Subscribe to site

Guys, we put our soul into the site. Thanks for that
for discovering this beauty. Thanks for the inspiration and goosebumps.
Join us at Facebook and In contact with

In literature lessons, children learn about a wide variety of works of art. Often you can hear the word chronicle.

Chronicle Definition

Despite the fact that the chronicle is considered a literary genre, it is thanks to it that people know about numerous historical events that could be lost in time. In such records, all significant incidents were described by years, and each time the text began with the phrase “In the summer ...”, which means “In the year ...”. This is where the name came from. This is a description of events by year.

This existed not only in Russia. For example, in the famous Byzantium, people preserved their history with the help of chronicles, and in Europe there were also annals.

Russian chronicles are considered monuments ancient Russian literature, and also it is on them that the history of Russia and a number of East Slavic lands is based. The first representatives of such records appeared around the eleventh century, in Kyiv, although the events described in them date back to the ninth century.

Known chronicles

There are approximately 5,000 of these literary monuments, however, there are practically no originals among them. Once recorded historical facts rewritten and revised many times. Thus, from the fourteenth to the eighteenth century, lists - transcribed texts. Depending on who exactly and when such a list was created, it differed both in terms of the expressions used and in the events themselves, which it was decided to include in the text. In this regard, it can be said with certainty that initial historical sources not anymore, and the surviving chronicles are a kind of collections of selected recorded events.

There are several well-known lists.

• Nestorovsky. It is also called Khlebnikovsky, since the Russian bibliographer Sergei Dmitrievich Poltoratsky received it from Peter Kirillovich Khlebnikov, who collected manuscripts. The first edition of this list was in German.
• The Laurentian list was opened to the world thanks to Alexei Ivanovich Musin-Pushkin. Its component is the well-known "Tale of Bygone Years", which is still studied in schools.
• The Ipatiev list is called so because it was found by Karamzin in the Ipatiev Monastery.
• The Radziwill list was created at the end of the fifteenth century. It contains great amount images - more than six hundred. For this reason, such a chronicle is called a front list.

Differences by terrain

Regardless of which chronicle was taken as the basis, it changed greatly in connection with the area where it was copied. The first to appear were Novgorod, who focused on the baptism of their city. These entries are highly compressed, written exclusively in a business style. There are no liberties and poetic colors here.

The Pskov chronicles appeared a little later, after the creation of the story about Dovmont. They describe Pskov life in detail and vividly. Galician-Volyn are distinguished by a strong poetic flavor. Initially, the text was written without years, which were subsequently somehow signed. Annals northeastern Russia are strongly concentrated on Rostov and have practically no poetic elements.

One of the last chronicles was the Moscow "Royal Book". Soon after, such records began to form into full-fledged works, Tales and simple notes.

• Chronicle (or chronicle) - historical literary genre, representing the weather, more or less detailed record historical events. Recording the events of each year in chronicles usually begins with the words: “in the summer ...” (that is, “in the year ...”), hence the name - chronicle. In Byzantium, analogues of the chronicle were called chronicles, in Western Europe in the Middle Ages by annals and chronicles.

  Russian chronicles have been preserved in in large numbers the so-called lists of the XIV-XVIII centuries. The list means "rewriting" ("writing off") from another source. These lists, according to the place of compilation or the place of the events depicted, are exclusively or mainly divided into categories (original Kyiv, Novgorod, Pskov, etc.). Lists of the same category differ from each other not only in expressions, but even in the selection of news, as a result of which the lists are divided into editions (editions). So, we can say: the Primary Chronicle of the southern version (the Ipatiev list and similar ones), the Initial Chronicle of the Suzdal version (the Lavrentiev list and similar ones).

  Such differences in the lists suggest that the annals are collections, and that their original sources have not come down to us. This idea, first expressed by P. M. Stroev, now constitutes the general opinion. Existence in separate form many detailed chronicle tales, as well as the ability to point out that in the same story, cross-links from different sources(bias is predominantly manifested in sympathy first for one, then for the other of opposing sides) further support this view.

  The most ancient Russian chronicles - the monk Lavrenty ( Laurentian Chronicle, judging by the postscript - 1377), and Ipatievskaya XIV century (by the name of the Ipatiev monastery near Kostroma, where it was kept); but at the heart of them is a more ancient set of the beginning of the XII century. This code, known under the name "The Tale of Bygone Years", is the first Kievan chronicle.

  Chronicles were kept in many cities. Novgorod (charate synodal list of the XIV century, Sofia) are distinguished by the conciseness of the syllable. Pskov - vividly portray public life, South Russian - literary, sometimes poetic. Chronicles were also compiled in the Moscow era of Russian history (Voskresenskaya and Nikonovskaya Chronicles). The so-called "royal book" concerns the reign of Ivan the Terrible. Then the Chronicles take on an official character and little by little they are converted, partly into standard books, partly into Tales and notes by individuals.

