Increasing the political significance of Moscow and its development as the literary center of Russia. Moscow literature reached a special rise at the turn of the 14th-15th centuries, when it was time to sum up the results of the previous time and the process of artistic comprehension of the turbulent events of the era of the Battle of Kulikovo began. Already at the very beginning, along with the description of the heroic events of the recent past, the literary works of Moscow set tasks of a political nature: the glorification of the Moscow princes, the coverage of the role of the metropolitans in the unification of Russia and the struggle against the Horde yoke, the rationale for the Moscow path of “gathering lands”. Metropolitan Cyprian was one of the first who took up the writing and editorial pen and set such tasks for the solution. The creation of two works, the basis of which were the monuments of the previous time, the Life of St. Metropolitan Peter and the Trinity Chronicle, was connected with him and his literary circle. The Metropolitan himself did not shy away from literary work. His Greek translations and epistles to some church hierarchs are known.

The first life of Metropolitan Peter was written during the time of Ivan Kalita and, apparently, by his order. Its authorship has not been definitely established. It is assumed that the author could be Bishop Prokhor of Rostov, an associate and eyewitness of the last acts of Peter, or some unknown writer close to the Metropolitan and the Grand Duke. The Life he wrote at that time looked more like a short biographical record, intended more for church commemoration than for reading. In the edition of Cyprian, the Life turned into a highly artistic work, burdened with literary embellishment with expressions of praise for the deceased metropolitan. The life reveals many similarities in the biographies of Peter and Cyprian: difficulties and selflessness on the way to the metropolitan throne, the struggle with rivals, the intrigues of enemies, the successful achievement of the goal. Under the pen of Cyprian, Saint Peter becomes the founder of Moscow statehood, he is credited with the prophecy of the future rise of Moscow, advice to Ivan Kalita on the construction of the Assumption Cathedral and the desire to be buried in it.

In the Trinity Chronicle, compiled at the beginning of the 15th century, as in the Life of St. Peter, Cyprian's political position and literary tastes were revealed. The compiled annals were based on: the grand-ducal chronicle of 1305, written in the circle of Prince Mikhail Yaroslavich of Tverskoy, the Moscow chronicle of Ivan Kalita, which included family and city chronicles of the first Moscow princes, annalistic records of Rostov and Vladimir. It turned out to be in the hands of the Metropolitan and the chronicler of Metropolitan Peter.

The Trinity Chronicle was the first all-Russian collection of Moscow origin. The main attention in it was given to church affairs and the struggle of the hierarchs for the metropolitan throne. The chronicle also included “The Tale of Mityai”, also compiled in Cyprian's entourage. It criticized and condemned the main opponents of the Metropolitan - the protege of Dmitry Donskoy, the confessor of the Grand Duke Mityai-Michael and the Bishop of Suzdal Dionysius. Very little space in the annals was given to Dmitry Donskoy himself, the Battle of Kulikovo and, contrary to late tradition, St. Sergius of Radonezh.

At the turn of the XIV-XV centuries. the literary activity of Epiphanius the Wise, a native of Rostov, tonsured at the Trinity Sergius Monastery, unfolds. In the 90s of the XIV century, he wrote the Life of Stefan of Perm. Epiphanius the Wise reached his greatest literary maturity during the years of writing the Life of Sergius of Radonezh, whose student he was in the last years of the life of the founder of the Trinity Monastery. The lives of Epiphanius the Wise are an example of the narrative prose of that time. The prose of Epiphanius was characterized by brevity, but at the same time, the capacity of the image. It was full of valuable biographical information about the ascetics. Even in later revisions, the writings of Epiphanius have not lost their former quality.

Stylistically connected with Epiphanius the Wise, “The Sermon on the Life and Repose of the Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich, Tsar of Russia”, also created in the 90s of the century. It combined hagiographic motives and verbal praise to the Grand Duke. The Word contains little biographical information about Dmitry Donskoy, but at the same time promotes the positive role of his deeds in the rise of Moscow.

