changes in political environment, as well as the ups and downs of the intra-church struggle, pushed for the creation of new large monuments of chronicle writing - the Code of the Abbot Nikon(70s of the XI century) and the Initial Code (1093-1095). Finally, the monk set to work Kievo-Pechersky monastery Nestor.
Tale of Bygone Years
Around 1113, Nestor finished his famous work, The Tale of Bygone Years. The name of the Nestor Chronicle comes from the first words of the text: "This is the tale of bygone years, where did the Russian land come from, who in Kiev began before the princes, and from where did the Russian land come from." The words "Behold the tale of bygone years..." translated from the Old Russian language mean something like this: "Here is a story about the past years..."
Having creatively reworked the works of his predecessors and supplemented them with his own materials (annual records of the events of recent years, information from Byzantine chronicles, agreements between Rus' and the Greeks, folk legends about the first Kiev rulers, etc.), Nestor created a holistic and fascinating literary work. He presented a broad panorama of world (biblical) history, against which the historical existence of the Eastern Slavs begins and the Kievan state is formed. Late leto-scribes treated the work of Nestor with great respect. They usually placed it at the beginning of their chronicles.
The Tale of Bygone Years contains a detailed story about the choice of faith by Prince Vladimir. The envoys of the prince say: “And we came to the Greeks, and brought us to where they serve their God, and did not know whether we were in heaven or on earth: for there is no such sight and beauty on earth, and we do not know how to tell about it".
A Word on Law and Grace
Almost all the literary monuments of Kievan Rus that have survived to this day are imbued with a lively religious feeling and are filled with a prayer appeal to God and the saints. Some are distinguished by originality of thoughts and bright artistic form. Among such works is the famous "Sermon on Law and Grace" by Metropolitan Hilarion.
"The Word about Law and Grace" is the first author's work of ancient Russian literature known to us. Basically, this is an Easter sermon delivered by Hilarion, apparently in 1049. Hence the festive elation of tone, and the special, enthusiastic mood that pervades the entire work. He persistently pursues the idea of the spiritual independence of Rus', "which is known and heard by all four corners of the earth."
The desire to assert the spiritual independence of Rus', clearly visible in Hilarion's "Word on Law and Grace", was also manifested in the veneration of the first Russian saints - Prince Vladimir Svyato-Slavich, his sons Boris and Gleb, the founders of the Kiev Caves Monastery Anthony And Theodosius. According to the church rules of that era, three conditions were necessary for posthumous canonization: miracles at the tomb, incorruptibility of relics and the presence of life - a story about the life and deeds of the saint, about the miracles he performed. material from the site
Teaching to children
The complete opposite of the loud rhetoric of the "Words on Law and Grace" was the deeply personal in nature, filled with religious and philosophical reflections "Instruction for Children" by Vladimir Monomakh. It was preserved in a single copy as part of the Laurentian Chronicle in the entry of 1096.
Mastering the all-Slavic intermediary literature, translating from Greek, Old Russian scribes simultaneously turn to the creation of original works of various genres. We cannot pinpoint exactly when the first records appeared. historical traditions when they began to unite into a coherent historical narrative, but there is no doubt that already in the middle of the 11th century, if not earlier, the first Russian chronicles were compiled.
At the same time, the Kiev priest Hilarion (the future metropolitan) wrote "The Sermon on Law and Grace" - a theological treatise, in which, however, from dogmatic arguments about the superiority of "grace" (the New Testament) over the "law" (Old Testament) grows distinctly a pronounced church-political and patriotic theme: Russia, which adopted Christianity, is a country no less authoritative and worthy of respect than Byzantium itself. Russian princes Igor and Svyatoslav became famous for their victories and "fortress"; Vladimir, who baptized Rus', is worthy of comparison with the apostles in the significance of his deed, and Kyiv prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich (under whom Hilarion wrote his "Word") does not "destroy", but "asserts" his father's undertakings. He created the Church of St. Sophia (St. Sophia Cathedral in Kiev), which is not like it in the "surrounding" countries, decorating it with "all kinds of beauty, gold and silver and precious stones," as Hilarion writes. D.S. Likhachev explained why it was so important to emphasize the construction of this temple: “while building the Sophia temple in Kyiv, Yaroslav “built” the Russian metropolis, the Russian independent church. Calling the newly built temple the same name as the main temple of the Greek Church, Yaroslav claimed the equality of the Russian Church with the Greek. It was in this awareness of the equality of Rus' and Byzantium that the main idea of Hilarion's Lay lay. The same patriotic ideas formed the basis of the most ancient Russian chronicle writing.
Russian scribes also act in the hagiographic genre: in the 11th - early 12th centuries. the lives of Anthony of the Caves (it has not survived), Theodosius of the Caves, two versions of the life of Boris and Gleb were written. In these hagiographies, Russian authors, undoubtedly familiar with the hagiographic canon and with the best examples of Byzantine hagiography, show, as we shall see below, an enviable independence and display high literary skill.
At the beginning of the XII century. (apparently, around 1117), Prince Vladimir Monomakh of Kiev writes "Instruction" addressed to his sons, but at the same time to those Russian princes who would like to heed his advice. The "Instruction" is surprising both in that it completely falls out of the strict system of genres, having no analogue in ancient Russian literature, and in the fact that Monomakh discovers in it not only the state outlook and rich life experience, but also a high literary education and unconditional writing talent. Both the “Instruction” and the surviving letter of Monomakh to Oleg Svyatoslavich are not only literary monuments, but also important monuments of social thought: one of the most authoritative Kiev princes is trying to convince his contemporaries of the perniciousness of feudal strife - Rus', weakened by strife, will not be able to actively resist external enemies. This basic idea of the work of Monomakh echoes the "Tale of Igor's Campaign".
A decade earlier than Monomakh's "Instruction" was written, the abbot of one of the Russian monasteries - Daniel visited the Kingdom of Jerusalem (founded by the crusaders in Palestine conquered from the Arabs) and compiled a detailed account of his journey, which is known as "Daniel's Journey of the Abbot of Russia". The traveler describes in detail the sights he has seen, while retelling the biblical stories and apocryphal legends associated with them. Daniel acts as a patriot of his native land, not forgetting in distant countries about her interests, caring about her prestige.
Second half of the 12th century marked by the rapid development of chronicle writing. This can be judged by the South Russian code of the beginning of the 15th century. (Ipatiev Chronicle), which contains fragments from the annals of an earlier time.
At the end of the XII century. The Bishop of the city of Turov, Kirill, one of the most brilliant ancient Russian writers, created his works. A particularly significant place in his work is occupied by words church holidays, designed for pronunciation in the church during a solemn service. The thoughtfulness of the composition, the richness of the language, the boldness and brightness of metaphors and comparisons, the skill in constructing phrases and periods with all the tricks of rhetorical art (syntactic parallelism, appeals, expressive antitheses, etc.) - all these advantages of Cyril's works put him on the same level with famous Byzantine writers.
crowns literary development of this era "The Tale of Igor's Campaign".
Brevity of the list of monuments of original Russian literature of the XI-XII centuries. - and almost all the most significant works are named here - makes us think about how incomplete, apparently, our information about the literature of Kievan Rus. We know only a small fraction of the works created then, only those of them that were lucky enough to survive the terrible years of the Mongol-Tatar invasion.
Such a comparison involuntarily suggests itself. The artists of the Classical era liked to depict a romantic landscape: among the fields overgrown with bushes, where herds of sheep graze and colorfully dressed shepherds play flutes, the ruins of a beautiful and majestic temple rise, which, it would seem, should not stand here, in the rural wilderness, but on the square. lively ancient city...
The literature of Kievan Rus presents something similar for us: several masterpieces that would be the glory of any literature rich in monuments - "The Tale of Bygone Years", "The Life of Boris and Gleb", "The Life of Theodosius of the Caves", "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", the creations of Cyril Turovsky... But where are the links connecting them, the environment in which these masterpieces were created? It was precisely such feelings that once possessed A. S. Pushkin, who wrote bitterly: “Unfortunately, we do not have ancient literature. Behind us is a dark steppe - and on it rises the only monument - "The Song of Igor's Campaign". In those years, ancient Russian literature was not yet “discovered”, Russian researchers will get to know it more deeply two or three decades later. But the same feeling of "loneliness" of masterpieces does not leave us until now. What is the reason for this strange phenomenon?
Of course, these monuments that have come down to us were not alone, they simply could not be alone, since they testify to the existence literary schools, O high level and literary skill, and the very literature that gave birth to them.
Before approaching the answer to our bewildered question, let us give one enough a prime example. In the Ipatiev Chronicle, we read in an article of 1147 about Metropolitan Kliment Smolyatich (that is, who came from the Smolensk land) - “he was a scribe and philosopher, as if there were no one in the Russian land.” But what do we know about the work of this "scribe and philosopher", which, according to the chronicler, had no equal in the Russian land? We only know the beginning of his "Epistle to Thomas the Caller". This is very little, but also very much: the fact is that from the letter we learn about an extremely interesting and significant fact of the literary life of Kievan Rus: Clement defends before his opponent the legitimacy of the "influx" interpretation of Holy Scripture, that is, interpretation with the help of allegorical stories - parable. So, on the one hand, both the chronicle and the reason known to us that caused the dispute between Clement and Thomas speak of the same thing - Clement Smolyatich was an undoubtedly educated and well-read writer (Foma even reproached him for writing “from Omir [ Homer], and from Aristotle [Aristotle], and from Plato") and, probably, quite prolific, if he enjoyed such fame and authority. On the other hand, if it were not for accidentally surviving in a single list of the XV century. "Message", we would know absolutely nothing about Clement, with the exception of the above description in the annals. One more example. In the 12th century, in Kievan Rus, there were several chronicle centers, and “ancestral” chroniclers were compiled at the princely courts. And these chroniclers and local chronicles have been lost, and if it were not for the South Russian collection of the end of the 12th century, which included fragments from these sources, and the Ipatiev Chronicle of the beginning of the 15th century, which preserved this collection, we would not have known anything about the annals in Russia in the 12th century, nor about the events themselves of this time - in other chronicles, events in Southern Russia are mentioned extremely sparingly.
If the Laurentian Chronicle of 1377 had not been preserved, we would have moved away from the time of the creation of the Tale of Bygone Years by three centuries, because the lists of the Tale that follow in seniority date back to the 15th century.
In a word, we know very little about the literature and literature of Kievan Rus. The Mongol-Tatar invasion led not only to the death of tens or hundreds of thousands of people, not only to the desolation of cities, including the largest centers of writing, it most cruelly destroyed ancient Russian literature itself. Only those works, the lists of which managed to survive and attract the attention of scribes of the XIV or XV century, became known to researchers of modern times. So, the journey of Abbot Daniel took place at the beginning of the 12th century, at the same time he wrote his “Journey”, however, the older lists of the monument refer only to the 15th century.
The oldest list of the "History of the Jewish War", translated in the XII century, refers to the end of the XV century. At the same time, according to N.A. Meshchersky, the lists of the ancient translation were lost in Rus'. But in 1399, in Constantinople, the Russian scribe John copied the Russian list that was there; from this manuscript of John, which returned again to Rus', the manuscript tradition of the monument was revived.
