The Tale of Bygone Years content by. "The Tale of Bygone Years" as a historical source

For more than 900 years, Russians have been drawing information about their history from the famous Tale of Bygone Years, the exact date of which is still unknown. There is also much controversy about the authorship of this work.

A few words about myths and historical facts

Scientific postulates often change over time, but if in the field of physics, chemistry, biology or astronomy such scientific revolutions are based on the discovery of new facts, then history has been repeatedly rewritten to please the authorities or according to the dominant ideology. Fortunately, modern man has a lot of opportunities to independently find and compare facts regarding events that occurred many centuries and even millennia ago, as well as get acquainted with the point of view of scientists who do not adhere to traditional views. All of the above applies to such an important document for understanding the history of Russia as The Tale of Bygone Years, the year of creation and authorship of which have recently been questioned by some members of the scientific community.

"The Tale of Bygone Years": authorship

From the Tale of Bygone Years itself, one can only learn about its creator that at the end of the 11th century he lived in the Pechora Monastery. In particular, there is a record of the Polovtsian attack on this monastery in 1096, which was witnessed by the chronicler himself. In addition, the document mentions the death of Elder Jan, who helped write the historical work, and indicates that the death of this monk occurred in 1106, which means that at that time the person who made the record was alive.

Russian official science, including Soviet, since the time of Peter the Great believes that the author of the story "The Tale of Bygone Years" is the chronicler Nestor. The oldest historical document that refers to it is the famous one written in the 20s of the 15th century. This work includes in a separate chapter the text of The Tale of Bygone Years, which is preceded by a mention as its author of a certain black-bearer from the Pechersk Monastery. The name of Nestor is first found in the correspondence of the monk Polycarp of the Caves with Archimandrite Akindin. The same fact is confirmed by the "Life of St. Anthony", compiled on the basis of oral monastic traditions.

Nestor the Chronicler

The “official” author of the story “The Tale of Bygone Years” was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church, so you can read about him in the lives of the saints. From these sources we learn that the Monk Nestor was born in Kyiv in the 1050s. At the age of seventeen, he entered the Kiev Caves Monastery, where he was a novice of the Monk Theodosius. At a fairly young age, Nestor took the tonsure, and later he was ordained a hierodeacon. He spent his whole life in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra: here he wrote not only The Tale of Bygone Years, the year of creation of which is not known for certain, but also the famous lives of the holy princes Gleb and Boris, as well as a work telling about the first ascetics of his monastery. Church sources also indicate that Nestor, who had reached a ripe old age, died around 1114.

What does "The Tale of Bygone Years" tell about?

“The Tale of Bygone Years” is the history of our country, covering a huge time period, incredibly rich in various events. The manuscript begins with a story about one of which - Japheth - went to manage such lands as Armenia, Britain, Scythia, Dalmatia, Ionia, Illyria, Macedonia, Media, Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, Thessaly and others. The brothers began the construction of the Pillar of Babylon, but the angry Lord not only destroyed this structure, which personifies human pride, but also divided the people “into 70 and 2 nations”, among which were the Norics, the progenitors of the Slavs, descended from the sons of Japheth. Further, the Apostle Andrew is mentioned, who predicted that a Great City would appear on the banks of the Dnieper, which happened when Kyiv was founded with the brothers Shchek and Khoriv. Another important mention concerns the year 862, when “Chud, Slovene, Krivichi and all” went to the Varangians to call them to reign, and the three brothers Rurik, Truvor and Sineus with their families and close associates came at their call. Two of the alien boyars - Askold and Dir - asked to leave Novgorod for Tsargrad and, seeing Kyiv on the way, stayed there. Further, The Tale of Bygone Years, the year of creation of which historians have yet to clarify, tells about the reign of Oleg and Igor and tells the story of the baptism of Russia. The story ends with the events of 1117.

"The Tale of Bygone Years": the history of the study of this work

The Nestor Chronicle became known after Peter the Great in 1715 ordered a copy to be made from the Radzivilov list stored in the library of Koenigsberg. Documents have been preserved confirming that Jacob Bruce, a person remarkable in all respects, drew the attention of the tsar to this manuscript. He also handed over the transcription of the Radzivilov list into modern language, which was going to write the history of Russia. In addition, such well-known scientists as A. Shleptser, P. M. Stroev and A. A. Shakhmatov were engaged in the study of the story.

