About the most famous ancient chronicles and chroniclers. How reliable are the old Russian chronicles?

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

(continuation)

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

Laurentian list of "Tale of Bygone Years"

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

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

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

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

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

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

CHRONICLES

CHRONICLES, historical works, a type of narrative literature in Russia in the 11th-17th centuries, consisted of weather records or were monuments of complex composition - chronicle vaults. L. were all-Russian (for example, "The Tale of Bygone Years", Nikonovskaya L., etc.) and local (Pskovsky and other L.). Preserved mainly in later lists.

Source: Encyclopedia "Fatherland"

The Monk Nestor came to the famous Kiev-Pechersk Monastery when he was a seventeen-year-old youth. The holy monastery lived according to the strict Studite Rule, which was introduced into it by the Monk Theodosius, borrowing it from Byzantine books. According to this charter, before taking monastic vows, the candidate had to go through a long preparatory stage. Newcomers first had to wear secular clothes until they had thoroughly studied the rules of monastic life. After this, the candidates were allowed to put on monastic attire and begin testing, that is, to show themselves in work at various obediences. The one who passed these tests successfully took monastic vows, but the test did not end there - the last stage acceptance into the monastery meant tonsure into the great schema, which not everyone was awarded.

The Monk Nestor went all the way from a simple novice to a schemamonk in just four years, and also received the rank of deacon. In addition to obedience and virtue, his education and outstanding literary talent played a significant role in this.

The Kiev Pechersky Monastery was a unique phenomenon in the spiritual life of Kievan Rus. The number of brethren reached one hundred people, which was rare even for Byzantium itself. The severity of the communal rules found in the Constantinople archives had no analogues. The monastery also flourished materially, although its governors did not care about collecting earthly riches. The powers that be listened to the voice of the monastery; it had a real political and, most importantly, spiritual influence on society.

The young Russian Church at that time was actively mastering the rich material of Byzantine church literature. She was faced with the task of creating original Russian texts in which the national image of Russian holiness would be revealed.

The first hagiographical (hagiography is a theological discipline that studies the lives of saints, theological and historical-ecclesiastical aspects of holiness - Ed.) work of the Monk Nestor - “Reading about the life and destruction of the blessed passion-bearers Boris and Gleb” - is dedicated to the memory of the first Russian saints. The chronicler, apparently, responded to the expected all-Russian church celebration - the consecration of a stone church over the relics of Saints Boris and Gleb.

The work of the Monk Nestor was not the first among works devoted to this topic. However, he did not recount the story of the brothers according to a ready-made chronicle legend, but created a text that was deeply original in form and content. The author of “Reading about the Life...” creatively reworked the best examples of Byzantine hagiographic literature and was able to express ideas that were very important for the Russian church and state identity. As Georgy Fedotov, a researcher of ancient Russian church culture, writes, “the memory of Saints Boris and Gleb was the voice of conscience in inter-princely appanage accounts, not regulated by law, but only vaguely limited by the idea of ​​clan seniority.”

The Monk Nestor did not have much information about the death of the brothers, but as a subtle artist he was able to recreate a psychologically reliable image of true Christians meekly accepting death. The truly Christian death of the sons of the baptizer of the Russian people, Prince Vladimir, is inscribed by the chronicler in the panorama of the global historical process, which he understands as the arena of the universal struggle between good and evil.

Father of Russian monasticism

The second hagiographic work of St. Nestor is dedicated to the life of one of the founders of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery - St. Theodosius. He writes this work in the 1080s, just a few years after the death of the ascetic, in the hope of the speedy canonization of the saint. This hope, however, was not destined to come true. The Monk Theodosius was canonized only in 1108.

The internal appearance of St. Theodosius of Pechersk has for us special meaning. As Georgy Fedotov writes, “in the person of St. Theodosius, Ancient Rus' found its ideal saint, to which it remained faithful for many centuries. Venerable Theodosius is the father of Russian monasticism. All Russian monks are his children, bearing his family traits.” And Nestor the Chronicler was the person who preserved for us his unique appearance and created on Russian soil the ideal type of biography of the saint. As the same Fedotov writes, “Nestor’s work forms the basis of all Russian hagiography, inspiring heroism, indicating the normal, Russian path of labor and, on the other hand, filling in the gaps of biographical tradition with general necessary features.<…>All this gives Nestor’s life exceptional significance for the Russian type of ascetic holiness.” The chronicler was not a witness to the life and exploits of St. Theodosius. Nevertheless, his life story is based on eyewitness accounts, which he was able to combine into a coherent, vivid and memorable story.

