Bibliography

"The Golden Word of Russian Literature"

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is an ever-blooming trunk stretching branches heavy with fruits into the future...

From a monument of antiquity, it turns into a living asset of a creative culture.

P. Antokolsky

About eight centuries ago, in 1187, "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" was created - a brilliant work of ancient Russian literature. The passing centuries have not muffled its poetic sound and have not erased the colors. Interest in "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" has not only not diminished, but is becoming more and more broad, more and more profound.

Why is this work so durable, so small in size? Why do the ideas of The Word continue to excite us?

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is imbued with a great human feeling - a warm, tender and strong feeling of love for the motherland. "The Word" is literally filled with it. This feeling is also reflected in the emotional excitement with which the author of the Lay speaks of the defeat of Igor's troops, and in the way he conveys the words of the lamentation of Russian wives for the dead soldiers, and in the broad picture of Russian nature, and joy at the return of Igor.

That is why the meaning of the Word has always been so great. His call for the defense of the motherland, for the protection of the peaceful labor of its people, resounds even today with unrelenting force.

the word prince igor literature

The meaning of the "Word" is especially great for us also because it is a living and indisputable evidence of the height of ancient Russian culture, its originality and its nationality.

I chose this topic because, in my opinion, it is relevant today and interesting in a historical sense. "The word about Igor's regiment" has long disturbed the minds and hearts of people of various professions, not only in all corners of our country, but also abroad. Many professional and amateur translations of the Lay have been created, as well as many research papers on this subject.

But at the same time, this greatest work of ancient Russian literature is still not fully understood, since we have by no means studied the historical soil on which this, in the words of the researcher of the Lay P. Antokolsky, "ever-blooming trunk" grew up. .

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is also interesting because it is the first achievement of its kind in the thought of the people, civil, patriotic. It is not only the voice of an unknown author, but also the voice of the people - the voice of the people, tired of the endless strife and civil strife of the princes. "Word" - a call for unity. For this alone, it deserves a detailed, detailed study.

And, finally, I have always been interested in ancient Russian literature, and in particular "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" - the brightest and most interesting work.

Russia of time "Words about Igor's Campaign"

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" with brilliant force and penetration reflected the main disaster of its time - the lack of political unity of Russia, the enmity of the princes among themselves and, as a result, the weakness of its defense against the ever-increasing pressure of the southern nomadic peoples and eastern neighbors of Russia.

The reason for the separation of Russia was the developing feudal relations. A multitude of feudal "semi-states" was formed - principalities that were at enmity with each other, contesting each other's possessions. The ancient Russian state, united in the 10th - early 19th centuries, completely disintegrates in the 12th century.

The Polotsk land, which remained in the possession of Izyaslav, was the first to stand apart. This subsequently led to endless internecine wars between the princes of Polotsk and the rest of the Russian princes - the descendants of Yaroslav the Wise.

After the death of Yaroslav the Wise, further division of the Russian land began. According to the will of Yaroslav, his eldest son Izyaslav received Kyiv, the next, Svyatoslav, - Chernigov, Vsevolod - Pereyaslavl, Igor - Vladimir Volynsky, Vyacheslav - Smolensk. At the end of the 19th century, the Chernigov principality was finally assigned to the son of Svyatoslav Yaroslavich - Oleg and his offspring.

This isolation Chernihiv land and assigning it to the offspring of Oleg Svyatoslavovich was as tragic as the assignment of Polotsk land to the offspring of Vseslav Polotsky. Oleg Svyatoslavovich was at enmity with Vladimir Monomakh all his life, and subsequently the strife of the Olgovichi and Monomakhovichi filled the entire 12th and first half of the 13th century with their noise. The author of the Lay nicknamed Oleg Svyatoslavich Oleg Gorislavich, correctly pointing out in him one of those princes from whom the Russian land would "shine and stretch with strife."

The isolation of individual lands as hereditary princely possessions was recognized under Vladimir Monomakh at the Lyubech Congress of Princes (1097): "Let everyone keep their fatherland" (let everyone own the father's land).

But the decision of the Lyubich Congress, which recognized the division of the Russian land, did not even lead to a temporary agreement between the princes, and was immediately violated. One of the princes, Vasilko Terebovlsky, was treacherously seized by two others and blinded. The princely strife began again. Calling for unity, the people of Kyiv turned to Vladimir Monomakh with the words: “We pray, prince, to you and your brother, you cannot destroy the Russian lands. and your grandfathers with great labor and courage, barking across the Russian land, searching for other lands, and you want to destroy the Russian land. The call of the people to unity sounded on the lips of every generation of Russian people, in every principality, in every city.

Galicia, Ryazan, Smolensk, Vladimir Volynsky, Vladimir Zalessky, Rostov, Novgorod - all these regional centers are resolutely striving for political independence; The princes forget about "this great" and get bogged down in endless fratricidal wars. The times of political unity and external power of Russia are receding into the past.

The internecine struggle of the princes was complicated by the Polovtsian danger hanging over Russia. The Polovtsians, a people of Turkic origin, occupied the steppes between the Volga and the Dnieper in the middle of the 11th century. They were so powerful military force that more than once threatened the very existence of the Byzantine Empire, which had to turn to the Russian princes for help.

The Russian princes managed to win major victories over the Polovtsians. But their sudden raids destroyed agriculture, ruined the civilian population of Russian villages and cities. The boundless "wild field", the "unknown country" was ready to absorb in the ebb and flow of the numerous centers of Russian culture. Waves of steppe raids broke against the staunch resistance of individual principalities. Part of the Polovtsy settled on the border lands under the names of "Kovuev", "their filthy". But the strife of the Russian princes was convenient for new invasions. The princes called on the Polovtsy to help themselves, thus shaking the buildings of Russian independence that had been built for centuries.

So era feudal fragmentation, natural in historical development of all peoples, suddenly acquired a sharp, tragic character because of the terrible Polovtsian danger.

At the time of the creation of the Lay, there was no shortage of energetic and capable princes. The trouble of Russia was that their activities were not coordinated, the princes understood their tasks differently, striving primarily to strengthen their principality. At the same time, for each of the princes striving for the unity of Russia, there were up to a dozen of those who forgot everything and everything for the sake of achieving selfish goals, heading their way to the "golden table".

The author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign was the spokesman for the idea of ​​uniting the Rhone Land.

Russia in the XII century

Events of Russian history, preceding the campaign of Prince Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky

Most of the feudal strife was associated with the enmity of the Monomakhoviches and the Olgoviches. Both of them constantly used the help of the Polovtsy in campaigns against neighboring Russian principalities. Especially often, the Chernigov Olgoviches turned to the help of the Polovtsy, who were looking for an alliance and peace with the restless population of the adjacent steppes. And this Polovtsian "help", as well as independent campaigns of the Polovtsy, became a cruel national disaster from the end of the 11th century. The raids intensified especially in the 70s of the XII century, when, according to the chronicler, "the army without a break" begins.

By that time, the Russian princes had experienced and battle-hardened warriors who made up the main core of their army - the squad. In addition to the squads, the princes, if necessary, could assemble a large army of peasants and townspeople. There were outposts on the borders with the steppe; in the steppe itself there were Russian "watchmen" - scouts who monitored the movements of the nomads.

The Russian army in the 12th century was mainly cavalry; it was very fast in its movements and developed skilful tactics against the nomads. Russian campaigns in the steppe were undertaken mainly in the spring, when the horses of the Polovtsy, exhausted on the meager winter pasture, turned out to be much weaker than the horses of the Russian army. In battle, Russian troops were able to operate in complex formations, were staunch and fearless. The armament of the combatants consisted of swords, sabers, bows, sometimes six-pointers. In addition, they had spears - a weapon, although easily broken, but indispensable in the first skirmish with the enemy. The combatants had strong damask helmets and chain mail, which appeared in Russia earlier than Western Europe. The armament of ordinary warriors was simpler - spears, axes. Heavy helmets and armor, heated in the sun, were usually put on just before the battle.

The particularly strong onslaught of the Polovtsy, which began in the 70s of the XII century, is broken up by Russian counter campaigns. After a series of defeats, the Polovtsians are united under the rule of Khan Konchak. Polovskie troops receive a single organization and good weapons. Disunited by discord, Russia faced a strong and, most importantly, united army of nomads face to face.

Under the influence of the Polovtsian danger, as subsequently under the influence of the Mongol-Tatar danger, the idea of ​​unity is ripening. In the 80s of the XII century, an attempt was made to reconcile the Olgovichi and Monomakhovichi. The Olgovichi are breaking with their traditional policy of alliance with the steppe. Igor Svyatoslavich, Prince of Novgorod-Seversky, plays a very important role in this.

At first, Igor is a typical Olgovich. As early as 1180, the Polovtsy actively helped him. Completely defeated by Rurik of Kyiv near Dolobsk, together with his Polovtsy allies, he jumped into the boat with his future enemy Konchakos and managed to escape from the pursuit of the Kyiv prince.

Having won, Rurik peculiarly took advantage of its fruits. He did not leave Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich in the great reign, but took all the other cities of the Kyiv region for himself. It is not known under what conditions Rurik conceded the "golden table". But most likely, one of these conditions was the refusal of an alliance with the Polovtsy of the Olgovichi and their consent to act against the Polovtsy together with other Russian princes. In the coming years, Rurik and Svyatoslav managed to widely organize allied campaigns of Russian princes on the steppe.

The obligations of the feudal head of all the Olgoviches - Svyatoslav of Kyiv - extended to Igor, his cousin, who was under his feudal subordination. He decisively breaks with his old policy and becomes an ardent opponent of the Polovtsians.

Despite the fact that the policy of the Olgovichi has undergone drastic changes since the very beginning of the 80s, Igor did not immediately manage to participate in the campaign against Konchak, his former ally. In 1183, by the combined efforts of the Russian princes, under the leadership of Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, the Polovtsy were defeated. 700 prisoners were taken, military vehicles were captured, Russian prisoners were repulsed, Khan Kobyak Karyevich was captured. Igor did not participate in this campaign. He walked independently and defeated the Polovtsian Khan Obovl Kostukovich. In 1184, Svyatoslav with the Russian princes again defeated the Polovtsy. A "basurman" who fired "live fire" was captured. The Polovtsy were terrified, and the danger seemed to be removed from the Russian land for a long time. However, Igor Svyatoslavich could not participate in this campaign either, it began in the spring and the sleet did not allow the cavalry to arrive in time. When Igor, in spite of everything, still wanted to go to connect with Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, the squad told him: “Prince! Sunday) is Kiev, then what can you comprehend?

Apparently, the prince was very upset by the failure: he failed to participate in the victory and prove his devotion to the alliance of Russian princes against the Polovtsians. That is why in the next year, in 1185, "not holding back his weariness," he rushes on a campaign against the Polovtsians.

Inspired by the victories of Svyatoslav, Igor sets himself an insanely bold task - with a few of his own forces to "search" for the old Chernigov Tmutorokan, once subject to his grandfather Oleg Svyatoslavich ("Gorislavich"), to reach the shores of the Black Sea, which has been closed to Russia for almost a hundred years by the Polovtsy .

But the consequences of this campaign turned out to be deplorable: they nullified all the efforts of Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich and for a long time "opened the gates" to the Russian land for the Polovtsians.

Campaign of Prince Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky

The campaign of Prince Igor Svyatoslavich in 1185 is told in two chronicles. A more extensive story has been preserved in the Ipalevsky chronicle (compiled by a southern chronicler), another, more concise, in the Laurentian chronicle (it was compiled in Vladimir Suzdal). Here is how, based on the stories of the chronicles, one can imagine Igor's campaign.

Without notifying their feudal head Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich on April 23, 1185, on Tuesday, Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky, his son Vladimir Putivlsky, his nephew - Prince Svyatoslav Olgovich Rylsky, together with the Kovuev squads sent from Yaroslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov, led by Olstin Oleksich, marched into the distant steppe campaign against the Polovtsy. Fat horses fattened for the winter walked quietly. Igor rode, gathering his squad.

On a campaign off the banks of the Donets on May 1, when the day was drawing to a close. They were overtaken by an eclipse, which in Russia was considered an omen of misfortune. But Igor did not turn his horses. He said to his boyars and retinue: "Brothers and retinue! No one knows the secrets of God, but God is the creator of the eclipse and his whole world. And what God does for us - either for good or for evil - and we see the same." Having said that, Igor crossed the Donets. At Oskol, Igor waited for two days for his brother Vsevolod, who was walking a different path from Kursk. From Oskol we went further, to the river Salnitsa.

It was not possible to take the Polovtsy by surprise: the Russian "watchmen" who were sent to catch the "tongue" reported that the Polovtsy were armed and ready for battle. But Igor said: "Ozhe we will not fight to return, then we will be rubbish forests of death, but how will God give them." Having agreed, the Russians did not stay for the night, but rode all night. The next day at lunchtime (at that time they dined early) the Russians met Polovtsian regiments. The Polovtsy sent back their vezhy (covered carts), and they themselves, gathered "from young to old", lined up on the other side of the Syuurliya River. Igor's troops lined up in six regiments. According to the custom of that time, the prince said a short encouraging word: "Brothers, we were looking for this, but we'll pull it." In the middle stood the regiment of Igor, on the right - the regiment of Vsevolod, on the left - the regiment of Svyatoslav Rylsky, in front - the regiment of Igor's son, Vladimir, and the regiment of Chernigov kovuy. Chosen riflemen from all regiments stood in front of the formation. The Polovtsy lined up their archers. With a volley of bows, they fled. Those Polovtsian regiments that stood far from the river also fled. The advanced regiments of the Chernigov kovuy and Vladimir Igorevich chased after them. Igor and Vsevolod walked slowly, keeping formation. The Russians took possession of the Polovtsian vezhas and captured prisoners.

The next day, at dawn, the Polovtsian regiments, "like a hog", that is, like a forest, began to suddenly attack the Russians. Igor did not turn the shelves.

For three days Igor slowly made his way to the Donets with his army. In battle, he was wounded in the right hand. The warriors and horses pushed aside from the water were exhausted from thirst. There were many wounded and dead in the Russian regiments. The Kowui were the first to waver.

Igor galloped towards them, removing his helmet to be recognized, but could not stop them. On the way back, exhausted from his wound, he was captured by the Polovtsy at a distance of an arrow from his troops. He saw how fiercely his brother Vsevolod fought at the head of his army and. according to the chronicle, he asked the god of death so as not to see his death.

Vsevolod, despite courageous resistance, was also taken prisoner. The captive princes were taken apart by the Polovtsian khans. Igor bailed him former ally Konchak. Of the entire Russian army, only 15 people were saved. And even fewer kovuevs. Others drowned in the sea (in the annals, a lake, a large expanse of water, could also be called a sea).

At that time, Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Kyiv, having decided to go to the Polovtsians to the Don for the whole summer, gathered soldiers in the north of his possessions. On the way back, he heard that cousins went to the enemy, hiding from him, and "it was not pleasant for him." Approaching on the boats to Chernigov, he learned about the defeat of Igor; learning about this, he “sighed deeply”, “wiped his tears” and said: “O love my brothers and sons and men of the Russian land! Yes, it will be about everything. Yes, it’s a pity for me to lash out at Igor (as I used to be annoyed), so now I pity more (so now I regret more) for Igor, wash my brother "This is Svyatoslav's" golden word with tears. The "Word" conveys it somewhat differently, but the very meaning and tone of his mournful reproach in the annals and the "Word" are the same.

In these words of Svyatoslav, the consequences of Igor's defeat are precisely defined. Svyatoslav "remembered the filthy ones" in his campaign of 1184, and Igor nullified all efforts by "opening the gates" to the Polovtsy on Russian soil.

And the "filthy" Polovtsy, "taking great pride" and gathering all their people, rushed to Russia. A strife arose between the Polovtsian khans: Konchak wanted to go to Kyiv to avenge his grandfather Sharukan and Bonyak, who were defeated there in 1106, and Gza offered to go to Seven, “where the wife and children are left: ready to be full of us gathered; "And so they split up. Konchak went to Pereyaslavl South, besieged the city and fought there all day.

Vladimir Glebovich then reigned in Pereyaslavl. He was "daring and strong to the rati", left the city and rushed to the enemy. But a little dared to leave the squad for him. In the battle, the prince was wounded by three spears. Then others came up from the city and recaptured it. Vladimir Glebovich sent a message to Svyatoslav of Kyiv, Rurik and Davyd Rostislavichs: "behold the weeds, but help us."

But disagreements arose between the troops of Rurik and Davyd, the Smolensk squads "became a veche" and refused to go on a campaign. Davyd with his "Smolyans" went back, and Svyatoslav and Rurik sailed along the Dnieper against the Polovtsians. The Polovtsy, having heard of their approach, retreated from Pereslavl and besieged the city of Rimov on the way back. During the siege, part of the wall (two gorodni) collapsed along with the people. Some of the besieged went on a sortie and escaped capture.

The rest were captured or killed. Meanwhile, Khan Gza devastated the land around

Engraving by V.A. Favorsky.

Engraving by V.A. Favorsky.

Putivl, burned many villages and prisons. But the city itself, which was fortified with wooden walls on high earthen ramparts, he could not take. There, as we know from the Lay, his wife, Efrosinya Yaroslavna, was saved in Igor's absence.

In captivity, Igor Svyatoslavich enjoyed relative honor and freedom. 20 watchmen were assigned to him, who did not interfere with his travel and obeyed him when he sent them anywhere. He went with his servants to falconry and even summoned a priest from Russia to conduct a church service.

Polovtsian Laurus, judging by the name of the baptized, invited the prince to flee. He refused to go not in the "unglorious way", but circumstances forced him to flee: the son of a thousand man and the equestrians, who were in captivity with him, reported that the Polovtsians returning from Pereyaslavl intended to kill all Russian prisoners.

The time for the escape was chosen in the evening - at sunset. Igor sent his groom to the Lavra, ordering him to cross to the other side of the river with a leash. The Polovtsy, guarding the prince, "drunk their fill of koumiss," played and had fun, thinking that the prince was sleeping. Having prayed and taking with him a cross and an icon, Igor left his vestry. He crossed the river, mounted a horse there and secretly crossed the Polovtsian towers. Eleven days Igor traveled to the border town of Donets, running away from the chase. Arriving in Novgorod Seversky, the prince soon set off on a detour - to Kyiv and Chernigov, and was greeted everywhere with joy. Apparently, this happened in September 1185.

In 1187, Igor's son, Vladimir, returned from captivity. He was with his wife and "with a child" and here, in Russia, he was married according to the church rite. When the rest of the princes returned from captivity is not clear.

The consequences of Igor's defeat made themselves felt in Russia for a long time. The Polovtsy constantly disturbed Russia with their raids. Russian princes quite often organized campaigns against them.

In 1196, Igor's brother, Vsevolod Buy Tur, died. The chronicler marked his death with an obituary, in which he praised his prowess, kindness, and "manly prowess."

Soon, in 1198, Yaroslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov also died - the brother of Svyatoslav of Kyiv, who had died four years earlier - in 1194. In place of Yaroslav in Chernigov, Igor Svyatoslavich became prince. He reigned for a short time: four years later (he died in 1202, and we know nothing about his reign.

From Igor left six sons. With the death of Roman Mstislavich, Vladimir manages to reign in Galich. He gets Vladimir Volynsky for his brother Svyatoslav, and gives Zvenigorod to Roman Igorevich.

