The most famous annals .... Russian chronicles of the 11th–12th centuries

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 commission to compile a chronicle was given not only to the most literate and intelligent person, but also to someone who could 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 the 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 collection of previous chronicle records, documents, various kinds of 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", 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 historian of that time, introducing philosophical and religious generalizations into the narrative, his figurative 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 sets, 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, who then reigned 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 Caves 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.

Chronicles were the most remarkable phenomenon of ancient Russian literature. The first weather records date back to the 9th century, they were extracted from later sources of the 16th century. They are very brief: notes in one or two lines.

As a phenomenon on a national scale, chronicle writing appeared in the 11th century. People of different ages became chroniclers, and not only monks. A very significant contribution to the restoration of the history of the annals was made by such researchers as A.A. Shakhmatov (1864-1920) and A.N. Nasonov (1898 - 1965). The first major historical work was the Code, completed in 997. Its compilers described the events of the 9th-10th centuries, ancient legends. It even includes epic court poetry that praised Olga, Svyatoslav and especially Vladimir Svyatoslavovich, in whose reign this Code was created.

Nestor, a monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, who by 1113 completed his work The Tale of Bygone Years and compiled an extensive historical introduction to it, must be attributed to figures of a European scale. Nestor knew Russian, Bulgarian and Greek literature very well, being a very educated person. He used in his work the earlier Codes of 997, 1073 and 1093, and the events of the turn of the XI-XII centuries. covered as an eyewitness. This chronicle gave the most complete picture of early Russian history and was copied over 500 years. It must be borne in mind that the ancient Russian annals covered not only the history of Russia, but also the history of other peoples.

Secular people were also engaged in writing chronicles. For example, Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh. It was in the composition of the chronicle that such beautiful works of his as “Instruction to Children” (c. 1099; subsequently supplemented, preserved in the list of 1377) have come down to us. In particular, in the "Instruction" Vladimir Monomakh holds the idea of the need to repulse external enemies. In total, there were 83 "paths" - campaigns in which he participated.

In the XII century. chronicles become very detailed, and since they are written by contemporaries, the class and political sympathies of the chroniclers are very clearly expressed in them. The social order of their patrons is traced. Among the largest chroniclers who wrote after Nestor, one can single out the Kyivian Peter Borislavich. The most mysterious author in the XII-XIII centuries. was Daniil the Sharpener. It is believed that he owns two works - "Word" and "Prayer". Daniil Zatochnik was an excellent connoisseur of Russian life, knew church literature well, wrote in a bright and colorful literary language. He said the following about himself: “My tongue was like the reed of a scribe, and my lips were friendly, like the speed of a river. For this reason, I tried to write about the fetters of my heart and broke them with bitterness, as in ancient times they smashed babies against a stone.

Separately, it is necessary to highlight the genre of "walking", describing the travel of our compatriots abroad. Firstly, these are the stories of pilgrims who carried out their “walks” to Palestine and Pargrad (Constantinople), but descriptions of Western European states gradually began to appear. One of the first was a description of the journey of Daniil, the abbot of one of the Chernigov monasteries, who visited Palestine in 1104-1107, spending 16 months there and participating in the crusader wars. The most outstanding work of this genre is "Journey Beyond Three Seas" by the Tver merchant Athanasius Nikitin, compiled in the form of a diary. It describes many southern peoples, but mostly Indians. "Walking" A. Nikitin lasting six years took place in the 70s. 15th century

The "hagiographic" literature is very interesting, since in it, in addition to describing the life of canonized persons, a true picture of life in monasteries was given. For example, cases of bribery for obtaining this or that church rank or place, etc., were described. Here one can single out the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon, which is a collection of stories about the monks of this monastery.

The latest fashion trends of this year on the Lady Glamor fashion portal.

The world-famous work of ancient Russian literature was "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", the date of writing of which is attributed to 1185. This poem was imitated by contemporaries, it was quoted by Pskovites already at the beginning of the 14th century, and after the victory at Kulikovo Field (1380) in imitation of the "Word. ..” was written “Zadonshchina”. "The Word..." was created in connection with the campaign of the Seversk prince Igor against the Polovtsian Khan Konchak. Igor, overwhelmed by ambitious plans, did not unite with the Grand Duke Vsevolod the Big Nest and was defeated. The idea of unification on the eve of the Tatar-Mongol invasion runs through the entire work. And again, as in the epics, here we are talking about defense, and not about aggression and expansion.

From the second half of the XIV century. Moscow chronicle is becoming increasingly important. In 1392 and 1408 Moscow chronicles are being created, which are of an all-Russian character. And in the middle of the XV century. the Chronograph appears, representing, in fact, the first experience of writing world history by our ancestors, and in the Chronograph an attempt was made to show the place and role of Ancient Russia in the world historical process.

Russian chronicles are the main written historical source on the history of Russia before Peter the Great. For the first time, historical records began to be kept in Kyiv in the 1st half. XI century, then for many centuries they were conducted continuously, periodically taking shape in separate chronicles (at the same time, only the centers of their creation changed). The only center of Russian chronicle writing that has existed throughout its history is Veliky Novgorod. Chronicles were kept in the form of weather records, each of which began with the words “In summer”. A large number of various annalistic monuments have survived to our time. In the literature, the number 5000 was called, but it is clearly arbitrary, since not all works have yet been taken into account.