Of course, to create a full-fledged literary life, it is necessary to rely on a developed literary tradition, which did not yet exist in Rus'. Therefore, the Monk Nestor borrows a lot from Greek sources, sometimes making long verbatim extracts. However, they have virtually no effect on the biographical basis of his story.

Memory of the unity of the people

The main feat of the life of the Monk Nestor was the compilation of the “Tale of Bygone Years” by 1112-1113. This work is separated from the first two literary works of the Monk Nestor known to us by a quarter of a century and belongs to a different literary genre- chronicles. Unfortunately, the entire set of “The Tale...” has not reached us. It was revised by the monk of the Vydubitsky monastery Sylvester.

The Tale of Bygone Years is based on the chronicle work of Abbot John, who made the first attempt at a systematic presentation of Russian history from ancient times. He brought his narrative up to 1093. Earlier chronicle records represent a fragmentary account of disparate events. It is interesting that these records contain a legend about Kiy and his brothers, a brief account of the reign of the Varangian Oleg in Novgorod, the destruction of Askold and Dir, and a legend about the death of the Prophetic Oleg. Actually, Kiev history begins with the reign of “old Igor,” whose origin is kept silent.

Hegumen John, dissatisfied with the inaccuracy and fabulousness of the chronicle, restores the years, relying on Greek and Novgorod chronicles. It is he who first introduces “old Igor” as the son of Rurik. Askold and Dir appear here for the first time as boyars of Rurik, and Oleg as his governor.

It was the arch of Abbot John that became the basis for the work of the Monk Nestor. He subjected the greatest processing to the initial part of the chronicle. The initial edition of the chronicle was supplemented by legends, monastic records, and Byzantine chronicles of John Malala and George Amartol. Saint Nestor attached great importance to oral testimonies - the stories of the elder boyar Jan Vyshatich, merchants, warriors, and travelers.

In his main work, Nestor the Chronicler acts both as a scientist-historian, and as a writer, and as a religious thinker, giving a theological understanding of Russian history, which is an integral part of the history of the salvation of the human race.

For St. Nestor, the history of Rus' is the history of the perception of Christian preaching. Therefore, he records in his chronicle the first mention of the Slavs in church sources - the year 866, and talks in detail about the activities of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Equal-to-the-Apostles, and about the baptism of Equal-to-the-Apostles Olga in Constantinople. It was this ascetic who introduced into the chronicle the story of the first Orthodox church in Kyiv, about the preaching feat of the Varangian martyrs Theodore Varangian and his son John.

Despite the huge amount of heterogeneous information, the chronicle of St. Nestor has become a true masterpiece of ancient Russian and world literature.

During the years of fragmentation, when almost nothing reminded of the former unity of Kievan Rus, “The Tale of Bygone Years” remained the monument that awakened in all corners of crumbling Rus' the memory of its former unity.

The Monk Nestor died around 1114, bequeathing to the Pechersk monks-chroniclers the continuation of his great work.

Newspaper "Orthodox Faith" No. 21 (545)

CHRONICLES - historical works X-XVIII centuries.

