The beginning of keeping chronicles in Russia is directly related to the spread of literacy among the Eastern Slavs. Within the framework of this manual, the following indisputable facts of the assimilation of writing by the Slavs, including the Eastern ones, can be noted. Before the appearance of two alphabets - Glagolitic and Cyrillic - in the 9th century. the Slavs did not have a written language, which is directly reported in the Tale of the 10th century. “About the writings” of the Chernorizet Khrabr: “After all, before the Slavs, when they were pagans, did not have letters, but (read) and guessed with the help of features and cuts.” It is worth paying attention to the fact that the verb "read" is in brackets, that is, this word was absent in the early lists of the Legend. Initially, it was read only "guessed with the help of features and cuts." Such an initial reading is confirmed by the subsequent presentation in the Legend: “When they were baptized, they tried to write down Slavic speech in Roman and Greek letters, without order. But how well can you write “God” or “belly” in Greek letters (the Slavs have letters, for example, “zh”, which are absent in these languages). Further, the Chernorizet (monk) Brave reports about Constantine (Cyril) the Philosopher, who created the alphabet for the Slavs: “thirty letters and eight, some on the model of Greek letters, others in accordance with Slavic speech.” Together with Cyril, his elder brother monk Methodius also took part in the creation of the Slavic alphabet: “If you ask the Slavic scribes who created the letters for you or translated the books, then everyone knows and, answering, they say: Saint Constantine the Philosopher, named Cyril, he and the letters created, and translated books, and Methodius, his brother ”(Tales of the beginning of Slavic writing. M., 1981). Quite a lot of their Lives, created in connection with their canonization, is known about the brothers Cyril and Methodius, the creators of Slavic writing. Cyril and Methodius are saints for all Slavic peoples. The elder Methodius (815-885) and Constantine (827-869) were born in the city of Thessalonica. Their father, a Greek, was one of the commanders of this city and the regions adjacent to it, where many Bulgarians lived at that time, so it is assumed that they knew the Slavic language from childhood (there is also a legend about their mother, a Bulgarian). The fate of the brothers initially developed differently. Methodius becomes a monk early, he is known only by his monastic name. Constantine received an excellent education for that time in Constantinople, where he attracted the attention of the emperor and patriarch Photius with his abilities. After several brilliantly executed trips to the east, Constantine was assigned to lead the Khazar mission (861 BC). ). Together with him, his brother Methodius went to the Khazars. One of the goals of the mission was to spread and promote Orthodoxy among the Khazars. In Kherson (Crimea), an event occurred that gave rise to endless scientific disputes in modern times. This event is described in the Life of Constantine as follows: “He found here the gospel and the psalter, written in Russian letters, and found a man speaking that language, and talked with him, and understood the meaning of this speech, and, comparing it with his own language, distinguished the letters vowels and consonants, and, praying to God, he soon began to read and expound (them), and many marveled at him, praising God ”(Tales. S. 77-78). What language is meant in the expression "Russian writings" is not clear, some suggest the Gothic language, others Syriac, etc. (there is no definite answer). The brothers completed the Khazar mission successfully.

In 863, at the invitation of Prince Rostislav, the Moravian mission was sent to Moravia, headed by the brothers Constantine and Methodius, its main goal was to spread Christianity among the Slavs of the Moravian state. In the course of this mission, the brothers created an alphabet for the Slavs and Konstantin "translated the entire church rite and taught them matins, hours, Mass, Vespers, Compline, and secret prayer." In 869, the brothers visited Rome, where Constantine died, before his death he took monasticism under the name of Cyril.

For a long time it was believed that our modern alphabet is based on the alphabet created by Cyril, hence its name - Cyrillic. But after doubts and disputes, another point of view became generally accepted: Cyril and Methodius created the Glagolitic alphabet, and the Cyrillic alphabet appeared at the end of the 9th century. on the territory of Bulgaria. Glagolic writing is the original Slavic (primarily Western Slavs) writing, it is based on an alphabet, the origin of which has not yet been clarified. It is quite possible that this is an artificial alphabet, and therefore it must have a clue to the explanation. It is curious that some signs found on stones and objects found in the Black Sea steppes are very similar to individual letters of the Glagolitic alphabet.

From the end of the ninth century the Slavs simultaneously had two alphabets and, consequently, two writing systems - Glagolitic and Cyrillic. The first was distributed mainly among the Western Slavs (Croats used this original script for many centuries), the second among the South Slavs. The Glagolitic alphabet developed under the strong influence of the Roman Church, while the Cyrillic alphabet developed under the Byzantine one. All this is directly related to the written culture of Ancient Russia. In the 11th century, when the first and fairly thorough steps were taken to assimilate writing by the Eastern Slavs, they simultaneously used both writing systems - Glagolitic and Cyrillic. This is evidenced by the inscriptions on the walls (graffiti) of the St. Sophia Cathedrals in Kyiv and Novgorod, which became the property of science only in the 20th century, where Glagolitic letters are found along with Cyrillic inscriptions. The Latin influence on Glagolitic writing can be judged, for example, by the Kyiv Glagolitic Sheets, which is a Slavic translation of the Latin Missal. Approximately in the XII century. Glagolitic is falling out of use among Russian people, and in the XV century. it is perceived as one of the variants of cryptography.

The adoption of Christianity under Prince Vladimir in 988 was of decisive importance in the appearance of their written language, the spread of literacy, and the emergence of original national literature. The adoption of Christianity is the starting point of the written culture of the Russian people. For worship, books were needed, which were originally in churches and cathedrals. The first church in Kyiv was the Church of the Mother of God (the full name is the Church of the Assumption of the Mother of God), the so-called Church of the Tithes (Prince Vladimir gave her a tenth of all his income for maintenance). It is assumed that it was at this church that the first Russian chronicle was compiled.

When dealing with the history of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th century, it is necessary to remember the simultaneous existence of two scripts that had rows of numbers that differed from each other, which could lead to confusion when translating numbers from Glagolitic to Cyrillic (in Ancient Russia there was a letter designation of numbers borrowed from Byzantium ).

The circle of reading among the Russian people at the time of the birth of chronicle writing was quite extensive, as evidenced by the manuscripts of the 11th century that have come down to us. These are, first of all, liturgical books (Gospel Aprakos, Service Menaions, Paroemia, Psalter) and books for reading: (Gospel Tetrs, Lives of Saints, collection of Chrysostom, where there are many words and teachings of John Chrysostom, various collections, the most famous of which are collections of 1073 and 1076, Paterik of Sinai, Pandects of Antiochus of Chernorizets, Parenesis of Ephrem the Syrian (Glagolitic), Words of Gregory the Theologian, etc.). This list of books and works that existed in Ancient Russia in the 11th century should be expanded with those books and works that have come down to us in later lists. It is to such works, created in the 11th century, but which have come down to us in manuscripts of the 14th-16th centuries, that the early Russian chronicles also belong: not a single Russian chronicle of the 11th-13th centuries. not preserved in manuscripts synchronous to these centuries.

The range of chronicles used by researchers to characterize the early history of Russian chronicle writing has long been outlined. Here are the most significant of them. In the first place are two chronicles that have come down to us in manuscripts on parchment of the 14th century. - Lavrentievskaya and Novgorod Harateynaya. But the latter, due to the loss of sheets at the beginning of the manuscript (weather records begin with a half-phrase of the news of 6524 (1016)) and because of the brevity of the text (the description of the events of the 11th century takes three pages of printed text, and in other chronicles several dozen pages ), is almost not involved in the restoration of the first stages of chronicle writing. The text of this chronicle can be used to show one feature of the Russian chronicles, namely: years that had no news were put down in the text, and sometimes the list of “empty” years occupied a significant place in the manuscript, and this despite the fact that parchment was a very expensive material for writing. . Sheet 2 of the Novgorod Haratean Chronicle is as follows:

“In the summer of 6529. Defeat Yaroslav Brichislav.

In the summer of 6530.

In the summer of 6531.

In the summer of 6532.

In the summer of 6533.

In the summer of 6534.

In the summer of 6535.

In the summer of 6536. The serpent's sign appeared in heaven. Etc.

A similar arrangement of news is sometimes found in the Easter tables (the definition of the day of Easter for each year). In such tables, brief entries were made in the margins of the annalistic type. M.I. Sukhomlinov in the 19th century. suggested that it was from the Easter tables that the Russian tradition of designating years without records of events originated. An unambiguous explanation for this has not been found, perhaps this is an invitation for subsequent chroniclers to fill in these years with events from new sources?

The second oldest Russian chronicle is Lavrentievskaya, its code is RNB. F. p. IV. 2 (cipher indicates: the manuscript is in the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg; F - the size of the manuscript (in folio) per sheet; the letter "p" - indicates the material of the manuscript - parchment; IV - the fourth section, where manuscripts of historical content are placed; 2 is the serial number in this section). For a long time it was believed that the text of the Laurentian Chronicle in the IX-XII centuries. the most authoritative among the other chronicles, but as the analysis conducted by A.A. Shakhmatov, its text is very unreliable for restoring the original text of the PVL from it.

The following chronicle monuments are also involved in the restoration of early annalistic collections: the Ipatievskaya, Radzivilovskaya, Novgorodskaya first junior edition (N1LM), the chroniclers of Vladimir, Pereyaslavl-Suzdal and Ustyug. Not all of these monuments are considered equivalent. For example, the use of the last three chroniclers remains controversial for characterizing early chronicles. The assessment of the significance of chronicle monuments changed over time, for example, the authority of N1LM is recognized by everyone after many years of research by A.A. Shakhmatova. Its text turned out to be the key to solving many problems of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th century. The main position of the scientist is that the chronicle of the 70s is presented in N1LM. XI century, which preceded the PVL, presented in the Lavrentiev (LL) and Ipatiev (IL) chronicles.

Laurentian Chronicle according to M.D. Priselkov

In the initial part of LL and IL, the news is given without indicating any dates: the resettlement of the sons of Noah (Sim, Ham, Afet), between whom the whole earth was divided. Russia and other tribes were in the Afetova part. This is followed by reports about the settlement of the Slavs, about the path from the Varangians to the Greeks, about the stay of the Apostle Andrew in Russia and about the blessing of this land by him, about the founding of Kyiv, about the neighbors of the Eastern Slavs, about the arrival of the Khazars on Russian land. Some of this news is taken from translated Byzantine chronicles, the other part is based on legends and traditions. The initial text of N1LM differs significantly from the text of LL-IL, it opens with a small preface, followed immediately by the first weather record under 6362 (854) with the indication “The Beginning of the Russian Land”, which reports the legend of the founding of Kyiv, the arrival of the Khazars on the Russian land . N1LM does not know the legend about the stay of the Apostle Andrew on Russian soil. This is followed by the news that is in the LL-IL in the introduction. The beginning of the Ustyug chronicler is closer to the text of N1LM, but it has neither a heading, nor a preface, nor an introductory part, the chronicler begins directly with the news of 6360 (852) - “The Beginning of the Russian Land”. The text of the Ustyug chronicler also lacks the legend of the Apostle Andrew. When comparing the beginnings of the listed chronicles, it is clear that they have significant differences. It is quite difficult to decide whether the readings of this or that chronicle are primary or secondary, especially given the established historiographical tradition that continues to recognize the primary nature of the Lavrentiev and Ipatiev chronicles. Most often, the most weighty arguments in favor of the primacy of a particular chronicle in a given historiographical situation can be obtained by drawing on other written sources of the 11th century. For example, when comparing the texts, it was found that the legend of the Apostle Andrew appears only in the texts of LL-IL, which are based on different editions of the PVL, that it was not in the earlier chronicles. We find confirmation of this in the Life of Boris and Gleb, written by the monk Nestor in the 70s. XI century, where it is stated that none of the apostles preached on the Russian land and that the Lord himself blessed the Russian land.

As already noted, the most effective method of analyzing written historical sources is comparative textual. Only on the material obtained by comparing two or more texts with each other, you can prove your point of view. You cannot limit yourself to the results of comparing the lists of the monument you are interested in, it is necessary to correlate them with the data of other literary and historical monuments that are synchronous with the text you are analyzing, and it is always necessary to look for similar phenomena and facts in the written heritage of other cultures. Let me explain the last position on the example of the legend about the founding of the city of Kyiv by the three brothers Kiy, Shchek and Khoriv. More A.-L. Schlozer noted that the legend of the three brothers accompanies the emergence of new cities in many European countries. Comparison of data from Russian chronicles with data from other cultures makes it possible to unequivocally perceive the news of the three brothers as a legend.

Comparison of texts provides material for analysis, reveals various additional sources of the chronicler, allows us to talk not only about the methods of work of this or that chronicler, but also to recreate, restore the text written by him.

The textual analysis of any monument requires the researcher to have a broad intellectual background, without which the text will not reveal its content, and if it does, it will be in a distorted or simplified form. For example, to study the Russian chronicle of the XI century. it is necessary, if possible, to know all Russian manuscripts and monuments of the 11th century, as well as works of the historical genre created at that time in Byzantium and Europe.

A significant amount of annals significantly complicates their analysis and use. Suppose you are interested in some news of the 11th century, in different chronicles it is read differently, you can understand the essence of these discrepancies only in the context of the discrepancies of the entire chronicle as a whole, that is, you must understand for yourself the history of the text of the entire chronicle in order to use for their historical constructions, some one of her news. Indispensable help in this case are the works of A.A. Shakhmatova, where a description is given of the texts of almost all Russian chronicles.

First Chronicle. The question of the first chronicle code, the first historical work dedicated to the Russian land, from which all chronicles and all Russian historiography originate, has always been one of the most difficult. In the XVII-XIX centuries. The first Russian chronicler was considered the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor, who allegedly wrote his chronicle at the beginning of the 12th century. In the second half of the XIX century. I.I. Sreznevsky suggested that already at the end of the 10th century. in Russia, some kind of historical work was created with news about Russian history. I.I. Sreznevsky was further developed in the works of M.N. Tikhomirova, L.V. Cherepnin, B.A. Rybakova and others. For example, M.N. Tikhomirov believed that at the end of the X century. was created in Kyiv by one of the secular people "The Legend of the Russian Princes." Arguments in favor of this assumption are taken from the texts of LL-N1LM-Ustyug chronicler. These are general arguments that run counter to such well-known facts as: that the writing of the Eastern Slavs appeared in connection with the adoption of Christianity in 988, therefore, it took time for the spread of literacy; that church people (priests, monks) were the first literate people, since the first Russian books were liturgical or theological. The indisputable fact remains that only from the XI century. Written monuments of the Eastern Slavs have come down to us. The inscription on the korchaga from Gnezdovo, represented by a single word (“pea”) and allegedly dating from the 10th century, cannot serve as an argument for the existence of a developed written culture, and this is precisely what is meant when it comes to creating an original historical work.

D.S. Likhachev calls the hypothetical monument “The Legend of the Spread of Christianity” the first work dedicated to the history of Russia, referring its creation to the end of the 40s. 11th century

When deciding on the issue of the first Russian historical work, the researcher should proceed from the analysis of chronicle material, without resorting to the creation of scientific fictions in the form of hypothetical monuments. The introduction of hypothetical monuments into scientific circulation is possible, but they cannot be abused, just as it is impossible to solve one of the most difficult issues of our historiography through them - the creation of the first domestic historical work.

