IV. PECHERSK ASCETS. THE BEGINNING OF BOOK LITERATURE AND LEGISLATION

(continuation)

Origin of the chronicle. – Sylvester Vydubetsky, its compiler. - A fable about the calling of the Varangians. – Daniel the Pilgrim.

Laurentian list of "Tale of Bygone Years"

By all indications, these two works, filled with high merits, earned Nestor the respect of his contemporaries and a lasting memory in posterity. Perhaps he wrote something else that has not reached us. In any case, his authorial fame can primarily explain the fact that subsequently such an important monument of ancient Russian literature as the initial Russian Chronicle began to be associated with his name; although she did not belong to him.

Our chronicles arose with the direct participation of the Russian princes themselves. It is known that already the son of the first Christian prince in Kyiv, Yaroslav, was distinguished by his love for book education, and gathered translators and scribes around him; forced to translate from Greek or rewrite ready-made Slavic-Bulgarian translations. Here we must understand translations of Holy Scripture, the works of the Church Fathers, as well as Byzantine chronographs. Yaroslav's zeal for the success of Russian literature is also evidenced by the patronage he provided to such a gifted writer as Hilarion, who by his will was elevated to the rank of metropolitan. The same phenomenon was repeated here as in Danube Bulgaria: Boris was baptized along with all the Bulgarian land; and under his son, the book lover Simeon, the prosperity of Bulgarian book literature began. Yaroslav's sons continued their father's work. At least it is known that Svyatoslav Yaroslavich already had a significant book depository, from which the Collection known under his name came down. Deacon John, who copied this collection from a Bulgarian manuscript for Svyatoslav Yaroslavich, noted about this prince in his afterword that he “fulfilled his pay with divine books.” Some of their boyars also imitated the princes. From the same era, we have preserved a copy of the Gospel known under the name “Ostromir”. It was written by order of Ostromir, former relative Grand Duke Izyaslav Yaroslavich and his mayor in Novgorod, as the writer himself, some deacon Gregory, noted in the afterword. Particularly dedicated to book education is Yaroslav's grandson Vladimir Monomakh, who himself was an author. Two of his works have reached us: an eloquent letter to Oleg Svyatoslavich about his son Izyaslav, who died in battle, and the famous “Teaching” addressed to children. Even if both of these works were written with the help of one of the clergy close to him, in any case, a significant share of the creativity here undoubtedly belongs to the prince himself. The participation of Vladimir Monomakh in the cause of Russian literature is most clearly confirmed by the fact that it was during his reign in Kyiv and, of course, not without his assistance that our first chronicle was compiled. There is no doubt that the beginnings of chronicle writing in Rus' date back to an earlier time and, in all likelihood, to the era of the book lover Yaroslav. Brief notes about important events military, about the birth, about the death of princes, about the construction of the most important temples, about solar eclipses, about famine, the sea, etc. could be included in the so-called. Easter tables. From these tables chronicles developed in the West; so it was with us. Easter tables came to us, of course, from Byzantium with their chronology based on indicts, with the solar circle, etc. The mentioned notes, as in Western Europe, were kept by literate monks at the main episcopal churches or in the silence of monastic cells. With the development of literacy, the need arose in Rus' to explain where the old Russian princes came from, and to perpetuate the deeds of the modern princes: a need arose for historical literature. Transferable Byzantine chronographs, or reviews world history, served as the closest samples for our chronicle. Such a chronicle naturally should have appeared in the center of the Russian land, near the main Russian prince, i.e. in the capital Kyiv.

A few miles from the capital, further behind the Pechersk monastery, on the steep bank of the Dnieper, there was the St. Michael’s Monastery of Vydubetsky, which was especially patronized Grand Duke Vsevolod Yaroslavich, father of Monomakh. By the way, he built a stone church of St. Mikhail. After Vsevolod, this monastery enjoyed special respect and patronage from his descendants. When Vladimir Monomakh established himself on the Kiev table, Sylvester was the abbot of the Vydubetsky monastery. The beginning of our chronicles, or so-called, belongs to him. The Tale of Bygone Years, which took upon itself the task of telling “where the Russian people came from, who first reigned in Kyiv and how the Russian land was established.” The author of the "Tale" obviously had skill in the book business and remarkable talent. He based his work on the Byzantine chronograph Georgiy Amartol, who lived in the 9th century, and his successors, having at hand a Slavic-Bulgarian translation of this chronograph. From here Sylvester, by the way, borrowed the description different nations and the languages that populated the earth after the Flood and the Babylonian Pandemonium. From here he took the news about the first attack of Rus' on Constantinople in 860 and about the attack of Igor in 941. The story is often decorated with texts and large extracts from Holy Scripture, from collections of Old Testament stories (i.e. from Palea), from some church writers Greek (for example, Methodius of Patara and Mikhail Sinkel) and Russian writers (for example, Theodosius of Pechersk), as well as from Slavic-Bulgarian works (for example, from the Life of Cyril and Methodius), which indicates the author’s rather extensive reading and his preparation for his business. Stories about the first times are filled with legends and fables, as is the case in the initial history of any people; but the closer to its time, the more complete, more reliable, and more thorough the “Tale” becomes. Its reliability, of course, has increased since the final establishment of Christianity in the Kyiv land, especially since the time of Yaroslav, when literacy began to develop in Rus' and when the above-mentioned notes on the Easter tables began. Traces of these tables are visible in the fact that the chronicler, telling events by year, also designates those years whose events remained unknown to him or in which nothing remarkable happened. For the 11th century, he was still served by the memories of old people. Sylvester himself points to one of these old men, namely the Kyiv boyar Yan Vyshatich, the same one who was a friend of Theodosius of Pechersk and died in 1106 at ninety years of age. Citing the news of his death, the author of the Tale notes: “I included a lot of what I heard from him in this chronicle.” The history of the second half of the 11th century and the beginning of the 12th century took place before the eyes of the author himself. His conscientious attitude to his work is evident from the fact that he tried to collect stories about this time at first hand, i.e. I questioned eyewitnesses and participants whenever possible. Such, for example, are the testimonies of some Pechersk monk about St. Abbot Theodosius, about the discovery and transfer of his relics from the cave to the Church of the Assumption, the story of some Vasily about the blinding and detention of Vasilko Rostislavich, the stories of the noble Novgorodian Gyurat Rogovich about the northern regions, the aforementioned Yan Vyshatich, etc.