Chronicler Nestor. “The Tale of Bygone Years”: the opinion of A. A. Shakhmatov

A new look at The Tale of Bygone Years was proposed at the beginning of the 20th century. Its author was A. A. Shakhmatov, who proposed and substantiated the “new history” of this work. In particular, he argued that in 1039 in Kyiv, on the basis of Byzantine chronicles and local folklore, the Kyiv code was created, which can be considered the oldest document of this kind in Russia. Approximately at the same time in Novgorod it was written It was on the basis of these two works in 1073 that Nestor first created the first Kiev-Pechersk Code, then the second, and finally the Tale of Bygone Years.

Was The Tale of Bygone Years written by a Russian monk or a Scottish prince?

The last two decades have been rich in all sorts of historical sensations. However, in fairness, it must be said that some of them have not found scientific confirmation. For example, today there is an opinion that the Tale of Bygone Years, whose year of creation is known only approximately, was actually written not between 1110 and 1118, but six centuries later. In any case, even official historians admit that the Radzivilov list, that is, a copy of the manuscript, the authorship of which is attributed to Nestor, was made in the 15th century and then decorated with numerous miniatures. Moreover, Tatishchev wrote the “History of Russia” not even from him, but from a retelling of this work into the language of his day, the author of which, perhaps, was Jacob Bruce himself, the great-great-grandson of King Robert the First of Scotland. But this theory does not have any serious justification.

What is the main essence of Nestor's work

Experts who hold an unofficial view of the work attributed to Nestor the Chronicler believe that it was necessary to justify autocracy as the only form of government in Russia. Moreover, it was this manuscript that put an end to the question of the rejection of the "old gods", pointing to Christianity as the only correct religion. This was its main essence.

“The Tale of Bygone Years” is the only work that tells the canonical version of the baptism of Russia, all the rest simply refer to it. This alone should make one study it very closely. And it is precisely the “Tale of Bygone Years”, the characteristic of which is now being questioned in official historiography, that is the first source telling that the Russian sovereigns descended from the Rurikovichs. For each historical work, the date of creation is very important. The Tale of Bygone Years, which is of exceptional importance for Russian historiography, does not have one. More precisely, at the moment there are no irrefutable facts that allow us to indicate even a specific year of its writing. And this means that new discoveries are ahead, which, perhaps, can shed light on some dark pages in the history of our country.

3. Ancient chronicle. Tale of Bygone Years

The "historical memory" of the East Slavic tribes extended several centuries in depth: from generation to generation, legends and traditions were passed on about the settlement of Slavic tribes, about the clashes of the Slavs with the Avars ("frames"), about the founding of Kyiv, about the glorious deeds of the first Kiev princes, about distant campaigns Kiya, about the wisdom of the prophetic Oleg, about the cunning and decisive Olga, about the warlike and noble Svyatoslav.

In the XI century. next to the historical epic there is chronicle writing. It was the annals that were destined for several centuries, up to the time of Peter the Great, to become not just a meteorological record of current events, but one of the leading literary genres in the depths of which Russian storytelling developed, and at the same time a journalistic genre, sensitively responding to the political demands of its time.

The study of chronicles of the XI-XII centuries. presents considerable difficulties: the oldest of the chronicles that have come down to us date back to the 13th (the first part of the Novgorod first chronicle of the older version) or to the end of the 14th century. (Laurentian chronicle). But thanks to the fundamental researches of A. A. Shakhmatov, M. D. Priselkov and D. S. Likhachev, a fairly well-founded hypothesis has now been created about the initial stage of Russian chronicle writing, which will undoubtedly be made some additions and clarifications over time, but which is unlikely essentially change.

