“The Tale of Bygone Years”: genre, compositional and stylistic originality. Stylistic originality of “The Tale of Bygone Years”

04.05.2019

Department of Literature

COURSE WORK

in the discipline "History of Russian Literature"

"The Tale of Bygone Years" - literary monument Ancient Rus'

Completed by a student

____________________________

Saint Petersburg

ABOUT THE CHAPTER:

Introduction 3

1. The history of the Russian chronicle “The Tale of Bygone Years”_ 6

2. “The Tale of Bygone Years” as a historical source and literary monument_ 11

3. Style originality"Tales of Bygone Years"_ 16

4. The significance of “The Tale of Bygone Years” in the literary aspect 19

Conclusion 21

List of used literature_ 22

Introduction

Relevance of the work . The main source of our knowledge about ancient Rus' is medieval chronicles. Currently, more than two hundred lists of chronicles are known. Most of them were published (in full or in the form of discrepancies to other lists) in Full meeting Russian chronicles. One of the most ancient and famous is “The Tale of Bygone Years” - a chronicle that got its name from the first words “This Tale of Bygone Years...” and tells about the events of Russian history in the mid-9th - early 12th centuries. According to the outstanding Russian scientist D.S. Likhachev, “The Tale of Bygone Years” with its world-historical introduction, with its broad desire to substantiate the place of the Russian people among other peoples of the world, with its special attention to the heroic, to military exploits, to the glory of the Russian weapons introduces us to the atmosphere of an epic folk-song attitude towards Russian history. In The Tale of Bygone Years we have before us a largely epic, poetic attitude towards native history. That is why “The Tale of Bygone Years” is not only a work of Russian historical thought, but also of Russian historical poetry. Poetry and history are in inextricable unity in it. Before us is a literary work and a monument to historical thought.”

Tradition names the monk Nestor of the Pechersk Monastery in Kyiv as the author of the Tale. For a long time it was believed that Nestor was the founder of Russian chronicle writing, but later it was established that chronicle codes existed even before him. “The Ancient”, “Nikon’s Code”, “Initial Code”.

The study of the “Tale” continues to this day, however, despite the significant body of literature devoted to this literary monument, researchers differ on many aspects of the appearance and interpretation of the chronicle. V.N. Tatishchev was the first in Russia to begin studying the chronicles. Having decided to create his grandiose “Russian History,” he turned to all the chronicles known in his time and found many new monuments. After V.N. Tatishchev, “The Tale of Bygone Years” was studied by A. Shletser. If V.N. Tatishchev worked in breadth, as it were, combining additional information from many lists in one text, and followed in the footsteps of the ancient chronicler - compiler, then Schletser worked in depth, identifying in the text itself a lot of typos, errors, and inaccuracies. Both research approaches, with all their external differences, had one similarity: the idea of a non-original form in which the Tale of Bygone Years has come down to us was consolidated in science. This is the great merit of both wonderful historians. The next major step was taken by the famous archaeographer P.M. Stroev. Both V.N. Tatishchev and A. Shletser imagined “The Tale of Bygone Years” as the creation of one chronicler, in in this case Nestor. P.M. Stroev expressed a completely new view of the chronicle as a set of several earlier chronicles and began to consider all the chronicles that have reached us as such sets. Thus, he opened the way not only to a more methodologically correct study of the chronicles and codes that have reached us, which have not reached us in their original form.

An extremely important step was taken by A.A. Shakhmatov, who showed that each of chronicle vaults, starting from the 11th century and ending with the 16th century, is not a random conglomeration of heterogeneous chronicle sources, but a historical work with its own political position, dictated by the place and time of creation. According to A.A. Shakhmatov, the chronicle, which is usually called the Tale of Bygone Years, was created in 1112 by Nestor - presumably the author of two famous hagiographic works - Readings about Boris and Gleb and the Life of Theodosius of Pechersk. Shakhmatov connected the history of chronicling with the history of the country. The opportunity arose to mutually verify the history of the state with the history of the source. Source data has become not an end in itself, but an essential aid in reconstructing the picture of the historical development of the entire people. And now, when starting to study a particular period, they first of all strive to analyze the question of how the chronicle and its information are connected with reality. The disadvantage of the approach developed by L.A. Shakhmatov, however, is that the critical analysis of the source actually boiled down to studying the history of its text. A large complex of problems related to the history of meanings and meanings that existed during the creation of this or that chronicle code remained outside the interests of the researcher. This gap was largely filled by the research of such remarkable scientists as: I.N. Danilevsky, V.M. Istrin, A.N. Nasonov, A.A. Likhachev, M.P. Pogodin and many others.

Target works – to show historical and artistic originality“The Tale of Bygone Years”, assess the significance of the “Tale” as a literary monument of Ancient Rus'.

1. The history of the Russian chronicle “The Tale of Bygone Years”

An analysis of the literature on the history of the appearance of “The Tale of Bygone Years” shows its debatability in science. At the same time, all publications about “The Tale” emphasize historical significance chronicles for the history and culture of Russia. Already in the very title of “The Tale of Bygone Years” there is an answer to the question about the purpose of the chronicle: to tell “where the Russian land came from, who began to reign first in Kyiv, and where the Russian land came from.” In other words, to tell about Russian history from its very beginning to the formation of the Orthodox state under the collective name Russian Land.

Revealing issues of chronicle terminology, I.N. Danilevsky wrote that traditionally chronicles in in a broad sense called historical works, the presentation of which is carried out strictly by year and is accompanied by chronographic (annual), often calendar, and sometimes chronometric (hourly) dates. In terms of species characteristics, they are close to Western European annals (from Latin annales libri - annual reports) and chronicles (from Greek chranihos - relating to time). In the narrow sense of the word, chronicles are usually called chronicle texts that have actually reached us, preserved in one or more copies that are similar to each other. But the scientific terminology in chronicles is largely arbitrary. This is due, in particular, to the “lack of clear boundaries and complexity of the history of chronicle texts”, to the “fluidity” of chronicle texts, allowing “gradual transitions from text to text without visible gradations of monuments and editions.” Until now, “in the study of chronicles, the use of terms is extremely vague.” At the same time, “any elimination of ambiguity in terminology should be based on the establishment of this ambiguity itself. It is impossible to agree on the use of terms without first finding out all the shades of their use in the past and present,” believes D.S. Likhachev.

According to M.I. Sukhomlinov, “all Russian chronicles are by the very name of “chronicles”, “chroniclers”, “vremenniki”, “tales of temporary years”, etc. expose their original form: none of these names would be appropriate for them if they did not indicate the time of each event, if summers and years did not occupy the same important place in them as the events themselves. In this respect, as in many others, our chronicles are similar not so much to Byzantine writers, but to those time books (annales) that were kept long ago, from the 8th century, in the monasteries of Roman and Germanic Europe - regardless of the historical examples of classical antiquity. The original basis of these annals was the Easter tables."

Most authors believe that the idea for the title of “The Tale of Bygone Years” belonged to Nestor, a scribe with a broad historical outlook and great literary talent: even before working on “The Tale of Bygone Years,” he wrote “The Life of Boris and Gleb” and “The Life of Theodosius of Pechersk.” In The Tale of Bygone Years, Nestor set himself a grandiose task: to decisively rework the story about the most ancient period of the history of Rus' - “where the Russian land came from.”

However, as A. A. Shakhmatov showed, “The Tale of Bygone Years” was preceded by other chronicles. The scientist cites, in particular, the following fact: “The Tale of Bygone Years,” preserved in the Laurentian, Ipatiev and other chronicles, differed significantly in the interpretation of many events from another chronicle that told about the same initial period of Russian history, the Novgorod First Chronicle of the younger edition. In the Novgorod Chronicle there were no texts of agreements with the Greeks; Prince Oleg was called the governor under the young Prince Igor; otherwise, it was told about the campaigns of Rus' against Constantinople, etc.

A. A. Shakhmatov came to the conclusion that the Novgorod First Chronicle in its initial part reflected a different chronicle code, which preceded the Tale of Bygone Years.

A prominent researcher of Russian chronicles, V. M. Istrin, undertook unsuccessful attempts find another explanation for the differences between the “Tale of Bygone Years” and the story of the First Novgorod Chronicle (that the Novgorod Chronicle allegedly abbreviated the “Tale of Bygone Years”). As a result, A. A. Shakhmatov’s conclusions were confirmed by many facts obtained both by himself and by other scientists.