  AT XVII century private chronicles appeared and became widespread. Among the creators of such chronicles, one can name the zemstvo deacon of the Annunciation churchyard (R. Vaga) Averky.

  There were also Lithuanian (Belarusian) chronicles, chronicles of the Moldavian principality. Cossack annals relate mainly to the era of Bogdan Khmelnitsky. Chronicle writing was also carried out in Siberia (Buryat Chronicles, Siberian Chronicles), Bashkiria (Bashkir shezhere).

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Annals(or chronicle) - a historical literary genre, which is an annual, more or less detailed record of historical events. Recording the events of each year in chronicles usually begins with the words: “in the summer ...” (that is, “in the year ...”), hence the name - chronicle. In Byzantium, analogues of the chronicle were called chronicles, in Western Europe in the Middle Ages, annals and chronicles.

There were also Lithuanian (Belarusian) chronicles, chronicles of the Moldavian Principality. The Cossack chronicles concern mainly the era of Bogdan Khmelnitsky. Chronicle writing was also carried out in Siberia (Buryat Chronicles, Siberian Chronicles), Bashkiria (Bashkir Shezhere).

Write a review on the article "Chronicle"

Literature

• Complete collection of Russian chronicles (PSRL), vol. 1-31, St. Petersburg. M. - L., 1841-1968.
• Shakhmatov A. A. Review of Russian chronicles of the XIV-XVI centuries. - M. - L., 1938.
• Nasonov A. N. History of Russian Chronicle XI - early. 18th century - M., 1969.
• Likhachev D.S. Russian chronicles and their cultural and historical significance, M. - L., 1947.
• History essays historical science in USSR. T. 1. M., 1955.
• Poppe A.//Ancient Russia. Medieval Questions. 2008. No. 3 (33). pp. 76-85.
• Konyavskaya E. L. The problem of author's self-awareness in the annals // Ancient Russia. Medieval Questions. 2000. No. 2. S. 65-75.
• Kiyanova O. N. Late chronicles in Russian history literary language: late XVI - early 18th centuries / Reviewers: M. L. Remneva, A. A. Burov. - St. Petersburg. : Aletheia, 2010. - 320 p. - 1000 copies. - ISBN 978-5-91419-382-6.(in trans.)

Sources

• Bestuzhev-Ryumin K. N.// Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg. , 1890-1907.

An excerpt characterizing the Chronicle

Natasha said that at first there was a danger from a feverish state and from suffering, but in the Trinity this passed, and the doctor was afraid of one thing - Antonov's fire. But that danger was over. When we arrived in Yaroslavl, the wound began to fester (Natasha knew everything about suppuration, etc.), and the doctor said that suppuration could go right. There was a fever. The doctor said that this fever was not so dangerous.
“But two days ago,” Natasha began, “it suddenly happened ...” She restrained her sobs. “I don't know why, but you'll see what he's become.
- Weakened? lost weight? .. - the princess asked.
No, not that, but worse. You will see. Ah, Marie, Marie, he's too good, he can't, can't live... because...

