In the Department of Manuscripts of the Russian National Library, along with other most valuable manuscripts, there is kept a chronicle called Lavrentievskaya, named after the man who copied it in 1377. “I am (I am) a bad, unworthy and sinful servant of God, Lavrentiy (monk),” we read on the last page.
This book is written in “ charters", or " veal“, - that’s what they called in Rus' parchment: specially treated calf leather. The chronicle, apparently, was read a lot: its pages are worn out, in many places there are traces of wax drops from candles, in some places the beautiful, even lines that at the beginning of the book ran across the entire page, then divided into two columns, have been erased. This book has seen a lot in its six hundred years of existence.

The Manuscript Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg houses Ipatiev Chronicle. It was transferred here in the 18th century from the famous in the history of Russian culture Ipatiev Monastery near Kostroma. It was written in the 14th century. This is a large book, heavily bound from two wooden boards covered with darkened leather. Five copper “bugs” decorate the binding. The entire book is handwritten in four different handwritings, meaning four scribes worked on it. The book is written in two columns in black ink with cinnabar (bright red) capital letters. The second page of the book, on which the text begins, is especially beautiful. It is all written in cinnabar, as if it were on fire. Capital letters, on the contrary, are written in black ink. The scribes worked hard to create this book. They set to work with reverence. “Russian Chronicler and God make peace. Good Father,” the scribe wrote before the text.

Most ancient list Russian chronicle made on parchment in the 14th century. This Synodal list Novgorod First Chronicle. It can be seen in the Historical Museum in Moscow. It belonged to the Moscow Synodal Library, hence its name.

It's interesting to see the illustrated Radzivilovskaya, or Koenigsberg Chronicle. At one time it belonged to the Radzivils and was discovered by Peter the Great in Konigsberg (now Kaliningrad). Now this chronicle is kept in the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg. It was written in semi-character at the end of the 15th century, apparently in Smolensk. Half-stavka is a faster and simpler handwriting than the solemn and slow charter, but also very beautiful.
Radzivilov Chronicle decorates 617 miniatures! 617 color drawings - bright, cheerful colors - illustrate what is described on the pages. Here you can see troops marching with banners flying, battles, and sieges of cities. Here the princes are depicted seated on “tables” - the tables that served as the throne actually resemble today’s small tables. And before the prince stand ambassadors with scrolls of speeches in their hands. The fortifications of Russian cities, bridges, towers, walls with “fences”, “cuts”, that is, dungeons, “vezhi” - nomadic tents - all this can be clearly imagined from the slightly naive drawings of the Radzivilov Chronicle. And what can we say about weapons and armor - they are depicted here in abundance. No wonder one researcher called these miniatures “windows into a vanished world.” The ratio of drawings and sheets, drawings and text, text and fields is very important. Everything is done with great taste. After all, every handwritten book is a work of art, and not just a monument to writing.

These are the most ancient lists of Russian chronicles. They are called “lists” because they were copied from more ancient chronicles that have not reached us.

How the chronicles were written

The text of any chronicle consists of weather (compiled by year) records. Each entry begins: “In the summer of such and such,” and is followed by a message about what happened in this “summer,” that is, the year. (The years were counted “from the creation of the world,” and to obtain a date according to modern chronology, one must subtract the number 5508 or 5507.) The messages were long, detailed stories, and there were also very short ones, like: “In the summer of 6741 (1230) signed (written ) there was a church of the Holy Mother of God in Suzdal and it was paved with various types of marble”, “In the summer of 6398 (1390) there was a pestilence in Pskov, as if (how) there had never been such a thing; where they dug up one, put five and ten there,” “In the summer of 6726 (1218) there was silence.” They also wrote: “In the summer of 6752 (1244) there was nothing” (that is, there was nothing).

If several events occurred in one year, the chronicler connected them with the words: “in the same summer” or “of the same summer.”
Entries related to the same year are called an article. The articles were in a row, highlighted only by a red line. The chronicler gave titles to only some of them. These are the stories about Alexander Nevsky, Prince Dovmont, the Battle of the Don and some others.

At first glance, it may seem that the chronicles were kept like this: year after year, more and more new entries were added, as if beads were strung on one thread. However, it is not.

The chronicles that have reached us are very complex works of Russian history. The chroniclers were publicists and historians. They were worried not only about contemporary events, but also about the fate of their homeland in the past. They made weather records of what happened during their lifetimes, and added to the records of previous chroniclers with new reports that they found in other sources. They inserted these additions under the corresponding years. As a result of all the additions, insertions and use by the chronicler of the chronicles of his predecessors, the result was “ vault“.

Let's take an example. The story of the Ipatiev Chronicle about the struggle of Izyaslav Mstislavich with Yuri Dolgoruky for Kyiv in 1151. There are three main participants in this story: Izyaslav, Yuri and Yuri’s son - Andrei Bogolyubsky. Each of these princes had their own chronicler. The chronicler of Izyaslav Mstislavich admired the intelligence and military cunning of his prince. The chronicler of Yuri described in detail how Yuri, being unable to pass down the Dnieper past Kyiv, sent his boats across Lake Dolobskoe. Finally, the chronicle of Andrei Bogolyubsky describes Andrei’s valor in battle.
After the death of all participants in the events of 1151, their chronicles came to the chronicler of the new Kyiv prince. He combined their news in his code. The result was a vivid and very complete story.

But how did researchers manage to identify more ancient vaults from later chronicles?
This was helped by the work method of the chroniclers themselves. Our ancient historians treated the records of their predecessors with great respect, since they saw in them a document, a living testimony of “what happened before.” Therefore, they did not alter the text of the chronicles they received, but only selected the news that interested them.
Thanks to careful attitude to the work of their predecessors, the news of the 11th-14th centuries was preserved almost unchanged even in relatively later chronicles. This allows them to be highlighted.

Very often, chroniclers, like real scientists, indicated where they received the news from. “When I came to Ladoga, the Ladoga residents told me...”, “I heard this from a self-witness,” they wrote. Moving from one written source to another, they noted: “And this is from another chronicler” or: “And this is from another, old one,” that is, copied from another, old chronicle. There are many such interesting postscripts. The Pskov chronicler, for example, makes a note in cinnabar against the place where he talks about the Slavs’ campaign against the Greeks: “This is written about in the miracles of Stephen of Sourozh.”

From its very inception, chronicle writing was not a personal matter for individual chroniclers, who, in the quiet of their cells, in solitude and silence, recorded the events of their time.
Chroniclers were always in the thick of things. They sat in the boyar council and attended the meeting. They fought “beside the stirrup” of their prince, accompanied him on campaigns, and were eyewitnesses and participants in sieges of cities. Our ancient historians carried out embassy assignments and monitored the construction of city fortifications and temples. They always lived the social life of their time and most often occupied a high position in society.

Princes and even princesses, princely warriors, boyars, bishops, and abbots took part in the chronicle writing. But among them there were also simple monks and priests of city parish churches.
Chronicle writing was caused by social necessity and met social demands. It was carried out at the behest of one or another prince, or bishop, or mayor. It reflected the political interests of equal centers - the principality of cities. They captured the intense struggle between different social groups. The chronicle has never been dispassionate. She testified to merits and virtues, she accused of violations of rights and legality.

Daniil Galitsky turns to the chronicle to testify to the betrayal of the “flattering” boyars, who “called Daniel a prince; and they themselves held the whole land.” At the critical moment of the struggle, Daniil’s “printer” (custodian of the seal) went to “cover up the robberies of the wicked boyars.” A few years later, Daniil’s son Mstislav ordered the treason of the inhabitants of Berestya (Brest) to be entered into the chronicle, “and I wrote down their sedition in the chronicle,” writes the chronicler. The entire collection of Daniil Galitsky and his immediate successors is a story about sedition and “many rebellions” of “crafty boyars” and about the valor of the Galician princes.

Things were different in Novgorod. The boyar party won there. Read the entry from the Novgorod First Chronicle about the expulsion of Vsevolod Mstislavich in 1136. You will be convinced that this is a real indictment against the prince. But this is only one article from the collection. After the events of 1136, the entire chronicle, which had previously been conducted under the auspices of Vsevolod and his father Mstislav the Great, was revised.
The previous name of the chronicle, “Russian temporary book”, was redone into “Sofia temporary book”: the chronicle was kept at the Cathedral of St. Sophia - the main public building Novgorod. Among some additions, a note was made: “First the Novgorod volost, and then the Kiev volost.” With the antiquity of the Novgorod “volost” (the word “volost” meant both “region” and “power”), the chronicler substantiated the independence of Novgorod from Kyiv, its right to elect and expel princes at will.

The political idea of ​​each code was expressed in its own way. It is expressed very clearly in the arch of 1200 by Abbot Moses of the Vydubitsky Monastery. The code was compiled in connection with the celebration of the completion of a grandiose engineering construction at that time - stone wall to protect the mountain near the Vydubitsky Monastery from erosion by the waters of the Dnieper. You might be interested to read the details.

The wall was erected at the expense of Rurik Rostislavich, the Grand Duke of Kyiv, who had “an insatiable love for the building” (for creation). The prince found “an artist suitable for such a task”, “not a simple master”, Pyotr Milonega. When the wall was “completed,” Rurik and his whole family came to the monastery. After praying “for the acceptance of his work,” he created “no small feast” and “fed the abbots and every church rank.” At this celebration, Abbot Moses gave an inspired speech. “Wonderfully today our eyes see,” he said. “For many who lived before us wanted to see what we see, but did not see, and were not worthy to hear.” Somewhat self-deprecatingly, according to the custom of that time, the abbot turned to the prince: “Accept our rudeness as a gift of words to praise the virtue of your reign.” He further said about the prince that his “autocratic power” shines “more (more) than the stars of heaven,” it is “known not only in the Russian ends, but also by those in the sea far away, for the glory of his Christ-loving deeds has spread throughout the whole earth.” “Standing not on the shore, but on the wall of your creation, I sing to you a song of victory,” exclaims the abbot. He calls the construction of the wall a “new miracle” and says that the “Kyians,” that is, the inhabitants of Kiev, are now standing on the wall and “from everywhere joy enters their souls and it seems to them that they have reached the sky” (that is, that they are soaring in the air).
The abbot's speech is an example of the high florid, that is, oratorical, art of that time. It ends with the vault of Abbot Moses. The glorification of Rurik Rostislavich is associated with admiration for the skill of Peter Miloneg.