Vladimir Monomakh, in all likelihood, not only encouraged the compilation of this chronicle, but, perhaps, himself helped the author by providing information and sources. This circumstance can explain, for example, the entry into the chronicle of his letter to Oleg Svyatoslavich and the “Teachings” to his children, as well as the famous agreements with the Greeks of Oleg, Igor and Svyatoslav - agreements, Slavic translations of which were, of course, kept at the Kiev court. It is also possible that, not without his knowledge and approval, the well-known fable that Rus' called three Varangian princes from across the sea to restore order in its vast land was included on the first pages of the chronicle. When and how this fable was first put into practice will, of course, forever remain unknown; but its appearance in the second half of the 11th or the first of the 12th century is sufficiently explained by the circumstances of that time. In history, one often encounters the tendency of sovereigns to trace their family from noble foreigners, from a princely tribe of another land, even from an insignificant tribe, but for some reason became famous. This vain desire was probably not alien to the Russian princes of that time and, perhaps, Monomakh himself. The idea of the Varangian origin of the Russian princely house could very naturally arise at a time when the glory of Norman exploits and conquests was still resounding in Europe; when the entire English kingdom became the prey of the Norman knights, and in southern Italy they founded a new kingdom, from where they destroyed Byzantine Empire; when in Rus' there were still memories of the close ties of Vladimir and Yaroslav with the Varangians, of the brave Varangian squads who fought at the head of their militias. Finally, such a thought could most naturally arise with the sons and grandsons of the ambitious and intelligent Norman princess Ingigerda, Yaroslav's wife. Perhaps this idea initially appeared not without the participation of the Russified sons or descendants of those Norman immigrants who really found their happiness in Russia. An example of such noble people is Shimon, the nephew of that Varangian prince Yakun, who was an ally of Yaroslav in the war with Mstislav of Tmutarakan. Expelled from his fatherland by his uncle, Shimon and many fellow citizens arrived in Russia, entered Russian service and converted to Orthodoxy; Subsequently, he became the first nobleman of Vsevolod Yaroslavich and helped with the construction of the Pechersk Church of the Mother of God with rich offerings. And his son Georgy was governor in Rostov under Monomakh. In the era of the chronicler, friendly and family ties of the Russian princely house with the Norman sovereigns still continued. Vladimir Monomakh himself had in his first marriage Gida, the daughter of the English king Harold; their eldest son Mstislav was married to Christina, daughter of the Swedish king Inga Stenkilson; two granddaughters of Vladimir were married to Scandinavian princes.

When Sylvester began his chronicle work, two and a half centuries had already passed since the first attack of Rus' on Constantinople, mentioned in the “Chronicle” of Amartol. The chronicler, in fact, begins his “Tale of Bygone Years” with this attack. But, in accordance with the naive concepts and literary techniques of that era, he prefaced this historical event with several fables, as if explaining the previous fates of Rus'. By the way, he tells the Kiev legend about the three brothers Kiya, Shchek and Horeb, who once reigned in the land of the glades and founded Kyiv; and next to it he placed a legend, the first grain of which, in all likelihood, came from Novgorod - the legend of three Varangian brothers called from across the sea to the Novgorod land. This speculation, obviously, was not yet a well-known legend: we do not find a hint of it in any of the other works of Russian literature of that time. But later he especially. lucky. The legend expanded and changed, so that among the later compilers of chronicles, it is no longer Rus' and the Novgorod Slavs who call on the Varangian princes, as was the case with the first chronicler, but the Slavs, Krivichi and Chud who call on the Varangians - Rus', i.e. the entire great Russian people are already ranked among the Varangians and appear in Russia under the guise of some princely retinue arriving from overseas. Such a distortion of the original legend is, of course, to blame for the ignorance and negligence of Sylvester's later copyists. Sylvester finished his Tale in 1116. Vladimir Monomakh was obviously pleased with his work: two years later he ordered him to be installed as bishop of his hereditary city of Pereyaslavl, where Sylvester died in 1123.

Almost at the same time as the "Tale of Bygone Years" by Abbot Sylvester, the work of another Russian abbot, Daniel, was written, namely: "Walking to Jerusalem." We have seen that pilgrimage, or the custom of going to worship holy places, arose in Rus' after the establishment of the Christian religion. Already in the 11th century, when Palestine was under the rule of the Seljuk Turks, Russian pilgrims penetrated there and suffered oppression there along with other Christian pilgrims. Their numbers increased from the beginning of the 12th century, when the Crusaders conquered the Holy Land and founded a kingdom there. Busy fighting with other Turks, i.e. with the Polovtsians, our princes did not participate in the crusades; nevertheless, the Russian people sympathized with the great movement of Western peoples against the infidels. This sympathy was also reflected in Daniel’s notes about his walk. He simply calls himself the Russian abbot, without naming his monastery; judging by some of his expressions, it is believed that he was from the Chernigov region. Daniel was not alone in visiting the Holy Land; he mentions a whole squad of Russian pilgrims and calls some by name. His entire work breathes deep faith and reverence for the sacred objects that he was privileged to see. He speaks with praise of the King of Jerusalem Baldwin; who paid attention to the Russian abbot and allowed him to place a censer on the Holy Sepulcher for the Russian princes and for the entire Russian land. Among the princes whose names our abbot wrote down for prayer for their health in the Lavra of St. Sava, where he had shelter, the first place is occupied by: Svyatopolk - Mikhail, Vladimir (Monomakh) - Vasily, Oleg - Mikhail and David Svyatoslavich.

The first Russian chronicles

"The Tale of Bygone Years" which is also called "Nestor's Chronicle" named after its compiler (c. 1110–1113), known in two editions;

- "Laurentian Chronicle"(manuscript 1377), on which is the name of its copyist, monk Lawrence, who supplemented it with a chronicle of events in North-Eastern Rus' until 1305;

And later (beginning of the 15th century) "Ipatiev Chronicle" discovered in Ipatiev Monastery in Kostroma. It also includes "The Tale of Bygone Years" to which is added a chronicle of events that took place in Kyiv, Galich and Volyn until 1292.