When Natasha, with a habitual movement, opened his door, letting the princess pass in front of her, Princess Marya already felt ready sobs in her throat. No matter how much she prepared herself, or tried to calm down, she knew that she would not be able to see him without tears.
Princess Mary understood what Natasha meant in words: it happened to him two days ago. She understood that this meant that he suddenly softened, and that softening, tenderness, these were signs of death. As she approached the door, she already saw in her imagination that face of Andryusha, which she had known since childhood, tender, meek, tender, which he had so rarely seen and therefore always had such a strong effect on her. She knew that he would say to her quiet, tender words, like those that her father had said to her before his death, and that she could not bear it and burst into tears over him. But, sooner or later, it had to be, and she entered the room. Sobs came closer and closer to her throat, while with her short-sighted eyes she more and more clearly distinguished his form and searched for his features, and now she saw his face and met his gaze.
He was lying on the sofa, padded with pillows, in a squirrel-fur robe. He was thin and pale. One thin, transparent white hand a handkerchief was holding him; with the other, with quiet movements of his fingers, he touched his thin overgrown mustache. His eyes were on those who entered.
Seeing his face and meeting his gaze, Princess Mary suddenly slowed down the speed of her step and felt that her tears had suddenly dried up and her sobs had stopped. Catching the expression on his face and eyes, she suddenly became shy and felt guilty.
“Yes, what am I guilty of?” she asked herself. “In the fact that you live and think about the living, and I! ..” answered his cold, stern look.
There was almost hostility in the deep, not out of himself, but looking into himself look, when he slowly looked around at his sister and Natasha.
He kissed his sister hand in hand, as was their custom.
Hello Marie, how did you get there? he said in a voice as even and alien as his eyes were. If he had squealed with a desperate cry, then this cry would have horrified Princess Marya less than the sound of this voice.
“And did you bring Nikolushka?” he said, also evenly and slowly, and with an obvious effort of recollection.
- How is your health now? - said Princess Marya, herself surprised at what she said.
“That, my friend, you need to ask the doctor,” he said, and, apparently making another effort to be affectionate, he said with one mouth (it was clear that he did not think at all what he was saying): “Merci, chere amie , d "etre venue. [Thank you, dear friend, for coming.]
Princess Mary shook his hand. He winced slightly as he shook her hand. He was silent and she didn't know what to say. She understood what had happened to him in two days. In his words, in his tone, and especially in that cold, almost hostile look, one could feel an estrangement from everything worldly, terrible for a living person. He apparently had difficulty understanding now all living things; but at the same time it was felt that he did not understand the living, not because he was deprived of the power of understanding, but because he understood something else, something that the living did not understand and could not understand and that absorbed him all.
- Yes, that's how strange fate brought us together! he said, breaking the silence and pointing to Natasha. - She keeps following me.
Princess Mary listened and did not understand what he was saying. He, sensitive, gentle Prince Andrei, how could he say this in front of the one he loved and who loved him! If he had thought to live, he would not have said it in such a coldly insulting tone. If he did not know that he was going to die, how could he not feel sorry for her, how could he say this in front of her! There could only be one explanation for this, that it was all the same to him, and all the same because something else, something more important, had been revealed to him.

