To make the chronicle interesting and informative, start by collecting and analyzing factual material. To get started, select the information that you personally have. Then start collecting data from your relatives. Be prepared for the fact that the process will be very long, and the information will be constantly updated. Through communication with distant relatives, you can get closer and see your family in a new light.

If possible, pay personal visits to relatives, ask about the past, about loved ones. Ask for some photographs, postcards, newspaper clippings. So you can collect a lot of valuable visual material

Remember that your loved ones can get confused in memories and facts, especially when it comes to older people. To check and clarify the information, it is advisable to use the city archives, local information desks, libraries. You will certainly be surprised at how much information about your family members is contained in public sources.

Genealogical tree

If your family is large enough, names and relationships can get confusing. A family tree is a great option for structuring basic information. With it, you will not forget any of the family members and specify the main dates. There are many websites on the Internet that help you create a family tree. To begin with, you can use a similar program, and later write information on paper and arrange it beautifully.

Chronicle design

Make several sections in the annals, which will be constantly updated both by you and your descendants. An approximate structure might be as follows:

The origin of the surname; - family tree; - a brief history of each generation; - bright events from different times; - people whose fate or achievements were the most outstanding.

You can add sections, illustrations, documents as you wish. In this case, your chronicle will be interesting and lively.

When creating a chronicle, remember that this document must be preserved for many decades. Do it yourself or order a large album from the master. The pages should be made of thick paper, the cover should be made of durable material, and the binding should be as reliable as possible. It is better not to paste the photos, but to fix them with the help of special corners, otherwise they will deteriorate from the glue much faster. Write texts with a hard pencil, since the ink of a pen or printer is easily washed out by moisture and fades in the light.

Chronicles are ancient Russian writings, they described events over the years, described the life of ordinary people and the princely court, legal documents and church texts were rewritten. They covered different periods for description. In some, the description came from biblical events, and in some, starting from the settlement of the lands by the Slavs. The emergence of the state, the adoption of Christianity are described. They described all the historical events that took place in Ancient Russia. Each period described in them, of course, carries elements of the ideology and propaganda of the unification, descriptions of the merits of the princes. In addition to historical events, there is a description of the policy of the state, the way of life of the Slavs.
Unlike European chronicles, which are written in Latin, the Old Russian chronicles are written in Old Russian. What made them accessible, since in Ancient Russia there were many men and women who were literate, and there were also many very educated people.

Chronicle centers in Ancient Russia

The annals used various methods of keeping and writing. Here, for example, lists were used. These are rewritten copies of ancient chronicles. Changes were made for various reasons. If the prince changed, then it was necessary to glorify the deeds, to describe the events of past years in a new way, making changes, taking into account new events. It was also done to introduce religious moments into writing.

The concept of "codes" or "consolidated annals" is also used. Chronicle of Ancient Russia is a description of what is happening in chronology. The description takes place from the point of view of the ruling class, the entire process of keeping chronicles was under the control of the authorities. Ideology played an important role.

Kiev-Pechersky Monastery - the center of chronicle writing

This place has always been the main shrine and pride. It was here that many of the brightest and most worthy people lived, dressed as monks, after a haircut, moving away from worldly fuss and life's blessings, completely devoting themselves to the affairs of God. This is not only a shrine, but also the concentration of enlightenment. And later - the main focus of the annals. It was in these walls that the chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years" was compiled and recorded for a long time. And the monk Nestor, who created this and a number of other significant works, lived here, having done many holy deeds, for 41 years. Together with other monks, he compiled a scripture about the old Russian church, described all the important church events and gave a description of its features in Russia. After his death, the incorruptible body was transferred and still rests in the cave of the Lavra.
The Vydubetsky Monastery also plays a special role. Within the walls of the Vydubetskaya shrine, hegumen Matthew was engaged in maintaining the Kyiv code, in which he chronolized the events in the period 1118-1198. Gave them a very accurate description and disclosure, without distorting the facts. This work is also one of the written monuments, which plays an important role in the study of the history of our ancestors. It became a logical continuation of the chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years".

The Kyiv model of reference formed the basis for the creation and application of principles in writing annals. This is where the rules and methods are based.

What were the centers of chronicle writing in Ancient Russia called:

• Novgorod
• Vladimir-Suzdal
• Galicia-Volyn

Novgorod Chronicle Center

Novgorod was the largest city with a developed structure, so it became the center of chronicles. A description of the city can be seen in the Tale of Ancient Years for 859. In the XI century, Yaroslav the Wise, having ascended the throne, did not stay in Kyiv, his court spent 10 years in Novgorod. All this time, the city was considered the actual capital of Russia.

Compilation began in the 11th century with the writing of the first Novgorod Chronicle. In total, four of them were created, but the rest were written later. It included:

• Brief description of "Russian Truth"
• Brief description of the legal collection
• Description of ongoing events and processes

Vaults were also kept here, led by their posadnik Ostromir. But history has not left us any information about him.

Vladimir-Suzdal Chronicle Center

The Vladimir temple is the place where the chronicles were kept, the monks did the work. The chronicles, the earliest of those that have come down to us, there are two of them, compiled from 1177-1193, describe the Chronicler of Pereyaslavl Russian. They covered politics, church life, described the life and main events at the princely court. Everything was presented and interpreted from the point of view of the church. Only at the beginning of XII, the chronicle began to be conducted at the princely court.

Galicia-Volynian Chronicle Center

For these lands, the confrontation between princely and boyar power has always been a big problem. Chronicles were created at the court, so the main idea when writing was a strong and fair princely power, and the complete opposite - the boyars. Perhaps the chronicle was written by warriors. They described events as separate fragments and descriptions. They stood on the side of the princely power, therefore, the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe fight against the boyars, a negative description of their desire for power, passes through the annals.

The Galicia-Volyn chronicle belongs to a later period, approximately to 1201-1291. She entered the Ipatiev vault. Already later it was issued in the form of a chronology, before the design it consisted of parts:

1. Galician chronicle, compiled in Galicia in 1201-1261.
2. Volhynian chronicle, compiled in Volhynia in 1262-1291.

The main feature: church events and way of life were not described.

The first ancient Russian chronicle

The oldest Russian chronicle was called The Tale of Bygone Years. Created in the 12th century. This is a consistent chronological description of events on the territory of Russia, the place of creation is the city of Kyiv. It was redone an unspecified number of times, but no fundamental changes were made. In any case, this version is officially considered correct.
Contains descriptions up to 1137, but originates from 852. Consists of a large number of articles of different nature. And in each there is a description of a particular year. The number of articles coincides with the number of years described. As a rule, each section begins with a phrase in the form: "In the summer such and such" and then the description, excerpts from important documents or in the form of legends goes the description. The name was given because of the phrase that appears at the beginning - "The Tale of Bygone Years."

The most ancient chronicle of the indicated ancient Russian chronicle, The Tale of Bygone Years, which managed to reach our days, was rewritten by the monk Lavrenty and dates back to the 14th century. The original chronicle, unfortunately, has been lost forever. Late versions with various modifications by other authors have now been found.
At the moment, there are many versions of the history of the chronicle. If you believe them, then it was completed in 1037, and the monk Nestor is also the author. Even under Nestor, it was rewritten, because he made changes to add Christian ideology, political additions were also made. Ideology, even in those days, was an important tool for strengthening princely power. Other versions say that the date of creation is 1100. It is generally accepted that the oldest Russian chronicle of the beginning of the XII century. is The Tale of Bygone Years.