According to the outstanding philologist A. A. Shakhmatov, "The Tale of Bygone Years" is a chronicle collection that combines:

The first Kyiv chronicle, dating back to 1037–1039;

Its continuation, written by the monk Nikon from the Pechersk Monastery in Kyiv (c. 1073);

The story of the adoption of Christianity by Vladimir and his people - “The Tale of the Baptism of Rus'”;

- new vault, everyone the texts listed above, compiled in the same monastery ca. 1093–1095;

Final edition of Nestor.

After the death of Prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavich in 1113, the monk Sylvester from the Mikhailovsky Vydubitsky Monastery, on behalf of Vladimir Monomakh, rewrote "The Tale of Bygone Years" bringing the story to 1117.

Gaps in the narrative were filled with borrowings from Byzantine chronographs (George Amartol) and from folk legends (for example, the story of Olga’s revenge on the Drevlyans).

From the book Rus' and the Horde. Great Empire of the Middle Ages author

Chapter 1 Russian Chronicles and the Miller-Romanov version of Russian history 1. The first attempts to write ancient Russian history A good overview of the history of writing Russian history is given by V.O. Klyuchevsky, p. 187–196. This story is little known and very interesting. We will bring

From the book Rus' and the Horde. Great Empire of the Middle Ages author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

5. Other Russian chronicles describing history up to the 13th century In addition to the Radzivilov list, today we have several more lists of ancient Russian chronicles. The main ones are: Laurentian Chronicle, Ipatiev Chronicle, Moscow Academic

From the book Reconstruction of World History [text only] author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

2. RUSSIAN AND WESTERN EUROPEAN CHRONICLES From the very beginning, an important circumstance should be emphasized. As we will see, Russian and Western European sources describe, in general, the same history of a single Great = “Mongol” Empire of the 14th–16th centuries. The center of which

From the book Book 1. New chronology of Rus' [Russian Chronicles. "Mongol-Tatar" conquest. Battle of Kulikovo. Ivan groznyj. Razin. Pugachev. The defeat of Tobolsk and author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

Chapter 1 Russian Chronicles and the Miller-Romanov version of Russian history 1. The first attempts to write ancient Russian history A good overview of the history of writing Russian history is given by V.O. Klyuchevsky, p. 187–196. She is little known and very interesting. We'll put it here

From the book New Chronology and Concept ancient history Rus', England and Rome author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

Chapter 1. Russian chronicles and traditional Russian history The first attempts to write ancient Russian history A good overview of the history of writing Russian history is given by V. O. Klyuchevsky, see, pp. 187–196. This story is little known and very interesting. We will present it here following

From the book Rus' and Rome. Reconstruction of the Battle of Kulikovo. Parallels of Chinese and European history. author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

2. Russian chronicles and the Romanov version of Russian history The first attempts to write ancient Russian history. A small but very rich overview of the historiography of Russian history was given by V.O. Klyuchevsky (“Unpublished works.” M., 1983). This "story of writing"

From the book Mister Veliky Novgorod. Did the Russian land come from Volkhov or the Volga? author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

4. Russian chronicles It is well known from Russian history that the Novgorodians sailed a lot along the Volga River. Not along Volkhov, but precisely along the Volga! It is believed that the Novgorodians ruled the Volga as if they were at home. This looks strange if we consider that Veliky Novgorod was located on

From the book The Path from the Varangians to the Greeks. A thousand-year-old mystery of history author Zvyagin Yuri Yurievich

A. Russian chronicles To begin with, let us remember that there are practically no Russian chronicle sources independent in their first part from the Tale of Bygone Years (PVL - a work hypothetically identified by historians after studying all the chronicles of the 12th century). Eat

From the book The Rus' That Was-2. Alternative version stories author Maksimov Albert Vasilievich

RUSSIAN CHRONICLES ABOUT THE INITIAL PERIOD In the Pushkin and Trinity Chronicles it is written: “... the oldest Rurik came... and the other Sineus came to Beloozero, and the third Izborst Truvor.” The place where Rurik came to reign is omitted from the chronicles. None of the historians paid attention to this, but

author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

5.2. Russian Chronicles: a dispute in the council of Ivan the Terrible - is it worth starting the Livonian Campaign? After the successful Kazan War, Ivan the Terrible decides to go to war with Livonia and the states of Western Europe allied with it. The campaign was considered by the king as a punishment.

From the book The Conquest of America by Ermak-Cortez and the Rebellion of the Reformation through the eyes of the “ancient” Greeks author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

7.1. Russian chronicles about the sailing of Ermak As soon as Ermak sailed, one of the Siberian rulers attacked the Stroganovs' possessions. Ivan the Terrible decided that the Stroganovs’ sending of Ermak’s detachment to Siberia, which had not been coordinated with the royal court, was to blame, which provoked the conflict. Tsar

From the book Rus'. China. England. Dating of the Nativity of Christ and the First Ecumenical Council author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

From the book Siberian Odyssey by Ermak author Skrynnikov Ruslan Grigorievich

From the book Russian Mystery [Where did Prince Rurik come from?] author Vinogradov Alexey Evgenievich

Russian chronicles and the “Varangian Prussian land” However, the bulk of Russian sources of the 16th and most of the 17th centuries. they also definitely indicate the southern Baltic, but still different, territory from which the legendary Rurik and his brothers came. So, in the Resurrection Chronicle

From the book Book 1. Western myth [“Ancient” Rome and the “German” Habsburgs are reflections of the Russian-Horde history of the 14th–17th centuries. The legacy of the Great Empire in cult author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

2. Russian and Western European chronicles Let us emphasize an important circumstance. As we will see, Russian and Western European sources describe, in general, the same “Mongol” Empire of the 13th–16th centuries. The center of which is first Vladimir-Suzdal Rus'-Horde, and then

From the book Diplomacy of Svyatoslav author Sakharov Andrey Nikolaevich

Byzantine chronicles and Russian chronicles The main sources on this topic are the “History” of Leo the Deacon, a Byzantine author of the second half of the 10th century, who described in detail the Russian-Bulgarian and Russian-Byzantine wars, the Byzantine chronicles of Skylitzes (XI century) and Zonara (XII century

Culture of Rus' X - early XIII centuries.
Chronicles

Chronicles are the focus of the history of Ancient Rus', its ideology, understanding of its place in world history - they are one of the most important monuments of writing, literature, history, and culture in general. For compiling chronicles, i.e. weather reports of events, only the most literate, knowledgeable, wise people were taken, capable of not only presenting various events year after year, but also giving them an appropriate explanation, leaving for posterity a vision of the era as the chroniclers understood it.

