Man in ancient Russian literature. "Tale of Bygone Years" as a historical and literary monument - Literature - Articles Catalog - Cabinet Methods

Rev. Nestor came to the famous Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, being seventeen-year-old boys. The holy abode lived in the strict studiosal charter, which introduced the Rev. Feodosi in it, borrowing it from Byzantine Books. According to this, the charter before giving monastic vows, the candidate was supposed to undergo a long preparatory stage. The newly came first to have to wear worldly clothes - as long as they study the rules of monastic life well. After that, candidates were allowed to put on monastery robes and proceed to testing, that is, show themselves in work on various obedience. The one who passed these tests was successful, took a tonsure, but on this test did not end up - the last stage of adoption in the monastery was a tonsure of the Great Schima, which not all was honored.

Rev. Nestor passed all the way from a simple novice to Schimonakh for only four years, and also received San Diacon. A considerable role in this was played, in addition to obedience and virtue, his education and outstanding literary talent.

Kiev-Pechersk Monastery was a unique phenomenon in spiritual life Kievan Rus. The number of breeds reached a hundred people, which was rare even for the Byzantium itself. The severity of the community charter found in Constantinople archives had no analogues. The monastery flourished in the material plan, although his governors did not care about collecting earthly wealth. The power of this was listening to the voice of the monastery, he had a real political and, most importantly, spiritual impact on society.

The young Russian church at that time actively mastered the richest material of the Byzantine church book. It was faced with the task of creating original Russian texts in which it would be revealed national appearance Russian holiness.

The first agiographic (agiography is theological discipline, which studies the lives of the saints, theological and historical and church aspects of holiness. - Ed.) The work of Rev. Nestor - "Reading about the lives and the crevice of the blissful passion recorders of Boris and Gleb" - is devoted to the memory of the first Russian saints. The chronicler, apparently, responded to the expensive communional church celebration - the consecration of the stone church over the relics of Saints Boris and Gleb.

The work of Rev. Nestor was not the first among the works dedicated to this topic. However, he did not state the history of the brothers on the finished chronicle legend, but created the text, deeply original in form and content. The author "Reading about Life ..." Creatively reworked the best samples of Byzantine life literature and was able to express very important for the Russian church and state identity of the idea. According to the researcher of the Old Russian church culture, Georgy Fedotov, "Memory of Saints Boris and Gleb was a voice of conscientious in transparent specific accounts, not resolved by law, but only vaguely limited by the idea of \u200b\u200bgeneric seniority."

Rev. Nestor did not have large quantity Data on the death of the brothers, but as thin artist I was able to recreate the psychologically reliable image of true Christians, badly accepting death. A genuinely Christian death of the sons of the Baptist of the Russian people of Prince Vladimir was inscribed by the chronicler in the panorama of the global historical process, which he understands how the arena of the universal struggle of good and evil.

Father of Russian monasses

The second living work of Rev. Nestor is devoted to the lives of one of the founders of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery - Rev. Feodosia. He writes this work in the 1080s, after just a few years after the death of the devotee, in the hope of an ambulance canonization of the Reverend. This, however, was not destined to come true. Reverend Feodosia was krankovized only in 1108.

Internal appearance Rev. Feodosia Pechersk has for us special meaning. As Georgy Fedotov writes, "in the face of Rev. Feodosia, ancient Russia found his ideal of the saint who remained true for many centuries. Rev. Feodosius - Father of Russian Monastic. All Russian buildings are his children who have his family features. " And Nestor's chronicler was the man who retained his unique appearance to us and created the ideal type of life-written life in Russian soil. As the same Fedotov writes, "the work of Nestor will form the basis of all Russian aeography, inspiring on the feat, pointing out the normal, Russian path of difficulty and, on the other hand, filling out the general necessary features of the biographical legend gaps.<…> All this informs Nestorous life of exceptional importance for the Russian type of ascetic holiness. " The chronicler was not a witness to the life and feats of Rev. Feodosia. Nevertheless, the basis of his living story is the evidence of eyewitnesses that he was able to combine in a solid, bright and memorable story.

Of course, to create full-fledged literary lives need a support for developed literary traditionwho has not yet been in Russia. So the Monk Nestor a lot bombs from greek sources, sometimes making long literal extracts. However, they practically do not affect the biographic basis of his story.

The memory of the unity of the people

The main feat of the life of Rev. Nestor was to comply with the 1112-1113 "Tale of Bygone Years". This work will be from the first two known literary works of Rev. Nestor for a quarter of a century and refers to another literary genre - Chronicles. The arch "Tale ...", unfortunately, did not reach us entirely. It was recycled by the monk of the Vestubitsky monastery Sylvestre.

At the basis of the "Tale of Bygone Years", the chronicle work of Heguman John, who took the first attempt to systematic presentation of Russian history from ancient times. He brought his story to 1093. Earlier chronicles are a fragmented statement of disparate events. Interestingly, these records contain a legend about Kie and his brothers, briefly reported on the reign of Varyaga Oleg in Novgorod, about the Earlings of Askold and Dira, the legend of death is given Of Oleg.. Actually, the Kiev history begins with the reign of "Old Igor", whose origin is silent.

Hegumen John, dissatisfied with the inaccuracy and fabulousness of the chronicle, restores the year, relying on the Greek and Novgorod chronicles. It is he who first represents "Old Igor" as the son of Rurik. Askold and Deer here for the first time appear as a boyar Rüric, and Oleg - as his governor.

The archman of John became the basis of the work of Rev. Nestor. He subjected the greatest processing the initial part of the chronicle. The initial edition of the chronicle was supplemented by tales, monastic records, Byzantine Chronicles of John Malali and George Amartol. The great importance of Holy Nestor attached to verbal testimonies - the stories of the elder-boyar Jana, the merchants, merchants, warriors, travelers.

In his main work, Nestor's chronicler acts as a historian scientist, and as a writer, and as a religious thinker, giving the theological understanding of the domestic history, which is part of History of rescue human race.

For Rev. Nestor, the history of Russia is the story of the perception of Christian preaching. Therefore, he records in his chronicle the first mention of the Slavs in church sources - 866, tells in detail about the activities of the Saints equal to the Apostles Kirill And Methodius, about baptism of equivalent Olga in Constantinople. It is this devotee that introduces a story about the first orthodox church In Kiev, the preaching feat of the Varyagov-Martyrs Theodore Varyag and his son John.

Despite the huge amount of heterogeneous information, the chronicle of the Rev. Nestor became a genuine masterpiece of the Old Russian and world literature.

During the years of fragmentation, when there was almost nothing about the unity of Kievan Russia, the "Tale of Bygone Years" remained the monument that wakes the memory of her former unity in all corners of Rus.

Rev. Nestor died around 1114, having taught Pechersk inocham-chroniclers to continue their great work.

Newspaper "Orthodox Vera" № 21 (545)

Introduction

1. The concept of chronicles

3. Methods of studying the chronicles

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Chronicles, historical works of the XI-XVII centuries, in which the story was conducted by year. The story about the events of each year in the chronicles usually began in words: "In the summer" - hence the name is the chronicle. The words "chronicle" and the "chronicler" are equal, but the chronicler could also call the compiler of such a work. Chronicles are the most important historical sources, the most significant monuments of public thought and culture of ancient Russia. Usually in the chronicles set forth the Russian history from its start, sometimes the chronicles were opened by the biblical history and continued the ancient, Byzantine and Russian. The chronicles played an important role in the ideological substantiation of the princely power in ancient Russia and the propaganda of the unity of Russian lands. The chronicle contains significant material about the origin of the Oriental Slavs, about their state power, on the political relations of the Eastern Slavs among themselves and with others. Peoples and countries.

Purpose of the study - Study of the chronicles as a historical source, methods for studying them.

Research tasks:

1) to reveal the concept of chronicles;

2) consider the content of the chronicle;

3) identify the methods of studying the chronicles.

1. The concept of chronicles

In Kiev in the XII century. The lunches were conducted in the Kiev-Pechersk and Vedubitsky Mikhailovsky monasteries, as well as with the princely yard. Galico-Volyn chroniclel in the XII century. Focusing at the courtyards of Galico-Volyn princes and bishops. The South Russian Lettering has been preserved in the Ipatiev Chronicles, which consists of the "Tale of Bygone Years", continued in the main Kiev news (ending 1200), and the Galico-Volyn Chronicles (ending 1289-92). In the Vladimir-Suzdal land, Vladimir, Suzdal, Rostov and Pereyaslavl were the main centers of the chronicles. The monument of this chronicles is the Lavrentievsky chronicle, which begins the "tag of the time years", continued by Vladimir-Suzdal news to 1305, as well as the chronicler of Pereyaslavl-Suzdalsky (ed. 1851) and Radziwalla chronicle, decorated with a large number of drawings. Large development received the chroniclel in Novgorod at the courtyard of the Archbishop, during monasteries and churches.

Mongol-Tatar invasion caused a temporary decay of the chronicles. In the XIV-XV centuries. It develops again. The largest centers of the chronicles were Novgorod, Pskov, Rostov, Tver, Moscow. In the chronicle crops were reflected in ch. Local Events (Birth and Death of Princes, Election of Planting and Thousands in Novgorod and Pskov, Military Hiking, Battle, etc.), Church (Testing and Death of Bishops, Hegumen Monasteries, Building Churches, etc.), cripples and hunger , epidemics, remarkable phenomena of nature and others. Events emerging beyond local interests are reflected in such chronicles weakly. Novgorod chronicles of the XII-XV centuries. The most fully represented by the Novgorod first chronicles in the senior and younger facing. Senior, or earlier, the origins have been preserved in a single synodal parchment (charat) list of the XIII-XIV centuries; The younger facing reached the lists of XV century. In Pskov, the lunches were associated with the positories and the state office with the Cathedral of the Trinity. In Tver, the chiefscription developed at the courtyard of Tver princes and bishops. The idea of \u200b\u200bit is given by the Tver Collection and Rogozhsky Chronicler. In Rostov, the luminoscription was conducted at the courtyard of the bishops, and the annals created in Rostov were reflected in a number of arms, incl. In the Yermolin chronicles to. XV.

New phenomena in the chronicles are celebrated in the XV century, when the Russian state was consumed with the center in Moscow. The policies of Moscow led. The princes were reflected in the community chronicle crops. About the first Moscow communional architecture gives the view of the Trinity Chronicle N. XV century (disappeared during a fire 1812) and the Simeon chronicle in the list of the XVI century. Troitskaya chronicle ends 1409. To compile it, a variety of sources were attracted: Novgorod, Tver, Pskov, Smolensk and others. Origin and political orientation This chronicles are emphasized by the predominance of the Moscow news and the overall favorable assessment of the activities of Moscow princes and Metropolitans. The community chronicle architects, compiled in Smolensk in thek. XV century, was so-called. Chronicle of Abrahamki; Dr. The arch is a Suzdal Chronicle (k. XV century).