A distinctive feature is that it carries a structured description of events, does not try to interpret them in its own way. In the first place was the Will of God, its existence explained many events. The causal relationship was not interesting and was not reflected in the work. The genre of the Tale of Bygone Years was open, it could include anything, from various legends to weather reports. The chronicle had legal force on a par with the set of officially adopted documents.

The purpose of writing the first ancient Russian chronicle, called The Tale of Bygone Years, is to clarify the roots of the Russian people, the philosophy of Christianity and a description of the valiant princely power. It begins with a story and reasoning about the origin and settlement. The Russian people are shown as a descendant of Noah's son, Japheth. The basis, to which the majority is subordinated, consists of legends about the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, about wars and brave heroes. The ending consists of battle stories from the princes' obituaries.
The Tale of Bygone Years is the first important document that described the history of Russia from its very beginning. She played a very important role in further historical research and is a very important source of knowledge about our ancestors.

Old Russian chroniclers

In our time, information about the chroniclers is collected bit by bit. The centers of their writing were, as a rule, temples. Chroniclers of Ancient Russia, names: Nestor and hegumen Matthew. These are one of the first chroniclers, others later appeared. Initially, chronicles were written almost everywhere only in temples, and later, at princely courts. Unfortunately, nothing is known about the life of Father Superior Matthew, except that he was engaged in writing chronicles in the Vydubetsky monastery.

Little more is known about Nestor the chronicler. As a seventeen-year-old teenager, he received the monastic dignity from Theodosius of the Caves. He came to the monastery already a literate and educated person, in Kyiv there were many teachers who could teach him. Nestor, in addition to The Tale of Bygone Years, left us a lot of works, one of them: The Biography of Theodosius of the Caves, whom he often saw as a novice. In 1196, he witnessed the destruction of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra. In his last writings, he raised topics about the unity of Russia by Christianity. Death overtook the chronicler at the age of 65.

Conclusion

Chronicles, summary chronicles and chronicle lists have only partially survived to this day, which help in studying the history of the ancient Slavs, political events, the way of life, both of the common people and the princely court.

In the Department of Manuscripts of the Russian National Library, along with other valuable manuscripts, a chronicle is kept, which is called Lavrentievskaya, named after the person who copied it in 1377. “Az (I am) a thin, unworthy and many-sinful servant of God, Lavrenty mnih (monk),” we read on the last page.
This book is written in charters", or " veal“- so called in Russia parchment: specially processed calf leather. The chronicle, apparently, was read a lot: its sheets were dilapidated, in many places there were traces of wax drops from candles, in some places beautiful, even lines were erased, at the beginning of the book running across the entire page, further divided into two columns. This book has seen a lot in its six-hundred-year-old century.

The Manuscript Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg contains Ipatiev Chronicle. It was transferred here in the 18th century from the Ipatiev Monastery, famous in the history of Russian culture, near Kostroma. It was written in the XIV century. It is a large book, bound heavily on two planks of wood covered in darkened leather. Five copper beetles decorate the binding. The whole book is written by hand in four different handwritings, which means that four scribes worked on it. The book is written in two columns in black ink with cinnabar (bright red) capital letters. The second sheet of the book, on which the text begins, is especially beautiful. It is all written in cinnabar, as if blazing. Capital letters, on the other hand, are written in black ink. The scribes have worked hard to create this book. With reverence they set to work. “The Russian chronicler is starting with God. Good Father,” the scribe wrote before the text.

The oldest copy of the Russian chronicle was made on parchment in the 14th century. it synodal list Novgorod First Chronicle. It can be seen in the Historical Museum in Moscow. It belonged to the Moscow Synodal Library, hence its name.

It is interesting to see the illustrated Radzivilovskaya, or Koenigsberg, chronicle. At one time it belonged to the Radzivils and was discovered by Peter the Great in Koenigsberg (now Kaliningrad). Now this chronicle is stored in the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg. It was written in semi-charter at the end of the 15th century, apparently in Smolensk. Semi-charter - the handwriting is faster and simpler than the solemn and slow charter, but also very beautiful.
Radzivilov Chronicle adorns 617 miniatures! 617 drawings in color - the colors are bright, cheerful - illustrate what is described on the pages. Here you can see the troops going on a campaign with banners fluttering, and battles, and sieges of cities. Here the princes are depicted seated on “tables” - the tables that served as the throne, in fact, resemble the current small tables. And in front of the prince are ambassadors with scrolls of speeches in their hands. The fortifications of Russian cities, bridges, towers, walls with "zaborblami", "cuts", that is, dungeons, "vezhs" - tents of nomads - all this can be visualized from the slightly naive drawings of the Radzivilov Chronicle. And what to say about weapons, armor - they are depicted here in abundance. No wonder one researcher called these miniatures "windows to a vanished world." The ratio of drawings and sheet, drawings and text, text and fields is very important. Everything is done with great taste. After all, each handwritten book is a work of art, and not just a monument of writing.

These are the most ancient lists of Russian chronicles. They are called “lists” because they were rewritten from older chronicles that have not come down to us.

How were chronicles written?

The text of any chronicle consists of weather records (compiled by years). Each entry begins: “In the summer of such and such”, and then follows a message about what happened in this “summer”, that is, the year. (The years were considered “from the creation of the world”, and in order to get the date according to modern chronology, you must subtract the number 5508 or 5507.) The messages were long, detailed stories, and there were also very short ones, like: “In the summer of 6741 (1230) signed (painted ) there was a church of the Holy Mother of God in Suzdal and was paved with various marbles”, “In the summer of 6398 (1390) there was a pestilence in Pskov, as if (how) there had not been such; where they dug up one, put that and five and ten”, “In the summer of 6726 (1218) there was silence.” They also wrote: “In the summer of 6752 (1244) there was nothing” (that is, there was nothing).

If several events happened in one year, then the chronicler connected them with the words: “in the same summer” or “of the same summer”.
Entries belonging to the same year are called an article.. Articles went in a row, standing out only in red line. Only some of them were given titles by the chronicler. Such are the stories about Alexander Nevsky, Prince Dovmont, the Battle of the Don, and some others.

At first glance, it may seem that the chronicles were kept like this: year after year, more and more new entries were added, as if beads were strung on one thread. However, it is not.

The chronicles that have come down to us are very complex works on Russian history. Chroniclers were publicists and historians. They were concerned not only with contemporary events, but also with the fate of their homeland in the past. They made weather records of what happened during their lives and added to the records of previous chroniclers new reports that they found in other sources. They inserted these additions under the respective years. As a result of all the additions, insertions and use by the chronicler of the annals of his predecessors, it turned out “ vault“.

Let's take an example. The story of the Ipatiev Chronicle about the struggle of Izyaslav Mstislavich with Yuri Dolgoruky for Kyiv in 1151. There are three main participants in this story: Izyaslav, Yuri and Yuri's oyn - Andrey Bogolyubsky. Each of these princes had his own chronicler. The chronicler Izyaslav Mstislavich admired the intelligence and military cunning of his prince. Yuriy's chronicler described in detail how Yuriy, unable to pass down the Dnieper past Kyiv, launched his boats across Dolobskoye Lake. Finally, in the chronicle of Andrei Bogolyubsky, Andrei's valor in battle is described.
After the death of all participants in the events of 1151, their chronicles came to the chronicler of the new Kyiv prince. He combined their news in his vault. It turned out to be a bright and very complete story.

But how did the researchers manage to isolate more ancient vaults from the later chronicles?
This was helped by the method of work of the chroniclers themselves. Our ancient historians treated with great respect the records of their predecessors, as they saw in them a document, a living evidence of the “previously former”. Therefore, they did not alter the text of the chronicles they received, but only selected the news they were interested in.
Thanks to the careful attitude to the work of the predecessors, the news of the 11th-14th centuries have been preserved almost unchanged even in relatively late chronicles. This allows them to stand out.