Russian chronicle writing at the very first stage of history reached one of its peaks due to the fact that such authors as Metropolitan Hilarion and monk Nestor took part in the creation of chronicles, who laid the foundations of Russian history, literature and philosophy. At the initial stage, the most significant annalistic code was created - the Tale of Bygone Years. A type of Russian chronicle was formed with its obligatory element - a weather record. And most importantly, the concept of the Russian land, the homeland of all Eastern Slavs, has received a clear definition.

Chronicles as a historical source are very complex objects of research because of their volume (manuscripts in folio of 300 or more sheets), composition (they include teachings, words, lives, stories, letters, legislative acts, etc.) and the form in which they have come down to us (all stages of chronicle writing in the 11th-13th centuries are represented by manuscripts that originate no earlier than the 14th century).

When using chronicle material for various characteristics and constructions, it must be remembered that any chronicle news requires a preliminary analysis based on modern textual criticism. The practice of analysis shows that chronicle news can be both a reflection of reality recorded in writing, and an idea of this reality, a product of fantasy or a mistake of one or another chronicler, or a deliberate distortion of events, which occurs quite often. Chronicle monuments were created on the basis of various ideological attitudes and views. The outlook and recording of events completely depended on the social position of the chronicler, his worldview and education.

The main thing in the analysis of chronicle news is knowledge of the history of the text of the chronicle, which allows you to have a clear idea of the time and circumstances of the appearance of this news. Not all researchers have to perform preliminary painstaking work on the analysis of each annalistic news, but it is necessary to know and be able to use the work of specialists on this topic. First of all, the works of the brilliant Russian scientist A.A. Shakhmatov, who, on the basis of various methods of analyzing the chronicle text, restored in general terms the history of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th-16th centuries. and showed the complexity of chronicle material as a historical source. Thanks to A.A. Shakhmatov and many generations of domestic researchers, the grandiose picture of the history of Russian chronicle writing became clear. Following the works of A.A. Shakhmatov and, thus, behind the Russian chroniclers, you become a witness to the development of the Russian worldview, ideology and national identity.

Each of the chroniclers of the 11th-18th centuries, introducing weather news into the chronicle he created, thereby contributed to the formation of Russian self-consciousness. The role of church representatives in this centuries-old process is indisputable: monks and priests, abbots and sextons, often without indicating their names, created the rules for the earthly life of Russian people, sometimes embodied in refined ideological postulates that remain relevant in our time. The phrase "Russian land", which appeared for the first time under the pen of the Kyiv chronicler of the 11th century, is a sacred concept for every Russian person. We perceive our past and present, everything that happens around us and in the world through the prism of our written history, which is based on chronicles. Russian chronicles are our sacred books, knowledge of them is obligatory for every citizen of Russia.

Historiography. Russian chronicle writing has been studied since the 18th century; several thousand special studies have been devoted to it. Briefly, the history of the study of chronicles can be presented as follows. In the XVIII century. the first small-scale studies of such scientists as G.F. Miller, M.V. Lomonosov, V.N. Tatishchev. From the same time, individual chronicles began to be published, the choice of which was most often random. The main question of the history of Russian chronicle writing, developed by researchers of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries, was the question of Nestor the chronicler. AT this time the work of many "decades" of A.-L. Schlozer "Nestor" (translation into Russian: Ch. I-III. St. Petersburg, 1809-1819). In 1820 P.M. Stroev, in the Preface to the publication of the Sophia Times, made an observation that is very important for characterizing Russian chronicles: any Russian chronicle is not the fruit of the work of one author, but a compilation (mechanical combination of different texts). In the middle of the 19th century, in connection with the publication of the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles (published since 1841), work on the study of chronicles was intensified. At this time, monographs and articles by I.I. Sreznevsky, K.N. Bestuzheva-Ryumin, N.N. Yanisha, I.A. Tikhomirova and others. The scale of Russian chronicle writing and the complexity of the analysis of chronicle texts became obvious, general preliminary observations were made. But there was no main thing - a method that would make it possible to effectively cope with complex chronicle material. This method - comparative textological - was first widely used in the analysis of the chronicles of A.A. Chess. Aleksey Aleksandrovich Shakhmatov (1864-1920) is a Russian philologist who devoted his whole life to studying the history of Russian chronicle writing along with other historical and philological topics. For the first time, he turned to chronicle writing, or rather, to the literary activity of the monk Nestor, while still a high school student. From that time until the end of his life, the topic of Nestor and Russian chronicles remained for him the main scientific topic. On the example of A.A. Shakhmatov, it becomes obvious that the most significant results in the analysis of chronicles can only be obtained on the basis of their long (lifelong) study. Applying the comparative textological method, A.A. Shakhmatov restored the history of the text of almost all the most significant chronicles and, on this basis, recreated a picture of the development of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th-16th centuries. It is safe to say that the works of A.A. Shakhmatova are the foundation of our knowledge of Russian chronicle writing. His work has shown convincingly that the basis of text analysis of any chronicle is the comparison of two or more chronicles throughout their texts, and not fragmentary random observations. When there is no material for comparison, the task facing the researcher becomes much more complicated, and only those who have mastered the comparative textological method can cope with it. Unfortunately, the creative heritage of the brilliant scientist has not yet been fully published, and this despite the fact that there are no equals to him in historical and philological science. Of his many works, first of all, it is necessary to familiarize yourself with two monographs: "Investigations about the most ancient Russian chronicle codes" (St. Petersburg, 1908) and "Review of Russian chronicle codes of the XIV-XVI centuries." (M.; L., 1938. Here is a description of all the most significant Russian chronicles). Any publication of this scientist always contains a detailed and in-depth analysis of the issue to which it is devoted; when referring to his works, one can always find the right direction for further research. In the face of M.D. Priselkov and A.N. Nasonov, laid down by A.A. Shakhmatov, the scientific school for the study of chronicle found worthy successors. M.D. Priselkov published the first course of lectures on the history of Russian chronicle writing in the 11th-15th centuries. (1940, reprinted 1996). Pupil M.D. Priselkova - A.N. Nasonov, more actively than his teacher, conducted archaeographic research in domestic ancient repositories, which allowed him to introduce many new chronicle monuments into scientific circulation. One of the important achievements of A.N. Nasonov was his reasoned statement, which runs counter to the opinion of A.A. Shakhmatov, that Russian chronicle writing did not stop in the 16th century, but continued and developed in the 17th century. and only in the 18th century, having completely completed its history, did it smoothly move into the initial stage of its study. Works of domestic researchers of the 60-90s. XX century fully confirmed the correctness of A.N. Nasonov. The resumption of the activities of the Archaeographic Commission and the publication of the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles on the initiative of M.N. Tikhomirov led to the intensification of research in the field of chronicle writing. Among the researchers of the second half of the 20th century, the works of M.N. Tikhomirova, B.A. Rybakova, D.S. Likhachev, Ya.S. Lurie, V.I. Koretsky, V.I. Buganova and others.