The Igoreviches failed to keep Vladimir Volynsky. In Galicia, they come to grips with the boyars. In 1211, the boyars managed to gain the upper hand, and three Igoreviches were hanged, including one of the participants in the campaign of 1185, Svyatoslav Igorevich. Soon the eldest son of Igor, Vladimir, also died (in 1212). When Oleg died, the third of Igor's sons, who participated in the campaign, is not known. Such was the fate of the participants in the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky.

Time of creation of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"

"The Lay of Igor's Campaign" was created shortly after the events of the campaign. It was written under the fresh impression of these events. This is not a historical narrative about the distant past, but a response to an event of its time, full of grief that has not yet subsided.

The author of the Lay refers in his work to his contemporaries, to whom these events were well known. Therefore, the "Word" is woven from hints, reminders, from deaf indications of what was still alive in the memory of every reader - his contemporary.

There are more precise indications that the "Word" about Igor's regiment "was created shortly after the events described in it. In 1196, Vsevolod Svyatoslavich died, in 1198 Igor sat down to reign in Chernigov, before that he repeatedly went to the Polovtsy again , but everything remained without mention of the "Word". Other events of Russian history that occurred after 1187 are not mentioned either. In particular, the author names Yaroslav Osmomysl of Galitsky among the living princes; the land of Rus, for the wounds of Igor, the buoy of Svyatslavich." From this it is clear that the "Word" was written no later than 1187, could not have been written earlier, since it ends with "glory" to the young princes, including Vladimir Igorevich, who returned from captivity only in the same year, 1187. Therefore, it is believed that the "Word" about Igor's regiment "was written in 1187.

Question about the authorship of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"

Undoubtedly, the author of the Lay is a contemporary of these events. He knows that during the battle the wind blew from the side of the Polovtsy, and the southerly winds are really typical for the area of ​​the battle in spring and summer, he knows about the location of the palace of the Galician prince, about the Russian settlements on the Danube. He crashed into political position individual Russian principalities. The language of the "Word" is undoubtedly the language of the second half of the 12th century. Archaeologically accurate descriptions of weapons and clothing.

So, in the 19th century, a hypothesis was put forward about the authorship of the wise scribe Timothy. But the scribes interpreted the sacred writings, and in the "Word" pagan gods are mentioned several times. The chronicles of Timothy are characterized by one side: "birth - death", they do not have the imagery and linguistic richness of the "Word". This hypothesis has no basis.

According to the hypothesis of Yugov and Fedorov, it is believed that the author is an eyewitness, a participant in the events (for example, Igor, Vsevolod, Vladimir, Polovtsy Lavr, thousand-man Raguil).

The researcher of the "Lay" I. Shklyarevsky put forward a version that the author was a hunter or falconer at the princely court (at that time the position was very honorable).

B. Rybakov discovered the name of Pyotr Borislavich. He was a chronicler of Rurik, performed diplomatic missions and, importantly, he created a chronicle, where he considered princely strife and strife from the people's point of view.

Whoever he may be, based on the analysis of the text of the Lay, we can draw up an approximate description of him.

The author calls all the princes by name, all names are real. It is felt in the appeals that he knows many of them personally: "And you, Roman, and you, Mstislav ...". In reproaches to the princes - the voice of a worthy and self-aware person.

In the "Word" one can see a strange symbiosis of Christianity and paganism. So, Yaroslavna turns to the Dnieper, the Wind, the Sun with a pagan prayer. God shows Igor the way to his father's "golden table", and at the same time nature helps: Donets, birds (magpies, woodpeckers). The author mentions pagan gods (for example, Zhelyu and Karna - Goddesses of the afterlife).

Most likely, when the author wrote "The Word", he was already "in years". The ethics of that time would not allow a young man to address elders in age and position in this way. In addition, he calls Boris "young", and Rostislav, brother Monomakh, who drowned in Stugna, "young". So they didn’t talk about peers.

The author created the nature of the "Word" semi-sighted: on the one hand, nameless, anxiously faceless, and on the other, concrete and nominal. His grasses and trees are nameless: "The tree bowed down in anguish", "the tree leaf did not give up good", "the grass droops from pity", "on the bloody grass", "the grass rustled". Only once is reed mentioned, and in Yaroslavna's lament - feather grass. And the monks were herbalists, not to mention sorcerers, sorcerers, sorcerers - herbalists and "pharmacists". Specific names of herbs would break into the "Word", as happened with birds and animals.

Birds are mentioned 54 times in the "Word": eagles, swans, crows, crows, jackdaws, hawks, cuckoos, gulls, woodpeckers, nightingales... The same is with animals. They are very real and specific. But at the same time, northern animals are not mentioned, for example, bears, wild boars. But fish, despite all the author's love for water, are not mentioned. Although the names of the rivers - Dnieper, Don, Danube, Stunga, Kayala, Dvina, Donets ... - are used 23 (!) Times.

Engraving by V.A. Favorsky.

1. "The Lay of Igor's Campaign" is a call for unity.

The Word was a direct response to the events of Igor's campaign. It was a call to unity in the face of a terrible external danger. Using the example of Igor's defeat, the author shows the sad consequences of the political separation of Russia.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" not only tells about the events of Igor Svyatoslavich's campaign - it gives an assessment to them and is a passionate and excited speech of a patriot, either referring to the events of modern times, or recalling the deeds of hoary antiquity. This speech is sometimes angry, sometimes sad and mournful, but always full of faith in the motherland, full of pride in it, confidence in its future.

The author constantly addresses the readers, calls them "brethren", as if he sees in front of him. He introduces them to the personalities of the present and the past, introduces the reader to the disturbing atmosphere of the campaign, interrupts himself with exclamations of grief. All this creates the impression of his closeness to the listeners.

The genre of "Words" is difficult to define. It is, no doubt, written by the author, but the author feels his connection with the oral word, with oral poetry. It is difficult to say whether it was meant to be spoken aloud as a speech or to be sung. If it is a speech, then it still has a resemblance to a song; if a song, then it is close to speech. It is not possible to define the genre of "Words" more closely. Written, it retains all the charm of a living, oral word - hot, persuasive, full of the most sincere, sincere and cordial love for the motherland.

The true meaning of the "Lay" lies, of course, not only in an attempt to organize this or that campaign, but also in uniting public opinion against the feudal strife of the princes, branding harmful feudal ideas, setting society against the princes' pursuit of personal "glory" and "honor". ", avenging their personal "grievances". The task of the Lay was not only military, but also the ideological rallying of all the best Russian people around the idea of ​​the unity of the Russian land.

2. The image of the Russian land in "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is dedicated to the entire Russian land as a whole. The hero is not one of the princes, but the Russian people, the Russian land. The image of Russia in the work is central. The author draws the vast expanses of the Russian land and feels the homeland as a whole.

There is hardly any other work in world literature in which such vast geographical areas are simultaneously involved in action. All Russia is in the author's field of vision, introduced into the circle of his narration.

The vast expanses of the homeland are united by the hyperbolic speed of movement of the actors in it and the simultaneity of action in its different parts: "the girls sing on the Danube - curl their voices to Kyiv."

The landscape of the Lay is distinguished by grandiosity, always taken as if in motion and concrete: before the battle with the Polovtsy, bloody dawns will tell the light, black clouds are coming from the sea. to be a great thunder, to rain like arrows to the great Don... The earth is buzzing, the rivers are flowing muddy, the dust is rushing over the fields... After the defeat of Igor's army, widespread sadness spreads across Russia.

All Russian nature takes part in the joy and sorrow of the Russian people. She is alive and sympathizes with the Russians. The sun obscures the path of the prince with darkness - it warns him of danger. Donets helps Igor to escape, dresses him with warm mists, guards the birds.

The image of the homeland, full of cities, rivers and numerous inhabitants, is as if opposed to the desert "unknown country", the Polovtsian steppe, its "yarugas" (ravines), swamps and "dirty" places.

Russia for the author is not only "land", but also the Russian people. The author talks about the peaceful labor of the plowmen, disturbed by the strife of the princes, about the wives of Russian soldiers, mourning their "lady; he talks about the grief of his people after the defeat of Igor, about the death of the property of the Russian people, about the joy of the inhabitants of cities and rural areas upon the return of the prince.

The army of Igor Svyatoslavich is primarily "Rusichi", Russian sons. They go to the enemy for their homeland, and say goodbye to it, and not to Novgorod-Seversky principality, Kursk or Putivl. "O Russian land! You are already behind the Shelomyan!".

At the same time, the concept of the motherland - the Russian land - for the author also includes its history. In the opening to the "Word" the author says that he is going to tell the story "from the old Vladimer to the present Igor.

The author draws a surprisingly vivid image of the Russian land. Creating the "Word", he managed to take a look at the whole of Russia, as a whole, united in his description both Russian nature, and Russian people, and Russian history. The image of the suffering homeland is very important in the artistic and ideological concept"Words": he evokes sympathy for her reader, hatred for her enemies, calls the Russian people to her defense. The image of the Russian land is an essential part of the "Word" as a call to its defense against external enemies.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is an amazingly integral work. The artistic form of the "Word" very accurately corresponds to its ideological design. All images of the "Word" contribute to the identification of its main ideas - the idea of ​​the unity of Russia.

3. Images of Russian princes in the Tale of Igor's Campaign.

The author of the Lay speaks of 44 princes and princesses of the 11th-12th centuries. Of these, 16 belong to the historical section, and 28 - to the author's contemporaries. The fate of these heroes, or, perhaps, more precisely, the characters of the poem, should interest us, since in many ways it was for them that the "Word" was created.

The author's attitude towards the Russian princes is ambivalent: he sees in them representatives of Russia, sympathizes with them, proud of their successes and grieving for their failures. But he condemns their selfish, narrowly local politics and their strife, their unwillingness to jointly defend Russia.

Using the example of Igor's campaign, the author shows what the lack of unity can lead to. Igor is defeated only because he went on a campaign alone. It operates according to the feudal formula: "we are ourselves, and you are yourself." In the "golden word" of Svyatoslav, the author also expresses his attitude to the campaign.

The whole story about Igor's campaign is sustained in the same lines: the brave, but short-sighted prince goes on a campaign, despite the fact that this campaign is doomed to failure from the very beginning; goes, despite all unfavorable "eclipses". Igor loves his homeland, Russia, but his main motivation is the desire for personal glory: "I want more, - speech, - a spear to break the end of the Polovtsian field; with you, Russians, I want to attach my head, and it's nice to drink the Don's helmet." The desire for personal glory "stands for him a sign."

However, the author emphasizes that the actions of Igor Svyatoslavich are conditioned to a greater extent by the concepts of his environment than by his personal qualities. In itself, Igor Svyatoslavich is even more good than bad, but his deeds are bad, because they are dominated by the prejudices of feudal society, the ideology of the ruling class. Therefore, in the image of Igor, the general, and not the individual, comes to the fore. Igor Svyatoslavich - the "average" prince of his time; brave, courageous, to a certain extent loving the motherland, but reckless and short-sighted, caring about his honor more than about the honor of the motherland.

With much greater condemnation, the author of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" speaks about the ancestor of the Olgovichi princes and the grandfather of Igor Svyatoslavich - Ogeya Gorislavich, the grandson of Yaroslav the Wise and the constant opponent of Vladimir Monomakh. Remembering this Oleg (Oleg lived in the second half of the 11th - early 12th century; he died in 1115), the author of the Lay says that he forged sedition with a sword and sowed arrows on the ground, with him the Russian land was sown and sprouted with strife. The author of the Lay dismisses the disastrous nature of Oleg’s seditions, primarily for the working people, for the peasantry: “Then, across the Russian land, roar rataev kikahut, n often lie, swear, troupia yourself for the sake of it, and Galicians say their own language, want to fly away.” The author endows Oleg with the ironic patronymic "Gorislavich", meaning, of course, not his personal grief, but the people's grief caused by Oleg's strife.

Prince Vseslav Polotsky, the founder of Polotsk, is also depicted as the initiator of strife. The entire text about Vseslav is a reflection on his ill-fated fate. Vseslav is depicted in the "Word" with alienation, but also with a certain, though very insignificant, share of sympathy. This is a restless prince, rushing about like a hunted animal, a cunning, "prophetic" loser. Before us exclusively vivid image prince of the period of feudal fragmentation of Russia.

In the rest of the Russian princes, the author of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" notes their positive features to a greater extent than their negative ones. The author emphasizes the exploits of the Russian princes, draws their power and glory. The images of the Russian princes reflect his dreams of strong power in Russia, of the military might of the Russian princes. Vladimir I Svyatoslavich went on campaigns against enemies so often that he "could not have been nailed to the mountains of Kyiv." Vsevolod Suzdalsky can splash the Volga with oars, and drink the Don with helmets, and the author mourns that this prince is not now in the south. Yaroslav Osmomysl propped up the Hungarian mountains with his iron regiments, blocked the way for the Hungarian king, opened the gates to Kyiv, shot at the Saltanov behind the lands.

The concept of hyperbole can be applied to the "Word" only with great limitations. The impression of hyperbole is achieved in the "Word" by the fact that the exploits of his squad are transferred to this or that prince. So, for example, Vsevolod Bui Tur streaks at enemies with arrows, rattles swords on helmets, Ovar helmets are "scraped" with his red-hot sabers. Of course, helmets, swords and sabers are not personal Vsevolod. The author of the "Lay" says here that Vsevolod spits arrows at the enemies of the squad, fights with its sabers and swords. We see the same transfer of the exploits of the squad to the prince in other cases. Svyatoslav of Kyiv "ruffled" the treachery of the Polovtsy "with his strong whips and swords"; Vsevolod of Suzdal can "pour out helmets" - of course, not with one of his helmets, but with many helmets of his army.

A very special group is made up of female images of the "Word": they are all fanned by the thought of the world, home, family, imbued with tenderness and affection, a brightly folk principle; they embody the sadness and care of the motherland for their soldiers. In the ideological concept of the author, these female images occupy a very important place.

The wives of Russian soldiers after the defeat of Igor's troops cry for their fallen husbands. Their executioner, full of tenderness and boundless sadness, has a deeply folk character: “We can’t understand our own dear ways, we can’t think, we can’t see.” The lament of Yaroslavna, Igor's wife, has the same folk-song character. It is remarkable that Yaroslavna mourns not only the capture of her husband - she mourns for all the fallen Russian soldiers: “Oh, see, it’s! Why, sir, are you forcibly fighting? Thou art dark and red: why, lord, stretch thy hot ray upon thy palm?"

The opposition of the war to the world, embodied in the image of Russian women, is especially vivid in the lyrical appeal of the author of the Lay to Vsevolod Bui Tur. In the midst of the battle, Vsevolod does not feel wounds on himself, he has forgotten the honor and life of his dear, beloved "red Glbovna of custom and custom." It is characteristic that not a single translator of the Slovo could satisfactorily translate the excellent and, in fact, well-understood expression: custom and custom.

So, the images of Russian princes, the female images of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" are not given by themselves - they serve as the author's ideas, serve the purposes of the same call to unity. The Word appears as an exceptionally purposeful work. The hand of the artist - the author of the Lay - was driven by political thought, an old thought, full of ardent love for the motherland.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" in Old Russian Literature

Acquaintance with the "Tale of Igor's Campaign" is clearly revealed in the entire subsequent development of ancient Russian literature. So, for example, in one liturgical book - the so-called Pskov "Apostle" of 1307, stored in the State Historical Museum in Moscow, - there is the following postscript made by the scribe on the last page of the manuscript: “This summer there was a battle in the Russian land, Mikhail and Yuri about the Prince of Novgorod. “This correspondence in its half is a reworking of the following passage from the Slovo: “Then, under Olz Gorislavichi, you will succumb and stretch out strife, you will perish the life of Dazhdbog’s grandson;

At the very beginning of the 15th century, "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" served as a literary model for the creation of "Zadonshchina". "Zadonshchina" is a small poetic work dedicated to the glorification of the victory of Dmitry Donskoy on the Kulikovo field, "beyond the Don". "zadonshchina" uses the images of the Lay, contrasting the sad past with the joy of victory. But the author of "Zadonshchina" did not understand "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" everywhere, distorted and left many of its artistic images.

Through the "Zadonshchina", and perhaps directly, "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" also influenced another work about the Battle of Kulikovo - the so-called "Tale of the Battle of Mamaev."

In the 16th century, the "Word" was undoubtedly copied in Pskov or Novgorod, since the manuscript that burned down during the fire of 1812 was of precisely this origin.

Thus, "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" from time to time made itself felt in various regions of Russia. It was read and rewritten, they looked for inspiration for their own works in it. Creation in the south of Russia, "The Word" "was not lost, - in the words of Academician A.S. Orlov, - on the border of the" wild field "; it went around the entire horizon of Russian territory, more than once crossed its circumference."

Opening of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", its publication and study

The handwritten list of the "Words" was found in the early 90s of the 18th century by the famous lover and collector of Russian antiquities A.I. Musin-Pushkin.

The text of the "Words" was in the collection old Russian stories secular content. Musin-Pushkin acquired it through his commission agent from the former archimandrite of the Spaso-Yaroslavl Monastery of Joel, abolished in 1788.

The first mention of the "Word" was made by the famous poet of that time Kheraskov in 1797 in the second edition of his poem "Vladimir". Then N.M. Karamzin about the October book for 1797 of the magazine "SpectateurduNord", published by French emigrants in Hamburg.

Copies were made from the manuscript of the Lay, one of them, intended for Catherine II, has come down to us.

In 1800, Musin-Pushkin published The Word in collaboration with his friends - scientists: A.F. Malinovsky, N.N. Bantyshevsky-Kamensky and N.M. Karamzin - the three best experts on ancient Russian manuscripts of that time.

In 1812, the collection, which included The Tale of Igor's Campaign, burned down in a Moscow fire in Musin-Pushkin's house on Razgulay. Tamm also lost other manuscripts of paramount importance, such as the famous parchment Trinity Chronicle from the very beginning of the 15th century, which Karamzin widely used when creating the History of the Russian State. Most of the first edition of the word also burned down.

In 1813, already after the manuscript of the Lay, together with the entire rich collection of antiquities, A.I. Musina-Pushkina died in a fire, the famous archeographer K.F. Kaidakovich wrote to Musin-Pushkin: “I would like to know about all the details of Igoreva’s incomparable song. On what, how and when was it written? Where was it found? Who was a participant in the publication? How many copies were printed? heard from A.F. Malinovsky".

Musin-Pushkin's response to this appeal is still the most important document for the history of the discovery and publication of The Tale of Igor's Campaign, but, unfortunately, it is far from complete and unclear.

Kaydalovich wrote in his notes in 1824 that Musin-Pushkin, in a conversation that took place on December 31, 1813, told him that the "Word" was written "on glossy paper, at the end of the chronicle it is enough clean writing", and most likely at the end of the 14th - beginning of the 15th century. The text was without division and lowercase characters. Kaydalovich also learned about how the "Word" was found.

But, dissatisfied with the results of the conversation, K.F. Kaidalovich again turned to Musin-Pushkin with a request to more accurately determine the nature of the writing of the manuscript to appoint the persons who saw it. However, he did not receive an answer: by this time, skeptics had already begun to suspect, talk began about the forgery of the manuscript, and Musin-Pushkin, who did not understand the scientific significance of Kaydalovich's questions, apparently saw in them the same distrustful attitude towards him personally and, perhaps, offended by this, he chose to remain silent.

A comparison of the Catherine's copy and the 1800 edition clearly shows how much was initially not understood in the "Lay" due to the natural ignorance of the history of the Russian language for that time or the lack of paleographic publications. What now seems to us simple and clear in "the word" was not recognized by its first publishers.