Very often chroniclers, like real scientists, indicated where they got the news from. “When I came to Ladoga, the people of Ladoga told me…”, “Behold, I heard from a witness,” they wrote. Passing from one written source to another, they noted: “And this is from another chronicler” or: “And this is from another, old,” that is, written off from another, old chronicle. There are many such interesting additions. The Pskovian chronicler, for example, makes a note in vermilion against the place where he talks about the campaign of the Slavs against the Greeks: “This is written about in the miracles of Stefan Surozh”.

Chronicle-writing from its very inception was not a private matter of individual chroniclers who, in the quiet of their cells, in solitude and silence, recorded the events of their time.
Chroniclers have always been in the thick of things. They sat in the boyar council, attended the veche. They fought “near the stirrup” of their prince, accompanied him on campaigns, were eyewitnesses and participants in the sieges of cities. Our ancient historians carried out embassy assignments, followed the construction of city fortifications and temples. They always lived the social life of their time and most often occupied a high position in society.

Princes and even princesses, princely combatants, boyars, bishops, abbots took part in the chronicle writing. But there were also simple monks among them, and priests of city parish churches.
Chronicle writing was caused by social necessity and met social requirements. It was conducted at the behest of this or that prince, or bishop, or posadnik. It reflected the political interests of equal centers - the principality of cities. They captured the sharp struggle of different social groups. Chronicle has never been impassive. She testified to the merits and virtues, she accused of violating the rights and the rule of law.

Daniil Galitsky turns to the chronicle to testify to the betrayal of the “flattering” boyars, who “called Daniil a prince; but they themselves held the whole land. At the acute moment of the struggle, the “printer” (keeper of the seal) Daniel went to “write the robberies of the wicked boyars”. A few years later, the son of Daniil Mstislav ordered that the betrayal of the inhabitants of Berestye (Brest) be recorded in the annals, “and I entered their sedition in the annals,” writes the chronicler. The whole set of Daniel of Galicia and his immediate successors is a story about sedition and “many rebellions” of the “crafty boyars” and about the valor of the Galician princes.

The situation was different in Novgorod. The boyar party won there. Read the record of the Novgorod First Chronicle about the expulsion of Vsevolod Mstislavich in 1136. You will be convinced that you have a real indictment against the prince. But this is only one article from the set. After the events of 1136, all chronicle writing, which had previously been conducted under the auspices of Vsevolod and his father Mstislav the Great, was revised.
The former name of the chronicle, "Russian Timepiece", was remade into "Sofia Timeline": the chronicle was kept at the Cathedral of St. Sophia - the main public building of Novgorod. Among some additions, an entry was made: “First the Novgorod volost, and then the Kyiv volost”. The antiquity of the Novgorod “volost” (the word “volost” meant both “region” and “power”) the chronicler justified the independence of Novgorod from Kyiv, its right to elect and expel princes at will.

The political idea of ​​each vault was expressed in its own way. It is expressed very clearly in the vault of 1200 of the abbot of the Vydubytsky monastery Moses. The code was compiled in connection with the celebration on the occasion of the completion of a grand engineering and technical structure for that time - a stone wall to protect the mountain near the Vydubytsky monastery from being washed away by the waters of the Dnieper. You might be interested in reading the details.

The wall was built at the expense of Rurik Rostislavich, the Grand Duke of Kyiv, who had “an insatiable love for the building” (for creation). The prince found an “artist suitable for this kind of work”, “not a simple master”, Peter Milonega. When the wall was “completed”, Rurik came to the monastery with his whole family. After praying "for the acceptance of his labor" he made "a feast not small" and "fed the abbots and every rank of the church." At this celebration, hegumen Moses delivered an inspirational speech. “Wonderful today our eyes see,” he said. “For many who lived before us wanted to see what we see, and did not see, and were not honored to hear.” Somewhat self-deprecatingly, according to the custom of that time, the abbot turned to the prince: “Accept our rude writing, as a gift of words to praise the virtue of your reign.” He spoke further about the prince that his “autocratic power” shines “more (more) than the stars of heaven”, she “is not only known in the Russian ends, but also to those who are in the sea far away, for the glory of Christ-loving deeds has spread throughout the earth” his. “Not standing on the shore, but on the wall of your creation, I sing you a song of victory,” exclaims the abbot. He calls the construction of the wall a “new miracle” and says that the “Kyyans”, that is, the inhabitants of Kyiv, are now standing on the wall and “from everywhere joy enters their souls and it seems to them that (as if) they have reached aera” (that is, that they soar in the air).
The abbot's speech is an example of the high oratory, that is, oratory, art of that time. It ends with the vault of Abbot Moses. The glorification of Rurik Rostislavich is associated with admiration for the skill of Peter Milonega.

Chronicles were of great importance. Therefore, the compilation of each new set was associated with an important event in the public life of that time: with the entry of the prince to the table, the consecration of the cathedral, the establishment of the episcopal chair.

Chronicle was an official document. It was referred to in various kinds of negotiations. For example, Novgorodians, concluding a “row”, that is, an agreement, with the new prince, reminded him of “old times and duties” (about customs), about “Yaroslavl letters” and their rights recorded in the Novgorod annals. The Russian princes, going to the Horde, carried chronicles with them and substantiated their demands on them, and resolved disputes. Prince Yuri of Zvenigorod, son of Dmitry Donskoy, proved his rights to reign in Moscow “by chroniclers and old lists and the spiritual (testament) of his father.” People who could “speak” according to the annals, that is, they knew their content well, were highly valued.

The chroniclers themselves understood that they were compiling a document that was supposed to preserve in the memory of their descendants what they had witnessed. “Yes, and this will not be forgotten in the last generations” (in the next generations), “Yes, we will leave those who exist for us, but it will not be completely forgotten,” they wrote. They confirmed the documentary nature of the news with documentary material. They used diaries of campaigns, reports of "watchmen" (scouts), letters, various kinds of diplomas(contractual, spiritual, that is, wills).

Diplomas always impress with their authenticity. In addition, they reveal the details of life, and sometimes the spiritual world of the people of Ancient Russia.
Such, for example, is the letter of the Volyn prince Vladimir Vasilkovich (nephew of Daniil Galitsky). This is a testament. It was written by a terminally ill man who knew that his end was near. The will concerned the prince's wife and his stepdaughter. There was a custom in Russia: after the death of her husband, the princess was tonsured into a monastery.
The letter begins like this: “Se az (I) Prince Vladimir, son Vasilkov, grandson Romanov, I am writing a letter.” The following lists the cities and villages that he gave the princess “by his stomach” (that is, after life: “belly” meant “life”). At the end, the prince writes: “If she wants to go to the blueberries, let her go, if she doesn’t want to go, but as she pleases. I can’t rise up to watch what someone will repair (do) on my stomach. Vladimir appointed a guardian for his stepdaughter, but ordered him "not to give her in marriage to anyone."

Chroniclers inserted works of various genres into the vaults - teachings, sermons, lives of saints, historical stories. Thanks to the involvement of a variety of material, the chronicle became a huge encyclopedia, including information about the life and culture of Russia at that time. “If you want to know everything, read the chronicler of the old Rostov,” wrote Bishop Simon of Suzdal in a once widely known work of the beginning of the 13th century - in the “Kiev-Pechersk Patericon”.