The text of the “Tale” that interests us covers a long period - from ancient times to the beginning of the second decade of the 12th century. It is quite rightly believed that this is one of the oldest chronicle codes, the text of which was preserved by the chronicle tradition. No separate lists of him are known. On this occasion V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote: “In libraries, do not ask for the Initial Chronicle - they will probably not understand you and will ask again: “What list of the chronicle do you need?” Then you, in turn, will be perplexed. So far, not a single manuscript has been found in which the Initial Chronicle would be placed separately in the form in which it came from the pen of the ancient compiler. In all known lists it merges with the story of its successors, which in later vaults usually reaches the end of the 16th century.” . In different chronicles, the text of the Tale reaches different years: to 1110 (Lavrentievsky and lists close to it) or to 1118 (Ipatievsky and lists close to it).

At the initial stage of studying the chronicles, researchers proceeded from the fact that the discrepancies found in the lists were a consequence of distortion of the source text during repeated rewriting. Based on this, for example, A.L. Schletser set the task of recreating the “purified Nestor.” An attempt to correct the accumulated mechanical errors and rethink the chronicle text, however, was unsuccessful. As a result of the work done, A.L. himself Schletser became convinced that over time the text was not only distorted, but also corrected by copyists and editors. Nevertheless, the non-original form in which The Tale of Bygone Years has reached us was proven. This actually raised the question of the need to reconstruct the original form of the chronicle text.

Having compared all the lists of chronicles available to him, A.A. Shakhmatov identified discrepancies and so-called common places inherent in the chronicles. Analysis of the detected discrepancies and their classification made it possible to identify lists with coinciding discrepancies. The researcher grouped the lists by edition and put forward a number of complementary hypotheses that explain the occurrence of discrepancies. A comparison of hypothetical codes has revealed a number of common features inherent in some of them. This is how the supposed source texts were recreated. At the same time, it turned out that many fragments of the chronicle presentation were borrowed from very early codes, which, in turn, made it possible to move on to the reconstruction of the oldest Russian chronicles. Conclusions A.A. Shakhmatov received full confirmation when the Moscow arch of 1408 was found, the existence of which was predicted by the great scientist. IN in full the path that A.A. took Shakhmatov, became clear only after the publication by his student M.D. Priselkov's workbooks for his teacher. Since then, the entire history of the study of chronicles has been divided into two periods: pre-Shakhmatova and modern.

During editing, the original text (the first edition of The Tale of Bygone Years) was changed so much that A.A. Shakhmatov came to the conclusion that its reconstruction was impossible. As for the texts of the Laurentian and Ipatiev editions of the Tale (they are usually called the second and third editions, respectively), then, despite later alterations in subsequent codes, Shakhmatov managed to determine their composition and presumably reconstruct it. It should be noted that Shakhmatov hesitated in assessing the stages of work on the text of the Tale of Bygone Years. Sometimes, for example, he believed that in 1116 Sylvester only rewrote Nestor’s text of 1113 (and the latter was sometimes dated 1111), without editing it.

If the question of Nestor’s authorship remains controversial (the Tale contains a number of indications that fundamentally diverge from the data of the Readings and Life of Theodosius), then in general the assumption of A.A. Shakhmatov’s opinion about the existence of three editions of the Tale of Bygone Years is shared by most modern researchers.

Based on the idea of political character ancient Russian chronicles, A.A. Shakhmatov, followed by M.D. Priselkov and other researchers believe that the origin of the chronicle tradition in Rus' is associated with the establishment of the Kyiv Metropolis. “The custom of the Byzantine church administration required, when opening a new department, episcopal or metropolitan, to draw up a note of a historical nature on this occasion about the reasons, place and persons of this event for the record keeping of the patriarchal synod in Constantinople.” This allegedly became the reason for the creation of the Most Ancient Code of 1037. Researchers present the later codes, compiled on the basis of the Tale of Bygone Years, either as purely journalistic works, written, as they say, on the topic of the day, or as some kind of medieval fiction, or simply as texts that systematically With amazing tenacity and perseverance, they “finish it” - almost by inertia.

At the same time, the entire history of studying the Tale shows that the purpose of creating chronicles should be significant enough for many generations of chroniclers to continue the work begun in Kyiv in the 11th century over a number of centuries. Moreover, “the authors and editors adhered to the same literary techniques and expressed the same views and principles.” social life and to moral demands."

It is believed that the first edition of The Tale of Bygone Years has not reached us. Its second edition, compiled in 1117 by the abbot of the Vydubitsky monastery (near Kiev) Sylvester, and the third edition, compiled in 1118 by order of Prince Mstislav Vladimirovich, have survived. In the second edition, only the final part of The Tale of Bygone Years was revised; This edition has come down to us as part of the Laurentian Chronicle of 1377, as well as other later chronicles. The third edition, according to a number of researchers, is presented in the Ipatiev Chronicle, the oldest list of which, the Ipatiev Chronicle, dates back to the first quarter of the 15th century.

From our point of view, the final point in the study of the origin of the “Tale” has not yet been set; this is shown by the entire history of the study of the chronicle. It is possible that scientists, based on newly discovered facts, will put forward new hypotheses regarding the history of the creation of the greatest monument ancient Russian literature- “The Tale of Bygone Years.”

Scientists have established that chronicle writing was carried out in Rus' from the 11th to the 17th centuries. Back in the 19th century. it became known that almost all surviving chronicle texts are compilations, codes of previous chronicles. According to D.S. Likhachev, “in relation to the chronicle, the vault is a more or less hypothetical monument, i.e., a supposed monument underlying its lists or other supposed vaults.” The Tale of Bygone Years owes its broad historical outlook to Nestor, introducing facts into the chronicle world history, against the background of which the history of the Slavs unfolds, and then the history of Rus'. Thanks to the state view, breadth of outlook and literary talent of Nestor, “The Tale of Bygone Years” was “not just a collection of facts of Russian history and not just a historical and journalistic work related to the urgent but transitory tasks of Russian reality, but an integral, literary history of Rus'” , notes D.S. Likhachev.

The introductory part of the “Tale” sets out the biblical legend about the division of the earth between the sons of Noah - Shem, Ham and Japheth - and the legend about the Babylonian pandemonium, which led to the division of the “single race” into 72 nations, each of which has its own language: “After the flood, three the sons of Noah divided the land - Shem, Ham, Japheth..."

Having determined that the “language (people) Slovenian” is from the tribe of Japheth, the chronicle further tells about the Slavs, the lands they inhabit, the history and customs of the Slavic tribes. Gradually narrowing the subject of its narrative, the chronicle focuses on the history of the glades and tells about the emergence of Kyiv. Speaking about the ancient times when the Kyiv glades were tributaries of the Khazars, The Tale of Bygone Years proudly notes that now, as was destined for a long time, the Khazars themselves are tributaries of the Kyiv princes.

Precise indications of the years begin in the “Tale of Bygone Years” in 852, since from that time, according to the chronicler, Rus' was mentioned in the “Greek chronicle”: this year the Kyiv princes Askold and Dir attacked Constantinople. A chronological calculation is also provided here - a countdown of the years that have passed from one to the other significant event. The calculation concludes with a calculation of the years from “the death of Yaroslavl to the death of Svyatopolch” (i.e., from 1054 to 1113), from which it follows that the “Tale of Bygone Years” could not have been compiled earlier than the beginning of the second decade of the 12th century.

Further in the chronicle it is told about major events 9th century - “the calling of the Varangians”, the campaign of Askold and Dir against Byzantium, the conquest of Kyiv by Oleg. The legend about the origin of Slavic literacy included in the chronicle ends with an important statement for the general concept of The Tale of Bygone Years about the identity of the “Slovenian” and Russian languages - another reminder of the place of the Polyans among the Slavic peoples and the Slavs among the peoples of the world.

Subsequent chronicle articles tell about Oleg's reign. The chronicler cites the texts of his treaties with Byzantium and folk legends about the prince: a story about his campaign against Constantinople, with spectacular episodes, undoubtedly of a folklore nature (Oleg approaches the walls of the city in boats moving under sails on land, hangs his shield over the gates of Constantinople, "showing victory").

The chronicler considered Igor the son of Rurik. Two campaigns of Igor against Byzantium are reported and the text of the agreement concluded by the Russian prince with the Byzantine emperors-co-rulers: Roman, Constantine and Stephen is given. Igor's death was unexpected and inglorious: on the advice of his squad, he went to the land of the Drevlyans to collect tribute (usually his governor Sveneld collected the tribute). On the way back, the prince suddenly turned to his soldiers: “Go with the house tribute, and I’ll come back with more.” The Drevlyans, having heard that Igor intended to collect tribute a second time, were indignant: “If a wolf (if a wolf gets into the habit) gets into a sheep, then carry out the whole flock, if not kill it, so and so: if we don’t kill it, then we will all be destroyed.” . But Igor did not heed the warning of the Drevlyans and was killed by them.

