Submitting your good work to the knowledge base is easy. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Literature of Kievan Rus (mid-11th - first third of the 12th centuries)
The first works of original ancient Russian literature that have reached us date back to the middle of the 11th century. Their creation was due to the growth of the political, patriotic consciousness of early feudal society, striving to strengthen new forms of statehood and assert the sovereignty of the Russian land. Substantiating the ideas of political and religious independence of Rus', literature seeks to consolidate new forms of Christian ethics, the authority of secular and spiritual power, to show the inviolability, the “eternity” of feudal relations and the norms of law and order. historical literary cultural
The main genres of literature of this time were historical: legend, tale, story - and religious-didactic: solemn words, teachings, lives, walks. Historical genres, relying in their development on the corresponding genres of folklore, develop specific book forms of storytelling “according to the epics of this time.” The leading genre is the historical story, based on a reliable depiction of events. Depending on the nature of the events reflected in the stories, they can be “military”, stories about princely crimes, etc. Each type of historical stories acquires its own specific stylistic features.
The central character of historical stories and legends is a warrior prince, a defender of the country's borders, a builder of temples, a zealot for education, a righteous judge of his subjects. His antipode is a seditious prince, violating the feudal legal order of subordinating the trade wind to his overlord, the eldest in the family, leading bloody internecine wars, seeking to gain power for himself by force.
The narration of the good and evil deeds of the princes is based on the testimony of eyewitnesses, participants in the events, oral traditions, who existed in a druzhina environment.
Historical tales and legends do not allow artistic fiction. modern meaning this word. The facts stated and them are documented, attached to exact dates, correlated with other events.
Historical genres of ancient Russian literature, as a rule, do not exist separately, but as part of chronicles, where the principle of weather presentation made it possible to include a variety of material: weather records, legends, stories. These historical genres were dedicated to the most important events related to military campaigns, the fight against external enemies of Rus', the construction activities of the prince, strife, unusual natural phenomena - heavenly signs. At the same time, the chronicle also included church legends, elements of lives, and even entire lives, legal documents.
One of the oldest and greatest historical and literary monuments of the second half of the 11th and early 12th centuries that has come down to us is The Tale of Bygone Years.
"The Tale of Bygone Years"
“The Tale of Bygone Years” is an outstanding historical and literary monument that reflected the formation of the ancient Russian state, its political and cultural flourishing, as well as the beginning of the process of feudal fragmentation. Created in the first decades of the 12th century, it has come to us as part of chronicles of a later time. The oldest of them are the Laurentian Chronicle - 1377, the Ipatiev Chronicle, dating back to the 20s of the 15th century, and the First Novgorod Chronicle of the 30s of the 14th century.
In the Laurentian Chronicle, the “Tale of Bygone Years” is continued by the North Russian Suzdal Chronicle, brought up to 1305, and the Iyatiev Chronicle, in addition to the “Tale of Bygone Years,” contains the Kyiv and Galician-Volyn chronicles, brought up to 1292.
All subsequent chronicles of the XV-XVI centuries. certainly included “The Tale of Bygone Years” in their composition, subjecting it to editorial and stylistic revision.
Formation of the chronicle. HYPOTHESIS A. A. SHAHMAMAVA. The history of the emergence of the Russian chronicle has attracted the attention of more than one generation of Russian scientists, starting with V.N. Tatishchev. However, only A. A. Shakhmatov, an outstanding Russian philologist, at the beginning of this century managed to create the most valuable scientific hypothesis about the composition, sources and editions of The Tale of Bygone Years. When developing his hypothesis, A. A. Shakhmatov brilliantly applied the comparative historical method of philological study of the text. The results of the research are presented in his works “Research on the most ancient Russian chronicles” (St. Petersburg, 1908) and “The Tale of Bygone Years” (Vol. 1. Pg., 1916).
In 1039, a metropolitanate was established in Kyiv - an independent church organization. At the court of the Metropolitan, the “Most Ancient Kievan Code” was created, brought up to 1037. This code, A. A. Shakhmatov suggested, arose on the basis of Greek translated chronicles and local folklore material. In Novgorod in 1036 the Novgorod Chronicle was created, on its basis and on the basis of the “Ancient Kievan Code” in 1050 the “Ancient Novgorod Code” appeared. In 1073, the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nikon the Great, using the “Ancient Kiev Code,” compiled the “First Kiev-Pechersk Code,” which also included records of historical events that occurred after the death of Yaroslav the Wise (1054).
Based on the “First Kiev-Pechersk Vault” and the “Ancient Novgorod Vault” of 1050, the “Second Kiev-Pechersk Vault” was created in 1095, or, as Shakhmatov first called it, the “Initial Vault”. The author of the “Second Kiev-Pechersk Code” supplemented his sources with materials from the Greek chronograph, the Paremiynik, oral stories of Jan Vyshatich and the life of Anthony of Pechersk.
“The Second Kiev-Pechersk Code” served as the basis for the “Tale of Bygone Years”, the first edition of which was created in 1113 by the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor, the second edition by the abbot of the Vydubitsky Monastery Sylvester in 1116 and the third by an unknown author - confessor of Prince Mstislav Vladimirovich.
The first edition of Nestor's "Tale of Bygone Years" focuses on the narrative of historical events of the late 11th - early 12th centuries. allocated to the great Kyiv prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, who died in 1113. Vladimir Monomakh, having become the great Kyiv prince after the death of Svyatopolk, transferred the keeping of the chronicle to his patrimonial Vydubitsky monastery. Here Abbot Sylvester carried out an editorial revision of Nestor's text, highlighting the figure of Vladimir Monomakh. The unpreserved text of Nesterov’s first edition of “The Tale of Bygone Years” is reconstructed by A. A. Shakhmatov in his work “The Tale of Bygone Years” (Vol. 1). The second edition, according to the scientist, was best preserved by the Laurentian Chronicle, and the third by the Ipatiev Chronicle.
The hypothesis of A. A. Shakhmatov, which so brilliantly restores the history of the origin and development of the initial Russian chronicle, however, remains a hypothesis for now. Its main provisions aroused objections from V. M. Istrin.
He believed that in 1039, at the court of the Greek metropolitan, by shortening the chronicle of George Amartol, a “Chronograph according to the Great Exposition” appeared, supplemented by Russian news. Isolated from the Chronograph in 1054, they constituted the first edition of the Tale of Bygone Years, and the second edition was created by Nestor at the beginning of the second decade of the 12th century.
Hypothesis of D. S. Likhachev. Interesting clarifications of A. A. Shakhmatov’s hypothesis were made by D. S. Likhachev. He rejected the possibility of the existence of the “Ancient Kievan Code” in 1039 and connected the history of the chronicle with the specific struggle that the Kievan state had to wage in the 30-50s of the 11th century against the political and religious claims of the Byzantine Empire. Byzantium sought to turn the Russian church into its political agency, which threatened the independence of the ancient Russian state. The claims of the empire met with active resistance from the grand ducal power, which was supported by the broad masses of the population in the struggle for the political and religious independence of Rus'. The struggle between Rus' and Byzantium reached particular tension in the middle of the 11th century. The Grand Duke of Kyiv Yaroslav the Wise manages to highly raise the political authority of Kyiv and the Russian state. He lays strong foundations for the political and religious independence of Rus'. In 1039, Yaroslav achieved the establishment of a metropolitanate in Kyiv. Thus, Byzantium recognized a certain independence of the Russian church, although the Greek metropolitan remained at its head. In addition, Yaroslav sought the canonization of Olga, Vladimir and his brothers Boris and Gleb, who were killed by Svyatopolk in 1015. In the end, Byzantium was forced to recognize Boris and Gleb as Russian saints, which was a triumph of Yaroslav’s national policy. The veneration of these first Russian saints acquired the character of a national cult; it was associated with the condemnation of fratricidal strife, with the idea of preserving the unity of the Russian land.
The political struggle between Rus' and Byzantium turns into an open armed conflict: in 1050 Yaroslav sends troops to Constantinople led by his son Vladimir. Although Vladimir Yaroslavich's campaign ended in defeat, in 1051 Yaroslav elevated the Russian priest Hilarion to the metropolitan throne.
During this period, the struggle for independence covered all areas of the culture of Kievan Rus, including literature. D. S. Likhachev points out that the chronicle was formed gradually, as a result of interest in the historical past of his native land and the desire to preserve significant events of his time for future descendants.
The researcher suggests that in the 30s and 40s of the 11th century. By order of Yaroslav the Wise, oral folk historical legends were recorded, which D. S. Likhachev conventionally calls “Tales of the initial spread of Christianity in Rus'.” The “Tale” included legends about Olga’s baptism in Constantinople, about the death of two Varangian martyrs, about Vladimir’s test of faith and his baptism. These legends were anti-Byzantine in nature. Thus, in the legend of Olga’s baptism, the superiority of the Russian princess over the Greek emperor was emphasized. Olga rejected the emperor’s claims to her hand, cleverly “outwitting” him. The legend stated that the Russian princess did not see much honor in the marriage offered to her. In her relations with the Greek emperor, Olga shows purely Russian ingenuity, intelligence and resourcefulness. She maintains her self-esteem by defending the honor of her native land.
The legend about the test of faith by Vladimir emphasizes that Christianity was adopted by Russia as a result of free choice, and not received as a gracious gift from the Greeks.
According to this legend, envoys of various faiths come to Kyiv: Mohammedan, Jewish and Christian, Greek, Roman. Each of the ambassadors extols the virtues of his religion. However, Vladimir wittily rejects both the Muslim and Jewish faiths, since they do not correspond to the national traditions of the Russian land. The Roman faith was rejected by “fathers and grandfathers” (meaning the mission of Bishop Adalbert in the middle of the 10th century). Having chosen Orthodoxy, Vladimir, before accepting this religion, sends his envoys to test which faith is better. Those sent are convinced with their own eyes of the beauty, splendor and splendor of Greek Christian church services, they prove to the prince the advantages of the Orthodox faith over other religions, and Vladimir finally decides on Christianity.
D. S. Likhachev suggests that “Tales about the initial spread of Christianity in Rus'” were recorded by scribes of the Kyiv Metropolis at the St. Sophia Cathedral. However, Constantinople did not agree with the appointment of the Russian Hilarion to the metropolitan see (in 1055 we see the Greek Ephraim in his place), and the “Tales,” which were anti-Byzantine in nature, did not receive further development here.
The center of Russian education, opposed to the Greek metropolitan, from the middle of the 11th century. becomes the Kiev Pechesra Monastery. Here in the 70s of the 11th century. the Russian chronicle is being compiled. The compiler of the chronicle is Nikon the Great. He used “Tales about the Spread of Christianity”, supplemented them with a number of oral historical traditions, eyewitness accounts, in particular the governor Vyshata, historical information about modern and recent events.
Obviously, under the influence of Easter chronological tables - Paschals, compiled in the monastery, Nikon gave his narrative the form of weather records - according to “years”. In the “First Kiev-Pechersk Code” created around 1073, he included a large number of legends about the first Russian princes and their campaigns against Constantinople. He, apparently, also used the Korsun legend about the campaign of Vladimir Svyatoslavich in 988 against the Greek city of Korsun (Chersonese Tauride), after the capture of which Vladimir demanded the sister of the Greek emperors Anna as his wife.