For us, the Russian chronicle is an inexhaustible source of information on the history of our country, a true treasury of knowledge. Therefore, we are very grateful to the people who have preserved for us information about the past. Everything we can learn about them is extremely precious to us. We are especially touched when the voice of the chronicler reaches us from the pages of the chronicle. After all, our ancient Russian writers, like architects and painters, were very modest and rarely identified themselves. But sometimes, as if forgetting, they talk about themselves in the first person. “I happened to be a sinner right there,” they write. “I have heard many words, hedgehogs (which) and entered in this annals.” Sometimes chroniclers bring in information about their lives: "The same summer they made me a priest." This entry about himself was made by the priest of one of the Novgorod churches German Voyata (Voyata is an abbreviation for the pagan name Voeslav).

From the mentions of the chronicler about himself in the first person, we learn whether he was present at the event described or heard about what happened from the lips of “seers”, it becomes clear to us what position he occupied in the society of that time, what was his education, where he lived and much more . Here he writes how in Novgorod the guards stood at the city gates, “and others on that side”, and we understand that this is written by a resident of the Sofia side, where the “city” was, that is, the citadel, the Kremlin, and the right, the Trading side was “other”, “she is me”.

Sometimes the presence of a chronicler is felt in the description of natural phenomena. He writes, for example, how the freezing Rostov Lake “howled” and “thumped”, and we can imagine that he was somewhere on the shore at that time.
It happens that the chronicler gives himself away in rude vernacular. “But he lied,” writes a Pskovian about one prince.
The chronicler is constantly, without even mentioning himself, yet as if invisibly present on the pages of his narrative and makes us look through his eyes at what was happening. The voice of the chronicler sounds especially clear in lyrical digressions: “Oh, woe, brothers!” or: “Who does not marvel at him who does not weep!” Sometimes our ancient historians conveyed their attitude to events in generalized forms of folk wisdom - in proverbs or sayings. So, the Novgorodian chronicler, speaking of how one of the posadniks was removed from his post, adds: “Whoever digs a hole under another will fall into it himself.”

The chronicler is not only a narrator, he is also a judge. He judges according to the standards of very high morality. He is constantly concerned with questions of good and evil. He now rejoices, now he is indignant, praises some and blames others.
The subsequent "bridler" connects the conflicting points of view of his predecessors. The presentation becomes more complete, versatile, calmer. An epic image of a chronicler grows in our minds - a wise old man who dispassionately looks at the vanity of the world. This image was brilliantly reproduced by A. S. Pushkin in the scene of Pimen and Grigory. This image lived already in the minds of Russian people in antiquity. So, in the Moscow Chronicle under 1409, the chronicler recalls the “initial chronicler of Kyiv”, who “without hesitation shows” all the “temporal riches” of the earth (that is, all earthly vanity) and “without anger” describes “everything good and bad”.

Not only chroniclers worked on chronicles, but also ordinary scribes.
If you look at an ancient Russian miniature depicting a scribe, you will see that he is sitting on a “ chair” with a foot and holds on his knees a scroll or a pack of sheets of parchment or paper folded two to four times, on which he writes. In front of him, on a low table, is an inkwell and a sandbox. In those days, wet ink was sprinkled with sand. Right there on the table is a pen, a ruler, a knife for mending feathers and cleaning up faulty places. On the stand is a book from which he cheats.

The work of a scribe required great effort and attention. Scribes often worked from dawn to dusk. They were hampered by fatigue, illness, hunger and the desire to sleep. To distract themselves a little, they wrote in the margins of their manuscripts, in which they poured out their complaints: “Oh, oh, my head hurts, I can’t write.” Sometimes the scribe asks God to make him laugh, because he is tormented by drowsiness and he is afraid that he will make a mistake. And then there will also come across “a dashing pen, involuntarily write to them.” Under the influence of hunger, the scribe made mistakes: instead of the word “abyss” he wrote “bread”, instead of “font” he wrote “jelly”.

It is not surprising that the scribe, having finished writing the last page, conveys his joy with a postscript: “Like a hare, he is happy, he escaped the net, so happy is the scribe, having finished writing the last page.”

A long and very figurative postscript was made by the monk Lavrenty, having completed his work. In this postscript, one can feel the joy of accomplishing a great and important deed: the book writer rejoices in the same way, having reached the end of books. So, I’m a thin, unworthy and sinful servant of God, Lavrenty of mine ... And now, gentlemen, fathers and brothers, if (if) where he described or rewrote, or didn’t finish, read (read), correcting God dividing (for God’s sake), and not curse, earlier (because) the books are dilapidated, and the mind is young, it has not reached.

The oldest Russian chronicle that has come down to us is called “The Tale of Bygone Years”. He brings his presentation to the second decade of the XII century, but he reached us only in the lists of the XIV and subsequent centuries. The compilation of The Tale of Bygone Years dates back to the 11th - early 12th centuries, by the time when the Old Russian state with its center in Kyiv was relatively united. That is why the authors of the Tale had such a wide coverage of events. They were interested in questions that were important for all of Russia as a whole. They were keenly aware of the unity of all Russian regions.

At the end of the 11th century, thanks to the economic development of the Russian regions, they were separated into independent principalities. Each principality has its own political and economic interests. They begin to compete with Kyiv. Each capital city strives to imitate the “mother of Russian cities”. Achievements of art, architecture and literature of Kyiv are a model for regional centers. The culture of Kyiv, spreading to all regions of Russia in the 12th century, falls on prepared soil. Before that, each region had its own original traditions, its own artistic skills and tastes, which went back to deep pagan antiquity and were closely connected with folk ideas, affections, and customs.

From the contact of the somewhat aristocratic culture of Kyiv with the folk culture of each region, a diverse ancient Russian art grew up, united both thanks to the Slavic community and thanks to the common model - Kyiv, but everywhere different, original, unlike a neighbor.

In connection with the isolation of the Russian principalities, chronicle writing is also expanding. It develops in such centers where, until the 12th century, only scattered records were kept, for example, in Chernigov, Pereyaslav Russky (Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky), Rostov, Vladimir-on-Klyazma, Ryazan and other cities. Every political center now felt an urgent need to have its own chronicle. The chronicle has become a necessary element of culture. It was impossible to live without your own cathedral, without your own monastery. In the same way, one could not live without one's chronicle.

The isolation of the lands affected the nature of chronicle writing. The chronicle becomes narrower in terms of the scope of events, in terms of the horizons of the chroniclers. It is closed within the framework of its political center. But even during this period of feudal fragmentation, the all-Russian unity was not forgotten. In Kyiv, they were interested in the events that took place in Novgorod. The Novgorodians kept an eye on what was being done in Vladimir and Rostov. Vladimirtsev worried about the fate of Russian Pereyaslavl. And of course, all regions turned to Kyiv.

This explains that in the Ipatiev Chronicle, that is, in the South Russian collection, we read about the events that took place in Novgorod, Vladimir, Ryazan, etc. In the north-eastern vault - in the Laurentian Chronicle, it tells about what happened in Kyiv, Pereyaslavl Russian, Chernigov, Novgorod-Seversky and in other principalities.
More than others, the Novgorod and Galicia-Volyn chronicles closed themselves in the narrow limits of their land, but even there we will find news about the events of all-Russian.

Regional chroniclers, compiling their codes, began them with the "Tale of Bygone Years", which told about the "beginning" of the Russian land, and therefore, about the beginning of each regional center. “The Tale of Bygone Years* supported our historians' consciousness of all-Russian unity.