The oldest chronicle code of 1037 (1039) Most researchers agree that the first chronicle in Russia was created in Kyiv in the first half of the 11th century. The point of view of A.A. Shakhmatova. The key point in his argument was the analysis of the text of the annalistic article LL-IL 6552 (1044), consisting of two news, which allowed him to outline two stages of annalistic work in the 11th century. The first news of this year says: “In the summer of 6552. Vygrebosh 2 princes, Yaropolk and Olga, the son of Svyatoslav, and baptized the bones with it, and I laid it in the church of the Holy Mother of God.” This news of 1044 was compared with the news of 6485 (977) about the tragic death of one of the brothers - Oleg near the city of Vruchev: "And Olga buried on the spot near the city of Vruchog, and there is his grave to this day at Vruchey." The researcher drew attention to the expression “to this day”, which is often found in Russian chronicles and is very important for the analysis of the chronicle text, and made the following assumption: it belongs to the chronicler, who knew about the existence of the grave near Vruchev and did not know about the reburial of the remains of the princes in 1044 ., which means that he worked until 1044. Thus, the first step was taken in substantiating the chronicle code. Further A.A. Shakhmatov and after him M.D. Priselkov clarified the time of the creation of the vault, indicating 1037 as the year of foundation of the metropolitan department in Kyiv. According to the Byzantine tradition, the establishment of a new metropolitan see was accompanied by the compilation of a historical note about this event. It was precisely such a note that the first annalistic code was compiled in Kyiv, surrounded by the metropolitan in 1037. So, two arguments were put in support of the code of 1037: the existence of a grave before 1044 and the Byzantine tradition in compiling documents. Both arguments are imperfect. Under the grave, the researcher means a grave in the modern sense of the word - a pit for burial, but the pagan grave of a prince is a barrow. The mound (grave) could have remained even after the reburial of the remains, so the expression "to this day" in relation to the grave could be used by any chronicler of the 11th century. and even the 12th century, who saw him near the city of Vruchev. As already noted, reference to dictionaries in the analysis of chronicles is mandatory. The meaning of words changes over time. In the Dictionary of the Russian language of the XI-XVII centuries. (Issue 9. M., 1982. S. 229) the word "grave" is said: 1) burial place, burial mound, barrow; 2) a pit for the burial of the dead. This word is common Slavic - hill, elevation, grave hill. (See: Etymological Dictionary of Slavic Languages: Proto-Slavic Lexical Fund. Vol. 19. M, 1992. S. 115-119). In the Ustyug chronicler, the sacred words of Princess Olga, spoken to her son Svyatoslav before her death, are conveyed as follows: “And Olga commanded neither to create feasts, nor to pour graves.” The argument about the establishment of the metropolis is also imperfect, since the questions about the first Russian metropolitan, about the foundation of the metropolis in Kyiv, remain controversial and unclear, that is, these data cannot be used for any statements. (See: Golubinsky E.E. History of the Russian Church. T. 1. The first half of the volume. M., 1997. S. 257-332.)

The solution of the issue of the first annalistic code is carried out in different directions: the assumption of hypothetical monuments, the analysis of general political and cultural events of the first half of the 11th century, the search for any indicating readings in the annalistic text. One of the directions was identified by A.A. Shakhmatov when analyzing the text “Memory and praise to the Russian prince Volodimer, how Volodimer and his children are baptized and the whole Russian land from end to end, and how Baba Volodimerova Olga is baptized before Volodimer. Written off by Jacob Mnich” (hereinafter referred to as “Memory and Praise” by Mnich Jacob). This is a work of the middle of the XI century. and when writing it, some kind of chronicle was used, as evidenced by chronicle news related to the reign of Vladimir (the spelling of the prince's name differed from the modern one). If these annalistic news from “Memory and Praise” are put together, then the following picture will turn out: “And gray hair (Volodimer) in the place of his father Svyatoslav and his grandfather Igor. And Svyatoslav Prince Pechenez was killed. And Yaroplk sits down on Kiev in the place of his father Svyatoslav. And Olga walking from the howl at Vrucha city, break off the bridge from the howl, and Olga strangled in rowing. And Yaroplka killed Kiev's husband Volodimerov. And Prince Volodimer sat down in Kiev in the 10th summer after the death of his father Svyatoslav, the month of June at 11, in the summer of 6486. Cry, Prince Volodimer in the 10th summer after the murder of his brother Yaroplk. And repenting and weeping, blessed Prince Volodimer of all this, he did so much in filth, not knowing God. By holy protection, blessed Prince Volodimer lived for 28 years. For another summer, go along the roof to the rapids. On the third Karsun city vzya. For the fourth summer lay down Pereyaslal. In the ninth year of the tithe, the blessed Christ-loving Prince Volodimer to the Church of the Holy Mother of God and on his own behalf. About that, the Lord himself also said: if there is your treasure, then your heart will be. And have peace with the world of the month of July on the 15th day, in the summer of 6523 in Christ Jesus, our Lord. (Quoted from the book: Priselkov M.D. The history of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th-15th centuries. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg, 1996. P. 57.)

None of the chronicles that have come down to us contain exactly the same text. There are several discrepancies, one of the most significant: the message that Prince Vladimir took Korsun for the third summer after baptism. All other chronicles unanimously report the baptism of Prince Vladimir in Korsun after the capture of this city. It is assumed that some chronicle text that has not come down to us was reflected in the “Memory and Praise”. But another assumption can be made: “Memory and Praise” by Jacob’s mnicha is one of the first historical works of Ancient Russia, it was created before the appearance of the first annalistic code and the Korsun legend contained in it, it was one of the sources of the first chronicle code. It is easy to make such an assumption, but it is very, very difficult to prove it. In historical and philological science, as well as in the exact sciences, any proposition must be proved, and such propositions can be proved only on the basis of modern textual criticism.

The question of the first historical work, the first chronicle has not yet been resolved, the proposed options are unproven, but it can be said with confidence that such a solution will be found.

Are there irrefutable data on the keeping of chronicles in the 11th century? Such an indication is in the text of the already mentioned annalistic article of 6552 (1044), where Prince Vseslav of Polotsk is mentioned as alive, and his death was reported under 6609 (1101). Therefore, the entry under 1044 was made before 1101, then is in the 11th century. until the creation of the PVL. When checking the date of death (any chronological indication should be checked), it turned out that April 14 was not a Wednesday in either March or September 6609. An explanation for this discrepancy has not yet been found.

On the creation of an annalistic code in the 11th century. topographic indications of Kyiv buildings also speak. For example, about the place where Kiy sat, it is said “where is now the court of Borichov” (Ustyug chronicler under 6360 (852)); about the grave of Askold, located on the mountain - “even now it is called Ugorskoe, where there is the Almel courtyard, on that grave Alma put the goddess of St. Nicholas. And Dir’s grave is behind St. Irina ”(Ustyug chronicler under 6389 (881), in LL not “Alma”, but “Olma”). In the Ustyug chronicler under 6453 (945) we read: “... and the pristasha (Drevlyans) near Borichev, then the water flowed, near Mount Kiev, and to the guilt of gray-haired people on the mountain. The city then was Kyiv, where is now the court of Goryatin and Nikiforov, and the court was better princes in the city, where now the court is Vrotislavl alone outside the city. And outside the city there were other courtyards, where the courtyard of the domestics behind the Holy Mother of God above the mountain, the courtyard of the tower, be that the tower was stone. In LL, in addition to discrepancies in the names of the owners, there is a small addition - “dvor Vorotislavl and Chudin”, “Chyudin” is also in N1LM. It is difficult to say whether "Chyudin" was in the original text, or was added by a subsequent chronicler. The detail is important, since this Chudin was a prominent figure in the 60-70s. 11th century It is he who, along with Mikyfor Kyyanin, is mentioned in Pravda of Yaroslavichi (“Truth is lined with the Russian land, when Izyaslav, Vsevolod, Svyatoslav, Kosnyachko, Perenyt, Mikyfor Kyyanin, Chudin Mikula” bought everything). In LL under 6576 (1068) the governor Kosnyachko and his court are mentioned, which confirms the approximate dating of topographic indications of the 60s of the 11th century.

Another indication of the maintenance of chronicles in the 60s. the exact dates of non-church events appearing at this time (year, month, day) can serve. Under 6569 (1061) we read: “The Polovtsy came first to the Russian land to fight; Vsevolod, however, went against them on the 2nd day of the month of February.

All of the above observations made by different researchers speak of one thing - in the 60s. 11th century in Kyiv, an annalistic code was compiled. It has been suggested in the literature that around these years the famous Hilarion, the first Russian metropolitan, was working on the chronicle.

Chronicle of 1073 The dating of events up to a day, which appears in the text from the 1060s, is attributed by researchers to the annals of 1073. Here are some of them: February 3, 1066 - the day of the death of Prince Rostislav in Tmutarakan, July 10 of the same year - the capture Prince Vseslav Yaroslavichi; September 15, 1068 - the release of Prince Vseslav, November 1 of the same year - the victory of Prince Svyatoslav over the Polovtsy; May 2, 1069 - the day of the return of Prince Izyaslav to Kyiv, etc.

Chronicle of the 1070s. none of the researchers doubts. It was compiled in the Caves Monastery, which since that time has become one of the centers of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th-12th centuries. The Kiev Caves Monastery was founded by the monk Anthony under Prince Yaroslav the Wise. One of the first abbots were Theodosius of the Caves and Nikon, who ordained Theodosius himself to the priesthood. It is this Nikon who is credited with compiling the annalistic code of 1073. A.A. did this. Shakhmatov, who drew attention to one curious circumstance. From the "Life of Theodosius of the Caves", written by the monk of the monastery Nestor in the 80s. XI century., We learn that Nikon in the 60-70s. made repeated trips from Kyiv to Tmutarakan, where he founded the monastery of the Holy Mother of God. Chronicle since the 60s. there are detailed stories about the events that took place in distant Tmutarakan. A.A. Shakhmatov, comparing the data of the Life of Theodosius of the Caves with those given in the annals, made an assumption about Nikon's participation in compiling the chronicle code of 1073. This code ended with a description of the events of 1073 (the expulsion of Prince Izyaslav from Kyiv), after which Nikon fled for the last time to Tmutarakan. The Tmutarakan news of the Life of Theodosius of the Caves and chronicles are unique. Basically, it is only thanks to them that we have at least some idea of ​​the events that took place in the Tmutarakan principality. To some extent, we owe the appearance of this news in the Life and Chronicles to chance - the biography of one of the Russian chroniclers was associated with this city. It is impossible to correlate all the news about Tmutarakan with Nikon, since he died in 1088, and the last event was entered into the annals under 1094. The question of these news and the chronicler who included them in his work has not yet been finally resolved. Some of the records clearly indicate, if not an eyewitness to the events described, then a person who is well acquainted with them. Especially vividly, with knowledge of the details, the events of 6574 (1066) are conveyed, telling about the circumstances of the death of Prince Rostislav: “To Rostislav I exist Tmutorokani and receive tribute from Kasots and from other countries, who was afraid of this, sending a catpan with flattery. To him who came to Rostislav and trusted him, honor and Rostislav. The only one drinking Rostislav with his retinue, the speech of the kotopan: “Prince! I want to drink.” Onomu same rekshyu: "Piy." He drank half, and gave half to the prince to drink, pressing his finger into the cup, for having mortal dissolution under the nail, and go to the prince, doom death to the bottom of this. I drank it to him, the kotopan, when Korsun came, tell him that Rostislav would die on this day, as it were. This kotopan was beaten with a stone by corsunstia people. Be bo Rostislav is a husband of doble, raten, grow up lep and red face, and merciful to the poor. And I died on the 3rd day of the month of February, and there it was laid in the church of the Holy Mother of God. (Kotopan - head, leader, some official in Korsun. Quoted from the book: Monuments of literature of Ancient Russia. XI - beginning of the XII century. M., 1978. S. 180.)

Chronicle 1093 (1095) After the compilation of 1073, the following annalistic code was compiled in the Pechersky Monastery - 1093 by A.A. Shakhmatov at one time considered this text to be the original text in the history of Russian chronicle writing, which is why it is sometimes called the Initial Code. The compiler of this monument, according to the researcher, was hegumen of the Caves Monastery Ivan, therefore it is sometimes also called Ivan's vault. V.N. Tatishchev had a now lost copy of the chronicle, in which the description of the events of 1093 ended with the word "amen", that is, an indication of the completion of the work.

In the annals of 1093, new features of record keeping appeared. The dating of events began to be given with maximum accuracy: the death of the abbot of the Caves Monastery is indicated to the nearest hour - at 2 pm on May 3, on the second Saturday after Easter, 6582; with the same accuracy, the time of death of the successor of Theodosius, the second abbot of the Pechersk monastery Stephen, who became bishop of Vladimir (in the south of Russia) is indicated - at 6 o'clock in the morning on April 27, 6612. All these dates of events are related to the Pechersk monastery and are made, possibly , by the same person.

In the vault of 1093 there is a whole series of skillfully executed literary portraits. For example, under 6586 (1078) we read: “Because Izyaslav’s husband is red in his eyes and great in body, mild in temper, hate crooked, loving the truth. Do not flatter in him, but simply the husband with his mind, not repaying evil for evil. How much did the kiyane do to him: he drove out himself, and plundered his house, and did not take evil against that ”(Monuments, p. 214). Or, for example, under 6594 (1086) about Prince Yaropolk: “We will accept many troubles, without guilt we will expel from our brothers, we will offend, plunder, other things and bitter death are pleasant, but be worthy of eternal life and peace. So the blessed prince was quiet, meek, humble and brotherly-loving, giving tithe to the Holy Mother of God from all his name for the whole year, and always praying to God ... ”(Monuments of literature of Ancient Russia. XI - the beginning of the XII century. M., 1978. S. 218). The chronicler also created a similar portrait for Prince Vsevolod in a message about his death under 6601 (1093), after which such descriptions disappear from the chronicle text for a long time.

A rare annalistic code has as many data confirming its existence as the annalistic code of 1093. Here is the word "amen" at the end of the list by V.N. Tatishchev, and a series of news about Tmutarakan, ending in the area of ​​this annalistic article, and double dating at the beginning of the weather record (In summer 6601, indiction of 1 summer ...). And, perhaps most importantly, it is here that the use of one of the extra-chronicle sources, Paremiynik, ceases. The paremiionnik is an ancient Russian liturgical collection, compiled from various readings of the Old Testament and New Testament books, it was read during the liturgy or vespers. The paremiion was used in Russian liturgical practice until the 15th century, after which it began to fall into disuse. For the first time, the most complete question of the use of Paremiynik as an extra-chronicle source in Russian chronicle writing of the 11th century. was developed by A.A. Shakhmatov. The main provisions of his observations are as follows: borrowings from Paremiynik were made by one chronicler, borrowings can be traced back to 1093. If the first provision can be disputed to some extent (readings from Paremiynik in the Vladimir Chronicler are peculiar and differ from borrowings in LL-IL), then the second one is no doubt. After 1093, there are no borrowings from Paremiynik in Russian chronicles, therefore, this observation serves as another argument in favor of the end of the annalistic code of 1093. Borrowings from Paremiynik are presented in the following chronicle articles: 955, 969, 980, 996, 1015, 1019, 1037, 1078, 1093. This list of weather records with borrowings from Paremiynik can serve as a clear example of how one of the chroniclers, who brought his work to 1093, actively worked with the material of his predecessors, in this case, supplementing it.

Here is an example of a comparison of the texts of Paremiynik (according to a manuscript of the 12th century) and the chronicle:

This paroemia reading includes another example of borrowing, noted by A.A. Shakhmatov (Prov. 1, 29-31 under 955), since he breaks one whole text into two fragments.

When comparing the texts, it becomes obvious that Paremiynik was the source of the chronicle, from which the chronicler borrowed the materials he needed, and citing them almost verbatim.

Paremia borrowings in chronicle articles of 1037, 1078, 1093 are in extensive digressions made by one of the ancient Russian chroniclers. In the first two cases, when characterizing the personality and activities of the two princes Yaroslav and Izyaslav, and in the third case, in the story of the third invasion of the Polovtsy on Kyiv (by the way, the count of the Polovtsy invasions stops here). All three digressions, unlike other cases of borrowings from Paremiynik, complete the weather accounts of events.

Between the annalistic code of 1093 and the first edition of the PVL (1113), one can note the work of another chronicler - priest Vasily, the author of the chronicle article of 1097, where he gave his name, calling himself the namesake of Prince Vasilko. This article, according to M.D. Priselkov, with a description of the princely struggle and the blinding of Prince Vasilko, should be considered a masterpiece not only of ancient Russian, but of all medieval literature.