If we sum up the results of almost 300 years of studying the history of Russian chronicle writing, we get the following picture: the activities of numerous chronicle centers are outlined in general terms, a large amount of factual material has been collected and published, and the preliminary history of chronicle writing for the entire period has been recreated. At the same time, almost all the main and even minor provisions of the history of chronicle writing remain controversial. We can say with confidence about the great work ahead, in which as many young researchers as possible should take part.

The monograph by V.I. Buganov "Domestic historiography of Russian chronicles. Review of Soviet Literature” (Moscow, 1975), where, as the title suggests, the focus is on the modern period, but the introduction gives a brief description of the studies of the 18th-19th centuries. Historiographic reviews are presented in various textbooks and manuals, for example: A.P. Prostein. Source Studies in Russia: The Epoch of Capitalism, Rostov-on-Don. 1991; Part I. Ch. 3. Historical source studies in the works of K.N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin; Part II. Ch. 3. A.A. Chess and the development of annalistic source studies in Russia; Part III. Ch. 1. Development of Russian chronicles (before A.A. Shakhmatov); A.L. Shapiro Historiography from ancient times to 1917. SPb., 1993. (Lecture 4. Historiography of Kievan Rus. "The Tale of Bygone Years"; Lecture 5. Chronicle writing during the period of feudal fragmentation and at the early stages of the formation of a unified Russian state (XII - mid-XV centuries); Lecture 38. Development of historical source studies A.A. Shakhmatov). A particularly important place, as already noted, in the study of chronicles is occupied by the works of Academician A.A. Shakhmatova. After his death, colleagues and admirers published a whole volume dedicated to his activities: Izvestiya Otdeleniya russkoi yazyka i literatury: 1920. Vol. XXV. Petrograd, 1922. (special attention should be paid to the articles by M.D. Priselkov “Russian Chronicle in the Works of A.A. Shakhmatov” and A.E. Presnyakov “A.A. Shakhmatov in the Study of Russian Chronicles”).

Bibliography. There are several publications that provide an almost exhaustive bibliography. First of all: Bibliography of Russian Chronicle / Comp. R.P. Dmitrieva (M.; L-., 1962). This publication takes into account for the first time all works on chronicle writing (beginning with the publication of the Synopsis in 1674) up to and including 1958. The book is accompanied by name and subject indexes, which should be actively used. The "Bibliography of Selected Foreign Works on Russian Chronicles" compiled by Yu.K. Begunov, which takes into account works from 1549 to 1959 inclusive. In another edition of Yu.K. Begunov published a small continuation to his bibliography: Foreign Literature on Russian Chronicles for 1960-1962. // Chronicles and chronicles. 1980 V.N. Tatishchev and the study of Russian chronicles (M., 1981. S. 244-253). The work of R.P. Dmitrieva in compiling the bibliography was continued by A.N. Kazakevich: Soviet Literature on Chronicles (1960-1972) // Chronicles and Chronicles. 1976 M.N. Tikhomirov and chronicle studies (M., 1976, pp. 294-356). The last two publications do not have indexes, which complicates their use. You can refer to broader thematic indexes, for example: Bibliography of works on Old Russian literature published in the USSR: 1958-1967. / Comp. N.F. Droblenkov. (Part 1. (1958-1962). L., 1978.; Part 2. (1963-1967) L., 1979). This bibliography has successive editions, all accompanied by excellent indexes.