The chronicle arch, based on a rich Novgorod writing, "Sofia Temperator", appeared in Novgorod. The big chronicle arch appeared in Moscow in thek. XV - N. XVI centuries. The resurrection chronicle, which ended in 1541, is particularly known (compilation of land. Parts of the chronicles refers to 1534-37). It includes many official records. The same official records entered the extensive Lviv chronicle, which included in their composition "The chronicler began the beginning of the king of the king and the Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich", up to 1560. At the court of Ivan Grozny, in the 1540-60s, a facial chronicle arch was created, i.e. Chronicle, including drawings corresponding to the text. The first three volumes of the facial arch are dedicated world History (compiled on the basis of the "chronograph" and other works), the following 7 volumes - Russian history from 1114 to 1567. The last volume of the facial arch dedicated to the reign of Ivan Grozny, was called the "royal book". The text of the facial arch is based on the earlier - Nikonovsky chronicle that represented a huge compilation from a variety of chronicle of news, leads, lives, etc. in the XVI century. The lunches continued to develop not only in Moscow, but also in other cities. The most famous Vologda-Perm chronicle. The chronicles were also conducted in Novgorod and Pskov, in the Pechersk Monastery under Pskov. In the XVI century appeared new species historical narrationAlready extending from the chronicle form, "the" Book of the Power Tsarskiy Rhodes "and" The Story of the Kazan Kingdom ".

In the XVII century There was a gradual death of the chronicle forms of the narration. At this time, local chronicles appeared, of which the Siberian chronicles are most interesting. The beginning of their compilation refers to the 1st floor. XVII century Of these, Stroganovskaya chronicle and Esipovskaya chronicle are more famous. In k. XVII century. Tobolsky son Boyarsky S. Remezov was compiled by the "History of Siberian". In the XVII century The chronicles are included in the power books and chronographs. The word "chronicle" continues to be used by tradition even for such works that weakly resemble the chronicle of the old time. This is the new chronicler telling about the events to. XVI - N. XVII centuries. (Polish-Swedish intervention and peasant War), and "chronicle about many rebellion."

The characteristic feature of the chronicles is the Vera Chronicles in the intervention of the Divine Forces. New chronicles were usually compiled as arms of the preceding chronicles and various materials (historical ages, lives, messages, etc.) and were recorded about the modern chronicles of events. Literary works at the same time used in the chronicles as sources. Traditions, epics, contracts, legislative acts, documents of prince and church archives were also crowded by the chronicler in the tissue of the narration. Rewriting materials included in the chronicles, he sought to create a single story, subordinating his historical concept that corresponded to the interests of the political center, where he wrote (Dvor Prince, the Office of Metropolitan, Bishop, Monastery, Planting Izba, etc.). However, along with the official ideology in the chronicles, the views of their immediate compilers were displayed, sometimes very democratically progressive. In general, the chronicles indicate the high patriotic consciousness of the Russian people in the XI-XVII centuries. The lettering was drawn up great importanceThey were treated in political disputes, with diplomatic negotiations. The skill of historical narration has reached high perfection in the chronicle. The lists of the chronicles reached at least 1500. Many works of Old Russian literature remained in the chronicle: the teachings of Vladimir Monomakh, the tale of Mamaev Bow, Haming for the three seas Athanasius Nikitina and others. The ancient chronicles of the XI-XII centuries. Preserved only in later lists. The most famous of the early chronicles that has come down to our time, "the Tale of Bygone Years". It is considered to be Nestor - the monk of the Pechersk Monastery in Kiev, who wrote his work about 1113.

Feudal fragmentation of the XII-XIV centuries. It is also reflected in the chronicle: the archives of this time express local political interests. In Kiev in the XII century. The lunches were conducted in Pechersk and the vydubitsky monasteries, as well as princely yard. Galico-Volyn chroniclel in the XIII century. (See Galico-Volyn Chronicle) focuses on the courtyards of Galician-Volyn princes and bishops. The South Russian Lettering has been preserved in the Ipatiev Chronicles, which consists of the "Tale of Bygone Years", continued in the main Kiev news (ending 1200), and the Galico-Volyn Chronicle (ending 1289-92) (PSRL, vol. 2, the annals in the Ipatiev List). In the Vladimir-Suzdal land, Vladimir, Suzdal, Rostov and Pereyaslavl were the main centers of the chronicles. The monument of this chronicles is the Lavrentievsky chronicle, which begins the "Tales of the Championships of the Days", continued by Vladimiro-Suzdal news to 1305 (PSRL, vol Large drawings. Large development received the chroniclel in Novgorod at the courtyard of the Archbishop, during monasteries and churches.

Mongol-Tatar invasion caused a temporary decay of the chronicles. In the XIV-XV centuries. It develops again. The largest centers of the chronicles were Novgorod, Pskov, Rostov, Tver, Moscow. In the chronicle crops, the main events of local importance (the birth and death of the princes, election of planting and communal in Novgorod and Pskov, military campaigns, battles, etc.), church (supply and death of bishops, monasteries' needles, the construction of churches, etc. ), cripplers and hunger, epidemics, noteworthy phenomena of nature, etc. Events emerging beyond local interests are reflected in such chronicles weakly. Novgorod chronicles of the XII-XV centuries. The most fully represented by the Novgorod first chronicle of the senior and younger facing (see Novgorod Chronicles). Senior, or earlier, the origins have been preserved in a single synodal parchment (charat) list of the XIII-XIV centuries; The younger facing reached the lists of XV century. (Novgorod first chronicles of senior and younger fabrics, PSRL, vol. 3). In Pskov, the lunches were connected with the posters and the state office under the Cathedral of the Trinity (PSRL, vol. 4-5; Pskov chronicles, in. 1-2, 1941-55). In Tver, the chiefscription developed at the courtyard of Tver princes and bishops. The idea of \u200b\u200bit is given by the Tver Collection (PSRL, vol. 15) and the Rogozhsky Chronicler (PSRL, 2007, century. 1). In Rostov, the lover was conducted at the courtyard of the bishops, and the annals created in Rostov were reflected in a number of arms, including in the Ermolin chronicle of the con. XV century

The chronicle arch, based on a rich Novgorod writing, "Sofia Temperator", appeared in Novgorod. The big chronicle arch appeared in Moscow at the end of the XV - early XVI centuries. Especially known, the Resurrection Chronicle, which ended in 1541 (the compilation of the main part of the chronicles belongs to 1534-37). It includes many official records. The same official records entered the extensive Lviv chronicle, which included in their composition "The chronicler began the beginning of the king of the king and the Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich", up to 1560. At the court of Ivan Grozny in the 40-60s. XVI in. A facial chronicle architecture was created, that is, the chronicle, including drawings corresponding to the text. The first 3 volumes of the facial arch are devoted to the world history (composed on the basis of the "chronograph" and other works), the following 7 volumes - Russian history from 1114 to 1567. The last volume of the facial arch dedicated to the reign of Ivan Grozny, got the name of the "royal book". The text of the facial arch is based on the earlier - Nikonovsky chronicle that represented a huge compilation from a variety of chronicle of news, leads, lives, etc. in the XVI century. The lunches continued to develop not only in Moscow, but also in other cities. The most famous Vologda-Perm chronicle. The chronicles were also conducted in Novgorod and Pskov, in the Pechersk Monastery under Pskov. In the XVI century New types of historical narratives appeared, already departing from the chronicle form, "the" Book of the Power Tsarskiy Rhodes "and" History about the Kazan Kingdom ".

In the XVII century There was a gradual death of the chronicle forms of the narration. At this time, local chronicles appeared, of which the Siberian chronicles are most interesting. The beginning of their compilation refers to the 1st half of the XVII century. Of these, Stroganovsky chronicle and Esipovskaya chronicle are more famous. At the end of the XVII century. The Tobolsky Son Boyarsky S. U. Remezov was drawn up the "History of Siberian" ("Siberian Chronicles", 1907). In the XVII century The chronicles are included in the power books and chronographs. The word "chronicle" continues to be used by tradition even for such works that weakly resemble the chronicles of the old time. This is the new chronicler telling about the events of the end of the XVI - early XVII centuries. (Polish-Swedish Intervention and Peasant War), and "Chronicle of many rebellion."

The chroniclel, which gained significant development in Russia, was to a lesser extent developed in Belarus and in Ukraine, which was part of the Grand District of Lithuania. The most interesting product of this chronicles began the beginning of the XVI century. It is the "Brief Kiev Chronicle", which contains the Novgorod and Kiev abbreviated chronicles (1836). Ancient history Rus is represented in this chronicles on the basis of earlier chronicles, and the events of the end of the XV - early XVI centuries. Described by the contemporary. The elevation also developed in Smolensk and Polotsk in the XV-XVI centuries. Belarusian and Smolensk chronicles have formed the basis of some chronicles on the history of Lithuania. Sometimes the chronicles are called some Ukrainian historical works of the XVIII century. (Self-Father's Chronicles, etc.). The lunches also conducted in Moldova, Siberia, Bashkiria.

Chronicles serve as the main source for studying the history of Kievan Rus, as well as Russia, Ukraine, Belarus in the XIII-XVII centuries, although they reflected mainly the class interests of the feudalists. Only in the annals, such sources are preserved as Rus agreements with the Greeks of the X century, Russian truth in a brief edition, etc. The chronicles for the study of Russian writing, language and literature have enormous importance. The chronicles also contain valuable material on the history of other peoples of the USSR.

The study and publication of the chronicles in Russia and the USSR is being conducted more than two hundred years: in 1767 in the "library of the Russian historical, containing the ancient chronicles and any notes" the chronicle text was published, and from 1841 to 1973 it turns out Full collection Russian chronicles.

V.N. Tatishchev and M.M. Scherbatov marked the beginning of the study of the chronicle of the forty years dedicated to the study of the "Tale of Bygone Years" by A. Chronicle Schlezer, cleaning the chronicle from errors and the descriptions, explaining the "dark" places. P.M. Stroyev considered the chronicles as collections or "vaults" of the preceding material. Using the technique of Schlezer and Stroyev, M.P. Pogodin and I. I. Szrenevsky enriched science with many facts that facilitated the study of the history of the Russian chronicle

I.D. Belyaev classified chronicles on state, family, monastic and chronicle collections and indicated that the position of the chronicler was determined by its territorial and class situation. M.I. Sukhomlinov in the book "On the ancient Russian chronicle as a literary monument" (1856) tried to establish literary sources of the initial Russian chronicle. K. N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin in the work "On the composition of Russian chronicles to the end of the XIV century." (1868) For the first time decomposed the chronicle text on annual entries and legends. A genuine coup in the study of the chronicle was produced by Acad. A. A. Chematov. He applied the draining of various lists, finely and deeply analyzing the material, and made this method mainly in his work on the study of the chief of chess attached great importance to find out all the circumstances of the creation of the chronicle, each list and archway, paid attention to the study of various chronological instructions found in the annals, Clarifying their compilation and correcting actual inaccuracies. Much data has extracted chess from the analysis of the descriptions, language errors, dialectisms. He first recreated a one-piece picture of Russian chronicles, introducing it as the genealogy of almost all lists and at the same time as the history of Russian public self-consciousness. The Shamatov method was developed in the works of MD Prettkov, strengthened his historical side. Significant contribution to the study of the Russian chronicle, followers of Chehams - N.F. Lavrov, A.N. Natsov, Chronicles V. Cherepnin, D.S. Likhachev, S.V. Bakhrushin, A.I. Andreev, M.N. Tikhomirov, N.K. Nikolsky, V.M. Istrin and others. Studying the history of the chronicles is one of the most complex sections of source studies and philological science.

