What annals were in ancient Russia. What is a chronicle? Ancient Russian Chronicles. "Facial Chronicle"

Chronicle - Old Russian essay on national history, consisting of weather news. For example: "In the summer of 6680. The faithful prince Gleb of Kiev reposed" ("In 1172. The faithful prince Gleb of Kyiv died"). The news can be short and lengthy, including lives, stories and legends.

Chronicler - a term that has two meanings: 1) the author of the chronicle (for example, Nestor the chronicler); 2) a small chronicle in terms of volume or thematic coverage (for example, the Vladimir chronicler). Chroniclers are often referred to as monuments of local or monastic annals.

chronicle - a stage in the history of chronicle writing reconstructed by researchers, which is characterized by the creation of a new chronicle by combining ("information") several previous chronicles. Vaults are also called all-Russian chronicles of the 17th century, the compilation nature of which is undeniable.

The oldest Russian chronicles have not been preserved in their original form. They came in later revisions, and the main task in studying them is to reconstruct the early chronicles (XIII–XVII centuries) on the basis of the later chronicles (XIII–XVII centuries).

Almost all Russian chronicles in their initial part contain a single text that tells about the Creation of the world and further - about Russian history from ancient times (from the settlement of the Slavs in the East European valley) to the beginning of the 12th century, namely until 1110. Further the text differs in different chronicles. From this it follows that the chronicle tradition is based on a certain chronicle that is common to all, brought to the beginning of the 12th century.

At the beginning of the text, most of the chronicles have a heading that begins with the words "Behold the Tale of Bygone Years ...". In some chronicles, for example, the Ipatiev and Radziwill chronicles, the author is also indicated - a monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery (see, for example, reading the Radziwill chronicle: "The Tale of the Bygone Years of the Chernorizet of the Fedosiev Monastery of the Caves ..."). In the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon among the monks of the XI century. “Nestor, who is also a chronicler of Papis,” is mentioned, and in the Khlebnikov list of the Ipatiev Chronicle, Nestor’s name appears already in the title: “The Tale of the Bygone Years of the Black Nester Feodosyev of the Pechersky Monastery ...”.

Reference

The Khlebnikov list was created in the 16th century. in Kyiv, where the text of the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon was well known. In the very ancient list of the Ipatiev Chronicle, Ipatiev, the name of Nestor is absent. It is possible that it was included in the text of the Khlebnikov list when creating the manuscript, guided by the instructions of the Kiev-Pechersk Patericon. One way or another, already the historians of the XVIII century. Nestor was considered the author of the oldest Russian chronicle. In the 19th century researchers have become more cautious in their judgments about the most ancient Russian chronicle. They no longer wrote about the chronicle of Nestor, but about the general text of the Russian chronicles and called it "The Tale of Bygone Years", which eventually became a textbook monument of ancient Russian literature.

It should be borne in mind that in reality, The Tale of Bygone Years is an exploratory reconstruction; by this name they mean the initial text of most Russian chronicles before the beginning of the 12th century, which did not reach us in an independent form.

Already in the composition of the so-called "Tale of Bygone Years" there are several contradictory indications of the time of the chronicler's work, as well as individual inconsistencies. Obviously, this stage of the beginning of the XII century. preceded by other chronicles. Only the remarkable philologist of the turn of the 19th-20th centuries managed to understand this confusing situation. Alexei Alexandrovich Shakhmatov (1864–1920).

A. A. Shakhmatov hypothesized that Nestor was not the author of The Tale of Bygone Years, but of earlier chronicle texts. He proposed to call such texts vaults, since the chronicler combined the materials of previous vaults and extracts from other sources into a single text. The concept of an annalistic code is today a key one in the reconstruction of the stages of ancient Russian chronicle writing.

Scholars distinguish the following chronicle codes that preceded The Tale of Bygone Years: 1) The most ancient code (the hypothetical date of creation is about 1037); 2) Code of 1073; 3) Initial Code (before 1093); 4) "The Tale of Bygone Years" edition before 1113 (possibly associated with the name of the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor): 5) "The Tale of Bygone Years" edition of 1116 (associated with the name of Abbot of the Mikhailovsky Vydubitsky Monastery Sylvester): 6) "The Tale of Bygone Years" edition of 1118 (also associated with the Vydubitsky Monastery).

Chronicle of the XII century. represented by three traditions: Novgorod, Vladimir-Suzdal and Kiev. The first is restored according to the Novgorod Chronicle I (the older and younger editions), the second - according to the annals of Lavrentiev, Radziwill and the Chronicler of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal, the third - according to the Ipatiev Chronicle with the involvement of the Vladimir-Suzdal chronicle.

Novgorod Chronicle It is represented by several arches, the first of which (1132) is considered by researchers to be princely, and the rest - created under the Novgorod archbishop. According to A. A. Gippius, each archbishop initiated the creation of his own chronicler, which described the time of his hierarchship. Arranged sequentially one after another, the sovereign chroniclers form the text of the Novgorod chronicle. Researchers consider one of the first sovereign chroniclers, Domestic Antonisva of the monastery of Kirika, who wrote the chronological treatise "Teaching them to tell a person the numbers of all years." In the chronicle article of 1136, describing the rebellion of the Novgorodians against Prince Vsevolod-Gabriel, chronological calculations are given, similar to those read in Kirik's treatise.

One of the stages of Novgorod chronicle writing falls on the 1180s. The name of the chronicler is also known. The article of 1188 describes in detail the death of the priest of the church of St. James Herman Voyata, and it is indicated that he served in this church for 45 years. Indeed, 45 years before this news, in the article of 1144, a news is read in the first person, in which the chronicler writes that the archbishop made him a priest.

Vladimir-Suzdal Chronicle known in several vaults of the second half of the 12th century, of which two seem to be the most probable. The first stage of the Vladimir Chronicle brought its presentation up to 1177. This chronicle was compiled on the basis of records that were kept from 1158 under Andrei Bogolyubsky, but were combined into a single code already under Vsevolod III. The last news of this chronicle is a lengthy story about the tragic death of Andrei Bogolyubsky, a story about the struggle of his younger brothers Mikhalka and Vsevolod with his nephews Mstislav and Yaropolk Rostislavich for the reign of Vladimir, the defeat and blinding of the latter. The second Vladimir vault is dated 1193, because after that year the series of dated weather reports breaks off. Researchers believe that the records for the end of the XII century. belong already to the arch of the beginning of the XIII century.

Kiev Chronicle represented by the Ipatiev Chronicle, which was influenced by the northeastern chronicle. Nevertheless, researchers manage to isolate at least two arches in the Ipatiev Chronicle. The first is the Kyiv code compiled in the reign of Rurik Rostislavich. It ends with the events of 1200, the last of which is the solemn speech of the abbot of the Kiev Vydubitsky monastery Moses with words of thanks to the prince who built a stone fence in the Vydubytsky monastery. In Moses they see the author of the code of 1200, who set the goal of exalting his prince. The second set, unmistakably defined in the Ipatiev Chronicle, refers to the Galician-Volyn chronicle of the late 13th century.

The oldest Russian chronicles are valuable, and for many stories, and the only historical source on the history of Ancient Russia.

The published book "Memoirs of the children of military Stalingrad" has become a real revelation not only for the current generation, but also for war veterans.

War broke into Stalingrad suddenly. August 23, 1942. Even the day before, residents heard on the radio that fighting was taking place on the Don, almost 100 kilometers from the city. All enterprises, shops, cinemas, kindergartens were working, schools were preparing for the new academic year. But on that day, in the afternoon, everything collapsed overnight. The 4th German Air Army launched its bombing strike on the streets of Stalingrad. Hundreds of aircraft, making one call after another, systematically destroyed residential areas. The history of wars has not yet known such a massive destructive raid. There was no accumulation of our troops in the city at that time, so all the efforts of the enemy were aimed at destroying the civilian population.

No one knows how many thousands of Stalingraders died in those days in the basements of collapsed buildings, suffocated in earthen shelters, burned alive in their houses.

“We ran out of our underground shelter,” recalls Gury Khvatkov, he was 13 years old. “Our house burned down. Many houses on both sides of the street were also engulfed in flames. Father and mother grabbed my sister and me by the hands. There are no words to describe the horror we felt. Everything around us burned, crackled, exploded, we ran along the fiery corridor to the Volga, which was not visible because of the smoke, although it was very close. Around were heard the cries of people distraught with horror. A lot of people gathered on the narrow edge of the shore. The wounded lay on the ground with the dead. Overhead, ammunition wagons exploded on the railroad tracks. Railroad wheels flew over our heads, burning debris. Burning streams of oil moved along the Volga. It seemed that the river was on fire ... We ran down the Volga. Suddenly they saw a small tugboat. We had scarcely climbed the ladder when the steamer departed. Looking around, I saw a solid wall of a burning city.

Hundreds of German planes, descending low over the Volga, shot down residents who tried to cross to the left bank. Rivermen took people out on ordinary pleasure steamers, boats, barges. The Nazis set fire to them from the air. The Volga became a grave for thousands of Stalingraders.

In his book "The Secret Tragedy of the Civilian Population in the Battle of Stalingrad" T.A. Pavlova cites the statement of an Abwehr officer who was taken prisoner in Stalingrad:

"We knew that Russian people should be destroyed as much as possible in order to prevent the possibility of any resistance after the establishment of a new order in Russia."

Soon the destroyed streets of Stalingrad became a battlefield, and many residents who miraculously survived during the bombing of the city faced a difficult fate. They were captured by the German occupiers. The Nazis drove people out of their homes and drove them in endless columns across the steppe into the unknown. Along the way, they plucked burnt ears of corn and drank water from puddles. For life, even among small children, there was a fear - if only not to fall behind the column - those who straggled were shot.

In these cruel circumstances, events took place that are fit to study psychologists. What fortitude a child can show in the struggle for life! Boris Usachev at that time was only five and a half years old when he and his mother left the destroyed house. The mother was about to give birth. And the boy began to realize that he was the only one who could help her on this difficult road. They spent the night in the open air, and Boris dragged straw to make it easier for mother to lie on the frozen ground, collected ears and corn cobs. They walked 200 kilometers before they managed to find a roof - to stay in a cold barn in a farm. The kid went down the icy slope to the hole to bring water, collected firewood to heat the barn. In these inhuman conditions, a girl was born ...