According to this hypothesis, the chronicle originates in the time of Yaroslav the Wise. At this time, Christianized Russia began to be weary of Byzantine guardianship and sought to justify its right to church independence, which was invariably combined with political independence, for Byzantium was inclined to consider all Christian states as the spiritual flock of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and as a kind of vassals of the Byzantine Empire. It is precisely this that Yaroslav's resolute actions resist: he seeks the establishment of a metropolitanate in Kyiv (which raises the church authority of Russia), seeks the canonization of the first Russian saints - princes Boris and Gleb. In this situation, apparently, the first historical work, the forerunner of the future chronicle, is being created - a set of stories about the spread of Christianity in Russia. The Kievan scribes asserted that the history of Russia repeats the history of other great powers: "divine grace" descended on Russia in the same way as once upon Rome and Byzantium; in Russia there were forerunners of Christianity - for example, Princess Olga, who was baptized in Constantinople in the days of the convinced pagan Svyatoslav; there were their own martyrs - a Christian Varangian, who did not give his son to "slaughter" to idols, and the prince-brothers Boris and Gleb, who died, but did not violate the Christian precepts of brotherly love and obedience to the "eldest". There was also in Russia its "Equal-to-the-Apostles" prince Vladimir, who baptized Russia and thereby equaled the great Constantine, who declared Christianity the state religion of Byzantium. To substantiate this idea, according to D.S. Likhachev, a set of legends about the emergence of Christianity in Russia was compiled. It includes stories about the baptism and death of Olga, a legend about the first Russian martyrs - the Varangian Christians, a legend about the baptism of Russia (including the Philosopher's Speech, which briefly outlined the Christian concept of world history), a legend about princes Boris and Gleb and extensive praise to Yaroslav the Wise under 1037. All six of these works "reveal their belonging to one hand ... the closest relationship between them: compositional, stylistic and ideological." This set of articles (which D.S. Likhachev proposed to conditionally call "The Tale of the Spread of Christianity in Russia") was compiled, in his opinion, in the first half of the 40s. 11th century scribes of the Kiev Metropolis.

Probably, at the same time, the first Russian chronographic code was created in Kyiv - "Chronograph according to the great exposition." It was a summary of world history (with a distinct interest in the history of the church), compiled on the basis of Byzantine chronicles - the Chronicle of George Amartol and the Chronicle of John Malala; it is possible that already at that time other translated monuments were becoming known in Russia, outlining world history or containing prophecies about the coming “end of the world”: “The Revelation of Methodius of Patara”, “Interpretations” of Hippolytus on the books of the prophet Daniel, “The Tale of Epiphanius of Cyprus about six days of creation, etc.

The next stage in the development of Russian chronicle writing falls on the 60-70s. 11th century and is associated with the activities of the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk monastery Nikon.

It was Nikon who added to the "Tale of the Spread of Christianity in Russia" the legends about the first Russian princes and stories about their campaigns against Constantinople. It is possible that Nikon also introduced the “Korsun legend” into the chronicle (according to which Vladimir was baptized not in Kyiv, but in Korsun), and finally, the chronicle owes the same Nikon the inclusion of the so-called Varangian legend in it. This legend reported that the princes of Kiev allegedly descended from the Varangian prince Rurik, invited to Russia to stop the internecine strife of the Slavs. The inclusion of the legend in the chronicle had its own meaning: by the authority of legend, 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.

Initial code. Around 1095, a new annalistic code was created, which A. A. Shakhmatov proposed to call "Initial". From the moment of the creation of the “Initial Code”, it becomes possible to conduct a proper textual study of the most ancient chronicle. A. A. Shakhmatov drew attention to the fact that the description of events up to the beginning of the XII century. different in the Laurentian, Radzivilov, Moscow-Academic and Ipatiev Chronicles, on the one hand, and in the First Novgorod Chronicle, on the other. This gave him the opportunity to establish that the Novgorod First Chronicle reflected the previous stage of chronicle writing - the "Initial Code", and the rest of the named chronicles included a revision of the "Initial Code", a new chronicle monument - "The Tale of Bygone Years".

The compiler of the “Initial Code” 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 journalistic character: he reproached the princes for internecine wars, complained that they did not care about the defense of the Russian land, do not listen to the advice of “smart men”.