In some cases, the research was carried out by year (by “le-there”; hence the name fybt) and co-pro-w-y-da- moose hro-no-gra-fi-che-ski-mi, sometimes ka-len-dar-ny-mi yes-ta-mi, and sometimes pointing to the clock, when about-is-ho-di-lo co-existence. Chronicles exist in a number of European countries, but one wide-spread country is mainly in The Old Russian state, Russian lands and princes, the Russian state, as well as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. According to visual features, they are close to Western European an-na-lamas and chron-kas. In the Old Russian state, the Chronicles could name not only the exact data about the events, but also the dis- false descriptions of actions in a chronological order without breaking them down into annual articles. Most of the Chronicles, representing a collection of previous texts, based on yearly records , include do-ku-men-you (international do-go-vo-ry, private and public-personal acts), sa-mo-hundred - significant literary works (“by weight”, “words”, lives and other hagio-graphic materials, sayings) ) or their frag-men, as well as for the texts of folk-lore-no-go pro-is-like-de-niya. Every Chronicle or chronicle is considered as a self-contained integral literary work, I have -what we sat down with, as well as the structure and ideological direction. The main attention in the Chronicles is usually given to the ancestors, since from them, according to medieval ideas, -whether from-me-not-in-the-historical development, around-the-same pra-vi-te-lei, church-hier-rar-hams, war-us and conf-lik-there; in the Chronicles there is not much information about the wide layers of the village, the development of culture, everything there is no outside information about economic developments. Chronicles were usually compiled at the courts of princes, church hierarchs, and in monasteries. Over 1000 lists of Chronicles have been preserved, dating back to the XIII-XVIII centuries, the most ancient of which are per-ga-men “Le-to-pi-sets soon pat-ri-ar-ha Ni-ki-for-ra” with Ros-tov-ski-mi from-ves-tiya-mi (last quarter of the 13th century ), Nov-gorod-skaya first summer-writing of the old-she-go-da (re-editions) (Si-no-distant list, 2nd half XIII century, 2nd quarter of the XIV century), Lav-ren-t-ev-skaya le-to-pis (1377), as well as on-pi-san-naya on bu-ma-ge Ipat-ev- skaya le-to-pis (1420s). Earlier summer-written codes of re-con-st-rui-ru-yut-xia is-sled-to-va-te-la-mi on the basis of ana- li-for the saved-memories. Summer-written texts are class-si-fi-tsi-ru-ut-sya by type, re-dak-tsi-yam, from-vo-dam; according to the conditional names (depending on the production, location, to one person or another; according to the place of storage) - Lav-ren-t-ev-skaya, Ipat-ev-skaya, Niko-nov-skaya, Er-mo-lin-skaya, Lvovskaya, Ti-po-grafskaya, etc. If several Chronicles have the same names, a condition is added to them number (Nov-gorod-skie 1-5th, Sophia-skie 1st and 2nd, Pskov-skie 1-3-ya), and tion is connected not with the time of their creation, but either with the subsequent publication, or with other circumstances.

The scheme of the ancient Russian le-to-pi-sa-niya, divided into a whole (with certain stipulations, to -pol-not-nii-mi and from-me-ne-nii-mi) with modern research-to-va-te-la-mi, proposed by A.A. Shah-ma-tov. According to his point of view, the initial stage of Russian literature was the Ancient Code, compiled under the Mitro -according to the ca-fed-re in Kiev around 1039 (according to M.D. Pri-sel-ko-vu - in 1037). In 1073, he was extended and became the head of the Kiev-Pecher Monastery of Ni- co-nom Ve-li-kim; along with other sources, was used by the abbot of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery, Io-an-n, with the co- becoming the so-called At the beginning of the century, around 1093-1095 (original title - “Time-name, like the na-ri-tsa-et-sya-to- writing of the Russian princes and the land of Russia..."). Text Initially, to the fullest extent you have written from the Byzantine chronicle and ma-te-ria-la-mi ki-ev-sko-go ve-li-ko-prince-of-ar-hi-va (Russian-Byzantine do-go-vo-ry), lay in the base “By the time of-men- new years." According to the Shah-ma-to-va scheme, its first edition (not preserved) was created by mo-na-khom Kiye- in the Pe-cher-sko-go monastery Ne-sto-rum around 1113, re-ra-ba-you-va-was the abbot of the Ki-ev-sko-go you-du-bits- of the Mi-hai-lov-go monastery of Sil-ve-st-rom in 1116 (kept in the composition of the Lav-ren-t-ev-skaya le-to- pi-si) and an unknown person close to the new city prince of Msti-sla-v Vla-di-mi-ro-vi-chu, in 1118 (kept in the village of Ipat-ev-skaya le-to-pi-si). In the future, the Initial Code and the “Tale of Bygone Years”, as a rule, were used in the production of art -to-rii of Ancient Ru-si in the regional le-to-pi-sa-nii. In later times, the pop-up appeared back in the 1850-1860s (M.I. Su-ho-mli-nov, I. I. Srez-nev-sky and others) concept of the emergence of Russian summer-pi-sa-niya in the form of an-na-li-sti-che- skih notes and their subsequent stage-by-stage narration (V.Yu. Aristov, T.V. Gi-mon, A. A. Gip-pi-us, A.P. To-loch-ko). According to this concept, Russian literature arose in Kiev at the end of the 10th and 11th centuries and continued until the creation of “Po -all the years” in the form of some an-n-fishings, year-by-year records of some-of-the-years, from-whether- with brevity, fact-graphic-ness, from-the-sut-st-vi-em of complex narrative constructions, development were in the right direction to increase the accuracy (appearance of exact dates) and increase the volume of light -de-niy, ras-shi-re-niya te-ma-ti-ki and ob-ga-sche-niya nar-ra-tiv-ny-mi insert-ka-mi and until-pol-not-nii- mi.

