The main features of works of ancient Russian literature. Seven centuries of ancient Russian literature: general features, spirituality and genres

1. Ancient literature is filled with deep patriotic content, the heroic pathos of serving the Russian land, state, and homeland.
2. main topic ancient Russian literature — world history and the meaning of human life.
3. Ancient literature glorifies the moral beauty of the Russian person, capable of sacrificing what is most precious for the sake of the common good - life. It expresses a deep belief in the power, the ultimate triumph of good and the ability of man to elevate his spirit and defeat evil.
4. A characteristic feature of Old Russian literature is historicism. The heroes are mainly historical figures. Literature strictly follows fact.
5. Feature artistic creativity The ancient Russian writer also has the so-called “literary etiquette”. This is a special literary and aesthetic regulation, the desire to subordinate the very image of the world to certain principles and rules, to establish once and for all what should be depicted and how.
6. Old Russian literature appears with the emergence of the state, writing and is based on book Christian culture and developed forms of oral poetic creativity. At this time, literature and folklore were closely connected. Literature often perceived plots artistic images, visual arts folk art.
7. The originality of ancient Russian literature in the depiction of the hero depends on the style and genre of the work. In relation to styles and genres, the hero is reproduced in the monuments of ancient literature, ideals are formed and created.
8. In ancient Russian literature, a system of genres was defined, within which the development of original Russian literature began. The main thing in their definition was the “use” of the genre, the “practical purpose” for which this or that work was intended.
9. The traditions of Old Russian literature are found in the works of Russian writers of the 18th-20th centuries.

TEST QUESTIONS AND TASKS

1. How does Academician D.S. characterize Likhachev ancient Russian literature? Why does he call it “one grandiose whole, one colossal work”?
2. What does Likhachev compare ancient literature with and why?
3. What are the main advantages of ancient literature?
4. Why would the artistic discoveries of literature of subsequent centuries be impossible without the works of ancient literature? (Think about what qualities of ancient literature were adopted by Russian literature of modern times. Give examples from works of Russian classics known to you.)
5. What did Russian poets and prose writers value and adopt from ancient literature? What A.S. wrote about her Pushkin, N.V. Gogol, A.I. Herzen, L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky, D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak?
6. What does ancient literature write about the benefits of books? Give examples of “praise of books” known in ancient Russian literature.
7. Why in ancient literature Did you have a high opinion of the power of words? What were they connected with, what did they rely on?
8. What is said about the word in the Gospel?
9. What do writers compare books to and why; why are books rivers, sources of wisdom, and what do the words mean: “if you diligently search for wisdom in the books, you will find great benefit for your soul”?
10. Name the monuments of ancient Russian literature known to you and the names of their scribes.
11. Tell us about the method of writing and the nature of ancient manuscripts.
12. Name the historical background for the emergence of ancient Russian literature and its specific features in contrast to modern literature.
13. What is the role of folklore in the formation of ancient literature?
14. Using vocabulary and reference material, briefly retell the history of the study of ancient monuments, write down the names of the scientists involved in their research and the stages of study.
15. What is the image of the world and man in the minds of Russian scribes?
16. Tell us about the depiction of man in ancient Russian literature.
17. Name the themes of ancient literature, using vocabulary and reference material, characterize its genres.
18. List the main stages in the development of ancient literature.

Read also the articles in the section “National identity of ancient literature, its origin and development.”

Old Russian(or Russian medieval, or ancient East Slavic) literature is the totality written works, written on the territory of Kievan and then Muscovite Rus' in the period from the 11th to the 17th centuries. Old Russian literature is common ancient literature of the Russian, Belarusian and Ukrainian peoples.

Map of Ancient Rus'
The largest researchers Old Russian literature are academicians Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev, Boris Aleksandrovich Rybakov, Alexey Aleksandrovich Shakhmatov.