Tale of Bygone Years. At the beginning of the XII century. The “Initial Code” was again revised: the monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery Nestor, a scribe with a broad historical outlook and great literary talent (he also wrote “The Life of Boris and Gleb” and “The Life of Theodosius of the Caves”) creates a new chronicle code - “The Tale of Bygone Years” ". Nestor set himself a significant task: not only to set out the events of the turn of the 11th-12th centuries, which he was an eyewitness, but also to completely rework the story about the beginning of Russia - “where did the Russian land come from, who in Kyiv began before the princes”, as he himself formulated this task in the title of his work (PVL, p. 9).

Nestor introduces the history of Russia into the mainstream of world history. He begins his chronicle by outlining the biblical legend about the division of the land between the sons of Noah, while placing the Slavs in the list of peoples ascending to the Chronicle of Amartol on the banks of the Danube). Nestor slowly and in detail tells about the territory occupied by the Slavs, about the Slavic tribes and their past, gradually focusing the attention of readers on one of these tribes - the glades, on the land of which Kyiv arose, the city that became in his time "the mother of Russian cities". Nestor clarifies and develops the Varangian concept of the history of Russia: Askold and Dir, mentioned in the "Initial Code" as "some" Varangian princes, are now called the "boyars" of Rurik, they are credited with the campaign against Byzantium during the time of Emperor Michael; Oleg, referred to in the "Initial Code" as governor of Igor, in "The Tale of Bygone Years" "returned" (in accordance with history) his princely dignity, but it is emphasized that it is Igor who is the direct heir of Rurik, and Oleg, a relative of Rurik, reigned only in the years of Igor's infancy.

Nestor is even more of a historian than his predecessors. He tries to arrange the maximum of events known to him on the scale of absolute chronology, draws on documents for his narrative (texts of treaties with Byzantium), uses fragments from the Chronicle of Georgy Amartol and Russian historical legends (for example, the story of Olga's fourth revenge, the legend of the "Belgorod jelly "and about the young man-kozhemyak). “We can safely say,” D.S. Likhachev writes about Nestor’s work, “that never before or later, until the 16th century, did Russian historical thought rise to such a height of scientific inquisitiveness and literary skill.”

Around 1116, on behalf of Vladimir Monomakh, The Tale of Bygone Years was revised by the abbot of the Vydubitsky monastery (near Kiev) Sylvester. In this new (second) edition of the Tale, the interpretation of the events of 1093-1113 was changed: they were now presented with a clear tendency to glorify the deeds of Monomakh. In particular, the story about the blinding of Vasilko Terebovlsky was introduced into the text of the Tale (in the article of 1097), for Monomakh acted as a champion of justice and brotherly love in the inter-princely strife of these years.

Finally, in 1118, The Tale of Bygone Years underwent another revision, carried out at the direction of Prince Mstislav, the son of Vladimir Monomakh. The narrative was continued until 1117, some articles for earlier years were changed. We call this edition of The Tale of Bygone Years the third edition. Such are the modern ideas about the history of ancient chronicle writing.

As already mentioned, only relatively late lists of annals have been preserved, in which the mentioned ancient codes were reflected. Thus, the “Initial Code” was preserved in the Novgorod First Chronicle (lists of the 13th–14th and 15th centuries), the second edition of the “Tale of Bygone Years” is best represented by the Lavrentiev (1377) and Radzivilov (15th century) chronicles, and the third edition came to us as part of the Ipatiev Chronicle. Through the "Tver vault of 1305" - a common source of the Laurentian and Trinity Chronicles - The Tale of Bygone Years of the second edition became part of the majority of Russian chronicles of the 15th-16th centuries.

Since the middle of the XIX century. researchers have repeatedly noted the high literary skill of Russian chroniclers. But private observations on the style of chronicles, sometimes quite deep and fair, were replaced by holistic ideas only relatively recently in the works of D. S. Likhachev and I. P. Eremin.

Thus, in the article “The Kyiv Chronicle as a Literary Monument”, I. P. Eremin draws attention to the different literary nature of the various components of the chronicle text: weather records, chronicle stories and chronicle stories. In the latter, according to the researcher, the chronicler resorted to a special "hagiographic", idealizing manner of narration.