So, the literary monuments of the XI-XII centuries that have survived to modern times. - these are only by a happy coincidence the surviving remnants of literature that was in its heyday on the eve of the Mongol-Tatar invasion. The high level of this literature is evidenced, in particular, by those works, the analysis of which we now turn to.
"The Tale of Bygone Years"
Every nation remembers and knows its history. In traditions, legends, songs, information and memories of the past were preserved and passed on from generation to generation. The Chronicle - a systematic chronicle, kept from year to year - has grown to a large extent on the basis of an oral historical epic.
Chronicle as literary genre(and not historical records in general!) appears, apparently, in the middle of the 11th century. However, the oldest lists of chronicles belong to a later time: XIII and XIV centuries. The Synodal list of the Novgorod First Chronicle is dated.
The Laurentian list refers to 1377, the Hypatiev list of the Ipatiev Chronicle - to the first quarter of the 15th century. Other lists of annals of a later time. Therefore history ancient period of the development of Russian chronicle writing, scientists have to restore, based on the texts of the lists mentioned above, separated from the time of compilation of the chronicles themselves by a significant period of time.
The study of chronicles is further complicated by the following circumstance. Almost every chronicle is a collection. This means that the chronicler, as a rule, not only recorded the events of his day, but supplemented with his notes the text of an earlier chronicle that told about the previous period. Therefore, it turns out that in almost every chronicle the history of Rus' is described “from the very beginning” - it is given in full or in an abridged, sometimes very significant, text of the Tale of Bygone Years, which tells “where the Russian land came from.” When compiling a new chronicle code, the chronicler did not treat his sources formally, mechanically “folding” them: he edited the text of his predecessor, shortened it or supplemented it according to other sources, and sometimes, in accordance with his historiographic views, changed the assessment of events or reinterpreted individual data. All these features of the work of ancient Russian historiographers greatly complicate the study of chronicles. However, science has developed a fairly perfect methodology for studying chronicle texts: by comparing them, similarities or differences in fragments telling about the same events are established, the sources of the code under study, the degree and nature of their processing in it, and the estimated time of its compilation are clarified.
The Tale of Bygone Years, which will be discussed later, was created at the beginning of the 12th century. Nestor is traditionally considered the compiler of its first edition, although the question of the possibility of identifying Nestor the chronicler and Nestor the hagiographer, the author of The Life of Boris and Gleb and The Life of Theodosius of the Caves, remains debatable to this day. In the rich chronicle tradition of Ancient Rus', The Tale of Bygone Years occupies a very special place. According to D.S. Likhachev, it was “not just a collection of facts of Russian history and not just a historical and journalistic work related to the urgent, but transient tasks of Russian reality, but an integral, literary exposition of the history of Rus'.
We can safely say, - the scientist continues, - that never before, nor later, until the 16th century, did Russian historical thought rise to such a height of scientific inquisitiveness and literary skill.
The oldest edition of The Tale of Bygone Years has not come down to us, but the second edition of the Tale has been preserved as part of the Laurentian and Radzivilov Chronicles, apparently only slightly changing its original text.
The Tale of Bygone Years, like most chronicles, is a collection, a work based on previous chronicle writings, which included fragments from various sources, literary, journalistic, folklore, etc. Let us digress here from the question of the origin of the components of the Tale temporary years” and, in particular, about its relationship with the previous annalistic code of the end of the 11th century. (scientists call it the Primary Code) and look at it as an integral monument.
“Behold the tales of temporary years, where did the Russian land come from, who in Kiev began first to reign, and where did the Russian land come from” - the chronicle begins with these words, and these first words became its traditional name - “The Tale of Bygone Years”.
For monuments of medieval historiography, dedicated to the problems world history, that is, for the chronicles, it was typical to begin the presentation "from the very beginning", from the creation of the world, and to trace the genealogical lines of the ruling dynasties to mythical heroes or even gods.
The Tale of Bygone Years did not remain aloof from this trend - Nestor also begins his narrative from a certain starting point. According to the biblical legend, God, having become angry with the human race, mired in all sorts of sins, decided to destroy it, sending it to the ground global flood. All "antediluvian" mankind perished, and only Noah, his wife, three sons and daughters-in-law managed to escape. From the sons of Noah - Shem, Ham and Japheth - the people who inhabit the earth today originated. That's what the Bible said.
Nestor, therefore, begins The Tale of Bygone Years with a story about the division of land between the sons of Noah, listing in detail, following the Byzantine chronicles, the lands that each of them inherited. In these chronicles, Rus', of course, was not mentioned, and the chronicler skillfully introduces the Slavic peoples into the context of world history: in the named list, after mentioning Ilyurik (Illyria - the eastern coast of the Adriatic Sea or the people who lived there), he adds the word "Slavs". Then, in the description of the lands inherited by the descendants of Japheth, mentions of Russian rivers appear in the annals - the Dnieper, Desna, Pripyat, Dvina, Volkhov, Volga. In the “part” of Japheth, the chronicler reports, “Rus, chyud and all languages live: Merya, Muroma, the whole ...” And then follows a list of tribes inhabiting the East European Plain.
After that, the chronicler goes on to the history of the Slavs, tells how they settled on the earth and how they were nicknamed depending on the place where they stayed to live: those who sat down along the Morava River called themselves marava, who settled on the banks of the Polot River - “nicknamed Polotsk”, and the Slovenes, who settled on the shores of Lake Ilmen, “are called by their name”. The chronicler tells about the founding of Novgorod and Kiev, about the customs of the glades, who, unlike the Drevlyans, Vyatichi and Northerners, were “men of wisdom and sense” and kept the custom of their fathers “meek and quiet.” This introductory historiographical part of The Tale of Bygone Years ends with a plot episode. The Khazars demanded tribute from the meadows (a tribe that lived in Kyiv and its environs), the same paid them tribute with swords. And the Khazar elders said to their lord: “Not a good tribute, prince! ... Si imut imati [will collect] tribute on us and on other countries. “Behold, everything will come true,” the chronicler proudly concludes.
This introductory part of The Tale of Bygone Years has an important historiographical significance. It stated that the Slavs, and Rus' among Slavic peoples, as equals among equals are mentioned among other nations - the descendants of the most worthy of the sons of Noah - Japheth. The Slavs, as if fulfilling some kind of destiny from above, inhabit the lands allotted to them, and the clearing, on the land of which the future capital of Rus', Kiev, was located, has long been distinguished by wisdom and high morality among other tribes. And finally, the prediction of the wise Khazar elders came true - Rus' now submits to no one, it itself collects tribute from the surrounding peoples. This is how Nestor defined the place of the Slavs and Rus' in world history. An equally important task was to justify the rights of the Kievan princes to own the entire Russian land. The legend about the calling of the Varangians appeared in the Primary Code, with Nestor it received its final completion. According to this legend, strife broke out among the Slavic tribes, “arising from clan to clan,” and it was decided to invite foreign princes from across the sea to come to establish order, “rule and reign” over them. According to the annals, three brothers came to Rus' - Rurik, Sineus and Truvor. Two of them died, and Rurik began to reign in Novgorod. After the death of Rurik, his relative Oleg became the prince, since Rurik's son, Igor, was still a "detesk velmi". Oleg, together with the baby Igor, went from Novgorod to the south, by cunning (and at the same time legally, for he acted "on behalf" of Rurik's son) captured Kiev and began to reign there. After the death of Oleg, Igor became the prince of Kyiv, that Igor, whose descendants still reign (during the creation of The Tale of Bygone Years) in Kyiv and in other destinies of the Russian land.
Researchers without much difficulty revealed the legend of the story of the calling of the Varangians. Suffice it to mention that the most ancient Russian monuments trace the dynasty of Kievan princes to Igor, and not to Rurik; it is also strange that Oleg’s “regency” continued under the “juvenile” Igor for no less than 33 years, and the fact that in the Primary Code Oleg is called not a prince, but a governor ... But this legend was one of the cornerstones of ancient Russian historiography. It corresponded primarily to the medieval historiographic tradition, where the ruling clan was often elevated to a foreigner: this eliminated the possibility of rivalry between local clans. “The origin of the French kings from the Trojans was believed even in the 16th century. The Germans derived many of their dynasties from Rome, the Swiss from the Scandinavians, the Italians from the Germans,” D.S. Likhachev illustrates this idea.
Secondly, the assertion that the Rurik dynasty has its roots in deep antiquity, should, according to the chronicler, raise the prestige of the consanguinity of the Rurik princes, strengthen their consciousness of fraternal ties, and prevent civil strife. However, feudal practice turned out to be in fact stronger than the most convincing historiographic concepts.
The introductory part of The Tale of Bygone Years has no dates. The first date in the annals is 6360 (852). From that time, the chronicler claims, "they began to call Ruska the land." The basis for this was the story of the Byzantine Chronicle of Georgy Amartol about the campaign of Rus' against Constantinople, which the chronicler himself identified with the campaign of the Kyiv princes Askold and Dir (who were later killed by Oleg). The same article of 852 contains a calculation, traditional for Byzantine chronography, of the years that have passed from one significant event in world history to another. It begins, as usual, by counting the years that have passed from Adam to the flood, from the flood to Abraham, etc., but, having mentioned the Byzantine emperor Michael III (842-867), the chronicler proceeds to the events of Russian history: “And from the first summer Mikhailov until the first summer of Olgov, the Russian prince, 29 years old ... ”And in this case, the history of Russia under the pen of the chronicler naturally merges with world history, continuing it.
The breadth of historical outlook, which distinguishes the introductory part of The Tale of Bygone Years, is also inherent in its further presentation. So, talking about the “choice of faiths” by Vladimir, the chronicler cites a lengthy speech, as if delivered to the prince by a Greek missionary, in which the entire sacred history is briefly retold (from the “creation of the world” to the crucifixion of Christ), decisions of seven ecumenical church councils are commented, at which controversial dogmatic issues of Christian doctrine were resolved, they are denounced by the “Latin”, that is, supporters Catholic, who openly opposed himself to the Greek Church after 1054. We see that the chronicle in these cases also goes beyond the framework of proper Russian history, raises problems of an ideological and church-dogmatic nature.
But the chronicler, of course, analyzes and comprehends the events in Rus' especially deeply. He assesses the significance of her Christianization, the activities of Russian translators and scribes under Yaroslav the Wise; talking about the emergence of the Kiev Caves Monastery, he persistently emphasizes the connection of Russian monasteries with the famous monasteries of Byzantium.
The chroniclers do not just describe the events, but try, of course, in the traditions of medieval Christian historiography, to comprehend and explain them. The chronicler interprets the defeat of the Russian princes in the war of 1068 with the Polovtsians as a consequence of "God's wrath" and even finds a specific reason for the manifestation of divine retribution: in Russia, according to him, there are still many Christians who are such only in words, they are superstitious, the devil is all sorts distracts them from God with temptations, “with trumpets and buffoons, harps and mermaids [holidays of commemoration of the dead].” At the merrymaking, the chronicler laments, “there are a lot of people,” “and the churches stand, but when there is a year of prayer [the hour of worship], few of them are found in the church.”