3. Methods of studying the chronicles

Methods for studying the history of the chronicles applied by chess, formed the basis of modern textology.

The restoration of the chronicles preceding the "Tale of Bygone Years" belongs to the fascinating pages of philological science.

So, for example, at the beginning of the lists of the Novgorod first chronicle (except for the Novgorod first on a synodal list, where the beginning of the manuscript is lost) the text is read, partially similar, and partially different with the "saying of temporary years."

Exploring this text, A.A. Chess came to the conclusion that it was preserved excerpts of more ancient chronicle than the "Tale of Bygone Years". Among the evidence A.A. Chess leads and marked above, where inserts are found in the text "Tale of Bygone Years". So, under 946 in the Novgorod first chronicle, there is no story about the fourth revenge Olga and the narrative is deployed logically: "And the victorious of the Dwarfs and placing the tribute to them," that is, just as, by the assumption of A.A. Chehamatova, read in the chronicle of the audience preceding the "Tale of Bygone Years".

It is also definitely absent in the Novgorod chronicle and the contract of Svyatoslav with the Greeks, which, as mentioned above, ripped the phrase: "And spectable:" I will have a friend in Russia and give more a squad; And widget in the boats. "

Based on these and many other considerations A.A. Chess came to the conclusion that the initial part of the Novgorod first chronicle was based on the chronicle of more ancient than the "Tale of Bygone Years". The chronicler, who was the "Tale of Bygone Years", expanded it with new materials, various written and oral sources, documents (contracts with the Greeks), extracts from the Greek chronicles and brought the application to its time.

However, the Code preceded by the "Tale of Bygone Years" is restored to the Novgorod first chronicle only partially, for example, there is no statement of events 1016 - 1052. and 1074 - 1093. The arch, the foregoing and "Tale of Bygone Years", and the Novgorod first chronicle, A. A. Chematov called "primary", assuming that the Russian chroniclel began with him.

Step by step in various studies A.A. Chessov managed to restore its composition completely, set the time of its preparation (1093-1095) and show, in which political situation it arose.

The initial arch was under the fresh impression of a terrible Polovtsian invasion of 1093. The description of this invasion he ended up, reflections on the reasons for the unfortunate people of the Russian people, he began. In joining the initial source, the chronicler wrote that God executes Russian land for the "inconsistency" of modern princes and warriors. They, the greedy and self-writer, the chronicler opposes the ancient princes and the warriors who did not ruin the people by lawsuits, they themselves contained their prey in distant campaigns, cared for the glory of Russian land and its princes.

By calling this arch initial, A.A. Chess did not assume that soon this name would be inaccurate. Further research A. A. Shamatov showed that various layers and insertion are available as part of the initial arch. A.A. Chessov managed to open the initial arch of two even more ancient arch.

Thus, the history of the oldest Russian chronicles seems to be A.A. Chessov in the following form.

In 1037-1039. The first Russian chronicle was compiled - the oldest Kiev arch.

Since the beginning of the 60s. Xi century The igumen of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nikon continued the maintenance of chronicles and by 1073 compiled a second chronicle arch.

In 1093-1095 In the same Kiev-Pechersk monastery, the third chronicle arch was compiled, conditionally called the initial. Finally, at the beginning of the XII century., Not immediately, and in several techniques, the "Tale of Bygone Years" came up to us.

A.A. Chess did not stop at clarifying the main facts of the history of the initial Russian chronicle. He sought to restore the text of each of the above arches. In "Search for the oldest Russian chronicle crops" (1908) A.A. Chess gave him the text of the oldest criterion in the editorial office of 1073, - that is, the text of Nicon's arch 1073, with the allocation in it with the help of a special font of those parts that entered into it from the oldest Code 1037-1039. In a later work of the "Tale of Bygone Years" (t. 1, 1916) A.A. Chess gave the text of the Tale of Bygone Years, in which large font allocated those parts of it, which go down to the initial severity of 1093-1095.

It should be noted that in its extremely bold attempt to visually imagine the whole history of Russian chronicles, restore the long-lasting texts of A.A. Chess has come across a number of questions, for which a sufficient material could not be found.

Therefore, in this last part of A.A. Chehamatova - where he interspersed had to, reconstructing text, solve all the questions - even those on which it was almost impossible to answer, - the conclusions were only supposed.

Along with the largest advantages of research A.A. Chehamatov possess, however, substantial disadvantages. These disadvantages are primarily a methodological nature. For its time, a general understanding of A.A. The chess history of Russian chronicles was distinguished by progressive features. A.A. Chess first introduced into a subtle but formal philological analysis Bourgeois philology is a historical approach. He drew attention to politically sharp and not an impassive nature of the chronicles, on their connection with the feudal struggle of his time.

Only on these premises of A.A. Chess was able to create the history of chronicle. However, the historical approach A.A. Chessatova was not always correct. In particular, A.A. Chess did not investigate the chronicle as monument of literature, I did not notice the changes in it purely genre. The genre of the chronicle, the ways of her maintenance were presented by A.A. Chesswood unchanged, always alone and the same.

Following A.A. Shakhmatov, we would have to assume that the first Russian chronicle has connected all the features of the Russian chronicle: Manera compile new records by year, the characteristics of the language, the wide attraction of folklore data for the restoration of Russian history, the most understanding of Russian history, its main milestones. We would have to assume also that the chronicle was out of the social struggle of their time.

It goes without saying that such a beginning of the chronicles is unlikely. In fact, as we will see below, the chronicle, her literary form And its ideological content grew gradually, changing under the influence of ideas and directions of its time, reflecting the inner, social struggle of the feudalizing state.

In fact, inserts, alterations, additions, compounds of heterogeneous ideological and stylistically, characterize the most ancient chronicle alignment, even in that of its form, in which it is restored by A.A. Chess.

Conclusion

So, examining the creativity of A.A. Chehamatova It should be noted that in its extremely bold attempt to visually submit the whole history of Russian chronicles, to restore the long-lost texts of A.A. Chess achieved serious success.

However, at the same time he came across a number of issues, which could not be found sufficient material for solving.

Along with the largest advantages of research A.A. Chehamatov possess, however, substantial disadvantages. These disadvantages are primarily a methodological nature. For its time, a general understanding of A.A. The chess history of Russian chronicles was distinguished by progressive features. A.A. Chess for the first time introduced into a subtle, but formal philological analysis of bourgeois philology historical approach.

He drew attention to politically sharp and not an impassive nature of the chronicles, on their connection with the feudal struggle of his time.

Only on these premises of A.A. Chess was able to create the history of chronicle. However, the historical approach A.A. Chessatova was not always correct.

In particular, A.A. Chess did not investigate the chronicle as a monument of literature, did not notice changes in it purely genre. The genre of the chronicle, the ways of her maintenance were presented by A.A. Chesswood unchanged, always alone and the same.

Bibliography

1. Danilevsky I.N. and others. Source studies. - M., 2005. - 445 p.

2. Danielz A.V. Efficiency // History and Policy. - 2009. - № 5. - S.78-85.

3. Kovalchenko I. D. Methods of historical research. - M., 2003. - 438 p.

4. Likhachev D.S. Russian chronicles // Sat. Literature and art. - M.: Science, 1997. - 340 p.

5. Medushevskaya O.M. Theoretical problems of source studies. - M., 2005. - 86 p.

6. Tale of temporary years. - M.: Academy. 1987. - 540 p.

7. Eliminals M. D. History of Russian Chronicles of the XI - XV centuries. - L.: Enlightenment, 1990. - 188 p.

Personalkov M. D. History of Russian Chronicles of the XI - XV centuries. - L.: Enlightenment, 1990. - P. 95.

Tutoring

Need help to study what language themes?

Our specialists will advise or have tutoring services for the subject of interest.
Send a request With the topic right now, to learn about the possibility of receiving consultation.

2. The word teacher

The goal of the knowledge of the stage:What events are the occurrence of ancient Russian literature related?

Teacher:

An incentive for the emergence of the ancient Russian literature was the adoption of Christianity, when it became necessary to introduce Russia with the Sacred Scriptures, with the history of the Church, with the World History, with the Life of Saints. Without liturgical books, the cultivated churches could not exist. And also there was a need to transfer from the Greek and Bulgarian originals and distribute a large number of texts. This is exactly what was the impetus for creating literature in the years. In contrast to the Western European countries, Russia adopted Christianity late, in 988. The initial development of Russian literature happened under the influence of Byzantium - that is, the Eastern Roman Empire with the capital in Constantinople. The oldest monuments are upgraded by the XI century and are written in the old Church Slavonic language. The earliest of the preserved manuscripts were created in Kiev, then at the crossroads of the most important trade routes and presented by one of the most prosperous and cultural cities of medieval Europe. Book centers were also Chernigov, Galich, Rostov, Novgorod. Books in ancient Russia were valued very high. They wrote them mostly monks of the recorders in their cells. The greatest interest was the works of moral, instructive character, as well as historical writings.

Answer:The beginning of ancient Russian literature refers to the x in. When writing appeared in Russia.

Question:Listen to the material and answer the question: what is the old Russian literature different from the literature of the new time?

Teacher:Specific features of the ancient Russian literature is:

1. Until 1564, Russian literature was handwritten. The problem of typography existed for a long time, up to the 18th century., Therefore, the creation of a book was a long-term business. Up to 17th century, all the works were distributed by correspondence.

2. Works were created on the basis of historical material. Old Russian literature did not know the fiction. All texts are based on real historical facts. The presence of fantastic elements in the texts says that a person in ancient Russia believed that these wonders really happened.

3. The literature of ancient Russia preached Christian spirituality and ethics, that is, high morality.

4. Old Russian literature remained anonymous for a long time.

Answer:The ancient Russian literature was molded, most often anonymous, was closely connected with religion, based on historical facts.

Teacher: Now let's talk about the genres of Old Russian literature. Old Russian literature is diverse in its genre composition: weather entries, stories, parables (about prodigal Son.), life - These are works in which it was told about the life of the saints (first lives - Boris and Gleb, these are the sons of Vladimir), legends (about the founding of Kiev), teaching (This is a genre of solemn eloquence, they pounded the vices, welcomed virtues, instructed believers in Christian morality, for example, the teaching of Vladimir Monomakh), walking Or travel (Athanasius Nikitina) - works describing the travels of Bogomolev to the shrines of Palestine and Byzantium.