Thanks to this, the code of 1073 acquired a pronounced anti-Byzantine orientation. Nikon gave the chronicle political urgency, historical breadth and unprecedented patriotic pathos, which made this work an outstanding monument ancient Russian culture. The code condemned the princely strife, emphasizing the role of the people in protecting the Russian land from external enemies.
Thus, the “First Kiev-Pechersk Code” was an exponent of the ideas and sentiments of the middle and even lower strata of feudal society. From now on, journalisticism, integrity, breadth of historical approach, and patriotic pathos become distinctive features of the Russian chronicle.
After Nikon's death, work on the chronicle continued in the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. Here weather records were kept about current events, which were then processed and combined by an unknown author into the “Second Kiev-Pechersk Code” of 1095.
The “Second Kiev-Pechersk Code” continued the propaganda of the ideas of the unity of the Russian land, begun by Nikon. This code also sharply condemns princely sedition, and the princes are called for unity to jointly fight the steppe nomadic Polovtsians. The compiler of the code sets clear journalistic goals: to correct the current ones by the example of previous princes.
The author of the “Second Kiev-Pechersk Vault” widely draws on the stories of eyewitnesses of the events, in particular the stories of Vyshata’s son Jan. The compiler of the code also uses Greek historical chronicles, in particular the chronicle of George Amartol, the data of which allows him to include the history of Rus' in the general chain of events of world history.
“The Tale of Bygone Years” was created at a time when Kievan Rus was experiencing the most strong blows steppe nomadic Polovtsians, when the ancient Russian society was faced with the question of uniting all forces to fight the steppe, the “field” for the Russian land, which “fathers and grandfathers acquired with sweat and blood.”
In 1098, the great Kiev prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavich reconciled with the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery: he began to support the anti-Byzantine direction of the monastery’s activities and, understanding the political significance of the chronicle, sought to take control of the chronicle writing. In the interests of Svyatopolk, on the basis of the “Second Kiev-Pechersk Code”, the first edition of the “Tale of Bygone Years” was created by the monk Nestor in 1113. Having retained the ideological orientation of the previous code, Nestor strives with the entire course of the historical narrative to convince the Russian princes to put an end to fratricidal wars and brings to the fore the idea of princely brotherly love. Under the pen of Nestor, the chronicle acquires a state official character.
Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, placed by Nestor at the center of the narrative about the events of 1093-1111, did not have much popularity in the society of that time. After his death, Vladimir Monomakh became the Grand Duke of Kyiv in 1113 - “a good sufferer for the Russian land.” Understanding the political and legal significance of the chronicle, he transferred its management to the Vydubitsky Monastery, whose abbot Sylvester, on behalf of the Grand Duke, compiled the second edition of the “Tale of Bygone Years” in 1116. It highlights the figure of Monomakh, emphasizing his merits in the fight against the Polovtsians and in establishing peace between the princes.
In 1118, in the same Vydubitsky Monastery, an unknown author created the third edition of The Tale of Bygone Years. This edition includes the “Teaching” of Vladimir Monomakh, the presentation was brought up to 1117.
Hypothesis of B. A. Rybakov. A different concept of the development of the initial stage of Russian chronicle writing is developed by B. A. Rybakov. Analyzing the text of the initial Russian chronicle, the researcher suggests that brief weather records began to be kept in Kyiv with the advent of the Christian clergy (from 867) under the reign of Askold. At the end of the 10th century, in 996-997, the “First Kiev Chronicle” was created, which summarized the heterogeneous material of brief weather records and oral legends. This code was created at the Church of the Tithes; Anastas Korsunyanin, the rector of the cathedral, the bishop of Belgorod and Vladimir’s uncle, Dobrynya, took part in its compilation. The code provided the first historical summary of the sesquicentennial life of Kievan Rus and ended with the glorification of Vladimir. At the same time, suggests B. A. Rybakov, Vladimirov’s cycle of epics was also taking shape, in which a popular assessment of events and persons was given, while the chronicle introduced court assessments, book culture, squad epics, as well as folk tales.
Sharing the point of view of A. A. Shakhmatov about the existence of the Novgorod Code of 1050, B. A. Rybakov believes that the chronicle was created with the active participation of the Novgorod mayor Ostromir and this “Ostromir Chronicle” should be dated 1054-1060. It was directed against Yaroslav the Wise and the Varangian mercenaries. It emphasized the heroic history of Novgorod and glorified the activities of Vladimir Svyatoslavich and Vladimir Yaroslavich, Prince of Novgorod. The chronicle was purely secular in nature and expressed the interests of the Novgorod boyars.
B. A. Rybakov offers an interesting reconstruction of the text of Nestor’s “Tale of Bygone Years”. He puts forward a hypothesis about the active personal participation of Vladimir Monomakh in the creation of the second, Sylvester, edition. The researcher associates the third edition of “The Tale of Bygone Years” with the activities of Monomakh’s son Mstislav Vladimirovich, who tried to oppose Novgorod to Kyiv.
Thus, the question of the initial stage of Russian chronicle writing, the composition, and sources of the “Tale of Bygone Years” is very complex and far from resolved.
What is certain, however, is that “The Tale of Bygone Years” is the result of a large summary of editorial work, summarizing the work of several generations of chroniclers.
The main ideas of the initial chronicle. Already in the title itself - “This is the story of the bygone years, where the Russian land came from, who began the first principality in Kyiv, and where the Russian land began to eat from” - contains an indication of the ideological and thematic content of the chronicle. The Russian land, its historical destinies, from its origin to the first decade of the 12th century, are the focus of the chronicle. The high patriotic idea of the power of the Russian land, its political independence, religious independence from Byzantium constantly guides the chronicler when he introduces into his work the “traditions of deep antiquity” and truly historical events of the recent past.
The chronicles are unusually topical, journalistic, full of sharp condemnation of princely strife and strife, weakening the power of the Russian land, a call to guard the Russian land, not to disgrace the Russian land in the fight against external enemies, first of all with the steppe nomads - the Pechenegs, and then the Polovtsians.
The theme of the homeland is decisive and leading in the chronicle. The interests of the homeland dictate to the chronicler one or another assessment of the prince’s actions and are the measure of his glory and greatness. Living feeling The Russian land, homeland and people convey to the Russian chronicler that unprecedented breadth of political horizon, which is unusual for Western European historical chronicles.
Let us think about the title given to the initial Russian chronicle - “The Tale of Bygone Years.” After all, the word “story” here means a story, i.e., what is told about the past of the Russian land in order to establish “where the Russian land came from, who began the reign in Kyiv first...”. If the work on compiling the chronicle began in the 30s and 40s of the 11th century, then its creators acted not only as historians-researchers, but also as the first historians-writers. First of all, they needed to obtain material about the past years, select it, literary process it and systematize it - “put it in a row.”
Such material apparently included oral historical traditions, legends, epic heroic songs, then written sources: Greek, Bulgarian chronicles, hagiographic literature.
From written sources, chroniclers borrow the historical Christian-scholastic concept, connecting the history of the Russian land with the general course of development of “world” history. The Tale of Bygone Years opens with the biblical legend about the division of the earth after the flood between the sons of Noah - Shem, Ham and Japheth. The Slavs are the descendants of Japhet, that is, they, like the Greeks, belong to a single family of European peoples.
Chroniclers are interested in fate Slavic peoples in the distant past (V-VI centuries), the settlement of Eastern Slavic tribes in the basin of the Dnieper and its tributaries, the Volkhov and Lake Ilmen, the Volga-Oka interfluve, the Southern Bug and the Dniester; the morals and customs of these tribes, from which the Polyan tribe stands out in terms of cultural development. Chroniclers seek explanations for the origin of the names of both individual tribes and cities by turning to oral legend. They correlate the events that took place in the Russian land with Greek and Bulgarian events. They realized the great cultural mission of the first Slavic “teachers” and “philosophers” Cyril and Methodius, and information about the activities of these great brothers related to the invention of the “Slovenian” alphabet is recorded in the chronicle.
Finally, they manage to “establish” the first date—6360—(852)—mention of the “Russian Land” in the “Greek Chronicle.” This date makes it possible to put “numbers in a row,” that is, to begin a consistent chronological presentation, or more precisely, to arrange the material “by years”—by years. And when they cannot attach any event to a particular date, they limit themselves to simply fixing the date itself (for example: “in the summer of 6368”, “in the summer of 6369”). The chronological principle provided ample opportunities for free handling of the material, made it possible to introduce new legends and stories into the chronicle, exclude old ones if they did not correspond to the political interests of the time and the author, and supplement the chronicle with records of events of recent years, of which its compiler was a contemporary.
As a result of the application of the weather chronological principle of presenting the material, the idea of history gradually emerged as a continuous sequential chain of events. The chronological connection was reinforced by a genealogical, tribal connection, the continuity of the rulers of the Russian land, starting from Rurik and ending (in the Tale of Bygone Years) with Vladimir Monomakh.
At the same time, this principle gave the chronicle fragmentation, which drew the attention of I. P. Eremin.
Genres included in the chronicle. The chronological principle of presentation allowed the chroniclers to include in the chronicle material that was heterogeneous in nature and genre characteristics. The simplest narrative unit of a chronicle is a laconic weather record, limited only to a statement of fact. However, the very inclusion of this or that information in the chronicle indicates its significance from the point of view of the medieval writer. For example: “In summer 6377 (869). The whole Bulgarian land was quickly baptized...”; “In summer 6419 (911). A great star appeared in the west like a spear..."; “In summer 6481 (973). The beginning of the princedom of Yaropolk,” etc. The structure of these entries is noteworthy: as a rule, the verb is placed first, which emphasizes the significance of the action.
The chronicle also presents a type of detailed record, recording not only the “actions” of the prince, but also their results. For example: “In the summer of 6391, Oleg fought against the Derevlyans, and, having tormented them, imposed tribute on them, according to black kun,” etc.
Both a brief weather record and a more detailed one are documentary. There are no speech-decorating tropes in them. The recording is simple, clear and concise, which gives it special significance, expressiveness and even majesty.
The chronicler's focus is on the event - "what happened in the years of strength." They are followed by news of the death of the princes. The birth of children and their marriage are recorded less frequently. Then information about the construction activities of the princes. Finally, reports on church affairs, which occupy a very modest place. True, the chronicler describes the transfer of the relics of Boris and Gleb, includes legends about the beginning of the Pechersk Monastery, the death of Theodosius of Pechersk and stories about the memorable monks of Pechersk. This is quite explainable by the political significance of the cult of the first Russian saints Boris and Gleb and the role of the Kiev Pechersk Monastery in the formation of the initial chronicle.
An important group of chronicle news consists of information about heavenly signs - eclipses of the sun, moon, earthquakes, epidemics, etc. The chronicler sees a connection between unusual natural phenomena and the lives of people, historical events. Historical experience associated with the evidence of the chronicle of George Amartol leads the chronicler to the conclusion: “Signs in the sky, or the stars, whether the sun, or birds, or nature, are not for good; but there are signs of evil, whether the manifestation of an army, or a famine, or death.”
News of various topics can be combined within one chronicle article. The material included in the “Tale of Bygone Years” allows us to distinguish a historical legend, a toponymic legend, a historical legend (associated with the heroic druzhina epic), a hagiographic legend, as well as a historical legend and a historical story.
The connection between the chronicle and folklore. The chronicler draws material about the events of the distant past from the treasury of folk memory.