The chronicle returns again to the topic of "God's executions" in the article of 10S2, telling about the defeat of the Russian princes in the battle with the Polovtsians near Trepol (south of Kyiv). After abundantly interspersed with biblical quotations about the reasons that brought divine punishment, the chronicler paints a dramatic picture: the Polovtsy take away the captured Russian captives, and those, hungry, thirsty, naked and barefoot, answered with tears to each other, saying: “Az beh this city”, and others: “Yaz sowing all [villages, settlements]”; dachshunds ask [question] with tears, telling their kind and breathing, raising their eyes to heaven to the highest, knowing the secret. It is not difficult to understand the feelings of the people of that time and the complexity of the task of scribes and church preachers: having adopted a new religion, the Russian people, it would seem, gave themselves under the protection of a powerful and just god. So why does this god grant victory to the filthy (pagans) Polovtsy and doom his faithful Christians to suffering? This is how the constant theme of divine retribution for sins arises in medieval literature.
The same topic is addressed in the chronicle in the article of 1096, which tells about a new raid of the Polovtsy, during which the Kiev-Pechersk monastery also suffered. The chronicler has no choice but to promise that Christians suffering on earth will be rewarded for their torments with the kingdom of heaven. But the thought of the power of the "filthy" does not leave the chronicler, and he cites an extensive extract from the apocryphal word of Methodius of Patara, "explaining" the origin of various nomadic peoples and mentioning, in particular, the legendary "unclean peoples" who were driven north by Alexander the Great, imprisoned in the mountains, but who will "escape" from there "to the end of the age" - on the eve of the death of the world. Dangers came to the Russian land not only from outside: the country was tormented by internecine wars of princes. Chroniclers passionately oppose fratricidal strife. It is no coincidence, apparently, that the nameless (and perhaps formulated by the chronicler himself) speech of the princes at the snema (congress) in Lyubech is given: “Are we destroying the Russian land, which we ourselves are working on? And the Polovtsians carry our land differently, and for the sake of the essence, even between us rati. Yes, from now on, we are in one heart and observe the Russian lands.
However, Lyubechsky did not put an end to the “who”; on the contrary, immediately after its completion, a new atrocity took place: Prince Vasilko Terebovlsky was slandered and blinded. And the chronicler inserts into the text of the chronicle a separate detailed story about the events of this time, a passionate “tale of princely crimes” (words by D. S. Likhachev), which should convince not only the mind, but also the heart of readers of the urgent need for sincere and real brotherly love among the Rurikovich . Only their union and joint actions can protect the country from the devastating raids of the Polovtsy, warn against internal strife.
The Tale of Bygone Years, as a monument of historiography, is permeated with a single patriotic idea: chroniclers strive to present their people as equal among other Christian peoples, proudly recall the glorious past of their country - the valor of pagan princes, piety and wisdom of Christian princes. The chroniclers speak on behalf of all of Rus', rising above petty feudal disputes, resolutely condemning the strife and "which", describing with pain and anxiety the disasters brought by the raids of nomads. In a word, The Tale of Bygone Years is not just a description of the first centuries of the existence of Rus', it is a story about great beginnings: the beginning of Russian statehood, the beginning of Russian culture, about the beginnings, which, according to the chroniclers, promise in the future the power and glory of their homeland.
But The Tale of Bygone Years is not only a monument of historiography, it is also an outstanding literary monument. In the annalistic text, one can distinguish, as it were, two types of narration, which are essentially different from each other. One type is weather records, i.e. brief information about the events that have taken place. So, article 1020 is one message: "Born a son to Yaroslav, and named him Volodimer." This is a record of historical fact, nothing more. Sometimes a chronicle article includes a number of such fixations, a list of various facts, sometimes it even reports in sufficient detail about an event that is complex in its structure: for example, it is reported who took part in a military action, where the troops gathered, where they moved, how that event ended. or another battle, what messages were exchanged between princes-enemies or princes-allies. There are especially many such detailed (sometimes multi-page) weather records in the Kyiv Chronicle of the 12th century. But the point is not in the brevity or detail of the narrative, but in its very principle: whether the chronicler informs about the events that have taken place and whether he talks about them, creating a plot narrative. The Tale of Bygone Years is characterized by the presence of just such plot stories. Let us give one illustrative example of a short chronicle story.
The article of 968 tells about the siege of Kyiv by the Pechenegs. Prince Svyatoslav is far from his capital: he is fighting in Bulgaria. In besieged Kyiv, his mother, the elderly Princess Olga, and his sons remained. People are "fatigued ... by famine and water [from lack of water]." On the opposite bank of the Dnieper is the Russian governor Pretich with his retinue. The chronicle tells how the message of Princess Olga from the besieged city was transmitted to the governor. Let us cite this chronicle fragment in the translation of D.S. Likhachev: “And people in the city began to grieve and said:“ Is there anyone who could get to the other side and tell them: if you don’t approach the city in the morning, we will surrender to the Pechenegs. And one youth said: "I will pass," and they answered him: "Go." He left the city, holding a bridle, and ran through the Pechenegs' camp, asking them: "Did anyone see a horse?" For he knew the Pecheneg language, and they took him for their own. And when he approached the river, then, throwing off his clothes, he rushed into the Dnieper and swam. Seeing this, the Pechenegs rushed after him, shot at him, but could not do anything to him. On the other side they noticed him, drove up to him in a boat, took him in a boat and brought him to the squad. And the youth said to them: “If you don’t come to the city tomorrow, then people will surrender to the Pechenegs.”
The story does not end there: it tells how the governor Pretich cunningly made peace with the Pechenegs and how Svyatoslav delivered his capital from enemies. But let's get back to the episode. Before us is not just information that a certain lad, having reached Pretich, conveyed to him the request of the princess, but an attempt to describe exactly how the lad managed to carry out his daring plan. The youth runs through the camp of enemies with a bridle in his hand, asking in their native language about the supposedly missing horse - all these details make the story visible and convincing; this is an artistically organized plot, and not dry information about what happened. So, in addition to the actual weather records, the chronicle knows and plot stories, and it is they who put the chronicle genre in a number of other genres of ancient Russian literature.
In The Tale of Bygone Years, a special place is occupied by stories that go back to oral historical traditions and legends. Such are the stories about the first Russian princes: Oleg, Igor, Princess Olga, about Svyatoslav, about the time of Vladimir. In these stories, the style of chronicle narration, which D.S. Likhachev called the epic style, was especially manifested.
Here it is necessary to emphasize that the style in Old Russian literature is not a narrow linguistic phenomenon, not only the syllable and the actual linguistic means. Style is a special vision of the world, a special approach to its image, and, of course, the sum of techniques (including linguistic ones) with which this approach is implemented.
So, for a narrative in the epic style, it is characteristic that the hero is a person of a heroic feat, distinguished by some extraordinary quality - cunning, intelligence, courage, strength; such a "hero is closely associated with one or more exploits, his characteristic is one, unchanged, attached to the hero."
A story about such a hero is usually a story about his feat, hence the presence of a sharp, entertaining plot is an indispensable feature of such a story. Very often, the guiding force of the plot conflict is the cunning of the hero. Outwitted the Pechenegs by the Kiev youth, which was discussed above. In folk legends, Princess Olga is also distinguished by cunning: the success of all her “revenges” on the Drevlyans for the murder of her husband is determined by the insidious wisdom of the princess, who cunningly deceives the simple-hearted and swaggering Drevlyans. Let's follow how these chronicle stories about Olga's revenge are built.
An article of 945 tells that after the murder of Igor, the Drevlyans send ambassadors to his widow with a proposal to marry their prince Mal. The Drevlyan ambassadors, sailing on boats to Kyiv, landed near Borichev. And here is a curious clarification: “because then the water flows along [at the foot] of the Kievan Mountains and on the skirts of not gray people, but on the mountain,” it further explains exactly where Kiev was located then, where the princess’s tower stood, etc. Why these details that at first glance only slow down the course of the story? Apparently, this is a trace of oral narration, when the narrator, addressing the listeners, sought to achieve their visual or, better, spatial empathy: now that the borders of Kiev have become different, the listeners need to explain what the city was then, in the distant times of the reign of Igor and Olga .
“And telling Olza, as if the Drevlyans had come ...” - the chronicler continues the story. This is followed by Olga's dialogue with the Drevlyansk ambassadors. A lively, unconstrained dialogue is an indispensable element of a story, it is often psychologically dispassionate, it is characterized by illustrative speech, it is important, not as they say, but only what is said, since this “what” is the grain of the plot. So, Olga offers the Drevlyansk ambassadors to go to their boats for the night, and in the morning to demand from the people of Kiev: “We don’t ride horses, we don’t walk, but carry us into the boats.” This favor of Olga to the ambassadors of the murderer of her husband is unexpected, and thanks to this, the plot acquires a certain tension, amusing. However, the author immediately ceases to intrigue the listener, reporting that Olga "ordered to dig a great and deep hole in the courtyard of the tower." Here, as in other epic stories, the negative hero remains in the dark until the last moment, and the reader guesses (or even definitely knows) about the cunning of the positive hero and anticipates victory in advance, the intrigue is ajar for “his” reader and remains a mystery to the enemy in the story .
And indeed, the Drevlyansk ambassadors, not suspecting deceit, demand to carry themselves in the boat, as the princess advised them: the chronicler emphasizes that they are sitting in it “proudly”; this further aggravates the denouement of the plot: the Drevlyans, intoxicated by the imaginary honors rendered to them, are unexpectedly thrown into the pit, and Olga, approaching its edge, asks with ominous irony: “Are you a good honor?” And orders to fill them up alive.
The story of Olga’s last, fourth revenge is built according to the same scheme: having laid siege to the capital of the Drevlyans Iskorosten, Olga suddenly announces her mercy: “But I no longer want revenge, but I want to pay tribute little by little, and reconciled with you, I will go again [back].” The tribute that Olga demands is really insignificant: three doves and three sparrows from the yard. But when the Drevlyans bring the required birds, Olga's warriors, on the orders of the princess, tie to each of them "tser [tinder], wrapping in scarves of mali, twisting [tying] with a thread to anyone of them." In the evening, the birds are released into the wild, and they carry lit tinder on their paws to the city: and taco the pigeons, ovo cages, ovo vezhe, ovo or odrins [sheds, haylofts], and not without a yard, where it’s not hot.
So, the amusement of the plot is built on the fact that the reader, along with goodie deceives (often in a medieval cruel and insidious way) the enemy, until the last moment unaware of his disastrous fate.
Another thing is also important: the liveliness, naturalness of the story is achieved not only by the indispensable introduction of a dialogue of characters into it, but also by a detailed, scrupulous description of any details, which immediately evokes a specific visual image in the reader. Let us pay attention to how the way in which tinder was attached to the legs of birds is described in detail, how the various buildings are listed, which are “kindled” by sparrows and pigeons that returned to their nests and under the eaves (again, a specific detail).