“The Tale of Bygone Years” formed the basis of the Ki-ev-sk-le-to-pi-sa-niya, which was carried out on pro-tya history of the XII - 1st third of the XIII centuries. The most important stage of its development was the Kiev vault of 1198 (kept in the Ipat-ev-skaya le-to-pi-si village) , founded in the Vydubetsky monastery. According to B.A. Fish-ba-ko-va, he was preceded by 3 other svo-das, established: in the Kiev-Pecher-sky monastery by abbot Po-li-kar-pom (oh-vaty-val of the co-being of 1141-1171); at the court of the Ki-ev-sky prince of the Holy-glory Vse-vo-lo-di-cha (1179); at the court of the Bel-gorod-sko-go and ov-ru-sko-go prince Ryu-ri-ka Ros-ti-sla-vi-cha (1190). According to V.T. Pa-shu-to, Kiev-skoe le-to-pi-sa-nie lasted until 1238. Its individual fragments (for example, the description of the Battle of Kalka in 1223) became part of the Galits-ko-Volyn-skaya le-to-pi-si ( XIII century; perhaps, separate summer-written records were kept in Ga-li-che and Vla-di-mi-re-Vo-lyn from the middle of the 12th century) , which at the end of the 13th century was united with the Kiev Battle of 1198. Both remembrances were kept in the Ipat-ev-skaya le-to-pi-si.

The Nov-gorod-skoe le-to-pi-sa-nie arose between 1039 and 1042 as a shortened selection or a copy of the earlier Kiev Chronicle (possibly, the Ancient Code), which is subsequently not-system-te-ma-ti-che-ski lasted until 1079. Around 1093, the New City arch was created, which was based on the previous New City tradition and culture. Ev-sky Initial vault (according to A.A. Gip-pi-us, T.V. Gi-mon). In the mid-2nd half of the 1110s the so-called Leningrad was formed. the Vse-vo-lo-yes vault, in which the Novy-Gorod vault was com- pletely extracted from the Ki-ev-skogo le-to-pi- sa-niya and notes-ka-mi about the new-city so-by-ti-yah of the end of the 11th - beginning of the 12th centuries, for-pi-san-nym mainly according to memory -ti. In the future, annual records in Novgorod were kept regularly. Is-follow-up-to-va-te-la-mi you-de-la-you-are-the-new-city-vul-dical vault, compiled by Herman Vo- started in the 2nd half of the 1160s and continued until 1188. Subsequently, the ruler's le-to-pi-sa-nie was carried out practically without interruptions until the 1430s. According to Gip-piu-sa, Ger-man Vo-yata also created the summer-written vault of the Yur-e-va monastery, on the basis of something Around 1195, a new vault was built in this monastery.