Title page of the first edition of The Tale of Igor's Campaign.

A clear misunderstanding of the text can be seen in those places where the words of the text are incorrectly divided or merged (in the original, according to Musin-Pushkin, the words were merged into a single line).

So, for example, in the first edition, it was printed separately "to meti", "by jumping", "shut into the Danube", "by sea, by suliya" instead of "Kymeti", "jump", "shut the Danube", "pomoria, promise ". Words incomprehensible to them were written by the first publishers of the Lay with a capital letter, believing that these were proper names. This is how "Koshchei" appeared - supposedly the proper name of the Polovtsy, "Urim" (instead of "U Rim") - supposedly one of the governor or associates of Igor, "Chaga", identified with Konchak. Finally, the publishers left some places without translation at all.

Not only the details, but the content itself was not understood by the publishers or their contemporaries. The literary milieu of the late 18th and early 19th centuries strove for the most part to find in the Lay conformity to their pre-romantic tastes. They searched for Ossianism, information about the ancient folk "bards", etc. At the same time, the moral and patriotic content of the Lay, its warm feeling for the homeland, did not yet find echoes; all the typically Russian features of the form of the "Word" were not understood - its correspondence to Russian folk poetry, annals, and works of Russian folk literature.

In many ways, the "Lay of Igor's Campaign" was not understood by its closest publishers N.N. Bantysh-Kamensky and A.F. Malinovsky are scrupulous, meticulously honest and accurate archivists.

A.S. Pushkin, who was engaged in the translation of the Lay, but did not have time to finish his work, correctly felt the connection between the Tale of Igor's Campaign and oral folk poetry. Following Pushkin, these folk foundations of the Lay were carefully studied by M.A. Maksimovich.

Gradually, the Lay was surrounded by a broad historical perspective. We got a correct interpretation of the political ideas of the Lay, its meaning. Many phenomena of the language of the "Words" that had previously seemed incomprehensible were explained.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" was studied by literary critics, poets, linguists and historians, it was translated by V. Zhukovsky, A. Maikov, L. Meyi and many other Russian poets. There was not a single major philologist who did not write about the Lay.

The "Word" became a factor in Russian science and literature of the 19th-20th centuries: interest in this stimulated studies in Russian literature of the 11th-13th centuries, the history of the Russian language, and paleography.

The poetic elements of the Lay were reflected in Russian poetry and prose for a year and a half.

In total, there are more than 700 works on the "Word" in the research literature. It has been translated into most Western European languages ​​(French, English, Dutch, Danish, German, Hungarian, Italian) and into all Slavic languages ​​(Czech, Slovene, Serbian, Bulgarian). All this speaks of an unflagging interest in the Lay.

In our country, such scientists as A.D. Grekov, M.D. Prisekov, S.P. Obnorsky, L.A. Bukhalovsky, N.M. Dylevsky, V.L. Vinogradova, A.N. Kotlyarenko, I.I. Shkelyarevsky, B.A. Rybakov and, of course, D.S. Likhachev.

On Immortality "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"

Dying, a person continues to live - he lives in his deeds. And it is important at the same time that only the best has lived, lives and will live in a person. The worst is not inherited in the broad sense of the word, it does not have long-term national traditions, it is fragile, it easily arises, but disappears even faster. The best in man is immortal. This applies even more to the life of art monuments. Artwork embodies a long tradition. They continue to live beyond their era. In its best works - works of humanism, humane in the highest sense of the word - art knows no aging. The highest works continue to be modern for centuries and millennia. The modernity of art is everything that people read, watch and listen to at the moment, regardless of the time when these works of art were created.

The history of art, and in particular literature, differs sharply from general history. Its process is not a process of simple, straightforward change, but a process of accumulation and selection of the best, most effective. The most perfect works of art and literature in particular continue to participate in the life of the people and their literature.

That is why "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", which continues to live in hundreds of works of Russian literature of the 19th-20th centuries, we have the right to consider a work not only of ancient, but to a certain extent of modern literature. It is alive and active, infects with its poetic energy and educates ideologically, teaches literary mastery and love for the motherland.

For more than seven and a half centuries, the Tale of Igor's Campaign has lived a full-blooded life, and the power of its influence not only does not weaken, but is growing and expanding. Such is the power over the time of the "Word" of its living connection with the worldview and creativity of the whole people.

Bibliography

1. "Golden word. Century XII". - M.: Young Guard, 1986. - 461s.

2. "Literature. Grade 9". Part 1. Textbook-reader for educational institutions. - M.: Enlightenment, 2006. - 369s.

3. "The Word about Igor's Campaign". Seventh edition. - M.: Children's literature, 1978 - 221s.

4. Likhachev D.S. "A word about Igor's regiment". Historical and literary essay. Handbook for teachers. 2nd edition, corrected and supplemented. - M.: Enlightenment, 1982. - 176s.

5. Rybakov B.A. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" and His Contemporaries". - M .: "Nauka", 1971. - 293 p.

6. Shklyarevsky I.I. "I'm reading "The Word of the Shelf": A book for students. - M .: Education, 1991. - 79s.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

"The Lay of Igor's Campaign" was found in the early 90s of the 18th century by the famous lover and collector of Russian antiquities A.I. Musin-Pushkin.

The first, very brief report on the "Word" was made by the famous poet of that time M.M. Kheraskov in 1797, in the second "edition" of his poem "Vladimir". "copies were made: one of them, intended for Catherine II, has come down to us. In addition to the rewritten text of the Lay, the Catherine's text contained a translation, notes and a brief note about the Lay. In the 17th century, other translations were made , gradually improving the first, in which there were many errors due to a clear misunderstanding of the Old Russian language. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is dedicated to the unsuccessful campaign against the Polovtsy in 1185 by Prince Igor Svyatoslavich of Novgorod-Seversky with few allies, a campaign that ended in a terrible defeat. Russian princes to unite to repulse the steppe, to defend the Russian land by joint efforts.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" with brilliant force and penetration reflected in itself the main disaster of its time - the insufficiency of the state unity of Russia and, as a result, the weakness of its defense against the onslaught of the steppe nomadic peoples, who in quick raids ravaged the old Russian cities, devastated villages, drove into slavery "the population, penetrating into the very depths of the country and everywhere carrying death and destruction with them.

The all-Russian power of the Kyiv prince did not completely disappear, but its significance was steadily declining. The princes were no longer afraid of the Kyiv prince and sought to capture Kyiv in order to increase their possessions and use the fading authority of Kyiv in their own interests.

However, the idea of ​​the unity of Russia does not die in the XII century. She speaks out in the annals, is proclaimed by individual princes, who use her popularity for their own selfish purposes. It is really supported by the cultural unity of the Russian people, the commonality of the Russian language throughout the Russian land, the commonality of folk art, judicial rulings, and the monetary system - the same everywhere. The idea of ​​the unity of Russia continued to exist among the people.

About eight centuries ago, in 1187, The Tale of Igor's Campaign was written, a brilliant work of ancient Russian literature. The past centuries have not muffled its poetic sound and have not erased the colors. Interest in The Tale of Igor's Campaign has not only not diminished, but is becoming more and more broad, more and more profound.

Why is this work so durable, so small in size? Why do the ideas of the Lay continue to excite us?

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is imbued with a great human feeling - a warm, tender and strong feeling of love for the motherland. The "Word" is literally filled with it. This feeling is reflected in the emotional excitement with which the author of the Lay speaks of the defeat of Igor's troops, and in the way he conveys the words of the lamentation of Russian wives for the dead soldiers, and in the broad picture of Russian nature, and in joy at the return of Igor .

The significance of the Lay grew so immeasurably in our great Soviet era, when the selfless patriotism and unity of the Soviet people manifested themselves with extraordinary force. That is why it finds such a warm response in the hearts of all Soviet people who are selflessly devoted to their homeland. The Slovo's call for the defense of the motherland, for the protection of the peaceful labor of its people, resounds even now with unrelenting force! The meaning of the "Word" is especially great for us also because it is a living and indisputable evidence of the height of ancient Russian culture, its originality and its nationality.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" was created in the years when the process of feudal fragmentation of Russia reached its greatest strength. Many small feudal principalities - "semi-states" - are at enmity with each other, taking away each other's possessions, seniority, being drawn into fratricidal wars in the name of selfish princely interests. The importance of Kyiv as the center of the Russian land is falling.

The collapse of the united Kievan state began already under Yaroslav the Wise, in the first half of the 11th century, when the Polotsk land became isolated. The death of Yaroslav the Wise led to a further division of the Russian land. According to Yaroslav's will, the main Russian cities of that time: Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl, Vladimir-Volynsky, Smolensk, with the surrounding areas were distributed among his sons. At the end of the 11th century, the Chernihiv principality was finally assigned to Yaroslav's grandson, Oleg Svyatoslavich, and his offspring. This Oleg Svyatoslavich, the author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign, nicknamed Oleg Gorislavich, correctly identifying in him one of those princes from whom "the Russian land will be connected and stretched with strife."

The isolation of individual lands as hereditary princely possessions was recognized under Vladimir Monomakh at the Lyubech Congress of Princes in 1097. One of the decisions of this congress read: "Let everyone keep his fatherland," that is, "let everyone own the father's land."

The Lyubech congress, which recognized the division of the Russian land, did not even lead the princes to a temporary agreement, its decisions were immediately violated. One of the princes - Vasilek Terebovlsky - was treacherously seized by two others and blinded. The princely strife began again. Calling for unity, the people of Kyiv appealed to Vladimir Monomakh with a request not to "destroy the Russian lands" with their strife, recalling that the enemies of the homeland - the Polovtsy "have to rejoice and revolt our land." The call ended with a direct reproach to the princes, who, with their strife, want to "destroy the Russian land." This appeal of the people to the princes was on the lips of every generation of Russian people, in every principality, in every city. Galich, Ryazan, Smolensk, Vladimir-Volynsky, Vladimir-Zalessky, Rostov, Novgorod - all these regional centers are resolutely striving for political independence, leaving the influence of the weakening golden Kyiv table, closing in on their selfish local interests; the princes enter into a struggle with each other, about the small they say "this is great" and get bogged down in endless fratricidal wars.

The internecine struggle of the princes was tragically complicated by the Polovtsian danger hanging over Russia. The Polovtsy occupied the steppes between the Volga and the Dnieper, the Crimea and penetrated the Balkan Peninsula in the middle of the 11th century. They were such a powerful military force that they repeatedly threatened the existence of the Byzantine Empire, and the latter constantly turned to the Russian princes for help. At the beginning of the 12th century, the Russian princes managed to win major victories over the Polovtsy, but the Polovtsy continued to ruin the civilian population of Russian villages and cities: they robbed the rural population, burned cities, beaten and enslaved the inhabitants. The fast steppe cavalry did not know the natural barriers on the endless, open, boundless southern and southeastern borders of Russia, which were difficult to protect. Nomads from the boundless "wild field", from the "unknown country" by unexpected campaigns sought to penetrate deeply into the Russian land. Waves of steppe raids broke against the staunch resistance of disparate principalities. Part of the Polovtsy settled on the border lands and "under the name of" Kovuev "and" their nasty, that is, "their pagans", gradually imbued with the peaceful influence of Russian culture. to help themselves, thereby shaking the edifice of Russian statehood that has been built up for centuries.

The decline of the political unity of Russia, however, was not connected with its cultural decline. The very disintegration of the Kievan state was caused by the development of local economic life and was accompanied by the growth of its separate parts, the formation of new regional centers, the rise in the activity of the urban masses of the population.

Near Kyiv, Novgorod and Chernigov during this period, numerous new centers of Russian culture grow and grow stronger: Vladimir-Zalessky and Vladimir-Volynsky, Polotsk and Smolensk, Turov and Galich. Local literary schools, deeply original architecture of each of the regions, painting and applied arts develop and grow stronger during this period. Numerous stone buildings are being erected in Kyiv, in Chernigov, in Vladimir-Volynsky, in Galich, in Novgorod, in Smolensk, in Vladimir-Zalessky and in other cities of the vast Russian land.

About one of the buildings of this time, the chronicler wrote that it was "worn out" "with all the cunning", accessible to man. The white-stone buildings of this period that have survived in Vladimir-Zalessky are richly decorated on the outside with relief images of lions, leopards, griffins, centaurs, horsemen, etc. Excellent frescoes are created in painting, that is, wall paintings with water-based paints on specially prepared plaster. The remains of such paintings have been preserved in Pskov, in Staraya Ladoga, in Novgorod. Although most of these frescoes were ecclesiastical in content, they were created by Russian craftsmen who knew and loved folk art, and therefore the colorful and cheerful art of the Russian people was also reflected in these frescoes. The high level of Russian culture of the time in "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is clearly evidenced by applied art. Artistic crafts in the XII century are represented by luxurious manuscripts, the finest jewelry made of gold and silver with enamel and niello, iron products, bone, stone, wood carving, etc. Forty-two names of various craft specialties of this time have come down to us.

special development in the XII century reaches the art of the word. Most of the ancient Russian written works of the 12th century did not reach us as a result of extermination by enemies, fires; but even the little that has survived testifies to the general high literary culture of the 12th century, the presence of several literary schools, the multiplicity of genres, the very need for literature, the habit of literary reading. The chronicle at this time is conducted in almost every city, in many monasteries, often - at the court of the local prince.

The exceptionally rapid development of Russian literature of the 11th-12th centuries is associated with the growth of the Old Russian literary language - concise, expressive, flexible, rich in words, abundantly saturated with synonyms capable of reflecting numerous shades of thoughts and feelings. The Russian language of that time responded to the needs of the extremely complicated Russian reality and created a rich political, military and technical terminology, was able to fully embody sophisticated oratory, convey the complex historical content of world and Russian history, perceive in translations the best works of pan-European medieval literature. The development of the Old Russian literary language reflected the general high level of Old Russian culture, which had not yet been destroyed by the Mongol-Tatar invasion.

The Old Russian written literary language grew up on the basis of the oral Russian literary language - a highly developed language of oral folk poetry and the language of political life. The speeches with which the Russian princes "gave impudence" to their warriors before the battles were magnificent in their conciseness, imagery, energy and freedom of expression. Speeches delivered at veche meetings were distinguished by special conciseness, elaborateness of verbal formulas, and figurativeness. The same can be said about speeches at feasts, at courts, at princely congresses, about speeches made by ambassadors. Separate words and expressions of the ancient Bulgarian language, which was used in church writing and in worship and known as the language of Church Slavonic, joined the Russian literary language.

However, the grammatical structure of the Russian language remained Russian, and individual Church Slavonic words did not destroy the main vocabulary of the Russian language. The Russian language reworked elements of the Church Slavonic language and became even richer and more expressive.

The vocabulary of the Old Russian language in the XII century was already very rich. The language of Russian chronicles, the language of Russian treaties and letters and many other works of Russian literature, and first of all the language of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is the Old Russian written literary language. Rich and expressive, it was one of the main achievements of the Russian people of that time.

Most of the feudal strife of the XII century was associated with the enmity of the offspring of Monomakh and the offspring of his opponent Oleg Svyatoslavich - Oleg Gorislavich "The Tale of Igor's Campaign". Both Monomakhovichi and Olgovichi constantly used Polovtsian help in their campaigns against neighboring Russian principalities. Especially often the Chernigov Olgoviches resorted to the help of the Polovtsians, who were looking for peace and alliance with the restless population of the adjacent steppes. And this Polovtsian "help", "like the independent campaigns of the Polovtsy, became a cruel national disaster from the end of the 11th century. The raids of the Polovtsy in the 70s of the 12th century, when, according to the chronicler, "the army without interruption" begin.

By this time, the Russian princes had experienced and battle-hardened professional warriors who made up the main core of their troops - the squad. In addition to these squads, the princes could, if necessary, assemble a large army from peasants and townspeople. There were outposts on the borders with the steppe; in the steppe itself there were Russian "watchmen" - scouts who monitored the movements of the nomads.

The Russian army in the 12th century was mainly mounted; it was very fast in movement, developed skillful tactics in the fight against nomads. Russian campaigns in the steppe were undertaken mainly in the spring, when the horses of the Polovtsy, exhausted on the meager winter pasture, turned out to be much weaker than the horses of the Russian army. In battle, Russian troops were able to operate in complex formations, were staunch and fearless. Feeling military honor and love for the motherland distinguished both professional combatants and ordinary soldiers recruited from the people. The armament of the warriors consisted of swords, sabers, bows, sometimes shestopers (special clubs with six-ribbed tips). In addition, the warriors had spears - a weapon, although easily broken, but indispensable in the first skirmish with the enemy.

The combatants had strong steel (damask) helmets and armor, that is, chain mail, which appeared in Russia earlier than in Western Europe. The armament of ordinary warriors was simpler - spears and axes were more common here. Heavy helmets and armor, heated in the sun, were usually put on just before the battle.

However, there was no all-Russian army with a single command in Russia at that time. The allied campaigns of the Russian princes were assembled with difficulty, and each of the troops of one or another Russian prince was much smaller than the Polovtsian troops. The particularly strong onslaught of the Polovtsy, which began in the 70s of the 12th century, is shattered by Russian reciprocal campaigns. After a series of defeats, the Polovtsians are united under the rule of Khan Konchak. Polovtsian troops receive a single organization and good weapons; they have complex throwing weapons, and "Greek fire", and huge crossbows moving "on a high cart", the bowstring of which was pulled by more than fifty people. Russia, divided by strife, faced a strong and, most importantly, united army of nomads face to face. Under the influence of the Polovtsian danger, as later under the influence of the Mongol-Tatar danger, even in the princely environment, the idea of ​​​​the need for unity is ripening. In the 80s of the XII century, an attempt was made to reconcile the Olgoviches and Monomakhoviches. The Olgovichi themselves are breaking with their traditional policy of alliance with the steppe, and it is remarkable that in the history of this turning point in the policy of the Olgovichi, the hero of The Tale of Igor's Campaign, Olgovich Igor Svyatoslavich, Prince Novgorod-Seversky, plays a very important role.

At first, Igor is a typical Olgovich. Back in 1180, the Polovtsy actively helped Igor Svyatoslavich. Completely defeated by Rurik Rostislavich of Kyiv near Dolobsk, together with his allies - the Polovtsy, Igor Svyatoslavich jumped into the boat himself-friend with his future worst enemy, and the current ally Khan Konchak, and managed to escape from the Kyiv prince.
Having won the victory, the Kyiv prince Rurik, in a peculiar way, took advantage of its fruits. Not feeling enough strength in himself to keep Kyiv in his power, he left the Kiev Olgovich - Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, the future hero of Igor's Tale, to the great reign of Kiev, and took the rest of the cities of the Kyiv region for himself. Kyiv was ceded by Rurik to Svyatoslav of Kyiv on conditions that we can only guess about: apparently, Svyatoslav undertook to abandon the alliance with the Polovtsy and agreed to act against them, in agreement with all the Russian princes. In the coming years, Rurik and Svyatoslav managed to widely organize allied campaigns of Russian princes on the steppe.

The obligations of the feudal head of all the princes of the Olgoviches - Svyatoslav of Kyiv - extended to Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky, his cousin, who was under his feudal subordination. Straightforward and honest, Igor resolutely breaks with his former policy; he becomes a fierce opponent of the Polovtsians. However, Igor Svyatoslavich did not immediately manage to prove his devotion to the new policy of unity for him, the joint struggle against the Polovtsy.