It turns out that even a young child can instantly realize what a danger that threatens death is ... Galina Kryzhanovskaya, who was not even five then, recalls how she, sick, with a high temperature, lay in the house where the Nazis were in charge: “I remember how one the young German began to swagger over me, bringing a knife to my ears, nose, threatening to cut them off if I moan and cough. In these terrible moments, not knowing a foreign language, with one instinct the girl realized what danger threatened her, and that she should not even squeak, let alone shout: “Mom!”

Galina Kryzhanovskaya talks about how they survived being under occupation. “From hunger, the skin of my sister and I rotted alive, our legs were swollen. At night, my mother crawled out of our underground shelter, got to the garbage pit, where the Germans dumped cleanings, bits, guts ... "

When, after suffering, the girl was bathed for the first time, they saw gray hair in her hair. So from the age of five she walked with a gray strand.

German troops pressed our divisions to the Volga, capturing one after another the streets of Stalingrad. And new columns of refugees under the protection of the invaders stretched to the west. Strong men and women were herded into wagons to be taken as slaves to Germany, children were driven aside with butts ...

But there were also families in Stalingrad who remained at the disposal of our fighting divisions and brigades. The leading edge passed through the streets, the ruins of houses. Caught in trouble, the inhabitants took refuge in basements, earthen shelters, sewer pipes, ravines.

This is also an unknown page of the war, which is revealed by the authors of the collection. In the very first days of the barbarian raids, shops, warehouses, transport, roads, and water supply were destroyed. The supply of food to the population was cut off, there was no water. I, as an eyewitness of those events and one of the authors of the collection, can testify that during the five and a half months of the defense of the city, the civil authorities did not give us any food, not a single piece of bread. However, there was no one to extradite them - the leaders of the city and districts immediately evacuated across the Volga. No one knew if there were inhabitants in the fighting city and where they were.

How did we survive? Only by the mercy of a Soviet soldier. His compassion for the hungry and tormented people saved us from hunger. Everyone who survived the shelling, explosions, the whistle of bullets remembers the taste of frozen soldier's bread and the brew from a millet briquette.

The inhabitants knew what mortal danger the fighters were exposed to, who, on their own initiative, sent with a cargo of food for us across the Volga. Having occupied Mamaev Kurgan and other heights of the city, the Germans sank boats and boats with aimed fire, and only rare of them sailed at night to our right bank.

Many regiments, fighting in the ruins of the city, found themselves on meager rations, but when they saw the hungry eyes of children and women, the soldiers shared their last with them.

Three women and eight children were hiding in our basement under a wooden house. Only older children, who were 10-12 years old, left the basement for porridge or water: women could be mistaken for scouts. Once, I crawled into the ravine where the soldiers' kitchens stood.

I waited out the shelling in the craters until I got to the place. Fighters with light machine guns, boxes of cartridges were walking towards me, rolling guns. By smell, I determined that there was a kitchen behind the dugout door. I stomped around, not daring to open the door and ask for porridge. An officer stopped in front of me: “Where are you from, girl?” Hearing about our basement, he took me to his dugout on the slope of a ravine. He put a bowl of pea soup in front of me. “My name is Pavel Mikhailovich Korzhenko,” said the captain. “I have a son, Boris, the same age as you.”

The spoon shook in my hand as I ate the soup. Pavel Mikhailovich looked at me with such kindness and compassion that my soul, bound by fear, went limp and trembled with gratitude. Many more times I will come to him in the dugout. He not only fed me, but also talked about his family, read letters from his son. It happened that he talked about the exploits of the fighters of the division. He seemed like a family to me. When I left, he always gave me porridge briquettes for our basement with him ... His compassion for the rest of my life will become a moral support for me.

Then, as a child, it seemed to me that the war could not destroy such a kind person. But after the war, I learned that Pavel Mikhailovich Korzhenko died in Ukraine during the liberation of the city of Kotovsk ...

Galina Kryzhanovskaya describes such a case. A young soldier jumped into the underground where the Shaposhnikov family was hiding - a mother and three children. "How did you live here?" - he was surprised and immediately took off his duffel bag. He put a piece of bread and a block of porridge on the trestle bed. And immediately jumped out. The mother of the family rushed after him to thank him. And then, in front of her eyes, a fighter was struck to death by a bullet. “If I hadn’t been late, I wouldn’t have shared bread with us, maybe I would have managed to slip through a dangerous place,” she later lamented.

The generation of children of wartime was characterized by an early awareness of their civic duty, the desire to do what was in their power to "help the fighting Motherland", no matter how high-flown it sounds today. But such were the young Stalingraders.

After the occupation, finding herself in a remote village, eleven-year-old Larisa Polyakova went to work in a hospital with her mother. Taking a medical bag, in frost and snowstorm every day Larisa went on a long journey to bring medicines and dressings to the hospital. Having survived the fear of bombing and hunger, the girl found the strength to take care of two seriously wounded soldiers.

Anatoly Stolpovsky was only 10 years old. He often left the underground shelter to get food for his mother and younger children. But the mother did not know that Tolik was constantly crawling under fire into the neighboring basement, where the artillery command post was located. The officers, noticing the firing points of the enemy, by telephone transmitted commands to the left bank of the Volga, where the artillery batteries were located. Once, when the Nazis launched another attack, the telephone wires were torn apart by an explosion. In front of Tolik, two signalmen died, who, one after the other, tried to restore communication. The Nazis were already tens of meters from the command post when Tolik, wearing a camouflage coat, crawled to look for the place of the cliff. Soon the officer was already transmitting commands to the gunners. The enemy attack was repulsed. More than once, at the decisive moments of the battle, the boy under fire connected the broken connection. Tolik and his family were in our basement, and I witnessed how the captain, handing over loaves of bread and canned food to his mother, thanked her for raising such a brave son.

Anatoly Stolpovsky was awarded the medal "For the Defense of Stalingrad". With a medal on his chest, he came to study in his 4th grade.

In basements, earthen burrows, underground pipes - everywhere where the inhabitants of Stalingrad hid, despite the bombing and shelling, there was a glimmer of hope - to live to victory. This, despite the cruel circumstances, was also dreamed of by those who were driven away by the Germans from their native city hundreds of kilometers away. Iraida Modina, who was 11 years old, talks about how they met the soldiers of the Red Army. In the days of the Battle of Stalingrad, their family - a mother and three children, was driven by the Nazis into the barracks of a concentration camp. Miraculously, they got out of it and the next day they saw that the Germans had burned the hut along with the people. The mother died of disease and starvation. “We were completely exhausted and resembled walking skeletons,” wrote Iraida Modina. - On the heads - purulent abscesses. We could hardly move... One day our older sister Maria saw a rider outside the window, on whose cap was a five-pointed red star. She opened the door and fell at the feet of the soldiers who had entered. I remember how she, in a shirt, hugging the knees of one of the fighters, shaking with sobs, repeated: “Our saviors have come. My family!” The fighters fed us and stroked our cropped heads. They seemed to us the closest people in the world.

The victory in Stalingrad became an event of a planetary scale. Thousands of greeting telegrams and letters came to the city, wagons with food and building materials went. Squares and streets were named after Stalingrad. But no one in the world rejoiced at the victory as much as the soldiers of Stalingrad and the inhabitants of the city that survived the battles. However, the press of those years did not report how hard life remained in the destroyed Stalingrad. Having got out of their wretched shelters, the inhabitants walked for a long time along narrow paths among endless minefields, charred chimneys stood in the place of their houses, water was carried from the Volga, where a putrid smell still remained, food was cooked on fires.

The whole city was a battlefield. And when the snow began to melt, on the streets, in the craters, factory buildings, everywhere where the fighting was going on, the corpses of our and German soldiers were found. They should have been buried.

“We returned to Stalingrad, and my mother went to work at an enterprise that was located at the foot of Mamaev Kurgan,” recalls Lyudmila Butenko, who was 6 years old. - From the first days, all workers, mostly women, had to collect and bury the corpses of our soldiers who died during the storming of Mamayev Kurgan. You just have to imagine what the women experienced, some who became widows, and others, who every day expected news from the front, worrying and praying for their loved ones. Before them were the bodies of someone's husbands, brothers, sons. Mom came home tired, depressed.

It is hard to imagine this in our pragmatic times, but just two months after the end of the fighting in Stalingrad, brigades of volunteer builders appeared.

It started like this. Kindergarten worker Alexandra Cherkasova offered to restore a small building on her own in order to quickly accept the kids. Women took up saws and hammers, plastered and painted themselves. The name of Cherkasova began to be called voluntary brigades, which raised the ruined city free of charge. Cherkasov brigades were created in broken workshops, among the ruins of residential buildings, clubs, and schools. After their main shift, the residents worked for another two or three hours, clearing the roads, manually dismantling the ruins. Even children collected bricks for their future schools.

“My mother also joined one of these teams,” recalls Lyudmila Butenko. - The inhabitants, who had not yet recovered from the suffering they had endured, wanted to help rebuild the city. They went to work in rags, almost all barefoot. And surprisingly, you could hear them singing. Is it possible to forget this?

There is a building in the city that is called Pavlov's House. Being almost surrounded, the soldiers under the command of Sergeant Pavlov defended this line for 58 days. The inscription remained on the house: “We will defend you, dear Stalingrad!” Cherkasovites, who came to restore this building, added one letter, and it was inscribed on the wall: “We will rebuild you, dear Stalingrad!”

Over time, this selfless work of the Cherkasov brigades, which included thousands of volunteers, seems to be a truly spiritual feat. And the first buildings that were built in Stalingrad were kindergartens and schools. The city cared about its future.