The chronicle was a state matter, a princely matter. Therefore, the order to compile a chronicle was given not just to the most literate and intelligent person, but also to the one who would be able to implement ideas close to this or that princely branch, this or that princely house. Thus, the chronicler’s objectivity and honesty came into conflict with what we call “social order.” If the chronicler did not satisfy the tastes of his customer, they parted with him and transferred the compilation of the chronicle to another, more reliable, more obedient author. Alas, work for the needs of power arose already at the dawn of writing, and not only in Rus', but also in other countries.

Chronicles, according to the observations of domestic scientists, appeared in Rus' shortly after the introduction of Christianity. The first chronicle may have been compiled at the end of the 10th century. It was intended to reflect the history of Rus' from the time the new Rurik dynasty appeared there until the reign of Vladimir with his impressive victories, with the introduction of Christianity in Rus'. From this time on, the right and duty to keep chronicles were given to church leaders. It was in churches and monasteries that the most literate, well-prepared and trained people were found - priests and monks. They had a rich book heritage, translated literature, Russian records of ancient tales, legends, epics, traditions; They also had the grand ducal archives at their disposal. It was best for them to carry out this responsible and important work: create a written historical monument era in which they lived and worked, connecting it with past times, with deep historical origins.

Scientists believe that before chronicles appeared - large-scale historical works covering several centuries of Russian history - there were separate records, including church, oral stories, which initially served as the basis for the first generalizing works. These were stories about Kiev and the founding of Kiev, about the campaigns of Russian troops against Byzantium, about the journey of Princess Olga to Constantinople, about the wars of Svyatoslav, the legend about the murder of Boris and Gleb, as well as epics, lives of saints, sermons, traditions, songs, various kinds of legends .

Later, already during the existence of the chronicles, more and more new stories were added to them, tales about impressive events in Rus', such as the famous feud of 1097 and the blinding of the young prince Vasilko, or about the campaign of the Russian princes against the Polovtsians in 1111. The chronicle also included Vladimir Monomakh's memoirs about life - his “Teachings to Children”.

The second chronicle was created under Yaroslav the Wise at the time when he united Rus' and founded the Church of Hagia Sophia. This chronicle absorbed the previous chronicle and other materials.

Already at the first stage of creating chronicles, it became obvious that they represent collective creativity, are a collection of previous chronicles, documents, and various types of oral and written historical evidence. The compiler of the next chronicle acted not only as the author of the corresponding newly written parts of the chronicle, but also as a compiler and editor. It was his ability to direct the idea of the arch in the right direction that was highly valued by the Kyiv princes.

The next chronicle Code was created by the famous Hilarion, who wrote it, apparently under the name of the monk Nikon, in the 60-70s of the 11th century, after the death of Yaroslav the Wise. And then the Code appeared already during the time of Svyatopolk in the 90s of the 11th century.

The vault, which was taken up by the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor and which entered our history under the name “The Tale of Bygone Years,” thus turned out to be at least the fifth in a row and was created in the first decade of the 12th century. at the court of Prince Svyatopolk. And each collection was enriched with more and more new materials, and each author contributed to it his talent, his knowledge, his erudition. Nestor's codex was in this sense the pinnacle of early Russian chronicle writing.

In the first lines of his chronicle, Nestor posed the question “Where did the Russian land come from, who was the first to reign in Kyiv, and where did the Russian land come from?” Thus, already in these first words of the chronicle it speaks of the large-scale goals that the author set for himself. And indeed, the chronicle did not become an ordinary chronicle, of which there were many in the world at that time - dry, dispassionately recording facts, but an excited story of the then historian, introducing philosophical and religious generalizations into the narrative, his own figurative system, temperament, his own style. Nestor depicts the origin of Rus', as we have already said, against the backdrop of the development of the entire world history. Rus' is one of the European nations.

Using previous codes and documentary materials, including, for example, treaties between Rus' and Byzantium, the chronicler develops a wide panorama of historical events that cover both the internal history of Rus' - the formation of all-Russian statehood with its center in Kiev, and international relationships Rus' with the surrounding world. A whole gallery of historical figures takes place on the pages of the Nestor Chronicle - princes, boyars, mayors, thousands, merchants, church leaders. He talks about military campaigns, the organization of monasteries, the foundation of new churches and the opening of schools, religious disputes and reforms of internal Russian life. Nestor constantly concerns the life of the people as a whole, their moods, expressions of dissatisfaction with the princely policies. On the pages of the chronicle we read about uprisings, murders of princes and boyars, and brutal social battles. The author describes all this thoughtfully and calmly, trying to be objective, as objective as a deeply religious person can be, guided in his assessments by the concepts of Christian virtue and sin. But, frankly speaking, his religious assessments are very close to universal human assessments. Nestor condemns murder, betrayal, deception, perjury uncompromisingly, but extols honesty, courage, loyalty, nobility, and other wonderful human qualities. The entire chronicle was imbued with a sense of the unity of Rus' and a patriotic mood. All the main events in it were assessed not only from the point of view of religious concepts, but also from the standpoint of these all-Russian state ideals. This motive sounded especially significant on the eve of the beginning of the political collapse of Rus'.