Chronicles were given great value. Therefore, the compilation of each new code was associated with an important event in the social life of that time: with the accession of the prince to the table, the consecration of the cathedral, the establishment of the episcopal see.

The chronicle was an official document. It was referred to during various types of negotiations. For example, the Novgorodians, concluding a “row”, that is, an agreement, with the new prince, reminded him of “antiquity and duties” (customs), about the “Yaroslavl charters” and their rights recorded in the Novgorod chronicles. Russian princes, going to the Horde, took chronicles with them and used them to justify their demands and resolve disputes. Zvenigorod Prince Yuri, the son of Dmitry Donskoy, proved his rights to reign in Moscow “with chroniclers and old lists and the spiritual (testament) of his father.” People who could “speak” from the chronicles, that is, knew their contents well, were highly valued.

The chroniclers themselves understood that they were compiling a document that was supposed to preserve in the memory of descendants what they witnessed. “And this will not be forgotten in the last generations” (in the next generations), “Let us leave it to those who live after us, so that it will not be completely forgotten,” they wrote. They confirmed the documentary nature of the news with documentary material. They used diaries of campaigns, reports of “watchmen” (scouts), letters, various kinds diplomas(contractual, spiritual, that is, wills).

Certificates always impress with their authenticity. In addition, they reveal details of everyday life, and sometimes spiritual world people of Ancient Rus'.
Such, for example, is the charter of the Volyn prince Vladimir Vasilkovich (nephew of Daniil Galitsky). This is a will. It was written by a terminally ill man who understood that his end was near. The will concerned the prince's wife and his stepdaughter. There was a custom in Rus': after the death of her husband, the princess was tonsured into a monastery.
The letter begins like this: “Behold (I) Prince Vladimir, son Vasilkov, grandson Romanov, am writing a letter.” The following lists the cities and villages that he gave to the princess “according to his belly” (that is, after life: “belly” meant “life”). At the end, the prince writes: “If she wants to go to the monastery, let her go, if she doesn’t want to go, but as she pleases. I can’t stand up to see what someone will do to my stomach.” Vladimir appointed a guardian for his stepdaughter, but ordered him “not to forcefully give her in marriage to anyone.”

Chroniclers inserted into the vaults works of various genres - teachings, sermons, lives of saints, historical stories. Thanks to the use of diverse material, the chronicle became a huge encyclopedia, including information about the life and culture of Rus' at that time. “If you want to know everything, read the chronicler of the old Rostov,” wrote the Suzdal bishop Simon in a once widely known work of the early 13th century - in the “Kievo-Pechersk Patericon.”

For us, the Russian chronicle is an inexhaustible source of information on the history of our country, a true treasury of knowledge. Therefore, we are extremely grateful to the people who have preserved information about the past for us. Everything we can learn about them is extremely precious to us. We are especially touched when the voice of the chronicler reaches us from the pages of the chronicle. After all, our ancient Russian writers, like architects and painters, were very modest and rarely identified themselves. But sometimes, as if having forgotten themselves, they talk about themselves in the first person. “It happened to me, a sinner, to be right there,” they write. “I heard many words, hedgehog (which) I wrote down in this chronicle.” Sometimes chroniclers add information about their lives: “That same summer they made me priest.” This entry about himself was made by the priest of one of the Novgorod churches, German Voyata (Voyata is an abbreviation for the pagan name Voeslav).

From the chronicler’s references to himself in the first person, we learn whether he was present at the event described or heard about what happened from the lips of “self-witnesses”; it becomes clear to us what position he occupied in the society of that time, what was his education, where he lived and much more. . So he writes how in Novgorod there were guards standing at the city gates, “and others on the other side,” and we understand that this is written by a resident of the Sofia side, where there was a “city,” that is, the Detinets, the Kremlin, and the right, Trade side was “other”, “she is me”.

Sometimes the presence of a chronicler is felt in the description of natural phenomena. He writes, for example, how the freezing Rostov Lake “howled” and “knocked,” and we can imagine that he was somewhere on the shore at that time.
It happens that the chronicler reveals himself in a rude vernacular. “And he lied,” writes a Pskovite about one prince.
The chronicler constantly, without even mentioning himself, still seems to be invisibly present on the pages of his narrative and forces us to look through his eyes at what was happening. The voice of the chronicler is especially clear in the lyrical digressions: “Oh woe, brothers!” or: “Who will not marvel at the one who does not cry!” Sometimes our ancient historians conveyed their attitude to events in generalized forms of folk wisdom - in proverbs or sayings. Thus, the Novgorodian chronicler, speaking about how one of the mayors was removed from his post, adds: “Whoever digs a hole under another will fall into it himself.”

The chronicler is not only a storyteller, he is also a judge. He judges by standards very much high morals. He is constantly concerned about questions of good and evil. He is sometimes happy, sometimes indignant, praising some and blaming others.
The subsequent “compiler” combines the contradictory points of view of his predecessors. The presentation becomes fuller, more versatile, and calmer. An epic image of a chronicler grows in our minds - a wise old man who dispassionately looks at the vanity of the world. This image was brilliantly reproduced by A.S. Pushkin in the scene of Pimen and Gregory. This image already lived in the minds of Russian people in ancient times. Thus, in the Moscow Chronicle under 1409, the chronicler recalls the “initial chronicler of Kyiv,” who “shows without hesitation” all the “temporary riches” of the earth (that is, all the vanity of the earth) and “without anger” describes “everything good and bad.”

Not only chroniclers, but also simple scribes worked on chronicles.
If you look at an ancient Russian miniature depicting a scribe, you will see that he is sitting on “ chair” with a footstool and holds on his knees a scroll or a pack of sheets of parchment or paper folded two to four times, on which he writes. In front of him on a low table there is an inkwell and a sandbox. In those days, wet ink was sprinkled with sand. Right there on the table there is a pen, a ruler, a knife for mending feathers and cleaning up faulty places. There is a book on the stand from which he is copying.

The work of a scribe required a lot of stress and attention. Scribes often worked from dawn to dark. They were hampered by fatigue, illness, hunger and the desire to sleep. To distract themselves a little, they wrote notes in the margins of their manuscripts, in which they poured out their complaints: “Oh, oh, my head hurts, I can’t write.” Sometimes the scribe asks God to make him laugh, because he is tormented by drowsiness and is afraid that he will make a mistake. And then you come across a “dashing pen, you can’t help but write with it.” Under the influence of hunger, the scribe made mistakes: instead of the word “abyss” he wrote “bread”, instead of “font” - “jelly”.

It is not surprising that the scribe, having completed the last page, conveys his joy with a postscript: “Like the hare is happy, he escaped the snare, so is the scribe happy, having completed the last page.”

Monk Lawrence made a long and very figurative note after finishing his work. In this postscript one can feel the joy of accomplishing a great and important deed: “The merchant rejoices when he has made the purchase, and the helmsman rejoices in the calm, and the wanderer has come to his fatherland; The book writer rejoices in the same way when he reaches the end of his books. Likewise, I am a bad, unworthy and sinful servant of God Lavrentiy... And now, gentlemen, fathers and brothers, what (if) where he described or copied, or did not finish writing, honor (read), correcting God, sharing (for God's sake), and not damn it, it’s too old (since) the books are dilapidated, but the mind is young, it hasn’t reached.”

The oldest Russian chronicle that has come down to us is called “The Tale of Bygone Years”. He brings his account up to the second decade of the 12th century, but it has reached us only in copies of the 14th and subsequent centuries. The composition of the “Tale of Bygone Years” dates back to the 11th - early 12th centuries, to the time when Old Russian state with the center in Kyiv it was relatively united. That is why the authors of “The Tale” had such a wide coverage of events. They were interested in issues that were important for all of Rus' as a whole. They were acutely aware of the unity of all Russian regions.

At the end of the 11th century, thanks to economic development Russian regions are being separated into independent principalities. Each principality has its own political and economic interests. They are beginning to compete with Kyiv. Every capital city strives to imitate the “mother of Russian cities.” The achievements of art, architecture and literature in Kyiv turn out to be a model for regional centers. The culture of Kyiv, spreading to all regions of Rus' in the 12th century, fell on prepared soil. Each region previously had its own original traditions, its own artistic skills and tastes, which went back to deep pagan antiquity and were closely connected with folk ideas, affections, and customs.

From the contact of the somewhat aristocratic culture of Kyiv with the folk culture of each region, a diverse ancient Russian art grew, unified both thanks to the Slavic community and thanks to the common model - Kyiv, but everywhere different, original, unlike its neighbor.

In connection with the isolation of the Russian principalities, chronicles are also expanding. It develops in centers where, until the 12th century, only scattered records were kept, for example, in Chernigov, Pereyaslav Russky (Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky), Rostov, Vladimir-on-Klyazma, Ryazan and other cities. Each political center now felt an urgent need to have its own chronicle. The chronicle has become a necessary element of culture. It was impossible to live without your cathedral, without your monastery. In the same way, it was impossible to live without one’s chronicle.

The isolation of lands affected the nature of chronicle writing. The chronicle becomes narrower in the scope of events, in the outlook of the chroniclers. It closes itself within the framework of its political center. But even during this period of feudal fragmentation, all-Russian unity was not forgotten. In Kyiv they were interested in the events that took place in Novgorod. Novgorodians looked closely at what was happening in Vladimir and Rostov. The Vladimir residents were worried about the fate of Pereyaslavl Russky. And of course, all regions turned to Kyiv.