PVL and its editions. At the beginning of the XII century. in Kyiv, an annalistic code was compiled, which at its beginning had an extensive heading: “Behold the tale of temporary years, where did the Russian land come from, who in Kiev began the first prince, and from where did the Russian land begin to eat.” At the time of the compilation of the first edition of the PVL, the list of princes placed under 6360 (852) indicates the following ending: "... from the death of Svyatoslavl to the death of Yaroslavl, 85 years, and from the death of Yaroslavl to the death of Svyatopolchi, 60 years." After Prince Svyatopolk, who died in 1113, no one is mentioned. The end of the list at Svyatopolk and the fact that after him none of the princes who ruled in Kyiv are mentioned made it possible for researchers to assert that the chronicler worked in 1113, immediately after the death of Prince Svyatopolk. Judging by the text of the LL (second edition of the PVL), he brought his work to the events of 6618 (1110) inclusive. It is assumed that the author of the first edition of the PVL was the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor (see below about him). Judging by the exact dating of events to the nearest hour (1113) IL and the indication of the indict at the beginning of the weather record of 6620 (1112), the author of the first edition of the PVL could bring the presentation of events up to and including 1113.

The beginning of Russian chronicle writing according to M.D. Priselkov

The author of the first edition of the PVL continued the work of his predecessor and supplemented it with various additional sources. Among them, not the last place is occupied by the stories of eyewitnesses or participants in the events. For example, the chronicler was familiar with representatives of one of the most prominent families in Kyiv - the Vyshatychi. About the son of the voivode Vyshata Yan, he writes in an annalistic article of 6614 (1106): live according to the law of God, not the worst of the first righteous. I also heard many words from him, and I wrote seven in the annals, but I heard from him. For the husband is good, and meek, gentle, robbing all sorts of things, and his coffin is in the Pechersk monastery, in the vestibule, where his body lies, it is supposed to be the month of June at 24. If we take into account the long years lived by Elder Yang, then he could tell the chronicler a lot.

One of the written additional sources of the author of the first edition of the PVL was the Byzantine Chronicle of George Amartol and his successors. The author of the chronicle of the 70s did not know this Chronicle, since there are no borrowings from it in the text of N1LM. Chronicle of George Amartol - a monument of Byzantine literature of the 9th century, which tells the history of the world. It was compiled by the monk George and in the XI century. was translated into Russian. For the first time, the use of this text in the Russian chronicle was pointed out by P.M. Stroev. A.A. Shakhmatov collected all borrowings from the Chronicle in the annals, there are 26 of them. Borrowings are often literal, for example, after a reference to the annals of George, the text follows:

(An example of a comparison of texts is given according to the work of A.A. Shakhmatov “The Tale of Bygone Years” and its sources // TODRL. T. 4. M .; L., 1940. P. 46).

Borrowings from the Chronicle are distributed by the chronicler throughout the text of the chronicle, sometimes a large fragment of the work is taken, sometimes a small clarifying detail. It is impossible to find all these borrowings without knowing their source, at the same time, without knowing about them, one can take the fact of someone else's history as an event in Russian reality.

Presumably, at the stage of creating the first edition of the PVL, treaties between the Russians and the Greeks (6420, 6453, 6479) were included in the text of the chronicle.

The compiler of the first edition of the PVL entered into his chronicle news of various kinds of heavenly signs, some of which can be verified according to astronomy. For example, under 6599 (1091) we read: “In this summer there was a sign in the sun, as if he would perish, and his remains were few, like a month was, at hour 2 in the day, the month of May was 21 days.” It was on this day that an annular eclipse was filed by astronomy. (Svyatsky D.O. Astronomical phenomena in Russian chronicles from a scientific-critical point of view. St. Petersburg, 1915, p. 104.) 1115) - IL. All these records must be checked against astronomical data to determine the accuracy of the chronology of the chronicle.

The second edition of the PVL is presented in the LL. We learn about the time, place and circumstances of its compilation from the postscript located after the annalistic article of 6618 (1110): “Hegumen Silivester of St. at that time I was abbess at St. Michael in 6624, indiction of the 9th year; and if you read these books, then be with us in prayers.

For all its brevity, this postscript requires great attention, which implies various kinds of verification and clarification. From the postscript it can be seen that the chronicler was the abbot of the Vydubitsky monastery Sylvester in 6624. First of all, it is necessary to check whether the indicated chronological data correspond to each other. Yes, they correspond: this year Prince Vladimir (1113-1125) was on the throne of Kiev, and 6624 corresponds to indict 9. It is also necessary to clarify each part of this postscript, paying attention to even minor details. For example, Vladimir is called a prince, not a grand prince, as his title is called in textbooks and various monographs. Is it by chance? No, if we turn to the primary sources (monuments of writing, synchronous to the time being analyzed), it turns out that everywhere, with one controversial exception, there is a title - prince, and the title grand duke appears only in the 13th century. Sylvester called his work “The Chronicler”, and at the beginning of the chronicle there is a different name - “Behold the stories of temporary years ...”, therefore, it is not Sylvester who probably owns the title - PVL.

At the first acquaintance with the postscript, the need for various knowledge on the history of the Russian church, which can be gleaned from special books, becomes obvious. For example, it is useful to have on the table the Complete Orthodox Theological Encyclopedic Dictionary (in two volumes, pre-revolutionary edition, reprinted in 1992). Using the dictionary, you can clarify the meaning of the word "abbot" and its difference from the word "archimandrite", get the first idea about the history of Orthodox monasteries. You should definitely ask about the name "Sylvester" - in honor of St. Sylvester, the Pope of Rome (314-335) was named hegumen of the Vydubytsky monastery: the Orthodox honor his memory on January 2, and the Catholics on December 31. There is also an exhaustive work on Christian names: Archbishop Sergius (Spassky). Complete Menologions Vostok (In 3 vols. Vladimir, 1901. Reprint. 1997). Having found out the origin of the name, you should get acquainted with the biography of the hegumen. You can learn about all the participants in the literary process of Ancient Russia from the dictionary: Dictionary of scribes and bookishness of Ancient Russia (Issue 1. XI - the first half of the XIV century, L., 1987. S. 390-391). This dictionary will give us scanty facts from the life of Sylvester: after being abbess, he was appointed bishop in Pereyaslavl South, where he died in 1123. An unanswerable question is important in this case: what was the name of Sylvester before he became a monk? At a later time, there was a tradition to keep the first letter of the secular name in the first letter of the monastic name. But whether this tradition was active in the 11th century is not known. The monastery of St. Michael is the Vydubitsky St. Michael Monastery, located near Kyiv on the banks of the Dnieper. Given, it was founded by Prince Vsevolod in 1070, at the place where the idol of Perun, thrown into the Dnieper, sailed from Kyiv. The church in the monastery was consecrated in 1088. The monastery, founded by Prince Vsevolod, became the spiritual center of the princely branch, the founder of which was Vsevolod. Almost all princely branches had their monasteries in Kyiv or in its suburbs. During the reign of Vsevolod's son Prince Vladimir in Kyiv, the Vydubitsky Monastery began to record chronicles and, naturally, the chronicler, who wrote in the Vsevolodovich Monastery, defended the interests of this dynasty in his work.

In Sylvester's postscript, perhaps the most key is the word "written". What degree of participation in the work on the chronicle does it indicate? The question, as it turns out, is not easy. In the XI century. “written” could mean “rewrote”, that is, the work of a copyist, and, in the literal sense, “wrote”, that is, created a new original text. It was in the latter sense that one of the Russian chroniclers took Sylvester's postscript, inserting the following words into the description of Edigey's invasion of Moscow in 1409: compelling and creeping, acquiring and rewarding for blessings and unforgettable; we are not vexing, nor defamatory, nor envious of honesty, such is the case, as if we are acquiring the initial Kievan chronicler, like all the temporal existence of the zemstvo, not hesitating to show; but our rulers without anger commandingly all the good and the unkind, having come to write, and others will be the images of the phenomena, even under Volodymyr Manomas of this great Sylvester Vydobyzhsky, without decorating the writer, and even if you want, PSRL, T. 11. Nikon Chronicle, Moscow, 1965, p. 211). An earlier text of this digression is found in the Rogozhsky chronicler (PSRL. T. 15. M., 2000. P. 185). It can be seen from the quotation that one of the Russian chroniclers considered Sylvester to be the author of the Kievan chronicle, calling him "the chronicler". In scientific literature, the question of the degree of participation of Abbot Sylvester in the creation of one of the Russian chronicles remains controversial, some consider him only a scribe, others - the author of the original work.

The third edition of the PVL is presented in the text of the IL, in which, unlike the Laurentian, the events after 6618 (1110) are not interrupted by Sylvester's postscript. The timing of this revision is determined as follows. Researchers drew attention to the fact that one of the Kyiv chroniclers under 6604 and 6622 speaks of his presence in the north, in the Novgorod land. Under 6604 (1096) we read: “Behold, I want to say, I have heard before these 4 years, even with the words of Gyuryata Rogovich Novgorodets, saying to this, like “The message of his youth to Pechera, people, who are the tribute to Novgorod. And my servant came to them, and from there I went to Ougra. Ougras are the people of the language, and they are neighbors with Samoyed on the midnight sides ... ”(PSRL. T. 2. M., 2000. Stb. 224-225). Then follows a story about what he saw in the north, about the customs of Yugra, about their traditions. The expression “I have heard before now for 4 years” is understood by researchers as follows: the author wrote his chronicle 4 years after his trip to Novgorod land. The answer to the question - in what year this chronicler visited the north - is the annalistic article of 6622 (1114) (it is in the Ipatiev Chronicle, but not in the Laurentian Chronicle): Prince Mstislav. I came to Ladoga, told me to Ladoga ... ”(PSRL. T. 2. M., 2000. Stb. 277). It can be seen from the text that the chronicler arrived in Ladoga in 6622 (1114), therefore, he worked on the chronicle in 6626 (1118). is obvious, in both articles we are talking about Yugra, about Samoyed, and their customs.

At the stage of creating the third edition of the PVL, the legend of the founder of the princely dynasty, Rurik, was included in the chronicle. This was quite convincingly shown in his studies by A.A. Chess.

What was the reason for the emergence of this legend? With all the controversy of the issue of Prince Rurik, the calling of the Varangians, written monuments of the 11th century. allow us to give the following explanation.

In some ancient Russian works of the second half of the 11th century. not Rurik, but Oleg, sometimes Igor, is called the ancestor of the Russian princely dynasty. Prince Rurik is not known to either Metropolitan Hilarion or monk Jacob. For example, in the “Sermon on Law and Grace”, Metropolitan Hilarion calls Igor the oldest Russian prince (“Let us also praise<...>the great kagan of our land Volodimer, the grandson of old Igor, the son of the glorious Svyatoslav”). There is no name of Rurik in the list of Russian princes, placed under 6360 (852), where the chronicler, speaking of the beginning of the Russian land, also mentions the first Russian prince, who, in his opinion, was Prince Oleg.

Thus, various historical and literary works of Ancient Russia give us several versions about the ancestor of the princely dynasty: according to one - this is Rurik, according to others - Oleg, according to the third - Igor.

In the first centuries of Russian history, as in later times, there was a tradition to name newborns in honor of glorious ancestors. According to the Laurentian Chronicle, 8 princes were named after Oleg in the pre-Mongolian period (11 according to the Nikon Chronicle), and 5 princes were named after Igor according to LL (6 according to the Nikon Chronicle). In honor of Rurik, supposedly the founder of the Russian princely dynasty, only two princes have been named in the entire history of Russia: one in the 11th century, the other in the 12th century. (the number of princes bearing the name Rurik is taken from the literature on Russian genealogy).

On the basis of chronicle material, we will try to deal with the princes who bore the name Rurik. The first mention of the real Rurik is in the chronicle article of 6594 (1086): V.Z.) I will rethink to Rurik ... ”It is believed that this Rurik, who was sitting in Przemysl, was the brother of Volodar and Vasilko Rostislavich. But in the annalistic article of 6592 (1084) it is not about three, but about two Rostislavich brothers (“Rostislavich’s runaway two from Yaropolk”). It can be assumed that the same prince is mentioned under two different names: the princely name is Rurik, the Christian name is Vasilko. It happened in the following way: one of the chroniclers (in the first case) traditionally called the prince a princely name, and another chronicler preferred to call him a Christian name. One can even explain the preference of the second chronicler: he was a priest and namesake of the prince by his Christian name (under 6605 (1097) the chronicle contains a detailed story about the blinding of Prince Vasilko, written down by priest Vasily).

No matter how the issue of the names of the prince of the 11th century was resolved, the second undisputed prince Rurik, also Rostislavich, lived in the second half of the 12th century and was a descendant of Vsevolod Yaroslavich (by the way, the Christian name of this Rurik is Vasily).

If you trace the genealogy of Rurik XI century. and Rurik of the 12th century, it turns out that they are representatives of the same princely branch, originating from the marriage of Yaroslav the Wise with the daughter of the Swedish “king” Ingigerda: one Rurik is a descendant of Vladimir Yaroslavich, the other is Vsevolod Yaroslavich. The Icelandic sagas and annals report the second marriage of Yaroslav and the offspring from him in most detail: “1019. King Olaf the Holy married Astrid, the daughter of King Olaf of Sweden, and King Yaritsleif in Holmgard married Ingigerd”, “... Ingigerd married King Yaritsleif. Their sons were Valdamar, Vissivald and Holti the Bold ”(Jackson T.N. Icelandic royal sagas as a source on the history of Ancient Russia and its neighbors in the 10th-13th centuries. // Ancient states on the territory of the USSR: Materials and research (1988-1989). ), M., 1991, p. 159). Researchers believe that Valdamar and Vissivald can be identified with the sons of Yaroslav Vladimir and Vsevolod, the third son, Holti the Bold, remains a controversial figure.

Summing up everything known to us, we get the following results: for the first time, the grandson of Yaroslav the Wise, Rostislav, named his son Rurik (approximately in the 70s of the 11th century). Only the descendants from the marriage of Yaroslav and the daughter of the Swedish king Ingigerd have the name Rurik. At least two Russian chroniclers (priest Vasily and hegumen Sylvester), who took part in the creation of the PVL, knew the representatives of this particular princely branch well (priest Vasily is the namesake of Vasily-Rurik, and Sylvester is the abbot of the monastery of the princely branch of the Vsevolodovichs) and, as can be assumed defended their political interests. One of the chroniclers, as we know, visited Ladoga. According to Icelandic sources, Ingigerda, having married Yaroslav, received Aldeygyuborg, that is, Ladoga, as a dowry.

In the second half of the XI century. there could be two legends about Rurik: a generic one associated with one of Ingigerda's ancestors (we are talking about her grandfather Eric, whose nickname Victorious is close in meaning to the name of one of the brothers of the Russian legend - Sineus; some researchers consider the word "Sineus" not a name, but one of the nicknames of Rurik and translate it as "victorious"), and a legend about the founder of the city of Ladoga. Both legends initially have a single basis - Swedish. They lack any chronology, which is typical for legends. Within the framework of Swedish history, chronological landmarks, quite likely, could be found, but the Swedish “historical texture” completely lost these landmarks when transferred to Russian soil.

Two legends of the second half of the 11th century. about Rurik and served as the initial material for one of the Russian chroniclers to create a legend about Prince Rurik, the ancestor of the Russian princely dynasty. The chronicler was a supporter of this particular princely branch, moreover, he personally knew one of the "real" Ruriks of the second half of the 11th century. The main purpose of the creation of the legend is clear: to justify the primacy and, thus, the supremacy of the representatives of the princely branch, which originated from the marriage of Prince Yaroslav with Ingigerda. In the Lavrentiev and close to it in their original history chronicles, it is stated that Prince Vladimir was the eldest son of Yaroslav. Yes, older, but from a second marriage. In the Ustyug chronicler, the list of the sons of Prince Yaroslav is rightfully headed by Prince Izyaslav.

This legend, as already noted, was entered into the Russian chronicle around 1118 by one of the Kievan chroniclers. It was at this time that Prince Vladimir Monomakh, the grandson of Ingigerda, ruled in Kyiv. The chronicler introduced the legend into the story about the beginning of Russian history created by his predecessors, taking as a basis the first mentions of Oleg and Igor.