We also meet all the same features of the epic tradition already familiar to us in the story of the siege of Belgorod by the Pechenegs, which is read in The Tale of Bygone Years under 997. A famine began in the besieged city. Having gathered at the veche, the townspeople decided to surrender to the mercy of the enemies: “Let's go to the Pechenegs, but who to live, who to kill; We are already dying of starvation.” But one of the elders was not present at the veche and, having learned about the decision of the people, offered his help. By order of the old man, two wells were dug, the townspeople gathered handfuls of oats, wheat and bran, got honey from the princely medusha (pantry), and from these supplies they prepared “cezh”, from which jelly is brewed, and satu - a drink from honey diluted with water . All this was poured into tubs installed in wells. Then the Pecheneg ambassadors were invited to the city. And the townspeople said to them: “Why destroy yourself? If [when] can you resist us? If you stand for 10 years, what can you do for us? We have more food from the earth. If you don't believe, then see your eyes." And further - again with details - it is told how the Pechenegs were brought to the wells, how they scooped tsezh and satu from them, cooked jelly and treated the ambassadors. The Pechenegs believed in a miracle and lifted the siege from the city.
We have reviewed some of the stories. folklore origin. These also include the legend about the death of Oleg, which served as the basis for the plot for Pushkin's "Song of the Prophetic Oleg", the story of the young kozhemyak who defeated the Pecheneg hero, and some others.
But in the annals we also find other stories, the plots of which were certain particular facts. Such, for example, is the message about the uprising in the Rostov land, led by the Magi, the story of how a certain Novgorodian was guessing from a magician (both - in the article of 1071), a description of the transfer of the relics of Theodosius of the Caves (in the article of 1091). Some historical events are narrated in detail, and these are stories, and not just detailed plot records. D.S. Likhachev, for example, drew attention to the plot of the chronicle "tales of princely crimes." In The Tale of Bygone Years, one of them is the story about the blinding of Vasilko Terebovlsky in the article of 1097.
What distinguishes such stories from weather records? First of all - the organization of the plot. The narrator dwells in detail on individual episodes that acquire a special meaning for the idea of the whole story. So, talking about the blinding of Vasilko Terebovlsky - an event that led to a long internecine war in which many Russian princes were drawn, the chronicler seeks to expose the criminals by all means: the Kiev prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavich and the Volyn prince David Igorevich.
This episode of Russian history is as follows. In 1097, the princes gathered in the city of Lyubech for a meeting (congress), where they decided to live in unanimity ("we have one heart") and strictly observe the principle: "let each one keep his fatherland." But when the princes began to disperse to their destinies, an hitherto unheard-of (according to the chronicler) "malice" happened. The boyars slandered before Davyd Igorevich (prince of Vladimir-Volynsky) Vasilko Rostislavich, Prince Terebovlsky. They convinced their overlord that Vasilka had conspired with Vladimir Monomakh to attack him, Davyd, and the Kyiv prince Svyatopolk. The chronicler, however, explains the slander by the intrigues of the devil, who, saddened by the just proclaimed friendship of the princes, "climbed" into the heart of "some husband", but somehow Davyd believed them and convinced Svyatopolk of this. The princes persuade Vasilko, on the way to his native inheritance, to linger and stay with them in Kyiv. Vasilka refuses at first, but then gives in to their requests.
The chronicler deliberately describes in detail (with the usual laconism of the chronicle narrative!), Describes how further events developed. Here are three princes sitting in Svyatopolk's hut and talking. At the same time, Davyd, who himself urged to captivate Vasilko, cannot restrain his excitement: he is "sedya as dumb." When Svyatopolk leaves, allegedly to order breakfast, and Davyd remains with Vasilko, the conversation does not stick again: “And Vasilko began to speak to Davydov, and there was no voice in Davyd, no obedience [no matter how , nor listen]: I was horrified [horrified] and had flattery in my heart. Davyd cannot stand it and asks the servants: “Where is the brother?”. They answer: "To stand on the seneh." And, having risen, David said: “I am going along the river, and you, brother, sit down.” And get up and go out." As soon as Davyd came out, the hut was locked, and Vasilko was chained. The next morning, after conferring with the people of Kiev, Svyatopolk orders Vasilko to be taken to the town of Belgorod near Kiev and there, on Davyd's advice, to blind him. It describes in detail how the prince's servants with difficulty overcome the mighty and desperately resisting prince...
But let us return to the above episode of the conversation between the princes. It is notable for the fact that here the chronicler skillfully conveys not only the actions (there are almost none of them), but the state of mind of the conspirators, and especially Davyd Igorevich. This psychologism, in general, very rare for Old Russian literature of the older period, speaks both of the great artistic possibilities and the literary skill of Old Russian scribes; These possibilities and this skill made themselves felt as soon as a sufficient occasion presented itself, when it was necessary to create a certain relation of the reader to what was being described. In this case, the chronicler departed from tradition, from the canon, from the usual dispassionate, etiquette depiction of reality, which is generally inherent in chronicle narrative.
It is in The Tale of Bygone Years, as in no other chronicle, that plot stories are frequent (we are not talking about inserted stories in the annals of the 15th-16th centuries). If we take the annals of the XI-XVI centuries. in general, then for the chronicle as a genre, a certain literary principle, developed already in the 11th-13th centuries, is more characteristic. and received from D.S. Likhachev, who studied it, the name of the “style of monumental historicism”.
Monumental historicism permeates the entire culture of Kievan Rus; its reflection in literature, and even more narrowly - in the annals is only a private, concrete embodiment of it.
According to the chroniclers, history is a book of human existence, to a large extent already written in advance, ordained by divine providence. The struggle between good and evil is eternal in the world, and the situation is also eternal when the people neglect their duties to God, violate his “covenants” and God punishes the disobedient - with pestilence, hunger, “finding foreigners” or even the complete death of the state and the “squandering” of the people. Therefore, the chronicle is full of analogies, broad historical perspectives, the event outline appears in it only as particular manifestations of the mentioned “eternal” collisions. Therefore, the chronicle speaks of the main characters of this historical mystery - kings, princes, governors and the main functions corresponding to their position in society. The prince is portrayed predominantly at the most central moments of his activity - upon accession to the throne, during battles or diplomatic actions; the death of a prince is a kind of result of his activity, and the chronicler seeks to express this result in a ceremonial posthumous obituary, which lists the valor and glorious deeds of the prince, while precisely those of his virtues that befit him as a prince and a Christian. The ceremoniality of the image requires compliance with the etiquette of verbal expression. The picture drawn here is an ideal, a kind of ideological and aesthetic credo of ancient Russian authors. We saw in the analysis of The Tale of Bygone Years that the chronicler often (and it is in The Tale of Bygone Years, in contrast to subsequent chronicles) crosses this credo, either giving way to the plots of historical legends, or offering entertaining eyewitness accounts, or concentrating on the image individual, most significant historical episodes. In these cases, ceremoniality also receded before the onslaught of reality, as we saw in the story about the blinding of Vasilko Terebovskiy.
But aside from these violations of the rules, these examples literary freedom which the chroniclers, the creators of The Tale of Bygone Years and the collections that preceded it, allowed themselves, then in general the chronicle is a genre in which the main, main provisions of the style of monumental historicism are most reflected.
The Tale of Bygone Years did not remain only a monument of its time. Almost all chronicles of subsequent centuries began with the Tale, although, of course, in the abridged codes of the 15th-16th centuries. or in local chroniclers, the most ancient history of Rus' appeared in the form of brief selections about the main events. Nevertheless, the history in them began from the very beginning, the historical continuity continued to be recognized by Russian scribes until the 17th century.
In the XI - the beginning of the XII century. the first Russian lives are created: two lives of Boris and Gleb, "The Life of Theodosius of the Caves", "The Life of Anthony of the Caves" (not preserved until modern times). Their writing was not only a literary fact, but also an important link in the ideological policy of the Russian state. At this time, the Russian princes persistently sought the rights of the Patriarch of Constantinople to canonize their Russian saints, which would significantly increase the authority of the Russian Church. The creation of a life was an indispensable condition for the canonization of a saint.
We will consider here one of the lives of Boris and Gleb - "Reading about the life and destruction" of Boris and Gleb and "The Life of Theodosius of the Caves." Both lives were written by Nestor. Comparing them is especially interesting, since they represent two hagiographic types - the life-martyria (the story of the martyrdom of the saint) and the monastic life, which tells about the whole life path of the righteous, his piety, asceticism, miracles he performed, etc. Nestor, of course, he took into account the requirements of the Byzantine hagiographic canon. There is no doubt that he knew translated Byzantine hagiographies. But at the same time, he showed such artistic independence, such an outstanding talent, that even the creation of these two masterpieces makes him one of the outstanding ancient Russian writers, regardless of whether he is also the compiler of The Tale of Bygone Years (this question remains controversial for the time being).
"Reading about Boris and Gleb"
In addition to two lives, the fate of the sons of the Kyiv prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich - Boris and Gleb is also devoted to a small article in the "Tale of Bygone Years", an analysis of which it is advisable to precede the analysis of Nestor's "Reading".
An article of 1015 in The Tale of Bygone Years tells that Prince Vladimir of Kiev, who was about to go on a campaign against the Pechenegs who attacked Rus', fell ill. He sends his son Boris at the head of his squad. In the absence of Boris, the old prince dies. The chronicler cites the traditional obituary praise of the deceased prince and then proceeds to the story of the fate of his sons (in the Laurentian Chronicle it is highlighted with a special heading: “On the murder of Borisov”). We give the beginning of the chronicle story.
“Svyatopolk, Sede Kiev, by his father, and called the Kyyans, and began to give them an estate. They took over, and their hearts were not with him, as their brothers were besha with Boris. Boris, who returned with a howl, having not found a cookie, the news came to him: "Your father is dead." And weeping for our fathers, we love our fathers more than [more than] anyone else, and came to Lte [on the Alta River, near Kiev]. Deciding to him the squad was taken away: “Behold, [here] the squad is taken away from you and howl. Go, sit down on the table for Kyieve.” He said: “Do not wake me to lay hands on my elder brother: if [if] my fathers die, then wake me up in my father’s place.” And when he heard it, the howl radiated from him. Boris is standing with his youths [younger retinue]”.
It is further said that Svyatopolk, having planned to kill Boris, wants to convince him of his disposition: “I want to have love with you, and by now I will give you [I will add to that inheritance, to that property that you owned during the life of your father].” Svyatopolk himself “came to Vyshegorod [a town near Kiev] at night, otai [secretly] called Putsha and the Vyshegorodsk bolyars, and said to them: “Do you accept me with all your heart?” The speech of Putsha from Vyshegorodtsi: “We can lay down our heads for you.” He said to them: "Do not lead anyone, go ahead, kill my brother Boris." They soon promised to do it for him.
Of course, we will not be able to raise the question of how much the plot of the chronicle story corresponded to actual events, and we understand well that the dialogue between Boris and the retinue or Svyatopolk with the Vyshegorodsky boyars is a literary device, the chronicler's conjecture. Nevertheless, in comparison with the above passage, the deliberate conventionality of the "Reading about Boris and Gleb" is striking and allows us to visualize the specifics of the hagiographic presentation.