This explains that in the Ipatiev Chronicle, that is, in the South Russian code, we read about events that took place in Novgorod, Vladimir, Ryazan, etc. In the northeastern arch - the Laurentian Chronicle - it tells about what happened in Kyiv, Pereyaslavl Russian, Chernigov, Novgorod-Seversky and other principalities.
The Novgorod and Galicia-Volyn chronicles are more confined to the narrow confines of their land than others, but even there we will find news about all-Russian events.

Regional chroniclers, compiling their codes, began them with the “Tale of Bygone Years,” which told about the “beginning” of the Russian land, and therefore, about the beginning of each regional center. “The Tale of Bygone Years* supported our historians’ consciousness of all-Russian unity.

The most colorful and artistic presentation was in the 12th century. Kyiv Chronicle, included in the Ipatiev list. She led a sequential account of events from 1118 to 1200. This presentation was preceded by The Tale of Bygone Years.
The Kyiv Chronicle is a princely chronicle. There are many stories in it, in which the main actor there was one prince or another.
Before us are stories about princely crimes, about breaking oaths, about the destruction of the possessions of warring princes, about the despair of the inhabitants, about the destruction of enormous artistic and cultural values. Reading the Kyiv Chronicle, we seem to hear the sounds of trumpets and tambourines, the crack of breaking spears, and see clouds of dust hiding both horsemen and foot soldiers. But the overall meaning of all these moving, intricate stories is deeply humane. The chronicler persistently praises those princes who “do not like bloodshed” and at the same time are filled with valor, the desire to “suffer” for the Russian land, “with all their hearts they wish it well.” In this way, the chronicle ideal of the prince is created, which corresponds to the people's ideals.
On the other hand, in the Kyiv Chronicle there is an angry condemnation of order breakers, oathbreakers, and princes who begin needless bloodshed.

Chronicle writing in Novgorod the Great began in the 11th century, but finally took shape in the 12th century. Initially, as in Kyiv, it was a princely chronicle. The son of Vladimir Monomakh, Mstislav the Great, did especially a lot for the Novgorod Chronicle. After him, the chronicle was kept at the court of Vsevolod Mstislavich. But the Novgorodians expelled Vsevolod in 1136, and a veche boyar republic was established in Novgorod. The chronicle was transferred to the court of the Novgorod ruler, that is, the archbishop. It was held at the Hagia Sophia and in some city churches. But this did not make it at all ecclesiastical.

The Novgorod chronicle has all its roots in the people. It is rude, figurative, sprinkled with proverbs and even in its writing retains the characteristic “clack” sound.

Most of the story is told in the form of short dialogues, in which there is not a single extra word. Here short story about the dispute between Prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, son of Vsevolod the Big Nest, and the Novgorodians because the prince wanted to displace the Novgorod mayor Tverdislav, whom he disliked. This dispute took place on the veche square in Novgorod in 1218.
“Prince Svyatoslav sent his thousand to the assembly, speaking (saying): “I can’t be with Tverdislav and I’m taking away the mayorship from him.” The Novgorodians asked: “Is it his fault?” He said: “Without guilt.” Speech Tverdislav: “I am glad that I am not guilty; and you, brothers, are in the posadnichestvo and in the princes” (that is, Novgorodians have the right to give and remove posadnichestvo, invite and expel princes). The Novgorodians answered: “Prince, he has no wife, you kissed the cross for us without guilt, do not deprive your husband (do not remove him from office); and we bow to you (we bow), and here is our mayor; but we won’t go into that” (otherwise we won’t agree to that). And there will be peace.”
This is how the Novgorodians briefly and firmly defended their mayor. The formula “We bow to you” did not mean bowing with a request, but, on the contrary, we bow and say: go away. Svyatoslav understood this perfectly.

The Novgorod chronicler describes veche unrest, changes of princes, and the construction of churches. He is interested in all the little things in life in his hometown: the weather, crop shortages, fires, prices for bread and turnips. The Novgorodian chronicler even talks about the fight against the Germans and Swedes in a businesslike, brief manner, without unnecessary words, without any embellishment.

The Novgorod chronicle can be compared with Novgorod architecture, simple and harsh, and with painting - lush and bright.

In the 12th century, chronicle writing began in the northeast - in Rostov and Vladimir. This chronicle was included in the codex rewritten by Lawrence. It also opens with the “Tale of Bygone Years,” which came to the northeast from the south, but not from Kyiv, but from Pereyaslavl Russky, the patrimony of Yuri Dolgoruky.

The Vladimir chronicle was written at the court of the bishop at the Assumption Cathedral, built by Andrei Bogolyubsky. This left its mark on him. It contains a lot of teachings and religious reflections. The heroes say long prayers, but rarely have lively and short conversations with each other, of which there are so many in the Kyiv and especially in the Novgorod Chronicle. The Vladimir Chronicle is rather dry and at the same time verbose.

But in the Vladimir chronicles, the idea of ​​the need to gather the Russian land in one center was heard more powerfully than anywhere else. For the Vladimir chronicler, this center, of course, was Vladimir. And he persistently pursues the idea of ​​the primacy of the city of Vladimir not only among other cities of the region - Rostov and Suzdal, but also in the system of Russian principalities as a whole. For the first time in the history of Rus', Prince Vsevolod the Big Nest of Vladimir was awarded the title of Grand Duke. He becomes the first among other princes.

The chronicler portrays the Vladimir prince not so much as a brave warrior, but as a builder, a zealous owner, a strict and fair judge, and a kind family man. The Vladimir chronicle is becoming more and more solemn, just as the Vladimir cathedrals are solemn, but it lacks the high artistic skill that the Vladimir architects achieved.

Under the year 1237, in the Ipatiev Chronicle, the words burn like cinnabar: “The Battle of Batyevo.” In other chronicles it is also highlighted: “Batu’s army.” After the Tatar invasion, chronicle writing stopped in a number of cities. However, having died out in one city, it was picked up in another. It becomes shorter, poorer in form and message, but does not freeze.

The main theme of Russian chronicles of the 13th century is the horrors of the Tatar invasion and the subsequent yoke. Against the background of rather meager records, the story about Alexander Nevsky, written by a southern Russian chronicler in the traditions of Kyiv chronicles, stands out.

The Vladimir Grand Ducal Chronicle goes to Rostov, which suffered less from the defeat. Here the chronicle was kept at the court of Bishop Kirill and Princess Maria.

Princess Maria was the daughter of Prince Mikhail of Chernigov, who was killed in the Horde, and the widow of Vasilko of Rostov, who died in the battle with the Tatars on the City River. She was an outstanding woman. She enjoyed great honor and respect in Rostov. When Prince Alexander Nevsky came to Rostov, he bowed to “the Holy Mother of God and Bishop Kirill and the Grand Duchess” (that is, Princess Mary). She “honored Prince Alexander with love.” Maria was present at the last minutes of the life of Alexander Nevsky's brother, Dmitry Yaroslavich, when, according to the custom of that time, he was tonsured into the Chernetsy and into the schema. Her death is described in the chronicle in the way that the death of only prominent princes was usually described: “That same summer (1271) there was a sign in the sun, as if all of him would perish before lunch and the pack would be filled (again). (You understand, we are talking about a solar eclipse.) The same winter, the blessed, Christ-loving princess Vasilkova passed away on the 9th day of December, as (when) the liturgy is sung throughout the city. And he will betray the soul quietly and easily, serenely. Hearing all the people of the city of Rostov her repose and all the people flocked to the monastery of the Holy Savior, Bishop Ignatius and the abbots, and the priests, and the clergy, sang the usual hymns over her and buried her at the Holy Savior, in her monastery, with many tears."

Princess Maria continued the work of her father and husband. On her instructions, the life of Mikhail of Chernigov was compiled in Rostov. She built a church in Rostov “in his name” and established a church holiday for him.
The chronicle of Princess Maria is imbued with the idea of ​​the need to stand firmly for the faith and independence of the homeland. It tells about the martyrdom of Russian princes, steadfast in the fight against the enemy. This is how Vasilek of Rostov, Mikhail of Chernigov, and the Ryazan prince Roman were bred. After a description of his fierce execution, there is an appeal to the Russian princes: “O beloved Russian princes, do not be seduced by the empty and deceptive glory of this world..., love truth and long-suffering and purity.” The novel is set as an example for the Russian princes: through martyrdom he acquired the kingdom of heaven together “with his relative Mikhail of Chernigov.”

In the Ryazan chronicle of the time of the Tatar invasion, events are viewed from a different angle. It accuses the princes of being the culprits of the misfortunes of the Tatar devastation. The accusation primarily concerns the Vladimir prince Yuri Vsevolodovich, who did not listen to the pleas of the Ryazan princes and did not go to their aid. Referring to biblical prophecies, the Ryazan chronicler writes that even “before these,” that is, before the Tatars, “the Lord took away our strength, and placed bewilderment and thunder and fear and trembling in us for our sins.” The chronicler expresses the idea that Yuri “prepared the way” for the Tatars with princely strife, the Battle of Lipetsk, and now for these sins the Russian people are suffering God’s execution.

At the end of the 13th - beginning of the 14th century, chronicles developed in cities that, having advanced at this time, began to challenge each other for the great reign.
They continue the idea of ​​the Vladimir chronicler about the supremacy of his principality in the Russian land. Such cities were Nizhny Novgorod, Tver and Moscow. Their vaults differ in width. They combine chronicle material from different regions and strive to become all-Russian.