Thus, a researcher of Russian chronicles, having at hand the above books, is in very favorable conditions for work. The only fundamental clarification needs to be made in relation to the first position of the bibliography of R.P. Dmitrieva: it should begin not with the edition of the Synopsis, but with the 1661 edition of the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon, where the Life of Nestor was first published, written especially for this edition. It was from this book that all biographical information about Nestor was taken.

Editions of annals, special and periodicals. Chronicles began to be published from the 18th century, while the choice of published texts was random, and the rules for publication are imperfect, so it is not possible to use editions of the 18th century. needed with caution. Equally imperfect were the rules for publishing texts when publishing the first volumes of a fundamental series called the Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles - PSRL (publication began in 1841), so these volumes at the beginning of the 20th century. reprinted. The publication continues to be published in our time, in total 41 volumes have been published (the list of the contents of the volumes is given at the end of the textbook).

A special edition (suspended) is dedicated to the Russian Chronicles: Chronicles and Chronicles. It has been published in Moscow since 1974 (first issue), there were four issues in total (1976, 1981, 1984). These collections contain various articles on the history of Russian chronicle writing, as well as small chronicle texts.

Among periodicals, the main one is a unique publication entirely devoted to the study of Old Russian literature - Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature (TODRL). Since the publication (at the initiative of A.S. Orlov) of the first volume in 1934, 52 volumes have been published. This publication is, to some extent, the successor to the magnificent pre-revolutionary publication - Izvestia of the Department of the Russian Language and Literature (IORYAS). Almost every volume of TODRL contains articles on chronicle writing, texts are published quite often (the indexes of articles and materials for the past decade are placed in tenfold numbers). In two more periodicals, considerable attention is paid to the study of chronicles - this is the Archeographic Yearbook (AE) and Auxiliary Historical Disciplines (VID).

Dictionaries. Every historian and philologist dealing with Old Russian written culture should have a multi-volume dictionary prepared by the staff of the Sector of Old Russian Literature of the Institute of Russian Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Pushkin House), in three editions of which (letter L) characterizes almost all annalistic works of Ancient Russia: Dictionary of Scribes and bookishness of Ancient Russia (Issue 1. XI - the first half of the XIV century. L., 1987; Issue 2. The second half of the XIV-XVI centuries. Part 2. L., 1989; Issue 3. XVII century. Ch. 2. St. Petersburg, 1993). This Dictionary (hereinafter: Dictionary of Scribes) provides comprehensive information about almost all ancient Russian works, including authors who, to one degree or another, took part in the creation of Russian chronicles. Each dictionary entry is accompanied by a bibliographic reference.

It is impossible to analyze chronicle texts without referring to linguistic dictionaries. Despite the superficial intelligibility of the texts of ancient Russian chronicles, the meaning or shade of a word and expression very often eludes the researcher, since over the centuries the semantic content of words has changed, and some words have fallen out of use. For example, the expression “the chronicler wrote” is perceived unequivocally by a modern person - he created an original work, which implies creativity on the part of the author. And in ancient times, the work of a scribe could also be called this expression.

The dictionary collected in the 19th century remains relevant: I.I. Sreznevsky. Materials for the dictionary of the Old Russian language. (T. I-III. St. Petersburg, 1893-1903 - republished in 1989). Two new dictionaries have been published: Dictionary of the Russian language of the XI-XVII centuries. (Issue 1. M., 1975 - edition not completed) and Dictionary of the Old Russian language of the XI-XIV centuries. (T. 1. M., 1988 - edition completed). In addition to these dictionaries, when working with Old Russian texts, it is necessary to refer to one more publication: Etymological Dictionary of Slavic Languages: Proto-Slavic Lexical Fund. (Issue 1. M., 1974 - edition not completed). You can get acquainted with the complex issues of lexical analysis of chronicle texts from the books: A.S. Lvov Lexicon "The Tale of Bygone Years". (M., 1975); O.V. Curds The lexical composition of The Tale of Bygone Years (Kyiv, 1984).

Terminology. chronicle- a historical work with a weather account of events, covering in its presentation the entire history of Russia, represented by a manuscript (the volume is significant - more than 100 sheets). Chronicler- a small in volume (several tens of sheets) chronicle work, as well as the chronicle, covering in its presentation the entire history of Russia. To some extent, the chronicler is a brief synopsis of the chronicle that has not come down to us. Chronicler in ancient Russia was also called the author of the chronicle. chronicler- a very small (up to 10 sheets) chronicle work, dedicated either to the person who compiled it, or to the place of its compilation, while the weather of the presentation is preserved. chronicle fragment- part of any chronicle work (often found in ancient Russian collections). The significance of chroniclers and chronicle fragments for the history of Russian chronicle writing is significant, since they brought to us information about non-preserved chronicle works. The ancient Russian chroniclers themselves called their works differently: in the 11th century. Chronicler (for example, Chronicler of the Russian Land) or Vremennik, later the Tale of Bygone Years, Sofia Vremennik, Chronograph, sometimes chronicles did not have any name.