The chronicle collection, known as PVL, which included the legend of Rurik, is presented in almost all Russian chronicles, and therefore the artificially created legend, consecrated by centuries of tradition, eventually turned into a historical fact. In addition, the descendants of Vladimir Monomakh ruled in the northeast. In turn, the artificial historical fact has become a starting point both for ancient Russian people and for researchers of modern times when they create other artificial intellectual structures.

The legend of Rurik shows how the chronicler, defending the interests of one princely branch of the 12th century, actively changed the text of his predecessors, introducing artificial facts into their work, and thereby into the history of Russia. It follows that any historical fact found in the annals requires preliminary painstaking analysis, the basis of which is the history of the text of the annals as a whole and a clear knowledge of the stage at which the historical fact of interest to us was entered into the annals. Before using this or that fact, which is within the framework of the PVL, for historical constructions, one should find out the textual characteristics given to it in the works of A.A. Shakhmatova.

Sources of PVL. Identification of individual non-annalistic sources of PVL was carried out by several generations of domestic scientists. The final work, deep and detailed, on this topic is the study of A.A. Shakhmatova "The Tale of Bygone Years and Its Sources" (TODRL. T. IV. M.; L., 1940. S. 5-150), which provides an overview and characterization of 12 non-annalistic sources. These are the following monuments and works: 1) Books “St. Scriptures”, where, in addition to the mentioned Paremiion, all quotations from the Psalter, the Gospels, and the Apostolic Epistles are noted; 2) Chronicle of George Amartol and his successors; 3) "The chronicler soon" of Patriarch Nicephorus (d. 829), which is a chronological list of the main events of world history from Adam to the death of the author. This monument would have been translated into Latin in 870, and into Slavonic (in Bulgaria) at the end of the 9th - beginning of the 10th century. There is a modern study dedicated to the Chronicler soon: Piotrovskaya E.K. Byzantine chronicles of the 9th century and their reflection in the monuments of Slavic-Russian writing (“Chronicler soon” of the Patriarch of Constantinople Nicephorus) / Orthodox Palestine collection. Issue. 97 (34). SPb., 1998). The first date of Russian history, 6360 (852), was taken from the Chronicler soon into the chronicle, and some data for the chronicle articles of 6366, 6377, 6410 were also transferred; 4) Life of Basil the New. This source was first pointed out by A.N. Veselovsky in 1889. The borrowing was made in article 6449 (941); 5) A chronograph of a special composition - a hypothetical monument of Russian historiography of the 11th century, containing a story about world history; 6) An article by Epiphanius of Cyprus about 12 stones on the robe of the Jerusalem High Priest. The expression "great Scythia" is taken from this work (in the introduction and in article 6415 (907));

7) "The legend about the transposition of books into the Slavic language", borrowings from it are in the introduction and in article 6409 (896);

8) The "Revelation" of Methodius of Patara, the chronicler twice refers to it in the story about Ugra under 6604 (1096). This is the chronicler who traveled to Ladoga in 6622 (1114);

9) “Teaching on the executions of God” - such a name was given by A.A. Chess teaching, which is in article 6576 (1068). The basis of the annalistic teaching was the "Word about the bucket and the executions of God" (it is in Simeonovsky Zlatostruy and in other lists of Zlatostruy - a collection of works by various authors, including John Chrysostom ). The insertion of the Teaching breaks a single chronicle story about the invasion of the Polovtsians and the Yaroslavichs’ rebellion against them (Beginning: “For the sake of our sins, God let the filthy ones fall on us, and the Russian princes ran away ...”). The lecture occupies about two pages of text and ends with the phrase traditional in such cases: “We will return to the present pack”; 10) Agreements between Russians and Greeks; 11) "Speech of the Philosopher" under 6494 (986); 12) The legend of the Apostle Andrew (it is in the introduction). Work on identifying quotations from non-chronicle sources was continued after A.A. Shakhmatova (G.M. Barats, N.A. Meshchersky).

Nestor- A monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery is traditionally considered the author of the most significant chronicle of the Old Russian period - the Tale of Bygone Years. This collection, which has come down to us in the Laurentian and Ipatiev Chronicles, was allegedly created by Nestor at the beginning of the 12th century, more precisely, in 1113. In addition, Nestor wrote two more works: The Life of Boris and Gleb and The Life of Theodosius of the Caves. After a long study of the written heritage of Nestor, it turned out that many historical facts described in two Lives diverge from the corresponding chronicle facts: in the Life of Boris and Gleb, Prince Boris reigned in Vladimir Volynsky, and according to the chronicle he reigned in Rostov; according to the Life of Theodosius of the Caves, Nestor came to the monastery under the hegumen Stefan, that is, between 1074 and 1078, and according to the annalistic article of 1051, he entered the monastery under the hegumen Theodosius. There are up to 10 such examples of various kinds of contradictions, all of them have long been known in the literature, but have no explanation.

The authentic biography of Nestor is scarce, we learn about them from the Life of Theodosius: he came to the Caves Monastery under Abbot Stephen (1074-1078) and before writing the Life of Theodosius he wrote the Life of Boris and Gleb. In the records of the monks of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery of the beginning of the XIII century. (meaning the original edition of the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon that has not come down to us) it is mentioned twice that Nestor worked on the chronicle: in the second letter of the monk Polycarp to the archimandrite of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Akindin we read “Nester, who wrote the chronicler”, and in the story Polycarp about Saint Agapit the doctor - "blessed Nester wrote in the chronicler." Thus, we see that the monks of the monastery, albeit in the form of a legend, knew about the work of Nestor in creating some kind of chronicler. Pay attention, the chronicler, and not the Tale of Bygone Years. To these indisputable data of Nestor's biography, one more fact can be added, obtained by researchers in the analysis of the text of the Life of Theodosius. They drew attention to the fact that the Life does not report the transfer of the relics of Theodosius in 1091, and at the same time Abbot Nikon (1078-1088) is mentioned as the current head of the monastery. From all this, a conclusion was drawn about Nestor's work on the Life in the late 80s. 11th century So, there is little biographical information. Then the question arises, where did all the researchers of the XVIII-XX centuries. take other data of Nestor's biography (the time of his birth - 1050, death - the beginning of the 12th century), including the fact of his work on the Tale of Bygone Years at the beginning of the 12th century? All these data were taken by researchers from two published in the 17th century. books, from the Paterik of the Kiev-Pechersk and Synopsis, where all the information from the annalistic articles of 1051, 1074 and 1091 was used without prior critical analysis to characterize Nestor. It should be noted that as the text of the Patericon changed, starting from the 13th century. and until the 17th century, a wide variety of facts from the life of the monks of the 11th century appeared in it. For example, in the edition of the Paterik of 1637, among other additional data, there was a mention of the younger brother Theodosius. As shown by V.N. Peretz, this fact of the biography of Theodosius, like other similar facts, is a figment of the imagination of the publisher of Paterik Sylvester Kossov. In 1661, in a new edition of the Paterik, a life of Nestor written especially for this purpose was published (at that time, local canonization of Nestor was taking place). In the Patericon, Nestor is credited with writing the entire first part of the monument, which, of course, is not true. No dates are indicated in the text of the Life of Nestor, his biography is characterized on the basis of chronicle articles of 1051. , 1074, 1091, the analysis of which shows that they belong to the pen of not one, but at least two monks of the Kiev Caves Monastery, and therefore it is impossible to use the data of these articles to characterize Nestor. It is curious how the compiler of the Life of Nestor, who worked in the 17th century, managed to remove the contradiction between the report of the chronicle under 1051 about the appearance of a 17-year-old monk in the monastery under Abbot Theodosius and the Life of Theodosius about the arrival of Nestor at the monastery under Abbot Stephen: Nestor allegedly came to the monastery under Theodosius as a 17-year-old youth and lived in the monastery as a layman, and he took the monastic form under Stefan. It should be noted that outwardly such an explanation is quite convincing, but such reasoning, when removing various kinds of contradictions in written historical sources, interferes with a real analysis of this source. About the time of death in the Life it is reported very vaguely - "according to the years of the temporal satisfied, I died for eternity." The Life also gives a general description of the chronicle, which Nestor allegedly compiled: “write us about the beginning and the first structure of our Russian world”, that is, all the first events of our history described in the chronicle belong to Nestor. An indirect indication of the time of Nestor's death is found in the first part of the Paterik, in the story about the circumstances of the inclusion of the name Theodosius in the Synodikon for national commemoration, the author of this Synodikon was also allegedly Nestor. In this story, there are names of specific historical persons, for example, Prince Svyatopolk, who was sitting in Kyiv in 1093-1113, and dates (the last date is 6620 (1114) - the year of the appointment of hegumen of the Pechersk Monastery Theoktist, on whose initiative the name of Theodosius and was submitted to the Synodik, to the bishopric in Chernigov). If we collect all the biographical data of Paterik, then we get a fairly complete biography of Nestor: at the age of 17 he came to the Caves Monastery under Abbot Theodosius and lived at the monastery until his death, remaining a layman; under hegumen Stefan (1074-1078) he was tonsured a monk and became a deacon; in 1091 he was a participant in the acquisition of the relics of Theodosius; died after 1112. On the content of the chronicler written by Nestor, Paterik also gives general but exhaustive information: the entire story about the initial history of Russia, together with the title - The Tale of Bygone Years - belongs to Nestor, he also owns all the messages about the Pechersk Monastery up to 1112. inclusive. This biography of Nestor and the description of his chronicler is the result of the creative activity of several generations of monks of the Caves Monastery, their conjectures, assumptions, conjectures, and mistakes. An irrepressible thirst for knowledge, despite the complete absence of data, about one of his glorious brothers - this is the basis of the search.

All researchers of the 18th-20th centuries, speaking about Nestor, directly or indirectly used the data from the Life of Nestor, created, as already noted, in the 17th century, while they often supplemented it on the basis of their fantasies and assumptions. For example, Nestor's memorial day - October 27, is indicated in some books as the day of his death, which, of course, is not true. I will give one more example of how new facts about Nestor's biography were found. V.N. Tatishchev first wrote that Nestor was born in Beloozero. As it turned out, this imaginary fact of Nestor's biography is based on a misunderstanding, more precisely, on an incorrect reading of the Radzivilov Chronicle, where under 6370 (862) the following text is read in the story about Prince Rurik and his brothers: “... old Rurik sat in Ladoza, and the other sits with us on Beleozero, and the third Truvor in Izborsk. V.N. Tatishchev considered the incorrect reading of the Radzvilovskaya chronicle - “sitting with us on Beleozero” (must be Sineus on Beleozero) - considered Nestor’s self-characteristic. This is an erroneous opinion of V.N. Tatishchev allowed one of the princes Beloselsky-Belozersky to consider Nestor his countryman.

Speaking of the Patericon, it is necessary to mention another edition of the 17th century, where for the first time various kinds of conjectures appeared regarding the biography of Nestor - Synopsis. Patericon and Synopsis were the most popular books among Russian readers of the 17th-19th centuries, it was thanks to them that the fantastic biography of Nestor entered deeply into the consciousness of several generations of Russian people.

If we compare the facts of his real biography and the events he describes, which are in the Life of Theodosius, with the data of the annalistic text N1LM, it turns out that not only will all the contradictions known until recently in the works of Nestor disappear, but the unity of views expressed by him in these works will become obvious . Nestor originally worked on the chronicle in 1076, bringing the weather account of events to 1075. In N1LM, the end of the chronicler Nestor was not preserved (the description of the events, more precisely, the death of Theodosius, is cut off in it, this happened, most likely due to the loss of the last sheet original), the ending is preserved in the Tver Chronicle, where we read: “In the summer of 6583<...>a start was made to make a stone church in the Pechersk monastery by hegumen Stefan demestvenik, on the basis of Feodosiev. The completion of the creation of the church is not indicated in the annals, but this happened in 1077.

Both in the annals and in the Life of Theodosius, Nestor pays special attention to the events that took place in Tmutarakan. It can be assumed that all the Tmutarakan news belong to the pen of one person - Nestor. A fact confirming the existence of the chronicler compiled by Nestor in the 1070s is the very existence of the chronicle text H1LM, where after the news of 1074 we see random brief records of events, which even allowed A.A. Shakhmatov to suggest the loss of the text in this place of the annals. Chronicler, created by Nestor in the second half of the 70s. XI century., was laid at the basis of all subsequent Novgorod chronicles and therefore preserved in it in a more “pure form” than in the Lavrentiev and Ipatiev chronicles.

It is known that the work of Nestor proceeded in the 70-80s. XI century, therefore it is appropriate to ask the question: did Nestor continue to work on the chronicle after the creation of his chronicler in 1076? I answer this question positively on the basis of the following observations: when writing his work in 1076, Nestor used an extra-chronicle source - Paremiynik, the same source in the form of quotations is found in the annals until 1094, after which there are no more borrowings from it. More A.A. Shakhmatov analyzed the quotes from Paremiynik and suggested that they were all made by the same author. It is possible that two chroniclers referred to this work. The first chronicler, who worked before Nestor, quoted only the first sentences from this or that proverb, while a small amount of quotations did not violate the integrity of the chronicle story, the quotations only made clarifications when characterizing the prince or event. Nestor worked with the Paremiinik in a slightly different way: all his quotations are an integral and to some extent an inseparable part of rather extensive digressions, most often of theological content, with which he completed the annalistic articles of a given year. When Nestor began to describe events as an eyewitness, and he made such records from the 70s to the mid-90s. XI century, he used quotations from Paremiynik also in voluminous digressions, most often in praise of the princes, while creating literary portraits of the “boasted”. Like quotations from Paremiynik, news of events that took place in Tmutarakan can be traced back to 1094 inclusive.

The version of Nestor's biography presented in this tutorial is preliminary, but only on the basis of the restored text entered by Nestor into the Russian chronicle, it will be possible to recreate in general terms his life path, which will differ significantly, at least in chronology, from that widely distributed in literature.

Sources : PSRL. T. 1. Laurentian Chronicle. Issue. 1-2. L., 1926-1927; PSRL. T. 2. Ipatiev Chronicle. M., 1998; Novgorod First Chronicle of the Senior and Junior Editions - Ed. and with prev. A.N. Nasonov. M.; L., 1950 (reprint 2000 as volume 3 PSRL); Life of Theodosius of the Caves // Assumption collection of the XII-XIII centuries. - Ed. prepared O.A. Knyazevskaya, V.G. Demyanov, M.V. Lapon. Ed. S.I. Kotkov. M., 1971; The Tale of Bygone Years // Monuments of Literature of Ancient Russia: the beginning of Russian literature: XI - the beginning of the XII century. M., 1978; The Tale of Bygone Years / Preparation of the text, translation and comments by D.S. Likhachev. SPb., 1996.

Literature : Schlözer A.-L. Nestor: Russian Chronicles in Old Slavonic... Ch. I-III. St. Petersburg, 1809-1819; Shakhmatov A.A. Research on the ancient Russian chronicles. St. Petersburg, 1908; Review of Russian chronicles of the XIV-XVI centuries. M.; L., 1938; Priselkov M.D. Nestor the Chronicler: Experience of Historical and Literary Characteristics. Pb., 1923; Aleshkovsky M.Kh. The Tale of Bygone Years: The Fate of a Literary Work in Ancient Russia. M., 1971; Kuzmin A.G. The initial stages of ancient Russian chronicle writing. M. 1977; Likhachev D. S. Textology: on the material of Russian literature of the X-XVII centuries. 2nd ed. L., 1983; Danilevsky I.N. Biblicalisms of the Tale of Bygone Years // Hermeneutics of Old Russian Literature of the X-XVI centuries. Sat. 3. M., 1992. S. 75-103; Ziborov V.K. About the chronicle of Nestor. The main chronicle code in Russian annals. 11th century L., 1995; The Romanovs and the Rurikovichs (on the genealogical legend of the Rurikoviches) // Sat: The House of the Romanovs in the history of Russia. SPb., 1995. S. 47-54.

Notes

. Priselkov M.D. History of Russian Chronicle XI-XV centuries. SPb., 1996, p. 166, fig. 3.

. Priselkov M.D. History of Russian Chronicle XI-XV centuries. SPb., 1996, p. 83, fig. one.

When quoting, the letter "ѣ" is replaced by the letter "e".