An important step in the New-city le-to-pi-sa-niya was the creation of the New-city 1st le-to-pi-si, came before us in 2 of the vo-dahs (re-dak-tsi-yah) - the elder and the younger (a number of lists from the middle of the 15th century). The next stage of the New-Gorod-sko-go summer-pi-sa-niya was developed in 2 sub-bor-kahs of the New-Gorod-Karam-zin -sky le-to-pi-si, okan-chi-va-shih-sya in 1411 and 1428 and preserved in the unified list of the late 15th - early 16th centuries . The co-founder of these sub-rocks for the first time paid attention not only to the local Nov-gorod, but also to the general Russian wow. This ten-den-tion is based on its development in the New City 4th Le-to-pi-si senior (from-lo-zhe-nie events before 1437; lists from the 1470s and the 1st quarter of the 16th century) and younger ones (before 1447; lists from the last quarter of the 15th century) edited tions. Its special re-working appears in the Nov-gorod-skaya 5th chronicle (from before 1446, list) the end of the 15th century), in which there is a tendency to return mainly to the local new towns -would-be. The history of the New City republic for the years 1447-1469 was preserved in the most complete form in the world. hundred-ve so-called Le-to-pi-si Av-ra-am-ki (1st part before 1469, created in the late 1460s - early 1470s; 2nd part - in 1495); more brief versions of the summer of the 3rd quarter of the 15th century - in some lists of the New City 4th summer pi-si, and also (until 1461) in the Le-to-scribe of Episcopal Paul (list of the 2nd half of the 16th century). Despite the morning of the New-Gorod-res-pub-li-coy not-for-vi-si-mo-sti (1478), summer-written work -that in Novgorod continued in the 16th century. In 1539, according to the authority of the arch-bishop Ma-ka-ria, a le-to-piss vault was created, known under the name of the New City Le-re -the-writing of Dub-rov-skogo (or Nov-gorod-skaya 4th le-to-pissi according to the list of Dub-rov-sko-go) (from the lo-zhe-nie before- up to 1539; preserved in the list at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th centuries). Another Chronicle of the 16th century - Nov-gorod-skaya 2nd, until 1572 - in fact, not-completed for-go-tov -ka, in which so-b-ra-ny you-pi-ki from various Chronicles without co-blue-de-niy chron-no-logich. in a row.

At the end of the 16th and 17th centuries, the Novgorod Uva-rovskaya Le-to-pis was compiled (continuous text until 1606, individual weight of 1612, 1645 and 1646), the final part of which (since 1500) is based on not-saved new native sources. The reintroduction of summer writing work in Novgorod (1670-1680s) is connected with the activity pat-ri-ar-ha Io-a-ki-ma. At this time, the Novgorod 3rd edition was created (spatially re-edited in the first form from -but-sit-by the time between 1674 and 1676, in the final form - by 1682 and, possibly, several after- current years; a brief edition in full form between 1682 and 1690, in brief - between 1690 and 1695 years), as well as the largest, both in volume and in abundance and variety of used sources -kov Nov-gorod-skaya Za-be-lin-skaya le-to-pis (from-lo-zhe-nie before-ve-de-but until 1679; co-sta-le-on-inter -du 1680 and 1681). Afterwards, a significant memory of the New-city-rod-sko-le-to-pi-sa-niya became Nov-go-rod-skaya Po-go-din-skaya let-to-write (created in the 1680-1690s), until the end of the 17th century, and in some ru-ko-pi-syakh continued until the end of the 18th century and even early XIX centuries. What is particularly special about the New City Chronicles of the late 17th century is the appearance in them of systematic references to sources -ki and even individual elements of cri-ti-ki is-precisely.

Per-re-yas-lav-skoye le-to-pi-sa-nie arose in the 1st quarter of the 12th century in the city of Per-re-yas-lavl (Russian), per-vo-na -started, but as the episcopal le-to-pi-sets (until 1175), someone was replaced by the prince's le-to-pi-sets, led as a mi-ni-mum until 1228.

On the basis of ana-li-for the preserved Chronicles you-de-la-et-sya and pre-Mongol-Cher-ni-gov-skoe le-to-pi -sa-nie, representing the summer-pi-set of Prince St.-glory Ol-go-vi-cha, arose in the 1140s and continued -married under his sons - Ole Svyato-sla-vi-che (died in 1180) and Igor Svyato-sla-vi-che (died in 1201).

In the Russian-in-Suz-dal-land, summer-written records have been traced since the middle of the 12th century, systematic Summer written records in North-Eastern Russia began to weigh in the late 1150s in Vladimir. In 1177, under the Uspensky council, the first vla-di-mir le-to-pis-ny vault was created. In the subsequent great princely palaces (1193, 1212 and 1228), local influences also co-existed with information from the summer writings of Pe-re-yas-lav-la (Russian). To the memory of the Vla-di-mir-skogo le-to-pi-sa-niya of the 13th century from the Rad-zi-vil-lov-skaya le-to-writing, preserved in 2 copies of the 15th century. (Rad-zi-vil-lov-sky sp-sok pro-il-lu-st-ri-ro-van more than 600 mi-nia-tyu-ra-mi). In the 13th-15th centuries, constant writing work was carried out in Ros-to-ve, fragment-men of Ro-to-to-go summer -pi-sa-niya were preserved in the composition of the Russian society collections of the 15th-16th centuries.