However, not all monuments of Moscow literature contained praise to the Grand Duke. “The Tale of the Invasion of Tokhtamysh on Moscow” told about a sudden campaign and the devastation of Moscow by the Horde Khan in 1382. During the first hundred years of its existence, the Tale underwent repeated editorial alterations. However, the original position of the author is clear enough. An ambiguous assessment, close to condemnation, was given both to the Grand Duke and Metropolitan Cyprian, and to the boyars, who abandoned or tried to abandon the city to the mercy of fate. The Tale also condemns the uprising of the Muscovites who organized the veche, but at the same time their perseverance and heroism in defense are noted. The author has special sympathy for merchants and merchants - the clothier Adam is one of the heroes of the defense. The author of the Tale also noted the main reason for Tokhtamyshev's ruin. This is the absence of the unity of the princes. The theme of the unity of Russia was one of the central ones in Moscow literature, its relevance filled the entire subsequent 15th century. As if in response to the Tale of the invasion of Tokhtamysh, the Tale of Temir-Aksak was written. She talked about the campaign of Timur (Tamerlane) in Russia. The central event of the Tale was the transfer of the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God to Moscow. The transfer of the all-Russian shrine and the intervention of divine guidance frustrated Timur's plans for conquest. The direction of the Tale testified to the increased political importance of Moscow at the turn of the XIV-XV centuries.

The activity of the writer of the middle of the 15th century was also connected with Moscow. Pachomija Logofeta, Serb by origin. In Moscow, he completed the "Chronograph of 1441". This particular type of historical writing came from Byzantium. This was the first attempt to present the history of Russia against the backdrop of events of global significance. Pachomius Logothetes was considered a master of emotional style. His name is also associated with the mass processing of hagiographic literature, most of which has come down to us under his authorship. Especially popular was the Life of Sergius of Radonezh written by him, which has come down to us in many editions, lists and variants. From him comes the beginning of the mythologization of the images of heroes, the distortion of many real features of historical figures.

The main features and ideas of early Moscow literature were reflected in the stories and legends of the so-called Kulikovo cycle. All of them are united by a common plot, the central event of which was the Battle of Kulikovo in 1380. The Kulikovo cycle included “Zadonshchina”, the annalistic Tale of the Battle of Kulikovo, the Legend of the Battle of Mamaev. All of them are presented in a variety of lists and editions. Of particular difficulty is the determination of the time of their writing. The earliest list of "Zadonshchina" refers to 1479. And the lists that have come down to us of the Legend of the Battle of Mamaev gravitate already to the 16th century. Only a brief annalistic version of the story about the Battle of Kulikovo can be attributed to the first half of the 15th century. Unlike later times, there is no mention here of the blessing of the Russian army by Sergius of Radonezh, the monks Oslyaba and Peresvet, the merits of Vladimir Serpukhovsky and Dmitry Bobrok on the Kulikovo field. There are no details about the course of the battle itself. All of these news, for the most part related to unreliable, appeared much later. So, in the Legend, Metropolitan Cyprian is mentioned, blessing the Russian army when it leaves Moscow, although Cyprian himself was not in 1380 either in Moscow or in other cities of North-Eastern Russia. The appearance of these works was associated with the events of the Standing on the Ugra River in 1480, when the Horde yoke was overthrown. It was at this time that the writers turned to the events of a hundred years ago, in the center of which was the Battle of Kulikovo. The Kulikovo cycle reflected the ideas and attitudes of contemporaries of the formation of a unified Russian state by the time when Russia was only gaining strength. Therefore, they wrote more not about how it was, but about how it should have been.

Nevertheless, these works were based on ideas developed by Russian literature at the turn of the 14th-15th centuries: the overthrow of the Horde yoke, the unification of Russia, retribution against the conquerors, the moral superiority of the superiority of Russians over the Tatars. Literary monuments of the past also had a significant influence on the formation of the Kulikovo cycle: chronicles, the Life of Sergius of Radonezh, “The Tale of Igor's Campaign”, folk tales.