Ludmila Ovchinnikova

In the Department of Manuscripts of the Russian National Library, along with other valuable manuscripts, a chronicle is kept, which is called Lavrentievskaya, named after the person who copied it in 1377. “Az (I am) a thin, unworthy and many-sinful servant of God, Lavrenty mnih (monk),” we read on the last page.
This book is written in charters", or " veal“- so called in Russia parchment: specially processed calf leather. The chronicle, apparently, was read a lot: its sheets were dilapidated, in many places there were traces of wax drops from candles, in some places beautiful, even lines were erased, at the beginning of the book running across the entire page, further divided into two columns. This book has seen a lot in its six-hundred-year-old century.

The Manuscript Department of the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg contains Ipatiev Chronicle. It was transferred here in the 18th century from the Ipatiev Monastery, famous in the history of Russian culture, near Kostroma. It was written in the XIV century. It is a large book, bound heavily on two planks of wood covered in darkened leather. Five copper beetles decorate the binding. The whole book is written by hand in four different handwritings, which means that four scribes worked on it. The book is written in two columns in black ink with cinnabar (bright red) capital letters. The second sheet of the book, on which the text begins, is especially beautiful. It is all written in cinnabar, as if blazing. Capital letters, on the other hand, are written in black ink. The scribes have worked hard to create this book. With reverence they set to work. “The Russian chronicler is starting with God. Good Father,” the scribe wrote before the text.

The oldest copy of the Russian chronicle was made on parchment in the 14th century. This is synodal list Novgorod First Chronicle. It can be seen in the Historical Museum in Moscow. It belonged to the Moscow Synodal Library, hence its name.

It is interesting to see the illustrated Radzivilovskaya, or Koenigsberg, chronicle. At one time it belonged to the Radzivils and was discovered by Peter the Great in Koenigsberg (now Kaliningrad). Now this chronicle is stored in the Library of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg. It was written in semi-charter at the end of the 15th century, apparently in Smolensk. Semi-charter - the handwriting is faster and simpler than the solemn and slow charter, but also very beautiful.
Radzivilov Chronicle adorns 617 miniatures! 617 drawings in color - the colors are bright, cheerful - illustrate what is described on the pages. Here you can see the troops going on a campaign with banners fluttering, and battles, and sieges of cities. Here the princes are depicted seated on “tables” - the tables that served as the throne, in fact, resemble the current small tables. And in front of the prince are ambassadors with scrolls of speeches in their hands. The fortifications of Russian cities, bridges, towers, walls with "zaborblami", "cuts", that is, dungeons, "vezhs" - tents of nomads - all this can be visualized from the slightly naive drawings of the Radzivilov Chronicle. And what to say about weapons, armor - they are depicted here in abundance. No wonder one researcher called these miniatures "windows to a vanished world." The ratio of drawings and sheet, drawings and text, text and fields is very important. Everything is done with great taste. After all, each handwritten book is a work of art, and not just a monument of writing.

These are the most ancient lists of Russian chronicles. They are called “lists” because they were rewritten from older chronicles that have not come down to us.

How were chronicles written?

The text of any chronicle consists of weather records (compiled by years). Each entry begins: “In the summer of such and such”, and then follows a message about what happened in this “summer”, that is, the year. (The years were considered “from the creation of the world”, and in order to get the date according to modern chronology, you must subtract the number 5508 or 5507.) The messages were long, detailed stories, and there were also very short ones, like: “In the summer of 6741 (1230) signed (painted ) there was a church of the Holy Mother of God in Suzdal and was paved with various marbles”, “In the summer of 6398 (1390) there was a pestilence in Pskov, as if (how) there had not been such; where they dug up one, put that and five and ten”, “In the summer of 6726 (1218) there was silence.” They also wrote: “In the summer of 6752 (1244) there was nothing” (that is, there was nothing).

If several events happened in one year, then the chronicler connected them with the words: “in the same summer” or “of the same summer”.
Entries belonging to the same year are called an article.. Articles went in a row, standing out only in red line. Only some of them were given titles by the chronicler. Such are the stories about Alexander Nevsky, Prince Dovmont, the Battle of the Don, and some others.

At first glance, it may seem that the chronicles were kept like this: year after year, more and more new entries were added, as if beads were strung on one thread. However, it is not.

The chronicles that have come down to us are very complex works on Russian history. Chroniclers were publicists and historians. They were concerned not only with contemporary events, but also with the fate of their homeland in the past. They made weather records of what happened during their lives and added to the records of previous chroniclers new reports that they found in other sources. They inserted these additions under the respective years. As a result of all the additions, insertions and use by the chronicler of the annals of his predecessors, it turned out “ vault“.

Let's take an example. The story of the Ipatiev Chronicle about the struggle of Izyaslav Mstislavich with Yuri Dolgoruky for Kyiv in 1151. There are three main participants in this story: Izyaslav, Yuri and Yuri's oyn - Andrey Bogolyubsky. Each of these princes had his own chronicler. The chronicler Izyaslav Mstislavich admired the intelligence and military cunning of his prince. Yuriy's chronicler described in detail how Yuriy, unable to pass down the Dnieper past Kyiv, launched his boats across Dolobskoye Lake. Finally, in the chronicle of Andrei Bogolyubsky, Andrei's valor in battle is described.
After the death of all participants in the events of 1151, their chronicles came to the chronicler of the new Kiev prince. He combined their news in his vault. It turned out to be a bright and very complete story.

But how did the researchers manage to isolate more ancient vaults from the later chronicles?
This was helped by the method of work of the chroniclers themselves. Our ancient historians treated with great respect the records of their predecessors, as they saw in them a document, a living evidence of the “previously former”. Therefore, they did not alter the text of the chronicles they received, but only selected the news they were interested in.
Thanks to the careful attitude to the work of the predecessors, the news of the 11th-14th centuries have been preserved almost unchanged even in relatively late chronicles. This allows them to stand out.

Very often chroniclers, like real scientists, indicated where they got the news from. “When I came to Ladoga, the people of Ladoga told me…”, “Behold, I heard from a witness,” they wrote. Passing from one written source to another, they noted: “And this is from another chronicler” or: “And this is from another, old,” that is, written off from another, old chronicle. There are many such interesting additions. The Pskovian chronicler, for example, makes a note in vermilion against the place where he talks about the campaign of the Slavs against the Greeks: “This is written about in the miracles of Stefan Surozh”.

Chronicle-writing from its very inception was not a private matter of individual chroniclers who, in the quiet of their cells, in solitude and silence, recorded the events of their time.
Chroniclers have always been in the thick of things. They sat in the boyar council, attended the veche. They fought “near the stirrup” of their prince, accompanied him on campaigns, were eyewitnesses and participants in the sieges of cities. Our ancient historians carried out embassy assignments, followed the construction of city fortifications and temples. They always lived the social life of their time and most often occupied a high position in society.

Princes and even princesses, princely combatants, boyars, bishops, abbots took part in the chronicle writing. But there were also simple monks among them, and priests of city parish churches.
Chronicle writing was caused by social necessity and met social requirements. It was conducted at the behest of this or that prince, or bishop, or posadnik. It reflected the political interests of equal centers - the principality of cities. They captured the sharp struggle of different social groups. Chronicle has never been impassive. She testified to the merits and virtues, she accused of violating the rights and the rule of law.

Daniil Galitsky turns to the chronicle to testify to the betrayal of the “flattering” boyars, who “called Daniil a prince; but they themselves held the whole land. At the acute moment of the struggle, the “printer” (keeper of the seal) Daniel went to “write the robberies of the wicked boyars”. A few years later, the son of Daniil Mstislav ordered that the betrayal of the inhabitants of Berestye (Brest) be recorded in the annals, “and I entered their sedition in the annals,” writes the chronicler. The whole set of Daniel of Galicia and his immediate successors is a story about sedition and “many rebellions” of the “crafty boyars” and about the valor of the Galician princes.

The situation was different in Novgorod. The boyar party won there. Read the record of the Novgorod First Chronicle about the expulsion of Vsevolod Mstislavich in 1136. You will be convinced that you have a real indictment against the prince. But this is only one article from the set. After the events of 1136, all chronicle writing, which had previously been conducted under the auspices of Vsevolod and his father Mstislav the Great, was revised.
The former name of the chronicle, "Russian Timepiece", was remade into "Sofia Timeline": the chronicle was kept at the Cathedral of St. Sophia - the main public building of Novgorod. Among some additions, an entry was made: “First the Novgorod volost, and then the Kyiv volost”. The antiquity of the Novgorod “volost” (the word “volost” meant both “region” and “power”) the chronicler justified the independence of Novgorod from Kyiv, its right to elect and expel princes at will.

The political idea of ​​each vault was expressed in its own way. It is expressed very clearly in the vault of 1200 of the abbot of the Vydubytsky monastery Moses. The code was compiled in connection with the celebration on the occasion of the completion of a grand engineering and technical structure for that time - a stone wall to protect the mountain near the Vydubytsky monastery from being washed away by the waters of the Dnieper. You might be interested in reading the details.

The wall was built at the expense of Rurik Rostislavich, the Grand Duke of Kiev, who had “an insatiable love for the building” (for creation). The prince found an “artist suitable for this kind of work”, “not a simple master”, Peter Milonega. When the wall was “completed”, Rurik came to the monastery with his whole family. After praying "for the acceptance of his labor" he made "a feast not small" and "fed the abbots and every rank of the church." At this celebration, hegumen Moses delivered an inspirational speech. “Wonderful today our eyes see,” he said. “For many who lived before us wanted to see what we see, and did not see, and were not honored to hear.” Somewhat self-deprecatingly, according to the custom of that time, the abbot turned to the prince: “Accept our rude writing, as a gift of words to praise the virtue of your reign.” He spoke further about the prince that his “autocratic power” shines “more (more) than the stars of heaven”, she “is not only known in the Russian ends, but also to those who are in the sea far away, for the glory of Christ-loving deeds has spread throughout the earth” his. “Not standing on the shore, but on the wall of your creation, I sing you a song of victory,” exclaims the abbot. He calls the construction of the wall a “new miracle” and says that the “Kyyans”, that is, the inhabitants of Kyiv, are now standing on the wall and “from everywhere joy enters their souls and it seems to them that (as if) they have reached aera” (that is, that they soar in the air).
The abbot's speech is an example of the high oratory, that is, oratory, art of that time. It ends with the vault of Abbot Moses. The glorification of Rurik Rostislavich is associated with admiration for the skill of Peter Milonega.