The “Reading” opens with a lengthy introduction that outlines the entire history of the human race: the creation of Adam and Eve, their fall into sin, the “idolatry” of people is denounced, it is recalled how Christ, who came to save the human race, taught and was crucified, how the apostles and triumphed new faith. Only Rus' remained "in the first [former] charm of the idol [remained pagan]." Vladimir baptized Rus', and this act is portrayed as a universal triumph and joy: people in a hurry to accept Christianity rejoice, and not one of them resists and does not even “say” “against” the will of the prince, Vladimir himself rejoices, seeing the “warm faith” newly converted Christians. Such is the prehistory of the villainous murder of Boris and Gleb by Svyatopolk.
Svyatopolk thinks and acts according to the machinations of the devil. The “historiographical” introduction to life corresponds to the idea of the unity of the world historical process: the events that took place in Rus' are only a special case of the eternal struggle between God and the devil, and Nestor looks for an analogy, a prototype in past history for every situation, every action. Therefore, Vladimir's decision to baptize Rus' leads to a comparison of him with Eustathius Plakida (the Byzantine saint, whose life was discussed above) on the grounds that Vladimir, as "ancient Plakida", God "has no way (in this case, illness)" after which the prince decided to be baptized. Vladimir is also compared with Constantine the Great, whom Christian historiography revered as an emperor who proclaimed Christianity the state religion of Byzantium. Nestor compares Boris with the biblical Joseph, who suffered because of the envy of his brothers, etc.
The characters are also traditional. The chronicle says nothing about the childhood and youth of Boris and Gleb. Nestor, according to the requirements of the hagiographic canon, tells how, as a youth, Boris constantly read "the lives and torments of the saints" and dreamed of being honored with the same martyr's death.
The chronicle does not mention the marriage of Boris. Nestor, on the other hand, has a traditional motive - the future saint seeks to avoid marriage and marries only at the insistence of his father: "not for the sake of bodily lust", but "for the sake of the Caesar's law and the obedience of his father."
Further, the plots of the life and the annals coincide. But how different are the two monuments in the interpretation of events! The chronicle says that Vladimir sends Boris with his soldiers against the Pechenegs, the Reading speaks abstractly about some “military” (that is, enemies, enemy), in the chronicle Boris returns to Kiev, because he did not “found” (did not meet) enemy army, in "Reading" the enemies take flight, as they do not dare to "stand against the blessed."
Vivid human relations are visible in the annals: Svyatopolk attracts the people of Kiev to his side by giving them gifts (“estate”), they are reluctant to take them, since the same people of Kiev (“their brothers”) are in Boris’s army and - how completely natural in the real conditions of that time - the people of Kiev are afraid of a fratricidal war: Svyatopolk can raise the people of Kiev against their relatives who went on a campaign with Boris. Finally, let us recall the nature of Svyatopolk’s promises (“I will give you fire”) or his negotiations with the “Vyshny Novgorod boyars”. All these episodes in the chronicle story look very vital, in "Reading" they are completely absent. This shows the tendency towards abstraction dictated by the canon of literary etiquette. The hagiographer strives to avoid concreteness, lively dialogue, names (remember - the chronicle mentions the river Alta, Vyshgorod, Putsha - apparently, the elder of Vyshgorodtsy, etc.) and even lively intonations in dialogues and monologues.
When the murder of Boris, and then Gleb, is described, the doomed princes only pray, and they pray ritually: either quoting psalms, or - contrary to any life plausibility - urging the killers to "finish their business."
On the example of "Reading" we can judge about salient features hagiographic canon is a cold rationality, a conscious detachment from specific facts, names, realities, theatricality and artificial pathos of dramatic episodes, the presence (and the inevitable formal construction) of such elements of the life of a saint, about which the hagiographer had not the slightest information: an example of this is description of the childhood years of Boris and Gleb in "Reading".
The position of those researchers who see in the anonymous "Tale of Boris and Gleb" a monument created after the "Reading" seems to be very convincing; in their opinion, the author of the Tale is trying to overcome the schematic and conventional nature of the traditional life, to fill it with vivid details, drawing them, in particular, from the original hagiographic version that has come down to us as part of the chronicle. The emotionality in The Tale is subtler and more sincere, despite the conditionality of the situation: Boris and Gleb meekly surrender themselves into the hands of the killers and here they have time to pray for a long time, literally at the moment when the killer’s sword is already raised over them, etc., but at the same time, their replicas are warmed by some sincere warmth and seem more natural. Analyzing the "Tale", the well-known researcher of ancient Russian literature I.P. Eremin drew attention to the following stroke: Gleb in the face of the killers, "wearing his body" (trembling, weakening), asks for mercy. He asks, as children ask: "Don't hurt me... Don't hurt me!" (here "deeds" - to touch). He does not understand what and why he must die for... Gleb's defenseless youth is very elegant and touching in its way. This is one of the most "watercolor" images of ancient Russian literature. In the “Reading”, the same Gleb does not express his emotions in any way - he reflects (hopes that he will be taken to his brother and that, having seen Gleb’s innocence, he will not “destroy” him), he prays, and at the same time rather impassively. Even when the killer "yat [took] Saint Gleb for an honest head," he "is silent, like a fire without malice, all the mind is named to God and roaring up to heaven praying." However, this is by no means evidence of Nestor's inability to convey living feelings: in the same scene, he describes, for example, the experiences of the soldiers and servants of Gleb. When the prince orders to leave him in the boat in the middle of the river, then the soldiers “sting for the saint and often look around, wanting to see that he wants to be a saint”, and the youths in his ship, at the sight of the killers, “put down the oars, gray-haired mourning and weeping for the saints”. As you can see, their behavior is much more natural, and, therefore, the dispassion with which Gleb is preparing to accept death is just a tribute to literary etiquette.
After "Reading about Boris and Gleb" Nestor writes "The Life of Theodosius of the Caves" - a monk, and then hegumen of the famous Kiev-Pechersk monastery. This life is very different from the one discussed above by the great psychologism of the characters, the abundance of lively realistic details, the plausibility and naturalness of replicas and dialogues. If in the lives of Boris and Gleb (especially in the "Reading") the canon triumphs over the vitality of the situations described, then in the "Life of Theodosius", on the contrary, miracles and fantastic visions are described so clearly and convincingly that the reader seems to see what is happening with his own eyes and cannot don't "believe" him.
It is unlikely that these differences are only the result of Nestor's increased literary skill or a consequence of a change in his attitude towards the hagiographic canon. The reasons here are probably different. First, these are lives of different types. The life of Boris and Gleb is a martyr's life, that is, a story about the martyrdom of a saint; this main theme determined and artistic structure such a life, the sharpness of the opposition between good and evil, the martyr and his tormentors, dictated a special tension and "poster" directness of the culminating scene of the murder: it should be painfully long and moralizing to the limit. Therefore, in the lives of martyrs, as a rule, the tortures of the martyr are described in detail, aero death occurs, as it were, in several stages, so that the reader empathizes with the hero for a longer time. At the same time, the hero turns to God with lengthy prayers, in which his steadfastness and humility are revealed and the whole gravity of the crime of his killers is exposed.
"The Life of Theodosius of the Caves"
“The Life of Theodosius of the Caves” is a typical monastic life, a story about a pious, meek, industrious righteous man, whose whole life is a continuous feat. It contains many everyday collisions: scenes of the saint's communication with monks, laity, princes, sinners; in addition, in the lives of this type, the miracles performed by the saint are an obligatory component - and this introduces an element of plot entertainment into the life, requires considerable art from the author so that the miracle is described effectively and believably. Medieval hagiographers were well aware that the effect of a miracle is especially well achieved when purely realistic everyday details are combined with a description of the action of otherworldly forces - the phenomena of angels, dirty tricks perpetrated by demons, visions, etc.
The composition of the "Life" is traditional: there is both a lengthy introduction and a story about the saint's childhood. But already in this narrative about the birth, childhood and adolescence of Theodosius, an involuntary clash of traditional clichés and life's truth takes place. The piety of Theodosius’ parents is traditionally mentioned, the scene of naming the baby is significant: the priest calls him “Theodosius” (which means “given to God”), since he foresaw with his “hearted eyes” that he “wanted to be given to God from childhood.” Traditionally, there is a mention of how the boy of Theodosius “goes all day to the church of God” and did not approach his peers playing on the street. However, the image of the mother of Theodosius is completely unconventional, full of undeniable individuality. She was physically strong, with a rough male voice; passionately loving her son, she nevertheless cannot come to terms with the fact that he, a boy from a very wealthy family, does not think of inheriting her villages and “slaves”, that he walks in shabby clothes, categorically refusing to put on “bright” and clean, and thereby brings reproach to the family that he spends his time in prayer or baking prosphora. The mother stops at nothing to break the exalted piety of her son (this is the paradox - the parents of Theodosius are presented by the hagiographer as pious and God-fearing people!), She severely beats him, puts him on a chain, tears the chains off the body of the boy. When Theodosius manages to leave for Kyiv in the hope of getting a haircut in one of the monasteries there, the mother announces a large reward to the one who will show her the whereabouts of her son. She finally discovers him in a cave, where he labors together with Anthony and Nikon (later the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery grows out of this dwelling of hermits). And here she resorts to a trick: she demands from Anthony to show her her son, threatening that otherwise she will “destroy” herself “in front of the doors of the oven.” But, seeing Theodosius, whose face “has changed from his much work and restraint,” the woman can no longer be angry: she, embracing her son, “weeping bitterly”, begs him to return home and do whatever he wants (“according to her will”) . Theodosius is adamant, and at his insistence, the mother is tonsured in one of the women's monasteries. However, we understand that this is not so much the result of a conviction that the path to God he had chosen is correct, but rather an act of a desperate woman who realized that only by becoming a nun would she be able to see her son at least occasionally.
The character of Theodosius himself is also complex. He possesses all the traditional virtues of an ascetic: meek, industrious, adamant in the mortification of the flesh, full of mercy, but when a princely strife occurs in Kiev (Svyatoslav drives his brother, Izyaslav Yaroslavich, from the grand-ducal throne), Theodosius is actively involved in a purely worldly political struggle and boldly denounces Svyatoslav.
But the most remarkable thing in the "Life" is the description of the monastic life and especially the miracles performed by Theodosius. It was here that the “charm of simplicity and fiction” of the legends about the Kyiv miracle workers, which A. S. Pushkin so admired, manifested itself.
Here is one of such miracles performed by Theodosius. To him, then hegumen of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, the elder over the bakers comes and reports that there is no flour left and there is nothing to bake bread from for the brethren. Theodosius sends the baker: “Go, look in the bottom, how little flour you find in it ...” But the baker remembers that he swept the bottom of the bottom and swept a small pile of bran into the corner - from three or four handfuls, and therefore answers Theodosius with conviction: “I’m telling you the truth, father, as if I myself had a litter of that sap, and there’s nothing in it, except for a single cut in a corner.” But Theodosius, recalling the omnipotence of God and citing a similar example from the Bible, sends the baker again to see if there is any flour in the bin. He goes to the pantry, goes to the bottom of the barrel and sees that the bottom of the barrel, previously empty, is full of flour.
In this episode, everything is artistically convincing: both the liveliness of the dialogue, and the effect of a miracle, enhanced precisely thanks to skillfully found details: the baker remembers that there are three or four handfuls of bran left - this is a concretely visible image and an equally visible image of a bin filled with flour: there is so much of it that she even spills over the wall to the ground.