We reached the chronicles, the lives of the saints and monks, sermons and several secular stories written in 1030-1240. The most famous of the chronicle works is the "Tale of Bygone Years". This work was created at the beginning of the XII century by the monk Kiev-Pechersk Lavra Nestor-chronicle. In the chronicle, it is told about the origin of the Russian Earth, the first Russian princes and the most important historical events. The peculiarity of the story is poeticity, the author of her masterfully owned the word, various artistic agents are used in the text, allowing to make a narrative more convincing.

Question: How did you understand what the chronicle is?

Answer:weather description of the events that took place in Russia for several centuries.

Answer:Nestor-chronicle.

Traditionally, chronicles in a broad sense called historical writings, the presentation in which is conducted strictly by year and is accompanied by chronographic (annual), often calendar, and sometimes chronometric (hourly) dates. In the narrow sense of the word chronicles, it was customary to call the chronicle of the chronicles that have survived in one or several similar lists. Sometimes small in the volume of the chronicle - most often a muddy or chronologically limited nature - called chroniclers (Rogozhsky chronicler, chronicle of the beginning of kingdoms, etc.). As a rule, under the chronicles in studies, the complex of lists, united in one edition (say, Lavrentievsky chronicle, Ipatievsky chronicle). It believes that they are based on the general intended source.

The lover was conducted in Russia from the XI to XVII century. Late Russian chronicles (XVI-XVII centuries) differ significantly from the chronicle of the previous time. Therefore, work with them has its own specifics. At that time, the chronicles as a special genre of historical narration was faded. A single species of historical sources came to change: Chronographs, Sinopsis, etc. The coexistence period of these types of sources is characterized by peculiar blurring of species boundaries. Chronicles are increasingly acquired by the traits of chronographic (more precisely, the graphic) presentation: the story is carried out on "faces" - the periods of the rules of the kings and the Grand Princes. In turn, late chronographs may include chronicle materials in their composition (sometimes whole fragments of chronicles).

Back in the XIX century. It was found that almost all preserved chronicle texts are compilations, crops of previous chronicles.

The reconstruction of text texts - the challenge of complex and time-consuming (examples of the ancient arch of 1036/39, the initial Code of 1096/97, I, II and III of the Test of the Tale of the Week, created by A.A. Chematov; Academic Edition of the Text Reconstruction Tale of time years, prepared by D.S. Likhachev). They are resorted to clarify the composition and content of the text of the hypothetical arch. Basically, such reconstructions are illustrative. At the same time, the case of scientific reconstruction MD is known. The sled Troitsky chronicle, the list of which died during the Moscow fire of 1812. Thanks to this reconstruction, the Trinity list was re-introduced into scientific turns. Program reconstructions are admissible, as a rule, at the final stage of the source studies, since it makes it possible to specifically submit the results of work on the texts of the chronicle lists. However, they are not accepted as a starting material.

\u003e When working with chronicle materials, you should remember the inaccuracies and conventions of scientific terminology. This is due, in particular, with the "lack of clear boundaries and the complexity of the history of chronicle texts", with the "fluidity" of the chronicles, allowing "gradual transitions from the text to the text without visible gradations of monuments and editions." It should be distinguished, whether the study is underway on the chronicles as a conditional edition or a specific list; Do not confuse the reconstruction of chronicle protograds with the texts of the lists that have come down to us and so on.

The clarification of chronicle of the terminology is one of the urgent tasks of chronicle sources. To date, "In the study of the chronicle, the use of terms is extremely vague.

One of the most difficult in the chronicle is the concept of authorship. After all, as already noted, almost all the famous chronicles are the result of several generations of chroniclers.

Therefore, the very idea of \u200b\u200bthe author (or compiler, or editor) of the chronicles is largely conditional. Each of them, before proceeding with the description of events and processes, an eyewitness or a contemporary that he was, first rewrote one or more preceding chronicles who were at his disposal.

In other things, the chronicler approached the creation of the original, "author's" text about the modern events, the participant or witness he was either of whom he learned from witnesses. Here, the individual experience of the author or his informants could conflict with public memory. However, this explicit paradox disappeared when it was possible to distinguish the features of the highest for the Christian consciousness of historical experience. For the chronicler, the sacred history is timeless and constantly experienced in real, "today's" events value. The event is essential for the chronicler in the postoline, since it, figuratively speaking, was an event.

Hence the description of the description - through direct or indirect citation of authoritative (most often sacred) texts. Analogy with already known events gave the chronicler with a substantial typology. That is why the texts of the sources that the chronicler relied was, were for him and his contemporaries by the semantic foundation, from which it remained to choose ready-made cliché for perception, descriptions and simultaneous evaluation of what happened. Apparently, individual creativity affected the main form and to a much lesser extent the content of the chronicle report.

The idea should allow consignatory to explain: 1) the reasons that prompted to create new vaults and continue the one-time statement; 2) the structure of the chronicle narration; 3) the selection of the material to be subject to 4) the form of its feed; 5) Selection of sources, which relied on the chronicler.

The path of identifying the plan - inverse: on the analysis of the content of texts, which he restored the chronicler (and the general ideas of the works, which he took, as the basis of the presentation), on literary forms found in the chronicle, should be restored to the chronicler and its potential readers, the content of chronicle reports should be restored , the arch in general, and already on this basis, try to strip the basic idea, which caused this work to life.

7. Tale of temporary years: origin, authorship, editorial office, internal structure. The beginning of the ancient Russian chronicles is customary to communicate with sustainable common textwhich begins the overwhelming majority of the chronicles that have reached our time. The text of the Tale of Bygone Years covers a long period - from ancient times before the second decade of the XII century. This is one of the oldest chronicles, the text of which was preserved by the chronicle tradition. In different chronicles, the text of the story reaches different years: up to 1110 (Lavrentiev and lists close to him) or until 1118 (Ipatiev and lists close to it). This is usually associated with repeated editing a story. The draining of both editors led A.A. Shahmatova to the conclusion that the text of the first edition was preserved in the Lavrentievsky chronicle, implemented by the Igumen of the Vestubitsky Monastery Sylvester. Text of articles 6618-6626. It is associated with the second edition of the Tale of Bygone Years, conducted, apparently, with the senior son of Vladimir Monomakh, Novgorod Prince Mstislava. At the same time, an indication that the author of the story was some monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, Nestor. According to A.A. Chehamatova, the chronicle, which is customary to refer to the tag of time years, was established in 1112 by Nestor - presumably the author of two well-known agiographic works - readings about Boris and Gleb and the lives of Feodosia Pechersk.

The chronicles preceding the tales of temporary years: the text of the chronicle of the chronicle of the old years preceded as part of the Novgorod I chronicles. Tale of the time years preceded the arch, which A.A. Chess offered to call the initial. Based on the content and character of the presentation of the chronicle, it was suggested to date 1096-1099. According to the researcher, on the basis of the Novgorod I chronicles. Further study of the initial Vault, however, showed that he was based on some kind of work (or works) of the chronicle. From this L.A. Chess concluded that the initial camp was based on some chronicle, compiled between 977 and 1044. Most likely in this gap L.A. Chess counted 1037, under which Praise was placed by the prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich. This hypothetical chronicle work researcher proposed to be called an ancient arch. The narrative in it has not yet been broken for the years and was a storyline. The annual dates (chronological network) in it introduced Kiev-Pechersk Monk Niko Great in the 70s of the XI century.

M.P. Tikhomirov drew attention to the fact that the time of the reign of Svyatoslav Igorevich was better reflected, than Vladimir Svyatoslavich and Yaroslav Vladimirovich. On the foundations of a comparative study of the story and the Novgorod I chronicles, the scientist concluded that the story was based on a monothematical story about the beginning of the Russian Earth, who told about the foundation of Kiev and the first Kiev princes.

D.S. Likhachev believes that the initial distribution of Christianity on Rus is preceded by the initial extent. It was a monotematic story compiled at the beginning of the 10th year. XI century The legend included: the legends on the baptism and the death of Princess Olga; On the first Russian martyrs Varyagakh-Christians; about the baptism of Russia; About Boris and Gleb Igor Vladimirovich's prince Yaroslav.

L.V. Cherepnin, comparing the text of the story with the praise prince Vladimir Jacob Mnich, came to the conclusion that at the heart of the latter lying in 996. This text was based on brief chronicle notes that were conducted with a tentine church in Kiev. It was also suggested that Anastas Korsunyanin was involved in the preparation of the Church of the Tentine Church.

Novgorod vaults of the XI century: together with the Kiev-Pechersk arch of 1074 (the so-called arch of Nikon), he lay down the initial arch. At the heart of the Novgorod Code of the Third quarter of the XI century, as A.A. Chess, lay the oldest Kiev arch of 1037 and some earlier Novgorod chronicle of 1017, compiled at the Novgorod bishop of Joachim.

B.A. Fishermen connected the compilation of such an arch with the name of Novgorod Postener of Ostrusira (1054-1059). According to the researcher, it was a secular chronicle, justifying the independence of Novgorod, its independence from Kiev.

Oral sources as part of the Tale of Bygone Years: Under 1096, the chronicler mentions Novgorod Guryan Rogovic, who told him the Ugra legend about the peoples living on the edge of the Earth in "Sunny countries".

Foreign sources of the Tale of Bygone Years: a significant part of them are foreign chronicles, first of all Greek. The most numerous borrowing from the translation of Chronicles George Amartol. The chronicle itself was created around 867 and covered the world history from Adam to the death of the Byzantine Emperor of Fofila (812). From the chronicles, information related to the history of Slavs were borrowed, and above all with the first hikes of Russia to Constantinople.

Another important source of the story was the chronicler of the Konstantinople Patriarch Nikifora (806-815), which contained a chronological list essential events World History, brought to the year of the author's death (829). Another important source of the story, according to A.A. Chematov, supported by a number of researchers, became some kind of a chronograph of a special composition before our time. It included fragments of the already mentioned chronicles of George Amartol, as well as the Greek Chronicles of John Malal, Chronicle Georgy Sinkella and Easter Chronicle.

It was used in the story and the text of the Jewish chronograph Book of IPILIKon, compiled in southern Italy in the middle of the X century. At the heart - latin translation "Jewish antiquities" and the retelling of the "Jewish war" of Joseph Flavia. The main source of shaped representations of the first Russian chroniclers were the works of a sacred character, primarily the Holy Scripture.

Apocryphah literature, which in the XI-XII centuries, was widely attracted to the compilation of chronicles. He told along with the liturgical books. It was used by the compiler of the story and life of Vasily New - the Greek Agiographic Work.

Internal structure: PVL consists of undated "administration" and annual articles of different volume, content and origin. These articles may have a character 1) of brief factual notes about a particular event, 2) independent novels, 3) parts of a single narration, separated by different years in the timing of the initial text that did not have a weather grid, and 4) "annual" articles of complex composition .