Chronicles were of great importance. Therefore, the compilation of each new set was associated with an important event in the public life of that time: with the entry of the prince to the table, the consecration of the cathedral, the establishment of the episcopal chair.

Chronicle was an official document. It was referred to in various kinds of negotiations. For example, Novgorodians, concluding a “row”, that is, an agreement, with the new prince, reminded him of “old times and duties” (about customs), about “Yaroslavl letters” and their rights recorded in the Novgorod annals. The Russian princes, going to the Horde, carried chronicles with them and substantiated their demands on them, and resolved disputes. Prince Yuri of Zvenigorod, son of Dmitry Donskoy, proved his rights to reign in Moscow “by chroniclers and old lists and the spiritual (testament) of his father.” People who could “speak” according to the annals, that is, they knew their content well, were highly valued.

The chroniclers themselves understood that they were compiling a document that was supposed to preserve in the memory of their descendants what they had witnessed. “Yes, and this will not be forgotten in the last generations” (in the next generations), “Yes, we will leave those who exist for us, but it will not be completely forgotten,” they wrote. They confirmed the documentary nature of the news with documentary material. They used diaries of campaigns, reports of "watchmen" (scouts), letters, various kinds of diplomas(contractual, spiritual, that is, wills).

Diplomas always impress with their authenticity. In addition, they reveal the details of life, and sometimes the spiritual world of the people of Ancient Russia.
Such, for example, is the letter of the Volyn prince Vladimir Vasilkovich (nephew of Daniil Galitsky). This is a testament. It was written by a terminally ill man who knew that his end was near. The will concerned the prince's wife and his stepdaughter. There was a custom in Russia: after the death of her husband, the princess was tonsured into a monastery.
The letter begins like this: “Se az (I) Prince Vladimir, son Vasilkov, grandson Romanov, I am writing a letter.” The following lists the cities and villages that he gave the princess “by his stomach” (that is, after life: “belly” meant “life”). At the end, the prince writes: “If she wants to go to the blueberries, let her go, if she doesn’t want to go, but as she pleases. I can’t rise up to watch what someone will repair (do) on my stomach. Vladimir appointed a guardian for his stepdaughter, but ordered him "not to give her in marriage to anyone."

Chroniclers inserted works of various genres into the vaults - teachings, sermons, lives of saints, historical stories. Thanks to the involvement of a variety of material, the chronicle became a huge encyclopedia, including information about the life and culture of Russia at that time. “If you want to know everything, read the chronicler of the old Rostov,” wrote Bishop Simon of Suzdal in a once widely known work from the beginning of the 13th century - in the “Kiev-Pechersk Patericon”.

For us, the Russian chronicle is an inexhaustible source of information on the history of our country, a true treasury of knowledge. Therefore, we are very grateful to the people who have preserved for us information about the past. Everything we can learn about them is extremely precious to us. We are especially touched when the voice of the chronicler reaches us from the pages of the chronicle. After all, our ancient Russian writers, like architects and painters, were very modest and rarely identified themselves. But sometimes, as if forgetting, they talk about themselves in the first person. “I happened to be a sinner right there,” they write. “I have heard many words, hedgehogs (which) and entered in this annals.” Sometimes chroniclers bring in information about their lives: "The same summer they made me a priest." This entry about himself was made by the priest of one of the Novgorod churches German Voyata (Voyata is an abbreviation for the pagan name Voeslav).

From the mentions of the chronicler about himself in the first person, we learn whether he was present at the event described or heard about what happened from the lips of “seers”, it becomes clear to us what position he occupied in the society of that time, what was his education, where he lived and much more . Here he writes how in Novgorod the guards stood at the city gates, “and others on that side”, and we understand that this is written by a resident of the Sofia side, where the “city” was, that is, the citadel, the Kremlin, and the right, the Trading side was “other”, “she is me”.

Sometimes the presence of a chronicler is felt in the description of natural phenomena. He writes, for example, how the freezing Rostov Lake “howled” and “thumped”, and we can imagine that he was somewhere on the shore at that time.
It happens that the chronicler gives himself away in rude vernacular. “But he lied,” writes a Pskovian about one prince.
The chronicler is constantly, without even mentioning himself, yet as if invisibly present on the pages of his narrative and makes us look through his eyes at what was happening. The voice of the chronicler sounds especially clear in lyrical digressions: “Oh, woe, brothers!” or: “Who does not marvel at him who does not weep!” Sometimes our ancient historians conveyed their attitude to events in generalized forms of folk wisdom - in proverbs or sayings. So, the Novgorodian chronicler, speaking of how one of the posadniks was removed from his post, adds: “Whoever digs a hole under another will fall into it himself.”

The chronicler is not only a narrator, he is also a judge. He judges according to the standards of very high morality. He is constantly concerned with questions of good and evil. He now rejoices, now he is indignant, praises some and blames others.
The subsequent "bridler" connects the conflicting points of view of his predecessors. The presentation becomes more complete, versatile, calmer. An epic image of a chronicler grows in our minds - a wise old man who dispassionately looks at the vanity of the world. This image was brilliantly reproduced by A. S. Pushkin in the scene of Pimen and Grigory. This image lived already in the minds of Russian people in antiquity. So, in the Moscow Chronicle under 1409, the chronicler recalls the “initial chronicler of Kiev”, who “without hesitation shows” all the “temporal riches” of the earth (that is, all earthly vanity) and “without anger” describes “everything good and bad”.

Not only chroniclers worked on chronicles, but also ordinary scribes.
If you look at an ancient Russian miniature depicting a scribe, you will see that he is sitting on a “ chair” with a foot and holds on his knees a scroll or a pack of sheets of parchment or paper folded two to four times, on which he writes. In front of him, on a low table, is an inkwell and a sandbox. In those days, wet ink was sprinkled with sand. Right there on the table is a pen, a ruler, a knife for mending feathers and cleaning up faulty places. On the stand is a book from which he cheats.

The work of a scribe required great effort and attention. Scribes often worked from dawn to dusk. They were hampered by fatigue, illness, hunger and the desire to sleep. To distract themselves a little, they wrote in the margins of their manuscripts, in which they poured out their complaints: “Oh, oh, my head hurts, I can’t write.” Sometimes the scribe asks God to make him laugh, because he is tormented by drowsiness and he is afraid that he will make a mistake. And then there will also come across “a dashing pen, involuntarily write to them.” Under the influence of hunger, the scribe made mistakes: instead of the word “abyss” he wrote “bread”, instead of “font” he wrote “jelly”.

It is not surprising that the scribe, having completed the last page, conveys his joy with a postscript: “Like a hare, he is happy, he escaped the net, so happy is the scribe, having finished writing the last page.”

A long and very figurative postscript was made by the monk Lavrenty, having completed his work. In this postscript, one feels the joy of accomplishing a great and important deed: the book writer rejoices in the same way, having reached the end of books. So I’m a thin, unworthy and sinful servant of God, Lavrenty of mine ... And now, gentlemen, fathers and brothers, if (if) where he described or rewrote, or didn’t finish, read (read), correcting God dividing (for God’s sake), and not curse, earlier (because) the books are dilapidated, and the mind is young, it has not reached.

The oldest Russian chronicle that has come down to us is called “The Tale of Bygone Years”. He brings his presentation to the second decade of the XII century, but he reached us only in the lists of the XIV and subsequent centuries. The compilation of the "Tale of Bygone Years" dates back to the 11th - early 12th centuries, by the time when the Old Russian state with its center in Kyiv was relatively united. That is why the authors of the Tale had such a wide coverage of events. They were interested in questions that were important for all of Russia as a whole. They were keenly aware of the unity of all Russian regions.

At the end of the 11th century, thanks to the economic development of the Russian regions, they were separated into independent principalities. Each principality has its own political and economic interests. They begin to compete with Kiev. Each capital city strives to imitate the “mother of Russian cities”. Achievements of art, architecture and literature of Kyiv are a model for regional centers. The culture of Kyiv, spreading to all regions of Russia in the 12th century, falls on prepared soil. Before that, each region had its own original traditions, its own artistic skills and tastes, which went back to deep pagan antiquity and were closely connected with folk ideas, affections, and customs.

From the contact of the somewhat aristocratic culture of Kyiv with the folk culture of each region, a diverse ancient Russian art grew up, united both thanks to the Slavic community and thanks to the common model - Kiev, but everywhere different, original, unlike a neighbor.

In connection with the isolation of the Russian principalities, chronicle writing is also expanding. It develops in such centers where, until the 12th century, only scattered records were kept, for example, in Chernigov, Pereyaslav Russky (Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky), Rostov, Vladimir-on-Klyazma, Ryazan and other cities. Every political center now felt an urgent need to have its own chronicle. The chronicle has become a necessary element of culture. It was impossible to live without your own cathedral, without your own monastery. In the same way, one could not live without one's chronicle.

The isolation of the lands affected the nature of chronicle writing. The chronicle becomes narrower in terms of the scope of events, in terms of the horizons of the chroniclers. It is closed within the framework of its political center. But even during this period of feudal fragmentation, the all-Russian unity was not forgotten. In Kyiv, they were interested in the events that took place in Novgorod. The Novgorodians kept an eye on what was being done in Vladimir and Rostov. Vladimirtsev worried about the fate of Russian Pereyaslavl. And of course, all regions turned to Kiev.

This explains that in the Ipatiev Chronicle, that is, in the South Russian collection, we read about the events that took place in Novgorod, Vladimir, Ryazan, etc. In the north-eastern vault - in the Laurentian Chronicle, it tells about what happened in Kyiv, Pereyaslavl Russian, Chernigov, Novgorod-Seversky and in other principalities.
More than others, the Novgorod and Galicia-Volyn chronicles closed themselves in the narrow limits of their land, but even there we will find news about the events of all-Russian.