The next episode is very picturesque. Theodosius was late on some business with the prince and must return to the monastery. The prince orders that Theodosius be brought up in a cart by a certain youth. The same, seeing the monk in “wretched clothes” (Theodosius, even being hegumen, dressed so modestly that those who did not know him took him for a monastery cook), boldly addresses him: “Chrnorizche! Behold, you are all day apart, but you are difficult [here you are idle all the days, and I work]. I can't ride horses. But having done this [we will do this]: let me lie down on the cart, you can go on horses. Theodosia agrees. But as you get closer to the monastery, you meet more and more people who know Theodosius. They respectfully bow to him, and the boy gradually begins to worry: who is this well-known monk, albeit in shabby clothes? He is completely horrified when he sees with what honor Theodosius is met by the monastery brethren. However, the abbot does not reproach the driver and even orders him to feed and pay him.
Let's not guess whether there was such a case with Theodosius himself. Undoubtedly something else - Nestor could and knew how to describe such collisions, he was a writer great talent, and the conventionality with which we meet in the works of ancient Russian literature is not the result of inability or special medieval thinking. When it comes to the very understanding of the phenomena of reality, one should only talk about special artistic thinking, that is, ideas about how this reality should be depicted in monuments of certain literary genres.
Over the next centuries, many dozens of different lives will be written - eloquent and simple, primitive and formal, or, on the contrary, vital and sincere. We will have to talk about some of them later. Nestor was one of the first Russian hagiographers, and the traditions of his work will be continued and developed in the works of his followers.
Starting from the XVI century. an important period of gradual formation of the national characteristics of the three future East Slavic nations begins: the Great Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian.
The formation of a special literary tradition begins in each of the three fraternal East Slavic peoples, but only from the 16th century. we can talk about the literature of ancient Great Russian, ancient Ukrainian and ancient Belarusian. By the 17th century their national characteristics are finalized.
If we call the ancient Great Russian literature of the XIV-XVII centuries. still ancient Russian, then this is nothing more than a tribute to a long-established tradition. It is already difficult now to establish new terminology, change language habits and give "unsettled" words (like the word "Old Great Russian") a stable meaning.
It goes without saying that there is no need, and indeed no possibility, to speak in the history of literature about all the monuments that existed in Ancient Rus'.
Naturally, it turns out that we are talking mainly about those works that continue to interest us today, about those that are part of our great literary heritage, about those that are better known and more understandable and accessible to us. In this case, there is some distortion of perspective - a distortion that is acceptable and inevitable.
Large compilation monuments of Ancient Russia have not yet been sufficiently studied: various types of Palea (“Explanatory”, “Chronographic”, “Historical”, etc.), “Great Honored Menaia”, Prologues, collections of sustainable content (such as “Chrysostom ”, “Izmaragd”, etc.) have been studied so little that it is difficult to talk about them in the history of literature. Meanwhile, many of them were read more often and have come down to us in more lists than the monuments we are familiar with, without which the history of literature cannot do if it claims to be of general educational significance for the modern reader. So, for example, "Izmaragd" was undoubtedly read more and was of greater importance in the 16th-17th centuries than the more famous in the 19th and 20th centuries. Domostroy, which, by the way, depended on Izmaragd itself. Nevertheless, we include Domostroy in the history of Russian literature, and omit Izmaragd. And we do this quite consciously: Domostroy is not only more famous in the history of Russian culture, but it is also more indicative of the historical and literary process. It bears the characteristic imprint of the 16th century. - Izmaragd does not have or almost does not have this imprint of its time (XIV century). In any case, the traces of its era (the era of the Russian Pre-Renaissance) must still be identified by researchers in it.
In general, the reader should be warned about one important circumstance: despite the fact that Russian literary works of the XI-XVII centuries. were engaged the largest representatives academic science – V. N. Tatishchev, N. I. Novikov, Evgeny Bolkhovitinov, K. F. Kalaidovich, F. I. Buslaev, N. S. Tikhonravov, A. N. Pypin, A. N. Veselovsky, A. A. Shakhmatov, V.N. Peretz, V.M. Istrin, N.K. Nikolsky, A.S. Orlov, V.P. weakly.
Many monuments have not only not been studied, but have not been published either: they have not been completed with the publication of the Great Honored Menaion, the Elinsky and Roman Chronicler has not been published, the Prologue has not been scientifically published, many collections of a stable composition, some chronicles have not been published. The largest writer of the 16th century has not been published scientifically. Maxim Grek, many works by Simeon of Polotsk remain unpublished; No scientific publications many famous monuments ancient Russian literature.
Many of the manuscript collections ancient Russian monuments not described or described in insufficient detail in their composition.
Ancient Russian literature, like the ancient Russian art, in many ways is still "behind the seven locks".
Does this mean that the time has not yet come to write a scientific history of ancient Russian literature? Many of the greatest Russian philologists of the past thought so. Other Russian philologists did not create histories of ancient Russian literature, but reviews of monuments, arranging them according to genres, themes, or grouping them according to historical periods, but without trying to determine the features of the era in them, to see significant historical and literary changes and development.
Proposed history of Russian literature of the XI-XVII centuries. takes into account the experience of the first two volumes of the ten-volume History of Russian Literature, published by the Institute of Russian Literature of the USSR Academy of Sciences in the 1940s, and the first part of the first volume of the three-volume History of Russian Literature, edited by D. D. Blagoy. But the main factual and theoretical foundation of this part was the numerous studies on the history of Russian literature of the Sector of Old Russian Literature of the Institute of Russian Literature of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR.
Literature of Kievan Rus
X - beginning of the XII century
1. Introduction
Turning to the literature of distant epochs - be it ancient literature, medieval literature of European or Asian countries, or the literature of Ancient Rus', we must somewhat digress from the usual assessments and ideas with which we approach the literary phenomena of modern times, and try to imagine with possible completeness those specific conditions in which literature developed in a particular country in the era we are studying.
Writing and literature came to Rus' along with the adoption of Christianity. At first, the scribes, both Byzantine and Bulgarian missionaries, as well as their Russian students and associates, considered their main task to be propaganda new religion and providing the churches being built in Rus' with books necessary for worship. In addition, the Christianization of Rus' led to a radical restructuring of the worldview. The former pagan ideas about the origin and structure of the universe or about the history of mankind were rejected, and Rus' was in dire need of literature that would expound the Christian concept of world history, explain cosmogonic problems, give a different, Christian, explanation of natural phenomena, etc.
So, the need for books in the young Christian state was extremely great, but at the same time, the possibilities for satisfying this need were very limited: in Russia there were still few skilled scribes, corporations of scribes (scriptoria) were just beginning to be created, the writing process itself was very long Finally, the material on which the books were written - parchment - was expensive. There was a strict choice that fettered individual initiative: the scribe could take up the copying of the manuscript only if he worked in a monastery or knew that his work would be paid by the customer. And the customers could be either rich and eminent people, or the church.
The Tale of Bygone Years has preserved an important testimony for us: Prince Yaroslav the Wise of Kiev (died in 1054), who, according to the chronicler, loved "church statutes" and day”, gathered scribes who “translated” Greek books. “And many books have been written off, and by them, learning to be faithful, people enjoy the teachings of the divine.” The predominance of "divine" books, that is, books of sacred writing or liturgical books, among those copied and translated is beyond doubt. Another thing is surprising: despite the primary need for texts of sacred scripture or liturgical texts, Kyiv scribes still found the opportunity to bring from Bulgaria, translate or rewrite works of other genres: chronicles, historical stories, collections of sayings, natural science works. The fact that among more than 130 handwritten books of the 11th-12th centuries that have survived to our time, about 80 are liturgical books, finds its explanation not only in the tendencies of early bookishness discussed above, but also in the fact that these books, stored in stone churches, they could rather survive, not perish in the fire of the conflagrations that devastated the wooden, mainly, ancient Russian cities. Therefore, the repertoire of books of the XI-XII centuries. to a large extent, it can only be reconstructed according to indirect data, because the manuscripts that have come down to us are an insignificant part of the book wealth.
Table of contents
Introduction………………………………………………………........................... ....................3
Chapter I
§1. Literature of Kievan Rus
1.1. Literature and folklore………………………………………………………………7
1.2. The emergence of literature ………………………………………………………………8
1.3. Main genres………………………………………………………………….10
§2. Chronicle of Kievan Rus
2.1. The emergence of chronicle. Hypotheses……………………………………………...12
2.2. Development History………………………………………………………………....17
Chapter II.
§1. The main monuments of literature of Kievan Rus………………………...20
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….26
References…………………………………………………………………....27
Introduction
For my work, I chose the topic of chronicle writing and literature of Kievan Rus. In my opinion, this is quite an interesting work.
Kievan Rus - one of the largest states of the Middle Ages. It arose at the turn of the 8th - 11th centuries as an association of East Slavic tribal unions. This is the time of cardinal historical shifts in the East Slavic lands.
The emergence of ancient Russian literature is inextricably linked with the process of creating an early feudal state. The necessary prerequisites for its emergence are the formation of the state, the emergence of writing, the existence of highly developed forms of oral folk art. For the development of original ancient Russian culture, the fact that Rus' adopted Christianity from Byzantium, which at that time was the bearer of the highest culture, was of no small importance. Christianity played a progressive role in the formation of the culture of Ancient Rus'. Also in the development of book education, including literature, big role played by monasteries, which in the first years of their existence were the center of a new Christian culture.
The history of Kievan literature has been attracting close attention of scholars for more than 150 years. Likhachev Dmitry Sergeevich 1 studied the literature of Kievan Rus, the South Slavic influence on it. After all, after the Mongol-Tatar invasion, Rus' was in a hurry to make up for the colossal damage that the Batu invasions had done to Russian culture and literature. Dmitry Sergeevich also considered the system of genres in the literature of Kievan Rus. All this he outlined in his work entitled "Research on Old Russian Literature." He was not the only one who studied Ancient Rus'. This was done by such scientists as Bush Vladimir Vladimirovich, Vinokur Tatyana Grigoryevna, Shlyakov Nikolay Vasilyevich, Pautkin Alexey Arkadyevich and many others. Each contributed something of his own, and examined the history of the development of the literature of Kievan Rus from different points of view.
1 Likhachev Dmitry Sergeevich - "Research on Old Russian Literature."
Chronicle-writing also attracted many scientists: Viktor Kuzmich Ziborov,
Berezhkov Nikolai Georgievich, Shakhmatov Alexei Alexandrovich and many
others. There is no consensus on the time of the origin of chronicle writing, although all researchers admit that the chronicles that have come down to us are collections, which included earlier chronicle collections.