Nizhny Novgorod became a capital city in the first quarter of the 14th century under the Grand Duke Konstantin Vasilyevich, who “honestly and menacingly harrowed (defended) his fatherland from princes stronger than himself,” that is, from the princes of Moscow. Under his son, Grand Duke of Suzdal-Nizhny Novgorod Dmitry Konstantinovich, the second archbishopric in Rus' was established in Nizhny Novgorod. Before this, only the Bishop of Novgorod had the rank of archbishop. The archbishop was subordinate in ecclesiastical terms directly to the Greek, that is, the Byzantine patriarch, while the bishops were subordinate to the Metropolitan of All Rus', who at that time already lived in Moscow. You yourself understand how important it was from a political point of view for the Nizhny Novgorod prince that the church pastor of his land should not depend on Moscow. In connection with the establishment of the archbishopric, a chronicle was compiled, which is called the Laurentian chronicle. Lavrenty, a monk of the Annunciation Monastery in Nizhny Novgorod, compiled it for Archbishop Dionysius.
Lawrence's chronicle paid much attention to the founder of Nizhny Novgorod, Yuri Vsevolodovich, the Vladimir prince who died in the battle with the Tatars on the City River. Laurentian Chronicle - invaluable contribution Nizhny Novgorod into Russian culture. Thanks to Lavrentiy, we have not only the oldest copy of the Tale of Bygone Years, but also the only copy of the Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh to Children.

In Tver, the chronicle was kept from the 13th to the 15th centuries and is most fully preserved in the Tver collection, the Rogozh chronicler and the Simeonovskaya chronicle. Scientists associate the beginning of the chronicle with the name of the Tver bishop Simeon, under whom the “great cathedral church” of the Savior was built in 1285. In 1305 Grand Duke Mikhail Yaroslavich Tverskoy laid the foundation for the grand ducal chronicle writing in Tver.
The Tver Chronicle contains many records about the construction of churches, fires and civil wars. But the Tver chronicle entered the history of Russian literature thanks to bright stories about the murder of the Tver princes Mikhail Yaroslavich and Alexander Mikhailovich.
We also owe the Tver Chronicle a colorful story about the uprising in Tver against the Tatars.

Initial chronicle of Moscow is conducted at the Assumption Cathedral, built in 1326 by Metropolitan Peter, the first metropolitan who began to live in Moscow. (Before that, the metropolitans lived in Kyiv, since 1301 - in Vladimir). The records of Moscow chroniclers were short and dry. They concerned the construction and painting of churches - a lot of construction was going on in Moscow at that time. They reported about fires, about diseases, and finally about family matters Grand Dukes of Moscow. However, gradually - this began after the Battle of Kulikovo - the chronicle of Moscow leaves the narrow framework of its principality.
Due to his position as the head of the Russian Church, the Metropolitan was interested in the affairs of all Russian regions. At his court, regional chronicles were collected in copies or originals; chronicles were brought from monasteries and cathedrals. Based on all the material collected in In 1409, the first all-Russian code was created in Moscow. It included news from the chronicles of Veliky Novgorod, Ryazan, Smolensk, Tver, Suzdal and other cities. He illuminated the history of the entire Russian people even before the unification of all Russian lands around Moscow. The code served as ideological preparation for this unification.

We draw information about early Russian history from chronicles. What, exactly, do we know about them? To this day, researchers cannot come to a consensus about both their authorship and their objectivity.

Old Russian chronicles: Main secrets

Magazine: History “Russian Seven” No. 6, August 2016
Category: Secrets
Text: Russian Seven

Who is author?

For people who do not delve deeply into history, there is only one chronicler - Nestor, a Monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. The consolidation of this status for him was facilitated by his canonization as a saint under the name Nestor the Chronicler. However, this monk as the author of the “Tale of Bygone Years” is mentioned only in one of its later (16th century) lists, and besides the “Tale” there are many other chronicle texts created in different centuries and in different, far distant places. other places.
Nestor alone could not have been torn apart in time and space to write them all. So in any case he is just one of the authors.
Who are the others? The creator of the Laurentian Chronicle is listed as the monk Lavrenty, the Trinity Chronicle is attributed to the monk of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, Epiphanius the Wise. And in general, judging by the fact that almost all the chronicles were kept in monasteries, they owe their origin to church people.
However, the style of writing some texts gives reason to look for authors in a secular environment. For example, in the Kyiv Chronicle, very little attention is paid to church issues, and the language is as close as possible to the folk language: common vocabulary, the use of dialogues, proverbs, quotes, pictorial descriptions. The Galician-Volyn Chronicle contains many special military words and is clearly aimed at expressing certain political ideas.

Where is the original?

The fact that all chronicles are known to us in lists (copies) and editions (editions) does not simplify the search for authors. In no collection in the world will you find “The Tale of Bygone Years,” written by Nestor’s hand at the turn of the 11th-12th centuries. There are only the Laurentian list of the 14th century, the Ipatievsky list of the 15th century, and the Khlebnikovsky list of the 16th century. etc.
And Nestor himself was hardly the first author of the Tale.
According to philologist and historian A.A. Shakhmatov, he merely revised the Initial code of 1093 of the abbot of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery John and supplemented it with the texts of Russian-Byzantine treaties and legends that came to him in the oral tradition.
John, in turn, supplemented the arch of the monk Nikon. And that version had its predecessor - the Most Ancient Code of the first half of the 11th century. But no one can give one hundred percent guarantee that it is not based on another, more ancient text.
This is the essence of the Russian tradition of chronicle writing. Each subsequent copyist uses old manuscripts, oral traditions, songs, eyewitness accounts and compiles a new, more complete - from his point of view - collection of historical information. This is clearly visible in the “uneven” Kyiv Chronicle, in which the abbot of the Vydubitsky Monastery, Moses, melted down the texts of authors of very different levels of education and talent.

Why do the chronicles contradict each other?

The answer to this question flows smoothly from the previous one. Since there are a lot of chronicles, their lists and editions (according to some sources, about five thousand), their authors lived at different times and in different cities, did not have modern methods of transmitting information and used sources available to them, it was difficult even unintentionally to avoid some inaccuracies. What can we say about the desire to pull the blanket over oneself and present this or that event, city, ruler in a favorable light...
Before this, we touched on issues related to the history of the chronicles themselves, but there are many mysteries in their content.

Where did the Russian Land come from?

The Tale of Bygone Years begins with this question. However, even here there are reasons for interpretation, and scientists still cannot come to a consensus.
On the one hand, it seems to be said quite clearly: “ And they went overseas to the Varangians, to Rus'.<…>The Chud, the Slovenians, the Krivichi and all said to the Russians: “Our land is great and abundant, but there is no order in it. Come reign and rule over us." And three brothers were chosen with their clans, and they took all of Rus' with them, and came.<…>And from those Varangians the Russian land was nicknamed».
The Norman theory of the origin of the state of Rus' - from the Varangians - is based on this passage.
But there is another fragment: “ ... From the same Slavs are we, Rus'... But the Slavic people and the Russians are one, after all, they were called Russia from the Varangians, and before there were Slavs; although they were called glades, the speech was Slavic" According to which it turns out that although we got our name from the Varangians, even before them we were a single people. This (anti-Norman or Slavic) hypothesis was adhered to by M.V. Lomonosov and V.N. Tatishchev.

To whom did Vladimir Monomakh write his “teaching”?

“The Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh” is part of the “Tale of Bygone Years” and contains three parts: a teaching to children, an autobiographical story and a letter, the addressee of which is usually the prince’s brother, Oleg Svyatoslavovich. But why include personal correspondence in a historical document?
It is worth noting that Oleg’s name is not mentioned anywhere in the letter, and the content of the text is of a penitential nature.
Perhaps by retelling this complex story with the brother who killed his son, Monomakh wanted to show a public example of humility and forgiveness, rhyming with the first part. But on the other hand, this text is included only in one of the lists of the “Tale” and was clearly not intended for a large number of eyes, so some scientists consider this a personal written confession, preparation for the Last Judgment.

Who wrote “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and when?

Disputes about the origin of the “Word” began immediately after its discovery by Count A.I. Musin-Pushkin at the end of the 18th century. The text of this literary monument is so unusual and complex that its authorship has not been attributed to anyone: Igor himself, Yaroslavna, Vladimir Igorevich and other princes or non-princes; fans of this campaign and, conversely, those who condemned Igor’s adventure; the name of the author was “deciphered” and isolated from the acrostics. So far to no avail.
It's the same with writing time. Did the time of the events described coincide with the time when they were described? Historiographer B.A. Rybakov considered “The Lay” almost a report from the scene, and B.I. Yatsenko moved the date of its creation ten years further, since the text mentions events that were not known in 1185, the year of the campaign. There are also many intermediate versions.

Great philosophers have often repeated that people who do not know their past have no future. You should know the history of your family, your people, your country, if only so that you don’t have to make the same discoveries and make the same mistakes.

Sources of information about past events are official documents at the state level, records of religious, social, educational institutions, preserved eyewitness accounts and much more. Chronicles are considered the most ancient documentary source.

Chronicle is one of the genres of Old Russian literature, which existed from the 11th to the 17th centuries. At its core, it is a sequential presentation of significant events in history. The records were kept by year; in terms of volume and details of the presentation of the material, they could vary greatly.

What events deserved mention in the chronicles?

Firstly, these are turning points in the biography of Russian princes: marriage, the birth of heirs, the beginning of a reign, military exploits, death. Sometimes Russian chronicles described miracles occurring from the relics of deceased princes, such as Boris and Gleb, the first Russian saints.

Secondly, chroniclers paid attention to describing celestial eclipses, solar and lunar, epidemics of serious diseases, earthquakes, etc. Chroniclers often tried to establish a relationship between natural phenomena and historical events. For example, defeat in a battle could be explained by the special position of the stars in the sky.

Thirdly, ancient chronicles told about events of national importance: military campaigns, attacks by enemies, construction of religious or administrative buildings, church affairs, etc.

Common features of famous chronicles

1) If you remember what a chronicle is, you can guess why this genre of literature received such a name. The fact is that instead of the word “year” the authors used the word “summer”. Each entry began with the words “In the summer,” followed by the year and a description of the event. If, from the chronicler’s point of view, nothing significant happened, then a note was written: “There was silence in the summer of XXXX.” The chronicler had no right to completely omit the description of a particular year.