Annals

(Russians). - a chronicle is called weather, more or less detailed story about events. Chronicles are preserved in a large number of lists of the XIV-XVIII centuries. These lists, according to the locality of compilation or the locality of the events depicted, are exclusively or mainly divided into categories (original Kyiv, Novgorod, Pskov, etc.). Lists of the same category differ from each other not only in expressions, but even in the selection of news, as a result of which the lists are divided into editions (excerpts). So, we can say: the chronicle is the original southern version (the Ipatsky list and similar ones), L. the original Suzdal version (the Lavrentiev list and similar ones). Such differences in the lists suggest that L. are our collections and that their original sources have not come down to us completely. This idea, first expressed by P. M. Stroev, now constitutes, one might say, the general opinion. The existence in a separate form of many detailed chronicle tales, as well as the ability to point out that in the same story, cross-links from different sources are clearly indicated (mainly manifested in sympathy first for one, then for the other of the fighting parties) - further confirm this opinion. The first in time are considered to have come down to us in numerous lists(the most ancient - XIV century) vault Lavrentievskiy, named after the monk Lawrence, who wrote it off, as can be seen from his postscript, in the city, and Ipatsky, named after the Kostroma Ipatsky (Ipatiev) convent, where it was kept. This latter scientists refer to the end of the XIV or the beginning of the XV century. Both of these lists are accompanied by various continuations: Lavrentievsky - Suzdal, Ipatsky - Kyiv and Volyn-Galician. The compilation of the original code is attributed to the beginning of the 12th century, on the basis of a postscript (in the Laurentian list and in Nikonovsky) after the year, in which we read: “Hegumen Sylvester St. Michael wrote a book and a chronicler, hoping to receive mercy from God, with Prince. Volodymyr, who reigns for him in Kiev, and at that time I am the abbess at St. Michael, in 6624, indiction of the 9th summer "(). Thus it is clear that at the beginning of the XII century. Selyvestre, hegumen of the Mikhailovsky Vydubetsky monastery in Kyiv, was the compiler of the first chronicle. The word “written” cannot be understood in any way, as some scholars thought, in the meaning of rewritten: the abbot of the Vydubetsky monastery was too big a person for a simple copyist. This collection is distinguished by a special title: “se tales of bygone years ( added to other lists: chernorizets Fedosyev, monastery of Pechersk), where did the Russian land come from, who was the first in Kyiv to start the princedom and from where did the Russian land come to be. The words “Chernorizet Fedosyev, Mr. Pechersky” made many consider Nestor the first chronicler, whose name, according to Tatishchev, was in the headings of some lists known to him, but now lost; at the present time we find it in one, and then very late, list (Khlebnikov). Nestor is known for his other works: "Tales of Boris and Gleb", "The Life of Theodosius". These works represent contradictions with L., indicated by P. S. Kazansky. So, the author of the essay, included in L., says that he came to Theodosius, and Nestor, according to own words him, came under the successor of Theodosius, Stephen, and tells about Theodosius according to tradition. The story about Boris and Gleb in the chronicle does not belong to Nestor, but to Jacob Chernorizets. The narratives of both have been preserved in a separate form, and it is easy to compare them. As a result, one has to abandon the idea that Nestor was the compiler of the first code. However, the name of the compiler is not important; much more important is the circumstance that the code is a work of the twelfth century. and that even more ancient materials are found in it. Some of his sources have come down to us in a separate form. So, we know “Reading about the Life and Destruction of the Blessed Passion-Bearer Boris and Gleb” by Jacob Chernorizets, “The Life of Vladimir”, attributed to the same Jacob, “The Chronicle of George Amartol”, known in ancient Slavic translations, Lives of St. Slavic primary teachers, known under the name of Pannonian. Moreover, there are clear traces of the fact that the compiler used other people's works: for example, in the story about the blinding of Vasilko Rostislavich, some Vasily tells how Prince. David Igorevich, who held Vasilko captive, sent him on an assignment to his prisoner. Consequently, this story constituted a separate legend, like the stories about Boris and Gleb, which, fortunately for science, have been preserved in a separate form. From these surviving works it is clear that we began early to record the details of events that struck contemporaries, and the features of the life of individuals, especially those who became famous for their holiness. Such a separate legend could (according to Solovyov's conjecture) have a title now attributed to the whole of Leningrad: "this is a story, etc." The original story, compiled partly from the Greek chronicle of Amartol, partly, perhaps, from Pannonian sources (for example, the legend about the initial life of the Slavs on the Danube and the invasion of the Volohs), partly from local news and legends, could reach the beginning of Oleg's reign in Kyiv. This story has the obvious purpose of linking the North with the South; that is why, perhaps, the very name of Russia was transferred to the north, while this name has always belonged to the south, and we know the northern Russians only from the story. The rapprochement of Askold and Dir with Rurik, made in order to explain the conquest of Kyiv by Oleg, the right of the Rurik dynasty to southern regions. The story is written without years, which is a sign of its individuality. The compiler of the compendium says: from here we shall begin and put the numbers. These words accompany an indication of the beginning of the reign of Michael, during which there was a campaign against Constantinople. Another source was for the compiler brief, weather notes of incidents that must certainly have existed, because otherwise how would the chronicler know the years of the death of princes, campaigns, celestial phenomena etc. Between these dates there are those whose reliability can be verified (for example, the comet of 911). Such notes were at least from the time that Oleg occupied Kyiv: in a brief chronological tablet included in L., the account begins directly with "the first year of Olgov, before sitting in Kyiv." The account was kept, as can be concluded from this table and partly from other sources (“praise to Volodymyr”, Jacob) by years of reigns. This account was transferred to the