By the 13th century, from the Pskov le-to-pi-sa-niya, which was connected with the aspirations of the Pskov-vi -whose pri-ob-re-sti is not-for-vis-si-most from the Nov-gorod-skaya re-pub-li-ki. Since the beginning of the 14th century, summer-to-pi-sa-nie was carried out at the Tro-its-kom so-bo-re, ru-ko-in-di-li-them in the garden. The pro-graph of the Pskov Chronicles that have come down to us was created in the 1450s or early 1460s as a result of the unification of shi-ro-co- go-kru-ha is-to-k-kov (Pskov-le-to-pi-s-pi-s, chrono-graphically ma-ter-ria-lov, smo-len-sko-li -tovsky is-toch-ni-ka, etc.). According to A.N. On-so-but-woo, as a result of it, until its completion, the codes of 1464, 1469, 1481 and the end of the 1480s arose. The oldest preserved Pskov Chronicle - Pskov 2nd Chronicle (from before 1486), presented by a single Si-no-distant list (mid-1480s), which was, in the opinion of Na-so-no- va, copy her pro-graph, but in my opinion B.M. Klos-sa, - her under-lin-no-one. On the basis of the building of 1481, 2 rights arose in the development of the Pskov summer, co-storage -she-go-xia and after the union of the Pskov Republic to the Russian state (1510). The first of them was represented by the 1547 palace (Pskov 1st Le-to-pis), co-sta-vi-tel of a co-feeling -vu-et to Moscow go-su-da-ryam, but about-li-cha-et them in-me-st-ni-kov; the second is the house of the abbot of the Psko-vo-Pe-cher-skogo monastery. Cor-ni-liy of 1567 (Pskov 3rd summer letter), reflecting the mood of the bo-yar-st-va, op-po-zi-tsi-on-but -go Mo-sk-ve.

According to A.N. On-so-now, from the end of the 13th century until the annexation of the Tver Grand Duchy to the Russian State (1485), the Tver forest was continuously conducted -to-pi-sa-nie. Once upon a time, the Tver summer-written ma-te-ri-al was preserved only in the form of separate pieces and excerpts, because it was glo-loved by the Moscow le-to-pi-sa-ni-y, and sometimes, perhaps, on-the-measure-but-destroyed-wives by Moscow books-no-ka- mi. Tver ma-te-ri-al co-contained in the great-prince's court of 1305, which became the basis of Lav-ren-ty-ev -skoy le-to-pi-si. Is-follow-to-va-te-la-mi you-de-la-ut-sya Tver arches of 1327, 1409, etc. Tver is-exact-ki-use-use -was involved in the compilation of the Ro-gozh-skogo le-to-scribe of the 1st half of the 15th century (list of the mid-15th century). The Tver Le-to-piss (Tver collection), containing a fragment of the Tver Le-to-pi-sa-niya, has been preserved the end of the 13th - the end of the 15th centuries (lists from the 17th century).

In connection with the rise of Mo-s-cov-sko-go-prince-st-va of Mo-s-cov-skoe le-to-pi- sa-nie, first-in-at-first-but (in the 14th century) su-sche-st-vo-vav-neck in the form of brief za-pi-se mi-tro-personally -th yard and family chronicle of Mo-s-cov-skih Yes-no-vi-whose, re-accepted and developed a society Russian summer-written tradition. Due to the political position of Mo-sk-you, both princely and mi-tro-personal le-to-pi have developed here -sa-nie. The first Moscow grand princely palace was the “Great Russian Le-to-pi-sets” (1389). The next significant memory of the summer in Moscow was the Russian society for the maintenance of Tro- Its-kaya le-to-write (from before 1408), compiled, according to V.A. Kuch-ki-na, after 1422. One of the largest written monuments of the 2nd half of the 15th century is the Moscow Grand Prince's Code of 1479, the ideological basis -how someone has established the hereditary right of the Grand Dukes of Moscow to Novgorod. Its later edition is the Moscow Grand Prince's Code of the late 15th century. An important memory of the Moscow le-to-pi-sa-niya of the end of the 15th century is the Si-me-o-nov-skaya le-to-pis (list of the 16th century ).