In 1184, by the combined efforts of the Russian princes, under the leadership of Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Kyiv, the Polovtsy were defeated. Military vehicles were captured, Russian prisoners were beaten off; was taken prisoner by a "basurman" who fired with "live fire". The Polovtsians were terrified, and the danger, it would seem, was removed from the Russian land for a long time. However, Igor Svyatoslavich Novgorod-Seversky could not participate in this victorious campaign: the campaign began in the spring, and sleet prevented his cavalry from arriving in time. Apparently, Igor Svyatoslavich took this failure hard: he failed to prove his loyalty to the alliance of Russian princes against the Polovtsy, he could be suspected of deliberately evading participation in the campaign, as a former ally of Konchak. That is why in the next year, 1185, Igor, "not holding back his youth" - his young enthusiasm, without collusion with Svyatoslav and Rurik, rushes on a campaign against the Polovtsians.

He sets himself a bold task - to "search for" the old Chernigov Tmutorokan on his own, located on the Black Sea and once belonged to the Chernigov princes. A high sense of military honor, repentance for his former policy, devotion to the new - all-Russian, hatred of his former allies - witnesses of his shame, the torment of suffering pride - all this moved him in the campaign.

Courage, sincerity, a sense of honor in Igor's character collided with his short-sightedness, love for the motherland - with the lack of a clear idea of ​​the need for unity, joint struggle. Igor acted with exceptional courage in the campaign, but he did not subordinate all his activities to the interests of his homeland, he could not give up the desire for personal glory, and this led him to a defeat that the Russians had not yet known. For the first time in the history of the struggle against the Polovtsy, the Russian princes - Igor and his brother Vsevolod, "buy tur" - were captured. For the first time, the Russian army suffered such a terrible defeat: This is the features of the special tragedy of the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich - the tragedy that riveted the attention of both the author of the Tale of Igor's Campaign and the chroniclers who compiled their stories about him in different parts of the Russian land, the most extensive and , perhaps the most lively of all the stories about the steppe campaigns of the Russian princes.

Two chronicles about the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich in 1185 have been preserved: one more extensive - in the Ipatiev Chronicle, the other more concise - in the Lavrentiev Chronicle. Here is how, on the basis of these two chronicle stories, one can imagine Igor's campaign.

April 23, 1185, Tuesday, Igor Svyatoslavich of Novgorod-Seversky, his son Vladimir Putivl, nephew and Prince Svyatoslav Olgovich of Rylsky, together with sent from Yaroslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov, led by Olstin Oleksich, the Kovuev squads set out on a distant steppe campaign against the Polovtsians without collusion with Kyiv prince Svyatoslav. The horses, fattened for the winter, walked quietly. Igor rode, gathering his squad. On a campaign off the banks of the Donets on May 1, when the day was drawing to a close, they were overtaken by a solar eclipse, which in those days was considered an omen of misfortune, but Igor did not turn his horses. At the Oskol River, Igor waited for two days for his brother Vsevolod, who was going the other way, from Kursk. From Oskol we went further, to the river Salnitsa.

It was not possible to take the Polovtsy by surprise, as Igor hoped: unexpectedly, the Russian watchmen, who were sent to catch the "tongue", reported that the Polovtsy were armed and ready for battle. The watchmen advised either to go faster or to return. But Igor said: “If we don’t fight back, then we’ll be more than death…” Agreeing on this, the Russians did not stay for the night, but drove all night. The next day, at lunchtime, the Russians met the Polovtsian regiments. The Polovtsy sent back their vezhy (nomadic dwellings on carts), and themselves, having gathered "from young to old", lined up on the other side of the Syuurliya River. Igor's troops lined up in six regiments. According to the custom of that time, Igor Svyatoslavich said a short encouraging word to the princes: "Brothers, we were looking for this, but pull it." Igor's regiment stood in the middle, on the right hand of him - the regiment of Vsevolod's buoy tour, on the left - the regiment of Igor's nephew Svyatoslav Rylsky, in front - the regiment of Igor's son, Vladimir, and the regiment of Chernigov kovuy. Selected riflemen, withdrawn from all regiments, stood in front of the formation. The Polovtsy lined up their archers. "Having fired at the arrow", that is, having fired a volley of bows, the Polovtsy fled. Those Polovtsian regiments that stood far from the river also fled. The advanced regiments of the Chernigov kovuy and Vladimir Igorevich chased the Polovtsy, while Igor and Vsevolod walked slowly, maintaining the order of battle of their regiments. The Russians took possession of the Polovtsian vezhas and captured full (prisoners). Part of the army pursued the Polovtsians further and returned back at night with full force.

As the Ipatiev Chronicle tells, the very next day after the first victory over the Polovtsy, at dawn, the Polovtsian regiments, "like a hog", that is, like a forest, began to suddenly attack the Russians. A small Russian army saw that it had gathered "the entire Polovtsian land" against itself. But in this case, the brave Igor did not turn the shelves. His speech before the battle is reminiscent of the speeches of Vladimir Monomakh in his concern for the "black people", that is, for simple warriors from the peasants. He said: "If we die or run away, and leave the black people, it will be a sin ... Let's go! But we will either die or live in one place." In order to make their way to the Donets, not ahead of or behind each other, Igor ordered the horsemen to dismount and fight all together.

For three days, day and night, Igor slowly made his way to the Donets with his army. In battle, Igor was wounded in the right hand. Pushed aside by the Polovtsians from the water, the warriors were exhausted by thirst. The horses were the first to be exhausted from thirst. There were many wounded and dead in the Russian regiments. They fought hard until evening, fought the second night; at dawn on Sunday morning, the Chernihiv kovui faltered. Igor galloped to the forges to stop them. He took off his helmet to be recognized by them, but could not stop them. On the way back, within an arrow's flight distance from his regiment, exhausted from his wound, he was taken prisoner by the Polovtsians. Captured by them, he saw how cruelly his brother Vsevolod was fighting at the head of his army, and, according to the chronicle, he asked for death so as not to see his death. The wounded Igor was taken on bail by his former ally, Konchak. Of the entire Russian army, only fifteen people were saved, and even fewer kovuevs. Others drowned.

At that time, Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Kyiv, having decided to go against the Polovtsy to the Don for the whole summer, gathered soldiers in the north of his possessions - in the "upper" lands. On the way back at Novgorod-Seversky, Svyatoslav heard that his cousins ​​went, hiding from him, to the Polovtsy, and "he did not like it." When Svyatoslav was already approaching Chernigov in the rooks, he learned about the defeat of Igor. Svyatoslav, hearing this, "sighed deeply", "wiped away his tears" and said: "O my brothers and sons and men of the Russian land! Yes, how sorry I am for Igor (as I was annoyed with him before), so now I regret more (so now I regret it even more) for Igor, my brother.

In these words of Svyatoslav, the consequences of Igor's defeat are precisely defined. Svyatoslav "tired the filthy" in his campaign of 1184, and Igor, "not holding back his youth," nullified his results - "opened the gates" to the Polovtsy on the Russian land. Sorrow and fierce tightness (sadness) spread throughout the Russian land. "And then it is not nice for someone to talk to their neighbor," says the chronicler.

The Polovtsy, having defeated Igor and his brother, "taking great pride" and gathering all their people, rushed to the Russian land. And there was a strife between them: Konchak wanted to go to Kyiv - to avenge Bonyak and his grandfather Sharukan, who were defeated there in 1106, and Gzakredlagal went to the Seim River, "where the wife and children are left: ready for us full collected; earth is cities without fear.

And so they split up. Konchak went to Pereyaslavl-Yuzhny, besieged the city and fought here all day. In Pereyaslavl was then Prince Vladimir Glebovich. He was "daring and strong to the rati", left the city and rushed to the Polovtsy, but the squads did not dare to go after him. The prince fought hard with the enemies, was surrounded and wounded by three spears. Then the others arrived in time from the city and took the prince away. Vladimir from the city sent a message to Svyatoslav of Kyiv, Rurik and Davyd Rostislavich: "Behold the Polovtsy, but help me." There were disagreements between the troops of Rurik and Davyd, the Smolensk squads of Davyd "became a veche" and refused to go on a campaign. Svyatoslav and Rurik sailed along the Dnieper against the Polovtsians, and Davyd and his Smolensk men returned. Hearing about the approach of the troops of Svyatoslav and Rurik, the Polovtsy retreated from Pereyaslavl and besieged the city of Rimov on the way back. All these events are reflected in the "Word".

In captivity, Igor enjoyed relative freedom and honor. Twenty watchmen were assigned to him, who did not prevent him from going wherever he wanted, and obeyed him when he sent them anywhere. With them, Igor went on a hawk hunt. A Polovtsian named Laurus offered Igor to run away. Igor refused to take the "unglorious path", but circumstances eventually forced him to flee: the son of a thousand man and the equestrians, who were in captivity with Igor, informed him that the Polovtsians returning from Pereyaslavl intended to kill all Russian prisoners. The time for flight was chosen in the evening - at sunset. Igor sent his equerry to the Lavr with the order to cross to the other side of the river with a lead horse. The Polovtsy, guarding Igor, got drunk on koumiss, played and had fun, thinking that the prince was sleeping. Igor lifted the floor of the Polovtsian vezha, went out, crossed the river, mounted a horse there and fled.

For eleven days, Igor made his way to the border town of Donets, running away from the chase. Arriving in Novgorod-Seversky, Igor soon set off on a detour - to Chernigov and Kyiv - looking for help and support, and everywhere he was greeted with joy.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" was created shortly after the events of Igor's campaign. It was written under the fresh impression of these events. This is not a historical Narrative of the distant past - it is a response to the events of its time, full of grief that has not yet blunted. The author of the Lay refers in his work to the contemporaries of the events, to whom these events were well known. Therefore, the "Word" is woven from allusions, from reminders, from deaf indications of what was still alive in the memory of every contemporary reader. There are also more precise indications in the "Lay of Igor's Campaign" that it was written shortly after the events described. In 1196, the buoy tour Vsevolod died, in 1198 Igor Svyatoslavich sat down to reign in Chernigov, more than once went to the Polovtsy before, but all this was left without mention in the "Lay of Igor's Campaign". Other events in Russian history that occurred after 1187 are not mentioned either. In particular, the author of the Lay names Yaroslav Osmomyl of Galicia, who died in 1187, among the living princes: the author of the Lay appeals to him to "shoot" Konchak "for the Russian land, for the wounds of Igor, the buoyant Svyatoslavich." Hence it is clear that the Lay was written not later than 1187; but it could not have been written before 1187, since it consists of "glory" to the young princes, including Vladimir Igorevich, only in the same year, 1187, who returned from captivity. Therefore, one can think that "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" was written in 1187.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" was a direct response to the events of Igor's campaign. This was a call to end the princely strife, to unite in the face of a terrible external danger. According to the exact expression of Karl Marx, "the meaning of the poem is the call of the Russian princes to unity just before the invasion of the Mongols." This call is the main content of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign". Using the example of Igor's defeat, the author shows the sad consequences of the political separation of Russia.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" not only tells about the events of Igor's campaign - it gives an assessment of them. It is a passionate and excited speech of a patriot, either referring to the events of living modernity, or recalling the deeds of hoary antiquity. This speech is sometimes angry, sometimes sad and mournful, but always full of faith in the motherland, full of pride in it, confidence in its future.

In "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" one can clearly feel the wide and free breathing oral speech. It is also felt in the choice of expressions - ordinary, used in oral speech terms, military and feudal; it is also felt in the choice of artistic images, devoid of literary sophistication, accessible and popular; it is felt in the very rhythm of the language.

The author of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" constantly addresses his readers, calling them "brethren", as if he sees them in front of him. He introduces both his contemporaries and people of the past into the circle of his imaginary listeners. He turns to Boyan: "Oh Boyan, the nightingale of the old time! Somehow you tickled the sia plyy." He turns to the buoy tur Vsevolod: "Yar ture Vsevolod! Stand on the harrow, pimple on the howl with arrows, rattle the swords with the swords on the helmets!" He addresses Igor, Vsevolod of Suzdal, Rurik and David Rostislavich and many others. Speaking of sad omens that "preceded Igor's campaign and accompanied Igor on his fatal way, he seems to want to stop him and thereby introduces the reader into the disturbing atmosphere of the campaign. He interrupts himself with exclamations of grief: "O Russian land! You are already behind the Shelomyan!" All this creates the impression that the author of the Lay is close to those to whom he is addressing.

This closeness is more than the closeness of a writer to his reader, rather it is the closeness of a speaker or a singer speaking directly to his listeners.

When you read The Tale of Igor's Campaign, you vividly feel that the author intended it, most likely, to be spoken aloud. However, it would be erroneous to assume that the "Tale of Igor's Campaign" was intended only for pronunciation or only for reading - it is possible that the author of the "Lay" intended his work for singing. The author of the Lay himself, although he calls his work very vaguely - either a "word", or a "song", or a "story", however, choosing his poetic manner, considers as his predecessor not any of the writers and orators known to us XI -XII centuries, and Boyan - a singer, a poet who performed his works to the accompaniment of some string instrument- apparently, goose. The author of the Lay considers Boyan to be his predecessor in the same kind of poetry in which he himself creates.

Thus, "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is a call for unity. It was undoubtedly written by the author, but the author felt his connection with the oral word, with oral poetry; the author felt his work spoken, but whether it was intended to be spoken aloud as a speech or for singing, it is difficult to say. If it is a speech, then it still has a resemblance to a song; if it is a song, then it is close to speech. Unfortunately, it is not possible to define the genre of "Words" more closely. Written, it retains all the charm of a living, oral word - a hot, persuasive word, full of the most sincere, most sincere and cordial love for the motherland.

The real meaning of the appeal of the author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign was, of course, not only in an attempt to organize this or that campaign, but also in uniting public opinion against the feudal strife of the princes, in branding harmful feudal ideas in public opinion, in turning public opinion against the search by the princes for personal "glory", personal "honor" and revenge by them for personal "grievances". The task of the Lay was not only military, but also the ideological rallying of all the best Russian people around the idea of ​​the unity of the Russian land.

How did the author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign imagine the unity of Russia, to which he called his readers? The unity of Russia was presented to the author of the "Lay" not in the form of beautiful-hearted "good-neighbourly" relations of all Russian princes on the basis of their good will. It goes without saying that it was impossible to simply persuade the Russian princes to stop being at enmity with each other. What was needed was such a strong central authority that could consolidate the unity of Russia, make Russia a powerful state. The author of the Lay is a supporter of strong princely power, which would be capable of curbing the arbitrariness of petty princes.

He sees the center of united Russia in Kyiv. The prince of Kyiv is drawn to him as a strong and "formidable" ruler. Therefore, the author of the Lay endows the "weak" Prince of Kyiv, Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, with the ideal qualities of the head of Russian princes: he is "formidable" and "great."

Appealing to the Russian princes to stand up for the defense of the Russian land, the author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign reminds these princes of their military might and, as it were, draws in his address a collective image of a strong, powerful prince. This prince is strong in the army: he is "many". He is strong in court: "the courts are rowing up to the Danube." He instills fear in the countries bordering on Russia; he can "scatter the oars on the Volga, and pour out the Don helmets." He "supported the Ugorsky mountains with his iron bars, blocking the queen's path, shutting the gates of the Danube." He is famous in other countries; they sing to him the glory of "Nemtsi and Veneditsi", "Greece Morava".

Before us is the image of a prince, embodying the idea of ​​a strong princely power, with the help of which the unity of the Russian land was to be realized. This idea of ​​strong princely power was only just emerging in the twelfth century. Subsequently, this same image of the "terrible" Grand Duke was reflected in the Life of Alexander Nevsky and in a number of other works of the 13th century. It will not only stand behind this image of the "terrible" Grand Duke - Kyiv as the center of Russia. The shift of the center of Russia to the northeast and the fall in the significance of the Kievan table will become too obvious. The significance of the center of the Russian land in the XV-XVI centuries will pass to Moscow, which will unite Russia with the help of the strong power of the Moscow prince.

In the 12th century, strong princely power was just beginning to emerge, it still had to develop in the future, however, the author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign already saw that with the help of strong princely power it would be possible to unite Russia and give a strong rebuff to external enemies.

The manuscript of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" was discovered two centuries ago, and from that time to the present day, disputes about who was the author of this brilliant work have not subsided. There are many versions about this, here are some of them.

The first version is that the "Word" was written by Prince Igor himself when he returned from the Polovtsian captivity. Researcher Vladimir Buinachev, a Moscow sculptor, provides the following evidence.

The first one is the title of the work itself. In full it sounds like this: "A word about Igor's regiment, Igor, son of Svyatoslav, grandson of Olgov." According to the literary rules of the Middle Ages, the first four words are combined into the title of the work, and the remaining five are called the full name of the author. According to the same principle, such works of the Middle Ages as "Instruction" by Prince Vladimir Monomakh, "Journey Beyond the Three Seas" by Athanasius Nikitin, and others are named.

The second proof is the decoding of the text of the work itself. Here it is necessary to make a small digression. The fact is that in the first edition of the Lay of 1800, the ancient and translated texts went in two parallel columns, so long lines had to be broken, transferring them to the next line. Vladimir Buinachev restored the ancient line-by-line writing. As a result, it turned out that the first letters in the introductory lines formed an acrostic, forming the phrase "Write great", the Acrostic broke off at the letter "I", which stood under the title - a superscript line used to write abbreviated words and numbers. In the ancient Russian tradition, such a titled "G" denoted ten, and the phrase "Prince Igor" contains exactly 10 letters. In the text of the poem itself, there were also many such ciphered phrases, only the initial letters should have been looked for in every second line. The result turned out to be very interesting: "Igor wrote this song in Chernigov." After all, Igor bore the title not only of Novgorod-Seversky, but also prince of Chernigov. The end of the work also contains an acrostic: "Pieakh Igor". The line at the beginning of which is the last letter of this phrase consists of 28 letters, and at the very beginning of the poem the phrase "Igor Prince" falls on the 28th line. After that, Buinachev decided to calculate where the "princely" "I" are located. It turned out that in the 28th place "I" occurs 16 times (that's how many letters in the phrase "Igor Svyatoslavl"), in the 29th place "I" occurs 12 times (according to the number of letters in the combination "Olgov's grandson"), in 30th place 8 times (in the word "write" eight letters). It seems that everything is also an indication of the author.

It is very likely that this version is correct, because the practice of such literary ciphers, which came to us from Byzantium, was widespread in then Russia. Acrostics are full of chronicles, ecclesiastical and secular texts. And they contain, as a rule, the name of the author.

The second version was put forward by the translator Alexander Stepanov and the writer Vladimir Nabokov. They drew attention to the place where another writer appears next to Boyan: "Boyan and Khodyna, both Svyatoslav songwriters, said..." This place was restored at the end of the 19th century by the historian Zabelin. In the original, the text was not divided into words, this work was done by the first publishers, which is far from always true. So they wrote Khodyn's name as two words: "moves on." Boyan in the 11th century had his own prince of Kyiv, Svyatoslav, and the author of the Lay had his own. This means that both Boyan and the author can be called "Svyatoslav songwriters."

If this version is correct, then we will know not only the name of the author, but also his fate, because the name "Khodyna" means "wanderer" in translation. Indeed, such a work, which not only describes historical events, but also evaluates them, could only be written by a person who did not depend on the will of the princes, which were the wandering songwriters.

This version may also be correct, since dozens of poets of that time, who lived in Europe and Asia, put the so-called sfahid - their own "seal", mentioning themselves in the text of the poem. The author of the Lay, too, may not have been an exception.