Olga took revenge on the Drevlyans three times for the death of her husband. Each revenge corresponds to one of the elements of the pagan funeral rite. According to the customs of that time, the dead were buried in a boat; a bath was prepared for the deceased, and then his corpse was burned; on the day of burial, a funeral feast was held, accompanied by war games.

The chronicler enthusiastically depicts Igor's son Svyatoslav, his belligerence, chivalrous straightforwardness (he allegedly warned his enemies in advance: “I want to go against you”), and unpretentiousness in everyday life.

After the death of Svyatoslav, an internecine struggle broke out between his sons - Oleg, Yaropolk and Vladimir. Vladimir emerged victorious, becoming the sole ruler of Rus' in 980.

In the section of The Tale of Bygone Years, dedicated to the reign of Vladimir, the theme of the baptism of Rus' occupies a large place. The chronicle reads the so-called “Philosopher’s Speech,” with which a Greek missionary allegedly addressed Vladimir, convincing the prince to accept Christianity. “The Philosopher’s Speech” was of great importance for the ancient Russian reader. educational value- it briefly outlined the entire “sacred history” and communicated the basic principles of the Christian faith.

After the death of Vladimir in 1015, internecine struggle broke out again between his sons. Svyatopolk is the son of Yaropolk and a captive nun, whom Vladimir, having killed his brother, made his wife, killed his half-brothers Boris and Gleb. The chronicle reads short story about the fate of the martyred princes, about the struggle between Yaroslav Vladimirovich and Svyatopolk, which ended in the latter’s military defeat and terrible divine retribution.

Last decade XI century was full of stormy events. After internecine wars, the instigator and indispensable participant of which was Oleg Svyatoslavich (“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” calls him Oleg Gorislavlich), the princes gathered in 1097 in Lyubech for a congress, at which they decided from now on to live in peace and friendship, to hold their father’s possessions and do not encroach on other people's inheritances. However, immediately after the congress, a new atrocity was committed: the Volyn prince Davyd Igorevich convinced the Kyiv prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavich that the Terebovl prince Vasilko was plotting against them. Svyatopolk and Davyd lured Vasilko to Kyiv, captured him and gouged out his eyes. This event shocked all the princes: Vladimir Monomakh, according to the chronicler, complained that such evil did not exist in Rus' “neither under our grandfathers, nor under our fathers.” In Article 1097 we find detailed story about the dramatic fate of Vasilko Terebovlsky.

Brief overview composition “The Tale of Bygone Years” shows the complexity of its composition and the diversity of components both in origin and genre. The Tale, in addition to brief weather records, includes texts of documents, retellings of folklore legends, plot stories, and excerpts from translated literature. There is a theological treatise in it - “the speech of a philosopher”, and a hagiographic story about Boris and Gleb, and patericon legends about the Kiev-Pechersk monks, and a church eulogy to Theodosius of the Pechersk, and a casual story about a Novgorodian who went to tell fortunes to a magician.

If we talk about the historicism of the “Tale”, it should be emphasized that artistic generalization in Ancient Rus' was built mainly on the basis of a single specific historical fact. Almost all events are attached to a specific historical event or a specific historical person. As is known, Ancient Rus' during the 9th-10th centuries. From a fragile tribal union it turned into a single early feudal state. The campaigns of the Kyiv princes Oleg, Igor and Svyatoslav brought Rus' into the sphere of European politics. The close diplomatic, trade and cultural relations of Ancient Rus' with its southern neighbors - with the Bulgarian kingdom and especially with the largest state in South-Eastern Europe - Byzantium, paved the way for the adoption of Christianity. Which is reflected in the “Tale”. Obviously, the Christianization of Rus' required a radical restructuring of the worldview; former pagan ideas about the origin and structure of the Universe, about history human race, about the ancestors of the Slavs were now rejected, and Russian scribes were in dire need of works that would present Christian ideas about world history and give a new, Christian interpretation of the world order and natural phenomena. Characterizing literature Kievan Rus, D.S. Likhachev notes that it was devoted mainly to ideological issues. Its genre system reflected the worldview typical of many Christian states in the early Middle Ages. “Old Russian literature can be considered as literature of one theme and one plot. This story is world history, and this topic is the meaning human life».

We also note the high citizenship and patriotism of the literary monument in question. The patriotism of ancient Russian literature is connected not only with the pride of the authors for the Russian land, but also with their grief over the defeats they suffered, with the desire to bring some sense to the princes and boyars, and sometimes with attempts to condemn them, to arouse the wrath of readers against the worst of them.

Thus, “The Tale of Bygone Years” is not only a unique historical source and literary monument, but also an example true patriotism Russian people, love for their Motherland.

3. Stylistic originality of “The Tale of Bygone Years”

The stylistic originality of “The Tale” deserves special attention, because in modern literary tradition there is no chronicle genre. The nature of the chronicle genre is very complex; the chronicle is one of the “unifying genres”, subordinating the genres of its components - a historical story, a life, a teaching, a word of praise, etc. And yet the chronicle remains an integral work that can be studied as a monument of one genre, as a monument literature. In the Tale of Bygone Years, as in any other chronicle, two types of narration can be distinguished - actual weather records and chronicle stories. Weather records contain reports of events, while chronicles offer descriptions of them. In a chronicle story, the author strives to depict an event, provide certain specific details, reproduce dialogues characters, in a word, to help the reader imagine what is happening, to evoke his empathy.

Thus, in the story about the boy who fled from Kyiv besieged by the Pechenegs in order to convey the request of Princess Olga to Voivode Pretich, not only is the very fact of transmitting the message mentioned, but it is precisely how the boy fled through the Pecheneg camp with a bridle in his hand, asking about supposedly the missing horse (at the same time, the important detail was not missed that the boy could speak Pecheneg), about how, having reached the banks of the Dnieper, he “overthrew the ports” and threw himself into the water, how Pretich’s warriors swam out to meet him in a boat; Pretich’s dialogue with the Pecheneg prince was also conveyed. This is precisely a story, and not a brief weather record, such as: “Svyatoslav defeated the Vyatichi and laid tribute on them,” or “Tsarina Anna of Volodymyr died,” or “Mstislav went to Yaroslav from the kozary and from the kasoga,” etc.

At the same time, the chronicle stories themselves belong to two types, largely determined by their origin. Some stories tell about events contemporary to the chronicler, others - about events that took place long before the chronicle was compiled; these are oral epic legends, only later included in the chronicle.

In the stories, sometimes strength and sometimes cunning triumph. Thus, the Pecheneg prince, who was at war with Russia, suggested that Vladimir send out a warrior from his army who would measure his strength with the Pecheneg hero. Nobody dares to take on the challenge. Vladimir is saddened, but then a certain “old husband” appears to him and offers to send for his youngest son. The young man, according to the old man, is very strong: “Since childhood, no one hit him with it” (that is, threw him to the ground). Once, the father recalls, the son, angry with him, “pretored the worm with his hands” (he tore the skin with his hands, which he was crumpling at that moment: the father and son were tanners). The young man is called to Vladimir, and he shows the prince his strength - he grabs the side of a bull running past and tears out “the skin from the meat, as big as his hare’s hand.” But nevertheless, the young man is “average in body”, and therefore the Pecheneg hero who came out to duel with him is “very great and terrible” - laughs at his opponent. Here (as in the story of Olga’s revenge) surprise awaits negative hero; the reader knows about the strength of the young man and triumphs when he “strangles” the leather meat with the hands of the Pecheneg hero.

Some stories in the chronicle are united by a special, epic style of depicting reality. This concept reflects, first of all, the narrator’s approach to the subject of the image, his author's position, and not just purely linguistic features of presentation. In each such story, in the center there is one event, one episode, and it is this episode that constitutes the characterization of the hero and highlights his main, memorable feature; Oleg (in the story about the campaign against Constantinople) is, first of all, a wise and brave warrior, the hero of the story about Belgorod jelly is a nameless old man, but his wisdom, which at the last moment saved the city besieged by the Pechenegs, is what characteristic feature, which won him immortality in people's memory.