2) Some Russian chronicles begin not with the emergence of the Russian state, which would be logical, but with the creation of the world. In this way, the chronicler sought to fit the history of his country into universal human history, to show the place and role of his homeland in his modern world. Dating was also carried out from the creation of the world, and not from the Nativity of Christ, as we do now. The interval between these dates is 5508 years. Therefore, the entry “In the summer of 6496” contains a description of the events of 988 - the Baptism of Rus'.

3) For work, the chronicler could use the works of his predecessors. But he not only included the materials they left behind in his narrative, but also gave them his own political and ideological assessment.

4) The chronicle differs from other genres of literature in its special style. The authors did not use any artistic techniques to decorate your speech. The main thing for them was documentation and information content.

The connection between the chronicle and literary and folklore genres

The special style mentioned above, however, did not prevent chroniclers from periodically resorting to oral folk art or other literary genres. Ancient chronicles contain elements of legends, traditions, heroic epics, as well as hagiographic and secular literature.

Turning to the toponymic legend, the author sought to explain where the names of the Slavic tribes, ancient cities and the entire country came from. Echoes of ritual poetry are present in the description of weddings and funerals. Epic techniques could be used to depict the glorious Russian princes and their heroic deeds. And to illustrate the life of rulers, for example, the feasts they organize, there are elements of folk tales.

Hagiographic literature, with its clear structure and symbolism, provided chroniclers with both material and a method for describing miraculous phenomena. They believed in the intervention of divine forces in human history and reflected this in their writings. The authors used elements of secular literature (teachings, stories, etc.) to reflect and illustrate their views.

Texts of legislative acts, princely and church archives, and other official documents were also woven into the fabric of the narrative. This helped the chronicler to give the most complete picture of important events. What is a chronicle if not a comprehensive historical description?

The most famous chronicles

It should be noted that chronicles are divided into local, which became widespread during the times of feudal fragmentation, and all-Russian, describing the history of the entire state. The list of the most famous is presented in the table:

Until the 19th century, it was believed that “The Tale of Bygone Years” was the first chronicle in Rus', and its creator, monk Nestor, was the first Russian historiographer. This assumption was refuted by A.A. Shkhmatov, D.S. Likhachev and other scientists. “The Tale of Bygone Years” has not survived, but its individual editions are known from lists in later works - the Laurentian and Ipatiev Chronicles.

Chronicle in the modern world

By the end of the 17th century, the chronicles had lost their historical meaning. More accurate and objective ways of recording events have emerged. History began to be studied from the standpoint of official science. And the word “chronicle” acquired additional meanings. We no longer remember what a chronicle is when we read the headings “Chronicles of life and work N”, “Chronicle of a museum” (theater or any other institution).

There is a magazine, a film studio, a radio program called “Chronicles,” and fans of computer games are probably familiar with the game “Arkham Chronicles.”

The chronicle of the ancient Slavic state was almost forgotten thanks to the German professors who wrote Russian history and set as their goal to rejuvenate the history of Rus', to show that the Slavic peoples were supposedly “virginly pure, not stained by the deeds of the Russians, Antes, barbarians, Vandals and Scythians, whom everyone remembered very well.” world".

The goal is to tear Rus' away from the Scythian past. Based on the work of German professors, a domestic historical school arose. All history textbooks teach us that before baptism, wild tribes lived in Rus' - “pagans”.

This is a big Lie, because history has been rewritten many times to please the existing ruling system - starting with the first Romanovs, i.e. history is interpreted as beneficial for the moment ruling class. Among the Slavs, their past is called Heritage or Chronicle, and not History (the word “Let” preceded, introduced by Peter the Great in 7208 years from S.M.Z.H., the concept of “year”, when instead of the Slavic chronology they introduced 1700 from the supposed Nativity of Christ). S.M.Z.H. - this is the Creation / signing / of Peace with the Arim / Chinese / in the summer called the Star Temple - after the end of the Great World War (something like May 9, 1945, but more significant for the Slavs).

Therefore, is it worth trusting textbooks that, even in our memory, have been rewritten more than once? And is it worth trusting textbooks that contradict many facts that say that before baptism, in Rus' there was a huge state with many cities and towns (Country of Cities), a developed economy and crafts, with its own unique Culture (Culture = Kultura = Cult of Ra = Cult of Light). Our ancestors who lived in those days had a vital Wisdom and worldview that helped them always act according to their Conscience and live in harmony with the world around them. This attitude to the World is now called the Old Faith (“old” means “pre-Christian”, and previously it was called simply - Faith - Knowledge of Ra - Knowledge of Light - Knowledge of the Shining Truth of the Almighty). Faith is primary, and Religion (for example, Christian) is secondary. The word “Religion” comes from “Re” - repetition, “League” - connection, unification. Faith is always one (there is either a connection with God or there is not), and there are many religions - as many as there are Gods among the people or as many ways as intermediaries (popes, patriarchs, priests, rabbis, mullahs, etc.) come up with to establish connection with them.

Since the connection with God established through third parties - intermediaries, for example - priests, is artificial, then, in order not to lose the flock, each religion claims to be “Truth in the first instance.” Because of this, many bloody religious wars have been and are being waged.

Mikhailo Vasilyevich Lomonosov fought alone against the German professorship, arguing that the history of the Slavs goes back to ancient times.

Ancient Slavic state RUSKOLAN occupied lands from the Danube and the Carpathians to the Crimea, North Caucasus and the Volga, and the subject lands captured the Trans-Volga and South Ural steppes.

The Scandinavian name for Rus' sounds like Gardarika - a country of cities. Arab historians also write about the same thing, numbering Russian cities in the hundreds. At the same time, claiming that in Byzantium there are only five cities, the rest are “fortified fortresses.” In ancient documents, the state of the Slavs is referred to as Scythia and Ruskolan.

The word “Ruskolan” has the syllable “lan”, which is present in the words “hand”, “valley” and means: space, territory, place, region. Subsequently, the syllable “lan” was transformed into the European land - country. Sergei Lesnoy in his book “Where are you from, Rus'?” says the following: “With regard to the word “Ruskolun”, it should be noted that there is also a variant “Ruskolan”. If the latter option is more correct, then the word can be understood differently: “Russian doe.” Lan - field. The whole expression: “Russian field.” In addition, Lesnoy makes the assumption that there was a word “cleaver”, which probably meant some kind of space. It is also found in other verbal environments. Historians and linguists also believe that the name of the state “Ruskolan” could come from two words “Rus” and “Alan” after the names of the Rus and Alans who lived in a single state.

Mikhail Vasilievich Lomonosov had the same opinion, who wrote:
“The same tribe of Alans and Roxolans is clear from many places of ancient historians and geographers, and the difference is that Alans are the common name of an entire people, and Roxolans are a word derived from their place of residence, which, not without reason, is derived from the River Ra, as among ancient writers is known as Volga (VolGa).”

The ancient historian and scientist Pliny puts the Alans and Roxolans together. Roksolane, by the ancient scientist and geographer Ptolemy, is called Alanorsi by figurative addition. The names Aorsi and Roxane or Rossane in Strabo - “the exact unity of the Rosses and Alans asserts, to which the reliability is increased, that they were both of the Slavic generation, then that the Sarmatians were of the same tribe from ancient writers and are therefore attested to have the same roots with the Varangians-Russians.”

Let us also note that Lomonosov also refers to the Varangians as Russians, which once again shows the fraud of the German professors, who deliberately called the Varangians a stranger, and not a Slavic people. This manipulation and the birth of a legend about the calling of a foreign tribe to reign in Rus' had a political background so that once again the “enlightened” West could point out to the “wild” Slavs their denseness, and that it was thanks to the Europeans that the Slavic state was created. Modern historians, in addition to adherents of the Norman theory, also agree that the Varangians are precisely a Slavic tribe.

Lomonosov writes:
“According to Helmold’s testimony, the Alans were mixed with the Kurlanders, the same tribe of the Varangian-Russians.”

Lomonosov writes - Varangians-Russians, and not Varangians-Scandinavians, or Varangians-Goths. In all documents of the pre-Christian period, the Varangians were classified as Slavs.

Lomonosov further writes:
“The Rugen Slavs were called for short the Ranas, that is, from the Ra (Volga) River, and the Rossans. This will be more clearly demonstrated by their resettlement to the Varangian shores. Weissel from Bohemia suggests that the Amakosovians, Alans, and Wends came from the east to Prussia.”

Lomonosov writes about the Rugen Slavs. It is known that on the island of Rügen in the city of Arkona there was the last Slavic pagan temple, destroyed in 1168. Now there is a Slavic museum there.

Lomonosov writes that it was from the east that Slavic tribes came to Prussia and the island of Rügen and adds:
“Such a resettlement of the Volga Alans, that is, Rossans or Rosses, to Baltic Sea happened, as can be seen from the evidence given by the authors above, not just once and not in a short time, which is clear from the traces that have remained to this day, with which the names of cities and rivers should be honored.”

But let's return to the Slavic state.

Capital of Ruskolani, city Kiyar was located in the Caucasus, in the Elbrus region near the modern villages of Upper Chegem and Bezengi. Sometimes it was also called Kiyar Antsky, named after the Slavic tribe of Ants. The results of the expeditions to the site of the ancient Slavic city will be written at the end. Descriptions of this Slavic city can be found in ancient documents.

“Avesta” in one place talks about the main city of the Scythians in the Caucasus, near one of the highest mountains in the world. And as you know, Elbrus is the highest mountain not only in the Caucasus, but also in Europe in general. “Rigveda” tells about the main city of the Rus, all on the same Elbrus.

Kiyara is mentioned in the Book of Veles. Judging by the text, Kiyar, or the city of Kiya the Old, was founded 1300 years before the fall of Ruskolani (368 AD), i.e. in the 9th century BC.