years from the collaborators. of the world by the compiler of the code, and perhaps even earlier, by another coder. Of the folk tales, some could be written down, others were preserved, perhaps in songs. From all this material a whole was made; it is now difficult to say how much the labor of one person participated in this whole. Code of the 12th century compiled mainly from Kyiv sources, but traces of L., conducted in other areas of Russia, especially Novgorod, are visible in it. The Novgorod vaults have come down to us in the lists not earlier than the 14th century, to which the harateic, so-called. synodal list. There are, however, traces of the 13th century vault: in the so-called. Sofia Vremennik and some other annalistic collections there is a common title "Sophia's Vremennik" and a preface ending with a promise to tell "everything in a row from Michael the Tsar to Alexander (that is, Alexei) and Isakius." Alexei and Isaac Angels reigned in the city, when Tsargrad took the Latins; a special legend about this was included in many annalistic collections and, obviously, was part of the code of the 13th century. Chronicles in Novgorod began early: in the story of the baptism of Novgorod, traces of recording by contemporaries are visible; even more important is the news: “Archbishop Akim of Novgorod has reposed and his disciple Ephraim, who taught us more, has died.” Only a contemporary could say that. Several Novgorod annalistic collections have come down to us - the so-called. L. I, II, III, IV, Sofia L., Suprasl L. and similar to it, included in the so-called. L. Abramki; in this latter, information about the last time of independence is precious, interrupted shortly before the fall of Novgorod, as well as L. Arkhangelsk. Most of the Novgorod news was recorded at churches and monasteries; in one of the annalistic Novgorod collections (Novg. II) there is an indication that "the abbot looked at the mon-re on Lisey Gora as a chronicler." There are also several pieces of news, obviously belonging to private individuals, which could be entered in the lists of finished L. or from the margins of the manuscript, where they were entered in the form of calendar notes, or could be transferred from some private notes. Novgorod letters are distinguished (according to S. M. Solovyov) by their special conciseness, as if business style. The compilers value time (and perhaps even parchment) so much that they omit words; “and you are brethren, in posadnichestvo and in princes,” says L. Tverdislav, without adding “freedom” - and so they will understand. No poetic colors, no dramatic conversations, no plentiful pious reflections - distinguishing features Kyiv L. - not in the Novgorod vaults; there are few events of Nenovgorod in them, and they got there by accident. L. Pskov began later than Novgorod: their beginning can be attributed to the XIII century, when the story about Dovmont was composed, which formed the basis of all Pskov collections. Pskov L. (especially the second one) are rich in vivid details about the social life of Pskov; only news about the times before Dovmont is not enough, and even those are borrowed. For a long time, the “Tale of the City of Vyatka” was attributed to L. Novgorod by origin, which concerns only the first times of the Vyatka community, but its authenticity was subjected to recent times fundamental doubts: her manuscripts are too late, and therefore it is better not to consider her among reliable sources. L. Kyiv has been preserved in several lists very close to each other, in which it directly follows the original L. (The Tale of Bygone Years). This Kyiv collection ends in all its lists in 1199. It consists, for the most part, of detailed stories, in their presentation having much in common with the stories that were part of the original L.. In its present form, the vault contains many traces of L. of various Russian lands: Smolensk, Chernigov, Suzdal. There are also separate legends: the legend about the murder of Andrei Bogolyubsky, written by his adherent (probably mentioned in it by Kuzmishch Kiyanin); the story about the exploits of Izyaslav Mstislavich should have been the same separate legend; in one place of this story we read: the place does not go to the head, but the head goes to the place. From this we can conclude that the story about this prince was borrowed from the notes of his comrade-in-arms and interrupted by news from other sources; fortunately, the stitching is so unskillful that the pieces are easy to separate. The part following the death of Izyaslav is devoted mainly to the princes from the Smolensk family who reigned in Kyiv; perhaps the source, which was mainly used by the matcher, is not devoid of connection with this genus. The presentation is very close to "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" - as if then a whole literary school. Izvestia from Kyiv later in the year are found in other annalistic collections (mainly northeastern Russia), as well as in the so-called Gustynskaya L. (a later compilation). In the Suprasl manuscript (published by Prince Obolensky) there is a short Kyiv L. belonging to the 14th century. Closely connected with Kievan L. is Volynian (or, as N. I. Kostomarov thoroughly suggests calling it, Galician-Volynian), which is even more distinguished by poetic coloring than Kievan. It, as one might suppose, was written at first without years, and the years are placed after and arranged very unskillfully; so, we read: “Danilov, who came from Volodimer, in the summer of 6722 there was silence. In the summer of 6723, by God's command, the princes of Lithuania were sent. It is clear that the last sentence must be connected with the first, which is indicated both by the form of the dative independent and the absence of the sentence “be quiet” in some lists; therefore, and two years, and this sentence is inserted after. The chronology is confused and applied to the chronology of the Kyiv L. Roman was killed in the city, and the Volyn L. relates his death to the city, since the Kyiv one ends with the city. In some places there is a promise to tell this or that, but nothing is told; so there are releases. L. begins with vague allusions to the exploits of Roman Mstislavich - obviously, fragments of a poetic legend about him. It ends at the beginning of the 14th century. and is not brought to the fall of Galich's independence. For the researcher L., in its inconsistency, this presents important difficulties, but in terms of the details of the presentation it serves as precious material for studying the life of Galich. Curiously, in Volyn L., there is an indication of the existence of official L.: Mstislav Danilovich, having defeated the rebellious Brest, imposed a heavy fine on the inhabitants and adds in the letter: “and the chronicler described them as a koromola.”