D. S. Likhachev showed that the difference in stylistic devices that we find in the annals is explained primarily by the origin and specifics of the chronicle genre: in the annals, articles created by the chronicler himself, telling about the events of his contemporary political life, coexist with fragments from epic traditions and legends , with their own special style, a special manner of storytelling. In addition, the "style of the era" had a significant influence on the stylistic devices of the chronicler. It is necessary to dwell on this last phenomenon in more detail.

It is extremely difficult to characterize the "style of the era", i.e., some general trends in worldview, literature, art, norms of social life, etc. Nevertheless, in the literature of the XI-XIII centuries. The phenomenon that D.S. Likhachev called “literary etiquette” manifests itself quite thoroughly. Literary etiquette - this is the refraction in the literary work of the "style of the era", the features of the worldview and ideology. Literary etiquette, as it were, determines the tasks of literature and already its themes, principles for constructing literary plots and, finally, the visual means themselves, highlighting the circle of the most preferred speech turns, images, metaphors.

The concept of literary etiquette is based on the idea of ​​an unshakable and orderly world, where all the deeds of people are, as it were, predetermined, where for each person there is a special standard of his behavior. Literature, on the other hand, must accordingly assert and demonstrate this static, “normative” world. This means that its subject should primarily be the depiction of "normative" situations: if a chronicle is written, then the focus is on descriptions of the prince's accession to the throne, battles, diplomatic actions, the death and burial of the prince; moreover, in this latter case, a peculiar summary of his life is summed up in an obituary description. Similarly, the hagiographies must necessarily tell about the childhood of the saint, about his path to asceticism, about his “traditional” (precisely traditional, almost obligatory for every saint) virtues, about the miracles he performed during life and after death, etc.

At the same time, each of these situations (in which the hero of the chronicle or life most clearly appears in his role - a prince or a saint) should have been depicted in similar, traditional speech turns: it was always said about the parents of the saint that they were pious, about the child - the future saint, that he shunned games with his peers, the battle was narrated in traditional formulas such as: “and there was a slaughter of evil”, “others were cut, and others were killed” (that is, some were cut down with swords, others were captured), etc.

That chronicle style, which most corresponded to the literary etiquette of the 11th-13th centuries, was called by D.S. Likhachev “the style of monumental historicism”. But at the same time, it cannot be argued that the entire chronicle narrative is sustained in this style. If we understand style as a general characteristic of the author's attitude to the subject of his narration, then we can undoubtedly speak of the all-encompassing nature of this style in the annals - the chronicler really selects for his narration only the most important events and deeds of state importance. If, on the other hand, one demands from the style and indispensable observance of certain linguistic features (that is, stylistic devices proper), then it turns out that far from every line of the annals will be an illustration of the style of monumental historicism. Firstly, because the various phenomena of reality - and the chronicle could not but correlate with it - could not fit into a pre-invented scheme of "etiquette situations", and therefore we find the most striking manifestation of this style only in the description of traditional situations: in the image of the parish prince “on the table”, in the description of battles, in obituary characteristics, etc. Secondly, two genetically different layers of narration coexist in the annals: along with the articles compiled by the chronicler, we also find fragments introduced by the chronicler into the text. Among them, a significant place is occupied by folk legends, legends, which are in many parts of the Tale of Bygone Years and - albeit to a lesser extent - subsequent chronicles.

If the actual chronicle articles were a product of their time, bore the stamp of the “style of the era”, were sustained in the traditions of the style of monumental historicism, then the oral legends included in the chronicle reflected a different - epic tradition and, naturally, had a different stylistic character. The style of folk legends included in the chronicle was defined by D.S. Likhachev as the “epic style”.

"The Tale of Bygone Years", where the story of the events of our time is preceded by recollections of the deeds of the glorious princes of past centuries - Oleg the Prophet, Igor, Olga, Svyatoslav, Vladimir, combines both of these styles.