The annalistic monuments of Moscow in the first half of the 15th century can be judged by the vaults of the end of this century, when the process of unification of Russia into a single state was already completed. They do not provide any information about the creation of major chronicle works in Moscow after the writing of the Trinity Chronicle. In Moscow, only brief princely and metropolitan chronicles were kept, reflecting local and church history. It was a period of preparation of materials for the creation of an all-Russian code. Metropolitan Photius did some work in this direction. In his office, records were made with all-Russian and pro-Moscow news. In the 1930s and 1940s, the so-called Novgorod-Sofia code was compiled, which served as the basis for further Moscow and Novgorod chronicle writing. His appearance is associated with the metropolitan office. which during the period of the feudal war moved around Russia. The code was written in Moscow, Novgorod, Pskov and other cities. The fratricidal war and the devastation of the Horde were the main concern of the chronicler. He considered the unity of all Russian lands to be the way out of the difficult situation. He was one of the first to turn to the collection of complete information about the struggle of the Russian people against the yoke, he covered in detail the events of the battle on Kalka in the 13th century, the uprising in Tver, the Battle of Kulikovo. The arch in its original form has not been preserved. His ideas about the equality of Russian lands and cities were not convenient for the grand ducal chroniclers.

With the advent of writing and the spread of literacy, ancient Russian literature developed.

Chronicles are monuments of historical writing and literature of Ancient Russia. The narration in them was carried out by years: the chroniclers consistently recorded the events that occurred in a particular year. The appearance of the first historical works dates back to the time of Yaroslav the Wise. Chronicles were created in Kyiv and Novgorod, on their basis, the monk Nestor in the 11th century compiled the annalistic code that has come down to us. "The Tale of Bygone Years"(The Primary Chronicle), which contains a summary of the ancient history of the Slavs, as well as the history of Russia until 1100.

The NIRO library invites you to familiarize yourself with the book "Old Russian Chronicles", in which you will find the text of the Primary Chronicle, as well as the Kyiv and Galicia-Volyn Chronicles.

"The Tale of Bygone Years" became part of Laurentian Chronicle, which got its name from the monk Lawrence, who copied it in 1377. The chronicle, together with The Tale of Bygone Years, contains a description of the events that took place in the southern Russian principalities, and then in Vladimir-Suzdal Russia. The full text of the Tale according to the Laurentian list can be found in the book

Thanks to Lavrenty, we have not only the most ancient copy of The Tale of Bygone Years, but also the only text of Vladimir Monomakh's Teachings to Children. Vladimir Vsevolodovich Monomakh's "Instruction to Children" is addressed not only to children - the heirs of state power, but also to everyone who reads it. You can get acquainted with the text of the "Instruction" and its translation by clicking on the link.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign"- a literary monument of the XII century, which is based on a historical event - the unsuccessful campaign of Novgorod-Northern Prince Igor Svyatoslavovich against the Polovtsians in 1185.

Edition spread

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign"

The only copy of the Lay has come down to us as part of a collection that was kept in the library of the Spaso-Yaroslavl Monastery. The name of the author and the exact date of writing the "Lay" is unknown. Most researchers believe that it was created at the end of the XII century.

"Domostroy" is one of the most famous ancient Russian literary monuments. It reflects the ideals of spiritual, social and family life, vividly shows pictures of medieval life, describes rituals associated with centuries-old Russian traditions.

Chronicles as monuments of historical writing and literature of Ancient Russia

Type of work: Essay Subject: Russian Literature Pages: 16

Detailed information about work

Excerpt from work

2. The Primary Chronicle as the Main Source for Studying the First Period of Our History

Turning to the study of the first period of our history, it is impossible not to complete one more preparatory task: it is necessary to consider the composition and nature of the Primary Chronicle, the main source of our information about this period.