Academician D.S. Likhachev
Old Russian literature was not the result fiction and had a close features .
1. Fiction was not allowed in ancient Russian literature, since fiction is a lie, and lies are sinful. That's why all works were of a religious or historical nature. The right to fiction was conceptualized only in the 17th century.
2. Due to the lack of fiction in ancient Russian literature there was no concept of authorship, since the works either reflected real historical events or were expositions of Christian books. Therefore, works of ancient Russian literature have a compiler, a copyist, but not an author.
3. Works of ancient Russian literature were created in accordance with etiquette, that is, according to certain rules. Etiquette was formed from ideas about how the course of events should unfold, how the hero should behave, and how the compiler of the work should describe what is happening.
4. Old Russian literature developed very slowly: over seven centuries, only a few dozen works were created. This was explained, firstly, by the fact that the works were copied by hand, and the books were not replicated, since before 1564 there was no printing in Rus'; secondly, the number of literate (reading) people was very small.

Genres Old Russian literature differed from modern ones.

In this article we will look at the features of Old Russian literature. The literature of Ancient Rus' was primarily church. After all, book culture in Rus' appeared with the adoption of Christianity. Monasteries became centers of writing, and the first literary monuments These are mainly works of a religious nature. Thus, one of the first original (that is, not translated, but written by a Russian author) works was the “Sermon on Law and Grace” by Metropolitan Hilarion. The author proves the superiority of Grace (the image of Jesus Christ is associated with it) over the Law, which, according to the preacher, is conservative and nationally limited.

Literature was created not for entertainment, but for teaching. Considering the features of ancient Russian literature, it should be noted that it is instructive. She teaches to love God and her Russian land; she creates images of ideal people: saints, princes, faithful wives.

Let us note one seemingly insignificant feature of ancient Russian literature: it was handwritten. Books were created in a single copy and only then copied by hand when it was necessary to make a copy or the original text became unusable over time. This gave the book special value and generated respect for it. In addition, for the Old Russian reader, all books traced their origins to the main one - the Holy Scriptures.

Since the literature of Ancient Rus' was fundamentally religious, the book was seen as a storehouse of wisdom, a textbook of righteous life. Old Russian literature is not fiction, but modern meaning this word. She does everything avoids fiction and strictly follows the facts. The author does not show his individuality; he hides behind the narrative form. He does not strive for originality; for an ancient Russian writer it is more important to stay within the framework of tradition, not to break it. Therefore, all lives are similar to one another, all biographies of princes or military stories are compiled according to a general plan, in compliance with the “rules”. When “The Tale of Bygone Years” tells us about Oleg’s death from his horse, this beautiful poetic legend sounds like a historical document; the author really believes that everything happened that way.

The hero of ancient Russian literature does not have no personality, no character in our view today. Man's destiny is in the hands of God. And at the same time, his soul acts as an arena for the struggle between good and evil. The first will win only when a person lives according to moral rules given once and for all.

Of course, in Russian medieval works we will not find either individual characters or psychologism - not because ancient Russian writers did not know how to do this. In the same way, icon painters created planar rather than three-dimensional images, not because they could not write “better”, but because they were faced with other artistic tasks: the face of Christ cannot be similar to the usual human face. An icon is a sign of holiness, not a depiction of a saint.

The literature of Ancient Rus' adheres to the same aesthetic principles: it creates faces, not faces, gives the reader sample correct behavior rather than depicting a person's character. Vladimir Monomakh behaves like a prince, Sergius of Radonezh behaves like a saint. Idealization is one of the key principles of ancient Russian art.

Old Russian literature in every possible way avoids mundaneness: she does not describe, but narrates. Moreover, the author does not narrate on his own behalf, he only conveys what is written in the sacred books, what he read, heard or saw. There can be nothing personal in this narrative: no manifestation of feelings, no individual manner. (“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” in this sense is one of the few exceptions.) Therefore, many works of the Russian Middle Ages anonymous, the authors do not even assume such immodesty - to put your name. And the ancient reader cannot even imagine that the word is not from God. And if God speaks through the mouth of the author, then why does he need a name, a biography? That is why the information available to us about ancient authors is so scarce.