The chronicles of northeastern Russia probably began quite early: from the 13th century, in the "Message of Simon to Polycarp" (one of constituent parts Paterik of the Caves), we have a certificate of the "old chronicler of Rostov". The first set of the northeastern (Suzdal) edition that has survived to us dates back to the same time. Lists of it until the beginning of the XIII century. - Radziwill, Pereyaslav-Suzdal, Lavrentiev and Trinity. At the beginning of the thirteenth century the first two stop, the rest differ from each other. The similarity up to a certain point and the difference further testify to a common source, which, therefore, extended until the beginning of the thirteenth century. Izvestia of Suzdal is also found earlier (especially in the original Leningrad); therefore, it should be recognized that the recording of events in the land of Suzdal began early. We do not have purely Suzdal L. to the Tatars, just as we do not have purely Kyiv ones; the collections that have come down to us are of a mixed nature and are designated by the predominance of events in one or another locality. L. were conducted in many cities of the land of Suzdal (Vladimir, Rostov, Pereyaslavl); but according to many signs, it should be recognized that most of the news was recorded in Rostov, for a long time former center education of the North-East. Russia.

After the Tatar invasion Trinity the list is made almost exclusively by Rostov. After the Tatars in general, the traces of local L. become clearer: in Lavrentiev list we meet a lot of Tver news, in the so-called. Tverskoy L. - Tver and Ryazan, in Sofia Vremennik and Resurrection L. - Novgorod and Tver, in Nikonovskaya- Tver, Ryazan, Nizhny Novgorod, etc. All these collections are of Moscow origin (or, at least, for the most part); their sources are local chronicles- not saved. Concerning the transfer of news to Tatar era from one locality to another, I. I. Sreznevsky made a curious find: in the manuscript of Ephraim the Sirin, he met a postscript of a scribe who tells about the attack of the Arapsha (Arab Shah), which took place in the year of writing. The story is not over, but its beginning is literally similar to the beginning of the chronicle story, from which I. I. Sreznevsky correctly concludes that the scribe had the same legend that served as material for the chronicler. L. north-east. Russia is distinguished by the absence of poetic elements and rarely borrows from poetic tales. "The legend of Mamaev massacre"- a special essay, only included in some codes. From the first half of the XIV century. in most of the northern Russian codes, Moscow news begins to predominate. According to I. A. Tikhomirov, the beginning of L. proper Moscow, which formed the basis of the vaults, must be considered the news of the construction of the Church of the Assumption in Moscow. The main vaults that contain the Moscow news are Sophia Vremyanik (in its last part), Voskresenskaya and Nikonovskaya L. (also beginning with vaults based on ancient vaults). Recently, L. of this period have been diligently studied (I. A. Tikhomirov, A. E. Presnyakov), but the question of them can be considered open, because new manuscripts are constantly found (for example, published by A. N. Lebedev Moscow L.) and some already well-known ones (Nikonovskaya with drawings, introduced into the study by Mr. Presnyakov) have not yet been published. Something, however, has already been done to clarify mutual relationship of these collections (in the study of Mr. Presnyakov, the relation of the royal book to them is determined, and in the study of Mr. Tikhomirov, the relation of the so-called Novgorod IV), but something else has only been touched upon, for example, the so-called. Lvovskaya L., chronicle published under the title: “Continuation of Nestorova L.”, as well as “Rus. Temp." or Kostroma L. The surviving manuscripts have not yet been examined, and many have not been preserved. L. in the Muscovite state more and more received the value of an official document: already at the beginning of the 15th century. the chronicler, praising the times of "that great Seliverst Vydobuzhsky, not decorating the writer," says: "the first of our rulers, without anger, commanded all the good and unkind who happened to write." Prince Yuri Dimitrievich, in his search for the Grand Duke's table, relied in the horde on old chronicles; led. Prince John Vasilyevich sent the clerk Bradatoy to Novgorod to prove to the Novgorodians their lies by the old chroniclers; in the inventory of the tsarist archive of the times of Ivan the Terrible we read: “black lists and what to write in the chronicler of the new times”; in the negotiations between the boyars and the Poles under Tsar Mikhail it is said: “and we will write this in the chronicler for future births.” best example How carefully one should treat the legends of the annals of that time can be the news of the tonsure of Salomon, the first wife of the led. book. Vasily Ioanovich, preserved in one L. According to this news, Salomoniya herself wished to have a haircut, but led. book. did not agree; in another story, also, judging by the solemn tone, official, we read that Grand Duke, seeing the birds in pairs, thought about the