The first to study chronicles was VN Tatishchev 2 . Thinking of creating his own grandiose "History of Russia", he turned to all the chronicles known in his time, found many new monuments. After V. N. Tatishchev, A. Schletser was engaged in the study of chronicles, specifically "The Tale of Bygone Years". If V. N. Tatishchev worked “in breadth”, combining additional information from many lists in one text and, as it were, following in the footsteps of an ancient chronicler - archer, then Schlozer worked “in depth”, revealing a lot of typos, errors, inaccuracies in the text itself. Both research approaches, with all their external differences, had similarities in one thing: the idea of a non-original form, in which the Tale of Bygone Years has come down to us, was fixed in science. This is the great merit of both remarkable historians. The next major step was taken by the famous archaeographer P. M. Stroev. Both V. N. Tatishchev and A. Shleptser imagined The Tale of Bygone Years as the creation of one chronicler, in this case Nestor. P. M. Stroev 3 expressed a completely new view of the chronicle, as a set of several earlier chronicles, and began to consider all the chronicles that have come down to us to be such sets. Thus, he opened the way to a more methodologically correct study of the chronicles and codes that have come down to us, which have not come down to us in their original form. Extraordinarily important was the next step taken by A. A. Shakhmatov 4 , who showed that each of the annalistic collections, from the 11th century to the 16th century, is not a random conglomeration of heterogeneous chronicle sources, but a historical work with its own political position dictated by the place and creation time.
2 V. N. Tatishchev - “Russian History”.
3 P. M. Stroev - “ Detailed description Slavic-Russian Manuscripts Stored in the Library of the Volokolamsky Monastery.
4 A. A. Shakhmatov - "The Tale of Bygone Years".
The initial part of the Laurentian, Ipatiev and a number of other chronicles of the XIV century and the following centuries is formed by the "Tale of Bygone Years" of the beginning of the XII century. Its first edition probably belonged to the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor and was brought to 1113 by him. In 1113, Prince Szyatopolk died, and Vladimir Monomakh occupied the Kiev table, on whose initiative the abbot of the Kiev Vydubetsky monastery Sylvester compiled the second edition of the Tale, brought to 1116. The author of the third edition, brought to 1118, is unknown to us by name. Already the first edition of The Tale of Bygone Years is not the work of one author - it is an annalistic code, which includes Kyiv and Novgorod annalistic codes of the 11th century.
Such a scheme for the development of ancient Russian chronicles was outlined by the outstanding researcher A. A. Shakhmatov in late XIX- early XX centuries. He tried to determine the time and place of origin of the 11th century chronicles and put forward a hypothesis according to which the oldest Kiev code was compiled from 1039 in connection with the formation of the metropolis in Kyiv. However, this dating of the beginning of chronicle writing in Rus' raised doubts among many subsequent researchers: M.N. Tikhomirov 5 , L.V. Cherepnin and other historians found it possible to push it back to the 10th century, and B.A. Rybakov even to the 9th century.
Such remarkable scientists as V. M. Istrin, A. N. Nasonov, M. P. Pogodin and many others also made a great contribution to the study of the history of Russian chronicle writing.
At present, the history of ancient chronicle writing is presented in the following form.
Oral historical traditions existed long before chronicle writing; with the advent of writing, separate records of historical events probably appear, however, chronicle as a genre appears, apparently, only during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise (1019-1054).
At this time, Rus', having adopted Christianity, begins to be weary of Byzantine church guardianship and seeks to justify its right to church independence, since Byzantium was inclined to consider states,
5 M. N. Tikhomirov - "Russian Chronicle".
In the Christianization of which she took part in one way or another, as the spiritual flock of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, she sought to turn them into her vassals and politically.
Kyiv scribes argued that the history of Rus' is similar to the history of other Christian states. There were also Christian ascetics here, who tried by personal example to induce the people to accept the new faith.
There was also in Rus' his “equal-to-the-apostles” (i.e., equal to the apostles - disciples of Jesus Christ) Prince Vladimir, who baptized his people and thereby became like Constantine the Great, the emperor, who declared Christianity the state religion of Byzantium.
To substantiate this idea, as D.S. Likhachev suggests, a set of traditions about the emergence of Christianity in Rus' was compiled. It includes stories about the baptism and death of Olga, a story about the Christian Varangians, a story about the baptism of Rus', a story about princes Boris and Gleb, and, finally, extensive praise for Yaroslav the Wise.
Currently, more than two hundred lists of chronicles are known.
In my work, I will introduce you to the annals and literature of Kievan Rus, tell you when and how they appeared, what they wrote in those days, and what has come down to our times.
Chapter I
§1. Literature of Kievan Rus.
1.1. Literature and folklore.
The development of oral poetry preceded the appearance of written literature, shaped and determined its ideological orientation and artistic feature.
Songs, epics, proverbs, fairy tales, lamentations, riddles, various kinds of legends have long been preserved in the people's memory. And although the written sources of the times of Ancient Rus' preserved them only partially, and most of the literary records were made in the 17th - 19th centuries, it is still possible to imagine the main character and content of the folklore of the 10th - 12th centuries from them.
Significant place in folk art Russ were occupied by mythological subjects, rooted in the pagan ideas of the ancient Slavs about nature, life and death, in the cult rites of pre-class society.
Ritual folklore was closely connected with calendar and non-calendar holidays. They celebrated carols and carnival. The holiday of the Red Hill and the Rainbow meant the meeting of spring, which was escorted to the Semik. There were summer holidays - Rusalia and Kupala, autumn - roasting, etc. In addition, weddings and funerals were arranged with a certain ceremony. These and other events were accompanied by specially timed songs and dances, divination and spells.
Songs were especially widespread in Rus'. They were sung at weddings. Song lamentations - "crying" - were part of the funeral rite. Songs were sung at feasts and feasts.
The most tenacious forms of folklore were incantations and incantations. In them, our ancestors saw a means of magical influence on the outside world. They were closely connected with the daily life of a person, with the desire to ensure their economic well-being, preserve the health of loved ones, etc.
1 Folklore - Folk art, most often it is oral; artistic collective creative activity of the people, reflecting their life, views, ideals; created by the people and existing among the masses.
There were fairy tales, traditions, legends in Rus'. It is possible that most fairy tales its roots go back into the depths of the centuries. Such are the numerous tales about the fight against the snake, woven into the epic epic, tales about the things of the virgin, about the Baba Yaga, tales about animals. They also clearly show the desire of people by the power of words, conspiracies, spells to influence the elemental forces of nature hostile to people.
At the same time, the inhabitants of Ancient Rus' in fairy tales expressed their dream of a good, happy life. Hence the fairy tales about the flying carpet, walking boots, self-assembled tablecloths, about palaces that grow in one night, about a wonderful spinning wheel.
Traces of numerous traditions and legends were brought to us by written sources. Most of the legends are of a religious nature and interpret questions about the creation of the world, the baptism of Rus', and the deeds of churchmen. However, there are legends of a different, secular content. These include legends about Kiya, Shchek, Khoriv and their sister Lybid and the founding of Kiev, legends about Oleg and his death, about Olga's revenge on the Drevlyans, about calling the Varangians to Rus', etc.
Rus' knew and loved proverbs, sayings, riddles. They are woven into written sources by chroniclers.
Among the monuments of oral art, a special place is occupied by epics, popularly known as "old people". The plots of most epics originated in the era of the Old Russian state and reflect historical facts, ideology and everyday features of that time.
The oral folklore of Rus', which was formed long before the advent of writing, had a great influence on the development of ancient Russian literature.
1.2. The emergence of literature.
The era of Kievan Rus belongs to one of the most brilliant flowerings of Russian literature. Old Russian literature is one of the most ancient in medieval Europe; it is older than French, English, German. The forerunner of ancient Russian literature, as I said, was folklore 1,
Common in the Middle Ages in all walks of life. Folklore accompanied Old Russian literature throughout its history. Through him, popular ideology, a popular point of view on the events depicted, penetrated into literature.
Literature, on the other hand, arose in Rus' simultaneously with the adoption of Christianity, that is, in 988. It was an important political event that allowed the young state to get acquainted with the rich Slavic - Byzantine culture. Beginnings literary life in our country, in addition to oral poetry, had another source - the literary works of other peoples, through translations in the Church Slavonic language came after the introduction of Christianity.
With the annexation of Russian lands to Christendom our ancestors opened the richest treasury of human experience and wisdom - the Bible.
Slavic literature begins with translations of the books of Holy Scripture. The first works were made by Cyril and Methodius. Initially, they translated mainly from the ancient Greek language, in rare cases - from Latin, Hebrew and Syriac sources.
After the adoption of Christianity, many books were brought to X-XI centuries from Byzantium and Bulgaria. The Bulgarian and Byzantine priests and their Russian students had to translate and rewrite the books needed for the young state.
It was necessary to talk about how - from a Christian point of view - the world is arranged, to explain the meaning of expediently and wisely "arranged by God" nature. In a word, it was necessary to immediately create literature devoted to the most complex worldview issues.
There are many translated books. First of all, this is the Holy Scripture, the writings of Christian writers, liturgical books. But translated literature does not precede the development of Russian original literature, but accompanies it.
One of the most early monuments own literature was Illarion's "Sermon on Law and Grace". The "Word" was uttered in 1049 on the occasion of the completion of the construction of defensive structures in Kyiv. The political problems of Kievan Rus were clearly reflected here.
At the beginning of the 12th century, the Kiev monk Nestor completed The Tale of Bygone Years, which had the lengthy title “Behold the Tale of Bygone Years, where the Russian land came from, who in Kiev began first to reign, and from where the Russian land began to eat.” It included oral traditions and written Kievan and Novgorod annals dating back to the time of the establishment of Christianity in Rus'.
A characteristic feature of ancient Russian literature is historicism. Her heroes are predominantly historical figures, she almost does not allow fiction and strictly follows the fact. Even numerous stories about "miracles" - phenomena that seem supernatural to a medieval person, are not so much the fiction of an ancient Russian writer, but accurate records of the stories of either eyewitnesses or the persons themselves with whom the "miracle" happened.
The historicism of Old Russian literature has a specifically medieval character. The course and development of historical events is explained by God's will, the will of Providence. The heroes of the works are princes, rulers of the state, standing at the top of the hierarchical ladder of feudal society.
Another feature of Old Russian literature is anonymity or pseudonymity. This was a consequence of the religious-Christian attitude of feudal society to man, and in particular to the work of a writer, artist, and architect. There was no concept of copyright.
In general, Old Russian literature can be regarded as the literature of one theme and one plot. This plot is world history, and this topic is the meaning of human life.
Monasteries, which in the first years of their existence were the center of a new Christian culture, played an important role in the development of book education, including literature. Particularly great was the role of the Kiev Caves Monastery, founded in the middle of the 11th century, in this respect.
1.3. Genres of literature of Kievan Rus.
Literary genres are commonly understood as historically established types of
Py works, united by both formal and substantive properties.
The first variants of the systematization of literary genres appeared in the era of antiquity, subsequently certain genres changed more than once, experienced their ups and downs in the literature of different countries and peoples. D. Likhachev pointed out that far from all genres of ancient Russian literature migrated from Byzantium. Some of them did not hit our soil at all, and some were created anew, on their own.
One of the most ancient and famous monuments of Russian writing is Novgorod birch bark letters. They existed from about the 11th century and reflected the daily life of medieval Russian society. Documents (petitions, debt lists), personal letters, church texts, folklore works have survived among the birch bark letters, but it is difficult to call them full-fledged literary works.
Among the genres of ancient Russian literature, the central place is occupied by the chronicle, which developed over many centuries. None European tradition did not have as many annals as the Russian.