8. Logging 12-15 century.Basic centers, features of chronicle content.

Local chief spelling of the XII-XIII centuries. South Russian Lettering Sources of Studying South Russian Chronicles of the XII-XIII centuries. Serve, first of all, Ipatievsky (the beginning of the XV century), close to him Khlebnikovsky (XVI century), Poghodinsky (XVII century), Yermolaevsky ( end of XVII. - The beginning of the XVIII century) and other lists, as well as the lists of the Resurrection and the main edition of the Sofia I chronicles. In the XII-XIII centuries. In the south of Russia, the Logging systematically was conducted only in Kiev and Pereyaslavl South. In Chernigov, there were only family princely chronicles.

K and E in with to about e chronicles, on the one hand, as if it continued the tradition of the Tale of Bygone Years. On the other hand, a national character has lost and turned into a family chronicle kiev princes. It was carried out continuously throughout the XII century.

The chronicles of the North-East sources of studying the chronicles of the Russian northeast for the XII-XIII centuries. Include Radzivilovsky (end of the XV century) and Moscow academic (XV century) lists ascending to a common protograph (Radzivilovskaya chronicle), the chronicler Pereyaslavlvalvalvalvsky (list of the 60s XV century) and the Lavrentiev list of 1377. According to M. D. Promotelkov, the central idea of \u200b\u200bthis (Various Vladimir Code of 1281) of the Code was the proof of the priority of Vladimir "among the allied feudal Russian principalities (as opposed to Galitsky, the end of the XIII century).

Vladimir-Suzdalskoye chronicles as an independent branch begins his beginning from 1158, when in Vladimir-on-Klyazma, continuous local entries were launched at the court of Andrei Bogolyubsky. In 1177, they were combined with individual chronicle notes of Yuri Dolgoruky in the Grand Duty Arch, relying, in addition to the Episcopian South Russian (Pereyaslav) chronicler. In the continuation of it was the chronicle of 1193, which also included the materials of the princely chronicler of sorry. In 1212, the facial arch was created on its basis (that is, decorated with miniatures whose copies now can be seen in the Radziwilovsky list) of the Grand Duke Vladimir. Up to this point, the chroniclel was probably conducted at the Vladimir Assumption Cathedral. Then the chronicle arch has acquired secular features, which is associated with the deterioration of the relationship between the Vladimir Prince Yuri with the Bishop of Ivan. Most likely, the compilation of the Code of 1212 was instructed by a man who is close to the great prince. In the future, as a result of the Mongolian invasion and ruin of Vladimir, the Vladimir School of Language fades.

Rostov Schooling continued the tradition of Vladimir Big Couples. Here at the beginning of the XIII century. A local princely chronicler was created, in many respects similar to Vladimir. In 1239, there was a continuation of the grand permanent Vladimir Vault, who was also known and the news of the Rostov Code 1207.

The northeastern chronicle of tradition was based on the idea of \u200b\u200bmoving the center of the Russian Earth from Kiev on Vladimir-on-Klyazma.

Novgorod decree in the sources of study of the Novgorod chronicle of the XII-XIII centuries. serve as a synodal list (XIII - the first one third of the XIV century) of the Novgorod first chronicle (elder origin), as well as the lists of the commission (XV century), the academic (second half of the XV and.) and Troitsky (second half of the XV century), united in Her younger faith. Their analysis allows you to establish that in Novgorod from the middle of the XI century. The chronicle tradition was not interrupted until the XVI century.

The history of the chronicle of Novgorod the Great. Around 1136, apparently, in connection with the exile from Novgorod, Prince Vsevolod, a Sofia Lord Code was created on the instructions of Bishop, reworked by the Novgorod Princely Chronicle, which was conducted from the middle of the XI century. Another source was also also the Kiev initial arch of 1096, the most as the basis of the Novgorod chronicle. Perhaps, the famous cleric of Novgorod Sophia Kijik participated in the creation of the first dominical arch. At the beginning of the XIII century. There was a new dominous arch. Its creation was somehow connected with the fall of Constantinople in 1204. VTO any case, he was completed by the story about the capture of the Byzantine capital with crusaders.

To the XIV century The first chronicles applying to cover the history of all Russian lands (although they actually disappeared in them, as a rule, only events that happened and northeastern Russia). Sources to study the origin of communional chronicles are primarily the Lavrentiev and Trinity Chronicle.

Due to the fact that in 1305, the Tver Prince Mikhail Yaroslavich, the Great Prince, Mikhail Yaroslavich, was moved to Tver, where, probably, at the end of the XIII century, became Mikhail Yaroslavich. The chronicle records begin. The creation of a high-grade arch of the beginning of the XIV p. Coincided with the assimilation of Mikhail Yaroslaviz a new title - "Grand Duke All Russia."

As a communional, the arch includes not only local, but also Novgorod, Ryazan, Smolensk, South Russian news and had an explicit antiordin orientation. Code of 1305 g, became the main source of Lavrentiev chronicles. With the transition of a label, a great reign in the hands of Ivan Kalita, the tradition of communional chronicles in Tver goes to Moscow. Here approximately in 1389, the chronicler Great Russian was created. The analysis shows that during the prince of Yuri Danilovich in Moscow, apparently, the chronicle records were not conducted. Separate fragments of such a work (family chronicle) are celebrated at the Moscow Princely Dvor, only from 1317. A little later, since 1327, the lunches began to begin in the Metropolitan Department transferred for the year to Moscow. Apparently, since 1327, a single chronicle is continuously carried out here.

Most likely, the chroniclel at that time was conducted in the Metropolitan yard. This indicates the nature of annual records: the chronicler relates much more attentively to changes in the Metropolitan throne, and not on the grand mining. However, it is quite explained. Let's not forget that it was Metropolitans, and not the great princes traditionally had the mention of "All Russia", which they (at least nominally) obeyed. Nevertheless, the appeared arch was not actually metropolitan, but a grand-road-metropolitan. This arch (according to Datrovka A.A. Shamatov - 1390) was probably the name of the chronicler Great Russian. It should be, however, it should be noted that the horizon of the compilers of the new arch was unusually narrow. The Moscow chronicler saw significantly less than the compilers of the Tver Grass Monasters. However, according to Ya.S. Lurie, the so-called chronicler The Great Russian could be both Tverskiy for his origin.

The next stage in the development of communional chronicles in existing independent lands and principalities was associated with the strengthening of the role and influence of the Metropolitan "All Russia". This was the result of a long confrontation between the Moscow Grand Duke and Church during the reign of Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoy. With the name of Metropolitan Cyprian bind the idea of \u200b\u200bcreating a new chronicle arch. He included the history of Russian lands, which were part of Russian Metropolitan, from ancient times. It was necessary to enter it, if possible, the materials of all local chronicle traditions, including individual chronicle records on the history of the Grand Principality of Lithuania. The first community metropolitan arch was the so-called Troitskaya chronicle of 1408, which was reflected mainly in the Simeon list.

After the invasion of one and in connection with the following, the struggle for the Moscow throne between the heirs of Dmitry Donskoy, the communal chroniclel, once again moved to Tver. As a result of the enhancement of Tver in the 1930s of the XV century. (according to the last datding of Ya.S. Lurie - in 1412) here appeared new edition The arch of 1408, who was directly reflected in the Rogozhsky Chronicler, Nikonovsky and (indirectly) Simeon chronicles. An important stage in the formation of the communional chronicles was the preparation of an archway, which lay down the basis of a large group of chronicle lists, united in Sofia I and the Novgorod IV of the Chronicles. The calculation of the years, placed under 6888 (1380), allowed L.L. Shakhmatov determines the date of its creation as 1448. The compiler of the Code of 1448 reflected the changed horizon of the reader of his time. Under his pen, it was quite clearly an idea of \u200b\u200bthe need to unite the Moscow lands with Rostov, Suzdal, Tver and Novgorod the Great for the joint struggle with "Pogan". The chronicler "for the first time put this question not with the Uzosokoskovskaya (or Tverskaya), but from a communional point of view (using South Russian Schooling in this case).

Code of 1448 did not reach us in its original form. Perhaps this is due to the fact that he interspersed, due to the time of his creation, was a compromise, sometimes paradoxically uniting Moscow, Tver and Suzdal point of view.

Nevertheless, he lay down the basis of almost all Russian chronicles of the subsequent period (first of all, Sofia I and Novgorod IV), one way or another we recycled it.

"Tale of time years"(Continued)