At the same time, in ancient Russian literature a special national ideal of beauty, captured by ancient scribes. First of all, this is spiritual beauty, the beauty of the Christian soul. In Russian medieval literature, in contrast to Western European literature of the same era, the knightly ideal of beauty - the beauty of weapons, armor, and victorious battle - is much less represented. The Russian knight (prince) wages war for the sake of peace, and not for the sake of glory. War for the sake of glory and profit is condemned, and this is clearly seen in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” Peace is assessed as an unconditional good. The ancient Russian ideal of beauty presupposes a wide expanse, an immense, “decorated” earth, and it is decorated with temples, because they were created specifically for the exaltation of the spirit, and not for practical purposes.

The attitude of ancient Russian literature is also connected with the theme of beauty to oral and poetic creativity, folklore. On the one hand, folklore had pagan origin, therefore did not fit into the framework of the new, Christian worldview. On the other hand, he could not help but penetrate literature. After all, the written language in Rus' from the very beginning was Russian, and not Latin, as in Western Europe, and there was no impassable border between the book and the spoken word. Folk ideas about beauty and goodness also generally coincided with Christian ones; Christianity penetrated into folklore almost unhindered. Therefore, the heroic epic (epics), which began to take shape in the pagan era, presents its heroes both as patriotic warriors and as defenders of the Christian faith, surrounded by “filthy” pagans. Just as easily, sometimes almost unconsciously, ancient Russian writers use folklore images and stories.

The religious literature of Rus' quickly outgrew its narrow church framework and became truly spiritual literature, which created a whole system of genres. Thus, “The Sermon on Law and Grace” belongs to the genre of a solemn sermon delivered in church, but Hilarion not only proves the Grace of Christianity, but also glorifies the Russian land, combining religious pathos with patriotic ones.

Genre of life

The most important genre for ancient Russian literature was the hagiography, the biography of a saint. At the same time, the task was pursued, by telling about the earthly life of a saint canonized by the church, to create an image ideal person for the edification of all people.

IN " Lives of the Holy Martyrs Boris and Gleb"Prince Gleb appeals to his killers with a request to spare him: “Do not cut the ear, which is not yet ripe, filled with the milk of goodness! Do not cut the vine, which is not yet fully grown, but bears fruit!” Abandoned by his squad, Boris in his tent “cries with a broken heart, but is joyful in his soul”: he is afraid of death and at the same time he realizes that he is repeating the fate of many saints who accepted martyrdom for their faith.

IN " Lives of Sergius of Radonezh“It is said that the future saint in his adolescence had difficulty comprehending literacy, lagged behind his peers in learning, which caused him a lot of suffering; when Sergius retired into the desert, a bear began to visit him, with whom the hermit shared his meager food, it happened that the saint gave the last piece of bread to the beast.

In the traditions of life in the 16th century, “ The Tale of Peter and Fevronia of Murom”, but it already sharply diverged from the canons (norms, requirements) of the genre and therefore was not included in the collection of lives of the “Great Chet-Minea” along with other biographies. Peter and Fevronia are real historical figures who reigned in Murom in the 13th century, Russian saints. The author of the 16th century produced not a hagiography, but an entertaining story, built on fairy-tale motifs, glorifying the love and loyalty of the heroes, and not just their Christian deeds.

A " Life of Archpriest Avvakum", written by himself in the 17th century, turned into a bright autobiographical work filled with authentic events and real people, living details, feelings and experiences of the hero-narrator, behind which stands the bright character of one of the spiritual leaders of the Old Believers.

Genre of teaching

Since religious literature was intended to educate true Christian, one of the genres was teaching. Although this is a church genre, close to a sermon, it was also used in secular (secular) literature, since the ideas of the people of that time about the correct, righteous life did not differ from the church ones. You know" Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh", written by him around 1117 "sitting on a sleigh" (shortly before his death) and addressed to children.