In 1116-1118 the chronicle was rewritten again. Vladimir Monomakh, who was then reigning in Kyiv, and his son Mstislav were dissatisfied with the way Nestor showed the role of Svyatopolk in Russian history, on whose order the “Tale of Bygone Years” was written in the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. Monomakh took the chronicle from the Pechersk monks and transferred it to his ancestral Vydubitsky monastery. His abbot Sylvester became the author of the new Code. Positive assessments of Svyatopolk were moderated, and all the deeds of Vladimir Monomakh were emphasized, but the main body of the Tale of Bygone Years remained unchanged. And in the future, Nestorov’s work was indispensable integral part both in the Kiev chronicles and in the chronicles of individual Russian principalities, being one of the connecting threads for all Russian culture.

Later, with the political collapse of Rus' and the rise of individual Russian centers, the chronicle began to fragment. In addition to Kyiv and Novgorod, their own chronicle collections appeared in Smolensk, Pskov, Vladimir-on-Klyazma, Galich, Vladimir-Volynsky, Ryazan, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl-Russky. Each of them reflected the peculiarities of the history of its region, bringing its own princes to the fore. Thus, the Vladimir-Suzdal chronicles showed the history of the reign of Yuri Dolgoruky, Andrei Bogolyubsky, Vsevolod the Big Nest; Galician chronicle of the beginning of the 13th century. became essentially a biography of the famous warrior prince Daniil Galitsky; the Chernigov branch of the Rurikovichs was mainly narrated in the Chernigov Chronicle. And yet, even in the local chronicles, all-Russian cultural origins were clearly visible. The history of each land was compared with the entire Russian history; The Tale of Bygone Years was an indispensable part of many local chronicles. Some of them continued the tradition of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th century. So, shortly before the Mongol-Tatar invasion, at the turn of the 12th-13th centuries. In Kyiv, a new chronicle was created, which reflected the events that took place in Chernigov, Galich, Vladimir-Suzdal Rus', Ryazan and other Russian cities. It is clear that the author of the code had at his disposal the chronicles of various Russian principalities and used them. The chronicler also knew European history well. He mentioned, for example, III crusade Frederick Barbarossa. In various Russian cities, including Kiev, in the Vydubitsky monastery, entire libraries of chronicles were created, which became sources for new historical works of the 12th-13th centuries.

The preservation of the all-Russian chronicle tradition was shown by the Vladimir-Suzdal chronicle code of the early 13th century, which covered the history of the country from the legendary Kiy to Vsevolod the Big Nest.

Chronicles of Rus'

Chronicle- More or less detailed story about events. Russian chronicles are the main written source on the history of Russia in pre-Petrine times. The beginning of Russian chronicle writing dates back to the 11th century, when historical records began to be made in Kyiv, although the chronicle period begins in them from the 9th century. Russian chronicles usually began with the words “V leto” + “date”, which today means “per year” + “date”. The number of surviving chronicle monuments, according to conventional estimates, is about 5000.

Most of the chronicles have not survived in the form of originals, but their copies, the so-called lists, created in the XIV-XVIII centuries have been preserved. The list means “rewriting” (“writing off”) from another source. These lists, based on the place of compilation or the place of the events depicted, are exclusively or predominantly divided into categories (original Kiev, Novgorod, Pskov, etc.). Lists of the same category differ from each other not only in expressions, but even in the selection of news, as a result of which the lists are divided into editions (editions). So, we can say: The original Chronicle of the southern edition (the Ipatievsky list and similar ones), the initial Chronicle of the Suzdal edition (the Lavrentievsky list and similar ones). Such differences in the lists suggest that the chronicles are collections and that their original sources have not reached us. This idea, first expressed by P. M. Stroev, now constitutes a general opinion. The existence in a separate form of many detailed chronicle legends, as well as the possibility of pointing out that in the same story stitchings from different sources(bias mainly manifests itself in sympathy for one or the other of the warring parties) - further confirm this opinion.

Basic chronicles

Nestorov's list

Another name is the Khlebnikov list. S. D. Poltoratsky received this list from the famous bibliophile and collector of manuscripts P. K. Khlebnikov. It is unknown where Khlebnikov got this document from. In 1809-1819 D.I. Yazykov translated it from German into Russian (the translation is dedicated to Alexander I), since the first printed edition of the Nestor Chronicle was published in German A. L. Shletser, "German historian in the royal service".

Laurentian list

There are also separate legends: “The Tale of the Murder of Andrei Bogolyubsky,” written by his follower (probably mentioned in it by Kuzmishch Kiyanin). The same separate legend should have been the story of the exploits of Izyaslav Mstislavich; at one point in this story we read: “I spoke the same word as before I heard it; the place does not go to the head, but the head to the place" From this we can conclude that the story about this prince was borrowed from the notes of his comrade-in-arms and interspersed with news from other sources; fortunately, the stitching is so clumsy that the parts can be easily separated. The part that follows the death of Izyaslav is dedicated mainly to the princes from the Smolensk family who reigned in Kyiv; Perhaps the source that the compiler mainly used is not unconnected with this family. The presentation is very close to “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” - as if a whole literary school had developed then. News from Kyiv later than 1199 are found in other chronicle collections (mainly from north-eastern Rus'), as well as in the so-called “Gustyn Chronicle” (latest compilation). The Suprasl Manuscript (published by Prince Obolensky) contains a brief Kiev chronicle dating back to the 14th century.

Galician-Volyn chronicles

Closely connected with “Kievskaya” is “Volynskaya” (or Galician-Volynskaya), which is even more distinguished by its poetic flavor. It, as one can assume, was written at first without years, and the years were placed later and arranged very unskillfully. So, we read: “When Danilov came from Volodymyr, there was silence in the summer of 6722. In the summer of 6723, by God’s command, the princes of Lithuania were sent.” It's clear that the last sentence must be connected to the first, as indicated by the form of the dative independent and the absence of the sentence “there was silence” in some lists; therefore, two years, and this sentence are inserted after. The chronology is mixed up and applied to the chronology of the Kyiv Chronicle. Roman was killed in the city, and the Volyn chronicle dates his death to 1200, since the Kiev chronicle ends in 1199. These chronicles were connected by the last compiler; was it not he who arranged the years? In some places there is a promise to tell this or that, but nothing is told; therefore, there are gaps. The chronicle begins with vague hints about the exploits of Roman Mstislavich - obviously, these are fragments of a poetic legend about him. It ends at the beginning of the 14th century. and does not lead to the collapse of Galich's independence. For a researcher, this chronicle, due to its inconsistency, presents serious difficulties, but due to the detail of its presentation, it serves as precious material for studying the life of Galich. It is curious in the Volyn chronicle that there is an indication of the existence of an official chronicle: Mstislav Danilovich, having defeated the rebellious Brest, imposed a heavy fine on the inhabitants and in the letter adds: “and the chronicler described their king.”