The appeal to the toponymic legend was dictated by the chronicler’s desire to find out the origin of the names of Slavic tribes, individual cities and the word “Rus” itself. Thus, the origin of the Slavic tribes Radimichi and Vyatichi is associated with the legendary people from the Poles - the brothers Radim and Vyatko. This legend arose among the Slavs, obviously, during the period of decomposition of the clan system, when an isolated clan elder, in order to justify his right to political dominance over the rest of the clan, creates a legend about his supposedly foreign origin. Close to this chronicle legend is the legend about the calling of princes, placed in the chronicle under 6370 (862). At the invitation of the Novgorodians from overseas to “reign and rule”, three Varangian brothers come to the Russian land with their clans: Rurik, Sineus, Truvor.
The folklore nature of the legend confirms the presence of the epic number three - three brothers. The legend is of purely Novgorod, local origin, reflecting the practice of relations between the feudal city republic and the princes. In the life of Novgorod, there were frequent cases of the “calling” of a prince, who performed the functions of a military leader. Introduced into the Russian chronicle, this local legend acquired a certain political meaning. She substantiated the rights of princes to political power over all of Russia. A single ancestor of the Kyiv princes was established - the semi-legendary Rurik, which allowed the chronicler to consider the history of the Russian land as the history of the princes of Rurik's house. The legend about the calling of the princes emphasized the political independence of the princely power from the Byzantine Empire.
Thus, the legend about the calling of the princes served as an important argument for proving the sovereignty of the Kyiv state, and did not at all indicate the inability of the Slavs to independently establish their state, without the help of Europeans, as some scientists tried to prove.
A typical toponymic legend is also the legend about the founding of Kyiv by three brothers - Kiy, Shchek, Khoryv and their sister Lybid. On oral source The chronicler himself indicates the material included in the chronicle: “Ini, ignorant, rekosha, what kind of carrier Kiy was.” The chronicler indignantly rejects the version of the folk legend about Kie the Carrier. He categorically states that Kiy was a prince, made successful campaigns against Constantinople, where he received great honor from the Greek king and founded the settlement of Kievets on the Danube.
Echoes ritual poetry Since the time of the clan system, chronicles are filled with news about the Slavic tribes, their customs, wedding and funeral ceremonies.
The first Russian princes are described in the chronicles using the techniques of oral folk epic: Oleg, Igor, Olga, Svyatoslav.
Oleg is, first of all, a courageous and wise warrior. Thanks to his military ingenuity, he defeats the Greeks by putting his ships on wheels and sailing them across the land. He deftly unravels all the intricacies of his Greek enemies and concludes a peace treaty with Byzantium that is beneficial for Rus'. As a sign of the victory, Oleg nails his shield on the gates of Constantinople to the greater shame of his enemies and the glory of his homeland.
The successful prince-warrior is popularly nicknamed the “prophetic”, i.e., a wizard (however, the Christian chronicler did not fail to emphasize that the nickname was given to Oleg by the pagans, “people of trash and lack of voice”), but he also cannot escape his fate. Under 912 the chronicle contains a poetic legend connected, obviously, “with Olgova’s grave,” which “exists... to this day.” This legend has a complete plot, which is revealed in a laconic dramatic narrative. It clearly expresses the idea of the power of fate, which no mortal, and even the “prophetic” prince, can avoid.
Igor is depicted in a slightly different way. He is also courageous and brave, defeating the Greeks in the campaign of 944. He is caring and attentive to the needs of his squad, but, in addition, he is greedy. The desire to collect as much tribute as possible from the Drevlyans becomes the reason for his death. Igor’s greed is condemned by the chronicler with a folk proverb, which he puts into the mouths of the Drevlyans: “If you put a wolf into a sheep, then carry out the whole flock, unless you kill it...”
Igor's wife Olga is a wise woman, faithful to the memory of her husband, rejecting the matchmaking of not only the Drevlyan prince Mal, but also the Greek emperor. She cruelly takes revenge on the murderers of her husband, but her cruelty is not condemned by the chronicler. The description of Olga's four places emphasizes the wisdom, firmness and inflexibility of the character of a Russian woman. D. S. Likhachev notes that the basis of the legend is made up of riddles that the unlucky Drevlyan matchmakers cannot solve. Olga's riddles are based on associations of wedding and funeral rites: not only honored guests, but also the dead were carried in boats; Olga's offer to the ambassadors to wash in the bathhouse is not only a sign of the highest hospitality, but also a symbol of the funeral rite; heading to the Drevlyans, Olga goes to perform a funeral feast not only for her husband, but also for the Drevlyan ambassadors she killed. The slow-witted Drevlyans understand Olga's words in their literal meaning, unaware of the other, hidden meaning of the wise woman's riddles, and thereby doom themselves to death. The entire description of Olga’s revenge is based on the bright, laconic and stagey dialogue of the princess with the messengers of the “Village Land”.
The heroics of the druzhina epic are inspired by the image of the stern, simple and strong, courageous and straightforward warrior Svyatoslav. Cunning, flattery, cunning are alien to him - qualities inherent in his Greek enemies, who, as the chronicler notes, “are flattering to this day.” With a small squad, he wins a victory over the superior forces of the enemy: with a short, courageous speech, he inspires his soldiers to fight: “... let us not disgrace the Russian land, but let us lie down with our bones, for a dead man has no shame.”
Svyatoslav despises wealth, he values only his squad, weapons, with the help of which he can obtain any wealth. The description of this prince in the chronicle is accurate and expressive: “...walking easily, like a pardus, he created many wars. Walking, he did not carry a cart on his own, nor cooked a cauldron, nor cooked meat, but he cut up a thin horse meat, an animal or a beef on coals, baked a meat, or a tent named after him, but sent a lining and a saddle at the head; as well as his other howl ecu byahu.”
Svyatoslav lives in the interests of his squad. He even goes against the admonitions of his mother, Olga, and refuses to accept Christianity, fearing the ridicule of the squad. But the constant desire
Svyatoslav to wars of conquest, neglect of the interests of Kyiv, his attempt to move the capital of Rus' to the Danube causes condemnation of the chronicler. He expresses this condemnation through the lips of “Kiyan”: “... you, prince, are looking for a foreign land and consuming it, but having taken possession of your own (left), small (barely) because we were not taken by the Pechenesi...”
The straightforward prince-warrior dies in an unequal battle with the Pechenegs at the Dnieper rapids. The Pecheneg prince Kurya, who killed Svyatoslav, “took his head, and made a cup in his forehead (skull), bound his forehead, and drank from it.” The chronicler does not moralize about this death, but the general trend is still evident: Svyatoslav’s death is natural, it is a consequence of his disobedience to his mother, a consequence of his refusal to accept baptism.
The chronicle news about Vladimir's marriage to the Polotsk princess Rogneda, about his abundant and generous feasts arranged in Kyiv - the Korsun legend - goes back to folk tales. On the one hand, before us appears a pagan prince with his unbridled passions, on the other, an ideal Christian ruler, endowed with all the virtues: meekness, humility, love for the poor, for the monastic and monastic order, etc. The contrasting comparison of the prince between a pagan and a Christian prince, the chronicler sought to prove the superiority of the new Christian morality over pagan morality.
The reign of Vladimir was covered in the heroism of folk tales already at the end of the 10th and beginning of the 11th centuries.
The spirit of the people heroic epic is imbued with the legend of the victory of the Russian youth Kozhemyaki over the Pechenezh giant. As in folk epic, the legend emphasizes the superiority of a person of peaceful labor, a simple artisan over a professional warrior - a Pecheneg hero. The images of the legend are built on the principle of contrastive comparison and broad generalization. At first glance, the Russian young man is an ordinary, unremarkable person, but he embodies that enormous, gigantic power that the Russian people possess, decorating the earth with their labor and protecting it on the battlefield from external enemies. The Pecheneg warrior with his gigantic size terrifies those around him. The boastful and arrogant enemy is contrasted with a modest Russian youth, the youngest son of a tanner. He accomplishes the feat without arrogance and boasting. At the same time, the legend is confined to the toponymic legend about the origin of the city of Pereyaslavl - “the zone of the glory of the youth,” but this is a clear anachronism, since Pereyaslavl was already mentioned more than once in the chronicle before this event.
The legend of Belgorod jelly is associated with the folk fairy tale epic. This legend glorifies the intelligence, resourcefulness and ingenuity of the Russian people.
Both the legend of Kozhemyak and the legend of Belgorod jelly are complete plot narratives, built on the opposition inner strength a toiler to the bragging of a terrible enemy only in appearance, to the wisdom of an old man to the gullibility of the Pechenegs. The culmination of the plots of both legends are duels: in the first - physical combat, in the second - dueling of the mind and resourcefulness with gullibility and stupidity. The plot of the legend about Kozhemyak is typologically close to the plots of heroic folk epics, and the legends about Belgorod jelly are folk tales.
The folklore basis is clearly felt in the church legend about the visit to the Russian land by the Apostle Andrew. By placing this legend, the chronicler sought to “historically” substantiate the religious independence of Rus' from Byzantium. The legend claimed that the Russian land received Christianity not from the Greeks, but allegedly by the disciple of Christ himself - the Apostle Andrew, who once walked the path “from the Varangians to the Greeks” along the Dnieper and Volkhov - Christianity was predicted on the Russian land. The church legend about how Andrei blessed the Kyiv mountains is combined with the folk tale about Andrei’s visit to the Novgorod land. This legend is of an everyday nature and is associated with the custom of the inhabitants of the Slavic north to steam in hotly heated wooden baths.
Compilers of chronicles of the 16th century. drew attention to the discrepancy between the first part of the story about the Apostle Andrew’s visit to Kyiv and the second, they replaced the everyday story with a pious legend, according to which Andrei Novgorod land leaves his cross.
Thus, most of the chronicles, dedicated to events IX - late X centuries, associated with oral folk art and its epic genres.
Historical stories and legends as part of the chronicle. As the chronicler moves from narrating events of long ago to the recent past, the chronicle material becomes increasingly historically accurate, strictly factual and official.
The chronicler's attention is drawn only to historical figures at the top of the feudal hierarchical ladder. In depicting their actions, he follows the principles of medieval historicism. According to these principles, only purely official events that have historical significance for the state should be recorded in the chronicle, and the private life of a person and the everyday environment around him are not of interest to the chronicler.
The chronicle develops the ideal of a prince-ruler. This ideal is inseparable from the general patriotic ideas of the chronicle. The ideal ruler is the living embodiment of love for native land, her honor and glory, the personification of her power and dignity. All his actions, all his activities are determined by the good of his homeland and people. Therefore, in the view of the chronicler, the prince cannot belong to himself. He is first and foremost a historical figure who always appears in an official setting, endowed with all the attributes of princely power. D. S. Likhachev notes that the prince in the chronicle is always official, he seems to be addressed to the viewer and is presented in his most significant actions. The prince's virtues are a kind of ceremonial clothing; at the same time, some virtues are purely mechanically attached to others, thanks to which it became possible to combine secular and church ideals. Fearlessness, courage, military valor are combined with humility, meekness and other Christian virtues.
If the prince’s activities are aimed at the good of his homeland, the chronicler glorifies him in every possible way, endowing him with all the qualities of a predetermined ideal. If the prince’s activities run counter to the interests of the state, the chronicler does not spare black paint and attributes negative character all mortal sins: pride, envy, ambition, greed, etc.