Another hypothesis was put forward by B. A. Rybakov. Comparing the texts of the Lay and the annals of the Mstislav tribe, he found similarities in the main ideas, assessment of events, and manner of writing. The author of this chronicle was Pyotr Boryslavich, a Kyiv thousand, and the scientist concluded that this diplomat and writer could also write the "Lay of Igor's Campaign".

This is not all versions of the authorship of the "Words". This work stands out from the background of others of that time, because in it the author expresses his opinion about those events. Perhaps that is why we do not know his name. But whoever he is - a diplomat, a chronicler, a voivode - no matter what prince he serves, the author of the Lay is internally free, he, as D.S. then order"; he "courageously and directly denounces the sedition of the princes - his contemporaries and their ancestors ... boldly demands concerted action from the princes against the enemies of Russia ... We recognize in the "Word" the wonderful heroic spirit of all subsequent Russian literature, high consciousness his responsibility, his calling as a writer, his social duty.” The author of The Lay was a truly brilliant man who, eight centuries ago, managed to write such a great work that is still alive today.

In "A Poem Without a Hero" to the line "Not to me, but to whom?" Anna Akhmatova makes a footnote: "Three" k "express the confusion of the author." Indeed, according to the norms of school poetics, such a junction (so To Whom...) is a euphonic mistake. However, how natural the line sounds! What an exact sound meaning it has... It is as if one's breath is caught, as if the reader, following the author, is excited by what happened. However, for some reason it is still easy to pronounce, and the "mistake" is noticeable only in writing. It is much more difficult to pronounce the phrase from "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" with the same convergence of three "k": "And the river Gzak to Konchakovi." So in a manuscript taken at the end of the 18th century for Catherine II. The first publishers of the Lay were apparently so shocked by this phrase with its unpronounceability that they even edited it: "And the speech of Gzak to Konchakovi." But the damned three "k" still remained.

Time to translate and explain the meaning of this line.
Rushing after Igor, who fled from captivity, the Polovtsian khans Gzak and Konchak argue what to do with the falcon (the son of Igor who remained in captivity) if the falcon leaves them: "And Gzak said to Konchak ..." It is much easier to pronounce in Russian, than in Old Russian.

Was the great poet of the 12th century really so indifferent to the sound of his poems? And if we allow this for a second, doesn't it mean that we have before us not poetry, but prose? Historians of the language claim that once "b" ("er") and "b" ("er") were pronounced: "b" - as a short "o", "b" - as "e". Not "bread", but "khliebo", not "Igor", but "Igor". So it was in the X century. But by the 12th century, semivowels no longer sound. At least in live speech. And yet let's try: "And reko Gzako ko Konchakovi ..." The unpronounceable line turned into something like a totem teaser imitating the guttural speech of the "swans" (this is how the self-name of the Polovtsy is translated - Kumane): "And reko Gzako KO Konchakovi"! The sound "b" and "b" in the "Word" was proposed by Academician F. Korsh at the beginning of our century.

But maybe we are dealing with just a random coincidence? Can't the story about the event of the XII century go in the language of the X century? A story, if by this word we mean a prosaic narrative, cannot ... Another thing is when we have verses in front of us: the same "b" and "b" are pronounced, say, in the spiritual verses of the Old Believers to this day. You can hear them in Chaliapin's recordings of Russian epics, and in ancient folklore songs.

Until now, scientists have been arguing what is the "Word of the Regiment" - a prose military story or a poetic poem? Because the rhythm of the "Word" is far from prosaic, but it also does not fit into any of the known poetic meters. "Then the great Svyatoslav utter the golden word ..." - obvious prose. And if you pronounce "b", as the author himself suggests to us, "old words"?

Then the great SVYATOSLAVO
spit the GOLD WORD
mixed with tears and speech:
Oh my son...

prose text turned into a verse. And yet how skillful:

Holy ... glory is the golden word!

It can no longer be a coincidence. Now let's check the sound of "b".

"Then Igor rise to the bright sun..."
Then Igor rise...

The consonance seemed to call out to the prince: he looked at the bright sun, and his heart sank - the sun covered all his army with darkness. We begin to read the "Word" in "old words", and it seems to come to life. How the bells are heard on the tape recorder:

To that in Polotsk I called the morning service "EARLY at St. Sophia's bells, AND HE in Kiev heard the ringing.

With some losses, this fading chime of the heavy Polotsk bells can also be transmitted in Russian:
In Polotsk, the bells of Hagia Sophia rang early in the morning for matins, but he listened to that ringing in Kyiv.
The heavy music of the long-standing battle of Vseslav Polotsky near the Nemiga River is drawn with alliteration for "that" and "that":
On Nemiz, sheaves lay their heads, Thresh chains with haraluzhny, lay their belly on the TOTS, Blow the soul from the body ...

Here is the tightness of the battle, and the crackle of spears, and the heavy blows of combat flails (there were such weapons) on living flesh. And the shadow of death on everything. This ability to fix the picture in sound is also characteristic of folklore. Let us recall at least the saying: "From the clatter of hooves, dust flies across the field." But in the hands of a great master, a miracle happens! It turns out that the most ordinary sound writing can turn into something immeasurably more: the phonetic set accurately encodes the very soul of the poet, and by repeating aloud (always aloud!) the ancient text, we not only see the picture through the eyes of an eyewitness, but get used to it, reproducing the author's to it attitude and resurrecting his voice. Back in the 19th century, Pavel Petrovich Vyazemsky (the poet's son) noticed the sound-pictorial alliteration in the "Word".

Igor and Ovlur flee from captivity, making their way through the tall grass of the Polovtsian field. Midnight. Grass, heavy with dew, lashes the fugitives with icy brooms. It is not a clatter that is heard, but the whistle of stems losing moisture:
If Igor is a falcon in flight, then Vlur will flow,
I rub myself against the icy dew,
pretrgosta bo own greyhound komonya.

Dew kills hot horses, therefore in the second quatrain in each line there are two alliterations for "s" (it's like two jumps, two strokes per verse), and in last verse sound painting dies, falls along with driven horses:
And cold dew
shook in the steppe,
and their greyhounds
the horses were driven.

The whistle is silent. Instead, there is an alarming silence, in which the chase is more audible. We listen to the voices of birds, we hear the crawling of snakes:
And not magpies in a tricot
on the trail of Igor -
ride Gzak with Konchak.
Then don’t lie, don’t lie, galitsy pomlkosha,
magpies are not troskotasha,
crawl position.

It must be said: vr-r-ani not gr-r-ayahut. Otherwise, the voices of ravens are indeed not heard (exactly like jackdaws and forty). It is useless here to read "to oneself", gliding through the lines with only one's eyes. If, as academician D.S. Likhachev claims, even the ancient Russian chronicles were intended to be read aloud (that is why their style was decorated with oratorical techniques and euphony), then a verse without sound reproduction, without resurrection by the efforts of the soul and voice - is just a score without an orchestra .

By the way, the test of "sound" (A.A. Akhmatova's term) is the most important test of the strength of a verse, of the energy inherent in it. How often with the "eyes" everything is smooth and smooth, but if you say it - and falsehood, deliberate intonation will creep in.

Sound in poetry is really a test of meaning. Let's say that in this place they sometimes see not snakes (nomads in Russia were traditionally compared with snakes, remember the Serpent Tugarinovich), but a vine: "Magpies are not troskotash, they only crawl along the vine ..." Let's translate: "Magpies did not crack, they jumped along the branches just…” Could it be? In no case! "Sliding crawler" - here the line itself twists, crawls, imitating large snakes-snakes. And "only" refers to the next line, because without this word you can't even hear the sound of woodpeckers:
Only dyatlov tektom
the way to the river seems ...
Another line, and a completely new sound, a completely different alliteration:
Nightingales with cheerful songs
tell the world.

Woodpeckers speak for the poet in "d" and "t", and nightingales sing in "vi" and "ve", that is, they whistle. From the first to the last line, the "Word" is filled with sound. Another thing is that without reading "b" and "b", without verse reconstruction, this sound is concealed. It is no coincidence that only two or three of the most explicit alliterations were traditionally noticed in the poem, and the rest of the richness simply did not fall into the field of view of researchers. However, this is very understandable: try at least to write "Eugene Onegin" in prose, and even release two, three and four vowels in each line. Will poetry be obtained with such an operation?

D. S. Likhachev wrote: "The Word" is undoubtedly composed by one author. And this author never ceases to amaze us with his amazing talent, his hidden and "unprovable" artistic discoveries. "Hidden discoveries" is not a slip of the tongue. The author of the Lay, like a true poet, influences “1 his readers not openly, but, as it were, under the canopy of their consciousness. :
And take them gold and curtains,
and Dragya OXAMITE!

Sound is the key to the "Word". Those who arm themselves with it will learn about the poem itself, its author and Ancient Russia, something that a simple reader will never guess. For example, the Moscow researcher Arsen Gogeshvili entered the world of the poem with this key and found an acrostic at the end: to the Holy Mother of God Pirogoshvili -
For the sake of the country, hail fun!
Singing a song by the old prince,
And then sing to the young:
Glory to Igor SVYATSLAVLICH!

The ending of the last word was always ruled: if glory, then, of course, to Svyatoslavich! But it turned out that this was not a typo. Researcher (by the way, A. A. Gogeshvili is not a philologist, but a "techie", candidate technical sciences) showed that it should be read here both horizontally and vertically: "SAVE SVYATOSLAVLICH". This acrostic-prayer is addressed to the one whose name is mentioned in the previous line, to the Holy Pyrogoscheya Mother of God (there was such a church in Kyiv on Podil). It is precisely such compound acrostics (vertically and horizontally) that are found in ancient Russian manuscripts of the 16th and 17th centuries. They were, of course, before, only books with verses, written down verses, from that time did not come down, except for one or two. And the "Word" itself, in the list that was in the hands of the original publishers, was rewritten in "prose." The acrostic just shows that the original, or, as philologists say, the protograph, was "in a column." Apparently, the acrostic in it stood out with cinnabar.

Begging the Mother of God "Save Svyatoslavlich!" the poet hardly has in mind Igor Svyatoslavich, his hero. From the inscriptions on the walls of ancient Russian churches, we know that such words were written about themselves. Maybe the patronymic of the poet coincided with the patronymic of Igor? If so, then this is another completely unexpected argument in favor of the assumption that the author’s name is named in the text of the poem: “Boyan and Khodyna, Svyatoslav’s songwriters, spoke ...” After all, here, too, the “patronymic” of two singers is given by the name of the prince. Only Boyan in the 11th century had his own Svyatoslav of Kyiv (Svyatoslav Yaroslavich), and the author of the "Lay" had his own (Svyatoslav Vsevolodich, the one who dropped the "golden word", that cousin of Igor and feudal head Kievan Rus, whom the author calls the "father" of Igor and Vsevolod): So, the great creator of the "Word" was called Khodyna Svyatoslavich? Not excluded.

"The Lay of Igor's Campaign" is a poem about the unity of Russian princes in the fight against an external enemy - the Polovtsians. "The Word" is a poem not only about a feat as such, only a military one, but about asceticism, about how a person (Prince Igor) finds spiritual balance in the world, returning to faith and thereby returning to the Russian land: "Igor Prince in the Russian earth" The Russian land is saved not only by defending it with arms in hand, but by overcoming sedition, preserving itself, its soul, its spirit. That is why The Tale of Igor's Campaign has such an amazing appeal that it seems to have been created at the wrong time, far ahead of it. There is already a novelistic thinking in him, which for that time seemed to be unthinkable. It talks about what is present in Russian life, in any case, from the time of its creation to the present day. It talks about how spiritual darkness arises and how it is overcome by man.

From the "Word" we learn a lot about the era in which it was created. This is a poem about how he lives, how he dies in unbelief and how he is saved in faith. human soul. This is the main reason why we need it. The "Word" has an amazing ability to become especially expensive and necessary, revealing its basic meaning in times of trouble, in periods of spiritual instability, when the forces of evil triumph, when spiritual warfare intensifies. In this short poem, a person gains spiritual support, draws ideological confidence, finds answers to the eternal questions of his being. But to this day it remains a mystery who he is - the author of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"?

1. Abie - suddenly, immediately, suddenly
2. Az - I
3. Aki, aky - how
4. Amo - where
5. Ano - I
6. Asche - if, although
7. Bagr, purple - purple clothes, royal mantle
8. Blaznen - seduced, seductive, deceptive
9. Watch out - beware
10. Borzo - fast
11. Swearing - battle, battle
12. Brasno - food, food
13. Buest - courage, courage
14. Vborze - soon, quickly
15. Lead, lead - know
16. Vezha - tent, wagon
17. Veliy - big
18. Velmy - very
19. Eight - I know
20. Vertograd - garden
21. All - village, village
22. Grapes - garden
23. Together - together
24. Vniti - enter
25. Air - a cover on a vessel with "holy gifts" on the throne in the church
26. Voi - warriors
27. Vyzhlets - hound dog, bloodhound
28. Verb - word, speech
29. Golka - noise, scream
30. Gonzuti - lose, get rid of, avoid
31. Much (th) - skillful, experienced
32. Grief - up
33. Bitter - comparative degree from bitter
34. Guest - merchant
35. Hryvnia - monetary unit
36. Dirt - go
37. Dividing - for
38. Right hand - right hand
39. Divy - wild
40. Dolu - down
41. Dondete - bye; until
42. When - when
43. Hedgehog - if; which, what
44. Ekshenya - part of worship
45. Eliko - how much
46. ​​Penance - church punishment
47. Belly is life
48. Zane, zane - because, because
49. Potion, potion - cereal, vegetable; medicine, poison; powder
50. Zelo - very, strongly
51. Zrak - view, appearance, gaze
52. Ide, Ide - where
53. Ite, yate, hedgehog - which, which, which
54. Imati - take, grab
55. Estate - wealth, property
56. Ino - but then
57. Iekup - ransom
58. Kamka - silk fabric
59. Kamo - where
60. Kelar - monk, head of the monastic household
61. Klasik - church minister
62. Casing - fur coat
63. To act as a coward - to do evil, intrigues
64. Paint, cross - canvas, canvas
65. Red - beautiful, beautiful
66. Peasants, Christians - Christians
67. Krylos - kliros, a place for singers in the church
68. Coupon - together
69. Kvizhdo - each
70. Leno - good, worthy
71. Lepy - good, beautiful
72. Summer - year
73. Litorgy - church service, mass
74. Catching, catching - hunting
75. Elbow - a measure of length
76. Radiate - happen
77. Mniti - think
78. Mnih - monk
79. Publican - tax collector
80. Naipage - the most
81. Naked - in half, in two
82. Narcissistic - rich, noble
83. Outfit - order, device; equipment
84. Nasad - a type of sudok
85. Unsightly - immaculate, pure
86. Neglect - neglect
87. Negley - rather than to
88. Than - than, than
89. Hostile - spiteful; diabolical
90. Song - no
91. Below - also not, and not
92. Nicoli - never
93. New - him
94. Obache - but, however,
95. Charm is sorcery
96. Sheathed - dressed
97. Situation - siege
98. Ov ... ov - one ... the other, that ... and that
99. Ovo ... ovo - that ... that, or ... or
100. Ovogda - sometimes
101. Right hand - on the right
102. Single row - outerwear
103. Okolny - neighboring, nearby
104. Payback - ransom
105. Ole - about (interjection)
106. Opaco - back
107. Oprich - except, excluding
108. Orats - plow
109. grin - smile, grin
110. Otai - secretly
111. From nowhere - from where
112. Youth, spur - a child, a young man; servant
113. Packs, packs - again, again
114. Papoloma - bedspread
115. Pardus - cheetah
116. Page - more, better; more
117. Percy - chest
118. Dust - dust, ashes
119. Pestun - educator
120. Pitati - educate
121. Linen, linen - silk fabric; cover
122. Incite - incite
123. Regiment - campaign; war; military unit
124. Poke, pokege - because, since, although, even
125. Field - a measure of length, distance
126. Pereklo - nickname, nickname
127. Ports, portishes - clothes
128. Posad - suburb
129. Benefit - help
130. Consume - exterminate, destroy
131. Pravezh - recovery by court verdict
132. Foretold - named above, mentioned above
133. Coming - serve, serve someone
134. Presbyter - a priest
135. Charming - deceitful, deceptive
136. Charm - deceit, temptation, delusion
137. Prohibition - threat, prohibition
138. Priiskati - come running
139. Prisko - always
140. Priskodevaya - eternally virgin (about the Mother of God)
141. Presny - native, close
142. Presny - native, close
143. Bailiff - guard; officer appointed to summon a defendant to trial
144. A span is a measure of length
145. Is it - except, besides
146. Cancer - tomb
147. Ratai - plowman, landowner
148. Jealousy - diligence
149. Cutter - monetary unit
150. Rel - crossbar
151. Craft - art, skill, craft
152. Reg, speak (reh, rti, etc.) - say, speak (said, etc.)
153. Robe - robe
154. Week - week
155. Semo - here
156. Segivo - second; axe
157. Ax - ax
158. Sisklit, synclit - approximate, advisers
159. That is to say - that is
160. Sitse - so
161. Well - a hole, a gap
162. Smerd - a peasant
163. Set - connect
164. Nozzle - flute
165. Sorokoust - forty-day prayer for the deceased
166. Spiratisya - to argue
167. Srachitsa - shirt
168. Stechno - thigh
169. From that place - since then
170. Stochka - street area
171. Stratich - commander, governor
172. Strug - a boat, a ship
173. Stry - father's brother (paternal uncle)
174. Stud - shame
175. Sumica - short throwing spear
176. Syta - honey dissolved in water
177. Tai - secretly
178. Tamo - there
179. Tat is a thief
180. Tatba - theft
181. Leaks, flow - go, run
182. Tium - servant, butler, housekeeper
183. Tokmo - only
184. Tolmach - translator
185. Tochiyu - only
186. True - earthquake
187. Tuga - sadness, grief
188. Ubo - so, just the same
189. Ubrus - scarf, bandage, towel
190. Oud - part of the body
191. Patterned - jewelry (fabrics, clothes, etc.)
192. Ties - ropes, chains
193. Assumption - death, death
194. Leaks - run away
195. Vulnerable - hit, hurt
196. Scarlet - beautiful
197. Cheso - forehead
198. Loins - lower back, camp
199. Shuitsa - left hand
200. Yad - food
201. Ulcer - hurt
202. Yako - what, how
203. Yaselnichey - shepherd
204. Yasti - eat
205. Yati - take

1. Averintsev, Bitov, Vinogradov and others. Reading circle. - M.: - Publishing house of political literature, - 1990;
2. Tarkhov, Kolesov, Sokol. A word about Igor's regiment. - M.: - Young Guard. - 1981;
3. Belyakova, Levinskaya, Stepina and others. A word about Igor's regiment. - M.: - Children's literature. - 1979.
4. K. Marx and F. Engels. Works. vol. XXII, p. 122
5. Tkachenko P. In search of the city of Tmutarakan. Unclaimed Reflections on Russian Literature and Life. - M.: Moscow University Publishing House. - 2000. - 240 p.