Any historiographical monument is created on the basis of the previous chronicle, and that, in turn, is also based on the previous one, so in the text of any chronicle, for example, the 15th century, more than a dozen stages of work are presented. The history of the chronicle text can be represented as a chain of such stages. The stages identified by researchers by analyzing the chronicle text are called chronicles. Annalistic code is a hypothetical stage of annalistic work. The most famous chronicle code - the Tale of Bygone Years (PVL), according to researchers, was compiled at the beginning of the 12th century. It should be referred to as follows: PVL according to the Laurentian Chronicle or the Ipatiev Chronicle, etc. In the literature there is no clear distinction between the concepts of chronicle and chronicle code, they are often mixed up. A.A. Shakhmatov, the best connoisseur of Russian chronicle writing, believed that such a distinction is necessary, it brings clarity and unambiguity. Chronicles and chronicles in the research literature are very often given different definitions: episcopal, princely, metropolitan, grand-ducal, official, oppositional, provincial, etc. All these definitions are conditional, they appeared as a result of a preliminary, often initial and incorrect, analysis of chronicle texts .

Each chronicle has its own individual name given to it on the basis of random signs: by the name of the owner or scribe of the chronicle, its location, etc. The names are simply incorrect and thus can be misleading, for example: the Nikon Chronicle is named after Patriarch Nikon, which was one of the lists of this chronicle, but Patriarch Nikon (years of life 1605-1681) had nothing to do with compiling this chronicle, since it was compiled in the 20s. 16th century Some chronicles have several names, for example, the oldest Russian chronicle is called Novgorod (written in Novgorod), Haratein (according to the material on which it is written - on leather, on parchment), Novgorod Synodal (according to the place of storage in the Synodal Assembly), Novgorod the first senior edition (the title reflected the systematization of the Novgorod chronicles).

chronicle writing called the whole process of keeping annals, covering the period from the XI-XVIII centuries. Hence, the chronicle can be early, late, Kyiv, Novgorod, etc. There were attempts to introduce the term "chronicle studies" - a part of source studies that studies chronicles, but this term was not widely used.

Techniques for identifying chronicles. Any chronicle is a collection of weather records; year after year, events that took place in Russia are recorded in it. How can you tell where one chronicler left off and another began? After all, there are very rare cases when the author indicates the end of his manuscript. Over a three-century period of studying the history of Russian chronicle writing, several methods have been found to resolve this issue. The main technique borrowed from classical philology and fully recognized after the works of A.A. Shakhmatova is a comparison of the texts of two chronicles with each other. When, for example, two or more chronicles, when compared, have the same text before 1110, and after that year each of them represents an individual text, then the researcher has the right to assert that all these chronicles reflected the annalistic code, which brought the presentation of events to 1110.

In addition to this, the main method, there are several more. The end of the work of the chronicler and, thus, the chronicle code can be indicated by the word "amen" at the end of the weather record; "Amen" in ancient Russian written practice was placed at the end of a large literary work. For example, this word completed the weather record of 1093 in the chronicle, which was in the hands of V.N. Tatishchev and now lost. The scientist believed that one of the ancient Russian chroniclers finished his work here. In the works of A.A. Shakhmatov, this annalistic code of 1093 received a multivariate substantiation on the basis of a wide variety of data and firmly entered the history of early chronicle writing.

Sometimes the author or compiler of the annals informs in the form of a postscript about his participation in the work on the annals, but such cases are rare. For example, the earliest postscript belongs to the abbot of the Vydubitsky monastery (not far from Kyiv) Sylvester, it is dated 6624 (1116). Such postscripts require careful verification.

The chronicler, compiling his weather records, sometimes drew on non-chronicle sources for work, for example, the Chronicle of Georgy Amartol or Paremiynik, from which he very often borrowed various material in verbatim quotations to characterize persons or events. If such a source is identified and all borrowings from it are identified, then the last weather record with a quotation from there can serve as an indication of the approximate time the chronicle was compiled. In addition, the absence of borrowings from an extra-chronicle source in any chronicle serves as a serious and weighty argument in favor of its primacy in relation to the chronicle, where such borrowings are present. For example, A.A. Shakhmatov considered one of the arguments for the primacy of the Novgorod First Chronicle of the junior edition (N1LM) within the framework of the PVL in relation to the annals of Lavrentievskaya and Ipatievskaya considered the absence in N1LM of borrowings from the Chronicle of Georgy Amartol, which are in the last two chronicles.

In the chronicle text itself, there are also other direct or indirect indications of the end time of the work of one or another chronicler. For example, chronicles often contain various lists of names of princes or metropolitans and calculations of years, which can be located anywhere in the text and can serve as an indication of the end time of the work of one or another chronicler. For example, under 6360 (852) there is a list of princes brought to the death of Prince Svyatopolk: “... and from the first year of Svyatoslav to the first year of Yaropolch, 28 years; and Yaropolk princes years ѣt 8; and Volodimer princes 37 years old; and Yaroslav the princes are 40 years old. The same from the death of Yaroslavl to the death of Svyatopolchi, 60 years. Consequently, this list indicates the year of the death of Prince Svyatopolk - 1113 as the year in which the chronicler worked or to which he brought his work, since the successor of Prince Svyatopolk on the Kiev table, Prince Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125) is not mentioned in this list.