The ancient Greek geographer Strabo, who lived in the 1st century. BC. - early 1st century AD writes about the Temple of the Sun and the sanctuary of the Golden Fleece in the sacred city of the Russians, in the Elbrus region, on the top of Mount Tuzuluk.

Our contemporaries discovered the foundation of an ancient structure on the mountain. Its height is about 40 meters, and the diameter of the base is 150 meters: the ratio is the same as that of the Egyptian pyramids and other religious buildings of antiquity. There are many obvious and not at all random patterns in the parameters of the mountain and the temple. The observatory-temple was created according to a “standard” design and, like other Cyclopean structures - Stonehenge and Arkaim - was intended for astrological observations.

In the legends of many peoples there is evidence of construction on the sacred Mount Alatyr ( modern name- Elbrus) of this majestic structure, revered by all ancient peoples. There are mentions of it in the national epic of the Greeks, Arabs, and European peoples. According to Zoroastrian legends, this temple was captured by Rus (Rustam) in Usenem (Kavi Useinas) in the second millennium BC. Archaeologists officially note at this time the emergence of the Koban culture in the Caucasus and the appearance of the Scythian-Sarmatian tribes.

The temple of the Sun is also mentioned by the geographer Strabo, placing in it the sanctuary of the Golden Fleece and the oracle of Eetus. Eat detailed descriptions this temple and confirmation that astronomical observations were carried out there.

The Sun Temple was a veritable paleoastronomical observatory of antiquity. Priests who had certain knowledge created such observatory temples and studied stellar science. There, not only dates for farming were calculated, but, most importantly, the most important milestones in world and spiritual history were determined.

The Arab historian Al Masudi described the Temple of the Sun on Elbrus as follows: “In the Slavic regions there were buildings revered by them. Among the others they had a building on a mountain, about which philosophers wrote that it was one of the highest mountains in the world. There is a story about this building: about the quality of its construction, about the arrangement of its different stones and their different colors, about the holes made in the upper part of it, about what was built in these holes for observing the sunrise, about the things placed there precious stones and the signs marked in it, which indicate future events and warn against incidents before their implementation, about the sounds heard in the upper part of it and about what befalls them when listening to these sounds.”

In addition to the above documents, information about the main ancient Slavic city, the Temple of the Sun and the Slavic state as a whole is in the Elder Edda, in Persian, Scandinavian and ancient Germanic sources, in the Book of Veles. According to legend, near the city of Kiyar (Kiev) there was sacred mountain Alatyr - archaeologists believe that this was Elbrus. Next to it was the Iriysky, or Garden of Eden, and the Smorodina River, which separated the earthly and afterlife worlds, and connected Yav and Nav (that Light) Kalinov Bridge.

This is how they talk about two wars between the Goths (an ancient Germanic tribe) and the Slavs, the invasion of the Goths into the ancient Slavic state by the Gothic historian of the 4th century Jordan in his book “The History of the Goths” and “The Book of Veles”. In the middle of the 4th century, the Gothic king Germanarech led his people to conquer the world. It was great commander. According to Jordanes, he was compared to Alexander the Great. The same thing was written about Germanarakh and Lomonosov:
Ermanarik, king of the Ostrogoths, for his courage in capturing many northern peoples was compared by some to Alexander the Great.”

Judging by the evidence of Jordan, the Elder Edda and the Book of Veles, Germanarekh, after long wars, captured almost all of Eastern Europe. He fought along the Volga to the Caspian Sea, then fought on the Terek River, crossed the Caucasus, then walked along the Black Sea coast and reached Azov.

According to the “Book of Veles,” Germanarekh first made peace with the Slavs (“drank wine for friendship”), and only then “came against us with a sword.”

The peace treaty between the Slavs and Goths was sealed by the dynastic marriage of the sister of the Slavic prince-tsar Bus - Lebedi and Germanarech. This was payment for peace, for Hermanarekh was many years old at that time (he died at 110 years old, the marriage was concluded shortly before that). According to Edda, Swan-Sva was wooed by the son of Germanarekh Randver, and he took her to his father. And then Earl Bikki, Germanareh’s adviser, told them that it would be better if Randver got the Swan, since both of them were young, and Germanareh was an old man. These words pleased Swan-Sva and Randver, and Jordan adds that Swan-Sva fled from Germanarech. And then Germanareh executed his son and Swan. And this murder was the cause of the Slavic-Gothic War. Having treacherously violated the “peace treaty,” Germanarekh defeated the Slavs in the first battles. But then, when Germanarekh moved into the heart of Ruskolani, the Antes stood in the way of Germanarekh. Germanarekh was defeated. According to Jordan, he was struck in the side with a sword by the Rossomons (Ruskolans) - Sar (king) and Ammius (brother). The Slavic prince Bus and his brother Zlatogor inflicted a mortal wound on Germanarech, and he soon died. This is how Jordan, the Book of Veles, and later Lomonosov wrote about it.

“The Book of Veles”: “And Ruskolan was defeated by the Goths of Germanarakh. And he took a wife from our family and killed her. And then our leaders rushed against him and defeated Germanarekh.”

Jordan. “History is ready”: “The unfaithful family of Rosomons (Ruskolan) ... took advantage of the following opportunity... After all, after the king, driven by rage, ordered a certain woman named Sunhilda (Swan) from the named family to be torn apart for treacherously leaving her husband, tied to fierce horses and prompting the horses to run in different directions, her brothers Sar (King Bus) and Ammius (Zlat), avenging the death of their sister, struck Germanarech in the side with a sword.”

M. Lomonosov: “Sonilda, a noble Roksolan woman, Ermanarik ordered to be torn apart by horses because her husband ran away. Her brothers Sar and Ammius, avenging the death of their sister, pierced Yermanarik in the side; died of a wound at one hundred and ten years old"

A few years later, the descendant of Germanarech, Amal Vinitarius, invaded the lands of the Slavic tribe of Antes. In the first battle he was defeated, but then “began to act more decisively,” and the Goths, led by Amal Vinitar, defeated the Slavs. The Slavic prince Busa and 70 other princes were crucified by the Goths on crosses. This happened on the night of March 20-21, 368 AD. On the same night that Bus was crucified, a total lunar eclipse occurred. Also, a monstrous earthquake shook the earth (the entire Black Sea coast shook, there was destruction in Constantinople and Nicaea (ancient historians testify to this. Later, the Slavs gathered strength and defeated the Goths. But the former powerful Slavic state was no longer restored.

“The Book of Veles”: “And then Rus' was defeated again. And Busa and seventy other princes were crucified on crosses. And there was great turmoil in Rus' from Amal Vend. And then Sloven gathered Rus' and led it. And that time the Goths were defeated. And we did not allow the Sting to flow anywhere. And everything worked out. And our grandfather Dazhbog rejoiced and greeted the warriors - many of our fathers who won victories. And there were no troubles and many worries, and so the Gothic land became ours. And so it will remain until the end"

Jordan. “History of the Goths”: Amal Vinitarius... moved the army into the territory of the Antes. And when he came to them, he was defeated in the first skirmish, then he behaved more bravely and crucified their king named Boz with his sons and 70 noble people, so that the corpses of the hanged would double the fear of the conquered.”

Bulgarian chronicle “Baraj Tarikh”: “Once in the land of the Anchians, the Galidzians (Galicians) attacked Bus and killed him along with all 70 princes.” The Slavic prince Bus and 70 princes were crucified by the Goths in the eastern Carpathians at the sources of the Seret and Prut, on the present border of Wallachia and Transylvania. In those days, these lands belonged to Ruskolani, or Scythia. Much later, under the famous Vlad Dracula, it was at the site of Bus’s crucifixion that mass executions and crucifixions were held. The bodies of Bus and the rest of the princes were removed from the crosses on Friday and taken to the Elbrus region, to Etaka (a tributary of the Podkumka). According to Caucasian legend, the body of Bus and other princes was brought by eight pairs of oxen. Bus's wife ordered a mound to be built over their grave on the banks of the Etoko River (a tributary of Podkumka) and in order to perpetuate the memory of Bus, she ordered the Altud River to be renamed Baksan (Busa River).

Caucasian legend says:
“Baksan (Bus) was killed by the Gothic king with all his brothers and eighty noble Narts. Hearing this, the people gave in to despair: the men beat their chests, and the women tore out the hair on their heads, saying: “Dauov’s eight sons are killed, killed!”

Those who carefully read “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” remember that it mentions the long-gone Time of Busovo, the year 368, the year of the crucifixion of Prince Busovo, which has an astrological meaning. According to Slavic astrology, this is a milestone. On the night of March 20-21, turn 368, the era of Aries ended and the era of Pisces began.

It was after the story of the crucifixion of Prince Bus, which became known in ancient world and the plot of the crucifixion of Christ appeared (was stolen) in Christianity.

The canonical Gospels nowhere say that Christ was crucified on the cross. Instead of the word “cross” (kryst), the word “stavros” is used there, which means pillar, and it does not talk about crucifixion, but about pillaring. That is why there are no early Christian images of the crucifixion.

The Christian Acts of the Apostles 10:39 says that Christ was “hanged on a tree.” The plot with the crucifixion first appeared only 400 years later!!! years after the execution of Christ, translated from Greek. The question arises: why, if Christ was crucified and not hanged, did Christians write in their holy books for four hundred years that Christ was hanged? Somehow illogical! It was the Slavic-Scythian tradition that influenced the distortion of the original texts during translation, and then the iconography (for there are no early Christian images of crucifixions).

The meaning of the original Greek text was well known in Greece itself (Byzantium), but after the corresponding reforms were carried out in the modern Greek language, unlike the previous custom, the word “stavros” took on, in addition to the meaning of “pillar,” also the meaning of “cross.”