We have rather diverse and versatile information about the first centuries of our history. Such are especially the foreign news of Patriarch Photius of the 9th century, Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus and Leo the Deacon of the 10th century, the legends of the Scandinavian sagas and a number of Arab writers of the same centuries, Ibn Khordadbe, Ibn Fadlan, Ibn Dasta, Masudi and others. We are not talking about native written monuments, which have been stretching in an ever-expanding chain since the 11th century, and material monuments, about temples, coins and other things that have survived from those times.

All these are separate details that do not add up to anything whole, scattered, sometimes bright points that do not illuminate the entire space. The Primary Chronicle makes it possible to unite and explain these separate data.

At first, it presents an intermittent, but, as time goes on, the more and more consistent story about the first two and a half centuries of our history, and not a simple story, but illuminated by the compiler’s integral, carefully worked out view of the beginning of Russian history.

Chronicle writing was a favorite pastime of the ancient scribes. Having begun by obedient imitation of the external methods of Byzantine chronography, they soon assimilated its spirit and concepts, over time developed certain features of chronicle presentation, their own style, a solid and integral historical outlook with a uniform assessment of historical events, and sometimes achieved remarkable art in their work. Chronicle writing was considered a charitable, edifying deed.

Therefore, not only individuals recorded for themselves, sometimes in the form of fragmentary notes on manuscripts, individual events that took place in the fatherland, but also at individual institutions, churches and especially monasteries, weather records of memorable incidents were kept for the common benefit / 6, site /.

In addition to such private and church records, official chronicles were also kept at the princely courts. From the letter of the Volyn prince Mstislav, preserved in the Volyn chronicle, dating back to 1289, it is clear that such an official chronicle was kept at the court of this prince, which had some kind of political purpose. Having punished the inhabitants of Berestye for sedition, Mstislav adds in the letter: but I am the chronicler who yelled at them. With the formation of the Muscovite state, the official chronicle at the sovereign's court received a particularly wide development.

The chronicles were kept mainly by clerics, bishops, simple monks, priests, the official Moscow chronicle was kept by clerks. Along with the events important for the whole earth, the chroniclers entered into their records mainly the affairs of their region. Over time, a significant stock of private and official local records accumulated under the hands of ancient Russian scribes.

The chroniclers who followed the initial local chroniclers collected these records, reduced them to a single continuous weather story about the whole earth, to which, for their part, they added a description of several subsequent years.

This is how secondary annals or all-Russian annalistic codes were compiled, compiled by subsequent chroniclers from ancient, primary records.

To understand this rather chaotic stock of Russian chronicle writing, to group and classify lists and editions, to find out their sources, composition and mutual relationship, and to reduce them to the main chronicle types - such is the preliminary complex critical work on Russian chronicle writing, begun long ago, actively and successfully continued by a number of researchers and not yet finished.

Introduction 3

1. First chronicler 5

2. Primary Chronicle as the main source for the study of the first period of our History 8

3. The oldest lists of the initial chronicle 11

Conclusion 14

References 16

When a modern researcher picks up an ancient Russian source, he must inevitably face the question: how adequately can he perceive a text created almost a millennium ago?

Naturally, in order to understand any informational message, it is necessary to know the language in which it is transmitted. But the problem is not as simple as it might seem at first glance.

First of all, one cannot be sure that linguists have managed to fix all the meanings of all the words found in ancient Russian sources.

Old Russian texts, apparently, can be rightly attributed to the second of these stages in the development of the language. The descriptions in them are still non-terminological, but already allow us to typify what is happening. However, the degree of generalization of chronicle descriptions is less than in the texts familiar to us; they are much more specific than modern "protocol" records.

Concretization is achieved, in particular, by indirectly assigning additional, so to speak, clarifying names to the described people, actions, events through the use of “quotes” from authoritative and, presumably, well-known texts to the potential reader in the descriptions.