Often in chronicle texts there is an expression "to this day", which must be treated with increased attention, since under favorable conditions it can serve as an indirect indication of the time of the chronicler's work. For example, under 6552 (1044) we read: “In this summer, Bryachislav, the son of Izyaslavl, the grandson Volodymyr, the father of Vseslavl, and Vseslavl, his son, sat on his table, his mother gave birth from vlhvovanya. Mothers who gave birth to him, be stung to him on his head, saying to the wolf of his mother: “Behold the stung on him, but wear it to your belly”, even wear Vseslav to this day on yourself; for this sake of mercilessness there is shedding of blood. For the chronicler, judging by the expression “to this day”, Prince Vseslav is alive, therefore, knowing the date of the death of this prince, it can be argued that the chronicler worked until this year. The Laurentian Chronicle, from which the quote about the birth of Prince Vseslav was quoted, also reports the time of his death: “In the summer of 6609. Vseslav, prince of Polotsk, reposed, the month of April on the 14th day, at 9 o’clock in the afternoon, on Wednesday.” It turns out that this chronicler worked until 6609 (1101).

When a weather record (from the second half of the 11th century) begins with an indication not only of the year, but also of its indict, then such a double dating in the chronicle text formally indicates the end time of the chronicler's work. For example, the already mentioned year 1093, the presentation of the events of which ended in the list of V.N. Tatishchev with the word “amen”, begins as follows: “In the summer of 6601, indiction 1 summer ...” Such a double dating at the beginning of the weather record, as a method of determining the end time of the annalistic code, requires additional checks.

Sometimes the chronicler narrates in the first person, in such cases, especially on late material (XVI-XVII centuries), it becomes possible to determine the name of the author and, knowing his biography, find out the time of his work on the chronicle.

Quite often, researchers use the original style of writing to solve the problem of the time of the chronicler's work, but this method is one of the most unreliable, for all its outward persuasiveness.

The justification for the existence of one or another chronicle code and the time of its compilation should always be multivariate, only in this case the assumption will be convincing.

Determining the time of compiling the annalistic code is not an end in itself, but the foundation of a source analysis of the news that appeared at the stage of creating this annalistic code. A clear knowledge of the time of creation of the code and the range of news included by the author in the text is the first stage in the critical comprehension of the news. Let me explain this using the example of the news about the calling of the Varangians, headed by Prince Rurik (6372). A.A. Shakhmatov proved that it appears in Russian chronicles in the first decades of the 12th century, that is, at the stage of the creation of the PVL. In earlier chronicles, and them in the XI century. there were at least four, no mention of Rurik existed. Having found out the time of the appearance of the news about Rurik, we can thereby determine the circumstances of the appearance of such news, which will be discussed when characterizing the PVL.

You can get acquainted with various methods of analyzing the Old Russian text in the book: D.S. Likhachev. Textology. On the material of Russian literature of the X-XVII centuries. (2nd ed. L., 1987 - or any other edition). This book should be on the desk of every source historian.

Chronology. The basis of any historical work, as well as of all historical science in general, is chronology. There is no event outside of time, but if the time is determined incorrectly, then the characteristic of the event will also be distorted. In the Russian chronicles, chronological indications occupy a prominent place in the full sense, since each weather record begins with a date, the first letter of this indication - "B" is very often written in vermilion.

The chronology in Russia was Byzantine, the reference point was the conditional date of the creation of the world. For example, the year of publication of this manual is 2002 from the Nativity of Christ, in order to translate it into the chronology from the creation of the world, it is necessary to add 5508 years to the figure of this year, it will turn out 7510 from the creation of the world. Before the Peter the Great calendar reform, Russia used the Byzantine chronology, so the translation of Old Russian chronology into modern should not be abused, since there are a number of nuances that must be followed in such translations. If the object of research is a written source of pre-Petrine Russia, then a double date must be indicated, for example: 6898 (1390)

The New Year began in Ancient Russia in March, the so-called March year. The beginning of the year in March is often associated with the remnants of paganism in Russia, but the March year was spread throughout Western Europe, since this month most often falls on the main Christian holiday - Easter. In addition, the March year does not have a clearly fixed beginning, unlike September and January, where the year begins on the 1st. In Byzantium, from where we borrowed the chronology, in the XI century. the September year, which began on September 1, was generally recognized, which was preserved in the school tradition of the beginning of the new academic year. In Russia, they began to switch to the September year in the first quarter of the 15th century. There was no decree or charter in this regard; in different centers of written culture they passed at different times, this process dragged on for a quarter of a century. The simultaneous existence of different chronology systems led to confusion and errors in our chronology of the 11th-14th centuries.

In ancient Russia, in accordance with the Byzantine tradition, the year very often had a double designation: the year from the creation of the world was accompanied by an indication of the indict of this year. indict- the ordinal place of a given year in a 15-year cycle, the starting point of the indicts is the creation of the world, the indict begins with the beginning of the new year - September 1. In the Byzantine chronicles, the reckoning was quite often carried out only according to indicts; we have never had such a tradition. Finding out the indict of any year from the creation of the world is very simple: the number of the year must be divided by 15, the remainder obtained by separation will be the indict of this year. If the remainder is equal to 0, then the indict of the year will be - 15. In the Old Russian chronology, the year 2002 is designated as follows - 7510 of the indict of 10 years. Such a double dating of the year makes it possible to verify the correspondence of the year to its indict, inconsistencies of such indications are often found in the sources. It is sometimes quite difficult to find an explanation for such a mistake, since this requires the researcher to have deep and varied knowledge, most often from the field of auxiliary historical disciplines. Indictions disappear from use in the annals, at least by the end of the 15th century, but in the written tradition, most often monastic, the indication of indicts is also found in the 16th-17th centuries.