Zharov Georgy - student of the 10th grade of gymnasium No. 1517

A happy accident in 1795 brought an amateur and collector of ancient Russian monuments A.I. Musin-Pushkin to the opening of the most precious monument of ancient Russian literature - "The Tale of Igor's Campaign". The "Word" was written about the unsuccessful campaign against the Polovtsians of the Seversky prince Igor Svyatoslavich in alliance with his brother Vsevolod from Trubchevsk, his son Vladimir from Putivl and nephew Svyatoslav Olgovich from Rylsk. The campaign took place at the end of April and at the beginning of May 1185. Prince Igor, who was captured by the Polovtsians, escaped from captivity in the autumn of that year. Having been in Novgorod-Seversky and then in Chernigov, he goes to Kyiv to Prince Svyatoslav, where the final part of the Lay finds him.

Such is the historical basis of our monument. It is a work of written creativity, but it cannot be confined to a specific name: the author of the Lay is unknown to us. One can only say that he was a combatant, most likely - of the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav, who acts in the "Word" as a central political figure, possessing all the power of political and moral authority. He is portrayed as a spokesman for the idea of ​​all-Russian interests and as an infallible judge of the princes, whose separate actions bring grief and misfortune to the Russian land. To Svyatoslav, who in fact was not always at his best as a guardian of all-Russian interests, the author of the Lay is clearly biased and clearly overestimates his authority and his political wisdom. This was most natural for a poet-publicist, who, in his position and in his personal connections, was close to the Kievan prince. The poet could also be a northerner by origin, but he, obviously, by the time of Igor's campaign, had already firmly settled in Kyiv, at the court of Svyatoslav. The content of the Lay does not give us any grounds for asserting that its author was a participant in the campaign. The Lay lacks those specific details in the description of the events of the campaign that would be natural for an eyewitness who directly observed everything that was happening.

The poetic genius of the author of the Lay fed on the book literature of his time - original and translated - and, apparently, even more on oral folk poetry. There is no reason to limit the richest oral-poetic element of the "Word" to the narrow framework of a specially combat environment, based only on the fact that the author himself was a combatant. We do not have any data in order to assert the existence of specific retinue features of epic or song oral creativity, specifically retinue poetics, different from the poetics characteristic of the work of the peasantry. And this, all the more so since it cannot be said that the cultural, and, consequently, the literary, level of the squad as a whole, as well as the privileged strata of ancient Russia in general, was sharply different from the corresponding level of the peasant masses. In addition, the squad did not represent a completely closed social stratum; natives of serfs and peasants fell not only into the younger squad, which was a fairly common phenomenon, but sometimes into the older one; Vladimir of Kyiv promoted a young furrier to senior combatants, who in single combat defeated the Pecheneg hero.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" attracts us by the fact that its deep ideological content is harmoniously embodied in an amazing poetic form, which we will not find in any monument of the ancient Slavic epic. The wealth of figurative and symbolic elements - distinguishing feature"The words". Poetic personification, comparison, parallelisms - all this we find in abundance in it. Its most important feature, which determined the richness of its poetic colors, is the inseparable connection in it between the natural world and the human world. Nature takes here the most active - friendly or hostile - part in all the events taking place; animals and plants, earthly and heavenly elements very vividly respond both to grief and to the joy of Igor, his troops and all those who are mentioned in the "Word". With gloomy omens, nature accompanies Igor's preparations for the campaign and the campaign itself, and with joyful excitement she helps him during his escape from captivity.

Nature in the "Word" is not mute, wordless, but resonant and speaking: jackdaws speak in their own speech, Donets talks with Igor; the whole “Word” is overwhelmed with sounds, ringing, singing: glory rings, the ringing comes from the battle, spears sing, wagons shout, battle banners speak,

Abundant and rich epithets and comparisons of the "Word" - entirely from the world of nature. Boyan is a nightingale, Vsevolod is a buoy-tour, a "filthy" Polovtsian is a black raven. Boyan spreads like a gray wolf on the ground, like a gray eagle under the clouds. The princes, the squad, the Polovtsian Khan Konchak are also compared with the gray wolf. Yaroslavna is compared with a cuckoo, Igor - with an ermine, with a white gogol, Vseslav - with a fierce beast, Polovtsy - with a leopard's nest. Boyan's prophetic fingers, which he lays on living strings to sing a song to the glory of the princes, are compared with ten falcons launched by a hunter on a flock of swans, screaming carts - also with a frightened swan flock. The organic consonance between the author of the Lay and the elemental forces of nature explains the presence of pagan gods in the monument. It should not be thought that the introduction of the gods of the pagan Olympus into the "Word" is a literary exercise, which the author engages in like the poets of the 18th century, who usually mentioned the names of the classical gods; there is no reason to believe that he believed in them, as his pagan ancestors believed. It would be more correct to think that he was so dominated by the poetic element that, despite his connection with Christianity, he could not and did not want to get away from the system of worldview that was prompted to him by paganism and which was still very strong at that time among the broad masses. It should not be forgotten that the so-called dual faith was still alive at that time, which was the source of the poetic perception of nature for such gifted people as the author of the Lay was.

In connection with the general nature of the poetic style of the "Word" is its diverse, colorful symbolism, its metaphorical language, the richness of its epithets. All this was also due to the influence on the author of the tradition not only of the book, but also to a greater extent of the oral-poetic, folk tradition.

The author of the Lay used the artistic means of poetic speech in such a way that he gave his work a deep lyrical excitement and great emotional tension, every now and then, expressing his subjective attitude to events and persons who took part in the events. This makes The Lay a thoroughly journalistic, agitational monument, calling for action, for the struggle for certain political ideals - in this case for the rallying of all Russian forces against the steppe nomads, who ravaged the Russian land and threatened it with incessantly unexpected destructive invasions. The author, with great passion and genuine civic sorrow, draws pictures of the misfortunes of his native land, resulting from princely strife and all sorts of troubles, shortening the human life, ruining the life of the "Dazhd-God's grandson", the Russian people. The call to stand "for the Russian land", forgetting personal scores and personal temporary selfish benefits, sounds much more energetic and convincing from our author than it sounds even from the ancient chronicler, who also guards the interests of the Russian land as a whole. In terms of the height of the main idea penetrating the Lay, it is a purely progressive literary monument for its time, clearly revealing the power of national self-consciousness of the most advanced people of Kievan Rus, who sought to direct the movement of history along a path objectively useful for the destinies of the entire Russian people.

The cognitive value of the Lay is also great. It gives a lively and very truthful picture of the feudal situation of old Russia, how this situation affected mainly inter-princely relations, as well as in the relations between the prince and the squad. Not a single monument of old Russian literature depicts for us the chivalrous way of Kievan Rus so concentrated as the Lay does. Igor and Vsevolod act in it as warriors, for whom honor and glory are the main engines of their behavior. Igor addresses his squad with the words: "Brothers and friends! It is better to fall in battle than to be captured. I want to break a spear at the end of the Polovtsian field, I want to either lay down my head with you, Russians, or get drunk with a helmet from the Don." According to Svyatoslav of Kyiv, the hearts of both brothers "are forged from strong damask steel and tempered in courage." Knightly courage, military prowess distinguish Igor, even more - his brother Vsevolod, who, standing in the vanguard, spits arrows at enemies, rattles damask swords on helmets. Prince Boris Vyacheslavovich, Vseslav of Polotsk, Roman of Vladimir-Volynsky also act as brave knights in the Lay. Prince's retinue also thinks about how to get himself honor and glory to the prince. Vsevolod speaks of his squad as follows: “my Kuryans are experienced warriors; they are twisted under pipes, cherished under helmets, fed from the end of a spear. like gray wolves, seeking honor for themselves, and glory for the prince. Turning to the princes Rurik and David, Svyatoslav says: "Don't you have a brave squad roaring like tours wounded by sabers, hardened in an unknown field?"

The Lay contains one of the most remarkable images in world literature - the yearning wife of Igor Yaroslavna, lamenting like a cuckoo on the walls of Putivl in her own way, conjuring the elements of nature to return her husband and with the power of overcoming and conquering love helping him to happily escape from captivity to his homeland. In passing, but with great lyrical enthusiasm, he depicts the "Word" and the grief of a mother crying for her drowned son Rostislav and infecting flowers and trees with her grief.

What is the date of the creation of the "Word"? First of all, one must think that it was written in at least two stages. For a relatively long time, some researchers have drawn attention to the fact that the story of Igor's flight and his return to the Russian land, written in jubilantly joyful tones, does not agree with all the previous narrative, in which the fate of the Russian land and Igor himself is depicted in gloomy, pessimistic colors. By itself, therefore, the thought suggests itself that when the main part of the Lay was being created, in sorrowful pictures depicting the misfortune of Russia and the wounded, captive Igor, Igor's escape had not yet taken place. When Igor returned to Russia, the author, to the glory of him and two other princes, participants in the campaign, wrote the final part of the Lay, which spoke of Igor's escape from captivity, and which was supposed to give satisfaction moral sense, overwhelmed by the vivid image of the recent military failure.

The timing of the creation of the main part of the Lay, ending with Yaroslavna's lament, is plausibly determined by the following considerations. The story of Igor's campaign against the Polovtsy, which was included in the Ipatiev Chronicle, in very real, though not devoid of lyricism, details, tells how Svyatoslav became aware of Igor's defeat: Svyatoslav came to Novgorod-Seversky in the summer of 1185, wanting to go to Polovtsy for the whole summer, and then he learned for the first time that his cousins ​​- Igor and Vsevolod - themselves went against the Polovtsy, and he became annoyed; then, having come to Chernigov, he heard from Belovolod Prosovich, apparently a participant in Igor's campaign, about the victory of the Polovtsy and with a sigh, wiping away his tears, began to reproach the princes, whose intemperate youth had opened the gates to the Russian land to the enemies whom he had exhausted a year ago. “But the will of the Lord be done in everything,” he says, “just as I used to be annoyed with Igor, so now I feel even more sorry for Igor, my brother.” After that, Svyatoslav sends the news of Igor's defeat to the neighboring princes, calling on them to help against the Polovtsians. Having the lesson of Igor's campaign before his eyes, Svyatoslav naturally had to think about how to guarantee the success of his enterprise and not put the Russian army in the position in which it found itself during Igor's campaign. It was necessary to rely on a solid force that would be capable of delivering a crushing blow to the Polovtsy. It was necessary to unite the Russian princes for a joint rebuff to the enemy. Here is the specific task, the implementation of which was a priority for Svyatoslav. The idea of ​​the "Lay" just needs to be connected precisely with these plans of Svyatoslav. In this case, the writing of the main part of the poem should be attributed to the summer of 1185: this part was created in the hot pursuit of events, in order to support the call of Svyatoslav. Let us pay attention to the fact that in his "golden word" he appeals to the princes Rurik and David Rostislavich with a request to join the golden stirrups "for the insult of this time, for the Russian land, for the wounds of Igor, the buoyant Svyatoslavlich." Judging by the story of the Ipatiev Chronicle, Rurik and David then, in the summer of 1185, responded in one way or another to the call of Svyatoslav and moved against the Polovtsy. So, one must think that the "golden word" was written even before it became known about the performance of the Rostislavichs. In any case, the main part of the Tale of Igor's Campaign could not have been written after 1187, since it mentions Prince Vladimir Glebovich of Pereyaslavsky, who died during a campaign against the Polovtsy on April 18 of this year. In addition, Svyatoslav appeals for help to Yaroslav of Galicia, who died on October 1, 1187.

As for the question of when the final part of the Lay, which tells about Igor's escape from captivity, was written, it can be answered by first determining the time of Igor's stay in captivity. Based on the fact that the "Word" speaks of nightingales announcing dawn to the fleeing Igor, it would logically follow from this that it was in the spring, that is, a year after the campaign. So Igor was in captivity whole year. Chronicle data do not give us precise indications on this matter, but, nevertheless, judging by them, one should think that Igor remained in captivity for much less than a year. The Laurentian chronicle, which erroneously dates the campaign to 1186, under the same year, after the mention of Vladimir Glebovich's wound near Pereyaslavl, reports: "And in small days, Igor rushed off the Polovtsy." In the Ipatiev Chronicle, which correctly determines the time of the campaign in 1185, again under the same year 1185, also after the mention of the wounding of Vladimir Glebovich, it is said: "Igor Svyatoslavlich was in the Polovtsy that year." But in the context of the story of the Ipatiev Chronicle, as in many other ancient Russian monuments, "year" means "time" (cf. in the story of the Ipatiev Chronicle: "They go to the Donets of the river in the evening year", etc.). Further, it is also said in the same place that Igor, believing that he would linger in captivity for a long time, ordered himself a priest from Russia "with holy service." This means that Igor did not stay in captivity for long, in any case, much less than a year. The one-year period was quite sufficient for the traditionally pious Russian prince to need a priest and his service. In addition, in the story of the Ipatiev Chronicle, Igor's flight is timed to coincide with the return of the Polovtsy from Pereyaslavl, which was a few months after Igor's capture. Thus, Igor, most likely, fled in the autumn of 1185 (winter is excluded, since the Ipatiev Chronicle says that, escaping from captivity, Igor forded the river). If, according to the Lay, Igor's escape was accompanied by nightingale singing, then here we are dealing, most likely, with the poetic liberty of the author of the poem. From all that has been said, it follows that the end of the Lay can be dated to the time starting from the autumn of 1185. If we agree with those researchers who believe that the inclusion of Vladimir Igorevich among the glorified princes could take place only after he returned from captivity, and this was in the autumn of 1187, then the completion of the Lay will have to be postponed to the last months of this year or to the beginning of 1188.

Soon after the appearance of the first edition of The Tale of Igor's Campaign (1800), the voices of skeptics began to be heard, denying the antiquity of the monument. Thus, Metropolitan Yevgeny Bolkhovitinov claimed that the "Lay" was written only in the 16th century, while Rumyantsev attributed it to the 18th century, believing that it was an obvious forgery. There were even such extreme deniers of the authenticity of the Lay, who saw in it a forgery of either Musin-Pushkin himself or Karamzin. Even after the publication (in 1838) of Behavior and Legends of the Massacre of Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoy, dating back to the beginning of the 15th century, some of the most stubborn skeptics did not shake the distrust of the Lay as a genuine monument. and written under the clear influence of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign". Among these skeptics were primarily Kachenovsky and Senkovsky, who spoke out against the authenticity of the Lay until the mid-1950s.

The skeptical attitude towards the famous monument was only a particular manifestation of the skeptical attitude, mainly in the 30-40s, of a group of historians and critics towards the past of Russian history, which seemed to them as an era culturally very poor, almost barbaric. Especially with regard to the "Word", skeptics pointed out, on the one hand, the absence in ancient Russian literature of works, although somehow approaching it in their artistic qualities, on the other hand, they emphasized the features of the language of the "Word", supposedly not finding parallels. in the language of the most ancient Russian monuments. Attention was also drawn to the presence in the "Word" of elements of knightly life, as if alien to the ancient Russian way of life.

The position of the Slavophile Konstantin Aksakov in his book Lomonosov in the History of Russian Literature and the Russian Language, published in 1846, is very indicative of the Lay. there is a living movement and inner life, which is reflected in the indifferent, pedantically correct use of the Old Russian and Church Slavonic languages ​​by the author. According to Aksakov, only a foreigner could write like this, having encountered two elements in our then literary language, having mastered both these elements well and using them evenly in his work. If the author were a Russian person, then, Aksakov argues, he would inevitably make mistakes when trying to combine two linguistic elements in one work, and this would indicate a living, organic, and not a purely bookish attitude to the language. And timid, cold correctness is just characteristic of a foreigner who, by mistake and slip of the tongue, is afraid to reveal his non-Russian origin.

On the other hand, Aksakov does not find in the Lay a religious element common to ancient Russian monuments. In addition, the poetic images of the Lay, in his words, "have so little of a Russian folk character, they so often respond with phrases that are almost modern, sometimes so curly, that one cannot in any way recognize Russian folk poetry in them, if one cannot deny the writer a poetic talent, to which he gave only a hint of Russianism" (p. 158). The author of the "Lay", according to Aksakov's guess, was a Greek who knew the Church Slavonic language back in his homeland and learned Russian in Russia. His lack of a religious element, Aksakov thinks, does not preclude the suggestion that he was a Greek, because despite the fact that the Christian faith was borrowed by the Russians from the Greeks, "religiosity was an inherent element of Russian life, and the Greek might not have it" (p. 159).

These arguments, unexpected in the mouth of a Slavophile, about the most precious monument of ancient Russia and its restrained, and sometimes unfriendly assessment, are striking in their subjectivity and complete groundlessness. Aksakov identifies the language of the later list with the language of the original, considers the figurative richness of speech to be "curly" and "intricacies" and is inclined to see in the "Word" the absence of a Christian religious element. It is easy to oppose the last statement with the judgment about the "Word" of K. Marx in his letter to Engels: "The whole song is of a Christian-heroic character, although pagan elements are still very noticeable" (K. Marx and F. Engels. Works. T. XXII, p. 122).

In 1877, the book Vs. Miller "A look at the Tale of Igor's Campaign". As an epigraph to the book, V. Miller took a quote from the "Lay": "The girls sing on the Danube, voices curl across the sea to Kyiv." With this epigraph, V. Miller emphasizes his fundamental view of the "Lay "as a dependent monument, written under the influence of foreign literary samples. He is looking for sources for the Word, mainly in medieval Byzantine poetry, which came down to the Russian author in the Bulgarian transmission, and also partly in Bulgarian literature. To prove the connection of the Word " With general formation Byzantine poems Miller compares it in great detail with our translation in the 12th century. with the Greek story "The Deed of Davgen", seeing in both works a common poetic style. The author of the "Word", according to Vs. Miller - a scribe, well-read in Byzantine and Bulgarian literature, far from the naive immediacy that, for example, Buslaev saw in him. Mentioning pagan deities, he allegedly does this solely to embellish his speech, transplanting onto Russian soil what he found in Greek and Bulgarian mythology. For example, according to Vs. Miller, "grandson of Dazhd-God" could be a transfer of the Byzantine epithet given in some Byzantine work to some mythical or historical person. Dazhdbog was put in place of Helios or Phoebus. Paying attention to the fact that among the gods mentioned in the "Word" there is no the most important Russian god - Perun, Vs. Miller explains this omission by the fact that the author of the Lay did not find Perun in his Bulgarian source, although this idea can be easily disputed by the simple consideration that the author of the Lay did not have to mention all Russian pagan gods and that only those of them were useful to him. which naturally fit in with the very context of the story.

Later, at least at the last stage of his scientific activity, Vs. Miller apparently abandoned his original view of The Lay as an imitative monument. In any case, in the article "Essay on the history of the Russian epic epic", written in the 1900s and first published in 1924 in volume III of "Essays on Russian folk literature", he does not say a word about this, but he devotes enough space connection of the "Word" with the Russian song tradition that preceded it.

A year after the publication of the book Vs. Miller, in 1878, Potebnya's book "The Tale of Igor's Campaign. Text and Notes" (republished in 1914) appeared, in its general direction representing, as it were, a refutation of the initial provisions of Vs. Miller. Potebnya considers The Word to be a personal and written work; he sees in it the presence of bookish elements, does not object to the fact that it is "composed according to a ready-made Byzantine template" (an obvious hint at the point of view of Vs. Miller), but, on the contrary, claims that "we do not know of another ancient Russian work, up to such degree imbued with folk-poetic elements" as "The Word". Potebnya cites a large number of parallels from Slavic folk poetry, especially Ukrainian and Great Russian, confirming his point of view. Along with this, he tries to reveal the mythological elements of the monument.