The chronicler who is talking to us finds himself in the position of a missionary who has fallen into the country of the infidels. His speeches are largely incomprehensible to the uninitiated "savages". Their perception occurs at the level of familiar images and categories. At the same time, however, the initial positions and metaphors are subjected to such deformations and metamorphoses that the associative series that are born in the heads of the "initiates" very often lead their thoughts not at all where the "missionary" was going to direct.

At best, the initial and final images are connected by some external resemblance, at worst, from the Old Testament legal norm cited in a legislative monument popular with Russian historians, it is concluded that Ancient Russia was an early feudal state.

But most importantly, it is almost impossible to establish how far or close the broadcast image and the perceived phantom are; for this, in the overwhelming majority of cases, there are no objective criteria for comparison.

1. The first chronicler

Already at the beginning of the 13th century, there was a legend in the Kiev-Pechersk monastery that it was a monk of the same Nestor monastery. This Nestor is mentioned in his letter to Archimandrite Akindinus by the monk of the same monastery Polycarp, who wrote at the beginning of the 13th century.

Historiographer Tatishchev knew that Nestor was born on Beloozero. Nestor is known in our ancient literature as the author of two narratives, the life of St. Theodosius and the legend of the holy princes Boris and Gleb. Comparing these monuments with the corresponding places of the Primary Chronicle known to us, we found irreconcilable contradictions.

These contradictions between the chronicle and the named monuments are explained by the fact that the legends about Boris and Gleb, about the Caves Monastery and the Monk Theodosius, read in the chronicle, do not belong to the chronicler, were inserted into the chronicle by the compiler of the code and written by other authors, the first by a monk of the 11th century. James, and the last two, placed in the annals under 1051 and 1074, together with the third story under 1091 about the transfer of the relics of the Monk Theodosius, represent torn parts of one whole story written by the tonsured and disciple Theodosiev, who, as an eyewitness, knew Theodosius and about the monastery of his time more than Nestor, who wrote according to the stories of the elder brothers of the monastery.

However, these contradictions gave rise to some scholars to doubt that the Primary Chronicle belonged to Nestor.

Doubting that the ancient Kievan chronicle belonged to Nestor, some researchers stop at this postscript as evidence that the original Kievan chronicler was Sylvester, abbot of the Mikhailovsky Vydubitsky Monastery in Kyiv, who previously lived as a monk in the Pechersky Monastery. But this assumption is also doubtful. If the ancient Kievan chronicle ended in 1110, and Sylvester made an addition in 1116, then why did he skip the intervening years without writing down the events that took place in them, or why did he make an addition not simultaneously with the end of the annals, but five or six years later?

Bibliography

1. Danilevsky I. I. Ancient Russia through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (IX-XII centuries); Course of lectures: Textbook for university students.- M.: Aspect Press, 1998

2. Darkevich V. P. Origin and development of cities of ancient Russia (X XIII centuries) M., 1997

3. Old Russian settlements // Ancient Russia: City, castle, village. M., 1985.

4. Klyuchevsky V. O., Russian history, full course of lectures, M., 1980

5. Laurentian Chronicle (Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles. Vol. 1). M., 1997.

6. Mavrodin VV Formation of the Old Russian state. L., 1995

7. Pokrovsky M. N. Russian history since ancient times. Ed. 6th. L., 1994.

8. Radzivilov Chronicle // PSRL. L., 1989. T. 38.

9. Cherepnin L. V. Russian historiography until the 19th century: a course of lectures. M., 1997

Fill out the form with current work

OR
↓

I. General characteristics of the poetic reform The first major historical work associated with the name of Trediakovsky was the reform of versification (17,341,735). This reform is in no direct relation to the early attempts of some educated foreigners to write Russian tonic verses. For a Swede, a Dane and a German who was abandoned by chance...

Balmont and Scriabin had a great friendship. They both "would be seekers of new sounds." Their contemporaries noticed that these two friends looked at all the other composers and poets as their forerunners. About Scriabin playing the piano, Balmont said this: "he kisses the sounds with his fingers." This comparison conveyed very subtly...