Chronicles of North-Eastern Rus'

The chronicles of northeastern Rus' probably began quite early: from the 13th century. In the "Epistle of Simon to Polycarp" (one of components Patericon of Pechersk), we have evidence of the “old chronicler of Rostov”. The first collection of the northeastern (Suzdal) edition that has survived to us dates back to the same time. Lists of him before the beginning of the 13th century. -Radziwillsky, Pereyaslavsky-Suzdal, Lavrentyevsky and Troitsky. At the beginning of the 13th century. the first two stop, the rest differ from each other. The similarity up to a certain point and the difference further indicate a common source, which, therefore, extended until the beginning of the 13th century. News from Suzdal can be found earlier (especially in the Tale of Bygone Years); Therefore, it should be recognized that the recording of events in the land of Suzdal began early. We do not have purely Suzdal chronicles before the Tatars, just as we do not have purely Kyiv ones. The collections that have come down to us are of a mixed nature and are designated by the predominance of events in one or another area.

Chronicles were kept in many cities of the Suzdal land (Vladimir, Rostov, Pereyaslavl); but by many signs it should be recognized that most of the news was recorded in Rostov, which for a long time was the center of education in northeastern Rus'. After the invasion of the Tatars, the Trinity List became almost exclusively Rostov. After the Tatars, in general, the traces of local chronicles become clearer: in the Laurentian list we find a lot of Tver news, in the so-called Tver Chronicle - Tver and Ryazan, in the Sophia Vremennik and Resurrection Chronicle - Novgorod and Tver, in the Nikon Chronicle - Tver, Ryazan, Nizhny Novgorod, etc. All these collections are of Moscow origin (or at least for the most part); original sources - local chronicles - have not survived. Regarding the transition of news in the Tatar era from one area to another, I. I. Sreznevsky made an interesting discovery: in the manuscript of Ephraim the Syrian, he came across a note from a scribe who talks about the attack of Arapsha (Arab Shah), which took place in the year of writing. The story is not finished, but its beginning is literally similar to the beginning of the chronicle story, from which I. I. Sreznevsky correctly concludes that the scribe had the same legend in front of him, which served as material for the chronicler. From fragments partially preserved in Russian and Belarusian chronicles of the 15th-16th centuries, the Smolensk Chronicle is known.

Moscow Chronicles

The chronicles of northeastern Rus' are distinguished by the absence of poetic elements and rarely borrow from poetic legends. “The Tale of the Massacre of Mamayev” is a special work, only included in some collections. From the first half of the 14th century. in most of the northern Russian arches, Moscow news begins to predominate. According to I. A. Tikhomirov, the beginning of the Moscow Chronicle itself, which formed the basis of the vaults, should be considered the news of the construction of the Church of the Assumption in Moscow. The main vaults containing Moscow news are the “Sofia Vremennik” (in its last part), the Resurrection and Nikon Chronicles (also beginning with vaults based on ancient vaults). There is the so-called Lvov Chronicle, a chronicle published under the title: “Continuation of the Nestor Chronicle”, as well as “Russian Time” or the Kostroma Chronicle. The chronicle in the Moscow state increasingly acquired the significance of an official document: already at the beginning of the 15th century. the chronicler, praising the times of “that great Seliverst of Vydobuzhsky, who wrote unadornedly,” says: “our first rulers without anger commanded all the good and bad things that happened to be written.” Prince Yuri Dimitrievich, in his quest for the grand-ducal table, relied on old chronicles in the Horde; Grand Duke John Vasilyevich sent clerk Bradaty to Novgorod to prove to the Novgorodians their lies with the old chroniclers; in the inventory of the royal archive of the times of Ivan the Terrible we read: “black lists and what to write in the chronicler of modern times”; in the negotiations between the boyars and the Poles under Tsar Mikhail it is said: “and we will write this in the chronicler for future generations.” The best example of how carefully one must treat the legends of the chronicle of that time is the news of the tonsure of Salomonia, the first wife of Grand Duke Vasily Ioanovich, preserved in one of the chronicles. Based on this news, Salomonia herself wanted to take a haircut, but the Grand Duke did not agree; in another story, also judging by the solemn, official tone, we read that the Grand Duke, seeing the birds in pairs, thought about Salomonia’s infertility and, after consulting with the boyars, divorced her. Meanwhile, from Herberstein’s narrative we know that the divorce was forced.

Evolution of chronicles

Not all chronicles, however, represent the types of official chronicle. In many, there is occasionally a mixture of official narration and private notes. Such a mixture is found in the story about the campaign of Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich to the Ugra, combined with the famous letter of Vasian. Becoming more and more official, the chronicles finally moved into category books. The same facts were entered into the chronicles, only with the omission of small details: for example, stories about the campaigns of the 16th century. taken from grade books; only news of miracles, signs, etc. were added, documents, speeches, and letters were inserted. There were private rank books in which well-born people noted the service of their ancestors for the purposes of localism. Such chronicles also appeared, an example of which we have in the “Norman Chronicles”. The number of individual tales that turn into private notes has also increased. Another way of transmission is to supplement the chronographs with Russian events. Such, for example, is the legend of Prince Kavtyrev-Rostovsky, placed in a chronograph; in several chronographs we find additional articles written by supporters of different parties. Thus, in one of the chronographs of the Rumyantsev Museum there are voices dissatisfied with Patriarch Filaret. In the chronicles of Novgorod and Pskov there are curious expressions of displeasure with Moscow. From the first years of Peter the Great there is an interesting protest against his innovations under the title “Chronicle of 1700”.