Even before Potebnya (in the works on the "Lay" by Maksimovich, Buslaev, Tikhonravov, Ogonovsky), as well as after Potebnya (in the works of Smirnov, Barsov, Vladimirov, Yakovlev, etc.), many comparisons were made of individual passages of the "Lay" with works of oral poetry - Great Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian. These comparisons, of necessity, were made with the texts of later records, mainly of the 19th century. (Monuments of oral poetry first began to be recorded in our country, and then only in very small numbers, only in the 17th century), but the stability of the artistic means of folk poetry makes us think that later recordings do not violate the original forms of poetics of folk art too much. As a result, we can confidently assert the direct and organic connection the poetics of the "Words" with the poetics of epics, oral lyrical songs, lamentations. Hence comes the amazingly varied and colorful symbolism of the "Word", the richness of its epithets and metaphors, hence the organic consonance of the world of man and the world of nature, observed at every step in the "Word".

The author of the poem about Igor's campaign appears to us as a lonely singer of significant and memorable pages of Russian antiquity. It seems as if he had no predecessors and peers in his poetic work. Meanwhile, he himself speaks with respect and enthusiasm about the "nightingale of the old time" Boyan, whose song gift he appreciates so highly that he does not dare to follow in his footsteps, feeling powerless to equal him in the art of poetry. Boyan sang to the glory of "old" Yaroslav, his brother - "brave" Mstislav, grandson - "red" Roman Svyatoslavich; he also told about the exploits of the restless prince, the warrior-adventurer Vseslav of Polotsk, about whose fate he also composed an instructive chorus. Our author would not mind giving up his place to Boyan, so that with his nightingale's tickle he would sing the praises of Igor's regiments, but, taking up his own song, the author of the "Lay" now and then says not "according to the epics of this time," as he promised to do, but "according to the intention of Boyan". The brilliance and hyperbolicity of the images of the Lay, the swiftness and intensity of the narration, the excitement of speech - all this, one must think, was suggested to him by Boyan's song style. He follows in the footsteps of Boyan both when, with obvious exaggeration, he depicts the wealth of Igor's booty during his victory over the Polovtsy that preceded his defeat, and when he paints a picture of the second battle of the Russians with the Polovtsians, and when he paints the victorious invasion of Svyatoslav into the Polovtsian land and the capture of Khan Kobyak by him. In the manner of Boyan, one must think, both the power and military successes of the princes Vsevolod are depicted big nest, Yaroslav Osmomysl and, perhaps, an episode of Igor's escape from captivity.

Thus, our author owed his poetic art not only to impersonal folk poetry, but also to the work of a personal singer, who, in turn, brought up his gift on the best examples of folk song creativity.

Unfortunately, we know very little about such personal singers of old Russia, but some information about them is given by the ancient chronicle. So, in the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle under 1240, it is mentioned about the "verbal singer" Mitus, who was punished for not wanting to serve Prince Daniel out of pride. In the same chronicle, under 1251, it is said that when princes Daniel and Vasilko, having defeated the Yotvingians, returned with glory to their land, they sang a "glorious song" to them. The same song was sung in honor of Alexander Nevsky, judging by his life, when he returned from the victory over the German knights on Lake Peipus. In both the latter cases, in the absence of indications of specific singers who sang to the glory of the victorious princes, their existence must still be assumed, since it is difficult to admit that songs composed about certain events arose without direct involvement individual singers.

Along with songs about the exploits of princes in ancient times, there were also songs that told about the exploits of the "brave" who defended the Russian land from the attacks of steppe enemies. These songs, grouped around the personality of Vladimir of Kyiv, were the ancestors of our epics and, as Vs. Miller ("Essays on Russian Folk Literature", Vol. III, p. 27), could not but be known to the author of the Lay.

So, the singer of Igor's campaign and behind him and in the near future had a certain song tradition. It is also possible that it was partially fixed in writing, but did not reach us in writing, just as, we can say with confidence, very much of what the ancient Russian written tradition was rich in did not reach us. It is quite possible that the songs of the prophetic Boyan existed not only in oral use, but were also written down, as was written by the author during the period of its creation and "The Tale of Igor's Campaign".

The ancient Russian chronicle has preserved traces of the influence of oral tradition and oral folk song. The stories of The Tale of Bygone Years about Oleg's campaigns against Constantinople, about his death from his horse, about Igor's death, about Svyatoslav's campaigns, about Vladimir's feasts, and others are to a large extent a reflection of the epic tales created around the most popular old Russian princes. The hand of the monk-editor of the chronicles, which absorbed all this folk-poetic material, erased and discolored it to a very large extent, but at the time when the author of the Lay lived and wrote, the oral epic tradition, dissolved in the chronicle narrative, is very likely , existed even outside of the chronicle compilation and still retained its freshness and fullness of poetic expression. This can be guessed at least from the praise to the princes Roman and Vladimir Monomakh, which opens the Galicia-Volyn chronicle and which is placed under 1201. It is said about Roman that he walked according to the commandments of God, rushed at the filthy like a lion, was angry like a lynx, destroyed [enemies] like a crocodile. Like an eagle, he passed through the enemy's land, he was brave, like a tour. He competed with his grandfather Monomakh, who defeated the Polovtsy, drove the Polovtsian Khan Otrok into Abkhazia and forced another Khan - Syrchan - to hide on the Don. Then, - it is said further, - Vladimir Monomakh drank with a golden helmet from the Don, taking possession of all the Polovtsian land and driving away the filthy Hagarians. This praise is woven into a poetic story on the theme of love for the motherland. The memory of her is awakened in the Polovtsian Khan by the smell of grass from his native steppes. After the death of Monomakh, Syrchan sends his singer Orya to Otrok with a proposal to return to his native land. But neither the words of Orya, nor the Polovtsian songs that he sings before the Otrok, incline him to return; when he sniffed the wormwood from the Polovtsian steppes (emshans), then, bursting into tears, he said: "it is better to lay down your bones in your own land than to become famous in someone else's", and returned to his land. From him - added in the story - Konchak was born, who, walking, carrying a cauldron on his shoulders, scooped out Sulu.

At the time, Sun. Miller in the above-mentioned book "A look at the Tale of Igor's Campaign" argued that the whole story had nothing to do with the chronicle and got into it from some heroic story like "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", perhaps even from an unreached the initial part of the Lay has come down to us, and this, according to V. Miller, is all the more likely that at the very beginning of the Lay the author promises to begin the narrative from "old Vladimir" (i.e., from Vladimir Monomakh) to the present Igor " and that it was hardly just an empty promise.

In fact, the story of the Galician-Volyn chronicle is related to the "Word" and the comparison of Roman with the tour, and the expression "drank Don with a golden helmet", and the mention of the Polovtsian singer and Polovtsian songs, and, finally, the hyperbolic image of Konchak scooping Sulu out with a cauldron, close to the image of the power of Vsevolod the Big Nest, capable of splashing the Volga with oars and scooping out the Don with a helmet, as well as the power of Yaroslav Osmomysl and Svyatoslav of Kyiv.

If guess Sun. Miller that the above story of the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle - a fragment of the part of the "Tale of Igor's Campaign" that has not come down to us, seems to be only a witty hypothesis, then his idea that this story was brought into the chronicle from the range of works, in its own way, is quite acceptable. poetic style very close to the "Word".

In the story of the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle mentioned above under 1251 about praise song in honor of Daniil and Vasilko, it is said about Roman that he "has sharpened himself on filthy things, like a lion, they are the same Polovtsi children who are afraid."

As you can see, the already familiar comparison of Roman with a lion is used here, "sharpened for filth" is close to "sharpen your hearts with courage" "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", and the mention that the Polovtsians frightened their children with the name of Roman is an echo of the epic formula, which found its use in the almost simultaneously written "Word about the destruction of the Russian land" in relation to Vladimir Monomakh.

If we now turn to Russian book literature, which preceded the appearance of The Tale of Igor's Campaign, as well as to literature contemporary to it and which arose in the near future after it, we will be convinced that it, having no equal in its artistic dignity, yet has worthy neighbors.

We must not forget that our knowledge of the most ancient period of Russian literature is far from complete, that we only have material that has come down to us by chance, having overcome a number of very unfavorable conditions for its storage and distribution. It is necessary to take into account the death, as a result of any natural disasters (fires, looting of book depositories during wars, etc.), individual literary monuments, especially those who applied in a small number of lists. The very discovery in one of the provincial monasteries of the "Lay of Igor's Campaign", which has come down to us in a single list, is to a large extent, as mentioned above, an accidental, happy discovery. If this discovery did not exist, our idea of ​​the nature and value of ancient Russian literature would be much poorer than it was as a result of the discovery of the Lay. But we are not sure that next to the "Lay" there were no other monuments, to some extent homogeneous with it in their artistic quality.

At the time, Acad. N. K. Nikolsky in the brochure "Immediate Tasks of Studying Old Russian Books" (1902) pointed out that we do not know Old Russian literature in its entirety, because writing, especially before the 15th century. inclusive, has been preserved only in remnants, and what has been preserved is the result of a one-sided selection of books by monastic book depositories. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", "The Tale of Daniil the Sharpener", fragments of historical legends in the annals, "The Tale of the Destruction of the Russian Land" and similar works, he wrote, show that in initial centuries In Russian life, in addition to church-teacher books, secular literature existed and developed, which reached a significant flowering in South Russia. If The Tale of Igor's Campaign was a single one for its era, then it would, of course, be a historical inconsistency. "But we also know," he continued, "that in the same early period there were many private book lovers and participants literary work. However, neither private collections of such persons (with the exception of random copies), nor works of literature alien to the edifying nature of the church, are known to us, apart from the little that the monastic libraries of a later formation, both northern Russian and partly southwestern" (p. 10).

What was the ancient Russian literature at the time of the creation of the Lay - translated and original, as far as we know it from the texts that have come down to us?

Of the monuments of translated literature, which contained elements of artistry, should be noted biblical books, apocrypha, lives, church oratorical teachings, historical chronicles, works on the animal and plant world ("Physiologist" and "Shestodievy") and, finally, works of secular narrative literature. By the peculiarities of their poetic style, all these translated monuments influenced ancient literature to a different extent. Already in early era we had in translation such major narrative monuments as "Alexandria", "Deed of Devgen", "The Tale of the Devastation of Jerusalem" by Josephus Flavius. The last two works, especially the second, are close in their style to The Tale of Igor's Campaign. However, not one of the translated works, even in a small part, is able to explain to us the poetic originality of the Lay as a whole. If translated literature can be involved in its consideration, it is mainly to establish that cultural and historical perspective that will help us understand the emergence of a major historical monument.

But such a perspective is created to a much greater extent as a result of taking into account the phenomena of original literature. If its monuments that have come down to us were distinguished by "the significance of their artistic and ideological level, then this in itself will make us see in the appearance of the Lay not an accidental phenomenon, but one that can be understood from the conditions of the development of our original literary culture, at least in it we could not find obvious analogies with the monument of interest to us.

Taking into account what was created in the field of ancient Russian literature for the first century of its existence, we must give it a very high assessment. Soon after the adoption of Christianity, which introduced Russia to European culture, literary monuments were created in Russia, in general, not inferior in quality to the monuments of medieval Europe, which had been introduced to Christianity long before that.

Writing in Russia developed to meet, first of all, the needs of the Christianized state, and therefore the literature of ancient Russia at first, in content and form, was predominantly ecclesiastical, religious and instructive. Religious tendencies are also characteristic of the most ancient monuments of translated literature with secular themes. Insofar as, however, the church was most closely connected with the state, being its political agent, so far as ecclesiastical literature in its basic content served not only the interests of the church per se, but at the same time the interests of the state.

The patronage that the state provided to the church and church literature was completely natural, since the struggle to strengthen the political system of the emerging Russian feudalism determined the role of the church as a major political and ideological factor in this process.

All this is clearly confirmed ancient monument Russian original literature (first half of the 11th century) - "Sermon on Law and Grace" by the first Russian Metropolitan Hilarion. The erection of Hilarion in 1051 by Yaroslav the Wise to the metropolitan see in Kyiv marked an attempt to get rid of the administrative interference of Byzantium in Russian church affairs and thereby - in that time - an attempt to protect the independent development of Russian culture. In order to justify his step, Yaroslav had to have among the then Russian church leaders a man who stood at a certain height of education and culture. Illarion turned out to be such a person in full measure. His "Lay", but for its literary qualities and for the significance of its ideological content, was a completely uncommon phenomenon in Russian literature. It is one of those monuments, the appearance of which is difficult to explain, taking into account the too short period that has passed since the introduction of Russia to European culture. If it is customary to point out the absence of literary precedents for the Tale of Igor's Campaign, then with no less right one can point to the same absence of precedents for Illarion's Lay.

Concluding in its first part a skillfully constructed dogmatic treatise on the theme of the worldwide role of Christianity, the "Sermon on Law and Grace" further turns into a journalistic saturated apology of Yaroslav's father Vladimir, as the planter of Christianity in Russia, and then Yaroslav himself, as the successor of Vladimir's work. .

The content of the "Lay" was prompted to Hilarion, first of all, by living modernity, by the political situation that at the time of Yaroslav was created for the young Kievan state and the Russian church. The central point of Illarion's work is, along with praise to Vladimir and Yaroslav, and an apology for the Russian land, which is "known and known throughout the world," as well as for the independent Russian church. By the whole course of his reasoning, Illarion sought to prove that Vladimir accepted Christianity not at the suggestion of Byzantium, but on his own initiative. However, the author glorifies Vladimir not only for his piety, but also for his courage, and for state merits, for the fact that he conquered the surrounding countries, some by peace, others, recalcitrant, by the sword.

Next to purely ecclesiastical interests, Illarion reveals national interests. No wonder he, in the spirit of the later "Tale of Igor's Campaign", speaking of Vladimir, mentions that he is "the grandson of old Igor, the son of the glorious Svyatoslav." Him, who cherishes the best pages of his native history, it is not embarrassing that both Igor and Svyatoslav were both pagans: they are Russian princes who glorified themselves for courage and bravery, and therefore Illarion commemorates them with a sense of patriotic pride, as he speaks of his land with the same pride.

In Illarion's work, we are dealing with an example of high oratory worthy to stand next to the best works of Byzantine church eloquence. It reveals in the author an outstanding verbal culture, wonderful taste and a real sense of proportion. With great skill and grace, he uses such techniques of style as symbolic parallelism and comparisons, the personification of abstract concepts, metaphors, antitheses, repetitions, rhetorical exclamations and questions, etc. - in a word, all those stylistic features, which we, although in a different form and in a different application, will meet in the "Tale of Igor's Campaign". Illarion's "Lay" is permeated through and through with ardent patriotic enthusiasm, written with great inner enthusiasm and is distinguished by impeccable external harmony. It can be said without exaggeration that all ancient Russian literature has left us nothing in the field of oratory equal in significance to Illarion's Lay. It is a brilliant indicator of that height literary skill, which Russia reached at the time of the early flowering of its culture, under Yaroslav the Wise. Illarion, one might think, was one of the first among those bookish people whom Yaroslav gathered around him and with the help of whom, according to the chronicle, he "sowed the hearts of faithful people with bookish words."

Oratorical speech is represented in our country by very vivid examples in the 12th century. In the middle of this century, one of the prominent preachers-rhetors was the second Russian Metropolitan Kliment Smolyatich, whom the chronicle speaks of as a scribe and philosopher, which did not happen in the Russian land. A typical feature of his literary work was, as can be seen from the only work of Clement that has come down to us - "Epistle to Prester Thomas", an allegorical-symbolic manner of interpreting biblical texts and the natural world. Judging by the message, Thomas reproached Clement for relying in his writings not on the "fathers of the church", but on Homer, Aristotle and Plato. This reproach in itself, regardless of the question of its solidity, suggests that the work of Kliment Smolyatich stood at the height that characterized the outstanding rhetoricians of the Byzantine Middle Ages.

But the most talented and prolific representative of the solemn, stylistically decorated church oratory was with us, in the second half of the 12th century, Cyril of Turovsky. In contrast to Illarion, in his “words” that have come down to us, he did not at all respond to contemporary political events and did not reveal any journalistic inclinations in himself. All his "words" are a lyrical and often dramatic praise of the holiday, in which its religious meaning is clarified through allegories, symbolic correspondences and rapprochements.

Having experienced in this respect strong influence on the part, mainly, of the Byzantine "fathers of the church" and speakers, Cyril of Turovsky was not, however, a simple compiler, mechanically assimilating other people's samples; genuine creative talent and undoubted poetic animation are reflected in it. He lacked that harmony and logical rigor in the arrangement of material, which was inherent in Illarion; in a number of cases, his speech is distinguished by excessive pomp and, as it were, self-sufficient rhetoric, but for all that, all his “words” expose him as an outstanding orator and poet. Cyril of Turovsky consciously sets the goal of the preacher to surpass secular writers in the elegance and beauty of speech. “If historians and vitii, that is, chroniclers and songwriters,” he wrote in one of his “words,” incline their ears to stories about the hosts and militias that were between the kings, in order to decorate with words what they heard and exalt, crowning with praises, who fought hard for their king and those who did not flee before their enemies, then it is all the more fitting for us to attach praise to the praise of the brave and great commanders of God, who fought hard for the son of God, their king, our Lord Jesus Christ.

The "words" of Cyril of Turov, as well as the "Words" of Hilarion, are characterized by symbolism and allegorism, as well as their significant saturation with tropes and figures - metaphor, personification, antithesis, rhetorical questions and exclamations. Kirill Turovsky in his writings very often goes from lyrical praise of the holiday to a narrative about the event itself associated with the holiday, dramatizing this narrative by introducing monologues, dialogues, poetic laments and depicting the events themselves as if taking place at the present time. Such a dramatization of the narrative is especially strong in the "Sermon about the paralytic", which contains a dialogue between Christ and the paralytic healed by him. Cyril of Turovsky used in his sermons and the technique of allegory - a parable ("The Parable of the Souls of Humans and Telesi", parallels to which we find in the Talmud and in the tales of "A Thousand and One Nights", and "The Parable of the Belarusian Man", dating back to stories about Barlaam and Joasaph). Finally, it is necessary to note the rhythmic orderliness of Cyril of Turov's speech, which is especially present in his prayers.

One must think that Kirill of Turovsky himself read Greek, perhaps he went through a strict school of writing under the guidance of some visiting educated Greek, which at that time, undoubtedly, should have appeared in Russia.

Researchers who compared "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" with literary works of ancient Russia, in determining its literary school, the works of Cyril of Turov most often attracted, after the annals.

At the earliest time - already in the 11th century - we have an original hagiographic literature. From the very beginning of its existence, it, like other monuments of ancient literature, is imbued with certain journalistic tendencies. The most significant hagiographical work of ancient times in terms of its literary merits is The Tale of Boris and Gleb, attributed without sufficient reason to Jacob the Mnich.

It differs significantly from the canonical form of the Byzantine life. It lacks a consistent presentation of the entire life of the saints, or at least its main points, as is usual for life, and only one episode is told - their murder. "The Tale" is rather a historical story, striving for an accurate designation of events and facts, with the mention of historical places and names, and at the same time it is a work lyrically saturated with laments, monologues, prayers and reflections put into the mouths of Boris and Gleb. The author himself does not remain aloof from the events he tells and reveals heightened lyrical emotion where the narrative reaches its greatest drama, and especially in praise of Boris and Gleb. Rhetoric and lyrical pathos, in some cases quite talented, dominate throughout the entire "Tale". The author is trying to portray psychological condition young brothers before the death that threatens them (especially the youngest - Gleb) and their inner struggle between fear and despair and faith in a heavenly reward. At the end of the Tale, a portrait of Boris is given, harmoniously combining the ideal inner and outer qualities of a Christian hero. The "Tale" is imbued with the vital political interests of its time. The literary and subsequent church apology of Boris and Gleb and the curse that weighed on Svyatopolk simultaneously performed two tasks - on the one hand, princely fratricidal feuds were condemned, on the other hand, all the behavior of the murdered brothers who did not want to raise a hand against their elder brother emphasized the idea of ​​tribal seniority in the system of princely inheritance was strengthened, which was carried out in order to strengthen the new feudal system.