The most colorful, artistic presentation was in the XII century Kyiv Chronicle included in the Ipatiev list. She led a sequential account of events from 1118 to 1200. This presentation was prefaced by The Tale of Bygone Years.
The Kyiv Chronicle is a princely chronicle. There are many stories in it, in which one or another prince was the main character.
Before us are stories about princely crimes, about breaking oaths, about ruining the possessions of warring princes, about the despair of the inhabitants, about the destruction of huge artistic and cultural values. Reading the Kyiv Chronicle, we seem to hear the sounds of trumpets and tambourines, the crackle of breaking spears, we see clouds of dust hiding both horsemen and footmen. But the general meaning of all these full of movement, intricate stories is deeply humane. The chronicler persistently praises those princes who "do not like bloodshed" and at the same time are filled with valor, the desire to "suffer" for the Russian land, "wish her well with all their hearts." Thus, the annalistic ideal of the prince is created, which corresponded to popular ideals.
On the other hand, in the Kievan Chronicle there is an angry condemnation of violators of the order, perjurers, princes who start unnecessary bloodshed.

Chronicle writing in Veliky Novgorod began in the 11th century, but finally took shape in the 12th century. Initially, as in Kyiv, it was a princely chronicle. The son of Vladimir Monomakh, Mstislav the Great, did especially much for the Novgorod Chronicle. After him, the chronicle was kept at the court of Vsevolod Mstislavich. But the Novgorodians expelled Vsevolod in 1136, and a veche boyar republic was established in Novgorod. Chronicle writing passed to the court of the Novgorod lord, that is, the archbishop. It was conducted at the Hagia Sophia and in some city churches. But from this it did not become a church at all.

The Novgorod chronicle has all its roots in the masses of the people. It is rude, figurative, sprinkled with proverbs and retained even in writing the characteristic “clatter”.

Most of the narrative is in the form of short dialogues, in which there is not a single superfluous word. Here is a short story about the dispute between Prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, the son of Vsevolod the Big Nest, with the Novgorodians because the prince wanted to remove the Novgorod mayor Tverdislav, who was objectionable to him. This dispute took place on Veche Square in Novgorod in 1218.
“Prince Svyatoslav sent his thousandth to the veche, speaking (saying):“ I can’t be with Tverdislav and I’m taking away the posadnik from him. The Novgorodians rekosha: “Is it (is) his fault?” He said: "Without guilt." Speech Tverdislav: “To that I am glad, oh (that) there is no my fault; and you, brothers, are in posadnichestvo and in princes ”(that is, the Novgorodians have the right to give and remove posadnichestvo, invite and expel princes). The Novgorodians answered: “Prince, there is no zina of him, you kissed the cross to us without guilt, do not deprive your husband (do not remove him from office); and we bow to you (we bow), and here is our posadnik; but we won’t put it into it ”(and we won’t go for that). And be peace."
This is how the Novgorodians briefly and firmly defended their posadnik. The formula “And we bow to you” did not mean bowing with a request, but, on the contrary, we bow and say: go away. Svyatoslav understood this perfectly.

The Novgorod chronicler describes the veche unrest, the change of princes, the construction of churches. He is interested in all the little things in the life of his native city: the weather, poor crops, fires, the price of bread and turnips. Even about the struggle against the Germans and the Swedes, the chronicler-Novgorodian tells in a businesslike, short way, without superfluous words, without any embellishment.

Novgorod annals can be compared with Novgorod architecture, simple and severe, and with painting - juicy and bright.

In the XII century, annalistic writing appeared in the northeast - in Rostov and Vladimir. This chronicle was included in the code, rewritten by Lawrence. It also opens with The Tale of Bygone Years, which came to the northeast from the south, but not from Kyiv, but from Pereyaslavl Russian - the estate of Yuri Dolgoruky.

The chronicle of Vladimir was conducted at the court of the bishop at the Assumption Cathedral, built by Andrey Bogolyubsky. It left its mark on him. It contains many teachings and religious reflections. The heroes say long prayers, but rarely have lively and short conversations with each other, which are so numerous in the Kievan and especially in the Novgorod Chronicle. The Vladimir chronicle is rather dry and at the same time verbose.

But in the Vladimir annals, the idea of ​​the need to gather the Russian land in one center sounded stronger than anywhere else. For the Vladimir chronicler, this center, of course, was Vladimir. And he persistently pursues the idea of ​​the supremacy of the city of Vladimir not only among other cities of the region - Rostov and Suzdal, but also in the system of Russian principalities as a whole. Vladimir Prince Vsevolod the Big Nest is awarded the title of Grand Duke for the first time in the history of Russia. He becomes the first among other princes.

The chronicler depicts the Prince of Vladimir not so much as a brave warrior, but as a builder, diligent owner, strict and fair judge, and a kind family man. The Vladimir annals are becoming more and more solemn, just as the Vladimir cathedrals are solemn, but it lacks the high artistic skill that Vladimir architects have achieved.

Under the year 1237, in the Ipatiev Chronicle, the words “Battle of Batyevo” burn with cinnabar. In other chronicles, it is also highlighted: “Batu's army”. After the Tatar invasion, chronicle writing ceased in a number of cities. However, having died out in one city, it was picked up in another. It becomes shorter, poorer in form and message, but does not stop.

The main theme of the Russian chronicles of the 13th century is the horrors of the Tatar invasion and the subsequent yoke. Against the backdrop of rather stingy records, the story about Alexander Nevsky, written by a South Russian chronicler in the tradition of the Kyiv chronicle, stands out.

The Vladimir grand-ducal chronicle goes to Rostov, it suffered less from the defeat. Here the chronicle was kept at the court of Bishop Kirill and Princess Maria.

Princess Maria was the daughter of Prince Mikhail of Chernigov, who was killed in the Horde, and the widow of Vasilok of Rostov, who died in the battle with the Tatars on the City River. This was an outstanding woman. She enjoyed great honor and respect in Rostov. When Prince Alexander Nevsky came to Rostov, he bowed to "the Holy Mother of God and Bishop Kirill and the Grand Duchess" (that is, Princess Mary). She "honored Prince Alexander with love." Maria was present during the last minutes of the life of Alexander Nevsky's brother, Dmitry Yaroslavich, when, according to the custom of that time, he was tonsured into blacks and schema. Her death is described in the annals in the same way as the death of only prominent princes was usually described: “The same summer (1271) there was a sign in the sun, as if (as if) everything would perish before dinner and the packs (again) would be filled. (You understand, we are talking about a solar eclipse.) The same winter, the blessed, Christ-loving Princess Vasilkova passed away on the 9th day of December, as if (when) the liturgy is sung throughout the city. And betray the soul quietly and easily, serenely. Hearing all the people of the city of Rostov her repose and flocking all the people to the monastery of the Holy Savior, Bishop Ignatius and abbots, and priests, and clergy, singing over her the usual hymns and burying her (her) at the holy Savior, in her monastery, with many tears."

Princess Maria continued the work of her father and husband. On her instructions, the life of Mikhail Chernigovsky was compiled in Rostov. She built a church in Rostov “in his name” and established a church holiday for him.
The chronicle of Princess Maria is imbued with the idea of ​​the need to stand firmly for the faith and independence of the motherland. It tells about the martyrdom of Russian princes, steadfast in the fight against the enemy. Vasilyok of Rostovsky, Mikhail Chernigov, Ryazan Prince Roman were bred like this. After describing his cruel execution, there is an appeal to the Russian princes: “O beloved Russian princes, do not be seduced by the empty and deceptive glory of this world ..., love truth and long-suffering and purity.” The novel is set as an example to the Russian princes: by martyrdom, he acquired the kingdom of heaven for himself, together with “his kinsman Mikhail of Chernigov”.