In Byzantium they were called chronicles. They describe historical events in detail (by year and month). Chronicles have been preserved in many cities and at large monasteries. The Tale of Bygone Years is considered the earliest chronicle that has survived to this day.
Religious literature became widespread in medieval Rus': lives (descriptions of the life and deeds of saints), works of the holy fathers, translations from the Gospel, visions (descriptions of the interaction of people with the divine world).
Gradually, such genres as walking (travel notes), stories, words and legends took shape. The Tale of Igor's Campaign, one of the first works glorifying the military glory of Rus', received great fame.
The glorification of virtue and the guise of vices were written in teachings and stories, for example, "Teaching of Vladimir Monomakh."
An example of solemn eloquence was the word ("The Word of Law and Grace").
Speaking about the system of genres of ancient Russian literature, one more important circumstance should be noted: for a long time, until the 17th century, this literature did not allow literary fiction. Old Russian authors wrote and read only about what was in reality: about the history of the world, countries, peoples, about generals and kings of antiquity, about holy ascetics. Even transmitting outright miracles, they believed that it could be that there were fantastic creatures inhabiting unknown lands through which Alexander the Great passed with his troops, that in the darkness of caves and cells demons appeared to holy hermits, then tempting them in the form of harlots , then frightening in the guise of beasts and monsters.
Frank fiction was allowed only in one genre - the genre of the apologist, or parable. It was a miniature story, each of whose characters and the whole plot existed only to illustrate an idea visually. It was an allegory story, and that was its meaning.
Thus, initially in Rus', literature of the most diverse genres was formed. These were historical narratives, biographies of saints and princes, ecclesiastical and political treatises. In the 11th-13th centuries, about 140 thousand books of several hundred titles were in circulation, while the population did not exceed 7 million people. Among the popular writings were books dating back to the pre-Christian era: records of folk signs, recipes for healing, epics, legends where pagan gods were mentioned.
§2. Chronicle of Kievan Rus.
2.1. The emergence of chronicle. Hypotheses.
The history of the emergence of the initial Russian chronicle attracted the attention of more than one generation of Russian scientists, starting with V. N. Tatishchev. However, only Academician A. A. Shakhmatov 2 succeeded at the beginning of this century in resolving the
2 A. Shakhmatov - "Investigations about the most ancient Russian chronicles" (1908)
Ros on the composition, sources and editions of the Tale. The results of his research are presented in the works "Research on the most ancient Russian annals" (1908) and "The Tale of Bygone Years" (1916). In 1039, a metropolis was established in Kyiv - an independent organization. At the court of the metropolitan, the most ancient Kiev code was created, brought to 1037. This collection, A. A. Shakhmatov suggested, arose on the basis of Greek translated chronicles and local folklore material. In Novgorod, in 1036, the Novgorod Chronicle was created, on the basis of which, in 1050, the Ancient Novgorod Code appeared. In 1073, the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor the Great, using the ancient Kiev code, compiled the first Kiev-Pechersk code, which included historical events that occurred after the death of Yaroslav the Wise (1054). On the basis of the first Kiev-Pechersk and Novgorod vault, the second Kiev-Pechersk vault is being created. The author of the second Kiev-Pechersk collection supplemented his sources with materials from Greek chronographs. The second Kiev-Pechersk vault served as the basis for the "Tale of Bygone Years", the first edition of which was created in 1113 by the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor, the second edition - by the abbot of the Vydubitsky monastery Sylvester in 1116 and the third - by an unknown author in the same monastery in 1118 year.
Interesting refinements of A. A. Shakhmatov's hypothesis were made by the Soviet researcher D. S. Likhachev. He rejected the possibility of the existence in 1039 of the Ancient Kiev Code and connected the history of the emergence of chronicle writing with a specific struggle that the Kiev state waged in the 30-50s of the 11th century against the political and religious claims of the Byzantine Empire.
Byzantium sought to turn the church into its political agents, which threatened the independence of the Russian state. The struggle of 2 A. Rus with Byzantium reached its peak in the middle of the 11th century. The political struggle between Rus' and Byzantium turns into an open armed clash: in 1050, Yaroslav sends troops to Constantinople, led by his son Vladimir. Although Vladimir's campaign ended in defeat, in 1051 Yaroslav elevated the Russian priest Hilarion to the metropolitan throne. This further strengthened and rallied the Russian state. The researcher suggests that in 30-40 years at 11
Century, by order of Yaroslav the Wise, a record was made of oral folk historical traditions about the spread of Christianity. This cycle served as the future basis of the chronicle. D.S. Likhachev suggests that "Tales of the initial spread of Christianity in Rus'" were written down by the scribes of the Kyiv Metropolitanate under Sophia Cathedral. Obviously, under the influence of Paschal chronological tables - Paschalia, compiled in the monastery. Nikon betrayed his narration in the form of weather records - by years. In the first Kiev-Pechersk collection, created around 1073, Nikon included a large number of legends about the first Russians, their numerous campaigns against Constantinople. Thanks to this, the code of 1073 acquired an even more anti-Byzantine orientation. In Tales of the Spread of Christianity, Nikon gave the chronicle a political edge. Thus, the first Kiev-Pechersk vault was the spokesman for folk ideas. After Nikon's death, work on the chronicle continued uninterruptedly within the walls of the Kiev Caves Monastery, and in 1095 the second Kiev Caves vault appeared. The second Kiev-Pechersk set continued the propaganda of the ideas of the unity of the Russian land, begun by Nikon. This code also sharply condemned princely civil strife. Further, in the interests of Svyatopolk, on the basis of the second Kiev-Pechersk Code, Nestor created the first edition of The Tale of Bygone Years. Under Vladimir Monomakh, hegumen Sylvester, on behalf of the Grand Duke in 1116, compiled the second edition of the Tale of Bygone Years. This edition has come down to us as part of the Laurentian Chronicle. In 1118, the third edition of The Tale of Bygone Years was created by an unknown author in the Vydubitsky Monastery. It was brought up to 1117. This edition is best preserved in the Ipatiev Chronicle.
There are many differences in these hypotheses, but both of these theories prove that the beginning of chronicle writing in Rus' is an event of great importance.
B. A. Rybakov develops a different concept of the development of the initial stage of Russian chronicle writing 3 . Analyzing the text of the initial Russian chronicle, the researcher suggests that short weather records began to be kept in Kyiv with the advent of the Christian clergy (since 867) during the reign of Askold. At the end of X
3 B. A. Rybakov - “Ancient Rus'. Legends. Epics. Chronicles".
For centuries, in 996-997, the "First Kiev Chronicle Code" was created, summarizing the heterogeneous material of brief weather records, oral stories.
This code was created at the Church of the Tithes, Anastas Korsunyanin, the rector of the cathedral, Bishop of Belgorod and Vladimir's uncle, Dobrynya, took part in its compilation. The code gave the first historical generalization of the century and a half life of Kievan Rus and ended with the glorification of Vladimir. At the same time, B. A. Rybakov suggests, Vladimirov’s cycle of epics was also taking shape, in which a people’s assessment of events and persons was given, while the chronicle introduced court assessments, book culture, squad epic, and also folk tales.
Sharing the point of view of A. A. Shakhmatov on the existence of the Novgorod vault of 1050, B. A. Rybakov believes that the chronicle was created with the active participation of the Novgorod posadnik Ostromir and this "Ostromir Chronicle" should be dated 1054-1060. It was directed against Yaroslav the Wise and the Varangians-mercenaries. It emphasized the heroic history of Novgorod and glorified the activities of Vladimir Svyatoslavich and Vladimir Yaroslavich, Prince of Novgorod. The chronicle was purely secular in nature and expressed the interests of the Novgorod boyars.
A chronicle is a historical genre of ancient Russian literature, which is an annual, more or less detailed record of historical events.
Chronicles of Kievan Rus are one of the most significant historical and cultural phenomena of the Middle Ages.
Unlike the chronicles of most European countries, compiled in Latin, they are written in their native language, which may not be completely identical to the spoken folk, but was very close to it. This is the reason for the great popularity of the chronicle genre in Rus'. Chronicles were available not only to the ancient Russian bookish elite, but also to a wide range of literate people. They were read and copied over several centuries, thanks to which they have survived to this day.
The tradition of chronicle writing originated in Kyiv in the 10th century, but soon spread to almost all regions of Rus'. Chronicles were compiled in
Novgorod, Pereyaslav, in Volhynia, in Galich, in Vladimir on the Klyazma, in other specific centers. Their authors were the monks of court monasteries, representatives of the princely administration, and even the princes themselves. At first, chronicles were records of the most important events by years (by “years”). One of the first such chronicles was compiled in Kyiv during the time of Yaroslav the Wise. It is called "The Tale of Bygone Years" and it is believed that it was written by the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor in 1113 and formed the basis of almost all other chronicles. And since the middle of the 12th century, there has been a division of a single chronicle process into a number of chronicles, the main content of which has become local history.
One of the oldest chronicle collections, in which South Russian chronicles of the 10th - 13th centuries are widely represented, are Lavrentievsky, Ipatiev and Radzivilov. The Lavrentievsky set was preserved in a single list, made under the guidance of the monk Lavrenty in 1377 for the Suzdal-Nizhny Novgorod prince Dmitry Konstantinovich. Its content ends in 1305. It includes: "The Tale of Bygone Years" in the edition of the early 12th century, "Instructions of Monomakh" and his messages to Oleg Svyatoslavich, as well as a chronicle of the events of South-Eastern Rus'. A feature of the Laurentian code is that it is the only one that contains the literary work of Monomakh.
Close to Lavrentievsky is the Radzivilov code, known in two lists of the 15th century: Radzivilov and Moscow-Academic. Radzivilovskiy belonged to different owners born in Western Rus'. As can be seen from the postscript, it was presented by Stanislav Zenovich to Prince Janusz Radziwill, and in 1671 he entered the Königsberg Library from Prince Bohuslav Radziwill. The description of events in it ends with the year 1206.
The Ipatiev Chronicle has been preserved in several copies, of which the main ones are the Ipatiev (circa 1425) and Khlebnikov (16th century). Their chronology reaches the middle of the 13th century.
Chronicles were written at princely courts, in monasteries, and sometimes townspeople or boyars became chroniclers. Some chronicles were written
Governors of the princely domain; such books mentioned not only the names of princes-commanders, but also the amounts that were paid to the prince hired to participate in
strife, and registers of princely property taken by the enemy: old mares, haystacks, church bells, etc.
In the XII century chronicles became especially detailed. They clearly manifested the class and political sympathies of the authors and their patrons. The church chroniclers are characterized by medieval providentialism, i.e. explanation of all historical events by the will of God or the machinations of the devil.
Nowadays, the chronicle has not lost its great not only historical and educational, but also educational value. It continues to serve the upbringing of noble patriotic feelings, teaches deep respect for the glorious historical past of our people.
2.2. History of development.
Already in the title itself - "Behold the tales of time years, where did the Russian land come from, who in Kiev began first before the princes, and where did the Russian land come from" - contains an indication of the ideological and thematic content of the chronicle. Russian land, its historical destinies, from the moment of its origin and ending with the first
etc.................