Each date of a written historical source must first of all be checked, since very often they are erroneous. For example, the first date of Russian history in the annals, 6360, contains an error: “In the summer of 6360, indiction 15, I will start reigning for Michael, starting to call Ruska the land ...” The indiction is indicated correctly, but Tsar Michael began to reign 10 years before this year. There are several explanations for this discrepancy, but they are unlikely to be definitive.

The names of the days of the week in ancient times were somewhat different, the main feature is associated with the name of Sunday: until the 16th century. Sunday was called a week (that is, to do nothing), hence - Monday, that is, the day after the week. In those days there was only one Sunday in the year - the day of Easter. The numerical designation of the day was often accompanied by an indication of the name of the saint whose memory was honored on this day. Double date designation allows you to check one indication through another. The saint's day is taken from the Saints. It should be remembered that the text of the Saints, like the text of any written monument, changed over time, for example, the circle of saints known to a Russian person in the 11th century was less complete than the circle of saints in the 15th century, and had some differences.

The dating of secular events up to the day appears in the annals from the 60s. XI century, accurate to the hour since the 90s. 11th century

More detailed information about Russian chronology can be found in the books: L.V. Cherepnin. Russian chronology. (M., 1944); N.G. Berezhkov. Chronology of Russian annals. (M., 1963); S.V. Tsyb. Old Russian chronology in The Tale of Bygone Years. (Barnaul, 1995).

In the annals there are references to various natural phenomena. All these references make it possible to check the Old Russian chronology by comparing it with the data of other European countries or with the data of astronomy. Two books can be recommended on these issues: D.O. Svyatsky. Astronomical phenomena in Russian chronicles from a scientific-critical point of view. (St. Petersburg, 1915); E.P. Borisenkov, V.M. Pasetsky. Extreme natural phenomena in Russian chronicles of the XI-XVII centuries. (L., 1983).

Manuscript. Any Russian chronicle, like most other written historical sources, has come down to us in manuscript, so it is necessary to get to know the following special disciplines as deeply as possible: archeography, codicology and paleography. At the same time, it is necessary to remember that it is necessary to hone the skill of working with a manuscript throughout one’s scientific activity, and in student years one should visit the Manuscript Departments of libraries as often as possible in order to create a so-called creative dialogue between a researcher and a manuscript. Without working with the original (in this case, with the manuscript), one cannot become a professional historian. The manuscript is the only reality for the historian; only through it can he enter the past. Depending on how deeply and carefully you analyze the written information of the original source, your scientific contribution to the question you are developing will be so well-reasoned. For a researcher, when analyzing a written historical source, everything speaks, in addition to the main content of the text: the color of the ink, the shade and arrangement of cinnabar letters and headings, erasures, density and layout of paper or parchment, format, binding, marks and corrections, lettering, handwriting and skill of the writer. For a historian, all knowledge about the manuscript is necessary, first of all, to solve the main issue - the dating of the manuscript, on the basis of which the entire subsequent analysis of its content unfolds. Chronicles, in the main, have come down to us in manuscripts written on paper, not parchment. Ever since the invention of paper in Europe in the 14th century. and until the middle of the XIX century. the paper was made by hand, which is why there are filigrees (watermarks) on the paper. Filigree dating of a manuscript is the most reliable method to date, but it requires thoroughness and thoroughness from the researcher: all the watermarks of the manuscript are taken into account, which are analyzed using all the albums published both here and in Europe. Modern requirements for the dating of the manuscript on filigree are so great that it is proposed to create a new special discipline - filigree. Recommended literature: V.N. Shchepkin. Russian paleography. (M., 1967); History and paleography. (Sat: Issue 1 and 2. M., 1993).

Scheme of the ratio of the main chronicles according to M.D. Priselkov

stemma. The history of the text of the chronicle can be depicted graphically, in the form of a diagram, with the earlier stages of the history of the text most often at the top of the diagram, and the later ones below. These schemes are called stems. Examples of such schemes are presented in the manual, all of them are taken from various books on annals. Abbreviations in stems are partially disclosed in the list of abbreviations at the end of the manual.

periodization. The creation of any chronicle, the activities of any chronicle center are directly related to the political and partly economic life of Russia, therefore, the periodization of the history of Russian chronicle writing generally coincides with the periodization of Russian history from the 11th century to the 11th century. by the 18th century So, for example, the first stage in the history of Russian chronicle writing, which ended with the creation of an annalistic code - PVL, corresponds to the time of the formation of the Old Russian state with its center in Kyiv and its heyday, which it reached by the beginning of the 12th century. In the XIII century. in connection with the invasion of the Tatar-Mongol, chronicle centers in Kyiv, Pereyaslavl South, Chernigov cease their activities. In the XIII-XV centuries. chronicle centers arise in those principalities, more precisely, in the main cities of the principalities, which occupy or seek to occupy a leading place in the political life of the country. From the end of the XV century. the position of Moscow as the capital of the new state determined its main place in the history of Russian chronicle writing, since that time all significant chronicle works have been created in Moscow. Each of the three periods in the history of Russian chronicle writing is devoted to a chapter of this manual.