Regional chroniclers, compiling their codes, began them with the "Tale of Bygone Years", which told about the "beginning" of the Russian land, and therefore, about the beginning of each regional center. “The Tale of Bygone Years* supported our historians' consciousness of all-Russian unity.

The most colorful, artistic presentation was in the XII century Kyiv Chronicle included in the Ipatiev list. She led a sequential account of events from 1118 to 1200. This presentation was prefaced by The Tale of Bygone Years.
The Kyiv Chronicle is a princely chronicle. There are many stories in it, in which one or another prince was the main character.
Before us are stories about princely crimes, about breaking oaths, about ruining the possessions of warring princes, about the despair of the inhabitants, about the destruction of huge artistic and cultural values. Reading the Kiev Chronicle, we seem to hear the sounds of trumpets and tambourines, the crackle of breaking spears, we see clouds of dust hiding both horsemen and footmen. But the general meaning of all these full of movement, intricate stories is deeply humane. The chronicler persistently praises those princes who "do not like bloodshed" and at the same time are filled with valor, the desire to "suffer" for the Russian land, "wish her well with all their hearts." Thus, the annalistic ideal of the prince is created, which corresponded to popular ideals.
On the other hand, in the Kievan Chronicle there is an angry condemnation of violators of the order, perjurers, princes who start unnecessary bloodshed.

Chronicle writing in Veliky Novgorod began in the 11th century, but finally took shape in the 12th century. Initially, as in Kyiv, it was a princely chronicle. The son of Vladimir Monomakh, Mstislav the Great, did especially much for the Novgorod Chronicle. After him, the chronicle was kept at the court of Vsevolod Mstislavich. But the Novgorodians expelled Vsevolod in 1136, and a veche boyar republic was established in Novgorod. Chronicle writing passed to the court of the Novgorod lord, that is, the archbishop. It was conducted at the Hagia Sophia and in some city churches. But from this it did not become a church at all.

The Novgorod chronicle has all its roots in the masses of the people. It is rude, figurative, sprinkled with proverbs and retained even in writing the characteristic “clatter”.

Most of the narrative is in the form of short dialogues, in which there is not a single superfluous word. Here is a short story about the dispute between Prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, the son of Vsevolod the Big Nest, with the Novgorodians because the prince wanted to remove the Novgorod mayor Tverdislav, who was objectionable to him. This dispute took place on Veche Square in Novgorod in 1218.
“Prince Svyatoslav sent his thousandth to the veche, speaking (saying):“ I can’t be with Tverdislav and I’m taking away the posadnik from him. The Novgorodians rekosha: “Is it (is) his fault?” He said: "Without guilt." Speech Tverdislav: “To that I am glad, oh (that) there is no my fault; and you, brothers, are in posadnichestvo and in princes ”(that is, the Novgorodians have the right to give and remove posadnichestvo, invite and expel princes). The Novgorodians answered: “Prince, there is no zina of him, you kissed the cross to us without guilt, do not deprive your husband (do not remove him from office); and we bow to you (we bow), and here is our posadnik; but we won’t put it into it ”(and we won’t go for that). And be peace."
This is how the Novgorodians briefly and firmly defended their posadnik. The formula “And we bow to you” did not mean bowing with a request, but, on the contrary, we bow and say: go away. Svyatoslav understood this perfectly.

The Novgorod chronicler describes the veche unrest, the change of princes, the construction of churches. He is interested in all the little things in the life of his native city: the weather, poor crops, fires, the price of bread and turnips. Even about the struggle against the Germans and the Swedes, the chronicler-Novgorodian tells in a businesslike, short way, without superfluous words, without any embellishment.

Novgorod annals can be compared with Novgorod architecture, simple and severe, and with painting - juicy and bright.

In the XII century, annalistic writing appeared in the northeast - in Rostov and Vladimir. This chronicle was included in the code, rewritten by Lawrence. It also opens with The Tale of Bygone Years, which came to the northeast from the south, but not from Kyiv, but from Pereyaslavl Russian - the estate of Yuri Dolgoruky.

The chronicle of Vladimir was conducted at the court of the bishop at the Assumption Cathedral, built by Andrey Bogolyubsky. It left its mark on him. It contains many teachings and religious reflections. The heroes say long prayers, but rarely have lively and short conversations with each other, which are so numerous in the Kievan and especially in the Novgorod Chronicle. The Vladimir chronicle is rather dry and at the same time verbose.

But in the Vladimir annals, the idea of ​​the need to gather the Russian land in one center sounded stronger than anywhere else. For the Vladimir chronicler, this center, of course, was Vladimir. And he persistently pursues the idea of ​​the supremacy of the city of Vladimir not only among other cities of the region - Rostov and Suzdal, but also in the system of Russian principalities as a whole. Vladimir Prince Vsevolod the Big Nest is awarded the title of Grand Duke for the first time in the history of Russia. He becomes the first among other princes.

The chronicler depicts the Prince of Vladimir not so much as a brave warrior, but as a builder, diligent owner, strict and fair judge, and a kind family man. The Vladimir chronicle is becoming more and more solemn, as the Vladimir cathedrals are solemn, but it lacks the high artistic skill that Vladimir architects have achieved.

Under the year 1237, in the Ipatiev Chronicle, the words “Battle of Batyevo” burn with cinnabar. In other chronicles, it is also highlighted: “Batu's army”. After the Tatar invasion, chronicle writing ceased in a number of cities. However, having died out in one city, it was picked up in another. It becomes shorter, poorer in form and message, but does not stop.

The main theme of the Russian chronicles of the 13th century is the horrors of the Tatar invasion and the subsequent yoke. Against the backdrop of rather stingy records, the story about Alexander Nevsky, written by a South Russian chronicler in the tradition of the Kiev chronicle, stands out.

The Vladimir grand-ducal chronicle goes to Rostov, it suffered less from the defeat. Here the chronicle was kept at the court of Bishop Kirill and Princess Maria.

Princess Maria was the daughter of Prince Mikhail of Chernigov, who was killed in the Horde, and the widow of Vasilok of Rostov, who died in the battle with the Tatars on the City River. This was an outstanding woman. She enjoyed great honor and respect in Rostov. When Prince Alexander Nevsky came to Rostov, he bowed to "the Holy Mother of God and Bishop Kirill and the Grand Duchess" (that is, Princess Mary). She "honored Prince Alexander with love." Maria was present during the last minutes of the life of Alexander Nevsky's brother, Dmitry Yaroslavich, when, according to the custom of that time, he was tonsured into blacks and schema. Her death is described in the annals in the same way as the death of only prominent princes was usually described: “The same summer (1271) there was a sign in the sun, as if (as if) everything would perish before dinner and the packs (again) would be filled. (You understand, we are talking about a solar eclipse.) The same winter, the blessed, Christ-loving Princess Vasilkova passed away on the 9th day of December, as if (when) the liturgy is sung throughout the city. And betray the soul quietly and easily, serenely. Hearing all the people of the city of Rostov her repose and flocking all the people to the monastery of the Holy Savior, Bishop Ignatius and abbots, and priests, and clergy, singing over her the usual hymns and burying her (her) at the Holy Savior, in her monastery, with many tears."

Princess Maria continued the work of her father and husband. On her instructions, the life of Mikhail Chernigovsky was compiled in Rostov. She built a church in Rostov “in his name” and established a church holiday for him.
The chronicle of Princess Maria is imbued with the idea of ​​the need to stand firmly for the faith and independence of the motherland. It tells about the martyrdom of Russian princes, steadfast in the fight against the enemy. Vasilyok of Rostovsky, Mikhail Chernigov, Ryazan Prince Roman were bred like this. After describing his cruel execution, there is an appeal to the Russian princes: “O beloved Russian princes, do not be seduced by the empty and deceptive glory of this world ..., love truth and long-suffering and purity.” The novel is set as an example to the Russian princes: by martyrdom, he acquired the kingdom of heaven for himself, together with “his kinsman Mikhail of Chernigov”.

In the Ryazan annals of the time of the Tatar invasion, events are viewed from a different angle. In it, the princes are accused of being responsible for the misfortunes of the Tatar devastation. The accusation primarily concerns Prince Yuri Vsevolodovich of Vladimir, who did not listen to the pleas of the Ryazan princes, did not go to their aid. Referring to biblical prophecies, the Ryazan chronicler writes that even “before these”, that is, before the Tatars, “the Lord took away our strength, and put bewilderment and thunder and fear and trembling into us for our sins.” The chronicler expresses the idea that Yuri “prepared the way” for the Tatars with princely strife, the Battle of Lipetsk, and now the Russian people are suffering God’s punishment for these sins.

At the end of the 13th - beginning of the 14th century, chronicle writing developed in the cities, which, having advanced at that time, began to challenge each other for a great reign.
They continue the idea of ​​the Vladimir chronicler about the supremacy of their principality in the Russian land. Such cities were Nizhny Novgorod, Tver and Moscow. Their vaults differ in breadth. They combine chronicle material from different areas and strive to become all-Russian.

Nizhny Novgorod became a capital city in the first quarter of the 14th century under Grand Duke Konstantin Vasilievich, who “honestly and menacingly harrowed (defended) his homeland from princes stronger than himself,” that is, from the princes of Moscow. Under his son, the Grand Duke of Suzdal-Nizhny Novgorod Dmitry Konstantinovich, the second archdiocese in Russia was established in Nizhny Novgorod. Prior to this, only Vladyka of Novgorod had the rank of archbishop. In ecclesiastical terms, the archbishop was directly subordinate to the Greek, that is, the Byzantine patriarch, while the bishops were subordinate to the Metropolitan of All Russia, who at that time was already living in Moscow. You yourself understand how important it was from a political point of view for the Nizhny Novgorod prince that the church pastor of his land did not depend on Moscow. In connection with the establishment of the archdiocese, a chronicle was compiled, which is called Lavrentievskaya. Lavrenty, a monk of the Annunciation Monastery in Nizhny Novgorod, compiled it for Archbishop Dionysius.
The chronicle of Lavrenty paid great attention to the founder of Nizhny Novgorod, Yuri Vsevolodovich, the prince of Vladimir, who died in the battle with the Tatars on the City River. The Laurentian Chronicle is Nizhny Novgorod's invaluable contribution to Russian culture. Thanks to Lavrenty, we have not only the most ancient copy of The Tale of Bygone Years, but also the only copy of Vladimir Monomakh's Teachings to Children.