Our contemporaries draw knowledge about the past from chronicles and archaeological excavations. Of course, these are not the only sources of information, but still they are the most important.

The main Russian chronicle is The Tale of Bygone Years, the rest of the chronicles (Ipatievskaya, Lavrentievskaya and others) only supplement and clarify it. The Kievan chronicle is also called the Primary, although, of course, there is nothing in it about the beginnings of Russian history; it only contains the history of Kievan Rus, and even that is far from complete. You need to know that the "Tale" was written by more than one author. This is a collection of documents relating to different times and, accordingly, written by different authors.

At least the names of two of them are known: this is the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor and the hegumen of the Mikhailovsky Vydubetsky monastery in Kyiv - Sylvester. Nestor lived in the middle of the 11th - early 12th century (he died in 1114) and is the author of the life of Saints Boris and Gleb, as well as the life of St. Theodosius, the founder of the Kyiv Lavra. He was the superintendent of chronicle writing in Kievan Rus and, according to researchers, the compiler of The Tale of Bygone Years (not so much writing chronicles as collecting them into a single collection). For his ascetic labors, Nestor was canonized by the Church as a saint. His memory is celebrated on October 27. The relics of Nestor rest in the Near Caves of the Lavra. A graphical reconstruction was made from his skull. The appearance of the chronicler turned out to be much simpler and more modest than on the famous sculpture of Mark Antokolsky. The ancient Russian writer, hegumen of the Mikhailovsky Vydubetsky Monastery Sylvester (year of birth unknown, died in 1123) was close to the Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh, at his behest he went to Pereyaslav in 1118 (the current Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky in Ukraine, during the time of Kievan Rus, the capital of the specific principality ) to become a bishop there.

The chronicle begins with the first author, a connoisseur of the Holy Scriptures. He tells how the Earth was divided between the sons of Noah, the righteous man who escaped the Great Flood. In this biblical version of the development of mankind, the writer seeks to insert the ancestors of our people - the ancient Rus. It turns out not very complicated and unconvincing. But the author was obliged to link together the Rus and the ancient Jews, perhaps at the threat of his own life. The second author - let's call him an "ideologist" - told about the resettlement of the Slavs. A Kyiv monk who lived in the 11th-12th centuries could not help but know about the Baltic ancestral home of the Rus: there, to Arkona on the island of Ruyan, even before the 13th century, pilgrims from all over the Slavic world, including Kyiv, set off. But it was precisely this fact that he had to pass over in silence, and at the same time depict the East Slavic peoples who remained faithful to their original religion (for example, the Drevlyans or Vyatichi) as bloodthirsty and wild monsters. On the other hand, the Polans, who are rather indifferent to questions of faith, but who were baptized in the Dnieper, look like an ideal people.

Excavations have shown that these peoples did not live like cattle: they developed many crafts, the objects of which the Slavs traded both with Western Europe and with the countries of the East.

Further more. If you believe the chronicle, then the Russian princes are the Varangians from across the sea. They were first called by the Novgorod Slovenes, and then they themselves moved south and captured Kyiv. And now they, the Varangians, having subjugated the Slavs, suddenly begin to be called Rus. Moreover, the Slavs and Russia are one and the same. It is simply impossible to understand, but it was necessary to believe. Obscure places in the annals are simply used with passion by nationalist societies of pseudo-historians for unseemly purposes.

For example, in modern Ukrainian historical books it is said how the Scandinavian king Helga (this is the Prophetic Oleg, if you didn’t understand) tricked out of the city and executed two Ukrainian rulers Askold and Dir. It is clear that Askold and Dir are the most common Ukrainian names, and under the name Helgu hides the “damned Muscovite”, who already in the early Middle Ages oppressed the freedom-loving Ukrainian people. Alas, a generation is growing up that is firmly convinced that Kievan Rus is Ukraine, all the princes who ruled in Kyiv are Ukrainians. But there were no Russians and there are none, at least in the medieval history of Ukraine. Alas, the Christian propaganda of the chronicle gave rise to nationalistic Ukrainian propaganda, and the fact that the ends do not meet, well, this never bothered the ignoramuses.

Christian authors condemn the ancient custom of cremation. They also report that our ancestors, before the veneration of the gods - Perun, Veles and others - allegedly worshiped "ghouls and coastlines." Of course, this is a caricature and should not be taken literally. Why would so many blood-sucking vampires have bred in Russia that in search of salvation it was necessary to run for help to some coastlines, which either gave a talisman against ghouls, or dispersed these reptiles with aspen stakes. At the same time, the basis of Russian pre-Christian culture is hidden in these words. The gods, whatever they may be, are the official cult, the faith of the upper classes. And the actual folk faith, which was before the veneration of Perun and Veles, has survived to this day.

Let's explain what we are talking about. Of course, vampires and amulets from them have nothing to do with it. We are talking about the mortgaged, walking dead and drowned virgins, that is, about those who died an unrighteous, wrong death. These are suicides, sorcerers or infants who died before naming (later - who died unbaptized). Sometimes mothers who die during childbirth. Righteous ancestors, whose corpses were burned after death, went to heaven and forever left the world of the living. And the unrighteous - who did not live out their lives or, on the contrary, healed for an excessively long time, could not find peace. These are sorcerers and witches - they seemed to take away the time of their lives from people - and in this sense they can be called ghouls; they died extremely painfully, and even then only if they transferred their skill to someone.

Therefore, at the heart of all the “spirits of nature” are the souls of the ancestors who have not found peace. Brownie is the first deceased in the house (in ancient times he was buried in the underground). Mermaids are drowned women, victims of unhappy love. This name itself is later, South Slavic in origin. The Russian designation for the virgins that people met on the shore is beregini.

Leshy were different, but often they were people who got lost and ran wild in the forest. Not to mention the dead, who, for one reason or another, after death continued to come to their house, frightening the living.

All these unrighteous ancestors were certainly buried outside the cemetery - often on the side of the road, on the slope of a ravine. Moreover, this tenacious custom was known to many peoples, both Asian and European. The oldest and most vital part of our mythology is about our ancestors surrounding us invisibly, but always and everywhere. Well, the ancestors are different, both during life and after it: some are good, others are evil.

Among the written monuments of Ancient Russia, one of the most honorable places rightfully belongs to the annals. Ancient Russian chronicles are a completely unique phenomenon of ancient Russian culture; they have made a unique and invaluable contribution to the treasury of world culture and writing. According to many scholars (A. Shakhmatov, D. Likhachev, A. Kuzmin, P. Tolochko), Russian chronicles were strikingly different from Byzantine chronicles and Western European annals. In the Byzantine chronicles, the narration was always carried out not by year, but by the time of the reign of patriarchs, emperors and empresses, and in Russian chronicles already from the beginning of the 11th century. there was a "weather grid" of the most important historical events in Russian and even world history that occurred in one or another "summer". In the annals of Western Europe there was also a "weather grid" of the most important historical events, but information about them was scarce and inexpressive. On the contrary, Russian annalistic collections often presented detailed narratives about various events and characters of ancient Russian and world history, which contained a very personal, expressive and extremely emotional assessment of many historical events and characters. The chronicles themselves were filled with numerous texts of official documents and treaties, obituaries of prominent state and church figures, philosophical treatises and religious teachings, folk traditions and legends.

The question of the time of the appearance of the first chronicles is still debatable. This is due, first of all, to the fact that the oldest lists of The Tale of Bygone Years have come down to us as part of later chronicle collections created in the 14th-15th centuries. For a long time, the hypothesis of academician A.A. Shakhmatov, the author of the fundamental monograph “Research on the most ancient Russian annalistic collections” (1908), that the first Russian annalistic collection was created in 1037–1039 in connection with the creation of a separate metropolis in Kyiv and the arrival in the capital of Russia of the first Russian metropolitan, the Greek Theopemt. On the basis of this "Ancient Kyiv Code" at the Novgorod St. Sophia Cathedral in 1050, the "Ancient Novgorod Code" was created. Then, in 1073, the rector of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nikon created the "First Kiev-Pechersk arch", and in 1095, on the basis of the "Ancient Novgorod arch" and the "First Kiev-Pechersk arch", the "Second Kiev-Pechersk arch" was created. ”, which A.A. Shakhmatov called the "Initial Chronicle", which became the direct basis for the creation of the famous "Tale of Bygone Years" (PVL), which was preserved in three different editions of 1113, 1116 and 1118.

Almost immediately, the scheme of Academician A.A. Shakhmatova, who deduced the entire PVL from a single chronicle tree, aroused sharp objections from a number of prominent scientists, in particular Academician V.M. Istrin, the author of the well-known work “Remarks on the Beginning of Russian Chronicle Writing” (1922), and Academician N.K. Nikolsky, who created a generalizing fundamental work "The Tale of Bygone Years as a Source on the History of Russian Culture and Literature" (1930). In the second half of the 20th century, many well-known scientists proposed various hypotheses for the beginning of Russian chronicle writing. But at the same time, all Soviet philologists and historians, with the exception of Professor A.G. Kuzmin, did not reject A.A. Shakhmatov "about a single tree", but only offered different dating of the most ancient chronicle and the place of its writing.

Academician L.V. Cherepnin dated the emergence of the Russian chronicle in 996 and directly connected it with the construction and consecration of the Church of the Tithes in Kyiv. Academician M.N. Tikhomirov dated the appearance of the first chronicle to 1007, when the solemn transfer of the relics of Princess Olga to the Church of the Tithes took place. At the same time, M.N. Tikhomirov believed that the historical basis of the first chronicle was the "Tale of the Russian Princes", created in Kyiv shortly after the official Baptism of Russia in the 990s. Academician D.S. Likhachev claimed that the first annalistic code arose in the 1030s-1040s. on the basis of a collection of various “Lives” about the baptism of Princess Olga and Prince Vladimir, about the death of two Varangian Christians and a number of other sources, which he combined under the general title “Tales of the initial spread of Christianity in Russia”. It was this "Tale", created by Bishop Hilarion, that later became the basis of the first Russian annalistic code, created in 1073 by the rector of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nikon. Academician B.A. Rybakov and his Ukrainian colleagues, Academician P.P. Tolochko and Professor M.Yu. Braichevsky believed that the first weather records of the most important historical events arose during the time of Prince Askold, shortly after the baptism of the Dnieper Rus by Patriarch Photius of Constantinople in 867. It was these records (“Askold's Chronicle”) that formed the basis of the “First Kyiv Chronicle Code”, which was created by Anastas Korsunian in 996-997. at the Church of the Tithes in Kyiv.

A little later, this point of view was partially supported by Professor A.G. Kuzmin, but at the same time he emphasized a number of important circumstances.

1) All ancient Russian chronicles were a generalized set of different-character and different-time, often contradictory, older chronicle and non-chronicle materials.

2) Almost all ancient chroniclers did not recognize the "copyright" of their predecessors, so they often edited the previous text, not paying much attention to the inevitable contradictions.

3) Most likely, the first chronicles, created in the 10th century, did not have absolute dates and the years were counted according to the years of the reign of one or another prince. Absolute dates appeared only in the 11th century, and different cosmic eras (Antiochian, Constantinople, Old Byzinthian) were introduced into various chronicle sources, which, obviously, was associated with different origins of Russian Christianity itself.

4) The centers of ancient Russian chronicle writing were not only such large cities as Kyiv, Novgorod, Chernigov, Smolensk and Rostov, but also various monasteries and temples, in particular, the Kiev-Pechersky, Vydubitsky and Yuryevsky monasteries, the Church of the Tithes in Kyiv, etc. ., where different chronicle traditions originally existed. Therefore, The Tale of Bygone Years did not stem from a "single chronicle tree", but was a multi-syllabic chronicle code.

A new all-Russian annalistic code arose approximately in the 1060s-1070s. According to many scholars (A. Shakhmatov, M. Priselkov, D. Likhachev, B. Rybakov, J. Lurie), the rector of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, Nikon the Great, began work on this chronicle in 1061. In the process of this work, he collected a large number of new historical sources, including the legends “On the First Russian Princes”, “On the Baptism of Princess Olga”, “On the Campaigns” of Princes Oleg, Igor and Svyatoslav to Constantinople and a number of other materials. Moreover, according to many authors, it was then that the “Korsun legend” about the baptism of Prince Vladimir and the “Varangian legend”, the author of which was the Novgorod governor Vyshata, who took part in the last campaign of Russian squads against Byzantium in 1043, got into the new chronicle. In total, work on this chronicle was completed in 1070/1072, during the congress of the "Yaroslavichs" - Izyaslav, Svyatoslav and Vsevolod in Vyshgorod. Although, I must say, some historians did not quite share this point of view. Some of them (A. Kuzmin, A. Tolochko) believed that the well-known student of Theodosius of the Caves, Sylvester, was the author of this chronicle code, while others (M. Priselkov, N. Rozov, P. Tolochko) claimed that several authors of this code were at once Caves monks-chroniclers, including Nikon the Great, Nestor and John.

During the reign of the Kyiv prince Svyatopolk in 1093-1095. a new chronicle code was created, which became the direct basis of the Tale of Bygone Years itself. According to many scholars (A. Shakhmatov, M. Priselkov, D. Likhachev, P. Tolochko), the first edition of this "Tale" was created in 1113 by the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor, who, in addition to the previous chronicles of 1050 and 1070/1072 used the "Chronicle" of George Amartol, the "Chronicle" of John Malala, "The Life of Basil the New" and other chronicle and non-chronicle sources. Back in the 1970s. a number of Soviet historians (A. Kuzmin) stated that Nikon not only had nothing to do with the creation of the PVL, but was not even familiar with this chronicle, and the real author of the first edition of the PVL was the future rector of the Vydubitsky Mikhailovsky Monastery Sylvester, who continued the chronicle traditions Church of the Tithes, not the Kiev Caves Monastery.

According to the same scientists (A. Shakhmatov, M. Priselkov, A. Orlov, D. Likhachev), the second edition of the PVL was created in 1116 by Abbot Sylvester, who was close to the new Kyiv prince Vladimir Monomakh. Probably, it was at the request of this prince that he revised the first edition of the PVL, especially in that part of it that covered the events of the 1090-1110s, and included the famous “Instruction of Vladimir Monomakh” in it. A number of Soviet historians (M. Aleshkovsky, P. Tolochko) believed that Sylvester did not create the second edition of the PVL, but was only a copyist of its first edition. In 1118, at a similar “request” of the Novgorod prince Mstislav the Great, the third and last edition of the PVL was created, the author of which was either some nameless monk of the Novgorod Yuriev or Antoniev monasteries (A. Orlov, B. Rybakov, P. Tolochko), or schismatic of the Kyiv Andreevsky Monastery Vasily (D. Likhachev, M. Aleshkovsky).

5. Old Russian literature

A) General remarks

According to many historians of the literary heritage of Ancient Russia (N. Gudziy, D. Likhachev, I. Eremin, V. Kuskov, A. Robinson), the emergence and development of Russian literature was due to the fact that in the process of formation and development of the Old Russian state, its role and significance in the ideological cementation of ancient Russian society. Many scientists emphasized that the Russian literature of that time was characterized by the following main features.

1) It was a synthetic literature that absorbed all the diversity of literary traditions, styles and directions of various peoples and ancient states. The vast majority of scientists (A. Muravyov, V. Kuskov, V. Kozhinov) speak of the decisive influence of the Byzantine heritage in the formation and development of ancient Russian literature. Their opponents (D. Likhachev, R. Skrynnikov) argue that neighboring Bulgaria played a much greater role in the development of Russian literature, and its Old Bulgarian language became the literary language of Ancient Russia.

2) In the era of Kievan Rus, national literature was in the process of genre formation. If some authors (V. Kuskov, N. Prokofiev) argued that Ancient Russia completely adopted the Byzantine genre system, then their opponents (I. Eremin, D. Likhachev) believed that only those literary genres that were directly associated with all religious dogma and the official Church, and with those ideological genres that reflected a new (Christian, not pagan) perception of the world around. Therefore, only those works of early Christian and early Byzantine literature were brought to Russia that corresponded to the level of its historical development in that period.