Another group of stories was compiled by the chronicler himself or his contemporaries. It is distinguished by a different style of narration; it does not have an elegant completeness of the plot, there is no epic laconicism and generalization of the images of the heroes. These stories, at the same time, can be more psychological, more realistic, and literary, since the chronicler strives not just to tell about the event, but to present it in such a way as to make a certain impression on the reader, to force him to relate to the characters in the story in one way or another. Among similar stories within the Tale of Bygone Years, the story about the blinding of Vasilko Terebovlsky (in article 1097) especially stands out.

The episode about the terrible fate of the slandered prince appears emotionally vivid, it evokes sympathy for him, his expressed desire to appear before God “in that bloody shirt” seems to remind of inevitable retribution, serves as a journalistic justification for the completely “earthly” actions of the princes who went to war against Davyd Igorevich in order to restore Vasilko’s rights to the inheritance taken from him.

Thus, together with the chronicle narrative, a special genre subordinate to the chronicle begins to form - the genre of the story of princely crimes.

The entire chronicle narrative is permeated by etiquette, especially in that part of it that is designed in the style of monumental historicism. In these cases, the chronicler selects for his narration only the most important events and deeds of national significance. In the style of monumental historicism, for example, the events of the time of Yaroslav the Wise and his son Vsevolod are presented. For example, a description of the battle on Alta, which brought Yaroslav victory over the “cursed” Svyatopolk, the killer of Boris and Gleb (in the “Tale of Bygone Years” under 1019).

The combination of monumental historicism and epic styles in The Tale of Bygone Years created its unique literary appearance, and its stylistic influence will be clearly felt for several centuries: chroniclers will begin to apply or vary those literary formulas that were first used by the creators of the Tale of Bygone Years, imitate the characteristics present in it, and sometimes quote the “Tale”, introducing fragments from this monument into your text.

4. The significance of “The Tale of Bygone Years” in the literary aspect

Assessing the significance of the “Tale”, one should first of all emphasize the globality of the goal that all chroniclers set for themselves - to show the origins of the emergence of the Russian land in a historical perspective. The overarching task assumed a multifaceted presentation, covering a wide range of very diverse in nature historical events. All this gave the Tale the depth that ensured its social multifunctionality.

It's exceptionally bright literary phenomenon, which absorbed not only many historical events, but also reflected the socio-political views of that time.

The significance of the Tale for Russian literature is also evidenced by the fact that the chroniclers used the rich traditions of oral public speaking. Oral sources provided mainly material, content and ideas for constructing Russian history, partly its stylistic design, and language. The traditions of writing introduced all this material into the compositional framework familiar to medieval books. Agreements, legal documents and establishments also contributed to the formation of the Russian literary language, and to some extent participated in the formation of the language of Russian literature.

It is important to note that the Middle Ages did not know “copyright”, copyright ownership in our sense of the word. The reader dominated the author - he was sometimes both a copyist and an editor of the book. Consequently, The Tale of Bygone Years is the result of a collective literary work. That is why attempts to restore the original “author’s” text of “The Tale of Bygone Years” (A. Shletser) or to find a single author for the chronicle Kyiv XII V. (Tatishchev, Shletser) and Novgorod XI century. (Tatishchev, Miller) have long been abandoned by science.

The form of the vault in which the ancient Russian historical “Tale” is clothed is closely connected with the special historical consciousness of its authors. The reader valued documentary, the reality of what happened, and not the subtleties of artistic depiction. At the same time, signs, wonders, predictions, etc. were reality for the reader. These factors should also be considered among the features of the Tale.

Conclusion

Summarizing what is presented in this work, we can draw the following conclusions.

1. “The Tale of Bygone Years” is a collection of chronicles. When compiling his collection, each chronicler first of all cared about getting into his hands the works of his predecessors, treaties, messages, wills of princes, historical stories, lives of Russian saints, etc., etc. Having collected all the material available to him , the chronicler put it together in a weather report. This circumstance gives the “Tale” a special depth, content and diversity of presentation.

2. Analysis of the content of the Tale shows that the “etiquette” of the writing craft is associated with the ideological ideas of the Middle Ages about the saint, about the villain, about the ideal type of prince, about the motives for which enemies attack the Russian land, about the causes of natural disasters (pestilence, drought and etc.). The chronicler was not far from politics and worldly passions. The course of the chronicler's narrative, his specific historical ideas very often go beyond the boundaries of religious thinking and are purely pragmatic in nature.

3. The chronicle is given special value by the personal experience of its creators, direct observation, elements of realism, political topicality - everything that is so rich in and thanks to which the Russian chronicle is so valuable.

4. “The Tale of Bygone Years” is the fruit of the collective work of ancient Russian scribes, a unique historical and literary monument of Ancient Rus', which is determined by the significance of the purpose of the work, deep historicism and valuable documentation, compositional and stylistic originality of the chronicle; high patriotism and citizenship of its creators.

List of used literature

1. Danilevsky I.N. The Bible and the Tale of Bygone Years (On the problem of interpreting chronicle texts). // Domestic history. - 1993. - No. 1.

2. Danilevsky I.N. The idea and title of the Tale of Bygone Years // Domestic History. - 1995. - No. 5.

3. Eremin I.P. Literature of Ancient Rus' (studies and characteristics). M.-L., 1966.

4. History of Russian literature X - XVII centuries: Textbook. manual for pedagogical students. Institute for specialties No. 2101 “Rus. language and lit.” / L. A. Dmitriev, D. S. Likhachev, Y. S. Lurie and others; Ed. D. S. Likhacheva. - M.: Education, 1979. - 462 p., ill.

5. Source study national history. Sat. Art. M., 1976.

6. Istrin V.M. Essays on the history of ancient Russian literature of the pre-Moscow period: 11-13 centuries. Pg., 1922.

7. Istrin V. M. Notes on the beginning of Russian chronicles. - IORYAS, vol. XXVI. Pg., 1923; t. XXV11. L., 1924.

8. Klyuchevsky V. O. Course of Russian history // Klyuchevsky V. O. Works: In 9 volumes. M., 1987. T. 1.

9. Likhachev D.S. “Oral Chronicles” as part of the “Tale of Bygone Years”. - “Historical Notes”, 1945, vol. 17.

10. Likhachev D.S. Russian chronicles and their cultural and historical significance. M.-L., 1947.

11. Likhachev D. S. Comments. - In the book: The Tale of Bygone Years, part 2. M.-L., 1950.

12. Likhachev D.S. Man in the literature of Ancient Rus'. M.-L., 1970.

13. Likhachev D.S. Literary etiquette of Ancient Rus' (to the problem of studying). - "TODRL". M.-L., 1961

14. Likhachev D.S. Poetics of Old Russian Literature. L., 1971.

15. Likhachev D.S. Great Heritage (Classical works of literature of Ancient Rus'). - M., Sovremennik, 1980.

16. Likhachev D.S. Textology; Based on the material of Russian literature of the X-XVIII centuries. 2nd ed., add. and processed L., 1983.

17. Nasonov A. N. History of Russian chronicles. XI - beginning of the XVIII century. M., 1969.

18. The Tale of Bygone Years, vol. I. Introductory part. Text. Notes Pg., 1916.

19. The Tale of Bygone Years. - St. Petersburg, 1996.

20. Priselkov M.D. History of Russian chronicles of the 11th-15th centuries. / Prepare To the stove V.G. Vovina. St. Petersburg, 1996.

21. Prokhorov G. M. “The Tale of Batu’s Invasion” in the Laurentian Chronicle. - "TODRL". L., 1974, vol. XXVIII.

22. Sukhomlinov M.I. On the ancient Russian chronicle as a literary monument // Studies on ancient Russian literature. - St. Petersburg, 1908.

23. Tvorogov O. V. “The Tale of Bygone Years” and “Initial Code” (textual commentary). - "TODRL". L., 1976.

24. Shakhmatov A.A. Research on the most ancient Russian chronicles. St. Petersburg, 1908.

25. Shakhmatov A.A. Review of Russian chronicles of the XIV-XVI centuries. M., 1938.

26. Shakhmatov A. A. “The Tale of Bygone Years” and its sources. - "TODRL". M.-L., 1940.

27. Shakhmatov A. A. Collection of articles and materials. /Ed. acad. S. P. Obnorsky. M.-L., 1947.

Likhachev D.S. Great Heritage (Classical works of literature of Ancient Rus'). - M., Sovremennik, 1980.

The Tale of Bygone Years. - St. Petersburg, 1996. - P.7.