In Tver, the chronicle was kept from the 13th to the 15th century and is most fully preserved in the Tver collection, the Rogozhsky chronicler and in the Simeonovskaya chronicle. Scientists associate the beginning of the chronicle with the name of the Bishop of Tver Simeon, under whom the “great cathedral church” of the Savior was built in 1285. In 1305, Grand Duke Mikhail Yaroslavich of Tver laid the foundation for the Grand Duke's chronicle writing in Tver.
The Tver Chronicle contains many records of the construction of churches, fires and internecine strife. But the Tver chronicle entered the history of Russian literature thanks to the vivid stories about the murder of the Tver princes Mikhail Yaroslavich and Alexander Mikhailovich.
We also owe to the Tver chronicle a colorful story about the uprising in Tver against the Tatars.

Initial annals of Moscow is conducted at the Assumption Cathedral, built in 1326 by Metropolitan Peter, the first metropolitan who began to live in Moscow. (Before that, the metropolitans lived in Kyiv, since 1301 - in Vladimir). The records of the Moscow chroniclers were brief and rather dry. They concerned the construction and murals of churches - in Moscow at that time a lot of construction was underway. They reported on fires, illnesses, and finally, on the family affairs of the Grand Dukes of Moscow. However, gradually - this began after the Battle of Kulikovo - the annals of Moscow are emerging from the narrow confines of their principality.
By his position as the head of the Russian Church, the metropolitan was interested in the affairs of all Russian regions. At his court, regional chronicles were collected in copies or in originals, chronicles were brought from monasteries and cathedrals. Based on all the material collected in In 1409, the first all-Russian code was created in Moscow. It includes news from the annals of Veliky Novgorod, Ryazan, Smolensk, Tver, Suzdal and other cities. He illuminated the history of the entire Russian people even before the unification of all Russian lands around Moscow. The code served as the ideological preparation for this association.

Among the genres of drl, the chronicle occupied a central place. The purpose of the chronicle is the desire to tell about the past of the Russian land and leave a memory. Initially, the first chronicles were created as historical encyclopedias for the Kiev nobility. The creation of annals is a state matter. Scholars define the time of creation in different ways: B.A. Rybakov connected the temporary beginnings of annals with the moment the state was born, but most researchers believe that annals appeared only in the 11th century. The 11th century is the beginning of the chronicles, which will be kept systematically until the 18th century.

Basically chronicles were compiled at monasteries and at the courts of princes. Almost always chronicles were written by monks - the most educated people of their time. Chronicles were created on a special assignment. The basis of the chronicle narrative is the arrangement of historical material by years / years. This principle was suggested by Paschalia. The chroniclers told all the historical events of Russia, arranging the material by year. The chronicler strove to show the uninterrupted course of life itself. The Old Russian scribe knew that history has its beginning and its end (the Last Judgment). The ancient Russian chronicles also reflected these eschatological thoughts.

The sources of Russian chronicles are divided into 2 types:

Sources of oral character: tribal traditions, squad poetry, local legends related to the origin of villages and cities.

Written sources: sacred writings (New Testament, Old Testament), translated Byzantine chronicles, various historical documents and letters.

Very often in the scientific literature chronicles are called chronicle compilations, since the chronicles combined the annals of the previous time and chronicle records about recent or contemporary events of the chronicler. Many scholars write about the fragmentation of the chronicle. The weather principle of the arrangement of the material led to the fact that the chronicle was made into many articles and fragments. Hence such features as fragmentary and episodic chronicle style.

"The Tale of Bygone Years" is a work on the creation of which

more than one generation of Russian chroniclers worked, this is a monument to the collective

creative creativity. In the beginning, in the first half of the 40s. XI century, a complex of articles was compiled, which academician D.S. Likhachev suggested calling it "The Tale of the Spread of Christianity in Russia." It included stories about the baptism and death of Princess Olga, a legend about the first Russian martyrs - the Varangian Christians, a legend about the baptism of Russia, a legend about princes Boris and Gleb, and extensive praise for Yaroslav the Wise. gg. 11th century and is associated with the activities of the monk of the Kiev Caves

Nikon monastery. Nikon added to the "Tale of the Spread of Christianity in Russia" legends about the first Russian princes and stories about their campaigns against Constantinople, the so-called "Varangian legend", according to which the Kiev princes descended from the Varangian prince Rurik, invited to Russia, to stop the internecine strife of the Slavs. The inclusion of this legend in the chronicle had its own meaning: Nikon tried to convince his contemporaries of the unnaturalness of internecine wars, of the need for all princes to obey the Grand Duke of Kiev - the heir and descendant of Rurik. Finally, according to the researchers, it was Nikon who gave the chronicle the form of weather records.

Around 1095, a new chronicle code was created, which A.A. Shakhmatov suggested calling it "Initial". The compiler of this collection continued the annalistic presentation with a description of the events of 1073-1095, giving his work, especially in this part supplemented by him, a clearly publicistic character: he reproached the princes for internecine wars, for not caring about the defense of the Russian land.

The chronicle is a collection: apparently, its creator skillfully worked with a rich arsenal of sources (Byzantine chronicles, Holy Scripture, historical documents, etc.), moreover, later scribes could make their own changes to the created text, making its structure even more heterogeneous . For this reason, many researchers call the chronicle a compilation, and consider compilability to be a distinctive feature of chronicle texts. D.S. Likhachev accompanies his literary translation of the PVL with the names of chronicle fragments, in which, along with the names of an eventful nature (the reign of Oleg, the second campaign of Prince Igor against the Greeks, the revenge of Princess Olga, the beginning of the reign of Yaroslav in Kyiv, etc.), there are proper genre names (the legend about the founding of Kyiv , the parable of Obrah, the legend of Belgorod jelly, the story of the blinding of Vasilko Terebovskiy, etc.)

From the point of view of the forms of chronicle writing, Eremin divided all chronicle material into 5 groups: weather record (a small documentary record, devoid of artistic form and emotionality), chronicle legend (oral historical tradition in the literary processing of the chronicler), chronicle story (factual narrative, in which the personality of the author is manifested: in the assessment of events, attempts to characterize the characters, comments, individual style of presentation), chronicle story (narration about the death of the prince, which gives a hagiographically enlightened image of the ideal ruler), documents (contracts and letters).

Curds, on the other hand, criticized the classification developed by Eremin, built on the nature of the combination of methods of depicting reality opposed to each other as not being confirmed by chronicle material, and proposed a typology by the nature of the story.

The first type of narration is weather records (only informing about events), the other is chronicle stories (telling about events with the help of a plot narrative).

Tvorogov distinguishes 2 types of storytelling: chronicle tales characteristic of "PVL" and chronicle stories. A distinctive feature of the former is the depiction of a legendary event. Chronicle stories are devoted to depicting the events of contemporary chroniclers. They are more extensive. They combine factual records, sketches of episodes, religious reasoning of the author.

The plot narrative of "PVL" is built with the help of art. Receptions: accentuation of a strong detail, causing visual representations, characterization of heroes, direct speech of characters.

Plot stories are common in PVL, but the style of monumental historicism is characteristic of chronicle writing as a whole.

Thus, on the basis of the theoretical study of the works of researchers, we obtained a number of genres (forms of narration) with characteristic features assigned to them, which became the basis for distinguishing types of presentation in Russian chronicles. To date, we have identified the following types in the PVL: hagiographic, military, business, didactic, documentary, folk-poetic, reference. 1. Hagiographic: the deeds of the saint or his life path as a whole act as the main subject of the image; involves the use of certain motives, for example, the motives of teaching (mentoring), prophecy.

Example: a fragment about Theodosius of the Caves (ll. 61v.-63v.).

2. Military: depiction of a historical event associated with the struggle of the Russian people against external enemies (mainly Pechenegs and Polovtsy), as well as princely strife; the central character is usually a real historical figure, usually a prince.

Example: a fragment about the captivity of Thrace and Macedonia by Simeon (l. 10).

3. Business: texts of documents included in the PVL.

Example: a fragment containing the text of the treaty between the Russians and the Greeks (ll. 11-14).

4. Didactic: contains edification, i.e. morality (teaching) moral/religious.

Example: a fragment about the unrighteous life of Prince Vladimir before he adopted Christianity (l. 25).

5. Documenting: a statement of the fact of an event that deserves mention, but does not require a detailed presentation; fragments of this type are distinguished by the protocol of the image, the lack of artistic form and emotionality.

Example: a fragment about the reign of Leon and his brother Alexander (fol. 8v.).

6. Folk poetic: a narrative about real or possible events, usually based on one vivid episode, may contain fiction.

Example: a fragment about the revenge of Princess Olga (ll. 14v.-16).

7. reference: fragments taken from authoritative sources (Byzantine chronicles, biblical texts, etc.).

CHRONICLES

CHRONICLES, historical works, a type of narrative literature in Russia in the 11th-17th centuries, consisted of weather records or were monuments of a complex composition - chronicles. L. were all-Russian (for example, "The Tale of Bygone Years", Nikonovskaya L., and others) and local (Pskov and other L.). Preserved mainly in later lists.