Now we should consider the written basis for the "Tale of Bygone Years" - its roots in the Russian writing of the XI - early XII century. "The Tale of Bygone Years" stands on the verge of two public engines - the already departed patriarchal-communal and new, feudal, two historical consciousness - epic and chronicle; She stands on the verge of two literature - oral and written, being essentially a written job, reflecting mainly consciousness initial and historical and belonging to the era of feudalism. From the past, the "Tale of Bygone Years" preserves only the best, creatively processing it in the work of the new time. Based on the oral tradition of its time, the "Tale of Bygone Years" creates a written literary language, a written story of Russia. Oral origins were mainly given material, content and ideas for the construction of Russian history, partly its stylistic design, language. The traditions of writing entered all this material into the composite framework familiar to the medieval book. Chronicles worked as conventional techniques of medieval recorders. In the "Tale of Bygone Years", the skills of handling the material, typical of medieval writers, and not quite similar to the writer skills of the new time. The medieval Russian book externally, its composition was sharply different from the books of the new time of the XVIII-XX centuries. In medieval writing, it was rare to find a product of one author or one work, intertwined in a separate binder, highlighted in a separate independent book. It is impossible to imagine that on a book regiment of a medieval reading amateur stood next to the "Word about the regiment of Igor", "Daniel Charple", "the teachings of Vladimir Monomakh", etc. Medieval Russian book - parchment originally, and from the end of XIV in. - Paper, covered with wooden covers, covered with skin, fastened on copper clasp, multi-sized and heavy - was most often a collection. Of course, the books of church, liturgical, theologian-translation were not collections. In the compilations, works intended for personal reading were collected. In its composition, the collections reflected the tastes of readers, their choice, their interests. The reader and the correspondence (and these two categories of the bookleubs of ancient Russia were much more united than in the new time), granted to their own interests, as soon as they felt more or less free from the cloister of the Church, rewrite, reworked and connected to the collections especially Works. The reader became co-author, the co-author was the "Decorator of the book" - her correspondence. The Middle Ages did not know the "copyright", the author's property in our sense of the word. Over the author, the reader dominated - he sometimes also a copywriter. The reader's requirements of this copywriter book were stronger than any copyright. Unless the author was church authority, the "Father of the Church", did not believed with his rights, his name was often not mentioned, his work was reworked in correspondence. The reader turned into a dedicator, and sometimes in the co-author. Hence the constant additions, accommodation inserts and alterations of works; Hence the multiplicity of editors and irregularities of the same essay. That is why the historical works of ancient Russia in most cases reached us, not in a single and solid author's text: the same chronicle or the same chronograph has been preserved in various editions and various facilities. Moreover, very often "author" in the modern sense of the word in medieval historical writings absent. Both in the chronicle and in chronographs, and often in the ones, lives, the pathers in front of us appear a kind of "collective author", multi-sighted, socially inhomogeneous, belonging to several centuries at once, and sometimes even several nationalities (if we are dealing with Russian alterations Translated works). It would be an invalid modernization to consider the texts of the chronicles (including the "Tale of Bygone Years") as the texts of the uniform belonging to the Unified Author. Attempts to restore the initial "author" text "Tale of Bygone Years" (A. Schlezer) or find a single author for the chronicles of Kiev XII century. (Tatishchev, Schöchlzer, Miller) and Novgorod XI century. (Tatishchev, Miller) have long been left by science. In fact, another P. M. Stroyev drew attention to the fact that the chronicles are peculiar collections of the time and heterogeneous works - the arrangements of the preceding material and the new text. This concept of "arch" was subsequently concretized and refined to be applied to the chronicles in the works of M. P. Pogodina, I. I. Szrevnevsky, I. D. Belyaeva, K. N. Bestumeva-Ryumin and especially in numerous works A. A . Chematov, who appealing to the fact that the creation of these arches can not be considered as a matter of incident that the basis of their creation is not a mechanical selection of a random material, but a conscious will of their compiler. Indeed, attentive and thoroughly studying the numerous texts of Russian chronicles, it is similar, then different among themselves in individual parts and in general, varying the news that reduce each other or expanding the news of others shows that all these complex chronicle relations were obtained from the fact that The chronicles constituted their chronicles as collections - the arrangements of the preceding chronicle materials with the accession of their records in recent years. It is as a result of this kind of compounds in the annals of the previous chronicle materials, it turns out that one or another chronicle is twice, and sometimes speaks three times about the same event: connecting several previously preceding chronicles in one, the chronicler could not notice that he repeated his story "Dubbed" the news on the basis of several sources. The "consolidated" character of the Russian chronicles is not only finding out by attentive and painstaking comparisons of lists, allowing to find out which sources there are one or another chronicle, but sometimes directly declared and the chronicle itself. The compiler of the synodal list of the Pskov chronicle in the first lines refers to some "Book this". The link to the "Old Chronicles" is available in the Chronicles of Abrahamki under 1421 in the Sofia First Chronicle there are references to the "Kiev Chronicler" fields. The compiler of the Tver Prince Boris Aleksandrovich is also indicated by its sources. Not only Russian chronicles, but also other historical works of ancient Russia possess this nature of the arches. The same vaults, like the chronicle, are the chronographs (Elelin chronicles of all kinds, Russian chronographs of all editions), Paless - chronographic, interpreting, historical, graders, lives. Sometimes they are sometimes grouped on local, local signs and many Russian historical stories. The cycle of Ryazan led on the Icon Nikol of Prazensky brings together in its composition the military story about the ruin of Ryazan Batym, the processing of the episodes of Evpathy Kolovrat, the church legend about the transfer of the icon of Nikola from Corsun, a number of inserted episodes of the XIV-XVI centuries, a story about the miracle from the icon in Kolomna, The genealogy of the "ministers" of this icon, etc. Separate local versions also constitute Murom's stories, Novgorod stories, aircraft legends, etc. The nature of the arches, which have ancient Russian historical works, is a feature of not only their forms. The very form of arches in which the ancient Russian historical works were enjoyed, was closely related to the special historical consciousness of their authors. The medieval vaults of the previous historical material were prepared primarily for the sake of maintaining the initial text of their as a kind of document in the work of the new. The medieval reader appreciated in historical works primarily their documentality. The ancient Russian reader in literary works was looking for what was "actually", he was not interested in the realism of the image, but the reality itself, not Plumbul, and the events themselves, although in assessment and understanding historical events He was often alien to realism, taking for real life about wonders, signs, phenomena, etc. In this regard, the ancient Russian historian gave his new author's text predominantly about the modern events to him, about those whom he could have witnessed or He could know from witnesses. We rarely can indicate in the ancient Russian literature historical work, whose initial text would be written later or more after the events described. About more or less distant past, medieval authors did not write new works , preferred to connect and recycle old works, make arches, keep the whole old actual basis, appreciate the document, authenticity in old works. No matter how much work, he put the chronicler for the compilation of his chronicle arch, personal, the author's text of the chronicler will cover only the last part of this arch. The chronicle works were constantly complemented, growed up with new records. History up to the XVI century. It did not have completed periods for Russian people, but always continued with modernity. Each chronicler always sought to bring the chronicle entries "to Prince of the present", until his time. And in these final recordings, the chronicles are concluded usually especially valuable historical material: here the chronicler writes not excerpts from other people's works, but with his own words. That is why the chronicle actually does not have the end; Its end in a constantly eclipant and continued present. Present as a continuation of the story, as a living and forever, the result is a kind of historical perception, also in the very form of arches connecting the old, documented material and continuing by its new records to modern chronicles of events. So, the chronicle is the arch. Composing his arch, the chronicler first of all cared to get into his hands the works of his predecessors - the same chronicles, then historical documents - contracts, messages, testaments of princes, historical stories, lives of Russian saints, etc., and t. P. Having collected the entire material affordable to him, sometimes numerous and diverse, sometimes only two or three works, the chronicler joined it in the weather presentation. Chronicles he joined the year with a year, seeking to avoid repetitions, the document was placed under the year, to which he treated, the life of the saint - under the year of the death of this saint, the historical story, if she covered for several years, smashed me over her year and etc. Building the chronicle presentation by the years gave him a convenient network to dissolve all new and new works into it. This work was not mechanical: the chronicler had to sometimes eliminate contradictions, sometimes producing complex chronological surveys to put each event under her year. Based on its political ideas, the chronicler sometimes missed this or that news, made a tendentious selection of these news, occasionally accompanied their own brief political comment, but at the same time did not compose new news. Having completed its work of the summers, the chronicler complemented this material with his own records about the events of recent years. Composed of different slices, from works of different genres, the chronicle appeared seems to be a motley, complex, inhomogeneous. However, the distround and the complexity of the maternity monuments that have reached us are explained not only by the fact that they represent vaults. IN scientific literature Repeatedly indicated stylistic stencils in Russian medieval writing ("Military Formulas" - Acad. A. S. Orlov, Life Templates - V. O. Klyuchevsky). These stylistic stencils are manifestations of a kind of medieval writing etiquette. About every kind of facts committed by the etiquette of the feudal society, the medieval writer seeks to write in its own, only for this group of facts of the intended manner: about the holy - only in the living stamps (in screen expressions, the childhood of the saint, feats in the desert, the death, death words, and so on .); about hostilities - only in military formulas (the enemy comes "in the strength of grave", the arrows fly, "like rain", the blood flows "by Udoliam"); The deceased princess is presented by the template necrological praise, etc. It should not be thought that military stencils are applied only in military agendes, the living templates are only in the lives of saints, etc. Here it is not the case in the genres templates, as some explorers of the Old Russian literature thought . S. Orlov, V. O. Klyuchevsky), namely in the etiquette: each family of facts should be described in only it belonging to the manner, in expressions, for him intended. That is why in the lives of saints, military actions are depicted not in housing expressions, and in the military, in the military titles the image of the saint is subordinate to the living templates. For some reason, all the manners of the presentation are used in the chronicles - depending on what we are talking about. And the matter here is again not only in the form of presentation, but also in the essence of the presentation, since all these stylistic stencils, all this "etiquette" of the writing craft was connected with the ideological ideas of the Middle Ages about the Holy, about the vulnea, about the ideal type of prince, About motives for which enemies attack Russian land, about the causes of natural disasters (browsers, droughts, etc.), also depicted in their etiquette expressions. Like the consolidated nature of the chronicles, it is "striving" of various types of stylistic stencils in the same chronicles leads us to another, deeply different from the modern presentation and on the author's text (the unity of which was not at all mandatory), and on the author's point of view on events . Chronicles are vaults, while not only prior articles, not only vaults of various stencils of writing "etiquette", but also vaults of ideas. They receive their reflection various ideologies. In fact, it has long and it is undoubtedly established that "the chronicler hand ruled political passions and worldly interests." Chronicles themselves repeatedly declare the political focus of their chronicles. In 1241, Galitsky Prince Daniel ordered his printed with Kirill "to write the robbery of wicked boyars", and this report of Kirill was the main part of the Princely Chronicles of Daniel. In another case (1289), Prince Mstislav Danilovich ordered to bring to the chronicle Kramol of the inhabitants of Borsery. In the Troitskaya chronicle of the beginning of the XV century burnt in 1812. Under 1392, according to the testimony of N. M. Karamzin, the bitter reproaches of the Novgorod men were read about their incontestation of the Grand Dukes of Moscow: "Besha Bo Hen Tree, unfortunately, stubborn, Non-Supplies ... Which of the prince is not predicted