The principles of medieval historicism are vividly embodied in the stories “About the Murder of Borisov” (1015) and about the blinding of Vasilko Terebovlsky, which can be classified as historical stories about princely crimes. However, in style these are completely different works. The story “About the Murder of Borisov” sets out the historical facts of Svyatopolk’s murder of the brothers Boris and Gleb with extensive use of elements of the hagiographic style. It is built on the contrast of the ideal martyred princes and the ideal villain - the “cursed” Svyatopolk. The story ends with praise glorifying the “Christ-loving passion-bearers”, “shining lamps”, “bright stars” - “intercessors of the Russian land”. At its end, there is a prayerful call to the martyrs to subdue the filthy “under the nose of our prince” and deliver them “from the hostile army”, so that they may remain in peace and unity. This is how the patriotic idea common to the entire chronicle is expressed in hagiographic form. At the same time, the story “About the Murder of Borisov” is interesting for a number of “documentary” details, “realistic details”.
Written by priest Vasily and placed in the chronicle under 1097, “The Tale of the Blinding of Vasilko of Terebovl” is designed in a historical-documentary style.
The exposition of the plot is a message about the congress of princes “to establish peace” in Lyubech. The unanimity of those gathered is expressed by a speech allegedly said by all the princes: “Why are we destroying the Russian land, which we ourselves are active in? And the Polovtsi will carry our zeshu separately, and for the sake of the essence, they will fight between us. Yes, but from now on we are united in one heart, and we guard the narrow lands; let each one hold on to his fatherland...”
The established new feudal order of relationships (“let each one keep his fatherland”) is sealed by the princes with an oath—the making of the cross. They give each other their word not to allow strife and strife. This decision meets with the approval of the people: “and for the sake of the people ecu.” However, the achieved unanimity turned out to be temporary and fragile, and the story, using the specific, terrible example of Vasilko’s blinding by his cousins, shows what the princes’ violation of their obligations leads to.
The motivation for the plot of the story is traditional, providentialist: saddened by “love”, the consent of the princes, the devil “climbed” into the heart of “a certain husband”; they say “lying words” to David that Vladimir Monomakh allegedly conspired with Vasilko about joint actions against him and Svyatopolk of Kyiv. What kind of “certain men” these are - it is not known what actually prompted them to convey their “lying words” to David - is unclear. Then the providentialist motivation develops into a purely psychological one. By believing the “husbands,” David sows doubts in the soul of Svyatopolk. The latter, “confused in mind,” hesitates, he does not believe in the justice of these statements. In the end, Svyatopolk agrees with David on the need to capture Vasilko.
When Vasilko came to the Vydubitsky monastery, Svyatopolk sent a messenger to him with a request to stay in Kyiv until his name day. Vasilko refuses, fearing that in his absence the “army” would not have happened at home. Davyda’s messenger, who then appeared to Vasilko, already demands that Vasilko stay and thereby not “disobey his elder brother.” Thus, Davyd raises the question of the need for Vasilko to observe his duty as a vassal in relation to the overlord. Note that Boris and Gleb die in the name of observing this duty. Vasilko’s refusal only convinces Davyd that Vasilko intends to capture the cities of Svyatopolk. Davyd insists that Svyatopolk immediately give Vasilko to him. Svyatopolk’s envoy goes to Vasilko again and, on behalf of the Grand Duke of Kyiv, asks him to come, say hello and sit with Davyd. Vasilko gets on his horse and with a small squad rides to Svyatopolk. It is characteristic that here the story is structured according to the laws of an epic plot: Vasilko decides to go to his brother only after the third invitation.
A warrior warns his brother Vasilko about his insidious plan, but the prince cannot believe it: “Why would you want to kill me? Sometimes (when recently) they kissed the cross.” Vasilko does not allow the thought of the possibility of the princes violating their obligations.
The story about Vasilko’s meeting with Svyatopolk and Davyd is dramatic and deeply psychological. Having introduced the guest into the upper room, Svyatopolk still tries to strike up a conversation with him, asks him to stay until Christmastide, but “David is gray, like mute,” and this detail clearly characterizes the psychological state of the latter. Svyatopolk cannot stand the tense atmosphere and leaves the upper room under the pretext of the need to arrange breakfast for the guest. Vasilko is left alone with Davyd, he tries to start a conversation with him, “and there is no voice or obedience in Davyd.” And only now Vasilko begins to see the light: he was “horrified”, realizing the deception. And Davyd, after sitting for a while, leaves. Vasilko, having been shackled in “two shackles,” is locked in the upper room, with guards posted for the night.
Emphasizing Svyatopolk’s indecision and hesitation, the author talks about how he does not dare to make a final decision about Vasilko’s fate. Svyatopolk convenes the “boyars and kiyans” the next morning and presents to them the accusations that Davyd brings against Vasilko. But both the boyars and the “Kyans” do not take moral responsibility. Forced to make a decision himself, Svyatopolk hesitates. The abbots beg him to let Vasilko go, and Davyd “encourages” him to be blinded. Svyatopolk already wants to let Vasilko go, but the scales are outweighed by the words of Davyd: “...if you don’t do this (blinding - V.K.), but let him go, then neither you nor I will reign.” The prince made a decision, and Vasilko is transported on a cart from Kyiv to Belgorod, where he is put in the “istoka mola.” The development of the plot reaches its climax, and it is given with great artistic skill. Seeing Torchin sharpening a knife, Vasilko guesses his fate: they want to blind him, and he “cries out to God with great weeping and lamentation.” It should be noted that the author of the story - priest Vasily - did not follow the path of hagiographic literature. According to the hagiographic canon, a lengthy monologue of the hero, his prayer, and lamentation should have been placed here.
The author conveys the climactic scene accurately and dynamically. The main artistic function in this scene belongs to the verb - a kind of “speech gesture”, as A. N. Tolstoy understood it. Enter the grooms of Svyatopolk and Davyd - Snovid Izechevich and Dmitry:
and wash the carpet often,
and stretched out, eating Vasilka
and want and damage;
and fights with him tightly,
and you can't damage it.
And behold, the friends were overthrown and,
and connected and,
and remove the board from the stove,
and put it on his chest.
And gray-haired both sexes Snovid Izenevich and Dmitry,
and you can’t hold it back.
And two attackers,
and took the other deck off the stump,
and gray hair,
and strangling and ramyano, like overeating troscotati.
The entire scene is maintained in a clear rhythmic structure, which is created by the anaphoric repetition of the connecting conjunction “and,” conveying the temporal sequence of the action, as well as by verbal rhymes.
Before us is a leisurely story about the event; there is no external emotional assessment in it. But before the reader - listener, a scene full of drama appears with great specificity: “And attack the stick... holding the knife and even hitting the eye, and sinning the eye and cutting his face, and there is that wound on Vasilka even now. And therefore hit the eye, and the apple of the eye, and then the other eye, and the other eye. And that hour he was like dead.”
The unconscious, lifeless Vasilko is taken on a cart, and at the Zdvizhenya bridge, at the market, they take off his bloody shirt and give it to his priest to wash. Now the outwardly dispassionate tale gives way to a lyrical episode. Popadya deeply sympathizes with the unfortunate man, she mourns him as if he were dead. And hearing the cry of a compassionate woman, Vasilko regains consciousness. “And he touched the shirt and said: “Why did they take it off me? May I accept death in that bloody shirt and stand before God.”
Davyd carried out his intention. He brings Vasilko to Vladimir Volynsky, “like catching a catch.” And in this comparison there is a moral condemnation of the crime committed by the brother.
Unlike the hagiographical narrative, Vasily does not moralize and does not provide biblical comparisons or quotes. From the story of the fate of Vasilko, he moves on to the story of how this crime affects the fate of the Russian land, and now the main place is given to the figure of Vladimir Monomakh. It is in him that the ideal of the prince is embodied. Vasily hyperbolically conveys the feelings of the prince who learned about Vasilko’s blindness. Monomakh “...was horrified and wept and said: “This kind of evil never happened in the Russian land, neither in the time of our grandfathers, nor in the time of our fathers.” He seeks to peacefully “correct” this evil in order to prevent the destruction of the Russian land. Vladimir and the Kiyans pray to Vladimir to “create peace” and “guard the Russian land,” and Vladimir burst into tears and says: “Truly our fathers and our grandfathers forsook the Russian land, but we want to destroy it.” The characterization of Monomakh takes on a hagiographic character. His obedience to his father and his stepmother is emphasized, as well as his veneration of the metropolitan, the rank of hierarch and especially the “chernechsky”. Having discovered that he has deviated from the main topic, the narrator hastens to return “to his place” and announces peace with Svyatopolk, who pledged to go against Davyd Igorevich and either capture him or expel him. Then the author talks about Davyd’s failed attempt to occupy Vasilkov volost and Vasilko’s return to Terebovl. It is characteristic that in negotiations with Vasilko’s brother Volodar, Davyd tries to shift the blame for Vasilko’s blinding onto Svyatopolk.
The peace is then disrupted by Vasilko and Volodar. They take the city of Vsevolozh with a spear, set it on fire and “execute vengeance on innocent people, and shed innocent blood.” Here the author clearly condemns Vasilko. This condemnation intensifies when Vasilko deals with Lazar and Turyak (who persuaded Davyd to commit the crime); “Behold, take the second vengeance, it wouldn’t have been so stupid to do it, so that God would be an avenger.”
Fulfilling the terms of the peace treaty, Svyatopolk Izyaslavich expels Davyd, but then, breaking the kiss of the cross, he goes against Vasilko and Volodrya. Now Vasilko is again performing in the aura of a hero. He becomes the head of the army, “raising the cross.” At the same time, “many faithful people saw the cross” over the soldiers.
Thus, the story does not idealize Vasilko. He is not only a victim of slander, cruelty and treachery of Davyd Igorevich, gullibility of Svyatopolk, but he himself reveals no less cruelty both towards the perpetrators of evil and towards innocent people. There is no idealization in the depiction of the Grand Duke of Kyiv Svyatopolk, indecisive, gullible, weak-willed. The story allows the modern reader to imagine the characters of living people with their human weaknesses and strengths.
The story was written by a medieval writer, who builds it on the opposition of two symbolic images of “cross” and “knife”, which run through the entire narrative as a leitmotif.
"Cross" - "kissing the cross" - is a symbol of princely brotherly love and unanimity, sealed by an oath. “If anyone from now on is against anyone, then we will give him an honorable cross,” - with this oath the princes seal their agreement in Lyubech. Vasilko does not believe in the brothers’ deceit: “What do they want to give me? They sometimes kissed the cross, saying: “If anyone falls on anyone, then there will be a cross on him, and we too.” Vladimir Monomakh makes peace with Svyatopolk “kissing the cross between them.” Vasilko, avenging his insult to Davyd, raises the “honest cross.”
The “knife” in the story about the blinding of Vasilko is not only a weapon for a specific crime - the blinding of Vasilko, but also a symbol of princely strife and strife. “...A knife has been thrown at us!” exclaims Monomakh, having learned about the terrible crime. Then these words are repeated by the ambassadors sent to Svyatopolk: “What evil has this ecu done in the Russian land and thrown a knife into us?”
Thus, “The Tale of the Blinding of Vasilko Terebovlsky” sharply condemns the princes’ violation of their contractual obligations, leading to terrible bloody crimes, bringing evil to the entire Russian land.