3) Speaking about the rich genre specifics of ancient Russian literature, a number of important remarks need to be made.

Firstly, in the early Middle Ages, literature was largely purely applied, utilitarian in nature, so many literary genres of that time - chronicles, walks, apocrypha and other works were primarily cognitive.

Secondly, ancient Russian literature was characterized by syncretism, i.e. interweaving of various both purely literary and folklore genres, in particular epics, incantations, spells, proverbs, sayings, etc. Speaking essentially, the historians of ancient Russian literature, as a rule, separate church and secular literary genres. Church genres included "Holy Scriptures", "Hymnography", "Words" and "Lives of the Saints" (hagiography), and secular - "Princely Lives", historical, military and didactic stories, chronicle tales and legends, etc. Many scientists (D. Likhachev, I. Eremin, V. Kuskov) note the fact that as literary creativity develops, traditional church genres are gradually transformed, and secular literary genres undergo significant fiction, as a result of which the authors of works began to pay much more attention to psychological portraits of their literary characters, motivations for their actions, etc. The literature of Kievan Rus did not yet know either fictional heroes or fictional historical events, and the heroes of its works were real historical figures and real events of the past and present.

Thirdly, many works of ancient Russian literature, including The Tale of Bygone Years itself, The Tale of the Blinding of Vasilko Terebovskiy, The Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh, The Prayer of Daniil the Sharpener, Praise to Roman Galitsky, and many other secular writings were outside the specific genre framework.

When studying the history of Russian literature of the era of Ancient Russia, scientists still argue on a number of key issues:

1) What was the specificity of the artistic method of ancient Russian literature. Some scientists (I. Eremin, V. Kuskov, S. Azbelev, A. Robinson) argue that one artistic method was inherent in Russian literature of that time. Professor S.N. Azbelev defined it as syncretic, Academician I.P. Eremin - as pre-realistic, and Professor A.B. Robinson - as a method of symbolic historicism. Other scientists (A. Orlov, D. Likhachev) put forward the thesis about the diversity of artistic methods within the framework of all ancient Russian literature. Moreover, these authors argued that this diversity was noticeable in the work of the authors themselves, and in many works of various literary genres.

2) What was the style of ancient Russian literature. There are many different points of view on this. For example, Academician P.N. Sakulin said that in ancient Russia there were two styles: realistic, or secular, and irrealistic, or ecclesiastical. Most scientists (V. Istrin, D. Likhachev, S. Azbelev, V. Kuskov) believed that the leading styles of ancient Russian literature were the style of monumental historicism and folk epic style. That is why many works of Russian literature of that time are characterized by numerous historical excursions into the past of different peoples and states, the discussion of complex philosophical, religious and moral problems, etc. It should be noted that, having adopted the theory of linear time and the biblical concept of the creation of the world from Byzantine chronography, many authors of that time paid great attention to practical, behavioral philosophy and moral education of the brightest and loftiest feelings in their contemporaries and descendants.

3) What time should the birth of Old Russian literature be dated. Most scientists, as a rule, date the formation of Russian national literature to the first half of the 11th century, i.e. the time of the appearance of the first original works of Russian authors. Academician D.S. Likhachev argued that ancient Russian literature arises with the appearance of the first literary works, regardless of whether they were original or translated. Therefore, he dated the formation of Russian literature to the end of the 10th century.

Chronicles are the focus of the history of Ancient Russia, its ideology, understanding of its place in world history - they are one of the most important monuments of both writing, and literature, and history, and culture in general. Only the most literate, knowledgeable, wise people undertook to compile chronicles, i.e., weather reports of events, able not only to state different things year after year, but also to give them an appropriate explanation, to leave to posterity a vision of the era as it was understood by the chroniclers.

The chronicle was a matter of state, a matter of princes. Therefore, the task of compiling a chronicle was given not only to the most literate and intelligent person, but also to someone who would be able to carry out ideas close to one or another princely branch, one or another princely house. Thus, the objectivity and honesty of the chronicler came into conflict with what we call "social order". If the chronicler did not satisfy the tastes of his customer, they parted with him and transferred the compilation of the chronicle to another, more reliable, more obedient author. Alas, work for the needs of the authorities was born already at the dawn of writing, and not only in Russia, but also in other countries.

Chronicle writing, according to the observations of domestic scientists, appeared in Russia shortly after the introduction of Christianity. The first chronicle may have been compiled at the end of the 10th century. It was intended to reflect the history of Russia since the emergence of a new dynasty there, the Rurikovich, and until the reign of Vladimir with his impressive victories, with the introduction of Christianity in Russia. Since that time, the right and duty to keep chronicles were given to the leaders of the Church. It was in churches and monasteries that the most literate, well-prepared and trained people were found - priests, monks. They had a rich book heritage, translated literature, Russian records of old tales, legends, epics, legends; they also had the grand ducal archives at their disposal. It was most convenient for them to carry out this responsible and important work: to create a written historical monument of the era in which they lived and worked, linking it with past times, with deep historical sources.

Scientists believe that before the chronicles appeared - large-scale historical works covering several centuries of Russian history, there were separate records, including church, oral stories, which at first served as the basis for the first generalizing works. These were stories about Kiev and the founding of Kyiv, about the campaigns of Russian troops against Byzantium, about the journey of Princess Olga to Constantinople, about the wars of Svyatoslav, the legend of the murder of Boris and Gleb, as well as epics, lives of saints, sermons, traditions, songs, all kinds of legends .

Later, already at the time of the existence of chronicles, they were joined by more and more new stories, legends about impressive events in Russia, such as the famous feud in 1097 and the blinding of the young prince Vasilko, or about the campaign of Russian princes against the Polovtsy in 1111. The chronicle also included memoirs Vladimir Monomakh about life - his Teaching to Children.

The second chronicle was created under Yaroslav the Wise at the time when he united Russia, laid the temple of Hagia Sophia. This chronicle absorbed the previous chronicle and other materials.

Already at the first stage of the creation of chronicles, it became obvious that they represent a collective work, they are a set of previous chronicle records, documents, various oral and written historical evidence. The compiler of the next chronicle acted not only as the author of the corresponding newly written parts of the annals, but also as a compiler and editor. It was his ability to direct the idea of ​​a vault in the right direction that was highly valued by the Kievan princes.

The next chronicle was created by the famous Illarion, who wrote it, apparently under the name of the monk Nikon, in the 60-70s. XI century, after the death of Yaroslav the Wise. And then a vault appeared already in the time of Svyatopolk, in the 90s. 11th century

The vault, which the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nestor took up and which entered our history under the name "The Tale of Bygone Years", thus turned out to be at least the fifth in a row and was created in the first decade of the 12th century. at the court of Prince Svyatopolk. And each collection was enriched with more and more new materials, and each author contributed his talent, his knowledge, erudition to it. The Code of Nestor was in this sense the pinnacle of early Russian chronicle writing.

In the first lines of his chronicle, Nestor posed the question "Where did the Russian land come from, who in Kyiv first began to reign and where did the Russian land come from." Thus, already in these first words of the chronicle, it is said about the large-scale goals that the author has set for himself. Indeed, the chronicle did not become an ordinary chronicle, of which there were many in the world at that time - dry, dispassionately fixing facts - but an excited story of the then historian, introducing philosophical and religious generalizations into the narrative, his image system, temperament, his own style. The origin of Russia, as we have already said, Nestor draws against the backdrop of the development of the entire world history. Russia is one of the European nations.

Using the previous codes, documentary materials, including, for example, the treaties of Russia with Byzantium, the chronicler unfolds a wide panorama of historical events that cover both the internal history of Russia - the formation of an all-Russian statehood with a center in Kyiv, and the international relations of Russia. A whole gallery of historical figures takes place on the pages of the Nestor Chronicle - princes, boyars, posadniks, thousands, merchants, church leaders. He talks about military campaigns, about the organization of monasteries, the laying of new churches and the opening of schools, about religious disputes and reforms in domestic Russian life. Constantly concerns Nestor and the life of the people as a whole, his moods, expressions of dissatisfaction with the princely policy. On the pages of the annals, we read about uprisings, the murders of princes and boyars, and cruel public fights. The author describes all this thoughtfully and calmly, trying to be objective, as much as a deeply religious person can be objective, guided in his assessments by the concepts of Christian virtue and sin. But, frankly, his religious assessments are very close to universal assessments. Murder, betrayal, deceit, perjury Nestor condemns uncompromisingly, but extols honesty, courage, fidelity, nobility, and other wonderful human qualities. The entire chronicle was imbued with a sense of the unity of Russia, a patriotic mood. All the main events in it were evaluated not only from the point of view of religious concepts, but also from the standpoint of these all-Russian state ideals. This motive sounded especially significant on the eve of the beginning of the political disintegration of Russia.

In 1116–1118 the chronicle was rewritten again. Vladimir Monomakh, then reigning in Kyiv, and his son Mstislav were dissatisfied with the way Nestor showed the role of Svyatopolk in Russian history, by order of which the Tale of Bygone Years was written in the Kiev-Pechersky Monastery. Monomakh took away the chronicle from the Cave monks and transferred it to his ancestral Vydubitsky monastery. His abbot Sylvester became the author of a new code. Positive assessments of Svyatopolk were moderated, and all the deeds of Vladimir Monomakh were emphasized, but the main body of The Tale of Bygone Years remained unchanged. And in the future, Nestor's work was an indispensable part of both the Kiev chronicle and the annals of individual Russian principalities, being one of the connecting threads for the entire Russian culture.

In the future, as the political collapse of Russia and the rise of individual Russian centers, the annals began to fragment. In addition to Kyiv and Novgorod, their own chronicles appeared in Smolensk, Pskov, Vladimir-on-Klyazma, Galich, Vladimir-Volynsky, Ryazan, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl-Russian. Each of them reflected the peculiarities of the history of their region, their own princes were brought to the fore. Thus, the Vladimir-Suzdal chronicles showed the history of the reign of Yuri Dolgoruky, Andrei Bogolyubsky, Vsevolod the Big Nest; Galician chronicle of the beginning of the XIII century. became, in essence, a biography of the famous warrior prince Daniel of Galicia; the Chernigov Chronicle narrated mainly about the Chernigov branch of the Rurikovich. And yet, in the local annals, all-Russian cultural sources were clearly visible. The history of each land was compared with the entire Russian history, "The Tale of Bygone Years" was an indispensable part of many local chronicles. Some of them continued the tradition of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th century. So, shortly before the Mongol-Tatar invasion, at the turn of the XII-XIII centuries. in Kyiv, a new annalistic code was created, which reflected the events that took place in Chernigov, Galich, Vladimir-Suzdal Rus, Ryazan and other Russian cities. It can be seen that the author of the collection had at his disposal the annals of various Russian principalities and used them. The chronicler also knew European history well. He mentioned, for example, Frederick Barbarossa's Third Crusade. In various Russian cities, including in Kyiv, in the Vydubytsky monastery, entire libraries of annals were created, which became sources for new historical works of the 12th-13th centuries.

The preservation of the all-Russian chronicle tradition was shown by the Vladimir-Suzdal chronicle of the beginning of the 13th century, covering the history of the country from the legendary Kyi to Vsevolod the Big Nest.

Long before the formation of Kievan Rus, the ancient Slavs had one of the largest state formations, which, according to scientists, existed from 1600 to 2500 thousand years and was destroyed by the Goths in 368 AD.

The chronicle of the ancient Slavic state was almost forgotten thanks to the German professors who wrote Russian history and aimed to rejuvenate the history of Russia, to show that the Slavic peoples were supposedly pristine, not tainted by the deeds of the Russians, Antes, barbarians, vandals and Scythians, whom the whole world remembered very well . The goal is to tear Russia away from the Scythian past. On the basis of the works of German professors, a national historical school arose. All history textbooks teach us that before the baptism in Russia lived wild tribes - pagans.

Russian way to paradise

Do you know that in ancient times the greatest peak of Europe and Russia - Elbrus - was called Mount Alatyr, which, like the famous Smorodina River and Kalinov Bridge, turned out to be not a fabulous, but a very real attraction of the Elbrus region? It also turned out that trusting epic landmarks, you can find ... the way to paradise.

16 centuries ago, behind the ridges of Ciscaucasia, there was a civilization that was comparable in terms of development to Greco-Roman antiquity. That country was called Ruskolan.

Its capital was the city of Kiyar, or Kyiv Antsky, founded 1300 years before the fall of Ruskolani. A prosperous country was ruined by the Goths, who were brought to these lands by King Germanaric. Although he himself was killed at the beginning of the war, his son brought the matter to a victorious end. For many years he tormented Ruskolan with raids, until the prosperous and fertile lands were completely devastated.

The ruler of Ruskolani, Prince Bus Beloyar, was crucified to a rock on the banks of the Terek, and people loyal to him were walled up alive in a crypt. It happened on the day of the spring equinox in 368. The facts testify that Bus Beloyar and his country are not a myth. In the 18th century, 20 km from Pyatigorsk, in one of the ancient mounds on the banks of the Etoka River, a necropolis and a monument erected in honor of the Slavic prince Bus were discovered. The name of Bus Beloyar is mentioned in the Tale of Igor's Campaign.

Gothic maidens at the edge

The blue seas live.

Playing with Russian gold

Time Busovo sing.

"The Tale of Igor's Campaign"

STATE OF RUSKOLAN

Ruskolan is one of the largest state formations of the Slavs in the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov, which existed 16 centuries ago, whose history is completely forgotten thanks to the German professors who wrote Russian history for Peter I.

The Ruskolan state was located beyond the ridges of the Ciscaucasia, on the territory that later became part of the Great Budgaria of Kurbat: from the Kuban and the Terek, a pasture plain, cut by wide river valleys and ravines, gradually rises to the Peredovoi ridge. The forest rises along them almost to the foot of Elbrus. In the valleys there are dozens of ancient settlements where the archaeologist's shovel did not ring. On the banks of the Etoko River, the grave of the legendary prince Ruskolani Bus Beloyar has been preserved.

This land is the source of the Slavic people who called themselves Cherkasy, known for Cherkassky lanes in Moscow, the cities of Cherkassk and Novocherkassk. According to Vatican sources, Cherkasy inhabited Pyatigorye and the Principality of Tmutarakan, and now they are known under the name "Cossacks".

The word "Ruskolan" has the syllable "lan", present in the words "hand", "valley" and meaning: space, territory, place, region. Subsequently, the syllable "lan" was transformed into land. Sergey Lesnoy in his book “Where are you from, Rus?” says the following: “With regard to the word “Ruskolun”, it should be noted that there is also a variant “Ruskolun”. If the latter option is more correct, then you can understand the word differently: “Russian doe”. Lan - field. The whole expression: "Russian field". In addition, Lesnoy makes an assumption that there was a word "cleaver", which probably meant some kind of space. It also occurs in other contexts.

The ruler of Ruskolani was Bus from the Beloyar clan. In the Gothic and Yaartian epic, he is mentioned under the name of Baksak (Bus-Busan-Baksan), in the Byzantine chronicles - God.

Ruskolan fought with the Goths of Germanarich. In this war, Germanaric was killed, and his son took his place. As a result of a long-term war, Ruskolan was defeated, and the ruler of Ruskolani, Bus Beloyar, the last elected prince of the Rus, was crucified by the Goths, as evidenced in the Gothic, Nart and Russian epic…. According to some sources, Bus, like Prometheus, was nailed to the rocks on the banks of the Terek, and his entourage were buried alive, walled up in a rocky crypt. According to other sources Bus and his closest assistants were crucified on crosses.

He crucified Bus Beloyar, according to the tablets of the Book of Veles, Amal Vend. It was Wend from the Amal clan, in whose veins Venedian and Germanic blood merged.

This happened on the vernal equinox in 368. The surviving princes tore Russia into many small principalities, and against the decisions of the veche, they established the transfer of power by inheritance. Avars and Khazars passed through the lands of Ruskolani. But the territory of Ruskolani, Tamatarkha, Tmutarakan, Taman were still considered Slavic principalities.