Danilevsky I.N. The idea and title of the Tale of Bygone Years // Domestic History. 1995.-No. 5.

Likhachev D.S. Textology; Based on the material of Russian literature of the X-XVIII centuries. 2nd ed., add. and processed L., p. 367.

Likhachev D.S. Textology...S. 368-369.

Sukhomlinov M.I. On the ancient Russian chronicle as a literary monument // Studies on ancient Russian literature.-SPb., 1908.S. 50.

The main works of A. A. Shakhmatov on this issue: Research on the most ancient Russian chronicles. St. Petersburg, 1908; “The Tale of Bygone Years”, vol. I. Introductory part. Text. Notes Pg., 1916; Kiev initial code 1095 - In the book: Shakhmatov A. A. Collection of articles and materials. Ed. acad. S. P. Obnorsky. M.-L., 1947.

Istrin V. M. Notes on the beginning of Russian chronicles. - IORYAS, vol. XXVI. Pg., 1923; t. XXV11. L., 1924.

Priselkov M.D. History of Russian chronicles of the 11th-15th centuries. L., 1940, p. 16-44; Likhachev D.S. Russian chronicles and their cultural and historical significance. M.-L., 1947, ch. 3, 5, 6, 8 and 9. See also: Lurie Ya. S. On the Chessman method of studying chronicle vaults. - In the book: Source study of Russian history. Sat. Art. M., 1976, p. 93-99; Tvorogov O. V. “The Tale of Bygone Years” and “Initial Code” (textual commentary). - "TODRL". L., 1976, vol. XXX and others.

Klyuchevsky V. O. Course of Russian history // Klyuchevsky V. O. Works: In 9 volumes. M., 1987. T. 1.S. 92-93.

History of Russian literature X - XVII centuries: Textbook. manual for pedagogical students. Institute for specialties No. 2101 “Rus. language and lit.” / L. A. Dmitriev, D. S. Likhachev, Y. S. Lurie and others; Ed. D. S. Likhacheva. - M.: Education, 1979. - 462 p., ill.

See: Likhachev D.S. Poetics of Old Russian Literature. L., 1971, p. 48-50.

See: Eremin I.P. The Tale of Bygone Years as a monument of literature. - In the book: Eremin I.P. Literature of Ancient Rus' (studies and characteristics). M.-L., 1966; Likhachev D.S. Russian chronicles and their cultural and historical significance, ch. 7; It's him. Man in the literature of Ancient Rus'. M.-L., 1970, ch. 2 and 3; Tvorogov O. V. Plot narration in chronicles of the 11th-13th centuries. - In the book: Origins of Russian fiction, p. 31-66.

Likhachev D.S. Russian chronicles and their cultural and historical significance, p. 215-247.

Prokhorov G.M. “The Tale of Batu’s Invasion” in the Laurentian Chronicle. - "TODRL". L., 1974, vol. XXVIII, p. 77-80.

Likhachev D.S. “Oral Chronicles” as part of the “Tale of Bygone Years”. - “Historical Notes”, 1945, vol. 17, p. 201-224.

The main idea set out in the chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years" which came down to contemporaries as part of the Laurentian and Hypatian Chronicles (1113), is the doctrine of divine the origin of princely power.

God's chosenness of princes is political tradition, which came from Byzantium, it established itself in Russian political culture along with the spread of Christianity. However, unlike the Byzantine emperor, the Grand Duke ruled not alone, but with all the princely originally from Therefore, he was, rather, the first among equals, rather than an autocrat. In the absence of a developed bureaucratic apparatus, the prince had to rely only on own forces, he must personally carry out all management functions.

This is probably why in the doctrine of the divine origin of princely power the emphasis is not on the competence and powers of the prince, but on his responsibilities. Consequently, in Russian political culture idea of power identified with the idea of responsibility: this or that person is elected by God to the role of head of state not in order to simply be the supreme ruler, but to serve the Russian land, to maintain order in it, protect it from enemies, administer justice, etc.

Ideal a prince in the Russian political consciousness is a hard-working prince, a warrior prince. The Tale of Bygone Years tells how during the reign of Grand Duke Vladimir the number of robberies in Rus' sharply increased and how the bishops approached him and asked: “Behold, the robbers have multiplied; why don’t you execute them?” “I’m afraid of sin,” answered the prince. Then the bishops said: “You have been appointed by God to be executed by the evil, and by the good to mercy. You are worthy of executing the robber, but with trial.” And Vladimir began to execute robbers from then on. The concept of the Grand Duke being chosen by God was also based on thesis that he is in charge defender Christian faith. The Grand Duke was called to the Orthodox faith and was supposed to serve as faith and support for the Holy Church.

However, the ratio secular And spiritual authorities in Kievan Rus Not had the nature of rivalry and struggle, as was the case in Byzantium or Western Europe. In Kievan Rus, Grand Duke Vladimir spread Christianity, and he created church organization. Therefore, the fate of religion and the church in Rus' depended on the Russian princes. The Church cared only about the prince’s worldview, the need for the prince to follow Christ’s teachings. In this regard, the Russian Church advocated gain state power, its unity. Of course, this situation is due to the fact that Orthodox Church as an all-Russian organization could only exist based on strong princely power.

The Orthodox Church played an equally important role for the Grand Duke and the entire state, being a sign civility, distinguishing him from barbarians. In this regard, in Russian political and legal thought the state is not separated from the church, and the church is inseparable from the state. It is not formed on this basis dualism secular - for which the state is responsible, and spiritual, religious, which is in charge of the church.

One of the central ideas of the chronicle is the idea unity Russian land. The chronicle idealizes the political system established by Yaroslav the Wise. All princes are declared brothers, and all of them are equally obliged to obey the Grand Duke in Kyiv.

"The Tale of Bygone Years" condemns princely strife, weakening the unity of the state. Thus, “sensible men” say to the warring princes: “Why are you fighting among yourselves? And the trash is destroying the Russian land.” At the Lyubech Congress, the princes say to each other: “Why are we destroying the Russian land, which we ourselves are causing strife?”

The idea of unity was also based on political mythology. The Tale of Bygone Years includes a story that the family of Kyiv princes goes back to the Varangian prince Rurik, who was called by the northern Slavs in order to establish “order”, which did not exist in their land. Rurik is announced father Kyiv Prince Igor. The point of including this legend about the origin of the power of the Kyiv princes from a foreigner was to stop disputes about the seniority of local families and increase their authority, since their ancestor established order and peace on Russian soil.

“The Tale of Bygone Years” is a collection, and therefore we will not find ideas here that cover all annual articles without exception. And yet, it is possible to highlight several points to which the compilers of the “Tale” turn again and again. A whole series information included in the chronicle has a pronounced anti-Byzantine orientation. The idea of independence from Byzantium, after the conversion of Rus' to Christianity, which probably expressed some claims not only to church leadership, but also to secular vassalage, according to researchers, was one of the central ones in the code of Nikon the Great. It was precisely in defiance of Byzantium that stories about the campaigns against Constantinople by Igor, Svyatoslav and especially Oleg, who demonstratively hung his shield on the gates of the Byzantine capital, could appear in the Russian chronicle.

Describing any contacts between Russian princes and the Byzantines, the chronicler is most concerned about how not to undermine the authority of the Slavic rulers. In any situation, he invariably portrays them not as modest supplicants, but as equal partners, often superior in intelligence and ingenuity to the prim Byzantine basileus. For example, according to the chronicle story, Princess Olga, who went to Constantinople, allegedly told the ruling Constantine Porphyrogenitus there “if you want to baptize me...”, thereby turning the matter around as if it was not she who came to ask for baptism, but the emperor who was very much seeking it. In his further narration, the chronicler will not forget to mention the godname of the Slavic princess - Elena, “like the ancient queen, mother of the Great Constantine,” and the fact that it was Olga, who had barely managed to be baptized, who reminded the Byzantine ruler who wanted to marry her while his wife was alive about Christian custom, according to for whom marriage between god-relatives is impossible. The author did not forget to include in his narrative a kind of recognition by the emperor of Olga’s moral superiority, as well as a memory of how, having arrived in Kyiv, the decisive princess sent unsalted Byzantine messengers, asking them to remind the emperor of how disrespectfully they treated the Kyiv embassy in Constantinople.

Anti-Byzantine sentiments were also reflected in a unique way in those articles of the chronicle that talk about Vladimir’s adoption of Christianity. It seems that the author is doing everything possible to belittle the role of Byzantium in this event. According to the chronicle, before accepting faith from the Greeks, the Kiev prince listens to the messenger of several religions, then sends a special embassy to Europe. The chronicler carefully emphasizes the special honors that were given to the Russians in Constantinople.