In addition to the direct source of execution—the canonical Gospels—others are also known. In the Jewish tradition, which is closest to the Christian one, the tradition of the hanging of Jesus is also affirmed. There is a Jewish “Tale of the Hanged Man” written in the first centuries of our era, which describes in detail the execution of Jesus by hanging. And in the Talmud there are two stories about the execution of Christ. According to the first, Jesus was stoned, not in Jerusalem, but in Lud. According to the second story, because Jesus was of royal descent, and stoning was also replaced by hanging. And it was official version Christians for 400 years!!!

Even throughout the Muslim world it is generally accepted that Christ was not crucified, but hanged. In the Koran, based on early Christian traditions, Christians are cursed who claim that Jesus was not hanged, but crucified, and who claim that Jesus was Allah (God) himself, and not a prophet and the Messiah, and also denies the crucifixion itself. Therefore, Muslims, while respecting Jesus, do not reject either the Ascension or the Transfiguration of Jesus Christ, but they reject the symbol of the cross, since they rely on early Christian texts that speak of hanging, not crucifixion.

Moreover, the natural phenomena described in the Bible simply could not have occurred in Jerusalem on the day of Christ’s crucifixion.

The Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Matthew say that Christ suffered passionate torment on the spring full moon from Holy Thursday to Good Friday, and that there was an eclipse from the sixth to the ninth hour. The event, which they call an “eclipse,” occurred at a time when, for objective astronomical reasons, it simply could not have happened. Christ was executed during the Jewish Passover, and it always falls on a full moon.

Firstly, there are no solar eclipses during a full moon. During a full moon, the Moon and the Sun are on opposite sides of the Earth, so the Moon cannot block the Earth's sunlight.

Secondly, solar eclipses unlike lunar ones, they do not last three hours, as it is written in the Bible. Maybe the Judeo-Christians meant a lunar eclipse, but the whole world did not understand them?...

But solar and lunar eclipses are very easy to calculate. Any astronomer will say that in the year of Christ’s execution and even in the years close to this event there were no lunar eclipses.

The nearest eclipse accurately indicates only one date - the night of March 20-21, 368 AD. This is an absolutely accurate astronomical calculation. Namely, on this night from Thursday to Friday, March 20/21, 368, Prince Bus and 70 other princes were crucified by the Goths. On the night of March 20-21, a total lunar eclipse occurred, which lasted from midnight until three o'clock on March 21, 368. This date was calculated by astronomers, including the director of the Pulkovo Observatory N. Morozov.

Why did Christians write from move 33 that Christ was hanged, and after move 368 they rewrote the “holy” scripture and began to claim that Christ was crucified? Apparently the crucifixion plot seemed more interesting to them and they once again engaged in religious plagiarism - i.e. simply theft... This is where the information in the Bible came from that Christ was crucified, that he suffered torment from Thursday to Friday, that there was an eclipse. Having stolen the plot with the crucifixion, the Jewish Christians decided to provide the Bible with details of the execution of the Slavic prince, without thinking that people in the future would pay attention to the described natural phenomena, which could not have happened in the year of Christ’s execution in the place in which he was executed.

And this is far from the only example of theft of materials by Jewish Christians. Speaking about the Slavs, I remember the myth of Arius’s father, who received a covenant from Dazhbog on Alatyr Mountain (Elbrus), and in the Bible, Arius and Alatyr miraculously turned into Moses and Sinai...

Or the Judeo-Christian baptismal rite. The Christian rite of baptism is one third of the Slavic pagan rite, which included: naming, fire baptism and water bath. In Judeo-Christianity, only the water bath remained.

We can recall examples from other traditions. Mithra - born on December 25th!!! 600 years before the birth of Jesus!!! December 25th - to the day 600 years later, Jesus was born. Mithra was born of a virgin in a stable, a star rose, the Magi came!!! Everything is the same as with Christ, only 600 years earlier. The cult of Mithras included: baptism with water, holy water, belief in immortality, belief in Mithras as a savior god, the concepts of Heaven and Hell. Mithra died and was resurrected in order to become a mediator between God the Father and man! Plagiarism (theft) of Christians is 100%.

More examples. Immaculately conceived: Gautama Buddha - India 600 BC; Indra - Tibet 700 BC; Dionysus - Greece; Quirinus - Roman; Adonis - Babylon all in the period from 400-200 BC; Krishna - India 1200 BC; Zarathustra - 1500 BC. In a word, whoever read the originals knows where the Jewish Christians got the materials for their writings.

So modern neo-Christians, who are trying in vain to find some kind of mythical Russian roots in the native Jew Yeshua - Jesus and his mother, need to stop doing nonsense and start worshiping Bus, nicknamed - the Cross, i.e. The Bus of the Cross, or what would be completely clear to them - the Bus of Christ. After all, this is the one a real Hero, from which the Judeo-Christians copied their New Testament, and the one they invented - the Judeo-Christian Jesus Christ - turns out to be some kind of charlatan and rogue, to say the least... After all, the New Testament is just a romantic comedy in the spirit of Jewish fiction, supposedly written by the so-called. n. “Apostle” Paul (in the world - Saul), and even then, it turns out, it was not written by him himself, but by unknown/!?/ disciples of disciples. Well, they had fun though...

But let's return to the Slavic chronicle. The discovery of an ancient Slavic city in the Caucasus no longer looks so surprising. In recent decades, several ancient Slavic cities have been discovered in Russia and Ukraine.

The most famous today is the famous Arkaim, whose age is more than 5,000 thousand years.

In 1987, in the Southern Urals in the Chelyabinsk region, during the construction of a hydroelectric power station, a fortified settlement of the early urban type, dating back to the Bronze Age, was discovered. to the times of the ancient Aryans. Arkaim is five hundred to six hundred years older than the famous Troy, even older than the Egyptian pyramids.

The discovered settlement is an observatory city. During its study, it was established that the monument was a city fortified by two wall circles inscribed within each other, ramparts and ditches. The dwellings in it were trapezoidal in shape, closely adjacent to each other and located in a circle in such a way that the wide end wall of each dwelling was part of the defensive wall. Every home has a bronze casting stove! But according to traditional academic knowledge, bronze came to Greece only in the second millennium BC. Later, the settlement turned out to be integral part the most ancient Aryan civilization - the “Country of Cities” of the Southern Trans-Urals. Scientists have discovered a whole complex of monuments belonging to this amazing culture.

Despite their small size, fortified centers can be called proto-cities. The use of the concept “city” to fortified settlements of the Arkaim-Sintashta type is, of course, conditional.

However, they cannot be called simply settlements, since the Arkaim “cities” are distinguished by powerful defensive structures, monumental architecture, and complex communication systems. The entire territory of the fortified center is extremely rich in planning details; it is very compact and carefully thought out. From the point of view of the organization of space, what we have in front of us is not even a city, but a kind of super-city.

The fortified centers of the Southern Urals are five to six centuries older than Homeric Troy. They are contemporaries of the first dynasty of Babylon, the pharaohs of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt and the Cretan-Mycenaean culture of the Mediterranean. The time of their existence corresponds to the last centuries of the famous civilization of India - Mahenjo-Daro and Harappa.

Website of the Arkaim Museum-Reserve: link

In Ukraine, in Tripoli, the remains of a city were discovered, the same age as Arkaim, more than five thousand years. He is five hundred years older than the civilization of Mesopotamia - Sumerian!

At the end of the 90s, not far from Rostov-on-Don in the town of Tanais, settlement cities were found, the age of which even scientists find it difficult to name... The age varies from ten to thirty thousand years. The traveler of the last century, Thor Heyerdahl, believed that from there, from Tanais, the entire pantheon of Scandinavian Gods, led by Odin, came to Scandinavia.

On the Kola Peninsula, slabs with inscriptions in Sanskrit that are 20,000 years old have been found. And only Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, as well as the Baltic languages ​​coincide with Sanskrit. Draw conclusions.

The results of the expedition to the site of the capital of the ancient Slavic city of Kiyara in the Elbrus region.

Five expeditions were carried out: in 1851,1881,1914, 2001 and 2002.

In 2001, the expedition was headed by A. Alekseev, and in 2002 the expedition was carried out under the patronage of the State Astronomical Institute named after Shtenberg (SAI), which was supervised by the director of the institute, Anatoly Mikhailovich Cherepashchuk.

Based on the data obtained as a result of topographic and geodetic studies of the area, recording astronomical events, the expedition members made preliminary conclusions that are fully consistent with the results of the 2001 expedition, based on the results of which, in March 2002, a report was made at a meeting of the Astronomical Society at the State Astronomical Institute Institute in the presence of employees of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, members of the International Astronomical Society and the State Historical Museum.
A report was also made at a conference on the problems of early civilizations in St. Petersburg.
What exactly did the researchers find?

Near Mount Karakaya, in the Rocky Range at an altitude of 3,646 meters above sea level between the villages of Upper Chegem and Bezengi with east side Elbrus, traces were found of the capital of Ruskolani, the city of Kiyar, which existed long before the birth of Christ, which is mentioned in many legends and epics of different peoples of the world, as well as the most ancient astronomical observatory - the Temple of the Sun, described by the ancient historian Al Masudi in his books precisely as the Temple of the Sun.

The location of the found city exactly coincides with the instructions from ancient sources, and later the location of the city was confirmed by the 17th century Turkish traveler Evliya Celebi.

The remains of an ancient temple, caves and graves were discovered on Mount Karakaya. An incredible number of ancient settlements and temple ruins have been discovered, many of which are quite well preserved. In the valley near the foot of Mount Karakaya, on the Bechesyn plateau, menhirs were found - tall man-made stones similar to wooden pagan idols.

On one of the stone pillars the face of a knight is carved, looking straight to the east. And behind the menhir you can see a bell-shaped hill. This is Tuzuluk (“Treasury of the Sun”). At its top you can actually see the ruins of the ancient sanctuary of the Sun. At the top of the hill there is a tour marking the highest point. Then three large rocks, hand-cut. Once upon a time, a slit was cut in them, directed from north to south. Stones were also found laid out like sectors in the zodiac calendar. Each sector is exactly 30 degrees.