infertility of Salomon and, after consulting with the boyars, divorced her. Meanwhile, we know from Herberstein's account that the divorce was forced. Of the L. that have come down to us, not all, however, represent types of official L.: in many, a mixture of official narrative with private notes is occasionally found. Such a mixture - according to the fair remark of G.F. Karpov - we meet in the story about the campaign led. book. John Vasilyevich on the Ugra, connected with the famous letter of Vasian. Becoming more and more official, L., finally, finally switched to bit books (see); the same facts were entered into the annals, only with the omission of small details; stories about the campaigns of the XVI century. taken from bit books; only news about miracles, signs, etc. was added, documents, speeches, letters were inserted. There were private books in which well-born people noted the service of their ancestors for the purposes of localism; there also appeared such L., a sample of which we have in L. Normantsky. The number of departments has also increased. tales that turn into private notes. Another way of transmission is the addition of chronographs with Russian events and local L. Such, for example, the legend of the book. Kavtyrev-Rostovsky, placed in a chronograph; in several chronographs we find additional articles written by supporters of different parties. So, in one of the chronographs of the Rumyantsev Museum there are voices of those dissatisfied with Patriarch Filaret. In L. Novgorod and Pskov there are curious expressions of displeasure with Moscow. From the first years of Peter the Great there is an interesting protest against his innovations under the title "L. G.". Already in the XVI century. there are attempts to pragmatize: this includes the power book and partly Nikonovskaya L. Next to the general L. were local: Arkhangelsk, Dvina, Vologda, Ustyug, Nizhny Novgorod, etc., especially monastic ones, in which local news was introduced, in summary. From a number of these L., especially Siberian ones stand out. The beginning of the Siberian chronicle is attributed to Cyprian, Metropolitan of Tobolsk (pr. Filaret, "Overview of Russian Spiritual Literature"). Several Siberian L. have come down to us, more or less deviating from one another: Strogonovskaya, Esipovskaya, Remezovskaya. The question of the degree of their reliability and their mutual relations still cannot be considered resolved (Soloviev and Nebolsin look at Strogonovskaya L. differently and therefore define the significance of the Strogonovs in the conquest of Siberia differently). important place in Russian annals, the so-called Lithuanian (rather Belarusian) annals are occupied, existing in two editions: a short one, starting with the death of Gediminas or, rather, Olgerd, and ending with the year and a detailed one, from fabulous times to the city. The source of L. short is the legends of contemporaries. So, on the occasion of the death of Skirgaila, the author says from himself: “I didn’t know how small we were then.” Kyiv and Smolensk can be considered a place for recording news; there is no discernible bias in their presentation. The detailed L. (the so-called L. Bykhovets) presents at the beginning a series of fabulous tales, then repeats the short L., and, finally, concludes with memoirs from the beginning of the 16th century. Many tendentious stories about various noble Lithuanian surnames are inserted into its text. Little Russian (actually Cossack) L. belong to the 17th and 18th centuries. V. B. Antonovich explains their late appearance by the fact that these are rather private notes or sometimes even attempts at pragmatic history, and not what we now mean by the name L. Cossack L., according to the remark of the same scientist, have their content, mainly the cases of Bohdan Khmelnitsky and his contemporaries. From L. more remarkable: Lvov, begun in the middle of the 16th century, brought to the city and outlining the events of Chervonnaya Rus; L. of a self-evident (from to), according to the conclusion of pr. Antonovich, is the first Cossack L., distinguished by the completeness and liveliness of the story, as well as reliability; extensive L. Samuil Velichka, who, serving in the military office, could know a lot; although his work is arranged according to years, it partly has the appearance of a scholarly essay; its disadvantage is the lack of criticism and ornate presentation. The chronicle of the Gadyach colonel Grabyanka begins and is brought to the city; it is preceded by a study on the Cossacks, whom the author derives from the Khazars. Some of the sources were L., and some, as is assumed, were foreigners. In addition to these detailed compilations, there are many brief, mostly local, L. (Chernigov, etc.); there are attempts at pragmatic history (for example, "History of the Russians") and there are all-Russian compilations: L. Gustynskaya, based on Ipatskaya and continued until the 16th century, Safonovich's "Chronicle", "Synopsis". All this literature ends with the "History of the Russes", the author of which is known only by conjecture. This work more clearly expressed the views of the Little Russian intelligentsia of the 18th century. and contains very dubious stories.