To top it all off, the chronicle sets out the so-called “Korsun Legend”. In this episode, the tone of the dialogue conducted by the chronicle Vladimir with the Byzantine brother emperors is especially indicative, since it is not about baptism at all, but about a wedding. Having captured the largest Greek colony in the Northern Black Sea region, Chersonese, the steppe pagan, who previously would not have been taken seriously in the Byzantine capital, asks for anything. On the contrary, he threatens the rulers of the empire with a new campaign against Constantinople and demands their sister, the porphyry princess Anna, as his wife. In these negotiations, with a significant flavor of blackmail, baptism turns out to be a concession to which Vladimir agrees, meeting the Byzantine rulers halfway. The legend ends with one more detail designed to elevate Vladimir above the Greeks: as a “vena” - the bride price required according to Slavic customs - the cunning Kiev prince gives the Byzantines the city of Korsun captured from them, thus managing to observe the customs and not go bankrupt too much.

And finally, most likely, it was precisely in defiance of Byzantium that the legend about the walk of the Apostle Andrew ended up in the Tale of Bygone Years. It seems that the search for a worthy heavenly patron for Rus' seriously occupied the compilers of the first Russian chronicles; at least, they included in their narrative the Moravian origin legend about Slavic writings, where Paul is named the teacher of Rus'. However, this was not enough for later editors, and in the text of the chronicle there appears a story about Andrew, the apostle from the twelve and, most importantly, the heavenly patron of Byzantium. And it doesn’t matter that this story from a historical point of view looks more than doubtful: it is completely incomprehensible why the apostle, who, if you believe his biography, never went further than the Scythians, had to go so deep into the wilds of the Dnieper forests that were absolutely deserted in the middle of the 1st century AD. And the very description of the legendary path “from the Varangians to the Greeks” is given in the chronicle through the eyes of a person located somewhere in the center of the Central Russian plain, in the “Okovsky Forest”. But the churches of the two powers could now consider themselves equal in status.

Another constant concern of the compilers of The Tale of Bygone Years was the description, assessment of the actions and justification of the legitimacy of the power of the ruling Rurik dynasty. This is explained not only by the fact that the chronicle was created in monasteries closely associated with the grand princely throne (Kievo-Pechersk and Vydubitsky), and apparently had the status of an official state document - it’s just that the very idea of Slavic statehood was associated with princely power in the 12th century . Let me remind you that in the title of the “Tale” the question of the origin of Rus' and the emergence of princely power in it are put side by side.

The degree of reliability of the information provided by 12th-century chroniclers about the first Russian princes can be assessed in different ways. Most likely, narrating the events of two hundred to three hundred years ago and relying largely on the material of oral legends, ancient historiographers do not recreate the material appearance of historical figures, but record princely portraits as they appeared in popular consciousness. Another thing is undoubtedly: despite the fact that the chronicle was compiled and edited mainly by monastics, in the descriptions of the Kyiv rulers it is often not Christian, but rather princely virtues that come to the fore - military valor, the ability to strengthen the power of the country, subjugating the surrounding peoples, the ability to go out with honor from difficult diplomatic situations. The compilers of the chronicle equally endow both the ancient pagan princes and the Christian rulers who replaced them with these qualities.

The Tale of Bygone Years - a literary monument of Ancient Rus'

Department of Literature

COURSE WORK

in the discipline "History of Russian Literature"

“The Tale of Bygone Years” - a literary monument of Ancient Rus'

Completed by a student

____________________________

Saint Petersburg

ABOUT THE CHAPTER:

Introduction

1. The history of the Russian chronicle “The Tale of Bygone Years”

2. “The Tale of Bygone Years” as a historical source and literary monument

3. Stylistic originality of “The Tale of Bygone Years”

4. The significance of “The Tale of Bygone Years” in the literary aspect

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

Relevance of the work. The main source of our knowledge about ancient Rus' is medieval chronicles. Currently, more than two hundred lists of chronicles are known. Most of them were published (in full or in the form of discrepancies to other lists) in the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles. One of the most ancient and famous is “The Tale of Bygone Years” - a chronicle that got its name from the first words “This Tale of Bygone Years...” and tells about the events of Russian history in the mid-9th - early 12th centuries. According to the outstanding Russian scientist D.S. Likhachev, “The Tale of Bygone Years” with its world-historical introduction, with its broad desire to substantiate the place of the Russian people among other peoples of the world, with its special attention to the heroic, to military exploits, to the glory of the Russian weapons introduces us to the atmosphere of an epic folk-song attitude towards Russian history. In “The Tale of Bygone Years” we have a largely epic, poetic attitude towards our native history. That is why “The Tale of Bygone Years” is not only a work of Russian historical thought, but also of Russian historical poetry. Poetry and history are in inextricable unity in it. Before us is a literary work and a monument to historical thought.”1

The study of the “Tale” continues to this day, however, despite the significant body of literature devoted to this literary monument, researchers differ on many aspects of the appearance and interpretation of the chronicle. V.N. Tatishchev was the first in Russia to begin studying the chronicles. Having decided to create his grandiose “Russian History,” he turned to all the chronicles known in his time and found many new monuments. After V.N. Tatishchev, “The Tale of Bygone Years” was studied by A. Shletser. If V.N. Tatishchev worked in breadth, as it were, combining additional information from many lists in one text, and followed in the footsteps of the ancient chronicler - compiler, then Schletser worked in depth, identifying in the text itself a lot of typos, errors, and inaccuracies. Both research approaches, with all their external differences, had one similarity: the idea of a non-original form in which the Tale of Bygone Years has come down to us was consolidated in science. This is the great merit of both wonderful historians. The next major step was taken by the famous archaeographer P.M. Stroev. Both V.N. Tatishchev and A. Shletser imagined “The Tale of Bygone Years” as the creation of one chronicler, in this case Nestor. P.M. Stroev expressed a completely new view of the chronicle as a set of several earlier chronicles and began to consider all the chronicles that have reached us as such sets. Thus, he opened the way not only to a more methodologically correct study of the chronicles and codes that have reached us, which have not reached us in their original form.

An extremely important step was taken by A.A. Shakhmatov, who showed that each of the chronicle codes, starting from the 11th century and ending with the 16th century, is not a random conglomeration of heterogeneous chronicle sources, but a historical work with its own political position, dictated by the place and time of creation. According to A.A. Shakhmatov, the chronicle, which is usually called the Tale of Bygone Years, was created in 1112 by Nestor - presumably the author of two famous hagiographic works - Readings about Boris and Gleb and the Life of Theodosius of Pechersk. Shakhmatov connected the history of chronicling with the history of the country. The opportunity arose to mutually verify the history of the state with the history of the source. Source data has become not an end in itself, but an essential aid in reconstructing the picture of the historical development of the entire people. And now, when starting to study a particular period, they first of all strive to analyze the question of how the chronicle and its information are connected with reality. The disadvantage of the approach developed by L.A. Shakhmatov, however, is that the critical analysis of the source actually boiled down to studying the history of its text. A large complex of problems related to the history of meanings and meanings that existed during the creation of this or that chronicle code remained outside the interests of the researcher. This gap was largely filled by the research of such remarkable scientists as: I.N. Danilevsky, V.M. Istrin, A.N. Nasonov, A.A. Likhachev, M.P. Pogodin and many others.

Target work - to show the historical and artistic originality of “The Tale of Bygone Years”, to assess the significance of “The Tale” as a literary monument of Ancient Rus'.

1. The history of the Russian chronicle “The Tale of Bygone Years”

An analysis of the literature on the history of the appearance of “The Tale of Bygone Years” shows its debatability in science. At the same time, all publications about the Tale emphasize the historical significance of the chronicle for the history and culture of Russia. Already in the very title of “The Tale of Bygone Years” there is an answer to the question about the purpose of the chronicle: to tell “where the Russian land came from, who began to reign first in Kyiv, and where the Russian land came from”2. In other words, to tell about Russian history from its very beginning to the formation of the Orthodox state under the collective name Russian Land.