The ideal appears before us Old Russian prince. He cares about the welfare of the state and each of his subjects, guided by Christian morality. The prince's other concern is about the church. All earthly life should be considered as work to save the soul. This is the work of mercy and kindness, and military work, and mental work. Hard work is the main virtue in Monomakh’s life. He made eighty-three large campaigns, signed twenty peace treaties, studied five languages, he himself did what his servants and warriors did.

Chronicles

A significant, if not the largest, part of ancient Russian literature is works of historical genres that were included in the chronicles. The first Russian chronicle - "The Tale of Bygone Years""was created at the beginning of the 12th century. Its significance is extremely great: it was proof of Rus'’s right to state independence, independence. But if chroniclers could record recent events “according to the epics of this time,” reliably, then the events of pre-Christian history had to be restored from oral sources: legends , legends, sayings, geographical names. Therefore, the chroniclers turn to folklore. These are the legends about the death of Oleg, about Olga’s revenge on the Drevlyans, about Belgorod jelly, etc.

Already in The Tale of Bygone Years, two most important features of Old Russian literature appeared: patriotism and connections with folklore. Book-Christian and folklore-pagan traditions are closely intertwined in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.”

Elements of fiction and satire

Of course, ancient Russian literature was not unchanged throughout all seven centuries. We saw that over time it became more secular, elements of fiction intensified, and satirical motifs increasingly penetrated into literature, especially in the 16th-17th centuries. These are, for example, " The Tale of Misfortune", showing what troubles disobedience and the desire to “live as he pleases,” and not as his elders teach, can bring a person, and “ The Tale of Ersha Ershovich", ridiculing the so-called "voivode's court" in the tradition of a folk tale.

But in general, we can talk about the literature of Ancient Rus' as a single phenomenon, with its own end-to-end ideas and motives that have passed through 700 years, with its general aesthetic principles, with a stable system of genres.

In ancient Russian literature, which knew no fiction, historical in large or small ways, the world itself was presented as something eternal, universal, where events and people’s actions are determined by the very system of the universe, where the forces of good and evil are forever fighting, a world whose history is well known ( after all, for each event mentioned in the chronicle, it was indicated exact date- the time that has passed since the “creation of the world”!) and even the future is destined: prophecies about the end of the world, the “second coming” of Christ and Last Judgment waiting for all the people of the earth.

Obviously, this could not but affect literature: the desire to subordinate the very image of the world, to determine the canons by which this or that event should be described led to the very schematicism of ancient Russian literature that we talked about in the introduction. This sketchiness is called subordination to the so-called literary etiquette - D.S. Likhachev discusses its structure in the literature of Ancient Rus':

1) how this or that course of events should have taken place;

2) how you should have behaved actor according to your position;

3) How should a writer describe what is happening?

“What we have before us, therefore, is the etiquette of the world order, the etiquette of behavior and the etiquette of words,” he says.

To explain these principles, consider next example: in the life of a saint, according to the etiquette of behavior, it should have been told about the childhood of the future saint, about his pious parents, about how he was drawn to church from infancy, shunned games with peers, and so on: in any life this plot component is not only necessarily is present, but is also expressed in every life in the same words, that is, verbal etiquette is observed. Here, for example, are the opening phrases of several lives belonging to different authors and written in different time: Theodosius of Pechersk “with his soul drawn to the love of God, and going to God’s church all day long, listening to divine books with great attention, and also not approaching children playing, as is the custom, and abhorring their games.. . Therefore, devote yourself to the teaching of divine books... And soon all grammar will be forgotten"; Nifont of Novgorod “was given by his parents to study divine books. And soon I became completely unaccustomed to book teaching, and was not at all like children’s games with my peers, but was more devoted to the church of God and revered the divine scriptures to my heart’s content”; Varlaam Khutynsky “at the same time was given the ability to quickly teach divine books, and also soon indiscriminately [quickly] learn the divine scriptures... not for any reason shying away from some games or disgraces [spectacles], but even more so from reading the divine scriptures.”