In the Ryazan annals of the time of the Tatar invasion, events are viewed from a different angle. In it, the princes are accused of being responsible for the misfortunes of the Tatar devastation. The accusation primarily concerns Prince Yuri Vsevolodovich of Vladimir, who did not listen to the pleas of the Ryazan princes, did not go to their aid. Referring to biblical prophecies, the Ryazan chronicler writes that even “before these”, that is, before the Tatars, “the Lord took away our strength, and put bewilderment and thunderstorm and fear and trembling into us for our sins.” The chronicler expresses the idea that Yuri “prepared the way” for the Tatars with princely strife, the Battle of Lipetsk, and now the Russian people are suffering God’s punishment for these sins.

At the end of the 13th - beginning of the 14th century, chronicle writing developed in the cities, which, having advanced at that time, began to challenge each other for a great reign.
They continue the idea of ​​the Vladimir chronicler about the supremacy of their principality in the Russian land. Such cities were Nizhny Novgorod, Tver and Moscow. Their vaults differ in breadth. They combine chronicle material from different areas and strive to become all-Russian.

Nizhny Novgorod became a capital city in the first quarter of the 14th century under Grand Duke Konstantin Vasilyevich, who “honestly and menacingly harrowed (defended) his homeland from princes stronger than himself,” that is, from the princes of Moscow. Under his son, the Grand Duke of Suzdal-Nizhny Novgorod Dmitry Konstantinovich, the second archdiocese in Russia was established in Nizhny Novgorod. Prior to this, only Vladyka of Novgorod had the rank of archbishop. In ecclesiastical terms, the archbishop was directly subordinate to the Greek, that is, the Byzantine patriarch, while the bishops were subordinate to the Metropolitan of All Russia, who at that time was already living in Moscow. You yourself understand how important it was from a political point of view for the Nizhny Novgorod prince that the church pastor of his land did not depend on Moscow. In connection with the establishment of the archdiocese, a chronicle was compiled, which is called Lavrentievskaya. Lavrenty, a monk of the Annunciation Monastery in Nizhny Novgorod, compiled it for Archbishop Dionysius.
The chronicle of Lavrenty paid great attention to the founder of Nizhny Novgorod, Yuri Vsevolodovich, the prince of Vladimir, who died in the battle with the Tatars on the City River. The Laurentian Chronicle is Nizhny Novgorod's invaluable contribution to Russian culture. Thanks to Lavrenty, we have not only the most ancient copy of The Tale of Bygone Years, but also the only copy of Vladimir Monomakh's Teachings to Children.

In Tver, the chronicle was kept from the 13th to the 15th century and is most fully preserved in the Tver collection, the Rogozhsky chronicler and in the Simeonovskaya chronicle. Scientists associate the beginning of the chronicle with the name of the Bishop of Tver Simeon, under whom the “great cathedral church” of the Savior was built in 1285. In 1305, Grand Duke Mikhail Yaroslavich of Tver laid the foundation for the Grand Duke's chronicle writing in Tver.
The Tver Chronicle contains many records of the construction of churches, fires and internecine strife. But the Tver chronicle entered the history of Russian literature thanks to the vivid stories about the murder of the Tver princes Mikhail Yaroslavich and Alexander Mikhailovich.
We also owe to the Tver chronicle a colorful story about the uprising in Tver against the Tatars.

Initial annals of Moscow is conducted at the Assumption Cathedral, built in 1326 by Metropolitan Peter, the first metropolitan who began to live in Moscow. (Before that, the metropolitans lived in Kyiv, since 1301 - in Vladimir). The records of the Moscow chroniclers were brief and rather dry. They concerned the construction and murals of churches - in Moscow at that time a lot of construction was underway. They reported on fires, illnesses, and finally, on the family affairs of the Grand Dukes of Moscow. However, gradually - this began after the Battle of Kulikovo - the annals of Moscow are emerging from the narrow confines of their principality.
By his position as the head of the Russian Church, the metropolitan was interested in the affairs of all Russian regions. At his court, regional chronicles were collected in copies or in originals, chronicles were brought from monasteries and cathedrals. Based on all the material collected in In 1409, the first all-Russian code was created in Moscow. It includes news from the annals of Veliky Novgorod, Ryazan, Smolensk, Tver, Suzdal and other cities. He illuminated the history of the entire Russian people even before the unification of all Russian lands around Moscow. The code served as the ideological preparation for this association.

A. When and who wrote chronicles?

It would be nice to start by parsing the text itself. I would like to remind the reader that historians do not have a common idea of ​​who, when, where and on the basis of what sources the Tale of Bygone Years was written. Or rather, no now. For a long time, from the beginning of the 20th century, after the classic works of A. A. Shakhmatov on the history of Russian chronicle writing, it was believed that there were three editions of the PVL, brought, respectively, to 1111 by the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor (or rather, Nester, so , as A. L. Nikitin rightly pointed out, the name of the author of “Readings on Boris and Gleb” and “The Life of Theodosius”) was actually written, until 1116 by hegumen of the Vydubitsky monastery Sylvester and until 1118 by some clergyman close to Mstislav Vladimirovich. In addition, the presence of more ancient chronicles used by the authors of the Tale was assumed. Shakhmatov considered the year 1073 to be the oldest date in the annalistic code (“the most ancient”, according to its designation). Later historians could not agree with the authorship of one or another edition, the dating of the previous codes (while often deepening them into antiquity, right up to the end of the 10th century), but the main provisions of the chess concept remained unchanged.

Only in the second half of the 20th century, primarily through the efforts of A. G. Kuzmin, was it sufficiently convincingly shown that Nestor had nothing to do with the first edition of the PVL. This follows at least from the fact that the works that clearly belong to him (“Readings about Boris and Gleb” and “The Life of Theodosius”) are not only written in a different style, but even differ in facts from the Tale of Bygone Years. I will refer those who are interested to the “Initial Stages of Ancient Russian Chronicle Writing”. And here, in order not to be unfounded, I will at least mention that in the annals Boris (the first Russian saint) reigned in Rostov, and in the Readings ... in Vladimir Volynsky. And his brother Gleb lived, according to "Readings ...", in Kyiv and fled from there to the north on a ship. According to the chronicle, he was in Murom and from there he went to Kyiv, strictly in the opposite direction. The same is about the life of the Pechersk monks. In the "Life ..." the new Caves Monastery was founded by Theodosius, and according to the annals - by Varlaam. And so on.

It is interesting that the list of such inconsistencies was compiled by N.I. Kostomarov, that is, it is known to Shakhmatov. It was also known that the author of the chronicle, according to his own statement, came to the monastery under Theodosius, and Nestor - under his successor, Stefan. But Shakhmatov ignored this, simply stating that Nestor wrote the chronicle at a time that was “separated from his first literary experiments by an interval of 25 years. The techniques of his work during this time could change and improve ". What does it have to do with the tricks, if we are talking about very specific facts? Including those relating to the life of Nestor himself. Did he know better in 25 years which of the abbots he came to the monastery?

So from Nestor, as the first chronicler, it is quite possible to refuse. Rather, it should be recognized that his name hit the headlines of some annals later, when the real author was already forgotten. And Nestor, thanks to his works, in which he did not forget to mention himself, was a famous "writer". To whom, if not to him, was it left to attribute the creation of the annals? This is what some scribes and successors did. Note: not all. In a number of chronicles, the name of Nestor is not in the title.