A wide range of sources (some of them unique) were attracted by Metropolitan Da-ni-l when he created the Ni-ko new le-to-pi-si - the largest memory of the Russian summer-to-pi-sa of the 16th century, subsequently the best -the name according to one of the later lists, under the-above-the-lying Patriarch Niko-nu. Is-to-ria was based on Da-ni-lom mainly from a church point of view, and the protection of property in- the Church has moved to the forefront. In the early 1560s, the summer-written tradition of the Moscow mi-tro-personal department continued in the “Step-pen-book” ", established under the blue-de-ni-em of Metropolitan Afa-na-siya and pro-po-ve-to-va-shay "symphony" of churches and secular authorities.

The Moscow summer-to-pi-sa-nie was carried out non-stop until the end of the 1560s, the largest memory-memories - os-no-van-naya at the Moscow Grand Prince's Palace at the end of the 15th century. Vos-Kre-sen-skaya le-to-pis (1st edition on-cha-ta in 1533, last, 3rd, edition created-on-me- railway 1542 and 1544) and “Le-to-pi-sets na-cha-la tsar-st-va” (in the first-initial edition from-la-gav-shiy events of 1533-1552 and then continued until 1556 and 1560). In the 2nd half of the 16th century, the Litse-voy vault was created - the most complete en-cyclo-pedia of historical knowledge of medieval Russia.

The most important chronicle of the 1st third of the 17th century was the New Le-to-pi-sets, oh-you-wa-y period since the end of the tsar-st-vo va-niya Iva-na IV Va-sil-e-vi-cha Groz-no-go until 1630. Ver-ro-yat-but, it is set up in the vicinity of the pat-ri-ar-ha Fi-la-re-ta and is based on a lot -numerical and different sources, including official grams and documents from the period of Time of Troubles -ni, various Chronicles, etc. He had a significant influence on the subsequent development of the Russian chronicle, the later creation its numerous continuations and re-workings.

Between 1652 and 1658, in the Moscow Chu-do-voy monastery, a pat-ri-ar-shiy summer-written vault of 1652 was created, the basis of which according to the significant-but-abbreviated texts of Vos-Kre-sen-skaya and Niko-nov-skaya le-to-pi-sey, and so- the same source, close to the New-letter-scribe; so-sta-vi-te-la-mi a number of words and sayings have been introduced into the written text. The work of the le-to-scribes of the Chu-do-va monastery became a pat-ri-ar-shiy le-to-piss code of the 1670s, and for -that pat-ri-ar-shiy summer-written code of the 1680s (between 1680 and 1688; from the weight-ten in 2 editions of the 1690s ). The vault of the 1680s became one of the most important literary monuments of the 17th century, created not from the world. nia of the Russian-society le-to-pi-sa-niya; for his co-sta-vi-te-la ha-rak-ter-but aspiration on the shi-ro-com is-to-ric ma-te-ria-le to establish a con-chain tion of the “out-of-bra-no-sti” of the Russian state and its self-powers among all the nations and states of the world. The author gave a patriotic, “go-su-dar-st-ven-nuyu,” point of view on domestic history.

In the 15th-16th centuries, a wide range of short-form scribes were obtained, which became part of the -st-ryakh: Ki-ril-lo-Be-lo-zer-skom, Io-si-fo-Vo-lo-ko-lam-skom, Troi-tse-Ser-gie-vom, So-lovets -com, Spa-so-Yaroslav-sk. Once upon a time, pro-vints. le-to-pi-sa-nie in Vo-lo-gde, Ve-li-kom Us-tyu-ge and some other cities. Significantly its-ra-zi-em from-li-cha-yut-sya le-to-pi-si white-Russian-li-tov-s, created on the territory ri-to-rii of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the XIV-XVI centuries and its sacred histories. At the beginning of the 16th century, a new type of historical history appeared, which was represented in the Russian chro-no-graphy. fe (the so-called re-edition of 1512) (see the article Chro-no-graphs). IN XVII-XVIII centuries the summer-written form from the us-toy-chi-was preserved only in the provincial summer-to-pi-sa-nia, and to end of the XVIII centuries, the pre-kra-ti-la of its existence.

In the middle of the 19th century, the publication of Chronicles began in the series “Complete collection of Russian chronicles” (PSRL).