The same situation is observed in the chronicles: descriptions of battles, posthumous characteristics of kings or church hierarchs are written using practically the same limited vocabulary.

The attitude towards the problem of authorship among the scribes of Ancient Rus' was also somewhat different from the modern one: for the most part, the name of the author was indicated only to verify events, in order to certify the reader of the authenticity of what was being described, and authorship itself had no value in the modern concept. Based on this, the situation is as follows: on the one hand, the majority of ancient Russian works anonymous: we do not know the name of the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” or of many other works, such as “The Tale of the Battle of Mamaev,” “The Tale of the Destruction of the Russian Land,” or “The Kazan History.” On the other hand, we encounter an abundance of so-called falsely inscribed monuments - its authorship is attributed to some famous person in order to make it more significant. In addition, the insertion into one’s works not only of individual phrases, but also of entire fragments was not considered plagiarism, but testified to the scribe’s erudition, high book culture and literary training.

So, getting acquainted with historical conditions and some principles of work of authors of the XI-XVII centuries. gives us the opportunity to appreciate the special style and methods of presentation of the ancient Russian scribes, who built their narrative according to accepted and justified canons: they introduced a fragment from exemplary works into the narration, demonstrating their erudition and describing events according to a certain stencil, following literary etiquette.

Poverty of details, everyday details, stereotypical characteristics, “insincerity” of the characters’ speeches - all these are not literary shortcomings at all, but precisely features of the style, which implied that literature is intended to tell only about the eternal, without going into passing everyday trifles and mundane details.

On the other hand, the modern reader especially appreciates the deviations from the canon that were periodically allowed by the authors: it was these deviations that made the narrative lively and interesting. These digressions were at one time given a terminological definition - “realistic elements”. Of course, this in no way correlates with the term “realism” - there are still seven centuries before it, and these are precisely anomalies, violations of the basic laws and trends of medieval literature under the influence of living observation of reality and the natural desire to reflect it.

Of course, despite the presence of a strict framework of etiquette, which significantly limited the freedom of creativity, ancient Russian literature did not stand still: it developed, changed styles, etiquette itself, its principles and means of its implementation changed. D. S. Likhachev in his book “Man in the Literature of Ancient Rus'” (Moscow, 1970) showed that each era had its own dominant style - either the style of monumental historicism of the 11th-13th centuries, or the expressive-emotional style of the 14th-19th centuries. XV centuries, then there was a return to the previous style of monumental historicism, but on a new basis - and the so-called “style of second monumentalism”, characteristic of the XVI century, arose.

Also, D. S. Likhachev considers several main directions leading to the development of ancient Russian literature into the literature of modern times: the increase in the personal element in literature and the individualization of style, the expansion of the social circle of people who can become heroes of works. The role of etiquette is gradually decreasing, and instead of schematic images of the conventional standards of a prince or saint, attempts appear to describe a complex individual character, its inconsistency and variability.

Here it is necessary to make one reservation: V. P. Adrianova-Peretz showed that understanding the complexity of human character, the subtlest psychological nuances was inherent in medieval literature already at the very early stages of its development, but was the norm for depiction in chronicles, stories, and lives there was still an image of etiquette, conventional characters depending on social status their owners.

The choice of plots or plot situations became wider, fiction appeared in literature; genres that do not have a primary need are gradually entering literature. Works of folk satire begin to be written down, chivalric novels are translated; moralizing, but essentially entertaining short stories - facets; in the 17th century syllabic poetry and dramaturgy emerge. In a word, by the 17th century. In literature, features of the literature of modern times are more and more revealed.

Any national literature has its own distinctive (specific) features.

Old Russian literature (DRL) is doubly specific, because in addition to national traits bears the features of the Middle Ages (XI - XVII centuries), which had a decisive influence on the worldview and human psychology of Ancient Rus'.

Two blocks of specific features can be distinguished.

The first block can be called general cultural, the second is most closely related to inner world personality of a person in the Russian Middle Ages.