Degree book

Ukrainian chronicles

Ukrainian (actually Cossack) chronicles date back to the 17th and 18th centuries. V.B. Antonovich explains their late appearance by the fact that these are rather private notes or sometimes even attempts at pragmatic history, and not what we now mean by a chronicle. Cossack chronicles, according to the same scientist, contain mainly the affairs of Bohdan Khmelnytsky and his contemporaries. The most significant of the chronicles are: Lvov, begun in the middle of the 16th century. , brought up to 1649 and outlining the events of Red Rus'; the chronicle of the Samovidets (from to), according to the conclusion of Professor Antonovich, is the first Cossack chronicle, distinguished by the completeness and vividness of the story, as well as reliability; an extensive chronicle of Samuil Velichko, who, serving in the military chancellery, could know a lot; Although his work is arranged by year, it partly has the appearance of a scholarly work; Its disadvantage is considered to be the lack of criticism and florid presentation. The chronicle of the Gadyach colonel Grabyanka begins in 1648 and is completed until 1709; It is preceded by a study about the Cossacks, whom the author derives from the Khazars. The sources were partly the chronicle, and partly, it is assumed, foreigners. In addition to these detailed compilations, there are many short, mainly local chronicles (Chernigov, etc.); there are attempts at pragmatic history (for example, “History of the Russians”) and there are all-Russian compilations: L. Gustynskaya, based on Ipatskaya and continued until the 16th century, Safonovich’s “Chronicle”, “Synopsis”. All this literature ends with the “History of the Russians,” the author of which is unknown. This work more clearly expressed the views of the Ukrainian intelligentsia of the 18th century.

Bibliography

See Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles

Other editions of Russian chronicles

Buganov V.I. Brief Moscow chronicler of the late 17th century. from the Ivanovo Regional Museum of Local Lore. // Chronicles and Chronicles - 1976. - M.: Nauka, 1976. - P. 283.
Zimin A. A. Brief chroniclers of the XV-XVI centuries. - Historical archive. - M., 1950. - T. 5.
Chronicle of Joasaph. - M.: ed. USSR Academy of Sciences, 1957.
Kyiv Chronicle of the first quarter of the 17th century. // Ukrainian Historical Journal, 1989. No. 2, p. 107; No. 5, p. 103.
Koretsky V.I. Solovetsky chronicler of the late 16th century. // Chronicles and Chronicles - 1980. - M.: Nauka, 1981. - P. 223.
Koretsky V.I. , Morozov B. N. Chronicler with new news from the 16th - early 17th centuries. // Chronicles and Chronicles - 1984. - M.: Nauka, 1984. - P. 187.
Chronicle of a self-witness based on newly discovered copies with the appendix of three Little Russian chronicles: Khmelnitsky, “A Brief Description of Little Russia” and “Historical Collection”. - K., 1878.
Lurie Ya. S. A brief chronicler of the Pogodin collection. // Archaeographic Yearbook - 1962. - M.: ed. USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963. - P. 431.
Nasonov A. N. Chronicle collection of the 15th century. // Materials on the history of the USSR. - M.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1955. - T. 2, p. 273.
Petrushevich A. S. Consolidated Galician-Russian chronicle from 1600 to 1700. - Lvov, 1874.
Priselkov M. D. Trinity Chronicle. - St. Petersburg. : Science, 2002.
Radziwill Chronicle. Facsimile reproduction of the manuscript. Text. Study. Description of miniatures. - M.: Art, 1994.
Russian timebook, that is, a chronicler, containing Russian history from (6730)/(862) to (7189)/(1682) summers, divided into two parts. - M., 1820.
Collection of chronicles relating to the history of Southern and Western Rus'. - K., 1888.
Tikhomirov M. N. Little-known chronicle monuments. // Russian chronicles. - M.: Nauka, 1979. - P. 183.
Tikhomirov M. N. Little-known chronicle monuments of the 16th century // Russian Chronicle. - M.: Nauka, 1979. - P. 220.
Schmidt S. O. Continuation of the chronograph from the 1512 edition. Historical archive. - M., 1951. - T. 7, p. 255.
South Russian chronicles, discovered and published by N. Belozersky. - K., 1856. - T. 1.

Research into Russian chronicles

Berezhkov N. G. Chronology of Russian chronicles. - M.: Publishing house. USSR Academy of Sciences, 1963.
Ziborov V.K. Russian chronicle of the XI-XVIII centuries. - St. Petersburg. : Philological Faculty of St. Petersburg State University, 2002.
Kloss B. M. Nikonovsky arch and Russian chronicles of the 16th-17th centuries. - M.: Science, 1980.
Kotlyar N. F. Ideological and political credo of the Galician-Volyn arch //Ancient Rus'. Questions of medieval studies. 2005. No. 4 (22). pp. 5–13.
Kuzmin A. G. Initial stages ancient Russian chronicles. - M.: Science, 1977.
Lurie Ya. S. All-Russian chronicles of the XIV-XV centuries. - M.: Science, 1976.
Muravyova L. L. Moscow chronicle of the second half of the 14th - early 15th centuries / Rep. ed. acad. B. A. Rybakov. .. - M.: Nauka, 1991. - 224 p. - 2,000 copies. - ISBN 5-02-009523-0(region)

Chronicle – ancient Russian essay on national history consisting of weather news. For example: “In the summer of 6680. The blessed prince Gleb of Kievsky passed away” (“In 1172. The blessed prince Gleb of Kyiv died”). News can be short or lengthy, including lives, stories and legends.

Chronicler – a term that has two meanings: 1) the author of the chronicle (for example, Nestor the Chronicler); 2) a chronicle that is small in volume or thematic scope (for example, the Vladimir Chronicler). Monuments of local or monastic chronicles are often called chroniclers.

Chronicle collection - a stage in the history of chronicle reconstructed by researchers, which is characterized by the creation of a new chronicle by combining (“compiling”) several previous chronicles. All-Russian chronicles of the 17th century are also called vaults, the compilative nature of which is undoubted.

The most ancient Russian chronicles have not been preserved in their original form. They survived in later revisions, and the main task in studying them is to reconstruct the earlier ones (XI-XII centuries) on the basis of later chronicles (XIII-XVII centuries).