The chronicles are the most important information on Russian history of the 9th-16th centuries, they contain a valuable material on history to-rii of the 17th-18th centuries. In the Chronicles from-ra-zhe-na bo-ga-taya si-no-ni-mi-ka, with-kept-shay military, church-naya and hell-mi-ni-st -ra-tiv-naya ter-mi-no-logia, on-m-astic and to-po-ni-mic lex-si-ka (many personal names, nicknames , geographical names, names of churches, monasteries, names of people according to their place of living tel-st-va), phrase-zeo-logia, used-re-la-ut-sya for them-st-vo-van-nye words and cal-ki from the Greek language. By comparing the lek-si-ki “According to the weight of the times” and the later Chronicles, it is possible to trace the life of some people -mi-new, in part-of the military, right up to their removal and replacement with new ones.

The language of the Chronicles has its own uniqueness and unity, and a certain unity -noe work-toy re-dak-to-ditch. The language of the Chronicles does not represent a single system. In it, in addition to two stylistic types of the ancient Russian literary language - bookish (see Church-Slavic language) and vernacular once-a-thief, - we found the origin of the dialistic difference. Individual language features, for example in fo-ne-ti-ke and lek-si-ke, indicate their source in different regions lo-ka-li-za-tion; grammatical and syn-tactical phenomena are more difficult to locate.

What features of the chronicles can you identify?

The chronicle arose back in Kievan Rus from the need of Russian society to have its own written history, and this was associated with the growth of the national self-awareness of the people. The chronicle was a historical document that included texts or transcriptions of treaty documents, wills of princes, resolutions of feudal congresses and other documents. Events of not only domestic but also world history and their interrelation became the subject of interest for chroniclers. This was especially evident in The Tale of Bygone Years, in which the question of the origin of the Russian people was explored in connection with global history. The chronicle was kept year by year, had collective authorship, and therefore in it we find diverse opinions about historical events, wider coverage, and a direct reflection of the people's point of view on these events. In it one can even notice differences in the political views and literary skills of its compilers.

Chroniclers often used folklore and book sources. One of the first chronicle collections - “The Tale of Bygone Years” - is a monument of collective creativity, on which, starting from the reign of Yaroslav the Wise in the 30s of the 11th century, more than one generation of Russian chroniclers, as a rule, monks or representatives of the princely-boyar environment, worked on it. The Monk Nestor, a monk of the Kiev Pechersk Monastery, gained the greatest fame as a chronicler.

Chronicles, and especially “The Tale of Bygone Years,” allowed for a mixture of genres within one work. Thus, as part of the “Tale...” we find chronicle legends (for example, about the death of Prince Oleg from his horse, later used by A. S. Pushkin), closeness to hagiographic literature (about the transfer of the relics of Saints Boris and Gleb, about the repose of Theodosius of Pechersk) . In the depths of the chronicle, a military story begins to take shape, for example, about Yaroslav’s revenge on Svyatopolk the Accursed. The Tale of Bygone Years also included the Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh. However, with all the eventual and genre mosaic of the chronicle, it is distinguished by thematic unity - the depiction of individual milestones in the history of Russia, the presentation of events in a strict time sequence. The chronological connection of events was supported in the chronicle by a genealogical line, that is, by showing the continuity of power of the Rurik princes. The chronicler necessarily points out the family relations between the princes, whose glory each of them inherits.

The chronicles proclaim as their main ideas the assertion of the independence of Russia, the superiority of Christianity over paganism, the inseparability of Russian history from universal history, a call for unity of action in the fight against enemies, and the spiritual unity of Russian society.

Can you name the distinctive features of the “educational” genre?

In Ancient Rus', oratorical prose developed, which, in turn, is divided into solemn and teacher eloquence. Teaching belongs to teacher eloquence. Its purpose is instruction (edification), information, polemics. It is small in volume, often devoid of rhetorical embellishments, and was written or pronounced in the generally accessible, living, spoken Old Russian language.

“The monuments of didactic prose, often artless in style, contained many vivid everyday realities and scenes of “low” reality, especially in the description of human vices... Fostering Christian morality, “educational” literature condemned vices and glorified virtues, reminding believers of the Day of Judgment and the inescapable the torment that is prepared for sinners after death in hell.

Among the works of didactic eloquence, a group of “words” on the topic of “plagues of God” stands out, where any disaster that has befallen the country: drought or flood, epidemic or enemy invasion<…>regarded as Divine retribution for sins. Another group of “teachings” and “conversations” is addressed to monks and contains a number of rules that a monk must strictly follow: fasting, being meek in character, performing feats of prayer, resorting to repentance and communion as often as possible.” (L. A. Olshevskaya, S. N. Travnikov)