Let's talk about the first block very briefly. Firstly, ancient Russian literature was handwritten. In the first centuries of Russian literary process the writing material was parchment (or parchment). It was made from the skin of calves or lambs and therefore it was called “veal” in Rus'. Parchment was an expensive material, it was used extremely carefully and the most important things were written on it. Later, paper appeared instead of parchment, which partly contributed, in the words of D. Likhachev, to “the breakthrough of literature to the masses.”

In Rus', three main types of writing successively replaced each other. The first (XI - XIV centuries) was called the charter, the second (XV - XVI centuries) - semi-charter, the third (XVII century) - cursive.

Since writing material was expensive, the book’s customers (large monasteries, princes, boyars) wanted the works that most interested them on various subjects and the time of their creation to be collected under one cover.

Works of ancient Russian literature are usually called monuments.

Monuments in Ancient Rus' functioned in the form of collections.

Particular attention should be paid to the second block of specific features of DRL.

1. The functioning of monuments in the form of collections is explained not only by the high price of the book. Old Russian man in his quest to acquire knowledge about the world around him, he strove for a kind of encyclopedicism. Therefore, ancient Russian collections often contain monuments of various themes and issues.

2. In the first centuries of the development of DRL, fiction had not yet emerged as an independent area of ​​creativity and social consciousness. Therefore, one and the same monument was simultaneously a monument of literature, a monument of historical thought, and a monument of philosophy, which existed in Ancient Rus' in the form of theology. It is interesting to know that, for example, Russian chronicles until the beginning of the 20th century were considered exclusively as historical literature. Only thanks to the efforts of Academician V. Adrianova-Peretz did the chronicles become the object of literary criticism.

At the same time, the special philosophical richness of ancient Russian literature in subsequent centuries of Russian literary development not only survive, but will actively develop and become one of the defining national features of Russian literature as such. This will allow Academician A. Losev to state with certainty: “Fiction is a storehouse of original Russian philosophy. In the prose works of Zhukovsky and Gogol, in the works of Tyutchev, Fet, Leo Tolstoy, Dostoevsky<...>basic ones are often developed philosophical problems, of course, in their specifically Russian, exclusively practical, life-oriented form. And these problems are resolved here in such a way that an unbiased and knowledgeable judge will call these solutions not just “literary” or “artistic,” but philosophical and ingenious.”

3. Old Russian literature was anonymous (impersonal) in nature, which is inextricably linked with another characteristic feature– collectivity of creativity. The authors of Ancient Rus' (often called scribes) did not seek to leave their name for centuries, firstly, due to Christian tradition(Scribe-monks often call themselves “foolish”, “sinful” monks who dared to become creators artistic word); secondly, due to the understanding of one’s work as part of an all-Russian, collective endeavor.

At first glance, this trait seems to indicate a poorly developed personal beginning in the Old Russian author compared to Western European masters artistic word. Even the name of the author of the brilliant “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is still unknown, while Western European medieval literature can “boast” of hundreds of great names. However, there can be no talk of the “backwardness” of ancient Russian literature or its “impersonality.” We can talk about its special national quality. Once D. Likhachev very accurately compared Western European literature with a group of soloists, and the Old Russian one with a choir. Really choral singing less beautiful than the performances of individual soloists? Is there really no manifestation in it? human personality?

4. The main character of ancient Russian literature is the Russian land. We agree with D. Likhachev, who emphasized that the literature of the pre-Mongol period is the literature of one theme - the theme of the Russian land. This does not mean at all that ancient Russian authors “refuse” to depict the experiences of an individual human personality, “get fixated” on the Russian land, depriving themselves of individuality and sharply limiting the “universal” significance of the DRL.

Firstly, ancient Russian authors always, even in the most tragic moments national history, for example, in the first decades of the Tatar-Mongol yoke, they sought through the richest Byzantine literature to join the highest achievements of the culture of other peoples and civilizations. Thus, in the 13th century, the medieval encyclopedias “Melissa” (“Bee”) and “Physiologist” were translated into Old Russian.