or who from prince ? Ash and great Alexander Yaroslavich (Nevsky. - D. L.) i did not hear. " As a proof, the chronicler refers to the Moscow chronicle: "And the chief of spraying, taking off the book: the chronicler is the Great Rusky - and read from the great Yaroslav and to this prince of the present". Indeed, the Moscow chronicle is full of political attacks against Novgorod, Tverchi, Suzdaltsev, Ryazantsev, as well as Ryazan, Tverskaya, Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod chronicle - against Muscovites. In the chronicles, we will meet angry chips of boyars (in Galitskaya, Vladimir, Moscow), verminated performances against democratic bases (in Novgorod), the protection of "black people" from "live people" and boyars (in some Pskov), anti-lunges of boyars (in the annals Novgorod XII century), Protection of the Basics of the Breasts of the Grand Duty "Uniformity" (in the annals of the Vladimir XII century, in the chronicles of the Tver Middle of the XV century. and at the Moscow end of the XV-XVI century.), etc. On pure "worldly" - political - The challenges that chroniclers put in front of them are also the prefaces to chronicles. The compiler of the "Chronicler of the Principles of the Top Blessed Great Princes of Tiffs" (the arch of Tver Prince Boris Aleksandrovich) writes in the preface to his work that he fulfilled him on the command of the "piety of the throttle" of Prince Boris Alexandrovich, that his work dedicates to the glorification " wheel Mikhaila, Bogolybivago Prince, "that is, Mikhail Alexandrovich Tverskogo. However, many of the chronicles researchers, and first of all, Academician A. A. Chematov, considered the "ideological" side of the chronicle only in connection with the political concepts of this or that feudal center, where the chronicle was compiled. From the point of view of A. A. Shamatov, the chronicle reflected the political concepts of Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod, subsequently - Moscow, Tver, Nizhny Novgorod, and so on. Meanwhile, the chronicles reflect not only the ideology of certain feudal centers, but also class ideology and estate. We saw above that the "Tale of Bygone Years" reflects the stories of oldwheatters - the butterlich and Yanya Pashtich are disturbed. Together with them in the "Tale of Bygone Years", elements of the doublennoy ideology were penetrated. This doublet ideology affects not only the stories are dropped and yany. For example, under 1075, in the story of the arrival in Kiev, the German embassy held the idea that the squad is more expensive than any wealth. "SE will eat it dead," says Ambassadors about the wealth of Svyatoslav. - This is the essence of Kmetier (bravets) beam. Meni Bo smoy and more so! In similar expressions, he speaks in the chronicles and Vladimir Svyatoslavich, when his squad came to him: "Srebroy and the Christians are not imaming a squad, but my boyfriend is a navel of Srebro and Zlatto, Jaco, my grandfather and my father's dedication to the friend of Zlata and Srebra (in the "Tale of Bygone Years" under 996). Particularly bright oppression of the squad is felt in the story of the "Tale of Bygone Years" under the 971 g means about the gifts of Tsimischiya Svyatoslav: Svyatoslav and did not look at Gold and Pavoloki, and took the weapon and welcomed. The same opposition is noticeable and in the story under 1073 G. On the flight of Izaslav to Poland "with a lot", about which Izyaslav, cheating, was thinking: "SIM TALE WORLD". Finally, the same opposition of gold a friend sounds in the "preface" of the initial arch of preceding the "tamenta of the time of time", and in the words of Yaroslav wise in the initial arch, facing his squad, under 1016: "My beloved and honest squad, southerly seeking Yesterday, in madness, mine, do not jump on them. Naturally, the question arises: how could the monastic chronicle be penetrated into the monastic chronicle political events His time? The answer to this question again lies in the consolidated, compile character of the "Tale of Bygone Years". The chronicle is not only the arch of preceding historical materials, not only the arch of the various stylistic techniques required by the "etiquette" of the writing craft, but sometimes the arch of various ideologies. It should be noted that the sepitude and focus of the political point of view of the chronicler does not contradict his desire to preserve in their chronicles more or less similar points of view - similar in their direction, although sometimes different on source positions. The ideology of the "old squad" at the end of the XI century. was directed against the new policy of the princes, and she gives herself to feel in the chronicles of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, who was in a quarrel with Svyatopolk, and subsequently the same squad reproaches to the princes through the Kiev-Pechersky initial align were transferred to Novgorod and here are used in a completely different social environment in goals of the boyars antichenage propaganda. For the chronicler, it is often no important, from what positions the princely power is criticized: he is important to her criticism; That is why the double argument against the new policies of the princes applies to anticogeneous purposes and in the monastery, and in the Boyar Republic. The same should be said not only about the political ideology of the chronicler, but also about his worldview as a whole. It is customary to talk about the pridentialism of the chronicler, about his religious worldview. However, it should be noted that the chronicler does not at all differ in the sequence in this religious point of view on events. The stroke of the chronicler's narration, its specific historical performances very often go beyond religious thinking and are purely pragmatic. The chronicler largely receives its providencyline in the finished form, and does not reach him, he is not a consequence of his thinking. Their religious views Chronicler in all of their details gets from the outside; from this they can largely diverge with his personal experience, with his practical activity as a historian. Russian political thought found an expression in close relationship with real relationships of his time. She concretely relied on the facts of modern history. It is not characterized by independent abstract constructions of Christian thought, who focused the chronicler from the earthly world to the distracted issues of the upcoming break with the Earth Being and the Arm of Contest. That's why, fortunately for historical knowledge Ancient Russia, the chronicler was not so often guided by his philosophy of history, did not subordinate her entire narration. It is important to note that in the choice of moments, about which the chronicler found it necessary to give religious and didactic comments, the same medieval "etiquette" of the writing craft was affected, which we have said above. The chronicler's religious and didactic comments always caused the same phenomena of the life described by him: croppedions, cities, fires, devastation from enemies, sudden death or heavenly "signs". So, the moment of religious did not permeate the whole chronicle presentation. In this inconsistency, the chronicler is the value of the chronicles, since only due to her in the presentation, experience, direct observation, elements of realism, political topical, are all that is so rich and so that is so valuable, the Russian chronicle is so valuable. If the chronicle is the arch of the previous historical material, the arch of various stylistic passages, a set of political ideologies and if the chronicle does not even reflect the one, the whole worldview of the chronicler, then why does it appear to us in a kind of whole and finished? The unity of the chronicles as a historical and literary work is not in the magnitude of the seams and not in the destruction of the masonry traces, but in the integrity and harness of the whole large chronicle construction in general, in a single thought that revives the entire composition. Chronicle - the work of monumental art, it is mosaic. Considered close to the emphasis, it produces an impression of a random set of pieces of precious smalt, but, an eye in her whole, it strikes us with a stringent thoughtfulness of the entire composition, the sequence of the narrative, the unity and grandeur of the idea, all-pervasive patriotism of the content. The chronicler deploys the picture of Russian history before us - always from its start, in a few centuries, without shivering the size of his narration. He gives this picture in contradictions of his own worldview and the worldview of its predecessors. These contradictions are vitality and regularly for his era. His ideas about the future are different from ours, but they are, and they fit into the framework of its own medieval system. Chronicle - as a work of wallopiism of the XI-XII centuries, where one human figure is more, the other is less, the buildings are placed in the second plan and are reduced to the height of the human shoulder, the horizon in one place is higher, in the other - below, the objects closest to the viewer are reduced, The remotely increased, but in general, the whole composition is made thoughtfully and clearly: increased the most important, reduced secondary. As in the ancient Russian picturesque images, it should be disclosed precisely from above (for example, a table with objects lying on it), it is shown from the bottom, that we are usually visible from below, each item is taken not from a random point of view, but with the one with which It can be shown to the viewer best and most fully in his essence. The contradictory, inener and mosaic chronicle will seem to us only until then, until we proceed from the thought that it was created all from beginning to end with one author. Such an author will be then devoid of strict unity of the stylistic manner, worldview, political views, etc. But as soon as we begin to proceed from the thought that the same author did not have the chronicle that the authentic author of the chronicle was the epoch, which created it that was not the system ideas, and the dynamics of ideas, - the chronicle will appear in their original unity - unity, which is determined not by the author's individuality, but the reality, life, in unity, reflecting all the vital contradictions. The huge expanses of the perpetual content of the chronicles will be then included in the wide, but nevertheless powerfully subordinating the movement of the chronicle text of the river - the direction of Russian reality. Like any chronicle, the "Tale of Bygone Years" is the arch. In fact, in the "Tale of Bygone Years", we are by no means dealing with a single author's text belonging to one author. It is clear, for example, that the texts of the Russian treaties with the Greeks under 907, 912, 945 and 971. Not invented by the chronicler that these are documents only included in the chronicler in their chronicle. Completely distinguished in the "Tale of Bygone Years" and translation sources. The chroniclers used as historical sources of various conversion writings, they made sampling, painstaking, on the basis of documents, recreating the historical past Rus. These translations reached us completely; Therefore, it is not difficult to install, from where, from which place of one or another essay is taken by the chronicle of some text and how it is reworked for inclusion in the chronicle. From the translation sources of historical information in the chronicler, we first point out the "Chronicle of George Amartol" (that is, the "sinning") and his unknown to us by the name of the Greek successor. The chronicler himself refers to this chronicle: "Glaboli Georgy in the Chronicle ..." refers to the chronicler and the chronograph (under 1114), from which he also leads excerpts in different places "Tale of Bygone Years". This chronograph was probably homogeneous by the type of Russian Elelinsky and the Roman chronicler, compiled on the basis of the Arartol's translation chronicles and John Malali. In any case, excerpts from the Chronicles of George Amartol are given in the "Tale of Bygone Years" in some places in the same combination with passages from the Chronicles of John Malal, as in this Elinsky and the Roman Chronicler. The chronicler is enjoyed as a historical source and the "chronicler soon" by the Konstantinople Patriarch Nikifora, from where he borrowed under 852. Chronological calculation. From the translation of Greek "Life", Vasily of the new chronicler leads to 941. The description of the Military Action Igor under Constantinople. Refers the chronicler and on the authority of the "Revelations" of Methodius, Bishop of Patari under 1096 ("Methodius also testifies to them ..." - about the Polovtsy; "Jaco, about them Methodius Pataria, verb ..."). The chronicler gives a large excerpt from Methodius. There is no doubt that the big legend of the beginning of Slavic diplomas under 898 is also not invented by the chronicler, but leads to them from some Western Slavic sources. It is more difficult to identify individual Russian legends that included the "Tale of Bygone Years": Olga's Baptism and Death, about the first Martyrs-Varyagas, about the baptism of Russia with a "philosopher's speech", about Boris and Gleb and others. It is even more difficult to identify those previously " Tales of temporary years "Letterishi, who used her compiler and its predecessors. What was the composition of these preceding "tales of temporary years" of the chronicles? What kind of extractive historical sources did each of the chronicles used? When were these chronicles? It is not easy for all these questions, here are possible for the most part only assumptions - some more convincing, others are less, but it is necessary to answer these questions, since it depends on this and the degree of reliability of the information leading. The close observation of the text "Tale" immediately detects individual parts that could not be written by the author of the XII century. Chronicler XII century. I could not know that the defeat of Vsevolod from Polovtsy in 1061 occurred exactly on February 2, that Rostislav Ttumutokansky died on February 3, 1066, that in 1065 fishermen caught in a setome of a lady of a ram that on March 3, 1067 there was a battle on Nemig and much more. In addition, explicit inserts destroying are found in the "Tale of Bygone Years" logical development story. So, for example, telling Olga Treek Mystery of Olga to the murder of her husband - Igor, the chronicler concludes: "And the victorious of the Drevoy." It would seem, after these words, we should expect information about the Dani, which Olga laid on the defeated. But it turns out that with the Drevlyans, it is not all finished: the Trees are indulging in their cities, after which the chronicler talks about Olga's second victory - about her fourth revenge; And