In the style of monumental historicism, for example, a presentation of the events of the time of Yaroslav the Wise and his son, Vsevolod, is being conducted. Suffice it to recall the description of the battle on Alta (PVL, pp. 97–98), which brought Yaroslav victory over the “cursed” Svyatopolk, the murderer of Boris and Gleb: Svyatopolk came to the battlefield “heavy in strength”, Yaroslav also gathered “many howls, and left against him on Lto. Before the battle, Yaroslav prays to God and his slain brothers, asking for their help "against this nasty and proud killer." And now the troops moved towards each other, "and covering the field of Letskoe wallpaper from a multitude of howls." At dawn (“the rising sun”) “there was a slaughter of evil, as if it had not been in Russia, and by the hands of it I was sechahus, and stepping down three times, as if in the valley [valleys, hollows] of the mother-in-law’s blood.” By evening, Yaroslav won, and Svyatopolk fled. Yaroslav ascended the throne of Kyiv, "wiped sweat with his retinue, showing victory and great work." Everything in this story is intended to emphasize the historical significance of the battle: both the indication of the large number of troops, and the details that testify to the fierceness of the battle, and the pathetic ending - Yaroslav triumphantly ascends the throne of Kyiv, obtained by him in military labor and struggle for a “just cause”.

And at the same time, it turns out that we have before us not so much the impression of an eyewitness about a particular battle, but rather the traditional formulas that described other battles in the same Tale of Bygone Years and in subsequent chronicles: the turnover “slashing evil” is traditional, the ending is traditional , telling who is “overcome” and who is “running”, usually for the annalistic narrative an indication of the large number of troops, and even the formula “as if by the mother-in-law’s blood” is found in descriptions of other battles. In a word, we have before us one of the samples of the "etiquette" image of the battle.

With special care, the creators of The Tale of Bygone Years write out the obituary characteristics of the princes. For example, according to the chronicler, Prince Vsevolod Yaroslavich was “mocking God-loving, loving the truth, looking after the wretched [took care of the unfortunate and poor], honoring the bishop and presbyter [priests], loving the Chernoristsy in excess, and making a demand to them” (PVL, with .142). This type of annalistic obituary would be used more than once by chroniclers of the 12th and subsequent centuries. The use of literary formulas, prescribed by the style of monumental historicism, gave the annalistic text a special artistic flavor: not the effect of surprise, but, on the contrary, the expectation of a meeting with the familiar, familiar, expressed in a “polished”, consecrated by tradition form - this is what had the power of aesthetic impact on the reader . The same technique is well known to folklore - let us recall the traditional plots of epics, three repetitions of plot situations, constant epithets and similar artistic means. The style of monumental historicism, therefore, is not evidence of limited artistic possibilities, but, on the contrary, evidence of a deep awareness of the role of the poetic word. But at the same time, this style, naturally, fettered the freedom of plot narration, for it sought to unify, express various life situations in the same speech formulas and plot motifs.

For the development of the plot narrative, the oral folk legends fixed in the chronicle text played a significant role, each time differing in the unusual and “amusing” of the plot. The story about the death of Oleg is widely known, the plot of which was the basis of the famous ballad of A. S. Pushkin, stories about Olga's revenge on the Drevlyans, etc. It was in this kind of legend that not only princes, but also insignificant in their social status, could act as heroes people: an old man who saved the people of Belgorod from death and Pecheneg captivity, a young man-kozhemyak who defeated the Pecheneg hero. But the main thing, perhaps, is something else: it is in such annalistic stories, which were genetically oral historical traditions, that the chronicler uses a completely different - compared to stories written in the style of monumental historicism - method of depicting events and characterizing characters.

In works of verbal art, there are two opposite methods of aesthetic impact on the reader (listener). In one case, a work of art affects, precisely by its dissimilarity, everyday life and, let us add, the “everyday” story about it. Such a work is distinguished by a special vocabulary, rhythm of speech, inversions, special visual means (epithets, metaphors) and, finally, a special “unusual” behavior of the characters. We know that people in life do not speak like that, do not act like that, but it is this unusualness that is perceived as art. The literature of the style of monumental historicism also stands on the same position.

In another case, art, as it were, strives to become like life, and the narrative strives to create an "illusion of authenticity", to bring itself as close as possible to the eyewitness's story. The means of influencing the reader here are completely different: in this kind of narration, a “plot detail” plays a huge role, a well-found everyday detail that, as it were, awakens in the reader his own life impressions, helps him see what is being described with his own eyes and thereby believe in the truth of the story.