In connection with the glorification of Boris and Gleb in 1175, on May 2, on the day of the celebration of their memory, a eulogy in honor of the brothers, known as the "Lay of the Princes", was pronounced in the Chernigov Cathedral by an unknown clergyman. It was compiled in the interests of the future Grand Duke of Kyiv Svyatoslav, who appears in the Tale of Igor's Campaign, who then competed with the younger Prince Oleg Svyatoslavich from the Chernigov table. The idea of ​​obedience of junior princes to elders and condemnation of princely strife sounds in this "Word" even more energetically than in "The Tale of Boris and Gleb". “Listen, princes who oppose their elder brothers, raising an army against them and bringing filthy ones! - we read here. - Will not God rebuke us at the terrible judgment with these two saints? "But you can't endure even a word to your brother, and for a small offense you stir up deadly enmity!.. Be ashamed, you who are at war with your brethren and friends of the same faith, tremble and weep before God! You want to lose your glory and honor for your vindictiveness and enmity!"

As it is easy to see, "The Tale of the Princes" in its ideological essence vividly echoes the "Lay of Igor's Campaign".

One of the most ancient and highly developed genres in Russia is the chronicle genre. Even in the first half of the XI century. in our country chronicle vaults are emerging, and by the beginning of the 12th century. finalizing the so-called Primary chronicle- "The Tale of Bygone Years". Our ancient chronicle found a worthy high appraisal not only among Russians, but also among Western European historians, who do not deny that in terms of its qualities it is in no way inferior to medieval European chronicles, and in some respects even surpasses them. The idea of ​​Slavic unity, on the one hand, and the idea of ​​the unity of goals and interests of the entire Russian land, on the other, run through the annals through the entire presentation of events. In the latter case, it approaches the "Lay of Igor's Campaign".

“It is wonderful,” says Klyuchevsky, “that in a society where human sacrifices were still made to idols a hundred years ago, thought was already learning to rise to the consciousness of the connection of world phenomena. which was not at all supported by modern reality "(" Course of Russian History ". Vol. I, ed. 4, M., 1911, p. 107). And further Klyuchevsky emphasizes that for the XI-XII centuries. characteristic is “the awakening in the whole society of the thought of the Russian land as something integral, about the common zemstvo business, as an inevitable, obligatory matter for everyone and everyone, about which princes and chroniclers so often speak” (ibid., p. 248).

The literary significance of the chronicle is determined by the large number of tales, stories and legends included in it, alternating with brief notes and references of a purely factual nature. If the editors of the annals were spiritual persons closely associated with the monastery, as we see in the practice of Western European medieval chronicle writing, if the pious tales, legends and teachings included in the annals should be attributed to the same spiritual environment, then the stories telling about military events or about privacy princes and their entourage, came out of the secular environment, in all likelihood retinue. A significant part of these stories arose on the basis of oral poetic traditions, in some cases complicated by motifs and plots drawn from the fund of international wandering stories. A large proportion of the narrative material of the chronicle, to a greater or lesser extent, is distinguished by all the signs of a poetic presentation. In other cases, the artistic merits of this material are very outstanding. This material, for the most part, arose independently of the annals and was used by it already in finished form, having undergone special processing under the hands of the editor of the annals; but it has not come down to us separately from the annalistic compilation, we get to know it only from the annalistic vaults, and this determines the great value of the annals from the point of view of specifically historical and literary. According to the successful definition of K. N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, the initial chronicle collection - "The Tale of Bygone Years" - is "an archive that stores traces of the works of our original literature that died for us" ("On the composition of Russian chronicles until the end of the 14th century.". SPb., 1868, p. 59).

Describing the features of the annalistic presentation of events, Klyuchevsky writes: “Under the pen of the chronicler of the 12th century, everything breathes and lives, everything moves tirelessly and speaks incessantly; he does not just describe events, but dramatizes them, plays them out before the eyes of the reader. Ipatievsky is especially distinguished by such dramatic presentation list Despite the discordance of feelings and interests, the noise and hustle of the events described, there is no chaos in the chronicle story: all events, small and large, harmoniously fit under one view, with which the chronicler looks at world phenomena "(" Course of Russian History. T. I, p. 111).

FROM half of XII in. the impoverishment of Kievan Rus begins, intensified by the invasion of the Tatars. Literary production here gradually begins to weaken, but its tradition is transmitted partly to northeastern Russia, partly to the Galicia-Volyn principality. In the decades following the appearance of The Tale of Igor's Campaign, literature here and there lives on with the still unused reserves of that cultural and poetic excitement that characterized the Kievan state. In the first quarter of the 13th century, as a result of the interaction of the north and south, a monument was created, which later received the name of the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon. Reading it, Pushkin admired in it "the charm of simplicity and fiction." Approximately at the same time, within the limits of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal, a sharp journalistic pamphlet appeared, known under the name "Daniel the Sharpener's Prayer". Its author, well-read in the translated and original literature of his time and well acquainted with "worldly parables" (sayings and proverbs), in a rhetorically upbeat speech appeals to the Pereyaslav prince with a request to save him from the servile position in which he is, being in the power of the merciless boyar. Daniel's appeal is interspersed with figurative comparisons, colorful aphorisms and sayings. In his work, the outstanding literary talent of the author and the temperament of a passionate exposer of the social turmoil of his era make themselves felt.

The Tatar invasion, which fell upon Russia as a terrible and unexpected disaster, was reflected in a number of literary monuments of the 13th century. The most significant of them in terms of their artistic merit is the story of the devastation of Ryazan by Batu in 1237, which, obviously, developed soon after this event under the influence of epic tales and songs about the devastation by the Tatars. Ryazan principality. The folk-poetic basis of the story makes itself felt especially strongly in the episode of the murder of Prince Fyodor Yuryevich by Batu and the suicide of his wife Evpraksia, which is reflected in the epic about Daniil Lovchanin, as well as in stories about the exploits and death of Evpaty Kolovrat, the avenger of the Tatars for the disasters they caused to the Ryazan land .

The story about the devastation of Ryazan by Batu, in its subject matter and style, is a vivid example of military stories. Among the latter, she occupies one of the first places in terms of her artistic qualities. Its characteristic feature is intense and at the same time restrained lyricism and drama. The impression of exciting drama produced by the story is achieved in it not by verbose rhetorical phraseology, as in later similar monuments, but, as it were, by a deliberately extremely compressed transmission of tragic events. The narration, which in its essence goes back to the lyrical-epic legend, seems to consciously eschew the pompous and ornate verbal hype, obscuring the direct and sincere expression of feelings; with the same extreme conciseness and verbal artlessness, the grief of others over the death of loved ones is conveyed. The original basis of the story is distinguished by all the characteristic features of the early military style, both in its phraseology and in its figurative means. The presentation is thoroughly imbued with the heroic pathos of military prowess, the princes and squad are depicted here in a halo of selfless courage, prompting them to fearlessly go towards death. The image of the "mortal cup", as a leitmotif, runs through the whole story. Next to the "pious" and "pious" princes, the "tender team", "rezanian patterning and upbringing", "rezansky daring and frisky" are repeatedly mentioned with lyrical enthusiasm. Throughout the tone of the story, the ideal ideas about the chivalrous relationship between the prince and the squad, characteristic of the early feudal period, strongly make themselves felt. The princes invariably take care of their squad and mourn the warriors who died in battle, the squad wants to "drink the cup of death with their sovereigns equally." Inspired by devotion to their princes, the "daring and frisky Rezansky" fight "strongly and mercilessly, as if they were postonating the land", "one with a thousand, and two with darkness", and when they are unable to defeat the enemy, every one of them dies after drinking a single death cup. The presentation of the story is distinguished in some cases by the rhythmic organization of speech. All these features make the story very highly regarded as a work of our early military genre, assigning it almost second place after The Tale of Igor's Campaign.

Among the monuments of the 13th century, connected with the Tatar invasion and created in northern Russia, is the above-mentioned "Word about the destruction of the Russian land", found in the early 1890s. It is very small in size (it takes only 45 lines in the manuscript).

In the "Word of Perdition", which in its style represents a combination of book presentation with oral and poetic forms of song speech, natural and material wealth is listed, which before Tatar invasion“the Russian land was bright and beautifully decorated” abounded: numerous lakes, locally revered rivers and wells, steep mountains, high hills, clean oak forests, marvelous fields, various animals, countless birds, great cities, marvelous villages, monastery gardens, church houses . Howled then in Russia formidable princes, honest boyars, many nobles. Large spaces and the peoples living on them were conquered by the Grand Duke Vsevolod, his father Yuri, Prince of Kyiv, his grandfather Vladimir Monomakh, in whose name the Polovtsy frightened their children in the cradle and under which the Lithuanians from their swamps did not appear in the world, and the Hungarians strengthened their stone walls. cities with iron gates, so that he would not enter through them; the Germans rejoiced, living far beyond the blue sea. Various neighboring tribes paid tribute to Vladimir with honey, and the Byzantine king Manuel, fearing that Vladimir would take Constantinople, sent him great gifts. So it was before, but now a disease has befallen the Christians.

Such is the content of the "Word of Perdition". The first publisher of the monument, Loparev, considered it "only the beginning of a magnificent poem of the 13th century, mourning the death of Russia," and compared it in terms of artistic qualities with the Tale of Igor's Campaign. We find the same comparison with the later researcher of the monument - Mansikki. Despite the fact that here we are dealing with a clear exaggeration, the "Word of Perdition" nevertheless testifies to outstanding literary ability its author.

Some scholars have compared the stylistic manner of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" with the manner in which the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle was written, a monument that finally took shape in the south of Russia at the end of the 13th century, but undoubtedly used materials from a much earlier period, from the very beginning. early XIII c., from where this chronicle leads its story.

With the "Word" it is related, first of all, by the colorfulness of the language, the brightness of poetic images. Its author reveals an undoubted literary talent. He loves a beautiful, sophisticated phrase and solemn decoration of style. At the same time, as a connoisseur and apologist for the chivalrous prowess of the princes he praises, he also listens to those songs that were sung by singers in honor of the victorious princes, and he himself, obviously, falls under the influence of these songs. The best example of a song warehouse in the presentation of the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle (praise to Roman and Vladimir Monomakh) is given above.

Like the Tale of Igor's Campaign, the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle owes its writing not to a clergyman, but to a secular author. It tells little about the facts of church history, and speaks mainly of military clashes, disasters, rebellions and strife, which accompanied, mainly, the reign of Roman's son, Daniel. The characteristics of the princes, their way of life, the details of their court life - all this is described in the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle from the point of view of a secular person who takes an ardent part in the events and in the fate of the princes and, probably, belonged to official circles.

Here are some examples of the style of the Galician Chronicle. Here the duel is likened to a game: "and I unsheathed my sword, playing for the queen's servant, grabbing a shield for another," or "the next morning I left the Germans with a crossbow, and went to not (on them) Russia with Polovtsi and arrows, and yatvyaz with sulits, and chasing the field like a game." The armament of the Galician infantry is described as follows: “Shield them like a dawn, but their sholom is like the rising sun, but with a spear of them holding in their hands like many canes, archers walking and holding in their hands their razor (bows) and putting their own against arrows military, Danilov is sitting on a horse and howling. Further, about the armament of the Russian regiments and about the military armor of Daniil, it is said: “besha bo horses in masks and in leather koyars (clothes), and people in yaryts (armor), and without regiments, his lordship is great, shining from weapons. Himself (i.e. e. Daniil) riding near the king (Hungarian), according to the custom of the Russian: the horse under him is like a wonder, and the saddle is burnt from gold, and the arrows and saber are decorated with gold, with other tricks, as if to wonder, the casing of the tin (silk fabric ) walnut and lace (lace) with gold flat stitching, and green xza (leather) shoes sewn with gold. About the "bright weapon", about "falcons-st" reltsy "it is said under 1231 in the story of Daniel's war with the Hungarians. Daniel himself is always portrayed by the chronicler in his apotheosis. Using the biblical image, the chronicler characterizes his hero in this way:" be more daring and brave, from his head to his foot there was no vice in him. "When the prince drove up to Galich, the inhabitants of the city rushed to meet him," like children to a father, like bees to a mother, like thirsty for water to a source. "Daniel has a knightly idea of the appointment of a warrior and his duty.To the princes who decided to evade the battle with the Polovtsy, he says in the style of the speech of Darius from "Alexandria": I have rebuked you, but now I see that Imate is a terrible soul; I didn’t tell you, as it’s not appropriate for the difficult (tired) to howl against the whole (vigorous)? Why are you embarrassed now? Go out against them. "To his defeated allies - the Poles, who have become discouraged, he addresses this speech:" Why are you horrified? do you know that there is no war without the fallen dead? Is it not to lead, as if they found nature on men on military men, and not on wives? if the husband is killed to eat at the rati, then what kind of miracle is there? Others die at home without glory, but here they die with glory; strengthen your hearts and move your weapons to the battlefield." The humiliation experienced by Daniel, when he went to bow to the Tatars, evokes a sorrowful tirade in the chronicler: "Oh, worse than evil, the honor of the Tatars! Danilov Romanovich, the former great prince, who owned the Russian land, Kiev and Volodimer and Galich, with his brother, and other countries, now sit on his knee and be called a slave, and want tribute, do not cherish the stomach, and thunderstorms come. O evil Tatar honor! His father was the king in the Russian land, even conquer the Polovtsian land and fight against all other countries; the son of that one who did not receive honor, then who else can accept it?

These examples, in terms of their artistic expressiveness, speak for themselves.

All of the above indicates that the oral-poetic and literary production of ancient Russia at the time of the creation of the "Lay" and in the near future after that was far from being as poor as the skeptics thought about it at first. decade XIX in. and as even Pushkin thought, always energetically defending the authenticity of the Lay in disputes with skeptics and, nevertheless, writing that it "rises as a solitary monument in the desert of our ancient literature."

At the time of Pushkin, the study of ancient Russian literature was just beginning; many of its major monuments were still unknown, and this can largely explain Pushkin's bleak view of our ancient literature as a "desert" in which the Word rises alone.

Even what has come down to us from the literary culture of ancient Russia tells us that this culture was distinguished by its considerable height and that it created in the shortest possible time outstanding monuments of verbal skill. Getting to know her convinces us that there were elements of genuine creative excitement and real creative growth in her. Both were the result of the general development of the culture of ancient Russia, which for a time only slowed down its further movement due to the severity of the Tatar yoke.

Ancient Russia gave us outstanding monuments not only of literary art, but also of pictorial and architectural art. Along with the author of The Tale of Igor's Campaign, she put forward such outstanding personalities as the book lover Yaroslav the Wise, the outstanding statesman and talented writer Vladimir Monomakh, his father Vsevolod, who studied five languages, and many others.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is, of course, much higher than what Russian literature created before it, just as Pushkin's "Boris Godunov" is incomparably higher than what pre-Pushkin Russian dramaturgy represented, but both "The Word" and "Boris Godunov" could not have arisen on soil unprepared by all previous literary development.

The Tale of Igor's Campaign is valuable not only in itself, but also as an organic product of our, although young, but already at that time talented culture, which was rapidly catching up with the older and much earlier culture of medieval Europe.

The problem of the authorship of literary monuments of Ancient Russia is directly related to the national specifics of the first centuries of the development of the Russian literary process. “The author's principle,” noted D.S. Likhachev, “was muted in ancient literature.<…>The absence of great names in ancient Russian literature seems like a death sentence.<…>We biasedly proceed from our ideas about the development of literature - ideas brought up<…>for centuries when it blossomed individual, personal art is the art of individual geniuses.<…>the literature of Ancient Russia was not the literature of individual writers: it, like folk art, was a supra-individual art. It was an art that was created through the accumulation of collective experience and made a huge impression with the wisdom of traditions and the unity of everything - mostly unnamed- writing.<…>Old Russian writers are not architects of separate buildings. These are city planners.<…>Any literature creates its own world, embodying the world of ideas of contemporary society. Consequently, anonymous (impersonal) the nature of the work of ancient Russian authors is a manifestation of the national identity of Russian literature and in this regard namelessness"Words about Igor's Campaign" is not a problem.

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

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

Thus, The Lay was presented as a literary hoax in the spirit of J. MacPherson, who allegedly discovered in the middle of the 18th century the works of the legendary Celtic warrior and singer Ossian, who, according to legend, lived in the 3rd century AD. in Ireland.

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

The arguments of the supporters of the authenticity of the Lay were very convincing. A.S. Pushkin: the authenticity of the monument is proved by “the spirit of antiquity, under which it is impossible to fake. Which of our writers in the 18th century could have had enough talent for that? VK Küchelbecker: “In terms of talent, this deceiver would have surpassed almost all the then Russian poets, taken together.”

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

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

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

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

PLAN

1. What is the enduring significance of the monument?
2. What traditions of Russian literature originate from The Lay...?
3. Why does the flow of translations of The Lay... not stop?

"The Word" is a beautiful, fragrant flower of Slavic folk poetry, worthy of attention, memory and respect" (V. G. Belinsky).

The most brilliant work of ancient Russian literature - "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" - was written in the 12th century and, having passed the most difficult test of time, it is still immortal. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" is close and understandable to every Russian person who truly loves his Motherland. It is written with great tenderness and love for the Russian land and its people living and working on this land.

The Tale of Igor's Campaign is of the greatest value to us. It living testimony great development of culture in ancient Russia.

The “Word...” contains the wisdom of our ancestors, who bequeathed it to us so that we learn from the mistakes of other generations and not repeat them.

The idea of ​​"The Tale of Igor's Campaign" - the unity of Russia, is very important for us at this time, the time of the collapse of a great power.

Before that, there were only chronicles, which briefly indicated only the main events and facts important for history. Undoubtedly, the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavovich is described in the annals, but the author of the Lay does it in a style that is completely new for the works of ancient Russian literature. Here a number of features appear that are characteristic and distinguish this work from other works of Ancient Russia. For the first time, a comparison of nature and events was used in it. For example, the description of the dawn before the second battle portends misfortune:

The next day, early in the morning Bloody dawns herald the light Black clouds come from the sea They want to cover the four suns, And blue lightnings tremble in them.

In The Tale of Igor's Campaign, Russian nature seems to be alive: it rejoices at the victory of the Russians, mourns and suffers at their defeat, mourns over those who died in battle. material from the site

The narration is conducted from the third person or from the perspective of a fictional character. The narrator was on the battlefield, and in Kyiv under Prince Svyatoslav, and in captivity along with Igor. Rhythm in the "Word" depends on the ongoing events, meaning, and this gives some kind of musicality to the work.

There are many different translations, and their flow does not stop. Interest in this amazing work has not dried up since its discovery in the 18th century. Translators of different eras find something new in The Tale of Igor's Campaign. It strikes with the brightness of words, colorfulness and completeness of descriptions, energy of style. This is one of the oldest works, which expresses a look at the life of the common people, the patriotic pathos of ancient Russian literature, and it is dear to the Russian people and loved by them.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search