Descriptions of events related to the military campaigns of the princes take on the character of a historical documentary tale, indicating the formation of the genre of military stories. Elements of this genre are present in the tale of Yaroslav's revenge on the Accursed Svyatopolk in 1015-1016. The plot of the plot is the news to Yaroslav from Kyiv from his sister Predslava about the death of his father and the death of Boris; Yaroslav begins to prepare for the campaign, gathers troops and goes to Svyatopolk. In turn, Svyatopolk, “the builder of the be-shchisla howl, Rus' and the Pechenegs,” goes to meet Lyubech. The opposing sides stop at a water barrier - on the banks of the Dnieper. For three months they stand against each other, not daring to attack. And only the ridicule and reproaches thrown by the governor Svyatopolk towards Yaroslav and the Novgorodians force the latter to take decisive action: “...if anyone does not come with us, we ourselves will kill him.” At dawn, Yaroslav and his troops cross the Dnieper, and, pushing away their boats, the warriors rush into battle. The description of the battle is the culmination of the plot: “... and left the place. The slaughter of evil happened, and it was not possible to help the Pechenegs with the lake, and pressed Svyatopolk with his squad to the lake, and stepped onto the ice and broke off the ice with him, and Yaroslav began to overcome, seeing Svyatopolk and Yaroslav ran and overcame. Using the stylistic formula “quick slaughter of evil,” the battle is assessed. The victory of Yaroslav and the flight of Svyatopolk is the denouement of the plot.
...Similar documents
The history of the Russian chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years". "The Tale of Bygone Years" as a historical source and literary monument. Style originality"Tales of Bygone Years". The significance of "The Tale of Bygone Years" in the literary aspect.
course work, added 10/25/2006
Analysis of coverage of origin issues Russian state in "The Tale of Bygone Years". General characteristics government system and form government structure Kievan Rus in the 9th-12th centuries. Reflection of branches of law in The Tale of Bygone Years.
course work, added 01/18/2014
The problem of the composition of “mysterious stories” and genre originality, the writer’s creative method, literary parallels and cultural and philosophical roots. The beginning of literary comprehension of works. Poetics realistic stories Turgenev 60–70s.
thesis, added 10/21/2014
Studying the features of chronicle writing. "The Tale of Bygone Years", its sources, history of creation and edition. Inclusion of various genres in the chronicle. Folklore in the chronicle. The “walking” genre in ancient Russian literature. Household and fictional stories of the late 17th century.
cheat sheet, added 09/22/2010
Problems of determining the genre specificity of V. Bykov’s war stories in Soviet literary criticism. The story "In the Fog": the construction of a "moral experiment". Characteristics of military stories by V. Bykov. Genre features V. Bykov's story "Obelisk".
course work, added 01/08/2010
Genre nature, history of creation and publication of the story. Love issues in "Ghosts" and the cycle of love stories by Turgenev. "Ghosts" in relation to the cycle "Notes of a Hunter" and the novel "Smoke". Philosophical, socio-political aspects of the story.
thesis, added 10/08/2017
The essence and history of the development of the concept of “hero” from ancient Greek myths to modern literature. Character as a person’s social appearance, differences this concept from the hero, the order and conditions for transforming a character into a hero. The structure of a literary hero.
abstract, added 09.09.2009
Favorite literary character. Principled, honest, open and kind person. Vladimir Ustimenko in Y. German’s trilogy “The Cause You Serve.” Without medicine, his life would be boring and meaningless. The main thing is people's health.
essay, added 01/05/2007
The relationship between the figurative idea of "Rome" and the St. Petersburg stories. Ideological originality the story "The Stroller", its internal structure and system of images. The cyclical organization of the “Petersburg Tales”, the denunciation of Petersburg as the center of all kinds of evil.
abstract, added 07/25/2012
Analysis of the elements of fantasy and miracles in ancient Russian works: “The Life of Archpriest Avvakum” and “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia.” Christian and pagan traditions of ancient Russian literature. The miraculous as an integral part of the picture of the world of ancient Russian man.
Periodization of Old Russian literature, its specific features.
Likhachev identified the following periods in the development of ancient Russian literature:
1. Literature of Kievan RusPeriod"11th century – first floor. 13th century."
Christian culture comes to Rus'. Bookishness is developing in Kyiv, Novgorod, Polotsk. This is the literature of a single ancient Russian nationality. This is the literature of Kievan Rus, because The style of monumental historicism dominates. Here are created the most important genres literature: chronicle, historical story, life, word. “The Life of Boris and Gleb” is the first Russian life. The origin of the original Russian genre - chronicle writing - “The Tale of Bygone Years”. Feudal fragmentation began.
2. Literature of the period of fragmentation and the Mongol-Tatar invasion. Period"Tue. floor. 13th century – first floor. 14th century."
Stage of literary conservation. The period of the Mongol-Tatar invasion, stories appear about it. Literature is dominated by the theme of the fight against invaders, hence tragedy, patriotism and citizenship. “The Prayer of Daniel the Prisoner”, “The Tale of the Ruin of Ryazan by Batu”, “Zadonshchina”, “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia”.
3. Literature from the time of the unification of the northeastern principalities into a single Moscow principality. Period"Tue. floor. 14th century – first floor. 15th century."
Pre-Renaissance. Rus' is being revived economically and culturally, and the expressive-emotional style characteristic of hagiographies dominates. “The Life of Stephen of Perm”, Epiphanius the Wise.
4. Literature of the centralized Russian state. Period"Tue. floor. 15th century – first floor. 16th century."
The period of government. In Old Russian lit. translated works penetrate, for example, “The Tale of Dracula”. In 1453, Constantinople (the capital of Byzantium) fell, and literature was democratized. A single central state (Moscow and Novgorod) begins to form, and a heretical disconnect occurs.
5. Literature of the stage of formation of the Russian nation. Period"Tue. floor. 16th century – beginning 17th century."
A period of lost balance. Riots, unrest, the Rurik dynasty is replaced by the Romanovs. Satire and Baroque are born. The main feature is the dominance of the journalistic style ( Correspondence between Tsar Ivan the Terrible and Prince Andrei Kurbsky).
6. Literature of the era of Peter I. Period"17th century."
Transition to new literature. The development of the individual principle in the work of writers is increasing (authorship, theater, poetry appear). Bookishness is fading into ecclesiastical oblivion.
The specific features of the medieval worldview determined the system of genres of ancient Russian literature, subordinated to practical utilitarian goals - both moral and political. Along with Christianity, Ancient Rus' also adopted the system of genres of church writing that was developed in Byzantium. There were no genres here yet in the modern literary understanding, but there were canons, enshrined in the decrees of ecumenical councils, legend - tradition and charter. Church literature was associated with ritual Christian cult, monastic life. Its significance and authority were built on a certain hierarchical principle.
Books occupied the top level "sacred scripture". She followed them hymnography And " words"related to interpretations of "scripture", explanations of the meaning of holidays. Such "words" were usually combined into collections - " celebrants", Triodi colored and Lenten. Then followed lives- stories about the exploits of saints. Lives were combined into collections: Prologues (Synaxari), Chetii-Minea, Patericon. Each type of hero: martyr, confessor, monk, stylite, holy fool - had its own type of life. The composition of the life depended on its use: liturgical practice dictated certain conditions to its compiler, addressing the life to readers and listeners. For example, " The Legend of Boris and Gleb», « Life of Theodosius of Pechersk" Based on Byzantine examples, ancient Russian writers created a number of outstanding works of hagiographic original literature that reflected the essential aspects of the life and everyday life of Ancient Rus'.
Unlike Byzantine hagiography, Old Russian literature creates an original genre princely life, whose goal was to strengthen the political authority of the princely power and surround it with an aura of holiness. A distinctive feature of the princely life is " historicism", a close connection with chronicles, military stories, i.e. genres of secular literature. Just like the princely life, they are on the verge of transition from church genres to secular ones" walking" - travel, descriptions of pilgrimages to "holy places", tales of icons. The chronicle could include all genres. The system of genres of worldly (secular) literature is more flexible. It was developed by ancient Russian writers through extensive interaction with the genres of oral folk art, business writing, as well as church literature. The dominant position among the genres of secular writing is occupied by historical story, dedicated to outstanding events related to the struggle against the external enemies of Rus', the evil of princely strife. The story is accompanied by a historical legend and legend. A special place among worldly genres is occupied by " Teaching"Vladimir Monomakh," A Word about Igor's Campaign", "A word about the destruction of the Russian land" And " Word"Daniil Zatochnik. They testify to the high level of literary development achieved by Ancient Russia in the 11th - first half of the 13th centuries. The development of Old Russian literature of the 11th-17th centuries proceeds through the gradual destruction of the stable system of church genres, their transformation. They increase interest in the inner world of a person, the psychological motivation of his actions, entertaining, everyday descriptions appear. Historical heroes are replaced by fictional ones. In the 17th century, this leads to radical changes in the internal structure and style of historical genres and contributes to the birth of new purely fictional works. drama, democratic satire, everyday story, picaresque short story.
One of the principles of Christ. cult. – orientation to the addressee.
Genre of life was borrowed from Byzantium. This is the most widespread genre of ancient Russian literature. Life was an indispensable attribute when a person was canonized, i.e. were canonized. The life was created by people who directly communicated with a person or could reliably testify about his life. Life was always created after the death of a person. The life of the saint was perceived as an example of a righteous life that must be imitated. In addition, life deprived a person of the fear of death, preaching the idea of immortality human soul. Life was built according to certain canons, from which they did not depart until the 15-16 centuries. Canons of Life: the pious origin of the hero of the life, whose parents must have been righteous; The saint's parents often begged God for him; a saint was born a saint, and did not become one; the saint was distinguished by an ascetic lifestyle, spending time in solitude and prayer; a description of the miracles that occurred during the life of the saint and after his death; the saint was not afraid of death; The life ended with the glorification of the saint. One of the first works of the hagiographic genre in ancient Russian literature was the life of the holy princes Boris and Gleb.
Chetyi-Minei(literally “reading by month”) - a collection of works about holy people.
Patericon- a description of the life of the holy fathers.
Literature of Kievan Rus. General characteristics.
The first works of original ancient Russian literature that have come down to us date back to the middle XI centuries. Their creation was due to the growth of the political, patriotic consciousness of early feudal society, striving to strengthen new forms of statehood and assert the sovereignty of the Russian land. Substantiating the ideas of political and religious independence of Rus', literature seeks to consolidate new forms of Christian ethics, the authority of secular and spiritual power, to show the inviolability, the “eternity” of feudal relations and the norms of law and order. The main genres of literature of this time historical: legend, legend, story - and religious-didactic: solemn words, teachings, lives, walks. Historical genres, relying in their development on the corresponding genres of folklore, develop specific book forms of storytelling “according to the epics of this time.” The leading genre is historical story, based on a reliable depiction of events. Depending on the nature of the events reflected in the stories, they can be “ military", stories about princely crimes, etc. Each type of historical stories acquires its own specific stylistic features.