Source: Encyclopedia "Fatherland"

historical works of the 11th-17th centuries, in which the narration was conducted by year. The story about the events of each year in the chronicles usually began with the words: “in the summer” - hence the name - chronicle. The words "chronicle" and "chronicler" are equivalent, but the compiler of such a work could also be called a chronicler. Chronicles are the most important historical sources, the most significant monuments of social thought and culture of Ancient Russia. Usually the annals outlined Russian history from its beginning, sometimes the annals opened with biblical history and continued with ancient, Byzantine and Russian history. Chronicles played an important role in the ideological substantiation of princely power in Ancient Russia and in promoting the unity of the Russian lands. The chronicles contain significant material about the origin of the Eastern Slavs, about their state power, about the political relations of the Eastern Slavs among themselves and with other peoples and countries.
A characteristic feature of the chronicle is the belief of the chroniclers in the intervention of divine forces. New chronicles were usually compiled as collections of previous chronicles and various materials (historical stories, lives, epistles, etc.) and were concluded with records of contemporary events for the chronicler. At the same time, literary works were used as sources in chronicles. Traditions, epics, treaties, legislative acts, documents of the princely and church archives were also woven into the fabric of the narrative by the chronicler. Rewriting the materials included in the chronicle, he sought to create a single narrative, subordinating it to a historical concept that corresponded to the interests of the political center where he wrote (the courtyard of the prince, the office of the metropolitan, the bishop, the monastery, the posadnik's hut, etc.). However, along with the official ideology, the annals reflected the views of their direct compilers. Chronicles testify to the high patriotic consciousness of the Russian people in the 11th-17th centuries. The compilation of annals was given great importance, they were addressed in political disputes, in diplomatic negotiations. The mastery of historical narration has reached a high perfection in them. At least 1,500 lists of chronicles have survived. Many works of ancient Russian literature have been preserved in their composition: “Instruction” by Vladimir Monomakh, “The Legend of the Battle of Mamaev”, “Journey Beyond Three Seas” by Athanasius Nikitin, and others. Ancient chronicles of the 11th-12th centuries. survived only in later lists. The oldest list of chronicles with a date is a short chronicler of Patriarch of Constantinople. Nikifor, supplemented by Russian articles up to 1278, contained in the Novgorod helmsman 1280. The most famous of the early annals, which has come down to our time, is The Tale of Bygone Years. Its creator is considered to be Nestor, a monk of the Pechersk Monastery in Kyiv, who wrote his work ca. 1113.
In Kyiv in the XII century. the annals were kept in the Kiev-Pechersk and Vydubitsky Mikhailovsky monasteries, as well as at the princely court. Galicia-Volyn chronicle in the XII century. concentrated at the courts of the Galician-Volyn princes and bishops. The South Russian chronicle was preserved in the Ipatiev Chronicle, which consists of The Tale of Bygone Years, continued mainly by the Kiev News (ending 1200), and the Galicia-Volyn Chronicle (ending 1289 - 92). In the Vladimir-Suzdal land, the main centers of chronicle writing were Vladimir, Suzdal, Rostov and Pereyaslavl. The monument of this chronicle is the Laurentian Chronicle, which begins with The Tale of Bygone Years, continued by the Vladimir-Suzdal News until 1305, as well as the Chronicler of Pereyaslavl-Suzdal (ed. 1851) and the Radziwill Chronicle, decorated with a large number of drawings. Chronicle writing was greatly developed in Novgorod at the court of the archbishop, at monasteries and churches.
The Mongol-Tatar invasion caused a temporary decline in chronicle writing. In the XIV-XV centuries. it develops again. The largest centers of chronicle writing were Novgorod, Pskov, Rostov, Tver, Moscow. In the annalistic vaults reflected ch. local events (the birth and death of princes, the election of posadniks and thousand in Novgorod and Pskov, military campaigns, battles, etc.), church events (the appointment and death of bishops, abbots of monasteries, the construction of churches, etc.), crop failure and famine , epidemics, remarkable natural phenomena, etc. Events that go beyond local interests are poorly reflected in such annals. Novgorod chronicle XII - XV centuries. most fully represented by the Novgorod First Chronicle of the older and younger editions. The older, or earlier, edition has been preserved in the only Synodal parchment (charate) list of the 13th-14th centuries; the younger edition came in the lists of the 15th century. In Pskov, chronicle writing was associated with the posadniks and the state chancellery at the Trinity Cathedral. In Tver, chronicle writing developed at the court of the Tver princes and bishops. An idea about him is given by the Tver collection and the Rogozhsky chronicler. In Rostov, the chronicle was kept at the court of bishops, and the chronicles created in Rostov are reflected in a number of codes, incl. in the Yermolinsky chronicle of the XV century.
New phenomena in the annals are noted in the 15th century, when the Russian state was taking shape with its center in Moscow. Politics of Moscow led. princes was reflected in the all-Russian annals. The first Moscow all-Russian collection is given by the Trinity Chronicle n. 15th century (disappeared in a fire in 1812) and the Simeon Chronicle in the list of the 16th century. The Trinity Chronicle ends in 1409. Various sources were used to compile it: Novgorod, Tver, Pskov, Smolensk, and others. The all-Russian annalistic code, compiled in Smolensk in the end of the 15th century, was the so-called. Annals of Abraham; another code is the Suzdal Chronicle (late 15th century).
An annalistic code based on the rich Novgorodian writing, the Sophia Timepiece, appeared in Novgorod. A large chronicle code appeared in Moscow in the XV - n. 16th century Especially known is the Resurrection Chronicle, ending in 1541 (the compilation of the main part of the chronicle dates back to 1534-37). It includes many official records. The same official records were included in the extensive Lviv Chronicle, which included “The Chronicler of the Beginning of the Kingdom of the Tsar and Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich”, until 1560. chronicle, including drawings corresponding to the text. The first 3 volumes of the Facial Code are devoted to world history (compiled on the basis of the Chronograph and other works), the next 7 volumes are devoted to Russian history from 1114 to 1567. The last volume of the Facial Code, dedicated to the reign of Ivan the Terrible, was called the "Royal Book". The text of the Facial Code is based on an earlier one - the Nikon Chronicle, which was a huge compilation of various chronicle news, stories, lives, etc. In the 16th century. chronicle writing continued to develop not only in Moscow, but also in other cities. The most famous is the Vologda-Perm chronicle. Chronicles were also kept in Novgorod and Pskov, in the Caves Monastery near Pskov. In the XVI century. new types of historical narrative appeared, already departing from the annalistic form, - “The Power Book of the Royal Genealogy” and “The History of the Kazan Kingdom”.
In the 17th century there was a gradual withering away of the annalistic form of narration. At this time, local chronicles appeared, of which the Siberian chronicles are the most interesting. The beginning of their compilation refers to the 1st floor. 17th century Of these, the Stroganov Chronicle and the Esipov Chronicle are better known. In the end of the XVII century. Tobolsk boyar son S.U. Remezov compiled "Siberian History". In the 17th century chronicle news are included in the power books and chronographs. The word "chronicle" continues to be used according to tradition even for such works that faintly resemble the Chronicles of the past. Such is the New Chronicler, who tells about the events of the end of the 16th century. 17th century (Polish-Swedish intervention and peasant war), and "Annals of many rebellions".
M.N. Tikhomirov
Orthodox worldview in the Russian chronicle tradition
“Russian history is striking in its extraordinary consciousness and the logical course of phenomena,” wrote K.S. Aksakov more than 120 years ago. We often forget about this awareness, involuntarily blaspheming our ancestors, subverting their high spirituality to our misery. Meanwhile, history has conveyed to us numerous testimonies of their harmonious, ecclesiastical worldview. Among such testimonies, the annals are distinguished by their special historical completeness.
In the development of Russian chronicle writing, it is customary to distinguish three periods: the most ancient, regional and all-Russian. Despite all the peculiarities of Russian chronicle traditions, whether it be the Tale of Bygone Years as edited by the Monk Nestor the chronicler, Novgorod chronicles with their conciseness and dryness of language, or Moscow chronicle collections, there is no doubt about the general worldview basis that determines their views. Orthodoxy gave the people a firm sense of the commonness of their historical destiny, even in the most difficult times of appanage strife and Tatar rule.
At the basis of the Russian chronicles lies the famous "Tale of Bygone Years" - "where did the Russian land come from, who in Kyiv began to reign first and where did the Russian land come from." Having more than one edition, "The Tale" formed the basis of various local annals. As a separate monument, it has not been preserved, having reached us as part of later chronicle codes - Lavrentiev (XIV century) and Ipatiev (XV century). The story is an all-Russian annalistic code compiled by 1113 in Kyiv on the basis of annalistic codes of the 11th century. and other sources - presumably of Greek origin. Rev. Nestor the chronicler, the holy ascetic of the Kiev Caves, completed his work a year before his death. The chronicle was continued by another holy monk - St. Sylvester, abbot of the Vydubitsky St. Michael's Monastery in Kyiv. The Holy Church celebrates their memory on October 27 and January 2, respectively, according to Art. Art.
The Tale clearly shows the desire to give, if possible, a comprehensive understanding of the course of world history. It begins with the biblical account of the creation of the world. Having thus declared his commitment to the Christian understanding of life, the author proceeds to the history of the Russian people. After the Babylonian pandemonium, when the peoples were divided, the Slavs stood out in the Japheth tribe, and the Russian people stood out among the Slavic tribes. Like everything in the created world, the course of Russian history is made according to the will of God, the princes are the instruments of His will, virtues are rewarded, sins are punished by the Lord: famine, pestilence, a coward, an invasion of foreigners.
Everyday details do not occupy the author of the chronicle. His thought hovers over vain cares, dwelling with love on the deeds of holy ascetics, the valor of Russian princes, and the struggle against foreigners of other faiths. But all this attracts the attention of the chronicler not in its bare historical "givenness", but as evidence of God's providential care for Russia.
In this series, a message about a visit to the Russian land of St. app. Andrew the First-Called, who predicted the greatness of Kyiv and the future flourishing of Orthodoxy in Russia. The factual authenticity of this story is not verifiable, but its inner meaning is certain. Russian Orthodoxy and the Russian people acquire the “first-called” apostolic dignity and purity of faith, which are later confirmed by the Equal-to-the-Apostles dignity of Saints Methodius and Cyril, the Enlighteners of the Slavs, and the Holy Prince Vladimir the Baptist. The message of the chronicle emphasizes the providential nature of the Baptism of Russia, tacitly assuming for her the corresponding religious duties, the duty of Orthodox Church obedience.