Almost all Russian chronicles in their initial part contain a single text that tells about the Creation of the world and then about Russian history from ancient times (from the settlement of the Slavs in the East European valley) to the beginning of the 12th century, namely until 1110. Further The text differs in different chronicles. It follows from this that the chronicle tradition is based on a certain chronicle that is common to all, brought to the beginning of the 12th century.

At the beginning of the text, most chronicles have a title beginning with the words “This is the Tale of Bygone Years...”. In some chronicles, for example, the Ipatiev and Radziwill chronicles, the author is also indicated - a monk Kiev-Pechersk monastery (see, for example, reading the Radziwill Chronicle: “The Tale of Bygone Years of the Monk Fedosiev of the Pechersk Monastery...”). In the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon among the monks of the 11th century. “Nestor, like Papis the chronicler” is mentioned, and in the Khlebnikov list of the Ipatiev Chronicle the name of Nestor appears already in the title: “The Tale of Bygone Years of the Monk Nester Feodosyev of the Pechersk Monastery...”.

Reference

The Khlebnikov list was created in the 16th century. in Kyiv, where they knew the text of the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon well. In fact ancient list In the Ipatiev Chronicle, Ipatievsk, the name of Nestor is missing. It is possible that it was included in the text of the Khlebnikov list when creating the manuscript, guided by the instructions of the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon. One way or another, already historians of the 18th century. Nestor was considered the author of the oldest Russian chronicle. In the 19th century researchers became more cautious in their judgments about the ancient Russian chronicle. They no longer wrote about Nestor’s chronicle, but about the general text of Russian chronicles and called it “The Tale of Bygone Years,” which over time became a textbook monument of ancient Russian literature.

It should be borne in mind that in reality, The Tale of Bygone Years is a research reconstruction; by this name they mean the initial text of most Russian chronicles before the beginning of the 12th century, which in independent form did not reach us.

Already in the so-called “Tale of Bygone Years” there are several contradictory indications of the time of the chronicler’s work, as well as individual inconsistencies. It is obvious that this stage of the beginning of the 12th century. preceded by other chronicles. Only a remarkable philologist at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries was able to understand this confusing situation. Alexey Alexandrovich Shakhmatov (1864–1920).

A. A. Shakhmatov hypothesized that Nestor is not the author of “The Tale of Bygone Years,” but of earlier chronicle texts. He proposed calling such texts codes, since the chronicler combined materials from previous codes and extracts from other sources into a single text. The concept of the chronicle code today is key in the reconstruction of the stages of ancient Russian chronicle writing.

Scientists identify the following chronicle codes that preceded the “Tale of Bygone Years”: 1) The most ancient code (hypothetical date of creation - about 1037); 2) Code 1073; 3) Initial arch (before 1093); 4) "The Tale of Bygone Years" edition before 1113 (possibly associated with the name of the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor): 5) "The Tale of Bygone Years" edition 1116 (associated with the name of the abbot of the Mikhailovsky Vydubitsky Monastery Sylvester): 6) "The Tale of Bygone Years" edition of 1118 (also associated with the Vydubitsky Monastery).

Chronicle of the 12th century. represented by three traditions: Novgorod, Vladimir-Suzdal and Kyiv. The first is restored according to the Novgorod I Chronicle (senior and younger editions), the second - according to the Laurentian, Radziwill and Chroniclers of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal, the third - according to the Ipatiev Chronicle with the involvement of the Vladimir-Suzdal chronicle.

Novgorod chronicle is represented by several vaults, the first of which (1132) is considered by researchers to be princely, and the rest - created under the Novgorod archbishop. According to the assumption of A. A. Gippius, each archbishop initiated the creation of his own chronicler, which described the time of his priesthood. Arranged sequentially one after another, the lord's chroniclers form the text of the Novgorod chronicle. Researchers consider one of the first lordly chroniclers to be Domestic Anthony of the Kirik Monastery, who wrote the chronological treatise “The Teaching of Him to Tell Man the Number of All Years.” The chronicle article of 1136, describing the rebellion of the Novgorodians against Prince Vsevolod-Gabriel, provides chronological calculations similar to those read in Kirik’s treatise.

One of the stages of Novgorod chronicle writing occurs in the 1180s. The name of the chronicler is also known. Article 1188 details the death of the priest of the Church of St. James, Herman Vojata, and states that he served in this church for 45 years. Indeed, 45 years before this news, in article 1144, news is read from the first person, in which the chronicler writes that the archbishop made him a priest.

Vladimir-Suzdal chronicle known in several vaults of the second half of the 12th century, of which two seem most likely. The first stage of the Vladimir chronicle brought its presentation up to 1177. This chronicle was compiled on the basis of records that were kept from 1158 under Andrei Bogolyubsky, but were combined into a single set already under Vsevolod III. The latest news of this chronicle is a lengthy story about the tragic death of Andrei Bogolyubsky, a story about his struggle younger brothers Mikhalka and Vsevolod with their nephews Mstislav and Yaropolk Rostislavich for the reign of Vladimir, the defeat and blinding of the latter. The second Vladimir vault is dated to 1193, since after this year the series of dated weather news ends. Researchers believe that the records for the end of the 12th century. date back to the arch of the early 13th century.

Kiev chronicle represented by the Ipatiev Chronicle, which was influenced by the northeastern chronicle. Nevertheless, researchers manage to identify at least two vaults in the Ipatiev Chronicle. The first is the Kiev codex, compiled during the reign of Rurik Rostislavich. It ends with the events of 1200, the last of which is a solemn speech by the abbot of the Kyiv Vydubitsky monastery Moses with words of gratitude addressed to the prince who built the stone fence in the Vydubitsky monastery. In Moses they see the author of the code of 1200, who set the goal of exalting his prince. The second code, unmistakably identified in the Ipatiev Chronicle, refers to the Galician-Volyn chronicle of the end of the 13th century.

The oldest Russian chronicles are valuable, and for many subjects, and the only historical source on the history of Ancient Rus'.

What chronicles exist? Old Russian chronicles