The central hero historical stories and legends is prince- warrior, defender of the country's borders, builder of temples, zealot for education, righteous judge of his subjects. His antipode- prince- cram flax, leading bloody internecine wars, seeking to gain power by force. The narration of the good and evil deeds of the princes is based on eyewitness accounts and oral traditions that existed among the warriors. Historical stories and legends do not allow for artistic fiction in the modern sense of the word. The facts presented in them are documented, attached to exact dates, and correlated with other events. Historical genres of ancient Russian literature, as a rule, do not exist separately, but as part of chronicles, where the principle of weather presentation made it possible to include a variety of material: weather records, legends, stories. These historical genres were dedicated to the most important events related to military campaigns, the fight against external enemies of Rus', the construction activities of the prince, strife, and unusual natural phenomena (celestial signs). At the same time, the chronicle also included church legends, elements of lives and even entire lives, and legal documents. One of the oldest and greatest historical and literary monuments of the second half of the 11th and early 12th centuries that has come down to us is “ The Tale of Bygone Years" Since the beginning of the 16th century, in connection with the formation of the centralized Russian state in the 15th century, regional trends have weakened. At this time, noble literature was firmly established as dominant.
But in the 17th century, culture, literature, both townsman and partly peasant, were already developing. The literature of Ancient Rus' was at first imbued with church ideology. The means of disseminating ancient Russian literature was exclusively the manuscript. Printing arose only in mid-16th century century.
The development of ancient Russian literature proceeded in parallel with the evolution literary language. The latter is based on the living Russian language, which appears most of all in works of a secular nature. Already in the most distant era, the foundations of the modern Russian language were laid.
4. " Prayer» Daniil Zatochnik. Idea, artistic originality, personality of Daniel.
From the anthology: “Prayer” was written at the end of the 12th or beginning of the 13th century. It was very popular in Ancient Rus', and has come down to us in two editions and many lists. In some lists the work is called a “message”, in others – a “prayer”, i.e. a petition, a request from a disgraced (falling out of favor) person. The popularity of “Prayer” is due to its progressive ideas of protecting the disadvantaged, people dependent on the prince, along with the praise of princely power, and high literary skill: the brightness of the language, filled with proverbs, aphorisms and craft terminology, the peculiar rhythm of stanzas and syntactic structures, internal riffs and assonances, many expressions in M. are borrowed from the collection “Bee,” popular in Ancient Rus'.
“Prayer” by Daniil Zatochnik addressed to the prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich Pereyaslavsky and listeners. “Prayer” can be classified as a work early noble journalism. “Prayer” belongs to the journalistic didactic works, which in a short form, filled with philosophical moral content, reveal the life and customs of Rus' on the eve of the Mongol-Tatar invasion. The style of “Prayers of Daniel the Imprisoner” is characterized by a combination of quotations from the Bible, chronicles with lively speech, satire directed against the boyars and the clergy. It is distinguished by the author's book knowledge, richness of images, and satirical attitude towards others. Deliberate humiliation is combined with emphasized mental superiority.
The theme of denunciation of monasticism is introduced in “Prayer.” Daniel indignantly rejects the prince's imaginary advice to become a monk. Daniel Sharpener depicts the morals of the monks. He denounces their vicious, base customs, which, like kind-hearted dogs, go around houses and villages "the glorious ones of this world."
Some researchers believe that Daniil the Sharpener is a purely literary character, on whose behalf an anonymous author created a purely literary work, others believe that Daniil the Sharpener is a historical figure, and his work is a real message to the prince. Supporters of the latter point of view define Daniel’s social status differently (nobleman, warrior, artisan, serf, chronicler, etc.) and consider different princes to be the addressee of the message. Finding himself in disgrace for his insolence, excessive straightforwardness and having experienced all the hardships of a beggarly life in exile, Daniel turns to the prince with a request to have mercy on him and return him to the princely squad, pointing out his merits (intelligence, wisdom, gift artistic word) and claiming the role of princely adviser, ambassador and rhetorician.
The original text of “Prayer” by Daniil Zatochnik was written according to all the rules epistolary genre. Daniel uses aphorisms, phraseology and imagery from the Bible and various ancient Russian monuments, creating from “other people’s words” a deeply personal, integral and organic work. “Prayer” by Daniil Zatochnik was written in bookish language, in a high style, which is characterized, in particular, by abstraction And " deconcretization».
5. " The story of Batu's destruction of Ryazan"as an example of a military story.
This work belongs to the best examples of military stories. It arose in the 13th century. and came to us in the lists of the 16th-17th centuries. The creation of the story was greatly influenced by oral poetic legends about the struggle of the Russian people with the Mongol-Tatar conquerors.
The story attracted the attention of poets of the 19th-20th centuries. A poem by L.A. was written based on its plot. Meya and poems by N.M. Yazykov and S.A. Yesenin about Evpatiy Kolovrat. In the 40s XX century part of the story was translated Soviet poet V. Vasiliev.
The story was written in 1237 the year when Batu came to Rus'.
“The Tale of Batu’s Coming to Ryazan” consists of four parts:
1. The appearance of Batu on the borders of the Ryazan land. Yuri Ingorevich asks for military assistance from the Grand Duke of Vladimir Georgy Vsevolodovich. Georgy Vsevolodovich refuses to help, wanting to fight Batu on his own. The Ryazan prince sends his son Fyodor Yuryevich to Batu with gifts and a request not to attack the Ryazan land. Batu wants the people of Ryazan to bring their wives and daughters to him. Having learned from one traitor, a Ryazan nobleman, that Fyodor Yuryevich himself has a beautiful wife, Batu turns to him with such a “proposal.” Prince Fyodor Yuryevich refuses Batu, for which he orders him to be killed. Having learned about this, Princess Eupraxia threw herself with her little son Ivan from the tower and fell to her death.
2. The heroic defense of Ryazan by Yuri Ingorevich, the death of the defenders and the ruin of Ryazan by Batu. The central episode is a hyperbolic description of the battle. A Russian warrior fights the enemy alone. Princess Agrippina, the mother of the Grand Duke, is killed in the church. The depiction of the devastation of the city is depicted in the story with great drama: everyone died, everything was bad.
3. The feat of Evpatiy Kolovrat. At this time, the brother of the Ryazan prince Yuri, Ingvar, is in Chernigov, and with him the Ryazan nobleman Evpatiy Kolovrat. They rush to the aid of Ryazan, but arrive after its destruction. Evpatiy gathers a squad and goes to fight the Tatars. He suddenly attacks Batu’s army and “cuts them without mercy” so that “the swords become dull.” The Tatars were amazed by the courage and daring of the Russians and, in particular, by the valor of Evpatiy Kolovrat. Evpatiy and Batu’s brother-in-law come together in a duel, in which the Russian hero cuts him in half “to the saddle.” The Tatars still manage to kill Evpatiy Kolovrat, but they are afraid of him even when he is dead. The author points out that the Tatars have respect for Russian brave men, and Tsar Batu says: “If such a person served with me, I would bring him closer to me.”
4. Renewal of Ryazan by Ingvar Ingorevich.
The last, final part of the story begins with the emotional crying of Prince Ingvar Ingorevich, created according to all the rules of book rhetoric. He sadly mourns the dead. The story ends with a story about the revival and renewal by the Russian people of Ryazan, which was incinerated by the enemy. The entire work is an example of a military story, which has absorbed significant elements of folklore. The story is not always accurate in conveying historical facts, but it correctly conveys the mood of society of that time and is distinguished by its liveliness, brightness and dramatic narrative.
6. " Life of Alexander Nevsky" Genre originality, the image of Alexander.
"J.Al.N." written at the end of the 13th century. in Vladimir-Suzdal Rus' by an unknown author who personally knew the prince. Subsequently, when Alexander Yaroslavovich was canonized, the secular narrative was supplemented with hagiographical legendary sentiments. In its form, the life is a work in which a military story and a princely life are fused together. In modern times, the life served as a source for a number of works of art: historical paintings by N.K. were written based on its plot. Roerich, A.K. Gorbunova, P.D. Corina; CM. Eisenstein created a historical film.
This work of the hagiographic genre is a princely biography, combining the features of a life and a military story. The composition of the “Life” dates back to the 80s. XIII century and are associated with the names of Dmitry Alexandrovich, son of Alexander Nevsky, and Metropolitan Kirill.
The author of the life, a scribe from the entourage of Metropolitan Kirill, based on his memories and stories of Alexander Nevsky’s comrades-in-arms, creates a biography of the prince, glorifying his military valor and political successes. Compiling a complete biography of Prince Alexander was not part of the author’s tasks. The content of the life is a brief summary of the main, from the author’s point of view, episodes of his life, which allow us to recreate the heroic image of the prince, preserved in the memory of his contemporaries: the prince - a warrior, a valiant commander and an intelligent politician. Descriptions of the famous victories of Alexander Nevsky in the battle on the Neva and on the ice of Lake Peipus, his diplomatic relations with the Horde and the Pope are the central episodes of his life. The story about the actions of the prince is characterized by abstraction. There is not a single annual date in the life, the author almost does not name historical names, especially when it comes to opponents; he is not always accurate in his presentation of events. The narrative is full of biblical analogies, quotes, and literary parallels. The eternal, timeless nature of Alexander’s activities is emphasized, his deeds are given majesty and monumentality. The author constantly reminds of the prince’s heavenly protection. The idea of the sacredness of princely power determines the features of the artistic structure of the biography of Alexander Nevsky.
« Life of Alexander Nevsky", written shortly after the death of the prince (in 1263), creates perfect image ruler, defender of his fatherland from military and ideological attacks by external enemies. It does not fit into the canons of hagiographic literature, and this was understood by the ancient Russian scribes, who included it primarily in the chronicles, and only in the 16th century. it was included in the “Great Cheti-Menaia” of Macarius. The life describes in detail the course of the battle of July 15, 1240, much attention is paid to the exploits of Alexander and his brave heroic warriors. Alexander himself shows extraordinary courage and fearlessness in battle. The Alexandrov warriors were distinguished by their courage and bravery. Characteristic feature life is the constant presence of the author-storyteller. Thus, “The Life of Alexander Nevsky” reveals a close connection with both hagiographic literature and military stories.
Literature of the Russian pre-renaissance. General characteristics.
Possibility to consider the period from the end XIV to the end XV V. like Russian time Pre-Renaissance has been substantiated in research Likhacheva. Russian literature since the X-XI centuries. was in close ties with the cultures of Byzantium and the South Slavs. The Mongol-Tatar invasion slowed down and interrupted these connections (although not completely), but already in the second half of the 14th century. they are being revived with extraordinary intensity, and Rus' finds itself involved in the process of cultural upsurge that all European states are experiencing during this period and which led some of them to the Renaissance itself.
If the Renaissance discovered man, recognized the value, complexity and individuality of the human personality, then in the Pre-Renaissance era this discovery was only just being prepared. And as the first step on this path, a keen interest in a person’s emotional life arises, not only in the narrow sphere of prayerful ecstasy or tenderness, but also in the whole variety of feelings that arise in various life situations. The writers of this time had not yet discovered the individual human character, but they began to willingly depict human emotions and they themselves, together with their heroes, cry, admire, and are indignant. These new interests, in turn, required the development of a new, more flexible, more expressive language style. This style was acquired in the 13th-14th centuries. widespread in the literature of Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia and, finally, in Russian literature, in relation to which it is usually called the style of the second South Slavic influence.
In the Pre-Renaissance era, the process of secularization of culture intensified. More free-thinking is manifested in ideology, and various heretical views are becoming widespread. Literature more boldly departs from the canons in the system of genres, in the type of plots, in the nature of the image; The reader is increasingly attracted by the entertaining nature of the narrative and the novelty of plot collisions. All these processes are observed in Russian literature of the 15th century.