only after that they are already following the words: "Age on Nia Tranny Sightyku." It is clear that the story about the fourth revenge of Olga Drevlyans is artificially inserted into the chronicle text. Or another example of insertion: in 971, seeing a decline in his squad, Svyatoslav decides to return from the Byzantine limits for a new army: "I will go to Russia," he says, "Bole will give a friend." And he really fulfills his decision: "Podice in the boys to the threshold." But between the story about the decision and the story about the execution of this decision there is a story about the conclusion of the Svyatoslav of the world with the Greeks and the extensive text of the contract. It is clear that here we are dealing with insert. Inserts in the text "Tale of Bygone Years" were found to various researchers. Special attention was paid to them by A. A. Chematov. The presence of these inserts suggests that the "Tale of Bygone Years" is still more ancient. Obviously, the compiler of the "Tale of Bygone Years" used the work of his chronicler's predecessor, expanding it with these inserts and continuing the statement of events until his time. The restoration of the chronicles preceding the "Tale of Bygone Years" belongs to the fascinating pages of philological science. We only give some of the considerations that give the opportunity to restore the work of the predecessors of the "Tale of Bygone Years". At the beginning of the lists of the Novgorod first chronicle (except for the Novgorod first on the Synodal List, where the beginning of the manuscript is lost) the text is read, partially similar, and partially different with the "Tales of Bygone Years". Exploring this text, A. A. Chematov, came to the conclusion that excerpts were preserved excerpts of a more ancient chronicle than the "Tale of Bygone Years." Among the evidence, A. A. Chematov cites marked above, where inserts are found in the text of the "Tale of Bygone Years". So, under 946 in the Novgorod first chronicle, there is no story about the fourth revenge of Olga and the narrative is deployed logically: "And the victorious of the Trees and placing the tribute to them," that is, exactly as, by the assumption A. A. Shahmatova, was read in the chronicen of the Around, preceding the "Tale of Bygone Years". It is also definitely absent in the Novgorod chronicle and the Treaty of Svyatoslav with the Greeks, which, as mentioned above, ripped the phrase: "And spectacle:" I will go to Russia and give more a friend "; And widget in the boats. " The idea that the chronicle of the Novgorod first chronicle was the chronicle of more ancient than the "Tale of Bygone Years", which is also confirmed in the following considerations. The Novgorod first chronicle could not be a simple reduction in the "Tale of Bygone Years". It does not have a single statement directly from the Greek Chronicle of Amartol, not a single contract with the Greeks, etc. So systematically could not cut the ancient chronicles, and why was the chronicler to set the goal of lowering in his work all excerpts of the Greek Chronicle of Amartol, all Four contracts with the Greeks, etc.? But, in addition, there are significant differences between the Novgorod first chronicles and the "tag of temporary years" and essentially. These discrepancies again can only be explained by the assumption that the text underlying the Novgorod first chronicle, ancient "Tale of Bygone Years". For example, in the Novgorod first chronicle, it is described that with the death of Rürik joined the princely throne of his son Igor, who had a Voevodoo Oleg. In the story of the time of time it is said that Igor, after the death of Rürger, was young and the rules for him are not a governor, but Prince Oleg. Such a difference will be quite clear to us, if we proceed from the assumption that the "Tale of Bygone Years" is compiled later than the initial part of the Novgorod first chronicle. It is obvious that the compiler of the "Tale of Bygone Years", including the agreement of 911. Oleg with the Greeks, drew attention to the fact that Oleg is in him quite an independent prince, and, accordingly, it rebuilt the story of the previous annals. If we assume, on the contrary, that the "Tale of Bygone Years" was drawn up earlier than the initial part of the Novgorod first and that the latter's compiler simply reduced the "Tale of Bygone Years", it will be completely incomprehensible why, throwing contracts with the Greeks, the chronicler "translated" Oleg from Princes To the governor. On the basis of these and many other considerations, A. A. Chematov came to the conclusion that the chronicle of the newly ancient in the initial part of the Novgorod first chronicle was based on the "tale of temporary years." The chronicler, who was the "Tale of Bygone Years," expanded it with new materials, various written and oral sources, documents (contracts with the Greeks), extracts from the Greek Chronicles and brought the presentation before his time. However, the Code preceded by the "Tale of Bygone Years" is restored to the Novgorod first chronicle only partially, for example, there is no statement of events 1016-1052. and 1074-1093. The arch, the foregoing and "Tale of Bygone Years", and the Novgorod first chronicle, A. A. Chematov called "primary", assuming that the Russian chroniclel began with him. Step by step in various studies, A. A. Shamatov managed to restore its composition completely, to establish the time of its preparation (1093-1095) and show, in which political situation it arose. The initial arch was under the fresh impression of a terrible Polovtsian invasion of 1093. The description of this invasion he ended up, reflections on the reasons for the unfortunate people of the Russian people, he began. In joining the initial source, the chronicler wrote that God executes Russian land for the "inconsistency" of modern princes and warriors. They, the greedy and self-writer, the chronicler opposes the ancient princes and the warriors who did not ruin the people by lawsuits, they themselves contained their prey in distant campaigns, cared for the glory of Russian land and its princes. By calling this arch initial, A. A. Chematov did not assume that soon this name would be inaccurate. Further research A. A. Shamatov showed that various layers and insertion are available as part of the initial arch. A. A. Chematov managed to open the initial arch of two even more ancient arch. One of the main arguments, on the basis of which the presence in the initial arch of more ancient chronicles is proved, is extracted from the analysis of the stories of the initial arch of the baptism of Prince Vladimir. The initial arch, and behind him and the "Tale of Bygone Years" are told under 986, as representatives of different faith came to Vladimir and convinced him to accept their faith. The latter performed the Greek "philosopher" who said an extensive speech. He outlined in detail the Christian doctrine, having finished the fact that he showed Vladimir "Zapkov" - a canvas with the image of a terrible court. It seems that the chronicler leads the reader to the expected end - the consent of Vladimir is baptized. However, Vladimir answers the question of the philosopher on the consent of the consent of the consent of the consent: "I still have little, although you have experienced about all veraes." Under the next, 987 talks about how the people elect by Vladimir are parting all countries and return with the same conclusion that the Greek faith is the best. But in this case, Vladimir is not baptized, but asks the boyars a strange question about where he is baptized. The boyars answer this question evasively: "Where to do anyone." Under the next, 988 in the chronicles there is a story about the baptism of Vladimir in Corsuni: regardless of the persuasion of the Philosopher, Vladimir takes Greek faith only because the Byzantine emperor agrees to give him his sister in marriage under the only condition - the baptism of Vladimir. It seems that two stories are merged in the chronicles: in one of them it was said about the baptism of Vladimir in Kiev, as a result of the "Testing of Ver", and in the other - about baptism in Corsun as the condition of the marriage of Vladimir on the sister of the emperor, and last story It was inserted into the first. Indeed, the traces of this insert are clearly noticeable in the chronicle. To find out the nature and origin of both stories, A.A.Shakhmatov appealed to the study of all the lives of Vladimir, lists of the church charter of Vladimir and especially the so-called "Life of Vladimir Special Makeup" (in the Pliginsky Collection of the library of the Academy of Sciences). As a result, A. A. Chematov came to the conclusion that the story about the baptism of Vladimir in Corsun was originally in the form of a special work and that the oldest chronicle preceded by the initial severity said that Vladimir was baptized in Kiev, directly following the speech of the "Philosopher" in 986; The hike to Korsun was performed by Vladimir already a Christian in 989. It was such a sequence of events that was found in those brief extractions from some very ancient chronicle, which are available in the "Memory and Praise of the Prince Rusky Volodymina, how to be baptized ...". Determine the time to compile this ancient chronicle preceding the initial severity, a number of observations helps. Among them we give it. Under 977, it was said that Oleg Svyatoslavich was buried from the city of Hand (modern Ovruch) and that there is a grave "and to the bottom of Hand". But in the future, the chronicler tells that Oleg Svyatoslavich, Oleg Svyatoslavich, and his brother Yaropolk Svyatoslavich were dug in 1044 from the graves and buried in the Kiev Church of the Virgin (Tenty). From here it is clear: the chronicler who wrote that Oleg Svyatoslavich was buried in Hyphego, where his grave is "and to this day," worked up to 1044; Otherwise, he would have agreed such an important circumstance as the absence of Oleg's bodies buried in her. Pay attention to the extensive entry, which refers to 1037 g.: Under this year, the construction activities of Yaroslav also described in detail and the lengthy praise him is placed; Yet subsequent records 1037-1044. We are the nature of brief assignments. It is possible that the oldest, the first chronicle arch ended with this record of 1037 with the glorification of Yaroslav and its activities. However, between the first chronicle arch and the initial arch of 1093-1095. You can see the existence of another arch, the circumstances of the compilation of which and the compiler itself can be clarified almost with full reliability. This is Nikon's igumen. Thus, the history of the oldest Russian chronicle is represented by A. A. Chematov in the following form. In 1037-1039. The first Russian chronicle was compiled - the oldest Kiev arch. Since the beginning of the 60s. XI century The igumen of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nikon continued the maintenance of chronicles and by 1073 compiled a second chronicle arch. In 1093-1095 In the same Kiev-Pechersk monastery, the third chronicle arch was compiled, conditionally called the initial. Finally, at the beginning of the XII century., Not immediately, and in several techniques, it was drawn up to us the "Tale of Bygone Years" (we will return to the history of its creation). This scheme of the history of ancient chronicle, in general, well-founded many considerations, and should be taken, despite the fact that after the death of A. A. Shamatov, he was made objections to academicians V. M. Istria and N. K. Nikolsky. Objections V. M. Istrina and N. K. Nikolsky proceeded from an incomplete number of facts and did not take into account the entire argument A. A. Shamatov as a whole. Meanwhile, recreating the picture of the ancient Russian chronicle, A. A. Chematov used all the surviving lists of Russian chronicles, coordinated his provisions with all the history of the Russian chronicles as a whole, with which it turned out to be the most closely connected. A. A. Chematov did not stop at clarifying the most important facts of the history of the initial Russian chronicle. He sought to restore the text of each of the above arches. In the "Search for the oldest Russian chronicles" (1908), A. A. Chematov gave them the text of the oldest arch of 1073 renovated by him, - that is, the text of Nikon's arch of 1073, with the allocation in it with the help of a special font of those parts that entered it from ancient arch 1037-1039. In a later work of the "Tale of Bygone Years" (t. I, 1916), A. A. Chematov gave the text of the Tale of Bygone Years, in which large font allocated those parts of it, which go down to the initial severity of 1093-1095. It should be noted that in its extremely bold attempt to clearly imagine the entire history of Russian chronicles, to restore the long-lost texts of A. A. Chematov came across a number of issues, which could not be found enough. Therefore, in this last part of the work, A. A. Shamatov - where he mutually owned, reconstructing text, solve all the questions - even those for which it was almost impossible to respond, "his conclusions were only alleged. Along with the largest advantages of research, A. A. Chematov possess, however, substantial disadvantages. These disadvantages are primarily a methodological nature. For its time, a general understanding of A. A. Chematov's history of Russian chronicles was distinguished by progressive features. A. A. Chematov first introduced into a subtle, but formal philological analysis of bourgeois philology. Historical approach. He drew attention to politically sharp and not an impassive nature of the chronicles, on their connection with the feudal struggle of his time. Only on these prerequisites, A. A. Chematov was able to create a chronicles history. However, the historical approach A. A. Shamatov was not always correct. In particular, A. A. Chematov did not investigate the chronicle as a monument of literature, did not notice the changes in it purely genre. The genre of chronicle, the ways of her maintenance were presented by A. A. Chematov unchanged, always alone and the same. Following A. A. Chematov, we would have to assume that already the first Russian chronicle combined all the features of the Russian chronicles: Manera compile new records by year, features of the language, wide attraction of folklore data to restore Russian history, the most understanding of Russian history, its main milestones. We would have to assume also that the chronicle was out of the social struggle of their time. It goes without saying that such a beginning of the chronicles is unlikely. In fact, as we will see below, the chronicle, its literary form and its ideological content grew gradually, changing under the influence of ideas and directions of its time, reflecting the inner, social struggle of the feudalizing state.