Secondly, and this is the most important thing, we must keep in mind that the personality of a Russian person and the personality of a Western European are formed on different ideological foundations: the Western European personality is individualistic, it is affirmed due to its special significance and exclusivity. This is due to the special course of Western European history, with the development of the Western Christian Church (Catholicism). A Russian person, by virtue of his Orthodoxy (belonging to Eastern Christianity - Orthodoxy), denies the individualistic (egoistic) principle as destructive both for the individual himself and for his environment. Russian classical literature - from the nameless scribes of Ancient Rus' to Pushkin and Gogol, A. Ostrovsky and Dostoevsky, V. Rasputin and V. Belov - depicts the tragedy of the individualistic personality and affirms its heroes on the path to overcoming the evil of individualism.

5. Old Russian literature did not know fiction. This refers to a conscious orientation towards fiction. The author and the reader absolutely believe in the truth of the literary word, even if we are talking about fiction from the point of view of a secular person.

A conscious attitude towards fiction will appear later. This will happen at the end of the 15th century during a period of exacerbation political struggle for leadership in the process of unification of primordially Russian lands. Rulers will also appeal to the unconditional authority of the book word. This is how the genre of political legend will arise. In Moscow there will appear: the eschatological theory “Moscow - the Third Rome”, which naturally took on a topical political overtones, as well as “The Tale of the Princes of Vladimir”. In Veliky Novgorod - “The Legend of the Novgorod White Cowl.”

6. In the first centuries of DRL, they tried not to depict everyday life for the following reasons. The first (religious): everyday life is sinful, its image prevents earthly man from directing his aspirations to the salvation of the soul. Second (psychological): life seemed unchanged. Both grandfather, father, and son wore the same clothes, weapons did not change, etc.

Over time, under the influence of the process of secularization, everyday life penetrates more and more into the pages of Russian books. This will lead to the emergence in the 16th century of the genre of everyday stories (“The Tale of Ulyany Osorgina”), and in the 17th century the genre of everyday stories will become the most popular.

7. DRL is characterized by a special attitude to history. The past is not only not separated from the present, but is actively present in it, and also determines the fate of the future. An example of this is “The Tale of Bygone Years”, “The Story of the Crime of the Ryazan Princes”, “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, etc.

8. Old Russian literature wore teacher character. This means that ancient Russian scribes sought, first of all, to enlighten the souls of their readers with the light of Christianity. In DRL, unlike Western medieval literature, there was never a desire to lure the reader with a wonderful fiction, to take him away from life’s difficulties. Adventurous translated stories will gradually penetrate into Russia from the beginning of the 17th century, when the Western European influence on Russian life becomes obvious.

So, we see that certain specific features of DID will gradually be lost over time. However, those characteristics of Russian national literature that determine the core of its ideological orientation will remain unchanged until the present time.

The problem of authorship of literary monuments of Ancient Rus' is directly related to the national specifics of the first centuries of the development of the Russian literary process. “The author’s principle,” noted D.S. Likhachev, “was muted in ancient literature.<…>The absence of great names in ancient Russian literature seems like a death sentence.<…>We are biased based on our ideas about the development of literature - ideas brought up<…>centuries when it flourished individual, personal art is the art of individual geniuses.<…>The literature of Ancient Rus' was not the literature of individual writers: it, like folk art, was supra-individual art. It was an art created through the accumulation of collective experience and making a huge impression with the wisdom of traditions and the unity of all - mostly nameless- writing.<…>Old Russian writers are not architects of free-standing buildings. These are city planners.<…>Every literature creates its own world, embodying the world of ideas of its contemporary society.” Hence, anonymous (personal) the nature of the creativity of ancient Russian authors is a manifestation of the national originality of Russian literature and in this regard namelessness“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” is not a problem.

Representatives of the skeptical school of literary criticism (the first half of the 19th century) proceeded from the fact that “backward” Ancient Rus' could not “give birth” to a monument of such a level of artistic perfection as “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.”