Literature

From the annals published "Bibl. ross. ist." (I, 1767, Königsberg or Radzivilov list): “Russian. L. according to the Nikon list ”(St. Petersburg, 1762-1792),“ Kingdoms. L." (St. Petersburg, 1772), “Dr. L." (St. Petersburg, 1774-1775, these two collections are variants of Nikonovskaya), “Kings. book "(St. Petersburg, the same); "Russian. time" (St. Petersburg,); "Russian L. according to the Sofia list" (St. Petersburg,); "Russian. L. on Sunday list" (St. Petersburg, 1793-94); “L. containing Ross. ist. from 852 to 1598 "(Arkhangelogorodskaya; M.,); "L. Novg." (synodal charter; M.,; another list. of this L. is placed in “Prod. ancient. Russian vivliofiki”, II) “L. content ross. ist. from to 1534 "(the so-called continuation of Nestorova L.; close to Nikon .; M.,); "L. Russian "(ed. Lvov, close to Nikonovsk.; St. Petersburg,)," Sophia Time " (, ed. P. M. Stroeva); "Supraslskaya L." (M., ed. book. Obolensky; abbreviated Kyiv and Novgorod); "Pskovskaya L." (M., ed. Pogodin). "Laurentian List" started ed. Moscow total history and ancient, but the printed sheets burned down in a Moscow fire; in the city, on behalf of the same society, prof. Timkovsky published the beginning of this list; publication stopped after his death. Since the beginning of the publication of the “Complete collection. Russian L. ”, in the I vol. of which Lavr. and Tr., in II - Ipatskaya and Gustynskaya, in III - three Novgorod, in IV - the fourth Novgorod and Pskov, in V - Pskov and Sofia, in VI - Sofia, in VII and VIII - Sunday, in IX and X - Nikonovskaya, in the XV - Tverskaya, in the XVI - the so-called. L. Abramki. In the city, the commission published the Ipatsky list and at the same time - a photolithographic edition of the initial L. according to this list; in the city the Lavrentievsky list was published and a photolithographic edition of the initial chronicler according to this list was made; in the city a photolithographic image of Nov. synod. L. (Novg. 1), and then the edition of this list came out, as well as Novg. II and III. In time. Tot. ist." (IX) book. Obolensky printed "L. Pereyaslavl of Suzdal"; them in the city of ed. in time." and separately the "New Chronicler" (similar to "Nik." and published in the XVIII century. "Chronicle of the rebellions"). In "Russian. ist. bibliot., III, arch. The commission published an annalistic passage about the time of John Vas. Grozny under the name "Alexandro-Nevsky L.". A. I. Lebedev published in “Thurs. Tot. ist." (, kn. 8), under the title “Mosk. L. ”, a presentation of events in the reign of Ivan the Terrible, following the“ Nick. L." Strogonovskaya Siberian L. ed. Spassky (St. Petersburg,), Strogonovskaya and Esipovskaya L., according to two lists - Nebolsin ("Otech. Zap.",); Remezovskaya (front in photolithographic image) published archeographic commission n. cap. "Brief Siberian L." (St. Petersburg,); The Nizhny Novgorod Chronicler, published earlier, is best published by A. S. Gatsiskiy (N. N., 1880); Dvinskaya L. published in Dr. ross. vivl." XVIII, republished by A. A. Titov (M., ); he also published "L. Veliky Ustyugskaya (Moscow, 1889); in Vologda, the Vologda Chronicler was published. Lithuanian L. published: short - Danilovich, “Letop. Litwy "(V.,), reprinted in Russian letters in Russov's "Memoirs" (), and A. N. Popov ("Uch. Zap. II Dep. Akd. Sciences"); detailed - by Narbut ("Pomn. do dziejow Litew."). "L. Samovidtsa” was published by Bodyansky (in “Thurs. General History”, year 2, book 1) and in Kyiv, in 1878, with a study; D. Velichki published in Kyiv (1848-64); L. Grabyanki - in Kyiv,

Opening the question of what a chronicle is, it must be said that, being a documentary confirmation of the history of Ancient Russia, it is a handwritten collection of works that reveal events in chronological order.

These documents are of interest to historians, linguists, ethnologists and philologists, as they are a source of study of past years, thanks to which we have the opportunity to learn the events of a certain era, as well as language, culture and customs. Moreover, on their basis modern history.

Annals ancient Russia were written both by individuals and by whole groups (Ipatiev Monastery). To date, historical vaults have not been preserved in the original, they exist in copies copied from the source.

The Tale of Bygone Years, which was written in Kyiv in the 12th century, is considered to be the most ancient document of Russia. The task of the compilers was to describe the historical events that took place throughout the state. Until the 17th century, chroniclers wrote entire books at monasteries and princely courts. This profession enjoyed respect among people, because it was believed that it contributes to the creation of a huge heritage for posterity.

Considering what a chronicle is, it should be noted that it takes its name from the words "In the summer ...", with which each story began. Such records were gradually collected into codes, which were divided into categories depending on the place of their compilation or the events described (Kyiv, Pskov, Novgorod and others). All of them differed in expressions and selection of news, as a result of which, over time, they began to be divided into so-called izvods.

Chronicles were written in many of them, the following are considered to be the main ones:

1. Laurentian list (origin unknown) - reveals the origin Kievan Rus and describes the reign of Prince Vladimir. Most its content is "The Tale of Bygone Years".

2. Nestorovsky or Khlebnikovsky list (origin unknown) - describes the reign

3. The Radziwill list (written in the 15th century) - has many illustrations, therefore it is called the front. The first copy was made in 1716, and in 1767 it was printed in full without any corrections.

Thus, knowing what a chronicle is, let's consider how it was compiled. Thus, small notes of incidents compiled in chronological order, as well as various legends and songs served as a source for writing documents. All materials were processed by the compiler and historical codes were written on their basis.

Depending on the place of the events described, there are Novgorod, Kyiv, Pskov chronicles, as well as Galician-Volyn and northeastern Russia chronicles.

This - these are those who have survived to this day and played great role in the development of our Fatherland. And although during the wars the opponents massively destroyed the storehouses of books in estates and monasteries, we still have the opportunity to study history from copies made from primary sources.

However, not all chronicles are official, many of them have private notes (for example, in the narrative about the campaign of Prince John Vasilyevich to the Ugra, one can find a letter from Vasian). Also, some people entered into them the time of the service of their ancestors, and chronographs - Russian events.

Thus, having understood what chronicles are and how they were created, we can conclude that today, thanks to these historical and literary documents, we have an idea about the life, customs and culture of our ancestors. This legacy plays important role in the development of modern society.