Further, it was proved that Sylvester could be nothing more than a copyist of the chronicle, but by no means its successor. Well, at least because his postscript (“Hegumen Sylvester of St. Michael wrote these chronicle books…”) is at the end of the Laurentian Chronicle, where it stands after the unfinished chronicle entry of 1110. And Ipatievskaya, in which the weather article was completed, does not contain it. Now, perhaps, the majority of researchers admit: Ipatievskaya not only goes back to the same prototype, but is also a more complete and older presentation of it. A. A. Shakhmatov believed that later editors completed the Laurentian Chronicle, creating the Ipatiev Chronicle from it. Or even used different editions of PVL. Modern historians, especially after the works of M. Kh. Aleshkovsky, reasonably notice: it is easier to assume a contraction than an expansion. Moreover, the text shows that the Laurentian Chronicle is drier and less detailed. What, then, to consider that the ancient author of the Ipatiev Chronicle deliberately embellished the text and at the same time invented facts? It is much more logical to admit that the person who wrote the Laurentian Chronicle made extracts from the full version, leaving only the main thing.

Note that Aleshkovsky was even more categorical. “The text of the Tale of Bygone Years in the Laurentian Chronicle seems to be ... the result of a reduction in the text that has been preserved in the Ipatiev Chronicle. This abbreviation is not of an editorial nature, is not natural, is not the result of deliberate editing, and, perhaps, appeared not in the 12th century, but later and as a result of not one, but several scribes. he wrote. That is, he did not consider Sylvester to be an editor at all, only a copyist, and even then one of many.

And it is even more problematic to recognize the presence of a third editor. He was previously identified by various historians with various characters. So, B. A. Rybakov considered him “Vasily, the husband of Svyatopolk Izyaslavich”, M. Kh. Aleshkovsky - “Vasily from Novgorod, an attentive reader of the Chronicle of Amartol”, and so on. Now its existence is generally questioned.

As a result, the history of Russian chronicle writing found itself practically in the same situation as it was before Shakhmatov: nothing is known about the place, time, and author. Everyone puts forward their own versions. The version of A. L. Nikitin seems to be the most developed at present. According to it, the author of the PVL is a monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery and cell-attendant of the Monk Theodosius Hilarion. This character is quite historical, since it was Nestor who mentioned it: “And here are the same black Hilarion with confessions, for better, and write books smartly, these days and nights writing books in the cell of our blessed father Theodosius, to whom I sing the psalter with my mouth quietly and spinning the wave with my hands or doing some other thing”. True, apart from these lines, we do not know anything about the hypothetical chronicler. Nikitin deduces all the "data of his biography" from the text of the chronicle, first considering a priori that the chronicler is Hilarion.

But among the diversity of hypotheses there are common points. With the exception of very big dreamers, most recognize that the annals in Russia were written no earlier than the second half of the 11th century. Without going into lengthy justifications, let us at least point out that the chronicles in Europe began to be compiled after the adoption of Christianity. When Russia was baptized, remember? At the end of the X century. Chronicles were written at royal courts and monasteries. Simply because there you could afford not to think about your daily bread, but to slowly but surely fill in the sheets with stories about the past and the present. Previously, everyone had to work, not to write here! And in Russia, just during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, by the middle of the 11th century, such conditions developed. Here, for his sons, obviously, the first Russian chronicles were written. Well, or with them, since the chroniclers in Russia worked at monasteries, and not at palaces. Therefore, by the way, there are not so many secular data in the annals. Basically just listings of who was born and died when.

A. L. Nikitin, for example, after researching the issue, came to the conclusion that chronicles began to be written in the last quarter of the 11th century. “The absence in the Kiev-Pechersk Chronicle of Hilarion, beginning PVL, of any obvious borrowings from hypothetical chronicles of the 11th century, Novgorod or Kyiv, as well as the absence of any reliable evidence of those who worked simultaneously with him within 1070-1140. chroniclers, since no evidence of the annalistic activity of Sylvester has yet been found, gives the right to consider the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Hilarion the first Russian chronicler who literary depicted the events of the early centuries of the history of the Russian state " he points out. And I pay attention: literary! “A factual and textual analysis of the plots included in the PVL ... leads to the conclusion that they are all built exclusively on legendary or fictional material”, Nikitin says. That is, individual legends could, of course, be written down, some documents could be preserved (such as agreements with the Greeks, and even those, rather, were brought from Greece). But certainly not weather records. The rest was thought out based on the memoirs of contemporaries of the events and oral folk art.

In addition, researchers recognize that the texts of the chronicles that have come down to us are, so to speak, collective creativity. In the sense that they are not only brought together from several sources, but also edited by different people and at different times. Moreover, the editor did not always closely monitor how organically the information taken from various places was combined. And the scribe could make elementary mistakes, not understanding what he was copying. How much time has passed!

So, of course, one cannot trust the annals, one needs a “criticism of the source”.

From the book I take my words back the author Suvorov Viktor

Chapter 6 No one wrote about the war like that! It is necessary to specifically prove that Zhukov was an outstanding strategist. But no one has ever substantiated this, so for now we can take it as a fact that the “Marshal of Victory” understood this area insofar as (and he himself is insanely boring

From the book the Letter went five millennia [ill. Lev Haylov] author Kublitsky Georgy Ivanovich

How Shakespeare wrote The great English playwright Shakespeare wrote with a quill pen. He lived four hundred years ago. Pushkin worked in the first half of the last century. However, the same goose quills lay on his desk. There was an expression "to creak with a pen." But a good goose feather

From the book The Great Trouble. End of Empire author

12.2. Which Samarkand was the capital of Timur when the chronicles speak of the events of the 15th century? Recall once again that the names of cities used to travel quite often on a geographical map. In other words, the same names could refer to different cities. Above we

From the book Reconstruction of True History author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

From the book of Molotov. semi-dominant ruler author Chuev Felix Ivanovich

He wrote everything himself - Stalin knew the ancient world and mythology very well. This side is very strong. He worked hard on himself... Politics? He was engaged in politics all his life ... He spoke quietly a little, but if there is acoustics .... Didn't like fast. Thoughtfully and at the same time

From the book Reconstruction of True History author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

33. What Shakespeare actually wrote about In [SHEK] we show that such outstanding Shakespearean plays as Hamlet, King Lear, Macbeth, Timon of Athens, Henry VIII, Titus Andronicus "(the action of which today is mistakenly attributed to the distant past and to the wrong

From the book Secrets of the Pyramids [The Constellation of Orion and the Pharaohs of Egypt] author Bauval Robert

II WHO WROTE THE PYRAMID TEXTS? Very often, when studying ancient written monuments, "experts" do not allow texts to speak for themselves. They spend many hours studying the content of the sources, but it all ends with some work on philology or

From the book Rus and Rome. Revolt of the Reformation. Moscow is the Jerusalem of the Old Testament. Who is King Solomon? author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

2. Reconstruction of the history of the creation of the modern Bible Who, where and when wrote the Pentateuch? Specialists in the history of Judaism know from medieval evidence that this religion at one time was divided into two (at least) different currents. One of them is called

From the book Everyday Life of Russian Gendarmes author Grigoriev Boris Nikolaevich

I wrote to you, what more? The daily life of the tsarist gendarmes and police officials is quite vividly characterized by the personal correspondence of some of them, which, although partially, was safely attached to the archives of the Police Department and is now available

From the book of the KGB - CIA - Secret springs of perestroika author Shironin Vyacheslav Sergeevich

WHAT IS THE "PRISONER OF MOABITE" WRITING ABOUT? By the way, special mention should be made of Shevardnadze as Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR. During the period of “perestroika” and the reformation of the USSR, Mr. Shevardnadze (as later Mr. Kozyrev) made a lot of efforts to distort