Revealing the issues of chronicle terminology, I.N. Danilevsky wrote that traditionally chronicles in a broad sense are called historical works, the presentation of which is strictly year-by-year and is accompanied by chronographic (annual), often calendar, and sometimes chronometric (hourly) dates. In terms of species characteristics, they are close to Western European annals (from Latin annales libri - annual reports) and chronicles (from Greek chranihos - relating to time). In the narrow sense of the word, chronicles are usually called chronicle texts that have actually reached us, preserved in one or more copies that are similar to each other.3 But the scientific terminology in chronicle materials is largely arbitrary. This is due, in particular, to the “lack of clear boundaries and complexity of the history of chronicle texts”, to the “fluidity” of chronicle texts, allowing “gradual transitions from text to text without visible gradations of monuments and editions”4. Until now, “in the study of chronicles, the use of terms is extremely vague.” At the same time, “any elimination of ambiguity in terminology should be based on the establishment of this ambiguity itself. It is impossible to agree on the use of terms without first finding out all the shades of their use in the past and present,” believes D.S. Likhachev5.

A. A. Shakhmatov came to the conclusion that the Novgorod First Chronicle in its initial part reflected a different chronicle code, which preceded the “Tale of Bygone Years”7.

A prominent researcher of Russian chronicles, V. M. Istrin8, made unsuccessful attempts to find a different explanation for the differences between “The Tale of Bygone Years” and the story of the First Novgorod Chronicle (that the Novgorod Chronicle allegedly abbreviated the “Tale of Bygone Years”). As a result, A. A. Shakhmatov’s conclusions were confirmed by many facts obtained both by himself and by other scientists9.

The text of the “Tale” that interests us covers a long period - from ancient times to the beginning of the second decade of the 12th century. It is quite rightly believed that this is one of the oldest chronicle codes, the text of which was preserved by the chronicle tradition. No separate lists of him are known. On this occasion V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote: “In libraries, do not ask for the Initial Chronicle - they will probably not understand you and will ask again: “What list of the chronicle do you need?” Then you, in turn, will be perplexed. So far, not a single manuscript has been found in which the Initial Chronicle would be placed separately in the form in which it came from the pen of the ancient compiler. In all known copies it merges with the story of its successors, which in later collections usually reaches the end of the 16th century.”10. In different chronicles, the text of the Tale reaches different years: to 1110 (Lavrentievsky and lists close to it) or to 1118 (Ipatievsky and lists close to it).

Having compared all the lists of chronicles available to him, A.A. Shakhmatov identified discrepancies and so-called common places inherent in the chronicles. Analysis of the detected discrepancies and their classification made it possible to identify lists with coinciding discrepancies. The researcher grouped the lists by edition and put forward a number of complementary hypotheses that explain the occurrence of discrepancies. A comparison of hypothetical codes made it possible to identify a number of common features inherent in some of them. This is how the supposed source texts were recreated. At the same time, it turned out that many fragments of the chronicle presentation were borrowed from very early codes, which, in turn, made it possible to move on to the reconstruction of the oldest Russian chronicles. Conclusions A.A. Shakhmatov received full confirmation when the Moscow arch of 1408 was found, the existence of which was predicted by the great scientist. In full, the path that A.A. Shakhmatov, became clear only after the publication by his student M.D. Priselkov workbooks of his teacher11. Since then, the entire history of the study of chronicles has been divided into two periods: pre-Shakhmatova and modern.

Based on the idea of the political nature of ancient Russian chronicles, A.A. Shakhmatov, followed by M.D. Priselkov and other researchers believe that the origin of the chronicle tradition in Rus' is associated with the establishment of the Kyiv Metropolis. “The custom of the Byzantine church administration required, when opening a new department, episcopal or metropolitan, to draw up a note of a historical nature on this occasion about the reasons, place and persons of this event for the record keeping of the patriarchal synod in Constantinople”12. This allegedly became the reason for the creation of the Most Ancient Code of 1037. Researchers present the later codes, compiled on the basis of the Tale of Bygone Years, either as purely journalistic works, written, as they say, on the topic of the day, or as some kind of medieval fiction, or simply as texts that systematically With amazing tenacity and perseverance, they “finish it” - almost by inertia.

From our point of view, the final point in the study of the origin of the “Tale” has not yet been set; this is shown by the entire history of the study of the chronicle. It is possible that scientists, based on newly discovered facts, will put forward new hypotheses regarding the history of the creation of the greatest monument of ancient Russian literature - “The Tale of Bygone Years”.

2. “The Tale of Bygone Years” as a historical source and literary monument

Scientists have established that chronicle writing was carried out in Rus' from the 11th to the 17th centuries. Back in the 19th century. it became known that almost all surviving chronicle texts are compilations, codes of previous chronicles. According to D.S. Likhachev, “in relation to the chronicle, the code is a more or less hypothetical monument, i.e., a supposed monument underlying its lists or other supposed codes”14. The Tale of Bygone Years owes its broad historical outlook to Nestor, introducing into the chronicle the facts of world history, against the background of which the history of the Slavs unfolds, and then the history of Rus'. Thanks to the state view, breadth of outlook and literary talent of Nestor, “The Tale of Bygone Years” was “not just a collection of facts of Russian history and not just a historical and journalistic work related to the urgent but transitory tasks of Russian reality, but an integral, literary history of Rus'” , notes D.S. Likhachev15.

Precise indications of the years begin in the “Tale of Bygone Years” in 852, since from that time, according to the chronicler, Rus' was mentioned in the “Greek chronicle”: this year the Kyiv princes Askold and Dir attacked Constantinople. A chronological calculation is also provided here - a countdown of the years that have passed from one significant event to another. The calculation concludes with a calculation of the years from “the death of Yaroslavl to the death of Svyatopolch” (i.e., from 1054 to 1113), from which it follows that the “Tale of Bygone Years” could not have been compiled earlier than the beginning of the second decade of the 12th century.

Further, the chronicle tells about the most important events of the 9th century. - “the calling of the Varangians”, the campaign of Askold and Dir against Byzantium, the conquest of Kyiv by Oleg. The legend about the origin of Slavic literacy included in the chronicle ends with an important statement for the general concept of The Tale of Bygone Years about the identity of the “Slovenian” and Russian languages - another reminder of the place of the Polyans among the Slavic peoples and the Slavs among the peoples of the world.

After the death of Svyatoslav, an internecine struggle broke out between his sons - Oleg, Yaropolk and Vladimir. Vladimir emerged victorious, becoming the sole ruler of Rus' in 980.

In the section of The Tale of Bygone Years, dedicated to the reign of Vladimir, the theme of the baptism of Rus' occupies a large place. The chronicle reads the so-called “Philosopher’s Speech,” with which a Greek missionary allegedly addressed Vladimir, convincing the prince to accept Christianity. “The Philosopher’s Speech” had great educational significance for the ancient Russian reader - it briefly outlined the entire “sacred history” and communicated the basic principles of the Christian faith.

After the death of Vladimir in 1015, internecine struggle broke out again between his sons. Svyatopolk is the son of Yaropolk and a captive nun, whom Vladimir, having killed his brother, made his wife, killed his half-brothers Boris and Gleb. The chronicle reads a short story about the fate of the martyred princes, about the struggle of Yaroslav Vladimirovich with Svyatopolk, which ended in the latter’s military defeat and terrible divine retribution.

The last decade of the 11th century. was full of stormy events. After internecine wars, the instigator and indispensable participant of which was Oleg Svyatoslavich (“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” calls him Oleg Gorislavlich), the princes gathered in 1097 in Lyubech for a congress, at which they decided from now on to live in peace and friendship, to hold their father’s possessions and do not encroach on other people's inheritances. However, immediately after the congress, a new atrocity was committed: the Volyn prince Davyd Igorevich convinced the Kyiv prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavich that the Terebovl prince Vasilko was plotting against them. Svyatopolk and Davyd lured Vasilko to Kyiv, captured him and gouged out his eyes. This event shocked all the princes: Vladimir Monomakh, according to the chronicler, complained that such evil did not exist in Rus' “neither under our grandfathers, nor under our fathers.” In article 1097 we find a detailed story about the dramatic fate of Vasilko Terebovlsky.

A brief overview of the composition “The Tale of Bygone Years” shows the complexity of its composition and the variety of components both in origin and genre. The Tale, in addition to brief weather records, also included texts of documents, retellings of folklore legends, plot stories, and excerpts from translated literature18. There is a theological treatise in it - “the speech of a philosopher”, and a hagiographic story about Boris and Gleb, and patericon legends about the Kiev-Pechersk monks, and a church eulogy to Theodosius of the Pechersk, and a casual story about a Novgorodian who went to tell fortunes to a magician.