Philologist-orientalist O.I. Senkovsky, for example, was sure that the creator of the Lay imitated examples of Polish poetry of the 16th – 17th centuries, that the work itself could not be older than the time of Peter I, that the author of the Lay was a Galician who moved to Russia or was educated in Kyiv. The creators of “The Lay” were also called A.I. Musin-Pushkin (the owner of the collection with the text “Words”), and Ioliy Bykovsky (the one from whom the collection was purchased), and N.M. Karamzin as the most gifted Russian writer of the late 18th century.

Thus, the “Word” was represented literary hoax in the spirit of J. Macpherson, who allegedly discovered in the middle of the 18th century the works of the legendary Celtic warrior and singer Ossian, who according to legend lived in the 3rd century AD. in Ireland.

The traditions of the skeptical school in the 20th century were continued by the French Slavist A. Mazon, who initially believed that the “Word” was supposedly created by A.I. Musin-Pushkin to justify the aggressive policy of Catherine II on the Black Sea: “We have here a case when history and literature deliver their evidence at the right time.” In many ways, the Soviet historian A. Zimin agreed with A. Mazon, calling Ioliy Bykovsky the creator of the Lay.

The arguments of supporters of the authenticity of the Lay were very convincing. A.S. Pushkin: the authenticity of the monument is proven by “the spirit of antiquity, which cannot be imitated. Which of our writers in the 18th century could have had enough talent for this? V.K. Kuchelbecker: “in terms of talent, this deceiver would have surpassed almost all the Russian poets of that time, taken together.”

““Attacks of skepticism,” V.A. rightly emphasized. Chivilikhin, “were to some extent even useful - they revived scientific and public interest in the Lay, encouraged scientists to look more closely into the depths of time, and gave rise to research done with scientific care, academic objectivity and thoroughness.”

After disputes related to the time of creation of the “Word” and “Zadonshchina”, the overwhelming majority of researchers, even, ultimately, A. Mazon, came to the conclusion that the “Word” is a monument of the 12th century. Now the search for the author of the Lay has focused on the circle of contemporaries of the tragic campaign of Prince Igor Svyatoslavich, which took place in the spring of 1185.

V.A. Chivilikhin in his novel-essay “Memory” gives the most full list the alleged authors of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and indicates the names of the researchers who put forward these assumptions: “they named a certain “Grechin” (N. Aksakov), the Galician “wise scribe” Timofey (N. Golovin), “folk singer” (D. Likhachev) , Timofey Raguilovich (writer I. Novikov), “The notorious singer Mitus” (writer A. Yugov), “the thousandth Raguil Dobrynich” (V. Fedorov), some unknown court singer, close Grand Duchess Kyiv Maria Vasilkovna (A. Solovyov), “singer Igor” (A. Petrushevich), “alms-giver” of Grand Duke Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, chronicle Kochkar (American researcher S. Tarasov), unknown “wandering book singer” (I. Malyshevsky), Belovolod Prosovich (anonymous Munich translator of the Lay), the Chernigov voivode Olstin Aleksich (M. Sokol), the Kiev boyar Pyotr Borislavich (B. Rybakov), the likely heir of the family singer Boyan (A. Robinson), the nameless grandson of Boyan (M. Shchepkina), in relation to a significant part of the text - Boyan himself (A. Nikitin), mentor, adviser to Igor (P. Okhrimenko), an unknown Polovtsian storyteller (O. Suleimenov)<…>».

V.A. himself Chivilikhin is sure that the creator of the word was Prince Igor. At the same time, the researcher refers to a long-standing and, in his opinion, undeservedly forgotten report by the famous zoologist and at the same time an expert on the “Word” N.V. Charlemagne (1952). One of the main arguments of V. Chivilikhin is the following: “it was not for the singer or the warrior to judge the contemporary princes, to indicate what they should do; this is the prerogative of a person standing on the same social level with those to whom he addressed"