In the fight against the Khazar yoke (V-VIII centuries), Russia, which almost never had a permanent army, had only one way to win: to unite, but each of the crown princes sought to do this under his command. Until there was one prince elected from the Veneds (Vends, Vends, Vins, Veins), who himself proclaimed himself to be Arius and Troyan, for which he received the name from the people: Prince Samo. He not only united the Slavs, but under his skillful management (which lasted 30 years), Russia defeated almost all of its enemies and regained the lands lost due to civil strife. However, after his death, Ruskolan fell apart again. The next attempt to unite the Slavs and restore the veche rule and selectiveness of the princes was made by Novgorod's chosen ones: princes Bravlins I and II. However, the people united and talentedly ruled by them, after their departure, again divided into clans, and again fell into a state of tug-of-war of power.

Ruler Ruskolani Bus Beloyar

Bus Beloyar - Grand Duke of Vedic Russia, heir to the throne of Ruskolani - Antia. Born April 20, 295 AD According to the Vedic calculus of time - 21 Beloyars 2084 of the Trojan Ages.

Caucasian legends say that Bus was the eldest son. In addition, his father had seven sons and one daughter.

According to various signs that were at the birth of Bus, the Magi predicted that he would complete the Svarog Circle.

Bus was born, just like Kolyada and Kryshen. At his birth, a new star also appeared - a comet. This is mentioned in the ancient Slavic manuscript of the 4th century "Boyanov Hymn", which tells about the star Chigir - eel (Halley's comet), according to which, at the birth of the prince, astrologers predicted his great future:

About Busa - the father of the young sorcerer,

about how he fought, hitting enemies,

sang the sorcerer Zlatogor.

Zlatogorov hymns -

you are really good!

He sang like Chegir-star

flew in the fire like a dragon,

shining with green light.

And forty magicians-sorcerers,

looking into stozhary, they saw the light,

that the sword of Yar Bus is glorious to Kyiv!

The Beloyar family originated from the combination of the Beloyar family, who lived near the White Mountain since ancient times, and the Aria Osednya family (Yar family) at the very beginning of the Beloyar era.

The power of the Ancestors of Bus Beloyar spread from Altai, Zagros, to the Caucasus. Bus was the throne name of the Saka and Slavic princes.

Bus was born, his brothers and sister in the sacred city of Kiyar - Kyiv Antsky (Sar - city) near Elbrus, founded 1300 years before the fall of Ruskolani. Busa and the brothers were taught the wisdom of the Antes by the sacred books that were kept in ancient temples. According to legend, these temples were built many thousands of years ago by the wizard Kitovras (he was also known to the Celts under the name Merlin) and Gamayun at the behest of the Sun God. Bus and the brothers were initiated. Initially, they walked the path of Knowledge, were novices-disciples. Having passed this path, they became veduns - that is, knowing, those who perfectly know the Vedas. Bus and Zlatogor, named after the Golden Mountain of Alatyr, rose to the highest degree, to the degree of Pobud (Buday), that is, the awakened and awakening, spiritual teacher and herald of the will of the Gods.

The great cultural act of the prince-sorcerer was the reform and ordering of the calendar. Bus improved the already existing calendar, based on the "Star Book of Kolyada" (Kolyada is a gift, a calendar). According to the Busa calendar, we live now, because many Christian holidays (to put it mildly) are borrowed from the past and used to have a Vedic meaning. Having given a new meaning to the ancient holiday, Christians did not change the original dates.

And these initial dates had astrological content. They were tied to the dates of passage of the brightest stars through the initial star meridian (the direction to the north). From the time of Bus and to this day, the dates of the festivities in the folk calendar coincide with the star dates of 368 AD. Bus's calendar merged with the Orthodox folk calendar, which for centuries determined the way of life of a Russian person.

Prince Bus not only defended Ruskolan, he also continued the ancient tradition of peaceful trade relations with neighboring peoples and great civilizations of that time.

Bus left a great legacy to the Russian people. These are the Russian lands that they managed to defend then, this is Bus's calendar, these are the songs of Bus's son - Boyan and his brother - Zlatogor, which have come down to us with folk songs, epics. Out of this tradition, the Tale of Igor's Campaign grew.

Bus laid the foundation for the Russian national spirit. He left us a legacy of Russia - earthly and heavenly.

The death of Bus Beloyar

The year 368, the year of the crucifixion of Prince Bus, has an astrological meaning. This is a frontier. The end of the Beloyar (Aries) era and the beginning of the Genus (Pisces) era. The Great Day of Svarog, which is also called the Year of Svarog, has ended.

And now, wave after wave of foreigners are coming to Russia - Goths, Huns, Heruli, Iazyges, Hellenes, Romans. The old one stopped and the New Kolo Svarog began to rotate.

The Night of Svarog (Winter of Svarog) has come. Invocation Vyshnya - Rooftop, or Dazhbog, must be crucified. And power at the beginning of the era passes to the Black God (Chernobog).

In the era of Pisces or in the era of the Sort (according to the songs - turning into a Fish), the collapse of the old world and the birth of a new one take place.

In the Age of Aquarius, which is waiting for us ahead, the Roof pours onto the Earth from a bowl filled with honey Surya, Vedic Knowledge. People are returning to their roots, to the Faith of the Ancestors.

According to the Caucasian legend, the Antes were defeated because Bus Beloyar did not take part in the common prayer. But he did not do this, because he understood the inevitability of defeat, the night of Svarog had come.

On the same night that Bus was crucified, there was a total eclipse. The Earth was also shaken by a monstrous earthquake (the entire coast of the Black Sea was shaking, destruction was in Constantinople and Nicaea).

In the same year, the court poet and educator of the emperor's son Decylus Magnus Ausonius wrote the following verses:

Between the Scythian rocks

There was a dry cross for the birds,

From which from the body of Prometheus

Bloody dew oozed.

This is a trace of the fact that in those years the crucifixion of Bus was also spoken in Rome.

In the minds of the people of that time, the images of Prometheus, Bus and Christ merged into one.

The pagans in Rome saw the crucified Prometheus in Buses, the early Christians saw in him a new incarnation of Christ the Savior, who, like Jesus, was resurrected on Sunday. The date of Bus's resurrection is March 23, 368.

The Slavs, who remained faithful to the ancient Tradition of the Ancestors, saw in Bus the third descent of the Almighty to Earth:

Ovsen-Tausen paved the bridge,

not a simple bridge with a railing -

star bridge between Yavu and Navu.

Three towers will ride

among the stars on the bridge.

The first is the roof-god,

and the second - Kolyada,

The third will be - Bus Beloyar.

"The Book of Kolyada", X d

Apparently, the symbol of the cross itself entered the Christian tradition after the crucifixion of Bus. The canon of the Gospels was established after the 4th century and was based incl. and on oral traditions that then went around Christian communities, incl. and Scythian. In those traditions, the images of Christ and Bus Beloyar were already mixed.

So, nowhere in the canonical Gospels is it said that Christ was crucified on the cross. Instead of the word “cross” (kryst), the word “stavros” (stavros) is used there, which means a pillar, and it does not speak of crucifixion, but of pillaring (besides, in the “Acts of the Apostles” 10:39 it is said that Christ “was hanged on the tree"). The words "cross" and "crucifixion" appear only in translations from Greek. Probably the distortion of the original texts during translation, and then the iconography (for there are no early Christian crucifixes) was influenced precisely by the Slavic-Scythian tradition. The meaning of the original Greek text was well known in Greece itself (Byzantium), but after the corresponding reforms in the modern Greek language, in contrast to the former custom, the word "stavros" took on the meaning of "pillar" and also the meaning of "cross".

They removed the bodies of Bus and other princes from the crosses on Friday. Then they were taken to their homeland. According to the Caucasian legend, eight pairs of oxen brought the body of Bus and other princes to their homeland. Bus's wife ordered a mound to be built over their grave on the banks of the Etoko River, a tributary of the Podkumka (30 kilometers from Pyatigorsk) and erected a monument made by Greek craftsmen on the mound. The fact that there was once a large city in the Pyatigorsk region is evidenced by two thousand mounds and the remains of temples at the foot of Mount Beshtau. The monument was discovered in the 18th century and in the 19th century on the barrow one could see a statue of Bus with ancient words written on it:

Oh oh hi! Wake up! Sar!

Believe! Sar Yar Bus - Gods Bus!

Bus - Wake up God's Russia! -

God Bus! Yar Bus!

5875, 31 lutes.

Now the statue is in the storerooms of the Historical Museum in Moscow, and now no one says that it belongs to Bus (although many scientists spoke about this in the last century). No one dares to translate the runic inscription...

The wife of Bus, in order to perpetuate the memory of Bus, ordered to rename the Altud River to Baksan (Bus River).

The transfiguration of Bus was forty days later on Faf-mountain, or the White Mountain of Alatyr. And so Bus Beloyar, like Kryshen and Kolyada, ascended on the fortieth day to the White Mountain (Elbrus) and became the Pobud of God's Russia, sat down at the throne of the Most High.

Scientific research. Fairy tale.

In addition to the mention of Kiyar the Ancient, the capital of the Ruskolan state, the studies of historians speak of the Temple of the Treasury of the Sun, located in the Elbrus region, on top of Mount Tuzuluk, on the territory of the state. The foundation of an ancient structure was discovered on the mountain. Its height is about 40 m, and the diameter of the base is 150 m: the ratio is the same as that of the Egyptian pyramids and other religious buildings of antiquity.

There are many obvious and not at all random patterns in the parameters of the mountain and the temple. In general, the observatory-temple was created according to a "standard" project and, like other cyclopean structures - Stonehenge and Arkaim - was intended to determine the most important dates in world history. In such observatories, the Magi determined the end and the beginning of the zodiac epochs. In the legends of many peoples there is evidence of the construction on the sacred mountain Alatyr (modern name - Elbrus) of this majestic structure, revered by all ancient peoples. There are mentions of him in the national epic of the Greeks, Arabs, and European peoples. For example, according to Zoroastrian and Old Russian legends, this temple was captured by Rus (Rustam) in the second millennium BC. e. Mentions the temple of the Sun and the geographer Strabo, placing in it the sanctuary of the golden fleece and the oracle of Eeta. There were detailed descriptions of this temple and confirmation that astronomical observations were carried out there. The Temple of the Sun was a true paleoastronomical observatory of antiquity. Priests who possessed Vedic knowledge created such observatory temples and studied stellar science. There, not only dates for agriculture were calculated, but, most importantly, the most important milestones in world and spiritual history were determined.

This information interested modern researchers, who in the summer of 2002 organized a scientific expedition "Caucasian Arkaim-2002". The expedition members decided to expand the data on the Temple of the Sun obtained by the 2001 scientific expedition. Based on the data obtained as a result of topographic, geodetic studies of the area, fixing astronomical events, the participants of the expedition made preliminary conclusions that are fully consistent with the results of the expedition of 2001, following the results of which in March 2002. a report was made at a meeting of the Astronomical Society at the State Astronomical Institute in the presence of employees of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the State Historical Museum, and a positive conclusion was received.

But the most amazing discoveries lurked on the ancient mountain roads along which heroes, bogatyrs and sledges (a fearless people of mighty warriors called to cleanse this world of everything that hinders people) went to the sacred country of Iriy - the Slavic paradise. According to ancient legends, in order to get to Iriy, it was necessary to cross the Valley of Death, go along the Kalinov Bridge and defeat the "dragons of Navi", guarding the path from the kingdom of the dead to fertile lands. The legendary valley of death lurks behind the Chatkara pass, whose name translates as black. Even the sand is black here! And the plateau itself resembles a gloomy refuge of trolls: a lifeless desert is crossed by a frozen lava flow, in which the Kyzylsu River, Red, or Fiery, has broken its channel. But she has another name, derived from the word "smaga" (fire): Currant is the river of death that separates Yav and Nav, the world of the living - and the world of the dead. Fairy tales say that you can cross the Smorodina only along the Kalinov Bridge, on which the battles of the heroes with the fire-breathing guardians of the kingdom of the dead took place. Imagine - such a passage really exists! Where Kyzylsu breaks through the frozen lava flow and plunges into the gloomy gorge with the Sultan waterfall, a water-washed lava plug has formed, hanging like a narrow ribbon over the very abyss!

And next to the Kalinov Bridge stands a giant stone head. This is the son of the god of the underworld and the guardian of the Kalinov Bridge. Behind the ominous rocks and dead lands, surrounded on all sides by impregnable mountains and bottomless cliffs, lies the vast tract of Irahityuz, sparkling with greenery, strewn with flowers, and the Irahitsyrt plateau, which means "The Highest Pasture", or "Field of the Most High". Or heavenly lands. The chain of amazing coincidences does not end there! Because walking along the path of fairy-tale heroes can drink water from the Adyrsu and Adylsu rivers, which means living and dead in translation ...

Is it worth trusting textbooks, which even in our memory have been copied more than once? And is it worth trusting textbooks that contradict many facts that indicate that before baptism, in Russia there was a huge state with many cities and villages (Country of cities), a developed economy and crafts, with its own original Culture.

Mikhailo Vasilyevich Lomonosov fought against the German professorship alone, arguing that the history of the Slavs is rooted in antiquity.

The ancient Slavic state RUSKOLAN occupied the lands from the Danube and the Carpathians to the Crimea, the North Caucasus and the Volga, and the subject lands seized the steppes of the Volga and South Urals.

The Scandinavian name of Russia sounds like Gardarika - the country of cities. Arab historians also write about the same, numbering hundreds of Russian cities. At the same time, he claims that there are only five cities in Byzantium, while the rest are “fortified fortresses”. In ancient documents, the state of the Slavs is also referred to as Scythia and Ruskolan. In his works, Academician B.A. Rybakov, the author of the books "Paganism of the Ancient Slavs" 1981, "Paganism of Ancient Russia" 1987, and many others, writes that the state of Ruskolan was the bearer of the Chernyakhov archaeological culture and experienced a heyday in the Troyan centuries (I-IV centuries AD). ). To show what level of scientists were engaged in the study of ancient Slavic history, we will cite who Academician B.A. Rybakov.

Boris Aleksandrovich Rybakov headed the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences for 40 years; M. V. Lomonosov, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Honorary Doctor of Krakow Jagiellonian University.

The word "Ruskolan" has the syllable "lan", present in the words "hand", "valley" and meaning: space, territory, place, region. Subsequently, the syllable "lan" was transformed into the European land - country. Sergey Lesnoy in his book “Where are you from, Rus?” says the following: “With regard to the word “Ruskolun”, it should be noted that there is also a variant “Ruskolun”. If the latter option is more correct, then you can understand the word differently: “Russian doe”. Lan - field. The whole expression: "Russian field". In addition, Lesnoy makes an assumption that there was a word "cleaver", which probably meant some kind of space. It also occurs in other contexts. Also, historians and linguists believe that the name of the state "Ruskolan" could come from two words "Rus" and "Alan" after the name of the Rus and Alans, who lived in a single state.

Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov was of the same opinion, who wrote:

“The Alans and Roxolans are of the same tribe from many places of ancient historians and geographers, and the difference lies in the fact that the Alans are the common name of the whole people, and the Roksolani is a saying composed from their place of residence, which is not without reason produced from the river Ra, as among ancient writers reputed to be the Volga (Volga)."

The ancient historian and scientist Pliny - Alans and Roxolans together has. The Roksolanes of the ancient scientist and geographer Ptolemy are called alanorsi by portable addition. Strabo's names Aorsi and Roksane or Rossane - "the exact unity of the Ross and Alans is confirmed, to which the reliability is multiplied, that they were wallpaper of the Slavic generation, then that the Sarmatians were of the same tribe from ancient writers and therefore with the Varangians-Rosses of the same root."

We also note that Lomonosov also refers the Varangians to the Russians, which once again shows the fraud of the German professors, who deliberately called the Varangians a foreign, and not a Slavic people. This juggling and the born legend about calling a foreign tribe to reign in Russia had political overtones so that once again the “enlightened” West could point out to the “wild” Slavs their denseness, and that it was thanks to the Europeans that the Slavic state was created. Modern historians, in addition to adherents of the Norman theory, also agree that the Varangians are precisely a Slavic tribe.

Lomonosov writes:

"According to Gelmold's testimony, the Alans were mixed with the Kurlandians, who were of the same tribe as the Varangians-Russians."