It is the sublime interpretation of light in the plays, the clear geometricity of color images, the perception of color through correlation with light that makes it possible to compare Chekhov's writing style with stained glass painting. An excursion into the history of the use of stained-glass windows in churches confirms this idea. In temples, the main task was not so much to emphasize the brightness of the color compositions of stained-glass windows...

Before the Russian society of the 40-50s. 18th century became one of the urgent tasks of creating a national public theater. The first such attempt under Peter I was unsuccessful. In the following decades after Peter's death, the court theater fell into the hands of visiting foreign troupes (French, German, and later Italian). These troupes have certain merits ...

For Tyutchev - and in this he agrees with Plato and Schelling - the highest goal of poetry is the creation of myths. Almost all of his great creations, from the earliest to the latest, are myths, that is, in short, action symbols. In this sense, there is no "turn towards realism" in his later work...

The need for a general plan for the publication of annals has been recognized for a long time. This problem, connected with the definition of the principles for choosing texts for publication, has recently acquired particular relevance. Recently, reprints of a number of chronicles from the PSRL series have appeared by the publishing house "Languages ​​of Russian Culture", as well as in the new series "Russian Chronicles" being prepared in Ryazan (A. I. Tsepkov).

Having republished the 1st and 2nd volumes of PSRL, Moscow publishers found themselves, however, in a difficult situation - to reproduce, for example, the 3rd volume of PSRL, published in 1841, is completely pointless - it in no way meets modern scientific requirements . As a result, the H1 edition by A. N. Nasonov (1950) was reprinted, which is true from a scientific point of view, but, strictly speaking, does not correspond to the principle of reprint reproduction of the series. As for the Ryazan series (under the editorship of A. I. Tsepkov), it has an educational rather than a purely scientific character, reproducing publications that have long become a bibliographic rarity. Thus, the generally unsystematic approach to the choice of published annalistic monuments has not yet been replaced by a new plan of publications.

However, back in 1936, such a plan was formulated by M. D. Priselkov (published by S. N. Valk in 1948)]. In the same 1948, M. N. Tikhomirov proposed his own plan for publishing chronicles, polemical in relation to the plan of M. D. Priselkov.

As is known, neither plan was implemented and was practically forgotten, however, when discussing the principles of publishing Old Russian chronicles and the problems associated with the choice of text, we must return to consideration of the proposals of these researchers. The main striking difference between M. D. Priselkov’s plan and M. N. Tikhomirov’s plan is that the former proposes a complete revision of the traditional principles for publishing annals, including their total renaming.

Indeed, as has been noted more than once, many names of annalistic monuments arose under the influence of random circumstances and can sometimes only confuse researchers. In those cases when the chronicle is called, according to the last dates found in it, “the code of such and such a year”, there is a possibility of referring the same name to different monuments. As D.S. Likhachev noted, “the end of the 15th and the beginning of the 16th century. “Clogged” in the history of chronicle writing with a huge number of codes with dates, and these dates are already beginning to be repeated, creating confusion (for example, two different codes have recently been introduced into scientific use - both called the code of 1518 and two different codes of 1484. )".

Thus, the issue of systematization and putting in order the names of chronicle monuments themselves is on the agenda, however, an analysis of the project proposed by M.D. Priselkov allows us to see its weaknesses. It is obvious that although this project is indeed based on the achievements in the study of the history of chronicle writing by A. A. Shakhmatov and his followers, however, the hypothetical nature of a number of reconstructed stages of chronicle writing does not allow rigidly fixing preliminary conclusions by renaming all monuments. Of course, "such a renaming could be considered relatively expedient only if the study of the history of chronicle writing could be considered completely completed and the discovery of new chronicles excluded."

A.G. Bobrov. Textology / D.S. Likhachev. Textology - St. Petersburg, 2001