From the book Book 1. Empire [Slavic conquest of the world. Europe. China. Japan. Russia as a medieval metropolis of the Great Empire] author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

13.2. Which Samarkand was the capital of Timur when the chronicles speak of the events of the 15th century? Let us recall once again that the names of cities could move around the geographical map and were “attached” to different cities in different eras. Above, we presented texts where, under Samarkand, there is clearly

From the book Book 2. Changing dates - everything changes. [New Chronology of Greece and the Bible. Mathematics reveals the deception of medieval chronologists] author Fomenko Anatoly Timofeevich

4. When Niccolò Machiavelli lived and what he actually wrote about in his "Sovereign" Today it is believed that Niccolò MACHIAVELLI, Machiavelli (Machiavelli) lived in 1469-1527. Encyclopedia reports: “Italian political thinker, writer, historian, military theorist. From

From the book Book 2. Development of America by Russia-Horde [Biblical Russia. The Beginning of American Civilizations. Biblical Noah and medieval Columbus. Revolt of the Reformation. dilapidated author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

1. Reconstruction of the history of the creation of the modern Bible Who, where and when wrote the Pentateuch Let us sum up the analysis of biblical history. The scheme of our reconstruction is shown in fig. 3.1. Rice. 3.1. A new chronology of major biblical events. The events of the New Testament are more ancient,

From the book Life of Constantine the author Pamphilus Eusebius

CHAPTER 8

From the book Myths and mysteries of our history author Malyshev Vladimir

Wrote in Russian The scientist wrote his works in Russian, and for a long time nothing was known about them in Europe. For this reason, the priority in obtaining an electric arc was unreasonably attributed to the English scientist X. Davy, who did this only in 1808 and described his

From the book I Call the Living: The Tale of Mikhail Petrashevsky author Kokin Lev Mikhailovich

He was writing… …Is there really nothing left for him besides his memory? He could not, was incapable of stirring it up endlessly and doing nothing but that; was incapable of looking at himself. The same, however, as well as others. Neither himself nor others - he absolutely did not know how, such was

CHRONICLE- in Russia were conducted from the 11th to the 18th centuries. Until ser. 16th century, time Ivan the Terrible, they were the main type of historical narrative, only since that time "yielding primacy to another historiographic genre - chronographs . L. were compiled in monasteries, at the courts of princes (and then kings), in the offices of metropolitans. Chroniclers were almost never private individuals, but carried out an order or order from spiritual or secular rulers, reflecting the interests of certain groups of people. That is why L. often contradicted each other not only in their assessments of events, but also in the actual basis, which creates significant difficulties for researchers of chronicle writing and historians who, on the basis of L., recreate the actual course of events.

In terms of their structure, ancient Russian legends represented sets of weather articles, i.e., reports on events that occurred in each year.

Russian chronicle writing has a long history. With the current level of knowledge, it is not yet possible to establish when they began to keep records of historical events, replacing the previous form of historical knowledge - oral stories, traditions and legends. According to the majority of scientists, followers of Acad. A. A. Shakhmatova, L. takes on a stable form and begins to be systematically conducted from the middle. 11th century The oldest L. that has come down to us is The Tale of Bygone Years. Already this chronicle of the beginning. 12th century what distinguishes it is the combination of actual weather records with monuments of other genres and even documents. The Tale of Bygone Years contains texts of treaties with Byzantium, legends about the emergence of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, a presentation of sacred history in the form of a “philosopher’s” story that prompted Prince Vladimir to adopt the Christian faith, etc. L. will retain this syncretic character later in further. Of particular interest are the so-called chronicle stories - plot stories about the most significant events in Russian history.

To date, several hundred lists of chronicles have been preserved (some of the records are known in several lists, others in the only ones), and scientists have identified at least several dozen chronicle collections. Strictly speaking, each L. is a vault, since it combines - in a revised, abridged or, on the contrary, supplemented form - the previous L. and records of the events of recent years or decades, belonging to the chronicler himself. The consolidated nature of L. made possible the path of research into the chronicle, which was discovered and developed by Acad. Chess. If two or more L. up to a certain year coincide with each other, then it follows that either one was written off from the other (this is rare), or they had a common source that reached that year. Shakhmatov and his followers succeeded in identifying a whole chain of chronicle collections that preceded the extant L. XIV-XVII centuries: collections of the XIV, XV and earlier centuries, up to the XI century. Of course, determining the exact date and place of compiling the codes is hypothetical, but these hypotheses, based on the texts that have actually come down to us and the relationship between them, allow us to navigate in the monuments included in the series that has been published for a hundred and fifty years - “The Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles” (PSRL ).

The chronicle containing the exposition of the ancient history of Russia is the Tale of Bygone Years. L. South Russian principalities XII-XIII centuries. came to us as part of the Ipatievskaya L. (see. Chronicle Ipatievskaya ). Chronicles of Rostov the Great, Vladimir and Pereyaslavl of Suzdal, late XII-beginning. 13th century best preserved in the composition of the Lavrentievskaya and Radzivilovskaya L. (see. Annals of Lavrentievskaya , Chronicle Radzivilovskaya ), as well as the Chronicler of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal. The annalistic code, associated with Metropolitan Cyprian and brought to 1408, came to Troitskaya L., which burned down in the Moscow fire of 1812. Its text was reconstructed by M. D. Priselkov (Trinity Chronicle: Reconstruction of the text - M .; L., 1950 ).

Around 1412, an annalistic code was created in Tver, reflecting the supplemented processing of the all-Russian annalistic code of the end of the XIV-beginning. XV century, close to Troitskaya L. It was reflected in Simeonovskaya L. (PSRL. - T. 18) and the Rogozhsky chronicler (PSRL. - T. 15. - Issue 1). Another source of the Rogozhsky chronicler was the Tver code of 1375, which was also reflected in the Tver collection of the 16th century. (PSRL.-T. 15). Of particular interest is the all-Russian, so-called Novgorod-Sofia code, compiled, apparently, in the 30s. 15th century (it is often defined as the “code of 1448”) and included extended chronicle stories about the battle on Kalka, the invasion of Batu and stories about the struggle of the princes of Tver with the Tatars, which were absent in Troitskaya L., lengthy editions of the stories about the Battle of Kulikovo, the story about the invasion of Tokhtamysh, “A WORD ABOUT THE LIFE OF DMITRY DONSKOY” and so on. This code, compiled, apparently, at the metropolitan see during the feudal war in Moscow, combined the all-Russian chronicle with the Novgorod one. The code came to Sofia L. I (PSRL.-T. 5; 2nd ed. not completed: in 1925 only the first issue of this volume was published) and Novgorod IV L. (V. 4, issue 1 and 2; 2nd ed. not completed).

The first monuments of the Moscow grand ducal chronicle, which have come down to us, were formed no earlier than ser. 15th century The chronicle of 1472 was reflected in the Vologda-Perm Leningrad (PSRL.-T. 26) and Nikanorovskaya L. (PSRL.-T. 27). It was based on the Novgorod-Sofia code, edited by the Grand Duke's chronicler (who excluded, in particular, the mention of Novgorod liberties). A more radical revision of the previous chronicle was carried out by the grand ducal archers in the late 70s. XV century: The Novgorod-Sofia arch was connected with the arch close to Troitskaya L. (with censored processing of the material from both sources), and with other monuments. The Grand Duke Moscow chronicle of 1479, which reflected this revision, formed the basis of all official chronicle writing at the end of the 15th-16th centuries. It has been preserved in an unpublished list of the 18th century. (in the Hermitage collection in the National Library of Russia), and its later edition, brought to 1492, was published in the 25th volume of PSRL