The author notes the voluntary nature of the acceptance of service. This is served by the famous story about the choice of faiths, when “Volodimer called his own and the Startsy Grad’s boyars”. The chronicle does not cite any circumstances restricting freedom of choice. “Even if you want to try much,” the “bolyars and elders” say to Vladimir, “by sending someone to test ... service and how it serves God.” The desire for a charitable life, the desire to find an unfalse path to God is Vladimir's only motive. The story of the ambassadors who returned after the trial of faith is extremely indicative. Muslims are rejected, because "there is no joy in them, but sadness", Catholics - because they have "beauty not seen by anyone." This, of course, is not about worldly "fun" - Muslims have it no less than anyone else, and not about worldly "sadness". It is about the living religious experience received by the ambassadors. They were looking for that joy that the Psalmist speaks of: “Heed to the voice of my supplication, my King and my God ... And let all who trust in You rejoice, rejoice forever; and you will dwell in them, and those who love your name will boast about you” (Ps. 5:3; 12). This is the joy and joy of a charitable life - quiet, unflappable, familiar to every sincerely believing Orthodox person from a touching personal experience that cannot be explained in words. Instead of this joy, the ambassadors felt sadness in the mosque - a terrible feeling of God-forsakenness and 6o-god-forsakenness, evidenced by the words of the Prophet: the head into sickness, and every heart into sorrow” (Isaiah 1:4-5).
And among the Catholics, the ambassadors were not struck by the lack of material beauty - although in terms of beauty and splendor, Catholic worship cannot be compared with Orthodox ones. A sound religious instinct unmistakably determined the inferiority of Catholicism, which cut itself off from the conciliar totality of the Church, from its blessed fullness. “Behold what is good, or what is red, but let the brethren live together,” the Holy Scripture testifies. The absence of this beauty was felt by the well-intentioned ambassadors. All the more striking was the contrast for them from the presence at the liturgy in the Hagia Sophia in Tsargrad: “We have come to the Greeks and we are where we serve our God.” The divine service so impressed the Russians that they repeat in confusion: “And we don’t know whether we were in heaven or on earth - for there is no such beauty on earth - only we know for sure that God is there with people ... And we don’t we can forget the beauty of that. Their hearts, seeking religious consolation, received it in unexpected fullness and irresistible certainty. The outcome of the case was decided not by external economic considerations (the validity of which is very doubtful), but by living religious experience, the abundant presence of which is confirmed by the entire subsequent history of the Russian people.
A fairly complete picture of the views of contemporaries on the course of Russian life is given by the Lavrentiev code. Here, for example, is a picture of the campaign of Russian princes against the Polovtsians in 1184: “In the same summer, God put in the heart of a Russian prince, for all the Russian princes went to the Polovtsy.”
In the 70s of the XII century. the onslaught of the Polovtsians on the borders of the Russian principalities intensifies. The Russians are undertaking a number of retaliatory campaigns. Several local defeats of the Polovtsian troops follow, the result of which is their unification under the rule of one khan - Konchak. The military organization of the Polovtsians receives uniformity and harmony, weapons are improved, throwing machines and “Greek fire” appear: Russia faces a united strong enemy army face to face.
The Polovtsy, seeing their superiority, take the fortunate circumstances as a sign of God's good will. "Behold God, there are Russian princes and their regiments in our hands." But the Providence of God is not connected with considerations of human wisdom: "not leading" unreasonable Gentiles, "as if there is no courage, no thoughts against God," the chronicler complains. In the battle that had begun, the Polovtsians were "chased by the wrath of God and the Holy Mother of God." The victory of the Russians is not the result of their own care: “The Lord has done great salvation for our princes and their howls over our enemies. The former foreigner was defeated by the providential help of God under the Protection of the Most Holy Theotokos, covering the God-loving Russian army with Her care. And the Russians themselves are well aware of this: “And Vladimir said: this is the day that the Lord has made, let us rejoice and rejoice in it. As if the Lord delivered us from our enemies and subdued our enemies under our feet. And the Russian troops returned home after the victory, "glorifying God and the Holy Mother of God, the quick intercessor of the Christian race." It is hardly possible to more fully and clearly express the view of Russian history as an area of ​​the all-encompassing action of God's Providence. At the same time, the chronicler, as a church man, remained far from primitive fatalism. Acting in history in a decisive way, the Providence of God at the same time does not suppress or restrict the freedom of personal choice, which lies at the basis of a person's responsibility for his deeds and actions.
The historical material, against which the concept of the religious and moral conditionality of Russian life is affirmed, becomes in the annals the events associated with the changeable military happiness. The following year, after a successful campaign against the Polovtsy, carried out by the combined forces of the princes, Igor Svyatoslavich, Prince of Novgorod-Seversky, organizes an unsuccessful independent raid. The famous "Tale of Igor's Campaign" gives an exceptionally beautiful and lyrical description of this campaign. In the annals of the campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich, two stories have been preserved. One, more extensive and detailed, is in the Ipatiev Code. Another, shorter - in Lavrentievskoye. But even his condensed narrative quite clearly reflects the chronicler's view of the freedom of the human will as a force that, along with the inconceivable Providence of God, determines the course of history.
This time, "won ours with the wrath of God," which found on the Russian troops "for our sin." Recognizing the failure of the campaign as a natural result of evading their religious duty, “sighing and weeping spread” among the Russian soldiers, who recalled, but according to the chronicler, the words of the prophet Isaiah: “Lord, in sorrow, remember Thee.” Sincere repentance was soon accepted by the merciful God, and “prince Igor rushed away from the Polovtsy” - that is, from Polovtsian captivity - “for the Lord will not leave the righteous in the hands of sinners, the eyes of the Lord are on those who fear Him (look), and His ears are in their prayer (to their prayers they are obedient). “Behold, having committed a sin for our sake,” the chronicler sums up, “for our sins and iniquities have multiplied.” God admonishes sinners with punishments, the virtuous, conscious of their duty and fulfilling it, has mercy and preserves. God does not force anyone: a person determines his own destiny, the people themselves determine their history - this is how the views of the annals can be summarized briefly. It remains only to reverently marvel at the purity and freshness of the Orthodox attitude of the chroniclers and their heroes, who look at the world with childish faith, about which the Lord said: “I praise Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You hid this from the wise and prudent and revealed it to babies; hey, Father! for this was your good pleasure” (Luke 10:21).
Developing and supplementing each other, Russian chroniclers sought to create a coherent and consistent picture of their native history. In its entirety, this desire was reflected in the Moscow chronicle tradition, as if crowning the efforts of many generations of chroniclers. “The Great Russian Chronicler”, the Trinity Chronicle, written under Metropolitan Cyprian, the collection of 1448 and other chronicles, more and more suitable for the name “general Russian”, despite the fact that they retained local features, and were often written not in Moscow, are as if the steps along which Russian self-consciousness ascended to understanding the unity of the religious fate of the people.
Mid 16th century became the era of the greatest church-state celebration in Russia. The primordially Russian lands were brought together, the Kazan and Astrakhan kingdoms were annexed, the way to the east was opened - to Siberia and Central Asia. Next in line was the opening of the western gates of the state - through Livonia. All Russian life passed under the sign of reverent churchness and inner religious concentration. It is not surprising, therefore, that it was during the reign of John IV Vasilyevich that a grandiose chronicle was created, reflecting a new understanding of Russian fate and its innermost meaning. He described the entire history of mankind as a succession of great kingdoms. In accordance with the importance attached to the completion of such an important work for the national self-consciousness, the chronicle collection received the most luxurious design. Its 10 volumes were written on the best paper, specially purchased from the royal stocks in France. The text was adorned with 15,000 skilfully executed miniatures depicting history “in faces”, for which the collection received the name of the “Facial Vault”. The last, tenth, volume of the collection was devoted to the reign of Ivan Vasilyevich, covering the events from 1535 to 1567.
When this last volume (known in science under the name of the "Synodal List", since it belonged to the library of the Holy Synod) was basically ready, it underwent significant editorial revision. Someone's hand made numerous additions, insertions and corrections right on the illustrated sheets. On a new, purely rewritten copy, which entered science under the name "Royal Book", the same hand again made many new additions and corrections. It seems that John IV himself was the editor of the Facial Code, consciously and purposefully working to complete the "Russian ideology".
Another annalistic collection, which was supposed to create a coherent concept of Russian life on a par with the "Facial Vault", was the Book of Powers. At the basis of this enormous work was the idea that the entire Russian history from the time of the Baptism of Russia to the reign of Ivan the Terrible should appear in the form of seventeen degrees (chapters), each of which corresponds to the reign of one or another prince. Summarizing the main thoughts of these vast chronicles, we can say that they boil down to two most important statements that were destined to determine the course of all Russian life for centuries:
1. God is pleased to entrust the preservation of the truths of Revelation, necessary for the salvation of people, to individual peoples and kingdoms, chosen by Himself for reasons unknown to the human mind. In Old Testament times such a ministry was entrusted to Israel. In New Testament history, it was successively entrusted to three kingdoms. Initially, the ministry was taken over by Rome, the capital of the world during the time of early Christianity. Having fallen into the heresy of Latinism, he was removed from the ministry, successively granted to the Orthodox Constantinople - the "second Rome" of the Middle Ages. Having encroached on the purity of the preserved faith because of selfish political calculations, having agreed to a union with Catholic heretics (at the Council of Florence in 1439), Byzantium lost the gift of service, which passed to the "Third Rome" of recent times - to Moscow, the capital of the Russian Orthodox kingdom. The Russian people are determined to keep the truths of Orthodoxy "until the end of time" - the second and glorious Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is the meaning of his existence, all his aspirations and forces must be subordinated to this.
2. The service assumed by the Russian people requires a corresponding organization of the Church, society and state. The God-established form of existence of the Orthodox people is autocracy. The King is the Anointed One of God. He is not limited in his autocratic power by anything, except for the fulfillment of the duties of a common service to all. The gospel is the "constitution" of the autocracy. The Orthodox Tsar is the personification of God's chosen and God-bearing of the whole people, his prayer chairman and guardian angel.
Metropolitan John (Snychev)