Every part temple complex intended for calendar and astrological calculations. In this, it is similar to the South Ural city-temple of Arkaim, which has the same zodiac structure, the same division into 12 sectors. It is also similar to Stonehenge in Great Britain. What makes it similar to Stonehenge is, firstly, the fact that the axis of the temple is also oriented from north to south, and secondly, one of the most important distinctive features Stonehenge is the presence of the so-called “Heel Stone” at a distance from the sanctuary. But there is also a menhir landmark at the Sun Sanctuary on Tuzuluk.

There is evidence that at the turn of our era the temple was plundered by the Bosporan king Pharnaces. The temple was finally destroyed in IV AD. Goths and Huns. Even the dimensions of the temple are known; 60 cubits (about 20 meters) in length, 20 (6-8 meters) in width and 15 (up to 10 meters) in height, as well as the number of windows and doors - 12 according to the number of Zodiac signs.

As a result of the work of the first expedition, there is every reason to believe that the stones on the top of Mount Tuzluk served as the foundation of the Sun Temple. Mount Tuzluk is a regular grassy cone about 40 meters high. The slopes rise to the top at an angle of 45 degrees, which actually corresponds to the latitude of the place, and, therefore, looking along it you can see the North Star. The axis of the temple foundation is 30 degrees with the direction to the Eastern peak of Elbrus. The same 30 degrees is the distance between the axis of the temple and the direction to the menhir, and the direction to the menhir and the Shaukam pass. Considering that 30 degrees - 1/12 of a circle - corresponds to a calendar month, this is not a coincidence. Azimuths of sunrise and sunset during summer and winter solstice differ by only 1.5 degrees from the directions to the Kanjal peaks, the “gate” of two hills in the depths of the pastures, Mount Dzhaurgen and Mount Tashly-Syrt. There is an assumption that the menhir served as a heel stone in the Temple of the Sun, similar to Stonehenge, and helped predict solar and lunar eclipses. Thus, Mount Tuzluk is tied to four natural landmarks along the Sun and is tied to the Eastern peak of Elbrus. The height of the mountain is only about 40 meters, the diameter of the base is about 150 meters. These are dimensions comparable to the dimensions of the Egyptian pyramids and other religious buildings.

In addition, two square tower-shaped aurochs were discovered at the Kayaeshik pass. One of them lies strictly on the axis of the temple. Here, on the pass, are the foundations of buildings and ramparts.

In addition, in the central part of the Caucasus, at the northern foot of Elbrus, in the late 70s and early 80s of the 20th century, an ancient center of metallurgical production, the remains of smelting furnaces, settlements, and burial grounds were discovered.

Summarizing the results of the work of the expeditions of the 1980s and 2001, which discovered the concentration within a radius of several kilometers of traces of ancient metallurgy, deposits of coal, silver, iron, as well as astronomical, religious and other archaeological objects, we can confidently assume the discovery of one of the most ancient cultural and administrative centers of the Slavs in the Elbrus region.

During expeditions in 1851 and 1914, archaeologist P.G. Akritas examined the ruins of the Scythian Temple of the Sun on the eastern slopes of Beshtau. The results of further archaeological excavations of this sanctuary were published in 1914 in the “Notes of the Rostov-on-Don Historical Society.” There, a huge stone “in the shape of a Scythian cap” was described, installed on three abutments, as well as a domed grotto.
And the beginning of major excavations in Pyatigorye (Kavminvody) was laid by the famous pre-revolutionary archaeologist D.Ya. Samokvasov, who described 44 mounds in the vicinity of Pyatigorsk in 1881. Subsequently, after the revolution, only some mounds were examined; only initial exploration work was carried out on the sites by archaeologists E.I. Krupnov, V.A. Kuznetsov, G.E. Runich, E.P. Alekseeva, S.Ya. Baychorov, Kh.Kh. Bidzhiev and others.

Our contemporaries draw knowledge about the past from chronicles and archaeological excavations. Of course, these are not the only sources of information, but they are still the most important.

The main Russian chronicle is “The Tale of Bygone Years”, the rest of the chronicles (Ipatiev, Lavrentiev and others) only complement and clarify it. The Kyiv Chronicle is also called the Initial Chronicle, although, of course, there is nothing in it about the beginnings of Russian history; it only contains the history of Kievan Rus, and even then not completely. You need to know that “The Tale” was written by more than one author. This is a collection of documents related to different times and, accordingly, written by different authors.

At least the names of two of them are known: the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor and the abbot of the Mikhailovsky Vydubetsky Monastery in Kyiv - Sylvester. Nestor lived in the mid-11th – early 12th centuries (died in 1114) and is the author of the lives of Saints Boris and Gleb, as well as the life of St. Theodosius, founder of the Kyiv Lavra. He was the superintendent of chronicles in Kievan Rus and, according to researchers, the compiler of the “Tale of Bygone Years” (he did not so much write chronicles as collect them into a single collection). For his ascetic labors, Nestor was canonized by the Church as a saint. His memory is celebrated on October 27. The relics of Nestor rest in the Near Caves of the Lavra. A graphic reconstruction was made of his skull. The chronicler's appearance turned out to be much simpler and more modest than in the famous sculpture of Mark Antokolsky. The ancient Russian writer, abbot of the St. Michael's Vydubetsky Monastery Sylvester (year of birth unknown, died in 1123) was close to the Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh, at his behest he went to Pereyaslav in 1118 (present-day Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky in Ukraine, during the time of Kievan Rus the capital of the appanage principality ), in order to become a bishop there.

The chronicle begins with the first author, an expert in the Holy Scriptures. It tells how the Earth was divided between the sons of Noah, the righteous man who escaped after the Great Flood. The writer seeks to insert into this biblical version of the development of mankind the ancestors of our people - the ancient Rus. It turns out not very smooth and unconvincing. But the author was obliged to connect the Rus and the ancient Jews together, perhaps at the risk of his own life. The second author—let’s call him an “ideologist”—talked about the settlement of the Slavs. A Kiev monk who lived in the 11th – 12th centuries could not help but know about the Baltic ancestral home of the Rus: pilgrims from all over the Slavic world, including Kiev, went there, to Arkona on the island of Ruyan, even before the 13th century. But it was precisely this fact that he needed to pass over in silence, and at the same time portray the East Slavic peoples who remained faithful to their original religion (for example, the Drevlyans or Vyatichi) as bloodthirsty and savage monsters. But the Polyans, who are rather indifferent to questions of faith, but who were baptized in the Dnieper, look like an ideal people.

Excavations have shown that the named peoples did not live like cattle: they developed many crafts, the items of which the Slavs traded with both Western Europe, and with the countries of the East.

Further more. If you believe the chronicle, then the Russian princes are Varangians from overseas. They were first called by the Novgorod Slovenes, and then they themselves moved south and captured Kyiv. And so they, the Varangians, having subjugated the Slavs, suddenly began to be called Russia. Moreover, the Slavs and Rus' are one and the same. It is simply impossible to understand, but it was necessary to believe. Unclear passages in the chronicle are simply enthusiastically used by nationalist societies of pseudo-historians for unseemly purposes.

For example, modern Ukrainian historical books talk about how the Scandinavian king Helga (this is the Prophetic Oleg, if you didn’t understand) deceived two Ukrainian rulers Askold and Dir from the city and executed them. It is clear that Askold and Dir are the most common Ukrainian names, and under the name Helgu hides the “damned Muscovite”, who already oppressed the freedom-loving Ukrainian people in the early Middle Ages. Alas, a generation is growing up that is firmly convinced: Kievan Rus is Ukraine, all the princes who ruled in Kyiv are Ukrainians. But there weren’t and aren’t any Russians, at least in medieval history Ukraine. Alas, the Christian propaganda of the chronicle gave rise to nationalist Ukrainian propaganda, and the fact that ends meet, well, this has never bothered the ignorant.

Christian authors condemn the ancient custom of burning corpses. They also report that our ancestors, before worshiping the gods - Perun, Veles and others - allegedly worshiped “ghouls and beregins.” Of course, this is a caricature and should not be taken literally. Why would there be so many blood-sucking vampires in Rus' that in search of salvation it was necessary to run for help to some coastlines, who either gave a talisman against ghouls, or themselves drove away these reptiles with aspen stakes. At the same time, these words conceal the basis of Russian pre-Christian culture. The gods, whatever they may be, are an official cult, the faith of the highest. And the actual popular faith, which existed before the veneration of Perun and Veles, has survived to this day.

Let us explain what we are talking about. Of course, vampires and amulets against them have nothing to do with it. We are talking about hostages, the walking dead and drowned virgins, that is, about those who died an unrighteous, wrong death. These are suicides, sorcerers or babies who died before naming (later - those who died unbaptized). Sometimes mothers who died during childbirth. The righteous ancestors, whose corpses were burned after death, went to heaven and left the world of the living forever. And the unrighteous - those who did not live out their lives or, on the contrary, who lived for too long, could not find peace. These are sorcerers and witches - they allegedly robbed people of the time of their lives - and in this sense they can be called ghouls; they died extremely painfully, and even then only if they transferred their skill to someone.

Therefore, at the basis of all “spirits of nature” are the souls of ancestors who have not found peace. The brownie is the first person to die in the house (in ancient times he was buried in the underground). Mermaids are drowned women, victims of unhappy love. This name itself is later, South Slavic in origin. The Russian designation for the maidens whom people met on the shore is bereginii.

Leshy were different, but often they were people who got lost and ran wild in the forest. Not to mention the dead, who for one reason or another, after death, continued to come to their house, frightening the living.

All these unrighteous ancestors were certainly buried outside the cemetery - often on the side of the road, on the slope of a ravine. Moreover, this enduring custom was known to many peoples, both Asian and European. The oldest and most vital part of our mythology is about our ancestors, surrounding us invisibly, but always and everywhere. Well, ancestors are different, both during life and after it: some are good, others are evil.

Return