The Pre-Renaissance era was also characterized by an increased interest in the world, alien to the barriers of national and even religious limitations. It is enough to mention in this regard that in Rus' at the turn of the XV-XVI centuries. translations are made from Latin that Rus', although to a lesser extent than Western Europe, became acquainted with ancient culture, and in particular with ancient epic and ancient mythology. All these examples indicate the similarity of cultural trends in a number of European countries and, therefore, the legitimacy of raising the question of the Russian Pre-Renaissance.
Related information.
This is the literature of a single ancient Russian nationality. The literature of this period is also called the literature of Kievan Rus. The Kiev state was one of the most advanced states of its time. The Russian land was famous for its rich cities. In the 12th century. it had more than 200 cities. The oldest Russian cities included Kyiv, Novgorod, Chernigov, and Smolensk. In Kyiv and other Russian cities from the end of the 11th century in Kyiv, the sister of Prince Yaroslav, Anna, established a women's school, the first in Europe. Literature XI-XII centuries. was the basis on which the subsequent development of the literatures of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus took place. The main monuments of this period are associated with Kyiv. The most important genres of literature are created here: the chronicle, the historical story, the life, the word.
2. Literature of the period of feudal fragmentation and unification of North-Eastern Rus' (XII-XV centuries)
The process of feudal fragmentation led to the collapse of Kievan Rus and the formation of new political and cultural centers: Vladimir, Moscow, Novgorod, Tver principalities. Literature develops separately in each of them. But during the period of the struggle against the Tatar-Mongols, literature called for the unification of all forces to fight against the enemies. The most significant literary monuments of this period are “The Prayer of Daniel the Prisoner”, “The Tale of the Devastation of Ryazan by Batu”, “Zadonshchina”, “Walking across the Three Seas”, “The Tale of Peter and Fevronia”.
3. Literature of the period of the centralized Russian state (XVI-XVII centuries)
During this period, the literature of the emerging Russian nation was created. The church worldview is giving way to a secular one, and a more widespread democratic readership is appearing. Literary genres are becoming more democratic in both form and content. Artistic fiction emerges, which until the 17th century. was not in the literature. Literature of the 17th century was mainly of a journalistic nature, reflecting the ideological positions of the warring parties (Correspondence between Tsar Ivan the Terrible and Prince Andrei Kurbsky). The literature of this period is characterized by the development of the story, presented in its various genre exploits: hagiographical (“The Tale of Juliania Lazarevskaya”), historical (“The Tale of the Azov Siege of the Don Cossacks”), everyday (“The Tale of Woe and Misfortune”), satirical (“The Tale of Shemyakin’s Court”, “The Tale of Ersha Ershovich”, “The Tale of Hawkmoth”).
An outstanding writer of the 17th century. was Archpriest Avvakum, author of the Life.
In addition to democratic literature in the 17th century. High literature continues to develop, and a special style emerges, called “Baroque.” Baroque was an aristocratic phenomenon, opposed to Russian democratic and satirical literature. This trend embraced court poetry and drama.
Ticket number 9. Main themes and genres of ancient Russian literature.
So, the literature of Ancient Rus' had very special circumstances of its origin, a special place and functions in the life of society. It was they who were ahead of the system of original genres. In fact, it was “one theme and one plot. This plot is world history, and this theme is the meaning of human life,” as D.S. Likhachev noted
The genres of ancient Russian literature were as follows: chronicles and chronographs - about the history of the world, chronicles - about the history of Rus'; further - countless biblical books and paleys (from the Greek palaios - ancient) - the same description of biblical events, but with reasoning and interpretation. Usedpopularitylives saints - large collection biographies of Christian ascetics, famous for their piety and asceticism, or who died for their religious beliefs at the hands of pagans or infidels, and patericon - collections of short, often action-packed stories from the lives of monks TeachingsAnd " words" representedgenresolemneloquence: firstdenouncedvices, welcomedvirtuesAndin every possible wayinstructedbelieversVChristianmorality; Ainsecond, pronounceableVchurchesintimeservices, opened upreligioussymbols and meanings of church holidays. RelativesthemwereAnddogmaticessays - Theywere engagedtheologicalquestionsAnddenouncedheresies. Moderngenre " travelnotes" hadVancestorswalking - storiesOtravelV " Holyland", T about Palestine: the pilgrims, their authors, not only retold biblical legends associated with the places they walked through, but also described the architecture, nature and customs of those places. Manygenresnewtime - such, Howdomesticnovelorstory, drama Turgy - will appear only much later - in the 15th or even 17th century, but this does not mean at all that the ancient Russian reader was not interested in either emotional prose or descriptions of the life of ordinary people. The everyday story-anecdote, love song, fairy tale, legend and heroic epic existed in Ancient Rus', but not at all in written form, that is, in the form of folklore, not literature: it was too irrational to write down accessible and well-known works of oral literature on expensive parchment through the efforts of a few scribes busy with more necessary Christian and historical literature. Unfortunately, we cannot completely reconstruct ancient folklore, but its later examples that have come down to us and its mentions in the literature of older times give us undoubted evidence of the presence of an extensive system of genres of ancient Russian folklore. The system of literary genres was not specific to only one ancient Russian literature: in Byzantium in the 9th-10th centuries. we will find almost the same genres in the same proportions. Secular genres - romance novel and lyric poetry - will appear in Byzantine literature somewhat later, in the 11th-12th centuries, but under the conditions of strict selection of literature for translation, books of this kind were practically not represented in Ancient Rus', with rare exceptions: for example, the epic poem about Digenis Akritos. Please payattentionmoreononeimportantcircumstance: right up totoXVIIV. VliteratureNotallowedliteraryfiction. Underfictionshouldunderstandfictionhimselfauthor: scribeAlwaysonlyrecording Al for witnesses of events will appear in Russian literature no earlier than the 15th century, although he will still be disguised as a hero of a distant country or a long time ago. Onlyonegenreadmittedfrankfiction, ButonlyForTogo, toillustratewhich one- oridea- this is an apologist, or a parable.
Ticket number 10. Structure and plots of the Old Russian chronicle.
Ticket number 11. Canon of Old Russian Life. Evolution of the genre.
The spiritual reserve that Ancient Rus' had at its disposal did not have enough resources to develop an inclination towards philosophical thinking. But she found plenty of material on which feeling and imagination could work. This was the life of the Russian people, who, following the example of Eastern Christian ascetics, devoted themselves to the fight against the temptations of the world. Old Russian society was very sensitive and sympathetic to such ascetics, just as the ascetics themselves very receptively adopted Eastern models. Perhaps both did so for the same reason: the temptations of their Russian life were too elementary or too difficult to obtain, and people love to struggle with an intractable or demanding life. The lives and biographies of such ascetics became the favorite reading of the ancient Russian literate person. Lives describe the lives of holy princes and princesses, the highest hierarchs of the Russian Church, then its subordinate servants, archimandrites, abbots, simple monks, most rarely people from the white clergy, most often the founders and ascetics of monasteries, who came from different classes of ancient Russian society, including from peasants. The people about whom the lives are narrated were all more or less historical figures who attracted the attention of contemporaries or the memories of immediate posterity, otherwise we would not have known about their existence. But a life is not a biography or a heroic epic. It differs from the latter in that it describes real life only with a certain selection of material, in the required typical, one might say stereotypical, manifestations. The hagiographer, the compiler of hagiography, has his own style, his own literary techniques, and his own special task. The Life is an entire literary structure, in some details reminiscent of an architectural building. It usually begins with a lengthy, solemn preface, expressing a view of the significance of holy lives for human society. Then the activity of the saint is narrated, destined from infancy, sometimes even before birth, to become God's chosen vessel of high talents; this activity is accompanied by miracles during life, and is sealed by miracles after the death of the saint. The life ends with a word of praise to the saint, usually expressing gratitude to the Lord God for sending down to the world a new lamp that illuminated the path of life for sinful people. All these parts are combined into something solemn, liturgical: the life was intended to be read in church at the all-night vigil on the eve of the saint’s memorial day. The Life is addressed not to the listener or reader, but to the one praying. It more than instructs: while instructing, it tunes, strives to turn a soulful moment into a prayerful inclination. It describes an individual personality, personal life, but this chance is valued not in itself, not as one of the diverse manifestations of human nature, but only as the embodiment of an eternal ideal. Byzantine lives served as a model for Russian hagiography, but already in the initial period of the development of Old Russian literature, two types of hagiographic texts appeared: princely lives and monastic lives. Princely lives generally gravitate towards a hagiographical scheme. This is, for example, created at the beginning of the 12th century. monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor, life entitled “Reading about Boris and Gleb.” This work was written according to the strict requirements of classical Byzantine hagiography. Nestor, following tradition, spoke about the childhood of princes Boris and Gleb, about Boris’s marriage, and about how the brothers prayed to God. The purpose of life is to clearly show in individual existence that everything that the commandments require of a person is not only doable, but has been fulfilled more than once, and therefore is obligatory for conscience, for of all the demands of goodness, only the impossible is not necessary for conscience. A work of art in its literary form, a life, treats its subject didactically: it is edification in living persons, and therefore living persons are instructive types in it. The Life is not a biography, but an edifying panegyric within the framework of a biography, just as the image of a saint in the Life is not a portrait, but an icon. Therefore, among the main sources of ancient Russian history, the lives of the saints of Ancient Rus' occupy their special place. The Old Russian Chronicle notes current phenomena in the life of their country; stories and legends convey individual events that had a particularly strong impact on the life or imagination of the people; monuments of law, legal codes and charters formulate general legal norms or establish private legal relations that arose from them: only ancient Russian life gives us the opportunity to observe personal life in Ancient Rus', although raised to an ideal, reworked into a type from which the correct hagiographer tried to shake everything off petty concrete accidents of personal existence that impart such vital freshness to a simple biography. His stereotypical details about the providential upbringing of the saint, about the fight against demons in the desert - are requirements of the hagiographical style, not biographical data. He didn't hide it. Knowing nothing about the origin and early life of his saint, he sometimes openly began his story: but from what city or village and from what parents such a lamp came, we have not found in the scriptures, God knows, but it is enough for us to know that he is a citizen of heavenly Jerusalem, his father is God, and his mother is the holy church, his relatives are all-night tearful prayers and incessant sighs, his neighbors are tireless desert labors. Finally, the posthumous miracles of a saint that often accompany the life of a saint, especially those who labored in a desert monastery, are very valuable for historiography. This is often a kind of local chronicle of a remote corner, which has not left a trace in the general chronicle, or even in any written record. Such records of miracles were sometimes kept on behalf of the abbot and the brethren by specially appointed persons, with interviews of those healed and testimonies, with the circumstances of the case written down, being more likely business documents, books of formal protocols, than literary works. Despite the fact that they sometimes vividly reflect the life of the local world, flowing to the grave or tomb of the saint with its needs and illnesses, family troubles and social troubles. Old Russian hagiography tried to perpetuate in their lives the memory of all Russian ascetics of piety for the edification of posterity; Several lives and individual legends have been compiled about some of them. Not all of these stories have reached us; many pass from hand to hand locally, remaining unknown to Russian church historiography. There are up to 250 hagiographic works about more than 170 ancient Russian saints. I present these figures to give you some idea of the available stock of Russian hagiography. The ancient Russian lives and tales that have reached us, mostly not yet published, are read in many lists - a sign that they were part of the most beloved reading of Ancient Rus'. This prevalence is explained by the literary features of hagiography.