Lomonosov writes - the Varangians-Russians, and not the Varangians-Scandinavians, or the Varangians-Goths. In all documents of the pre-Christian period, the Varangians were classified as Slavs.

“The Rugen Slavs were abbreviated as wounds, that is, from the Ra (Volga) River, and Rossans. This, by their resettlement to the Varangian shores, as follows, will be more detailed. Weissel from Bohemia suggests that Amakosovia, Alans, Vendi came from the east to Prussia.

Lomonosov writes about Rugen Slavs. It is known that on the island of Rügen there was the capital of the Rug Arkona and the largest Slavic pagan temple in Europe, destroyed in 1168. Now there is a Slavic museum.

Lomonosov writes that it was from the east that the Slavic tribes came to Prussia and the island of Rügen and adds:

“Such a resettlement of the Volga Alans, that is, the Russians or Ross, to the Baltic Sea took place, as can be seen from the above authors’ testimonies, not once and not in a short time, which, according to the traces that have remained to this day, it is clear that the names of cities and rivers are honored must"

But back to the Slavic state.

The capital of Ruskolani, the city of Kiyar, was located in the Caucasus, in the Elbrus region near the modern villages of Upper Chegem and Bezengi. Sometimes it was also called Kiyar Antsky, after the name of the Slavic tribe Antes. The results of the expeditions to the site of the ancient Slavic city will be written at the end. Descriptions of this Slavic city can be found in ancient documents.

"Avesta" in one of the places tells about the main city of the Scythians in the Caucasus near one of the highest mountains in the world. And As you know, Elbrus is the highest mountain not only in the Caucasus, but also in Europe in general. "Rig Veda" tells about the main city of the Rus all on the same Elbrus.

Kiyar is mentioned in the Book of Veles. Judging by the text, Kiyar, or the city of Kiy the Old, was founded 1300 years before the fall of Ruskolani (368 AD), i.e. in the ninth century BC.

The ancient Greek geographer Strabo, who lived in the 1st century. BC. - beginning of the 1st c. AD writes about the temple of the Sun and the sanctuary of the Golden Fleece in the sacred city of the Ross, in the Elbrus region, on the top of Mount Tuzuluk.

In the legends of many peoples there is evidence of the construction on the sacred mountain Alatyr (modern name - Elbrus) of this majestic structure, revered by all ancient peoples. There are mentions of him in the national epic of the Greeks, Arabs, and European peoples. According to Zoroastrian legends, this temple was captured by Rus (Rustam) in Usen (Kavi Useinas) in the second millennium BC. Archaeologists officially note at this time the emergence of the Koban culture in the Caucasus and the appearance of the Scythian-Sarmatian tribes.

Mentions the temple of the Sun and the geographer Strabo, placing in it the sanctuary of the golden fleece and the oracle of Eeta. There are detailed descriptions of this temple and evidence that astronomical observations were made there.

The Temple of the Sun was a true paleoastronomical observatory of antiquity. The priests, who possessed certain knowledge, created such observatory temples and studied stellar science. There, not only dates for agriculture were calculated, but, most importantly, the most important milestones in world and spiritual history were determined.

The Arab historian Al Masudi described the temple of the Sun on Elbrus as follows: “In the Slavic regions there were buildings revered by them. Between others they had a building on a mountain, about which philosophers wrote that it was one of the highest mountains in the world. There is a story about this building: about the quality of its construction, about the location of its heterogeneous stones and their different colors, about the holes made in its upper part, about what was built in these holes to watch the sunrise, about the precious stones placed there and signs marked in it, which indicate future events and warn against incidents before their implementation, about the sounds heard in its upper part and about what comprehends them when they hear these sounds.

In addition to the above documents, information about the main ancient Slavic city, the temple of the Sun and the Slavic state as a whole is in the Elder Edda, in Persian, Scandinavian and ancient German sources, in the Book of Veles. According to the legends, near the city of Kiyar (Kyiv) was the sacred mountain Alatyr - archaeologists believe that it was Elbrus. Next to it was the Iriysky, or the Garden of Eden, and the Smorodina River, which separated the earthly world and the afterlife, and connected Yav and Nav (that Light) Kalinov Bridge.

This is how they talk about two wars between the Goths (an ancient Germanic tribe) and the Slavs, the invasion of the Goths into the ancient Slavic state, the Gothic historian of the 4th century Jordan in his book “History of the Goths”. In the middle of the 4th century, the Goth king Germanareh led his people to conquer the world. This was a great commander. According to Jordanes, he was compared with Alexander the Great. The same was written about Germanarekh and Lomonosov:

"Ermanarik, the king of the Ostrogoths, for his courage in conquering many northern peoples was compared by some with Alensander the Great."

Judging by the testimonies of Jordan, the Elder Edda and the Book of Veles, Germanareh, after long wars, captured almost all of Eastern Europe. He fought along the Volga to the Caspian, then fought on the Terek River, crossed the Caucasus, then went along the Black Sea coast and reached Azov.

According to the “Book of Veles”, Germanareh first made peace with the Slavs (“drank wine for friendship”), and only then “went with a sword against us”.

The peace treaty between the Slavs and the Goths was sealed by the dynastic marriage of the sister of the Slavic prince-king Bus - Swans and Germanarekh. This was a payment for peace, for Germanarekh was then many years old (he died at 110 years old, but the marriage was concluded shortly before that). According to Edda, the son of Germanareh Randver wooed Swan-Sva, and he took her to his father. And then Jarl Bikki, adviser to Germanarekh, told them that it would be better if the Swan went to Randver, since both of them are young, and Germanarekh is an old man. These words pleased Swans-Sva and Randver, and Jordan adds that Swans-Sva fled from Germanarekh. And then Germanarekh executed his son and Swan. And this murder was the cause of the Slavic-Gothic war. Having treacherously violated the "peace treaty", Germanarekh defeated the Slavs in the first battles. But then, when Germanarekh moved into the heart of Ruskolani, the Ants stepped in to Germanarekh. Germanareh was defeated. According to Jordan, he was struck with a sword in the side by the Rossomons (Ruskolans) - Sar (king) and Ammius (brother). The Slavic prince Bus and his brother Zlatogor inflicted a mortal wound on Germanarekh, and he soon died. Here is how Jordan, the Book of Veles, and later Lomonosov wrote about it.

"The Book of Veles": “And Ruskolan was defeated by the Goths of Germanarekh. And he took a wife from our generation and killed her. And then our leaders flowed against him and Germanarekh was defeated.

Jordan. “History ready”: “The unfaithful family of Rosomones (Ruskolan) ... took advantage of the following opportunity ... After all, after the king, driven by rage, ordered a certain woman named Sunhilda (Swan) from the named family to break for insidious leaving her husband, tying her to ferocious horses and prompting the horses to flee to different sides, her brothers Sar (King Bus) and Ammii (Gold), avenging the death of their sister, stabbed Germanarekh in the side with a sword.

M. Lomonosov: “Sonilda, a noble Roxolan woman, Yermanarik ordered to be torn apart by horses for her husband’s escape. Her brothers Sar and Ammius, avenging the death of their sister, Ermanarik was pierced in the side; died of a wound a hundred and ten years"

A few years later, a descendant of Germanarekh, Amal Vinitary, invaded the lands of the Slavic tribe of Ants. In the first battle, he was defeated, but then "began to act more decisively", and the Goths, led by Amal Vinitar, defeated the Slavs. The Slavic prince Busa and 70 other princes were crucified by the Goths. This happened on the night of March 20-21, 368 AD. On the same night that Bus was crucified, there was a total lunar eclipse. A monstrous earthquake also shook the earth (the entire coast of the Black Sea shook, destruction was in Constantinople and Nicaea (ancient historians testify to this. Later, the Slavs gathered their strength and defeated the Goths. But the former powerful Slavic state was no longer restored.

"The Book of Veles": “And then Russia was again defeated. And Busa and seventy other princes were crucified on crosses. And there was great turmoil in Russia from Amala Vend. And then Sloven gathered Russia and led it. And at that time the Goths were defeated. And we didn't let the Sting go anywhere. And everything got better. And our grandfather Dazhbog rejoiced, and welcomed the soldiers - many of our fathers who won victories. And there were no troubles and worries of many, and so the land of the Gothic became ours. And so it will be until the end"

Jordan. "History Ready": Amal Vinitary ... moved the army within the boundaries of the Ants. And when he came to them, he was defeated in the first skirmish, then he behaved more bravely and crucified their king, named Boz, with his sons and 70 noble people, so that the corpses of the hanged would double the fear of the conquered.

The Bulgarian chronicle “Baradj Tarihy”: “Once in the land of the Anchians, the Galidjians (Galicians) attacked Bus and killed him along with all 70 princes.”

The Slavic prince Busa and 70 princes were crucified by the Goths in the eastern Carpathians at the sources of Seret and Prut, on the current border of Wallachia and Transylvania. In those days, these lands belonged to Ruskolani, or Scythia. Much later, under the famous Vlad Dracul, it was at the place of the crucifixion of Bus that mass executions and crucifixions were held. They removed the bodies of Bus and other princes from the crosses on Friday and took them to the Elbrus region, to the Etoka (a tributary of the Podkumka). According to Caucasian legend, the body of Bus and other princes was brought by eight pairs of oxen. Busa's wife ordered a mound to be built over their grave on the banks of the Etoko River (a tributary of the Podkumka River) and, in order to perpetuate the memory of Busa, ordered the Altud River to be renamed Baksan (Busa River).

Caucasian legend says:

“Baksan (Bus) was killed by the Goth king with all his brothers and eighty noble Narts. Hearing this, the people gave way to despair: the men beat their breasts, and the women tore their hair on their heads, saying: “Dauov’s eight sons are killed, killed!”

Those who carefully read "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" remember that it mentions the "gone Time of Busovo" long ago.

The year 368, the year of the crucifixion of Prince Bus, has an astrological meaning. According to Slavic astrology, this is a milestone. On the night of March 20-21, 368 moves, the Aries era ended and the Pisces era began.

It was after the story of the crucifixion of Prince Bus, which became known in the ancient world and the story of the crucifixion of Christ appeared (borrowed) in Christianity.

The results of the expedition to the site of the capital of the ancient Slavic city of Kiyara in the Elbrus region.

Five expeditions were carried out: in 1851,1881,1914, 2001 and 2002.

In 2001, the expedition was led by A. Alekseev, and in 2002 the expedition was carried out under the patronage of the Shtenberg State Astronomical Institute (GAISh), which was supervised by the director of the institute, Anatoly Mikhailovich Cherepashchuk.

Based on the data obtained as a result of topographic, geodetic studies of the area, fixing astronomical events, the participants of the expedition made preliminary conclusions that are fully consistent with the results of the expedition of 2001, following the results of which, in March 2002, a report was made at a meeting of the Astronomical Society at the State Astronomical Institute in the presence of members of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, members of the International Astronomical Society and the State Historical Museum.

A report was also made at a conference on the problems of early civilizations in St. Petersburg.

What exactly did the researchers find?

Near Mount Karakaya, in the Rocky Range at an altitude of 3,646 meters above sea level between the villages of Upper Chegem and Bezengi on the eastern side of Elbrus, traces of the capital of Ruskolani, the city of Kiyar, were found, which existed long before the birth of Christ, which is mentioned in many legends and epics of different peoples of the world, as well as the oldest astronomical observatory - the Temple of the Sun, described by the ancient historian Al Masudi in his books as the Temple of the Sun.

The location of the found city exactly matches the indications from ancient sources, and later the Turkish traveler of the 17th century, Evliya Celebi, confirmed the location of the city.

On Mount Karakaya, the remains of an ancient temple, caves and graves were found. An incredible number of settlements, ruins of temples have been discovered, and a lot of them have been preserved quite well. Menhirs were found in a valley near the foot of Mount Karakaya, on the Bechesyn plateau - high man-made stones similar to wooden pagan idols.

On one of the stone pillars, the face of a knight is carved, looking straight to the east. And behind the menhir is a bell-shaped hill. This is Tuzuluk ("Treasury of the Sun"). At its top, the ruins of the ancient sanctuary of the Sun are really visible. At the top of the hill is a tour that marks the highest point. Then three large rocks that have undergone manual processing. Once a gap was cut in them, directed from north to south. Stones were also found laid out like sectors in the zodiac calendar. Each sector is exactly 30 degrees.

Each part of the temple complex was intended for calendar and astrological calculations. In this it is similar to the South Ural city-temple Arkaim, which has the same zodiac structure, the same division into 12 sectors. It is also similar to Stonehenge in the UK. It is closer to Stonehenge, firstly, by the fact that the axis of the temple is also oriented from north to south, and secondly, one of the most important distinguishing features of Stonehenge is the presence of the so-called “Heel Stone” at a distance from the sanctuary. But after all, at the sanctuary of the Sun on Tuzuluk, a landmark-menhir was installed.

There is evidence that at the turn of our era the temple was plundered by the Bosporus king Farnak. The temple was finally destroyed in IV AD. Goths and Huns. Even the dimensions of the temple are known; 60 cubits (about 20 meters) in length, 20 (6-8 meters) in width and 15 (up to 10 meters) in height, as well as the number of windows and doors - 12 according to the number of signs of the Zodiac.

As a result of the work of the first expedition, there is every reason to believe that the stones on the top of Mount Tuzluk served as the foundation of the Temple of the Sun. Mount Tuzluk is a regular grassy cone about 40 meters high. The slopes rise to the top at an angle of 45 degrees, which actually corresponds to the latitude of the place, and, therefore, looking along it, you can see the North Star. The axis of the foundation of the temple is 30 degrees with the direction to the Eastern peak of Elbrus. The same 30 degrees is the distance between the axis of the temple and the direction to the menhir, and the direction to the menhir and the Shaukam pass. Considering that 30 degrees - 1/12 of a circle - corresponds to a calendar month, this is no coincidence. The azimuths of sunrise and sunset on the days of the summer and winter solstices differ by only 1.5 degrees from the directions to the peaks of Kanjal, the “gate” of two hills in the depths of pastures, Mount Dzhaurgen and Mount Tashly-Syrt. There is an assumption that the menhir served as a heel stone in the temple of the Sun, by analogy with Stonehenge, and helped predict solar and lunar eclipses. Thus, Mount Tuzluk is tied to four natural landmarks by the Sun and is tied to the Eastern peak of Elbrus. The height of the mountain is only about 40 meters, the diameter of the base is about 150 meters. These are dimensions comparable to those of the Egyptian pyramids and other places of worship.

In addition, two square tower-like tours were found on the Kayaesik pass. One of them lies strictly on the axis of the temple. Here, on the pass, there are the foundations of structures, ramparts.

In addition, in the central part of the Caucasus, at the northern foot of Elbrus, in the late 70s and early 80s of the XX century, an ancient center of metallurgical production, the remains of smelting furnaces, settlements, burial grounds were discovered.

Summing up the results of the work of the expeditions of the 1980s and 2001, which discovered the concentration of traces of ancient metallurgy, deposits of coal, silver, iron, as well as astronomical, cult and other archaeological objects within a radius of several kilometers, we can confidently assume the discovery of one of the most ancient cultural and administrative centers of the Slavs in the Elbrus region.

During the expeditions of 1851 and 1914, the archaeologist P.G. Akritas examined the ruins of the Scythian Temple of the Sun on the eastern slopes of Beshtau. The results of further archaeological excavations of this shrine were published in 1914 in the Notes of the Rostov-on-Don Historical Society. There was described a huge stone “in the form of a Scythian cap”, installed on three abutments, as well as a domed grotto.

And the beginning of major excavations in Pyatigorye (Kavminvody) was laid by the famous pre-revolutionary archaeologist D.Ya. Samokvasov, who described 44 mounds in the vicinity of Pyatigorsk in 1881. Later, after the revolution, only some mounds were examined; only initial exploration work was carried out on the settlements by archaeologists E.I. Krupnov, V.A. Kuznetsov, G.E. Runich, E.P. Alekseeva, S.Ya. Baychorov, Kh.Kh. Bidzhiev and others.

Subscribe to us