Editions : The complete collection of Russian chronicles has been published since 1841, since then 41 volumes have been published, the list of all volumes is given at the end of the manual (pp. 504-505).

Literature: Kloss B.M., Lurie Ya.S. Russian chronicles of the XI-XV centuries. (Materials for description) // Guidelines for the description of Slavic-Russian manuscripts for the Consolidated catalog of manuscripts stored in the USSR. Issue. 2. Part 1. M., 1976. S. 78-139; Likhachev D.S. Russian chronicles and their cultural and historical significance. M.; L., 1947; Nasonov A.N. History of Russian Chronicle XI - the beginning of the XVIII century. Essays and research. M., 1969; Priselkov M.D. History of Russian Chronicle XI-XV centuries. 2nd ed. SPb., 1996; Tikhomirov M.N. Russian chronicle. M., 1979; Shakhmatov A.A. Review of Russian chronicles of the XIV-XVI centuries. M.; L., 1938.

Notes

. Priselkov M.D. History of Russian Chronicle XI-XV centuries. SPb., 1996. S. 22.

The history of the chronicle in Russia goes back into the distant past. It is known that writing originated before the 10th century. The texts were written, as a rule, by representatives of the clergy. It is thanks to ancient writings that we know. But what was the name of the first Russian chronicle? How did it all start? Why is it of great historical importance?

What was the name of the first Russian chronicle?

Everyone should know the answer to this question. The first Russian chronicle was called The Tale of Bygone Years. It was written in 1110-1118 in Kyiv. The linguist Shakhmatov revealed that she had predecessors. However, it is still the first Russian chronicle. It is called confirmed, reliable.

The story describes the chronicle of the events that took place over a certain period of time. It consisted of articles that described each past year.

Author

The monk described events from biblical times to 1117. The name of the first Russian chronicle is the first lines of the chronicle.

History of creation

The chronicle had copies made after Nestor, which were able to survive to this day. They didn't differ much from each other. The original itself has been lost. According to Shakhmatov, the chronicle was rewritten just a few years after its appearance. Big changes were made to it.

In the XIV century, the monk Lavrentiy copied the work of Nestor, and it is this copy that is considered the most ancient that has come down to our time.

There are several versions of where Nestor took the information for his chronicle. Since the chronology dates back to ancient times, and articles with dates appeared only after 852, many historians believe that the monk described the old period thanks to the legends of people and written sources in the monastery.

She corresponded frequently. Even Nestor himself rewrote the chronicle, making some changes.

Interestingly, in those days, scripture was also a code of laws.

Everything was described in The Tale of Bygone Years: from exact events to biblical traditions.

The purpose of the creation was to write a chronicle, capture events, restore the chronology in order to understand where the Russian people take their roots from, how Russia was formed.

Nestor wrote that the Slavs appeared long ago from the son of Noah. In total, Noah had three of them. They divided three territories among themselves. One of them, Japheth, got the northwestern part.

Then there are articles about the princes, the East Slavic tribes that descended from the "Noriks". It is here that Rurik and his brothers are mentioned. About Rurik it is said that he became the ruler of Russia, having founded Novgorod. This explains why there are so many supporters of the Norman theory of the origin of the princes from the Ruriks, although there is no actual evidence.

It tells about Yaroslav the Wise and many other people and their reign, about wars and other significant events that shaped the history of Russia, made it what we know it now.

Meaning

"The Tale of Bygone Years" has great importance these days. This is one of the main historical sources on which historians are engaged in research. Thanks to her, the chronology of that period has been restored.

Since the chronicle has the openness of the genre, ranging from stories of epics to descriptions of wars and weather, one can understand a lot about the mentality and ordinary life of Russians who lived at that time.

Christianity played a special role in the chronicle. All events are described through the prism of religion. Even getting rid of idols and accepting Christianity is described as a period when people got rid of temptations and ignorance. And the new religion is the light for Russia.

Volume three. IV. Novgorod Chronicles

Download Download Download Download Download Download Download Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume one. I. II. Laurentian and Trinity chronicles
Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume four. IV. V. Novgorod and Pskov chronicles
Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume five. V. VI. Pskov and Sofia chronicles
Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume six. VI. Sofia chronicles
Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume seven. VII. Chronicle according to the Sunday list
Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume eight. VII. Continuation of the chronicle according to the Sunday list
Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume nine. VIII. Chronicle collection, called the Patriarchal or Nikon Chronicle
Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume ten. VIII. Chronicle collection, called the Patriarchal or Nikon Chronicle

Download all volumes in PDF

Complete collection of Russian chronicles

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume two. III. Hypatian Chronicle

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume three. IV. Novgorod Chronicles

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume four. IV. V. Novgorod and Pskov chronicles

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume five. V. VI. Pskov and Sofia chronicles

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume six. VI. Sofia chronicles

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume seven. VII. Chronicle according to the Sunday list

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume eight. VII. Continuation of the chronicle according to the Sunday list

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume nine. VIII. Chronicle collection, called the Patriarchal or Nikon Chronicle

Download

Complete collection of Russian chronicles. Volume ten. VIII. Chronicle collection, called the Patriarchal or Nikon Chronicle

Download

Download all volumes from BitTorrent (PDF)