If we talk about the historicism of the Tale, it should be emphasized that artistic generalization in Ancient Rus' was built mainly on the basis of a single specific historical fact. Almost all events are attached to a specific historical event or a specific historical person. As is known, Ancient Rus' during the 9th-10th centuries. From a fragile tribal union it turned into a single early feudal state. The campaigns of the Kyiv princes Oleg, Igor and Svyatoslav brought Rus' into the sphere of European politics. The close diplomatic, trade and cultural relations of Ancient Rus' with its southern neighbors - with the Bulgarian kingdom and especially with the largest state in South-Eastern Europe - Byzantium, paved the way for the adoption of Christianity. Which is reflected in the “Tale”. Obviously, the Christianization of Rus' required a radical restructuring of the worldview; previous pagan ideas about the origin and structure of the Universe, about the history of the human race, about the ancestors of the Slavs were now rejected, and Russian scribes were in dire need of works that would set out Christian ideas about world history, would give a new, Christian interpretation of the world order and natural phenomena. Characterizing the literature of Kievan Rus, D.S. Likhachev notes that it was devoted mainly to ideological issues. Its genre system reflected the worldview typical of many Christian states in the early Middle Ages. “Old Russian literature can be considered as literature of one theme and one plot. This plot is world history, and this theme is the meaning of human life.”19

We also note the high citizenship and patriotism of the literary monument in question. The patriotism of ancient Russian literature is associated not only with the pride of the authors for the Russian land, but also with their grief over the defeats they suffered, with the desire to bring some sense to the princes and boyars, and sometimes with attempts to condemn them, to arouse the wrath of readers against the worst of them.20

Thus, “The Tale of Bygone Years” is not only a unique historical source and literary monument, but also an example of the true patriotism of the Russian people, love for their Motherland.

3. Stylistic originality of “The Tale of Bygone Years”

The stylistic originality of the “Tale” deserves special attention, since the chronicle genre is absent in the modern literary tradition. The nature of the chronicle genre is very complex; the chronicle is one of the “unifying genres”, subordinating the genres of its components - a historical story, a life, a teaching, a word of praise, etc.21 And yet the chronicle remains an integral work that can be studied as a monument of one genre, as literary monument22. In the Tale of Bygone Years, as in any other chronicle, two types of narration can be distinguished - actual weather records and chronicle stories. Weather records contain reports of events, while chronicles offer descriptions of them. In a chronicle story, the author strives to depict an event, provide certain specific details, reproduce the dialogues of the characters, in a word, help the reader imagine what is happening, evoke his empathy.

In the stories, sometimes strength and sometimes cunning triumph. Thus, the Pecheneg prince, who was at war with Russia, suggested that Vladimir send out a warrior from his army who would measure his strength with the Pecheneg hero. Nobody dares to take on the challenge. Vladimir is saddened, but then a certain “old husband” appears to him and offers to send for his youngest son. The young man, according to the old man, is very strong: “Since childhood, no one hit him with it” (that is, threw him to the ground). Once, the father recalls, the son, angry with him, “pretored the worm with his hands” (he tore the skin with his hands, which he was crumpling at that moment: the father and son were tanners). The young man is called to Vladimir, and he shows the prince his strength - he grabs the side of a bull running past and tears out “the skin from the meat, as big as his hare’s hand.” But nevertheless, the young man is “average in body”, and therefore the Pecheneg hero who came out to duel with him is “very great and terrible” - laughs at his opponent. Here (as in the story of Olga’s revenge), a surprise awaits the negative hero; the reader knows about the strength of the young man and triumphs when he “strangles” the leather meat with the hands of the Pecheneg hero.

Some stories in the chronicle are united by a special, epic style of depicting reality. This concept reflects, first of all, the narrator’s approach to the subject of the image, his author’s position, and not just the purely linguistic features of the presentation. In each such story, in the center there is one event, one episode, and it is this episode that constitutes the characterization of the hero and highlights his main, memorable feature; Oleg (in the story about the campaign against Constantinople) is, first of all, a wise and brave warrior, the hero of the story about the Belgorod jelly is a nameless old man, but his wisdom, which at the last moment saved the city besieged by the Pechenegs, is the characteristic feature that won him immortality in people's memory.

Similar abstracts:

Inner world works of verbal art. The world of reality from a creative perspective. The social and moral structure of the world in the work. The artistic world in A. Akhmatova’s poem “To the Muse.” Temporal and spatial characteristics.

"The Tale of Bygone Years" is a large collection of Russian chronicles, the author and compiler of which was the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor. "The Tale of Bygone Years" is a revised and expanded version of more early work- “Initial Code” (1095).

At the beginning of the 12th century. The “Initial Code” was again revised: the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor, a scribe with a broad historical outlook and great literary talent (he also wrote “The Life of Boris and Gleb” and “The Life of Theodosius of the Pechersk”) creates a new chronicle collection - “The Tale of Bygone Years” " Nestor set himself a significant task: not only to present the events of the turn of the 11th-12th centuries, of which he was an eyewitness, but also to completely rework the story about the beginning of Rus' - “where did the Russian land come from, who began the first princedom in Kyiv,” as he himself formulated this task in the title of his work (PVL, p. 9).

Nestor introduces the history of Rus' into the mainstream of world history. He begins his chronicle with a presentation of the biblical legend about the division of the land between the sons of Noah, while placing the Slavs in the list of peoples going back to the “Chronicle of Amartol” (elsewhere in the text the Slavs are identified by the chronicler with the “Norics” - the inhabitants of one of the provinces of the Roman Empire, located on the banks of the Danube). Nestor slowly and thoroughly talks about the territory occupied by the Slavs, about Slavic tribes and their past, gradually focusing the attention of readers on one of these tribes - the glades, on the land of which Kyiv arose, a city that in his time became the “mother of Russian cities.” Nestor clarifies and develops the Varangian concept of the history of Rus': Askold and Dir, mentioned in the “Initial Code” as “certain” Varangian princes, are now called “boyars” of Rurik, they are credited with the campaign against Byzantium during the time of Emperor Michael; Oleg, referred to in the “Initial Code” as Igor’s governor, in the “Tale of Bygone Years” his princely dignity was “returned” (in accordance with history), but it is emphasized that it is Igor who is the direct heir of Rurik, and Oleg, a relative of Rurik, was the prince only during Igor’s childhood.

Nestor is even more of a historian than his predecessors. He tries to arrange the maximum of events known to him on the scale of absolute chronology, uses documents for his narration (texts of treaties with Byzantium), uses fragments from the “Chronicle of George Amartol” and Russian historical legends(for example, the story of Olga’s fourth revenge, the legend of “Belgorod jelly” and the young man-kozhemyak). “We can safely say,” D.S. Likhachev writes about Nestor’s work, “that never before or later, until the 16th century, has Russian historical thought risen to such a height of scholarly inquisitiveness and literary skill.”

The first part of the chronicle consists of a story about the division of the earth by the children of Noah (Shem, Ham, Japheth), about the Babylonian pandemonium and the division of a single clan into 72 languages (peoples); about the origin of the Slavs from Japheth, their customs and traditions; about the Polyan tribe; about the foundation of Kyiv, dated 852; about the first Novgorod and Kyiv princes.
Nestor brings the story up to 1111. The work, completed by the chronicler in 1113, became an integral part of later chronicle collections (Ipatiev and Laurentian chronicles).
Main topic"Tales..." - the historical past of Rus' in the context of world history. The idea is, during the period of feudal fragmentation, to point out to contemporaries the commonality of history, the ability of Rus' to reunite in the face of a common danger.

Nestor’s main task was to rework the story about the beginning of Rus' - “where did the Russian land come from, who began in Kyiv first than the princedom.” Nestor demonstrates a broad historical outlook, therefore main feature“The Tale of Bygone Years” is that the ancient author thus, through chronicle writing, introduces the history of the Slavs and Rus' into the mainstream of world history.
The main part (the story about the princes) has an enfilade composition, that is, it is built according to the principle of strictly consistent chronology. Such a composition allows you to freely handle the material, introduce new ones, exclude old events, and include material that is heterogeneous in nature and genres.

Forms of chronicle narration in The Tale of Bygone Years:

weather record (consistent, concise description of events by year);
chronicle legend (reworking stories about the distant past), Nestor uses pagan traditions and legends only to affirm moral lessons;
chronicle story - a detailed form of weather recording;
chronicle story - a narrative in which the image of the prince after his death is idealized;
documents from archives;
Life (“Life of Theodosius of Pechersk”, “Life of Boris and Gleb”).