Is it possible today to imagine a life in which there are no books, newspapers, magazines, or notebooks? Modern man is so accustomed to the fact that everything important and requiring organization should be written down, that without this knowledge would be unsystematized and fragmentary. But this was preceded by a very difficult period that lasted for millennia. Literature consisted of chronicles, chronicles and lives of saints. Works of fiction began to be written much later.
When did ancient Russian literature emerge?
The prerequisite for the emergence of Old Russian literature was various forms of oral folklore and pagan legends. Slavic writing arose only in the 9th century AD. Until this time, knowledge and epics were passed on from mouth to mouth. But the baptism of Rus' and the creation of the alphabet by Byzantine missionaries Cyril and Methodius in 863 opened the way for books from Byzantium, Greece, and Bulgaria. Christian teaching was transmitted through the first books. Since there were few written sources in ancient times, the need arose to rewrite books.
ABC contributed cultural development Eastern Slavs. Since the Old Russian language is similar to the Old Bulgarian, the Slavic alphabet, which was used in Bulgaria and Serbia, could be used in Rus'. The Eastern Slavs gradually adopted a new writing system. In ancient Bulgaria, by the 10th century, culture had reached its peak of development. Works by writers John the Exarch of Bulgaria, Clement, and Tsar Simeon began to appear. Their works also influenced ancient Russian culture.
The Christianization of the ancient Russian state made writing a necessity, because without it it was impossible public life, public, international relations. The Christian religion is not able to exist without teachings, solemn words, lives, and the life of the prince and his court, relations with neighbors and enemies were reflected in the chronicles. Translators and copyists appeared. They were all church people: priests, deacons, monks. Rewriting took a lot of time, and there were still few books.
Old Russian books were written mainly on parchment, which was obtained after special processing of pork, calf, and lamb skin. In the ancient Russian state, handwritten books were called “harateynye”, “harati” or “veal books”. The durable but expensive material also made books expensive, which is why it was so important to find a replacement for pet leather. Foreign paper, called “overseas”, appeared only in the 14th century. But until the 17th century, to write valuable state documents used parchment.
Ink was made by combining old iron (nails) and tannin (growths on oak leaves called “ink nuts”). To make the ink thick and shiny, cherry and molasses glue was poured into it. Ferrous ink, which has a brown tint, was distinguished by its increased durability. To add originality and decorativeness, colored ink, gold or silver sheets were used. Used for writing goose feathers, the tip of which was cut off, and a cut was made in the middle of the tip.
What century does ancient Russian literature belong to?
The first ancient Russian written sources date back to the 9th century. Old Russian state Kievan Rus occupied a place of honor among other European states. Written sources contributed to the strengthening of the state and its development. The Old Russian period ends in the 17th century.
Periodization of Old Russian literature.
- Written sources of Kievan Rus: the period covers the 11th century and the beginning of the 13th century. At this time, the main written source was the chronicle.
- Literature of the second third of the 13th century and the end of the 14th century. The Old Russian state is going through a period of fragmentation. Dependence on the Golden Horde set back the development of culture many centuries ago.
- The end of the 14th century, which is characterized by the unification of the principalities of the northeast into one Moscow principality, the emergence of appanage principalities, and the beginning of the 15th century.
- XV - XVI centuries: this is the period of centralization of the Russian state and the emergence of journalistic literature.
- The 16th - end of the 17th century is the New Age, which marks the emergence of poetry. Now works are released with an indication of the author.
The oldest of famous works Russian literature is the Ostromir Gospel. It received its name from the name of the Novgorod mayor Ostromir, who ordered the scribe Deacon Gregory to translate it. During 1056 - 1057 the translation has been completed. This was the mayor's contribution to the St. Sophia Cathedral, erected in Novgorod.
The second gospel is the Arkhangelsk Gospel, which was written in 1092. From the literature of this period, a lot of hidden and philosophical meaning is hidden in the Izbornik of Grand Duke Svyatoslav of 1073. The Izbornik reveals the meaning and idea of mercy, the principles of morality. The basis philosophical thought The Gospels and Apostolic Epistles came to Kievan Rus. They described the earthly life of Jesus and also described his miraculous resurrection.
Books have always been the source of philosophical thought. Translations from Syriac, Greek, and Georgian penetrated into Rus'. There were also translations from European countries: England, France, Norway, Denmark, Sweden. Their works were revised and rewritten by ancient Russian scribes. Old Russian philosophical culture is a reflection of mythology and has Christian roots. Among the monuments of ancient Russian writing, the “Messages of Vladimir Monomakh” and “Prayers of Daniil the Zatochnik” stand out.
The first ancient Russian literature is characterized by high expressiveness and richness of language. To enrich the Old Church Slavonic language, they used the language of folklore and the performances of orators. Two literary styles arose, one of which was “High,” which was solemn, and the other, “Low,” which was used in everyday life.
Genres of literature
- lives of saints, include biographies of bishops, patriarchs, founders of monasteries, saints (created in compliance with special rules and required a special style of presentation) - patericon (life of the first saints Boris and Gleb, Abbess Feodosia),
- lives of saints, which are presented from a different point of view - apocrypha,
- historical works or chronicles (chronographs) - brief records of the history of ancient Rus', Russian chronograph of the second half of the 15th century,
- works about fictional travels and adventures - walking.
Genres of Old Russian literature table
The central place among the genres of ancient Russian literature is occupied by chronicle writing, which developed over the centuries. These are weather records of the history and events of Ancient Rus'. The chronicle is a preserved written chronicle (from the word - summer, records begin “in the summer”) monument from one or several lists. The names of the chronicles are random. This may be the name of the scribe or the name of the area where the chronicle was written. For example, Lavrentyevskaya - on behalf of the scribe Lavrenty, Ipatyevskaya - after the name of the monastery where the chronicle was found. Often chronicles are collections that combine several chronicles at once. The source for such vaults were protographs.
The chronicle that served as the basis for the vast majority of ancient Russian written sources is the Tale of Bygone Years of 1068. A common feature chronicles of the XII - XV centuries is that the chroniclers no longer consider political events in their chronicles, but focus on the needs and interests of “their principality” (Chronicle of Veliky Novgorod, Pskov chronicle, chronicle of the Vladimir-Suzdal land, Moscow chronicle), and not events of the Russian land as a whole, as it was before
What work do we call a monument of ancient Russian literature?
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” of 1185-1188 is considered the main monument of ancient Russian literature, describing not so much an episode from the Russian-Polovtsian wars, but rather reflecting events on an all-Russian scale. The author connects Igor’s failed campaign of 1185 with strife and calls for unification for the sake of saving his people.
Sources of personal origin are heterogeneous verbal sources that are united common origin: private correspondence, autobiographies, travel descriptions. They reflect the author’s direct perception of historical events. Such sources first appeared in the princely period. These are the memoirs of Nestor the chronicler, for example.
In the 15th century, the heyday of chronicle writing began, when voluminous chronicles and short chroniclers coexisted, telling about the activities of one princely family. Two parallel directions emerge: the official and oppositional point of view (the church and princely descriptions).
Here we should talk about the problem of falsifying historical sources or creating documents that never existed before, making amendments to original documents. For this purpose, entire systems of methods were developed. In the 18th century, interest in historical science was universal. This resulted in the appearance of a large number of counterfeits, presented in an epic form and passed off as the original. A whole industry is emerging in Russia for falsifying ancient sources. We study burned or lost chronicles, for example the Lay, from surviving copies. This is how copies were made by Musin-Pushkin, A. Bardin, A. Surakadzev. Among the most mysterious sources is the “Book of Veles,” found on the Zadonsky estate in the form of wooden tablets with text scratched on them.
Old Russian literature of the 11th – 14th centuries is not only teachings, but also rewriting from Bulgarian originals or translation from Greek of a huge amount of literature. The large-scale work done allowed ancient Russian scribes to get acquainted with the main genres and literary monuments Byzantium.
They give us chronicles. Already the first acquaintance with Byzantine historical chronicles gave Russian scribes the idea of creating something similar for their country. They began to collect ancient legends and keep annual records of current events. This primary material was combined and edited in general works - chronicles.
The compilation of a new chronicle was always associated with some important event in political or church life - the beginning of the reign of the Grand Duke, the arrival of a new metropolitan or bishop, the construction of a temple. It is believed that the impetus for the beginning of Russian chronicle writing - the compilation of the Most Ancient Code - was the consecration of the St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv. The residence of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, the Metropolitan of Kyiv, was located near the cathedral.
Changes in the political situation, as well as the vicissitudes of the intra-church struggle, pushed for the creation of new large chronicle monuments - the Abbot's Code Nikon(70s of the 11th century) and the Initial Code (1093-1095). Finally, the monk of the Kiev Pechersk Monastery got down to business Nestor.
The Tale of Bygone Years
Around 1113, Nestor finished his famous work, “The Tale of Bygone Years.” The name of the Nestor Chronicle comes from the first words of the text: “This is the tale of bygone years, where the Russian land came from, who began to reign first in Kyiv, and where the Russian land came from.” The words “Behold the message of bygone years...” translated from the Old Russian language mean approximately the following: “Here is the story of the past years...”
Having creatively revised the works of his predecessors and supplemented them with his own materials (annual records about the events of recent years, information from Byzantine chronicles, treaties between Rus' and the Greeks, folk legends about the first Kyiv rulers, etc.), Nestor created a holistic and fascinating literary work. He presented a wide panorama of world (biblical) history, against the background of which the historical existence of the Eastern Slavs begins and the Kievan state is formed. Late summer scribes treated Nestor's work with great respect. They usually placed it in the initial part of their chronicles.
The Tale of Bygone Years contains detailed story about the choice of faith by Prince Vladimir. The prince’s envoys say: “And we came to the Greeks, and led us to where they serve their God, and we did not know whether we were in heaven or on earth: for there is no such spectacle and such beauty on earth, and we do not know how to tell about this."
A Word on Law and Grace
Almost all the monuments of literature of Kievan Rus that have survived to this day are imbued with a living religious feeling and filled with prayerful appeals to God and the saints. Some are distinguished by originality of thoughts and vivid artistic form. Among such works is the famous “Sermon on Law and Grace” by Metropolitan Hilarion.
“The Tale of Law and Grace” is the first author’s work of ancient Russian literature known to us. Basically, this is an Easter sermon, delivered by Hilarion, apparently in 1049. Hence the festive elation of tone, and the special, enthusiastic mood that permeates the entire work. He persistently pursues the idea of the spiritual independence of Rus', “which is known and heard by all four ends of the earth.”
The desire to establish the spiritual independence of Rus', clearly noticeable in Hilarion’s “Sermon on Law and Grace,” was also manifested in the veneration of the first Russian saints - Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich, his sons Boris and Gleb, the founders of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Antonia And Feodosia. According to church rules of that era, for posthumous canonization three conditions were necessary: miracles at the tomb, incorruptibility of the relics and the presence of a life - a story about the life and exploits of the saint, about the miracles he performed. Material from the site
Lesson for children
The complete opposite of the loud rhetoric of “The Word of Law and Grace” was deeply personal in nature, filled with religious and philosophical reflections, “Instructions for Children” by Vladimir Monomakh. It was preserved in a single copy as part of the Laurentian Chronicle, recorded in 1096.