Here it is necessary to make an important reservation. Such details are often called “elements of realism”, but it is significant that if in modern literature these realistic elements are a means for reproducing real life (and the work itself is intended not only to depict reality, but also to comprehend it), then in ancient times “plot details” - nothing more than a means to create an “illusion of reality”, since the story itself can tell about a legendary event, about a miracle, in a word, about what the author portrays as really being, but which may not be so.

In The Tale of Bygone Years, the stories performed in this manner make extensive use of the “everyday detail”: either this is a bridle in the hands of a Kievan boy who, pretending to be looking for a horse, runs through the camp of enemies with it, then a mention of how, testing himself before a duel with Pecheneg hero, a young man-kozhemyak pulls out (with professionally strong hands) from the side of a bull running past “skin from meat, like a hand for him”, then a detailed, detailed (and skillfully slowing down the story) description of how the Belgorod people “taking onion honey”, which they found “in the princes of medush”, how they diluted the honey, how they poured the drink into the “kad”, etc. These details evoke vivid visual images in the reader, help him to imagine what is being described, to become, as it were, a witness to the events.

If in the stories performed in the manner of monumental historicism, everything is known to the reader in advance, then in epic legends the narrator skillfully uses the effect of surprise. The wise Olga, as it were, takes seriously the courtship of the Drevlyansk prince Mal, secretly preparing a terrible death for his ambassadors; the prediction given to Oleg the Prophet did not seem to come true (the horse from which the prince was supposed to die had already died himself), but nevertheless the bones of this horse, from which the snake would crawl out, would bring death to Oleg. It is not a warrior who goes out to a duel with a Pecheneg hero, but a lad-kozhemyaka, moreover, “medium in body”, and the Pecheneg hero - “great and terrible” - chuckles at him. And despite this “exposure”, it is the lad who overcomes.

It is very significant to note that the chronicler resorts to the method of "reproducing reality" not only in retelling epic legends, but also in narrating about contemporary events. An example of this is the story "The Tale of Bygone Years" under 1097 about the blinding of Vasilko Terebovlsky (p. 170–180). It is no coincidence that it was on this example that the researchers considered the “elements of realism” of the Old Russian narrative, it was in it that they found the skillful use of “strong details”, it was here that they discovered the masterful use of “narrative direct speech”.

The culminating episode of the story is the scene of Vasilko's blinding. On the way to the Terebovl volost assigned to him at the Lubech princely congress, Vasilko settled down for the night not far from Vydobych. Kyiv Prince Svyatopolk, yielding to the persuasion of David Igorevich, decides to lure Vasilko and blind him. After persistent invitations ("Do not go from my name day") Vasilko arrives at the "prince's yard"; David and Svyatopolk lead the guest into the "istobka" (hut). Svyatopolk persuades Vasilko to visit, and David, frightened by his own malice, “sits down like a dumbass.” When Svyatopolk came out of the exhaustion, Vasilko tries to continue the conversation with David, but, says the chronicler, “there was no voice in Davyd, no obedience [hearing].” This is a very rare example for early chronicle writing when the mood of the interlocutors is conveyed. But then David comes out (allegedly in order to call Svyatopolk), and the prince's servants burst into the vent, they rush at Vasilko, knock him to the floor. And the terrible details of the ensuing struggle: in order to keep the mighty and desperately resisting Cornflower, they remove the board from the stove, put it on his chest, sit on the board and press their victim to the floor so, “like perse [chest] troskotati”, - and the mention that “ torchin Berendi", who was supposed to blind the prince with a knife blow, missed and cut the unfortunate face - all these are not simple details of the narrative, but precisely artistic "strong details" that help the reader visually imagine the terrible scene of blinding. According to the plan of the chronicler, the story was supposed to excite the reader, set him up against Svyatopolk and David, convince Vladimir Monomakh of the rightness, who condemned the brutal massacre of the innocent Vasilko and punished the perjurer princes.

The literary influence of The Tale of Bygone Years has been clearly felt for several centuries: chroniclers continue to apply or vary those literary formulas that were used by the creators of The Tale of Bygone Years, imitate its characteristics, and sometimes quote the Tale, introducing fragments into their text. from this monument. The Tale of Bygone Years has retained its aesthetic charm to our time, eloquently testifying to the literary skill of the ancient Russian chroniclers.